« THE NETS WIN! | Main | N. Bergen: Tower is OK at Columbia Park mall »
December 21, 2006
Political pull didn't carry the day for Forest City
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
By Dan Fitzpatrick
Forest City didn't get everything they wanted, when yesterday the Pennsylvania Gaming Board awarded the license to operate a gigantic slot machine parlor to a rival bidder:
Maybe the "fix" wasn't in, after all.
Fourteen months ago, former Pittsburgh Mayor Tom Murphy worried openly that Station Square owner Forest City Enterprises had a political advantage over the other slot-casino bidders and that a decision in its favor had already been made behind the scenes. "It's no secret,'' he said on Oct. 27, 2005, "that supposedly, the fix is in."
...
Forest City Executive Vice President Brian Ratner is still "taken aback and appalled" at the suggestion that Forest City tried to rig the casino selection in its favor. "We do things above board to get things done," he said. And "we were pretty comfortable with what we put forward. I guess it wasn't meant to be."There were several theories yesterday why Forest City did not get the nod.
Maybe the gaming board had issues with the amount of traffic a Station Square casino would generate on the South Side. Maybe there were doubts about Forest City's aggressive revenue projections ($617 million a year). Maybe the gaming board did not like the fact that Forest City promised the fewest number of slots, 4,000 to the others' 5,000.
NoLandGrab: If the Pittsburgh press and the city's residents thought that the fix was in, then what are Brooklynites to think about Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards plan?
Yesterday, we linked an item about Charles Ratner exercising options, which he would have only done as a hedge against a possible drop in Forest City's stock price. With Atlantic Yards being tossed around like a political football and the casino plan going head-to-head with real opposition, no wonder Chuck was nervous.
Posted by lumi at December 21, 2006 7:58 AM