He's still saying he didn't do it. Why would he apologize for something he didn't do?

...

This.

Yahoo Finance says he's 41, for what that's worth. I imagine he has to be one of the youngest CEOs in the S&P 500. Especially if you don't consider technology companies. Extremely impressive. I tried looking at his LinkedIn but looks like he does not have one. Anyone have some video interviews with him? This guy must be something. Making VP by 40 is an accomplishment. CEO is almost unheard of.

Wynn stock is up 8.41% thus far this morning. Wow

He became CEO because his boss was accused of stuff with women.

Not sure how much has changed since 2016, but according to this list, Matt Maddox would be the 3rd youngest CEO in the Fortune 500. One of the two younger is Mark Zuckerberg.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/...500-companies/

You mean if the Wynn would be in the Fortune 500?

Looks like they fell off the list in 2017. But were on the list 2012 -2016. Close enough. You get the point.

Because he did do it. You must also think Trump didn't bang Stormy Daniels.

You're missing his point. Why would you apologize for something you continue to deny happened, whether that be truth or lie? You'd be contradicting yourself. "I apologize for doing that thing I still deny doing in the first place"?

I think you're missing pig4bill's point. He's not defending Steve Wynn's self consistency, he really thinks Wynn didn't do it.

I did miss that. But he actually makes a point, and Wynn's guilt/innocence is irrelevant to it. If you're going to stick to a story that you didn't do X, then it doesn't make sense to apologize for doing X.

It's common for public figures accused of misbehavior to apologize if they offended anyone (aka the non-apology apology) or to apologize for unspecified past mistakes while denying specific allegations. Wynn seems to be following the standard playbook that involves signaling to potential supporters that he is somehow a martyr taking a bullet for the good of the company.

I have an upcoming trip to Vegas and I was planning on playing at the Wynn. These allegations made me lean towards not playing there, but his resignation makes me feel that I can play there now.

The question is whether I will suck out and stack an old lady and whether, upon doing so, I can avoid pointing out that, just like Steve Wynn, I now know what it's like to **** a grandmother.

Even though he stepped down as CEO, every time you gamble or spend money at his casino a rapist is still profiting from your business.

I wouldn't be shocked if the majority of billionaires are rapists.

It's a step in the right direction that he felt the need to step down so quickly.

As opposed to the rest who are all stand up, model members of society?

If you limit all of your spending to only companies with impeccable records of employing people with the highest moral standards you are likely walking around naked as we speak. You are also starving, living in a box and walking everywhere you go.

Edit to add=I'm sure someone is rushing to reply that they would rather spend their money with a theif or a con artist than a rapist and I get it, but if you think, especially in the casino industry, that Steve Wynn is the only one who has used his power to take advantage of a woman I'd say you are likely misled.

Personally I didn't give Wynn my business anyway, because I don't like their business model of giving the least back to their customers for their money spent and then bragging about it.

But I figured that anyone who would stop patronizing them because of the actions of the main owner shouldn't change just because the figurehead stepped down, without change in ownership.

I owned MGM stock for a while. If you spent money in any MGM property in 2009-2011, an idiot and Internet troll profited from your business.

Boycotting a company because of an individual is pointless. There are thousands of employees of $WYNN and maybe millions of shareholders. Do you do your research in all of those before spending your money?

Boycotting companies for corporate policies is what boycotting is for.

I just can't spend my money at a Sheldon Adelson property, even though I work in them frequently. Working @ the Sands convention center atm, but that is paid by the conference client. Haven't spent a dime here all week.

Yep, which as I said is the reason I don't go there.

Just don't get why Wynn stepping down would change the mind of anyone who was objecting to his actions.

Sorry, our posts crossed. They're almost an hour apart but I was typing here and there as I made breakfasts and lunches for the kids and woke them up.

I totally agree with your post. Wynn is a scumbag, but we all knew that years ago and honestly we all knew his behavior isn't unusual. Those of us who grew up in the 1900s are admittedly complicit in just accepting "demanding blowjobs from your subordinates" as standard behavior (I mean really, it was just given for a long time that anyone who could hired hot secretaries and banged them).

Times are changing and the old guard is being held accountable for their misdeeds. People are rushing to shred their escort rolodexes and pay their mistresses to keep them out of the news, whether they're Steve Wynn or Sheldon Adelson or any other C-suite executive at any other publicly traded company.

It seems like Wynn got exactly the right punishment - he did something definitely icky but maybe not illegal and received a lot of bad press, and he probably broke some kind of company policy and got fired for it. If he did anything illegal, it should be the police, not the public, that brings him to justice.

The company will go on. That's fine.

If he had been a regular CEO at a company that didn’t carry his name, he would have been ousted within 24 hours of that $7.5mil hush money going public.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-his-old-boss

Interesting read. Pretty important point is all the way at the bottom:
Yesterday I saw a TV interview with a gaming analyst who said that other major shareholders might try to force both Steve Wynn and his ex-wife into selling at least part of their stock.

So does anyone think we'll see any new, interesting changes or directions from Wynn/Encore now that Steve is out? Does anyone have any knowledge of any business ideas that Steve really liked but most or all other executives did not? It'll be interesting to see if anything new comes of this for the customer.

I wonder if he has a non compete.