What if they gave a casino and nobody came?

That’s what’s happening in Chicago, where nobody—and I mean nobody—is showing any interest in a new casino license. Gee, do you think it could have something to do with the 72% tax rate which effectively ensures that a Windy City casino would operate at a loss? Besides, a Chicago casino is no slam-dunk even under a lower rate as it presumes that potential patrons would A) pass up ‘convenience gambling’ in the suburbs, B) brave the hassle of driving into Chicago (I can testify to this first-hand), a challenge at the best of times, in order to C) patronize a casino in the slums, which is where tax-and-spend Mayor Lori Lightfoot (D) wants to put it. The casino industry’s mass refusal to submit to Illinois‘ crazed taxation demands is a welcome show of solidarity.

Lightfoot is holding Chicagoans hostage, threatening higher property taxes if she doesn’t get a more business-friendly casino tax. Thanks to Chicago’s traditional chronicle of mismanaged finances, she’s looking at an $838 million budget shortfall plus a $30 billion gap in the city’s underfunded pension system. Her Honor is looking to the casino as a bridge to civic prosperity. All concerned are banking on a project of $200 million-$215 million in tax revenues from aforesaid casino, a number that is probably hopelessly optimistic.

While Illinois legislators have generally turned a deaf ear to her, casino booster state Rep. Robert Rita (D) has proposed amending the casino tax to a progressive rate—which seems like it would punish success—an idea that hasn’t caught on with his colleagues. Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) is being exquisitely vague on all this, sending a herald out to proclaim that “The governor is committed to continuing to work with the city and other stakeholders to finalize this important element.” Rita promises that “We’re going to continue to work,” but will have to wait until next year to have another crack at tax reduction.

* Casino memorabilia collectors, take note. Sahara Las Vegas wants your old Sahara souvenirs and merchandise as it prepares to unveil a “new exquisite, modern design” peppered with accents of the Sahara past. According to Fox 5, “rare items from the 1950s through the 1970s are of particular interest, especially those that will provide dimension to the look and feel of the all-new lobby including menus, china, figurines and more.” We like owner Alex Meruelo‘s return to the brand equity of the Sahara, demolished—like so much of the property itself—by Sam Nazarian‘s reign of error.

* Unlike the U.S., participation revenues for slot machines don’t exist in Macao. That’s partly a reflection of the overall gaming picture, in which slots account for 5% of gross revenue. But manufacturers like Scientific Games are lobbying to change that. “When you invest in a slot machine, you never know if it’s going to be a success; profit sharing would give casinos a guarantee,” says Jay Chun, chairman of slot-maker Paradise Entertainment. I’m not sure if I follow his logic but Interblock‘s Michael Hu says the incentive for manufacturers would be “stable monthly income to invest on research and development.” He also contends that shared ownership would make it easier to replace a game that bombs. The consensus among slot makers is that it takes too long in Macao to get a new or updated game approved, sometimes as much as three months. No word yet on how the operators feel about sharing the relatively thin slot-revenue pie.

* In its evermore authoritarian tendency, the hotel industry is deploying security robots equipped with facial-recognition technology, as well as the ability to scan and store license-plate numbers. Does this make you feel safer? Not me. Pechanga Resort Casino already employs these information-gatherers and a news reports states that “as surveillance devices, they have a lot of potential.” They can also snoop on your wifi and cell phone. Casinos can use the latter to gather information on how long you spend in different parts of the property, which could alter how they market themselves to you. Properties are relying on the bots’ intimidation factor, too. As one consultant says, “I use the analogy of the police car parked at the corner. Even when no one is in it, people around the car adjust their behavior.”