The beat of casino expansion continues throughout Asia. Indeed, while the rest of the world seems to have hit the pause button when it comes to large-scale gaming expansion due to a combination of political indecisiveness among governments and fear of a faltering worldwide economy among operators, Asian nation after Asian nation has announced plans to pursue casino resort development. Over the past two months, this list has grown to include:

• Thailand — Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, the first popularly elected head of government since the military coup in 2006, said he was committed to a three-pronged policy of gaming expansion that includes regularizing Thailand’s massive illegal gambling industry, promoting resort-style casinos in several of the country’s tourist destinations and moving forward with a national lottery to fund education.

• The Philippines — Four companies have committed to build multi-billion-dollar gaming resorts at the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation’s Bagong Nayong Pilipino-Manila Bay Integrated City mixed-use gaming complex, moving the long-planned project a step closer to reality. (See story

page 12.)

• Taiwan — President–elect Ma Ying-jeou pledged to support Penghu Island’s efforts to establish a casino resort industry. Previous efforts to allow casinos on the island, a popular tourist destination, were blocked by the Yuan, Taiwan’s national legislature.

• Various Pacific island nations — The Saipan island of Rota is reportedly looking for a gaming consultant to help it establish and administer casino operations. Casino gaming legislation was approved there earlier this year. Meanwhile, an initiative has been launched in Guam that, if passed by voters, would allow all forms of casino gaming, including card games, blackjack, poker and roulette, as well as slot machines at the Guam Greyhound Race Park.

Despite this projected wave of casino expansion, not all the gaming news coming out of the Asia region is positive in nature. Although Macau has risen to become the top gaming destination in the world and the wealthiest region in Asia, with a per capita gross domestic product that now exceeds those in Hong Kong, Singapore, Brunei and Japan, there appears to be a growing amount of animosity among long-time Macau residents to the enclave’s casino industry. Such ire is understandable when one takes into consideration Macau worker wages rose only 7.5 percent in 2007, and could not keep pace with inflation and increases in rent and medical care. In addition, the number of employed workers in Macau has dropped for the first time since 2004, according to government statistics. The decrease was small (0.6 percent), but hardly could have made the locals happy, considering the primary benefit for them from casino gaming is steady employment.

Still, casino circumstances in Macau seem positively rosy compared to the political and social drubbing certain segments of the gaming industry are undergoing in Australia. The island nation is home to casino resorts and a gaming machine market that consists of slot-like “pokie” machines housed at hotels, clubs, pubs and other locations throughout the country. The pokie industry has been incredibly lucrative of late — generating A$2.5 billion a year in the state of Victoria alone (A$1 = US$0.92). But as pokie use has grown, so too have complaints that the machines promote compulsive gambling behavior. Australia is now home to 200,000 pokie machines, and, according to some studies, as many as 300,000 people who can be classified as having a gambling problem. 

Anti-gaming groups have managed to successfully push this issue into the political realm, and a number of recently-elected politicians have anti-pokie planks in their platforms. Nowhere is this more noticeable than in Victoria, where Premier John Brumby, elected in part on his no pokie expansion stance, has come down hard on the industry. Although one-third of all pokie proceeds go to the government in the form of a machine tax, Brumby has taken steps to curtail pokie growth, including enacting legislation that forces outlets to put systems in place that will allow players to set daily, weekly or monthly loss limits by 2010. The government also wants all pokie machines set to a maximum bet of A$5 per spin and flash warnings about problem gaming.

Brumby’s latest attack against the pokie segment involved eliminating gaming machine license duopoly of Tabcorp Holding and Tatts group, which controlled all 27,500 non-casino pokie machines in operation in Victoria. When the current licenses expire in 2012, separate venues will be able to apply for individual gaming machine licenses, creating an estimated A$2 billion windfall for the government and more local control over gaming, which is being touted as another way to combat compulsive gambling. The government is doing this despite an agreement in the current license that would award Tabcorp and Tatts roughly A$600 million each if the license is not renewed in 2012. The Brumby government claims the companies are not entitled to this compensation, and it is likely the case will be dragged into court.

For long-time observers of the Australia gaming market, the current situation with Pokies still comes as something a shock. In the 1990s, state governments in Australia were as gung-ho for expanded gaming as Thailand and Taiwan are now. Gaming operators seeking development in emerging Asian nations need to take note, and realize economic success does not necessarily provide long-term protection against social and political trends.