Robin Camacho
Las Vegas Real Estate
David Matthews
Gambling in Space
David McKee
Stiffs & Georges
Jean Scott
Frugal Vegas
"Cher" is a four-letter word ...
Deb said: We were at opening night of Cher, We enjoyed it as well as the rest of the people there the show reg... [More]
This isn't my day
Jeff in OKC said: Business writing is usually very dry. Money isn't funny. McKee puts a different spin on stories, som... [More]
This isn't my day
dave202 said: I think you should scrap every blog post since you seem to be out of touch with just about everyone.... [More]
Earth to NYT, Earth to NYT ...
David McKee said: Honestly, no. I don't think P&B merit big photo play in the NYT, especially given the brevity of... [More]
Earth to NYT, Earth to NYT ...
Steve said: Come on, David. Own up. You were picking on the whole thing based on something minor you spotted abo... [More]
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog.
Posted At : May 7, 2008 01:36 PM | Posted By : D McKee
Related Categories:
The Strip,Columbia Sussex
They don't call the New York Times "the gray lady" for nothing. Today, she seems a little more hard of hearing and out of touch than usual. Four of the six "New Titans" pictured in this story haven't been in the casino industry for more than three years.
Mind you, there could be worse things than if Messrs. Breitling, Agassi & Rogers pooled their pennies and bought the San Remo/Hooters out of its interminable "for sale" limbo. Or maybe they could scare up the $1 billion necessary to persuade Columbia Sussex to part with the Las Vegas Tropicana. They seem like just the fellows to bring class back to that much-abused dowager.
Tim Poster, though, they should probably leave at home. As depicted in Breitling's Double or Nothing, Poster comes off as temperamentally ill-suited to running a casino. After all, if you raise the limits on high-end play, you've got to lie in the bed you've made, not have a meltdown and get resentful toward the player(s) who took you to the cleaners.
Hi David. Next time, try reading the article instead of just looking at the pictures. You'll find a discussion of several other young moguls, including Maloof, Nazarian, Loveman, Marnell and Murren. It's unfortunate that the photos taken of Maloof didn't make it in, but I would think you'd be well aware that reporters don't get to choose the photos aligned with their pieces. The photo that did run happened to have been taken at a rather cool six-way interview I conducted for the piece with this clique. And I know you disliked Breitling's book, but they were worthy of inclusion inasmuch as they were, at the time, the youngest gaming licensees in the state.
That's why I criticized the *photo,* not the article.
Come on, David. Own up. You were picking on the whole thing based on something minor you spotted about a photo. You didn't say, "in this otherwise outstanding story..." It's OK! It's the tradition of all bloggers!
Honestly, no. I don't think P&B merit big photo play in the NYT, especially given the brevity of their involvement in the industry. The story seemed fine; I don't recall having any issues with it.
Print | 
Send to Friend | 
del.icio.us | 
Digg It! | 
Linking Blogs |