Sahara hotel-casino in Las Vegas closing in May

Well, this rots.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_travel/20110311/ap_tr_ge/us_travel_brief_sahara_closing_las_vegas

Sahara hotel-casino in Las Vegas closing in May

By OSKAR GARCIA, Associated Press Oskar Garcia, Associated Press – 2 hrs 20 mins ago

LAS VEGAS – The Sahara Hotel & Casino, among a few Las Vegas Strip resorts left from the Rat Pack era, is closing nearly six decades after dealing its first hand.

Several other casinos from the earliest days of gambling in Sin City were remade into new megaresorts, but the Sahara's owners don't yet have a plan for the property.

"The continued operation of the aging Sahara was no longer economically viable," CEO Sam Nazarian of owner SBE Entertainment Group said.

The property will close May 16, officials said.

(more)

I just read that! :cry:

CEO Sam Nazarian < that name says it all...It's people with names like this one for example, and first generations that have no understanding of American Culture, nor give a shit about it. They only worry about money, not history or context. Same thing happened with the Beverly Hills Hotel/Trader Vic's...First genners come here with money, or enter with construction/redevelopment companies and go from there. Tear it all down and rebuild. Smart business people, but they have no soul.

Oh no....so sad....another icon of LV to bite the dust. It was such a great theme. Boo Hoo Hoo :(

Not to be one of those guys* but the times I've been there over the last 10 years there wasn't that much left of anything cool. Some small photos around the Casino bar and that was it. Lately it's been more known for the NASCAR Cafe and the roller coaster out front. Plus it's so far down from the walkable part of the strip it wasn't really an option for Casino hoping unless you wanted to take a cab and be disappointed when you got there. While I don't want to see it leveled and forgotten a New Sahara with a classic Las Vegas theme would be nice but I'll bet it'll become vacant condo towers or another empty mall. :(

*Turns out I am one of those guys. :wink:

You're 100% right, Boris. It has become pretty lame with the roller coaster & the NASCAR Cafe, but it's still sad to see any part of that era die. I like your idea about a rejuvenated, classic Sahara, but you're probably right on that end too. It'll be something boring & insignificant.

On 2011-03-13 17:21, Tom Slick wrote:
CEO Sam Nazarian < that name says it all...It's people with names like this one for example, and first generations that have no understanding of American Culture, nor give a shit about it. They only worry about money, not history or context. Same thing happened with the Beverly Hills Hotel/Trader Vic's...First genners come here with money, or enter with construction/redevelopment companies and go from there. Tear it all down and rebuild. Smart business people, but they have no soul.

You got it wrong there Tom Slick, Nazarian's original plan was to renovate and remodel the Sahara, returning the place to its former mid-century glory and to target a more young and upscale crowd. He simply ran out of money as the Sahara was losing more than it was taking in.

The people you accuse of erasing Las Vegas's history are actually those with decades old relationships to the town like Steve Wynn and the Boyd family.

I also take exception to your opinion that first generation immigrants don't appreciate the culture of their adopted home. Take LA Conservancy's Broadway Ave tour in Downtown LA for instance. Many of those Mexican immigrant businesses and churches allow tour group access to their historically significant buildings. The first generation owners/tenants don't have to do that, but understand the rich history of their properties need to be shared with the general public.

[ Edited by: JOHN-O 2011-03-13 22:30 ]

Its sad to see one of the last landmarks go. I for one will be making a pilgramage to the place to have some drinks and bask in the former glory of what was once one of the coolest places in the U.S.. I remember back in the 70's when they held the Jerry Lewis Telethon there (when it was a BIG deal). I remember in the 80's when I went to the showroom and I thought the place had seen better days. I'm too young to remember the Rat Pack days and those fantastic lounge acts but I'm sure the ghosts still roam the halls. I also went to the Sands and the Desert Inn before they were leveled to pay my respects.

On 2011-03-13 17:21, Tom Slick wrote:
CEO Sam Nazarian < that name says it all...It's people with names like this one for example, ....

Is the above quote the Missionary Position on this subject?

John-O...The latinos that run the stores in downtown are mostly leasing the locations. Therefore, they would have no rights to remodel or do teardowns. That is aside from the fact that there are more middle east development companies and corporations, than that of latin development firms doing this...

