Common sense would seem to indicate that the sale of Wynn is very um, win win. Normally this is rare because if something is a great buy why would someone sell it? But since there are a lot of people who will now switch to places that may be slightly inferior to Wynn properties as long as he owns them, it would seem that those properties may be worth significantly more to someone else. Wynn likes to drive a hard bargain so he might ask for 200 a share if he thinks its worth 205 to others and 150 to him. but he doesn't have controlling interes. So, given my example it might go for 175.

So is the right play to buy Wynn? Would it be better yet to buy the company that buys it? I think that would be better if you knew who it was. But since you don't, is it worth a guess? Perhaps it would be if you have good reason to trust your prediction.

I would wait min 6 months (after it is sold) and then buy the company that buys it.

Why would you expect any gains?

It will be interesting to see how big of impact this actually has on revenues, if enough people actually care enough to not visit that otherwise would.

I'll be buying the stock if it dips much further as I don't think many consumers will actually vote with their feet.

Left wing women in the US are mostly deranged, and women make most of the purchasing decisions or at least have the vetos ("I'm not going to stay in that rapist's casino!"). So yeah, plenty will care. Husbands won't book either, even without the wife getting involved. There's a lot of accommodation in Vegas, you don't need to stay in the Raper's Palace and for the large number of husbands with crazy wives, they'd have the sense not to.

WYNN has a lot of Macau operations so the reaction will be tempered by that somewhat. In time I think it all blows over. Wynn goes into the background and people simply don't care after a while.
You have to understand how completely insane let wing females are to appreciate the impact this will have. They're WOKE and they're MAD about all the sexual harassment, even though they enabled it for decades and even though it's usually their husbands, idols and left wing politicians doing all the raping.

So yeah, don't underestimate the impact of this stuff.

I think David is jumping the gun though. Is this really going to be sold?

I agree, but most of the liberal women I know don't even care about this, I have not heard it mentioned once in my day to day life other than reading news articles and my interest in gambling and this forum, and I live in a pretty liberal area. It is possible Steve Wynn falls to public outrage, but I don't think most of the people staying at the Wynn/Bellagio/Aria/Venetian care enough to make their decisions based on this, and even fewer would stay at a lesser resort such as MGM Grand if they had to chose between that and the Wynn. There will still be plenty of demand for his rooms.

I think there is a lot of MeToo fatigue right now especially with how they went overboard on Aziz.

You only need 1 in 10 to care.

I don't think you'd expect people to talk about it in everyday life and I don't think that's a barometer of booking decisions. He's just some sleazy Vegas guy, not a major celebrity, it's hardly the kind of thing you discuss. But some people will think twice about staying there.

I'm on the side of this being hugely overblown long term. I'm just not as sure as you on the short term impact.

I agree on that. I am probably underestimating the short-term impact because I don't think there is a long-term one.

Basically outlining ow to construct a speculation model. Interesting.

ToothSayer's posts are good in my view FWIW.

It seems like the market is pricing it at 1 in 5 people caring. I'm basing this off the 20% pullback since the negative news about Steve ($200 post Q4 earnings and now $160).

Seeing as Steve has now resigned as of this evening we can assume this means the brand is pivoting away from him and his image. Do others agree the number of visitors who would avoid the properties worldwide is even less and now $wynn is a buy?

Now that Wynn is stepping down, if they don't sell will they change the name and rebrand themselves?

Yeah. +10% today/$180 already with Wynn stepping aside. That was always going to be the outcome if the problems were possibly continuing:
It all seems like a nothing. As long as the alleged alleged raper isn't in charge, no one cares imo.

I don't think so, rebranding seems more costly.

FWIW, I live in Vegas and work in female medicine so I spend most of my time talking with liberal women. This topic comes up daily (the me too thing, not Wynn specifically) and I haven’t met a single woman who cares even slightly about Wynn’s shenanigans. This includes current Wynn employees and even current Wynn employees who have been propositioned by Wynn.

For the most part, and maybe even the entire part, women understand that sex will play a role in their professional lives and they deal with it. I’ve definitely never met a woman who would tell their husband NOT to take them to the Wynn, for any reason that currently exists other than it being too expensive.

Once Steve stepped down it became virtually the same as with the projects Louie CK executive produces. Nobody stopped watching Better Things or One Mississippi.

My prediction is that the Wynn properties will be fine. They won’t sell. They will rename and rebrand. Unfortunately quality will drop because you need a maniac to insist on the best of everything. So Wynn properties will become like MGM. And if they do sell, MGM will be the buyer.

I believe the above, Irieguy's post, is worth giving a careful read. He is not making something up on the fly............................b

Irieguy post is spot on. Doubt I've ever met a girl who would be upset that I booked her a room at the Wynn.

Vegas is a sleaze pit. 1/3 of the girls at Wynn would have been happy to blow the old coot if it meant $$$. I'm not sure that's representative of potential visitors to Wynn.

9/10 women fit into that category. Maybe 96/100 in Vegas. It's the 1/10 that matter. While it's great to hear your opinion, I don't believe your sample is meaningful nor would it capture enough of the data points that matter.

If I formed a view of all women, especially liberal women, based on what Vegas locals discuss and admit publicly, I think I'd be a little far from reality.
Sure, we're in agreement there. Long term this is a nothing and the stepping down (which was always going to happen) makes it a nothing.

They should rename it The Win.

