[COM] SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

[Shuz]

Personally I hope that they vacate somewhere near Victoria Sqaure, as someone had suggested earlier and that the building will be refurbished extenisely back as it was, with all the eu de grandeur of a proper Railway Station. I would like to see it modified extensively so that the current platforms move up to the ground level as the 'terminus' and the existing platform space the new 'throughfare' for future undergound routes; to O-Bahn, and city loops.

[Omicron]

The article in Tuesday's Advertiser suggests that one of the key reasons for Skycity's move would be to directly incorporate a hotel into the casino complex controlled by Skycity itself, rather than one nearby run by a separate operator. One would think that Skycity is planning with the assumption that the RAH will be built on the railyards - they have many more options for expansion if the RAH remains where it is and the railyards site is freed up for other developments, but that would only occur as a result of a massive Rann Government backflip or substantial swing at the 2010 election that places the Liberal Party in power (and further assumes that construction work on the railyards is not far enough advanced that the hospital plans can be abandoned). Neither option seems particularly likely at the moment.

The option of developing the Morphett St bridge area in conjunction with the Convention Centre (as Crown does with Kings Way) seems logical, because that could go ahead irrespective of the future of the railyards. I imagine there's enough room in that area for such a development to go ahead, but alongside a hospital seems like an odd place for a 24hr entertainment venue. Then again, mind you, that still leaves us with an empty heritage-listed Railway Station, a dreadful tired old concrete plaza, an overcrowded Parliament House, a tired-looking ASER, an under-utilised Riverbank walkway, and a backwards-facing theatre.

As for a Victoria Square location, I'm not sure there's any space nearby at all. The Way building would present exactly the same problems as Skycity is facing now - heritage limitations, space limitations, a nearby hotel controlled by another operator and so on, and the small area on the south-west corner is (I imagine), earmarked for for the Supreme Court's relocation in due course. I don't know of any other locations around Victoria Square that could reasonably be demolished or converted into an appropriately-large casino and hotel. The existing RAH site is a possibility, but I suspect many would fight tooth and nail the notion of filling up the area with buildings when the intent was to return much of the space to parklands and the Botanic Gardens.

Do photos exist of the Casino in its original form? I've heard that it was a nicer place than it is now, but I wonder if that's more a function of the higher dress standards of the day and lack of poker machines rather than any particular architectural or interior design features worth rediscovering.

[Brando]

I've heard that it was a nicer place than it is now, but I wonder if that's more a function of the higher dress standards of the day and lack of poker machines rather than any particular architectural or interior design features worth rediscovering.

The old casino was more of a classy Monte Carlo look, now it's more of a cheap Vegas sibling....if that.

[skyliner]

I totally agree.

As to location - if they have to move - up near the Victoria Bridge over the railway.However, as have inferred, it concerns me as to the future of the station - a true icon of the heyday of steam railways - albeit a carbon copy of USA practices of the time. (1926)

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

[pushbutton]

I

[pushbutton]

I have never been a fan of the casino but the only thing I am really interested in is what will happen now to the Adelaide Railway station? Would TransAdelaide / Department of Transport move back in? Or would it be ruined internally to became another boring shopping centre?

I don't know, they could always make it a NON-BORING shopping centre!

[Howie]

The article in Tuesday's Advertiser suggests that one of the key reasons for Skycity's move would be to directly incorporate a hotel into the casino complex controlled by Skycity itself, rather than one nearby run by a separate operator. One would think that Skycity is planning with the assumption that the RAH will be built on the railyards - they have many more options for expansion if the RAH remains where it is and the railyards site is freed up for other developments, but that would only occur as a result of a massive Rann Government backflip or substantial swing at the 2010 election that places the Liberal Party in power (and further assumes that construction work on the railyards is not far enough advanced that the hospital plans can be abandoned). Neither option seems particularly likely at the moment.

There seems to be quite a bit of space in between the new convention centre and the stadium in the Riverside project don't you think? One's gotta wonder... why'd they do that?

[Mants]

There seems to be quite a bit of space in between the new convention centre and the stadium in the Riverside project don't you think? One's gotta wonder... why'd they do that?

i get the feeling you know something we dont know.

[monotonehell]

There seems to be quite a bit of space in between the new convention centre and the stadium in the Riverside project don't you think? One's gotta wonder... why'd they do that?

According to their press in the 'tiser that's the "Federation Square like space". They wouldn't give the public an open space, only to build a casino on top of it would they?