I don't make the statistics, I just call 'em out. It is no more different than Indians running 7-11, hispanics as longshoremen, blacks at the airports, and filipinos in the gambling industry and post office. These are not derogatory remarks. These are simple facts of majority ethnicity in the workplace, mainly dealing with CA and NV.

I made the simple statement that first generation people,and who have the capital to do so, usually are first to tear down iconic landmarks because they do not understand American Culture, History or preservation. They haven't had the time to absorb any, nor do they care. Trader Vic's Beverly Hills, Johnnys Broiler in Downey, now the Sahara. There are THOUSANDS more, but I think I've made my point quite clear, and can definitively show a pattern.
With little investigation and research, you would be able to find and add up for yourself, drawing the same conclusions I've already come to. I do not knock that they came to America and made a rich life for themselves. I knock at what expense that they do it at...Sorry I didn't add any sugar to my original statement, but I've never had much of a sweet tooth while dealing with truth.

From 2003, actually during Mondo Tiki. Are these still there?

Sad that the Sahara will go. I don't recognize Vegas anymore already though. At least two of the big five from the original Ocean's 11 are still there - Flamingo and Riviera. They are, aren't they?

-Randy

Last I heard, Riviera is in bankruptcy, and Flamingo is still hanging. The last time I drove by Sahara, I did not see the wisemen/camel characters, myself. Not saying they are gone for sure, but as we went by, I missed them somehow.

"CEO Sam Nazarian < that name says it all...It's people with names like this one for example, and first generations that have no understanding of American Culture, nor give a shit about it. They only worry about money, not history or context. Same thing happened with the Beverly Hills Hotel/Trader Vic's...First genners come here with money, or enter with construction/redevelopment companies and go from there. Tear it all down and rebuild. Smart business people, but they have no soul."

It's really difficult to read this as anything other than judging someone on their ethnicity, national origin, or immigrant status.

The above argument seems to be:

*Nazarian = foreign name = immigrant = no comprehension or appreciation of American culture.

Foreigner with money = only interested in money = soulless.*

One of the aspects of American culture I most appreciate is the ideal that someone should be judged on his and her merit, not on their country of origin, the color of their skin, or their religious background.

There may be plenty to critique about Mr Nazarian's business practices. Focusing on his ethnicity and immigrant status seems like nothing more than a judgment based on anything but his busines practices.

Show me a 1st generation developer(not born in USA) who has preserved something historical, Historic-worthy, or an American Icon and I'll stand corrected(Even if that is not the majority represented).

I'm sorry, but ethnicity does play a role under this topic, as well as the afore mentioned examples that were listed. I don't dictate what ethnicity is to take what job role in life, but I am not afraid to call it out when it becomes patterned.
When the same ethnicity groups follow the same type business ethics/practices, that becomes a pretty solid pattern to me. It is also enough grounds to call out, especially when it is a type of "erasing" destruction.

I also do not believe any part of what I've stated about Mr. Nazarian is false. If it is, please feel free to correct me.

Woofy, kind of off topic, but let me ask you this... What is the first thing that comes to mind ethnicity-wise, when someone talks about the Taliban?
Now, as that first image popped in your mind, you do understand that there are/were white people from the U.S.A. involved and practicing with the Taliban, but yet 99% of population will still tie Terrorist groups like Taliban with being from the Middle East? This is really no different as when we speak on topic, we generally refer to the majority, and not the minority.

There is a heavy influx of first generation Middle Eastern Construction/Development corporations buying up and tearing down(or plan to tear down) potentially iconic landmarks or places of interest. This is pretty much irrefutable based on actions either already taken, or planned in the future, such as the Sahara. All those "=" signs you added are things you tied together, but not what I stated. Agree to disagree in my approach to the root, and sorry if it offended anyone. But I still stand by my original observations.

Moved to page 2...

[ Edited by: JOHN-O 2011-03-16 22:05 ]

OK, let's clarify one point here. There are no plans to blow up the Sahara. It was closed because it was losing more money than it was taking in. This situation is not unique in Las Vegas. Both Binion's and the Plaza in Downtown have shut down their hotel operations for the same reason. Also on the North Strip, where the Sahara is located, both the in-progress Echelon Place and the Fontainebleau have stalled further construction. These places are victims of the depressed Las Vegas economy.

