Integrated Resorts vs Repeater-Market Resorts Essay Example

  • Category:
    Management
  • Document type:
    Essay
  • Level:
    Undergraduate
  • Page:
    1
  • Words:
    502

Integrated Resorts Vs Repeater Market Resorts

Repeater market resorts consist of properties that attract clients from nearby locations who are interested in playing but they do not spend the night in the hotel and neither do they dine. In most cases, the integrated resorts are marketed as resorts first and for this reason, the properties can easily be sold as compared to repeater market resorts. The repeater market resorts will be identified as a gaming entity. The repeater market resort identified is Adelaide Resorts and the Integrated Resort identified is Crown Melbourne. The Adelaide Resort is classified as a repeater market resort because it is marketed as a casino destination. Also, its focus as an entertainment destination with most of the revenue collected being from gaming activities justifies the classification of the resort as repeater market resort. The Crown Melbourne is classified as an integrated resort because most of its activities consist of both hotel and gaming activities. Integrated resorts attract patrons that visit less frequently who stay for longer and will most likely spend more. Integrated resorts can maintain the desired revenue levels through dependence of diversified ventures and less onn gaming activities.

The income statements of the Crown Melbourne and Adelaide Resorts are included below for comparison.

Crown Melbourne

Consolidated Income Report

For the 12-Month Period Ended 30th June 2015

Description Amount %

Revenue:

Main floor gaming 1,090,583 48.82%

VIP program Play 706,610 31.63%

Wagering & Non-gaming 436,689 19.55%

Operating Revenue 2,233,882 100%

Total Revenue 2,233,882 100%

Gaming taxes, commissions & other 735,960 32.95%

Operating expenses 835,840 37.42%

EBITDA 662,082 29.64%

Adelaide Casino

Consolidated Income Report

For the 12-Month Period Ended 30th June 2015

Description Amount %

Revenue:

Main floor gaming 704,066 76.85%

VIP program Play

Wagering & Non-gaming 212,021 23.15%

Operating Revenue 916,087 100%

Total Revenue 916,087 100%

Gaming taxes, commissions & other 420,098 45.86%

Operating expenses 495,989 54.14%

EBITDA 333,92736.45%

Crown Melbourne Vs Adelaide Casino

Consolidated Income Report

For the 12-Month Period Ended 30th June 2015

Integrated Resort Repeater Market Resort

Description Amount % Amount %

Revenue:

Main floor gaming 1,090,583 48.82% 704,066 76.85%

VIP program Play 706,610 31.63%

Wagering & Non-gaming 436,689 19.55% 212,021 23.15%

Operating Revenue 2,233,882 100% 916,087 100%

Total Revenue 2,233,882 100% 916,087 100%

Gaming taxes, commissions & other 735,960 32.95% 420,098 45.86%

Operating expenses 835,840 37.42% 495,989 54.14%

EBITDA 662,082 29.64% 333,92736.45%

A comparison of the EBITDA indicates that the difference in percentage is close to 7% which is small compared to the difference in the overall net income values (EBITDA) where the value for Crown Melbourne is almost as twice as the value for Adelaide Casino.To conclude, the percentage revenue of the integrated resorts and repeater market resorts are comparable even though the net income values will be significantly higher for the integrated resorts.

Reference List:

CROWN RESORTS. (2015). Annual Report 2015. [Crownresorts] [online]. Available at: http://www.crownresorts.com.au/CrownResorts/files/c5/c5b9b374-3ab2-410a-8735-9a3266f461fa.pdf [Accessed 26 Sept. 2016]

SkyCity Darwin. (2016). Annual Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2016. [Skycityentertainmentgroup] [Online]. Available at: https://www.skycityentertainmentgroup.com/media/1440/2016-skycity-entertainment-group-annual-report.pdf [Accessed 26 Sept. 2016]