Post #304948 by Humuhumu on Tue, May 8, 2007 3:24 PM

Mattesq, you make good points, but here are my thoughts:

1. It's quite common for development plans to be altered to accomodate an existing structure if the community deems it important. The community didn't get to have their say; Hilton made it a moot point. It was their prerogative, absolutely, but it stinks, and it speaks to a lack of sensitivity to their community.

2. None of this really has anything to do with the supposed unprofitability of Trader Vic's -- they wanted it out of the way. No restaurant on this planet would be able to compete with the dollars that a condo tower could bring, and Hilton didn't want to have to alter their plans. It's entirely possible that Trader Vic's could have been made reasonably profitable, but the effort just wasn't made, because that wasn't Hilton's agenda. I just don't consider the source -- Hilton -- to be credible re: Trader Vic's profitability.