Twin River bet to build allegiance

PLAYING THE ODDS: Twin River is looking to grow its market share by promoting its new table games and its identity as a “convenience casino” in the local market. / COURTESY TWIN RIVER CASINO
PLAYING THE ODDS: Twin River is looking to grow its market share by promoting its new table games and its identity as a “convenience casino” in the local market. / COURTESY TWIN RIVER CASINO

Twin River Casino has not taken the prospect of casinos coming to Massachusetts lightly, adding table games in Lincoln in July to help stem competition in the Northeast.
Table games are not the only tool in the operator’s arsenal, although at $18 million in revenue generated in the first three months of operation, according to the R.I. Department of Revenue’s Office of Revenue Analysis, success has exceeded expectations, says John E. Taylor Jr., chairman of the board of Twin River Worldwide Holdings.
But with slot and resort casino projects seemingly moving forward in the Bay State, Twin River operators are fighting to define their market – honing in on the casino’s identity as a “convenience casino” dedicated to marketing locally – meaning Rhode Island, nearby Massachusetts and Connecticut.
“Convenience casino” is a term applied in a 2011 report by the Innovation Group on the impact of Massachusetts gaming. The concept is straightforward: cater to those customers who are closest and who don’t need a hotel on the property to take advantage of casino offerings, Taylor said.
“At this point, we’re very focused on staying true to our ‘convenience casino’ roots,” said Taylor, “which is a competitive advantage. It’s easy for people to get to us and we’ve been able to leverage that.”
Roger Gros, publisher of Global Gaming Business Magazine in Henderson, Nev., said any impact from new resort casinos over the next three years or so will likely be offset by the model Taylor describes.
“Twin River got a big head start by launching table games,” Gros said. “Now, they’re developing a full-casino clientele. What’s going to happen is, they’re developing a nice, little 50-mile radius market and this is a model that we see in Pennsylvania. They have a market within 50 miles of their casino and they don’t really care what happens beyond that.”
Still, that doesn’t mean operators and community supporters at Twin River and Newport Grand aren’t thinking about how to counter future developments in gaming in New England, should they occur.
After voters weighed in on Nov. 5, resort-casino projects left standing in Eastern Massachusetts include the Crossroads Massachusetts LLC proposal in Milford, in which Connecticut tribal gaming competitor Foxwoods Casino Resort is a partner, and Wynn MA LLC, in Everett, Mass., Las Vegas casino mogul Steve Wynn’s proposal. Also in the mix is the Suffolk Downs proposal, which was rejected in East Boston but approved in neighboring Revere. Suffolk Downs is reportedly trying to shift its plans to an alternative proposal in Revere. Connecticut-based, tribally owned Mohegan Sun and a community support group for a proposal for a project in Palmer, in the western part of the state, successfully petitioned for a recount after a close defeat in the election. That recount is slated for Nov. 26, according to a spokeswoman for Mohegan Sun Massachusetts.
And in the Massachusetts slots parlor arena, three candidates are still in the running – Raynham Park LLC in Raynham; PPE Casino Resorts in Leominster, and Penn National Gaming Inc. in Plainville.
Long-debated plans for Indian-run casinos are also moving forward.
The Wampanoag Tribe of Aquinnah tribe announced on Nov. 13 its casino plan for Martha’s Vineyard won approval from the National Indian Gaming Commission, while the separate Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe’s compact negotiated with Gov. Deval L. Patrick in March for a planned Taunton casino recently received final approval from the state legislature, according to media reports.
The Aquinnah plan to convert an unfinished tribal community center on the island into a temporary casino until a permanent facility can be built. The completed casino would be allowed to host high-stakes bingo, poker and some varieties of slot machines.
“The real danger to Twin River right now will be the licensing of the slots parlor in Massachusetts: Raynham, Plainville or Leominster,” said Clyde Barrow, director of the Center for Policy Analysis at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. “Regardless of who gets that license, that [new competition] will put an immediate hit on Twin River.”
Right between Boston and Lincoln off Interstate 495, a new slots parlor in any of those towns will attract customer traffic there, Barrow said. With a maximum of 1,250 slot machines, the project, if licensed by the end of the year, could capture “half of the Massachusetts customers going to Twin River right now,” he said. A little further off, according to Scott Butera, president and CEO of Foxwoods, Crossroads Massachusetts could get its license this spring, which would lead to a resort casino by 2017, if the developer gets past a Nov. 19 referendum in Milford and a Dec. 9 town meeting on rezoning land from commercial to casino zoning.
Twin River is “different” than the elaborate resort Foxwoods has planned, which could include spas, ample outdoor spaces for recreation and a luxury hotel, Butera says. Nonetheless, “We’re doing whatever it takes to be as competitive as we can, [because] anything a competitor does to add to their product is a challenge,” he said.
Taylor, meanwhile, says he is focused on continuing to deliver the type of personalized customer service that will keep gamers coming back to Twin River – while keeping an eye on amenities that could be enhanced as competition stiffens.
“It’s hard for us to know exactly where casinos will go in Massachusetts,” Taylor said. “They’re still working through that process. So, everything we’ve done has really focused on things we can control and evolve as a business to more successfully compete. We know that our players probably will want to try new product, but what we want them to say is, ‘We really like the experience at Twin River. We like the people.’ ”
To that end, Taylor said casino operators are spending “significant dollars” on training and marketing. While the casino does not disclose its finances, Taylor did say that after 62.5 cents on every dollar is shared with the state and 10 cents of every dollar is spent on technology on the casino floor, the remainder – 27.5 cents of every dollar – is needed for operating costs, capital costs and marketing. With marketing dollars at a premium, and competitors spending 20 percent of their revenue on marketing alone, he said, promotions done in collaboration with the state have proved “absolutely critical” in helping advertise the casino effectively. Likewise, Taylor said, table games have brought not just revenue but younger men and heightened “excitement and energy” to the gaming floor.
“When people are winning and having fun it kind of rubs off on others,” he said.
While building a hotel on the property is not under consideration at this time, enhanced restaurant offerings are being evaluated, though nothing is immediately pending. And depending on what happens in the next three years, operators plan to keep an “open mind” about a hotel or other future developments in hospitality, he said.
In the meantime, a three-year window – based on the Crossroads timetable – for resort casinos would give Twin River time to adapt, said John C. Gregory, president and CEO of the 700-member Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce. “It’d be more clearly defined.”
Some supporters of Newport Grand want to see that venue get table games, despite an electoral defeat for the change that happened at the same time it was approved for Twin River.
Since Newport Grand gets a large percentage of its customers from southeastern Massachusetts, said Jody Sullivan, executive director of the Newport County Chamber of Commerce, “everyone understands that it would be very difficult to remain competitive if it doesn’t have the same menu of choice, including table games. … There are supporters of Newport Grand that would like to see them try again.”
Newport Grand CEO Diane Hurley could not be immediately reached for comment last week, but Sullivan said that since it began operation in 1976, Newport Grand has paid $550 million in gaming taxes to Newport and the state.
Gros, the Nevada gaming publisher, agreed that without table games, Newport Grand’s ability to compete is diminished.
“They don’t have much of a chance to develop beyond [what they have now] without table games,” he said.
Barrow, the UMass Dartmouth analyst, added that Rhode Island gaming facilities still have time to prepare for any changes that Massachusetts gaming may impose on New England.
“Nothing goes fast in Massachusetts,” he said. •

No posts to display