When he acquired the Sahara back in 2007, it was Nazarian's intent to renovate (not blow up) the Sahara...

http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/article/sahara-buyer-sees-new-life-for-old-resort-164550?contentID=164550

Hopefully this is a temporary situation and the Sahara will reopen when both the Las Vegas economy recovers and additional financing is secured.

Tom Slick, you have to give Nazarain some credit here. He went against the Las Vegas tide of "blow up and rebuild". As I stated earlier, mid-century landmarks like the Stardust, Desert Inn, Sands, Dunes, etc were all destroyed not by first-generation immigrants, but by people who had decades long relationships with Las Vegas. I'm talking about Steve Wynn, Sheldon Adelson, and the Boyd family. Where was the appreciation for Las Vegas's culture and history by these native born sons ?? It took an immigrant to attempt a different approach.

On 2011-03-16 14:29, Tom Slick wrote:
Show me a 1st generation developer(not born in USA) who has preserved something historical, Historic-worthy, or an American Icon and I'll stand corrected(Even if that is not the majority represented).

Ok, here's an example in my own backyard of Santa Monica. There's a 1939 art deco hotel on Ocean Ave, the Shangri-La Hotel...

For decades it remained a historic diamond in the rough, when in 1983 it was purchased by Ahmed Adaya, a Muslim real estate tycoon who immigrated to the US from Pakistan in the 1970's. Did he tear the place down to take advantage of its prime ocean facing real estate? No, he continued to run place as it always had been. And if you want to argue that he couldn't tear the place down due to protected historic status, my research shows no indication of this. Yes, they advertise themselves as a "historic landmark" but there are many different classifications for this.

His daughter Tehmina, who now runs the family trust (and who is also an immigrant), recently invested $30 million (!!) to renovate the property. For her efforts, she was a recipient of 2009 Preservation Award from the Santa Monica Conservancy.

http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2009_1st/Mar09_ShangriLaRedo.html

Well ??... :)

On 2011-03-16 14:29, Tom Slick wrote:
I also do not believe any part of what I've stated about Mr. Nazarian is false. If it is, please feel free to correct me...

There is a heavy influx of first generation Middle Eastern Construction/Development corporations buying up and tearing down(or plan to tear down) potentially iconic landmarks or places of interest. This is pretty much irrefutable based on actions either already taken, or planned in the future, such as the Sahara...

Actually, I think you may have pegged Nazarian wrong as well as his intentions, he was only 4 or 5 years old (!!) when he immigrated with his family from Iran. Just because someone has a foreign-sounding name, doesn't make them a "foreigner". If this is the logic you're using to justify your assumptions then I think you need to rethink things.

[ Edited by: JOHN-O 2011-03-17 08:39 ]

"What is the first thing that comes to mind ethnicity-wise, when someone talks about the Taliban?
Now, as that first image popped in your mind, you do understand that there are/were white people from the U.S.A. involved and practicing with the Taliban, but yet 99% of population will still tie Terrorist groups like Taliban with being from the Middle East? This is really no different as when we speak on topic, we generally refer to the majority, and not the minority."

Most people told of a successful Tokyo businessman would probably assume the businessman was Japanese even though there are most likely successful businessmen from all over the world in Tokyo. Such an assumption is entirely different than saying all successful Tokyo businessmen are short, misogynistic, and have a foot fetish.

One can hang an argument or outrage against an action (in this case the destruction of American culture and landmarks) on an aspect of the people committing the action (such as their race or religious beliefs) but many people will just dismiss such an argument as one based on nothing more than prejudice. The point of the argument might be sound (developers usually have no sense of history) but once people have a reason to dismiss an argument they usually won't sift through the bias to see if there's any truth to be found.

The problem with basing an argument on sweeping generalities (such as "It's people with names like (Nazarian) for example, and first generations...Only worry about money, not history or context.") is that if one example can be cited that is an exception to the generality then the argument can essentially be regarded as false.

"I'm sorry, but ethnicity does play a role under this topic..."

I don't believe that, but I do believe nationality has a lot to do with it. And here's how: Most Americans don't have any appreciation for all the cool stuff that the average Tiki Centralite digs.