[rhino]

According to their press in the 'tiser that's the "Federation Square like space". They wouldn't give the public an open space, only to build a casino on top of it would they?

Nah, they wouldn't have a clause written in about that bit of land being available for lease in a few years to help pay for this development! Would they?

[adam73837]

Once this is built along with the RAH and HMRI the only exposed bit of rail from North Terrace will be between the HMRI and the bridge. I would not be surprised at all to see that make that spot of land become very appealing for some sort of development over the trainlines.

As I have not seen a map of this development, what I'm about to say is relatively uninformed. I remember that last year, either the Libs or the ALP (I think it was the latter) mentioned something about building a new Casino on the riverfront. Perhaps this area of which Nort speaks could be used for such a thing. Although, I'm sure the land would be quite narrow, so I suppose we could build it upwards, but I can't make an informed statement. Anyone?

[Aidan]

Once this is built along with the RAH and HMRI the only exposed bit of rail from North Terrace will be between the HMRI and the bridge. I would not be surprised at all to see that make that spot of land become very appealing for some sort of development over the trainlines.

As I have not seen a map of this development, what I'm about to say is relatively uninformed. I remember that last year, either the Libs or the ALP (I think it was the latter) mentioned something about building a new Casino on the riverfront. Perhaps this area of which Nort speaks could be used for such a thing. Although, I'm sure the land would be quite narrow, so I suppose we could build it upwards, but I can't make an informed statement. Anyone?

Building anything there would be incredibly stupid, as it's the best location for a railway tunnel portal. And if all the other developments go ahead, it will be the only suitable location.

And what good would a new casino do SA anyway?

[Omicron]

Once this is built along with the RAH and HMRI the only exposed bit of rail from North Terrace will be between the HMRI and the bridge. I would not be surprised at all to see that make that spot of land become very appealing for some sort of development over the trainlines.

As I have not seen a map of this development, what I'm about to say is relatively uninformed. I remember that last year, either the Libs or the ALP (I think it was the latter) mentioned something about building a new Casino on the riverfront. Perhaps this area of which Nort speaks could be used for such a thing. Although, I'm sure the land would be quite narrow, so I suppose we could build it upwards, but I can't make an informed statement. Anyone?

Building anything there would be incredibly stupid, as it's the best location for a railway tunnel portal. And if all the other developments go ahead, it will be the only suitable location.

And what good would a new casino do SA anyway?

New casino = larger casino = more gambling = increased gambling taxation revenue.

[Aidan]

And what good would a new casino do SA anyway?

New casino = larger casino = more gambling = increased gambling taxation revenue.

That argument may have had some validity before the GST was introduced, but I very much doubt it does now. Essentially the government gets a slice of the money whatever people spend it on. But when it's spent on casino gambling, the public get practically nothing in return. Technically it counts as entertainment, but there's nothing entertaining about it when you don't have money at stake.

And without a larger casino, we could instead have more of other forms of gambling, such as spread betting (which indirectly, through the hedging activities of the bookies, has the useful function of increasing liquidity in financial markets) and sports betting (which gets people more interested in sport).

If our casino attracted the international high rollers, it could be different. But even if it expands, it's never going to be in the same league as Melbourne, let alone Vegas or Macau. So we'll lose much more than we gain.

[Wayno]

If our casino attracted the international high rollers, it could be different. But even if it expands, it's never going to be in the same league as Melbourne, let alone Vegas or Macau. So we'll lose much more than we gain.

Not true. You'll obviously be surprised to hear that Adelaide Casino punches above it's weight with high rollers. A friend of mine is a SkyCity Exec and says the "overall grandiosity" of a Casino does not matter so much to the big guns, that's more of a concern for the lower-end gamblers who mentally correlate size & glitz with a better gambling experience. The high rollers expect glitz too, but it's more about intimacy, superb service, extra treats, and especially the "Welcome back to Adelaide Mr Smith. The chef is out personally sourcing the ingredients for your favourite dinner tonight" touch.

Think about it - it's the same with hotels. Large & glitzy is good, but boutique is so much better, and actually preferred, in many respects. So the Adelaide Casino strategy continues to strengthen as larger casinos emerge in other places.

Interestingly, the main profitability issue with Adelaide Casino is not the lack of big guns (although more is always better), but more to a lagging interest from local South Aussies. So a modest increase in grandiosity (via relocate or rebuild) won't go astray.