This type of statement damages your credibility quite a bit. Wynn employs over 10,000 women in Las Vegas and you think that there are 3300 women in town that would happily perform sexual favors in exchange for money? Your sexism and ignorance are likely making your life less fulfilling. This isn’t a troll, the ideas behind the words you wrote above are making you a worse person. Just think about it a bit, you seem intelligent enough to recognize that as true.

Yes, money and the thrill of power/status, gladly. I posted $$$, not $.

How is it sexist to say that 1/3 of the women who work at the Wynn would gladly blow a guy for money? I'm not making a statement about women in general. At worst you could I'm a Wynnist, discriminating against Wynn employees. I even said:
So here you are going after me like a tard, claiming I'm "sexist" against 50% of the population on a statement about casino employees which explicitly says they're not the norm.

You desperate overreach in an attempt to gain some moral high ground, or push your "holy" view of women, is ****ing hilarious, and your sexism and ignorance are likely making your life less fulfilling while your wife actively cucks you and laughs about it.

Ashley Madison had 10s of millions of subscribers. Fully 10% of young to early middle age women in surveys claim to have had sex for money, and far more would if given the opportunity, let alone with a billionaire and a bit of cash with it. Are you ****ing kidding me? What rock do you live under?

Already the numbers are at least 20% of women who'd do this, just based on the available, known data. On top of that, Vegas has a concentration of these kinds of people. The #1 sexual fantasy book for women of the last decade is an abusive psychopathic billionaire hurting them and treating them like trash.

Yet you think I'm off the mark? Your view of women is comedy dude. I'm way closer to truth than you are.
The ideas behind your dopey, lazy moralizing make you a worse person, and an ignorant one. By the way, if you're against sex work, or view it as a negative, YOU'RE the one who's a sexist according to feminist theory this decade. Try to keep up, lest stupid people moralize at you.

Just to follow up with some simple math:

600,000 people in Vegas.
Half of those women.
1/2 of those at the right age.

10% of women of that age - across all the US, which is generally far less sleazy than Vegas - have participated in prostitution.

That's at least 15,000 women in Vegas just on the base established numbers who'd do sexual favors in exchange for money.

Compare the bolded. You have no idea what you're talking about.

I’ll ignore the jeuvenile insults and moral high ground stuff because that’s boring, but your last point is topical and relevant to this thread.

It is a mischaracterization of modern feminism to assert that “sex work” is now embraced as an expression of free feminist will. It’s more complicated than that. There are many modern feminists who believe that all forms of sex work are exploitative and there are many modern feminists who believe that an informed, autonomous woman should be able to choose whether or not to engage in sex acts for pay (I am in the latter group, contrary to your assertion otherwise.) But that isn’t the heart of the matter. The underlying tenet of feminism has always been equality, so what matters is whether or not a woman in any particular situation has the same opportunity to succeed as a man would.

If you are a female massage therapist and your boss offers you money for sex, are you being treated the same as your male counterparts? Clearly no, but you can see pretty quickly that it woudnt help if he also propositioned male therapists. Nor would it help if he exclusively propositioned men. So this isn’t actually a feminist issue. It’s an abuse of power issue. Steve was wrong to do it and he should be held accountable. But feminists don’t view Wynn’s actions as offensive to them as women so much as they view it as offensive to them as humans. Their feminism would be offended if they got paid less than their male counterparts (which they don’t, the women earn more in most positions at the Wynn.)

My point is that women don’t want bosses to proposition their employees for sex. They want Steve out, but they still like “the Wynn” because it’s awesome. And when I say “women” I mean both the terrible, slutty, depraved, whores who live in the town where my mother and I live as well as the wholesome, righteous, and generally higher quality women who live in your home town.

Yes it is boring, but you started it. Now you want to claim it's boring? What kind of a coward are you?

You got your face smacked in in a fight YOU chose to pick via your fuddy-duddy, i-hate-my-life version of juvenile insults ("sexism and ignorance", "worse person") and moral high ground stuff, and now you're trying to back out. This is transparent to everyone, by the way. You're not fooling anyone with your juvenile backtrack attempt.
Dude, I ****ing crushed you on your ridiculous claims about women with hard data and facts. Naturally you want to ignore the complete crushing, and just focus on the only line you can use to attempt to redeem your utterly laughable moral overreach and naive characterization of women. Since I'm a kind person I'll let you do that:

Your characterization of women is ****ing comical. You admit above very diverse views on whores even among the small subset of women who actively choose to identify as "feminists", then you go on to talk about what crazy feminists think, but write as if it's representative of women who would book these suites or not.

And no, feminism (or any other ism) isn't about equality. It's about elevating the privileges of the identity group (in this case women) in whatever area they want and can have their privileges elevated, in a naked and unholy attempt to grab more power for themselves and those they identify as like them, at various externalized costs. That's all. If you cared about equality, let alone human equality, you'd be trying to get more women into garbageman jobs and sewer cleaning, and more men into daycare, not just going after high paid high prestige typically male jobs.

We've already established that you have no clue about what women do or think - your stated views on what women would or wouldn't do are contrary to plenty of data, and your claimed data set is Vegas women who chat to you which you no doubt view within your own framework - so why should we take your claims about what "women" want seriously? Fact: A sizable percentage of women (>10%) have done sexual favors for money, and an even larger percentage would do given the chance. Fact: You didn't believe this to be the case.

The bolded is ridiculous by the way. They'd call themselves "humanists" and not "feminists" if the female element in particular wasn't the most salient bit.

TS getting clowned on again, I see.

You two should get a room already and exchange money for services.