We'd probably all be happy as heck if Las Vegas (or any American city) was perfectly frozen in time somewhere around 1969. But most of America has zero interest in automats, neon signs, drive in movies, windowless bars, or mid-century commercial architecture.

I know this thread will be locked soon, but I have to say something quick before it closes. I hate assumptions. I have been subjected to them all my life. For example, my name is clearly ethnically Spanish (my real name, that is) but all my life people have assumed that I was mexican (nothing wrong with that) but the simple fact is a am 100% cuacasian, as much as any French or northern italian would be. I have no mestizo blood in me (indian/spanish mixture) and therefore am not Latino. People are confused about this. So is Charlie Sheen when he refers to himself as "latino". He is not Latino, he is Spanish, and there is a huge difference, both in the DNA and in the cultures. yes, there are other countries with people like us such as Uruguay where the demographic is 90% caucasian. But, I can understand when people don't take the time to understand, and just make stupid assumptions about me. I say that, because I also have committed the same mistakes. You see, I did not grow up with many black people. There were none at my school, and none in my neighborhood or close vicinity. I would only see them on TV or when I went to LA. Bot once I joined the military, I was basically in another world. Their world. I was in south carolina for basic training, where it seems everyone was black. I can clearly remember riding on a bus, being bored, and seeing some black guy with a walkman and a large cassette tape box with all his tapes in it. I struck up a conversation. "hey man, what are you listening to? Got any funkadelic, cameo, prince, slave, barkays?"
The guy looks at me like I was an idiot and opens his cassette box and shows me his collection. Foreigner, cheap trick, foghat, Tom Petty........wow, what an asshat I felt like!

So to see a name like "nazarian" (which is probably a caucasian/armernian name anyway, and assume this person is a middle easterner or otherwise not a loyal american just based on his name is kinda sad, you know? I thought we had grown out of this mentality by now?

John-O, Lucas, and Woofmut - All well said. I think you're right Lucas, this thread will be locked very soon.

But perhaps it shouldn't. An intelligent discussion regarding the destruction of any part of someone's history or "historical culture" (is Las Vegas old enough to fit that term) is a discussion that could enjoy some great depths. As Woofmut stated, however, when that discussion is permeated with bellicose and prejudicial statements, then the whole discussion is derailed or ignored or....

I suppose there is no greater relevant example of what Tom Slick was alluding to then what our white missionaries did to the Hawaiians or what the Spanish Conquistadors and Jesuits did to the Pueblo Indians or .... the list goes on.

Frankly, tearing down a building pales in comparison. (Think about the Trail of Tears).

Vitriolic statements about ethnicity and the intentions of various ethnicities will get us no where. More to the point, they are all too often based on anecdotal observations and flawed in their logic.

So why do I think this thread could be relevant. Any discussion that really tries to understand the true motives about why great places are torn down is a discussion worth having. Think about the one we just had regarding Tiki Palaces. Cammo did a wonderful job encouraging the topic. Ultimately, I think it comes down to what America values and to me, that seems to be money.

I want to make one of my rooms a tiki bar, but I don't because I might sell my house and that would lower my ability to make a profit off of it. ( or so I reason).

Honestly, so many people justify their view points by saying, "I am just being honest.) Seriously, statement undermines any logic you might be trying to bring to your argument. Arguments are not demonstrated by showing a correlation, you must demonstrate a causation. And here, Tom Slick, I do not believe your observations merit a definitive proof of causation. And if they don't, then your science is either flawed, or you need to re-examine your motives.

I for one do not see any correlation with the demise of mid century style and incoming immigrant generations who some believe don't get it or don't value it. As was said ad nauseum on Cammo's thread, it is about corporate america's view that anything old is dirty. Vintage is bad. New is good. This is more Aldous Huxley-ian then it is anti-american. let's not forget that in the countries these people came from, they retain almost all of their old buildings, castles, architecture. When I went to spain, I walked through a roman coliseum that is still in suprisingly great shape..as was a castle and two big towers in sevilla. In the middle east and India, there are structures that definitely pre-date the 50s! Meanwhile here in America, we only have a few ancient structures, the missions and maybe some buildings in St. Augustine, Florida. American's as a whole like things to be shiny and new. It's only tiki freaks like us that prefer dingy, dusty, musty and old!

Explaining Beverly Hills' Persian Palaces
Updated 5:45 PM PDT, Wed, Jun 17, 2009 | Print

Buzz up! 0digg

[Image via W magazine]

For their forthcoming July issue, W magazine's West Coast editor Kevin West looks at how Tehran’s wealthy Jewish community came to settle in Beverly Hills, and naturally, issues of opulence and so-called Persian Palaces come up. Two architects/builders in Beverly Hills, Hamid Omrani, and Hamid Gabbay, are interviewed for the story, and one gets some insight into why Beverly Hills looks the way it does. “When I came to Beverly Hills, there was not any architecture,” Omrani, tells the magazine. “There were old houses belonging to the World War I or World War II era. These were not buildings that had good material or good architecture. So I said, ‘Why should I match with them?’” Additionally, the establishment of a 2004 commisison to oversee design standards in Beverly Hills was "thinly veiled prejudice," according to Omrani. Meanwhile, Gabbay, whose work is more understated (check out some of his work here) isn't a fan of the term Persian Palace because the style “has nothing to do with Persian architecture. I never saw anything like it in Tehran.” One thing that is changing: According to the magazine"many younger members of the Persian community favor a less ornate style..." The magazine online photo spread also has some inside shots of SBE Entertainment Sam Nazarian's home, still available for $18.95 million.

Wow.

The main thing that struck me when I first saw the story was the fact that they're aren't any plans for the property. So while it's good that it won't be torn down immediately (because that costs money), it felt awfully crummy that it would just be left to sit there and rot. Seems even sadder than losing it to the more typical Vegas implode-and-rebuild scenario.

I'm hoping JOHN-O's optimism is on target and they can reopen sometime down the line. I don't feel as hopeful, but I'm trying. I didn't start going to Vegas early enough to have a true appreciation for things as they were, but do have a fondness for the Sahara & the handful of other older properties I've been able to visit.

I just hate losing cool places, regardless of who's responsible.

I don't think we'll see any more implosions on the Strip in the near future. After the recent financial struggles of CityCenter and the still uncompleted Echelon Place and Fontainebleau, developers are going to be gun shy to develop from scratch.

It makes more financial sense these days to take an existing property and renovate it. That was Nazarian's (now stalled) plan. It's also what Alex Yemenidjian (there's another immigrant for you, Tom Slick !! :)) is doing with the Tropicana Hotel. He's sinking in $165 million to update the place in a South Beach style. I visited there last month and the place was looking good. I think the reason why the Tropicana has been more successful is the better location on the Strip. The Sahara is really out there in the boondocks. :(

Dude, lets drink some ASS JUICE at Mohave Oasis!!! Lighten up guys...

If I could show at least 2 first Generation Middle Eastern development companies that tear down and rebuild, to each of your one preservationalist Middle Eastern development company, would that stand as true and fact? Could it prove majority versus minority?
I mean, I can dig all day long and know I can find 2 to your 1, but if you don't see a correlation between what's happening here and by who, I highly doubt if I threw out a thousand companies that youd be swayed to see it from my perspective.

This was in no way brought up to be a rascist statement, as it was formed from recorded fact. For example, there are 3 major development companies in my city alone, and all 3 are in fact owned by middle eastern 1st generation citizens. By middle eastern I am referring to the actual middle east, as NOT to stereotype the words Arabic, Armenian, Iranian, Libyan, Syrian, and Israeli which are actual Countries within the Middle East. Should I be persecuted for stating the fact that they are first genners and happen to be from the Middle East? Maybe I just don't get where the "offended" bunch are coming from, especially when I know most of you taking offense of what I said, are not even Middle Eastern to begin with.
(By the way, and not to derail, but I was always under the impression "Latino" meant "of latin descent"? So why would Spain Not be a part of the word that umbrellas ALL Latin Countries?)

Anyhow, back to this, I see no reason to lock the topic, as I have not disrespected anyone, nor has anyone else. We are all adults, and are we not allowed to state our findings and opinions so long as we do not insult, defame or threaten another?
I really believe a few of you are reading further into what I said, than what was actually stated to begin with. Maybe I came off harsh with the "with names like this..." statement. Maybe it would have been better worded and more subtle if I said "Nazarian is a First Generation Immigrant, and recent past years have shown most first generation immigrants do not understand American Culture because they are no longer required to Assimilate." However, it is just added sugarcoating.(When reading this, know there is no sarcasm or bitterness in my typing. I am just trying to get my point across to the best of my ability.)

Yes, I made a correalation between The Sahara, a 1st gen Middle Eastern real estate tycoon, and yes I did say that there are alot more Middle Eastern Development companies buying up property and tearing down, than preserving. These statements can be proven with research. Like I said before, I don't make the demographics, or ethnically organize where people should be employed.
It is what it is.

And as a man of my word, I stand corrected John-O, for you providing a 1st generation Immigrant who actually remodeled/restored a historical building; the Shangri-La Hotel.
(Just don't hold your breath on the Sahara returning to its former retro glory. They confirmed that they are closing it, but believe this, it is not to sit on it and lose even more money.)

[ Edited by: Tom Slick 2011-03-17 23:35 ]

I think the fact that many of these real estate developers are from the Middle East has nothing to do with them tearing down and rebuilding. I think what DOES have to do with it is that they are REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS. That's what real estate developers typically do. Yes there are a few exceptions, but where they are from is moot.

"I think what DOES have to do with it is that they are REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS. That's what real estate developers typically do."

And usually real estate developers try to develop property that's going to be commercially successful. That means property that's going to appeal to the wants and needs of our fellow countrymen. And, as it turns out, our fellow countrymen generally don't give a rat's ass for old style casinos.

On 2011-03-18 00:54, woofmutt wrote:
"I think what DOES have to do with it is that they are REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS. That's what real estate developers typically do."

And usually real estate developers try to develop property that's going to be commercially successful. That means property that's going to appeal to the wants and needs of our fellow countrymen. And, as it turns out, our fellow countrymen generally don't give a rat's ass for old style casinos.

And that is "causation". By the way, who can tell me what GD MFer tore Trader Vics out of the New York Hilton? It probably was an immigrant with no ear for American history or pop culture.

Did someone say Donald Trump?

Self deleted because woof is correct, this is tempting me to veer off too close to politics, which never ends well. But as in regards to the definition of "latino", this is part of the wiki article:

"Although a large majority of Hispanic and Latino Americans have Spanish ancestry, most are not of direct (non–Latin American) Spanish descent; many are not primarily of Spanish descent; and some are not of Spanish descent at all. People whose ancestors or who themselves arrived in the United States directly from Spain are a tiny minority of the Hispanic or Latino population (see figures in this article), and there are Hispanic/Latino Americans who are primarily or entirely of European ancestries other than Spanish (e.g. Italian, German, Polish, Portuguese), and of Middle Eastern (e.g. Lebanese), Black, Amerindian/Native American, or East Asian/South Asian ancestries"

So according to this, I am a part of an ethic group that has an enonormous umbrella, containing many different races? I dissagree. I consider my self an American of European descent, and nothing else. At the least, according to wikipedia I constitute a very small part of the "latino" ethnic group.

[ Edited by: lucas vigor 2011-03-18 09:16 ]

"I see no reason to lock the topic, as I have not disrespected anyone, nor has anyone else. We are all adults, and are we not allowed to state our findings and opinions so long as we do not insult, defame or threaten another?"

I agree entirely.

The discussion up until this point has been civil without personal attacks with the focus being on the arguments made and not the people who made them.

And it was nonpolitical...Until the post just above this one was made. I can't see any reason to bring politics into the discussion now especially as that's a sure way to see that the thread gets locked.

(Edited to add "up until this point" to the post and to change "been" to "was.")

[ Edited by: woofmutt 2011-03-18 09:24 ]

On 2011-03-18 08:23, lucas vigor wrote:
With all due respect, Tom, your argument follows typical tea party logic. You already have your opinion, and now will find examples to prove it.

As if nobody has tried to refute my examples, either? That is a two way street. Besides, I always thought that examples were used to prove or elevate points being made, during conversations and debates?

In no way did I EVER state that ALL Middle Eastern or ALL First Generation Immigrant Development companies ALWAYS tear down iconic places. I simply made a generalized statement. What you read beyond that, is on you.

On 2011-03-18 08:23, lucas vigor wrote:
You appear to be fixing your blame on one demographic, and there has and always will be a name for that kind of thing.

Really? What happened to the "With all due respect..."?
First and last Lucas, don't ever insinuate I am a racist, or a biggot. You don't know me, have no idea about me, or my background, so you need to back off with that tone(with all due respect, of course).
(this coming from someone who claims a Latino can't be from Spanish background...Heh.)

And Telescopes, If Donald Trump was responsible for NY Trader Vic's demise, you mind telling us who was responsible for Beverly Hills Trader Vic's, since the company was used as an example anyway?
Again, in case some people missed it;
Nothing derogatory was stated about Mr. Nazarian and his ethnicity, and just because I used the two together, still is not derogatory. It is factual.

And for the future, and just to keep things simple...The next time I decide to chime in on something, I'll make sure to keep it as generic and without detail, as possible. That way, I can avoid the witch hunt in the future.

Hak, I see your point of view about ethnicity and developers being moot, but I also see a trend, and thats the only reason why I brought it up to begin with.

Tom, I already edited my post. I reacted angrily, which should not happen. In turn, you should consider editing your posts as well before we both end up looking like asses.

On 2011-03-18 09:18, lucas vigor wrote:
Tom, I already edited my post. I reacted angrily, which should not happen. In turn, you should consider editing your posts as well before we both end up looking like asses.

Now you're calling me an ass? wow.

Tell me, how does your shoe really taste, especially when it's on the other foot?
Do you now see how easy it is to misconstrue and twist people's words around, maybe even indirectly to incite trouble?(kinda like what you did to me?)

Look, I'm a firm believer in "say what you mean, and mean what you say".
You weren't too concerned about what you said BEFORE Woof replied with his insightful reply....Just saying. I'm not editing anything to PC up things. If I ever edit, it is because of spelling or grammatical error, or to add something I may have forgot...I don't edit my posts to sugarcoat or cover up my temporary fits of anger. Nobody ever said you had to like what I said, or even add a direct reply to me. That was your choice, however wreckless it may have been.
(Its a good thing I don't take anything said, to heart. But I do feel people should be held accountable for what they say, and stick to it.) If that makes me an "Ass" in your eyes, so be it. I still stand by my posts.

Well, your posts are showing a strong xenophobic element, and it is too bad you can't see that yourself. Maybe it's not how you meant it, but I think the average person would probably make that inference.

On 2011-03-18 10:46, Tom Slick wrote:

On 2011-03-18 09:18, lucas vigor wrote:
Tom, I already edited my post. I reacted angrily, which should not happen. In turn, you should consider editing your posts as well before we both end up looking like asses.

Now you're calling me an ass? wow.

Tell me, how does your shoe really taste, especially when it's on the other foot?
Do you now see how easy it is to misconstrue and twist people's words around, maybe even indirectly to incite trouble?(kinda like what you did to me?)

Look, I'm a firm believer in "say what you mean, and mean what you say".
You weren't too concerned about what you said BEFORE Woof replied with his insightful reply....Just saying. I'm not editing anything to PC up things. If I ever edit, it is because of spelling or grammatical error, or to add something I may have forgot...I don't edit my posts to sugarcoat or cover up my temporary fits of anger. Nobody ever said you had to like what I said, or even add a direct reply to me. That was your choice, however wreckless it may have been.
(Its a good thing I don't take anything said, to heart. But I do feel people should be held accountable for what they say, and stick to it.) If that makes me an "Ass" in your eyes, so be it. I still stand by my posts.

I suppose we will all be taking trailertiki's advice. Dude, lets drink some ASS JUICE at Mohave Oasis!!! Lighten up guys..."

However, their are some things that were stated that are wrong assumptions. First, "Look, I'm a firm believer in "say what you mean, and mean what you say" is not a defense of a logical argument. In fact, it precludes a logical argument because either the maker of the statement has some divine insight into the truth that the other side lacks or you in fact in the possession of something that exists outside the laws of our physical understanding.

Either way, it's a cheap way to make a point.

Secondly, when someone says, "As if nobody has tried to refute my examples, either? That is a two way street. Besides, I always thought that examples were used to prove or elevate points being made, during conversations and debates? "

Examples are anecdotal and neither confirm causation or reject causation. At most, they are postulates. They prove nothing in and of themselves. They only serve as starting points for further examination. Hence, the reason why I stated my examples regarding Donald Trump, the missionaries who went to Hawaii, and the Conquestador (those latins) and Jesuits who went to New Mexico. We can all find examples of generalities in ethnic groups that laid wast to native culture - if indeed poly pop constitutes being labeled a native culture. I am from the midwest and I can tell you, we were almost all white and wow, did we ever destroy native culture - I give the St. Louis Trader Vics and the Mainlander as examples - although it might be argued that the Mainlander was taken out by the Mormons, but saying that would almost certainly get this thread deleted.

Now in closing, when you say (Its a good thing I don't take anything said, to heart. But I do feel people should be held accountable for what they say, and stick to it.) If that makes me an "Ass" in your eyes, so be it. I still stand by my posts.

Ah, why?

Why stand by something just because you said it. Your statement that started this thread, is indeed a statement that is both nativist, prejudicial (based on every definition of prejudice that is found in the dictionary, and is based on observational assumptions (if a and b are in the same room then a and b must be related)

"CEO Sam Nazarian < that name says it all...It's people with names like this one for example, and first generations that have no understanding of American Culture, nor give a shit about it. They only worry about money, not history or context. Same thing happened with the Beverly Hills Hotel/Trader Vic's...First genners come here with money, or enter with construction/redevelopment companies and go from there. Tear it all down and rebuild. Smart business people, but they have no soul."

Above all, it clearly is a statement that many have found offensive. If indeed it were a statement that bespoke the clarity of truth, then don't delete it or retract it. But it doesn't meet the standards required for "I'm just being honest (or truthful).

So why not retract or delate a statement that in the minds of many, might cause you to look like an ass - and from reading other things you have posted, you clearly are not an ass.

On 2011-03-18 10:56, lucas vigor wrote:
Well, your posts are showing a strong xenophobic element, and it is too bad you can't see that yourself. Maybe it's not how you meant it, but I think the average person would probably make that inference.

Maybe it depends on the individual who reads it?
Mr. Nazarian is Middle Eastern. Mr. Nazarian is a first generation Immigrant. Mr. Nazarian is a Developer/Real Estate tycoon. All of those are facts. All of those are what I stated. Therefore, how does one indirectly(or directly) arrive that I'm a bigot or xenophobe? Because I call it as it is? This has obviously spun out of control because people dug in, tried to connect and incite something that just isn't there. No more different than the old fashioned Witch Hunt, because someone spoke directly about the immediate topic.

I'm done and finished with derailing this topic about the Sahara any longer. Like I stated before;
In the future, I will generically and neutrally approach topics as not to upset the sensitive.
Lesson learned on my end, no matter what the facts that I'll have to omit.
Also, I genuinely state that I have no hard feelings with anyone within the topic. I have my opinions, as do others have theirs. I respect it, and leave it at that.

My final thought on the Sahara is this:
When(not If), they close the doors to the Sahara to the public, don't expect the property to sit dormant for very long. Look to City Center Development area defunct casino's like the Boardwalk or further down, the New Frontier and Stardust properties for reference...They did not sit vacant/dormant for very long before they met their demise. You don't make money in Vegas by sitting on vacant land. Expect to see more Brass, Glass, and white blandness that will most likely fill in that area, based on current Vegas trend.

Back to the topic of the Sahara!

When I was in High School, a fairly new high school at that, I remember talking to the counselor about the poor condition of the school and how run down it looked. He said something that has stayed with me. "Low cost, high maintenance."

When I studied school architecture while working on my doctorate in education, my class was taught by the gentleman who designed Bush Stadium in St. Louis. The topic came up again. Sadly, we all know what happened to that iconic stadium. It was torn down, having served it's "half-life". It too, was an example of low cost, high maintenance.

Vegas is probably the best example of this philosophy and this probably explains why so many of the buildings are torn down. The upkeep expenses rot away your profits. It's cheaper to start over.

And start over they do.

Even the White House, the iconic symbol of American Government, had to be totally rebuilt at expense that blew past the price of simply building a new house. But, then again, it was the White House and that symbol wasn't going to be remade.

There are examples of High Cost, low maintenance in America - The Hoover Dam, The Golden Gate Bridge, Mount Rushmore, and the Saint Louis Arch, but even the first two require quite a bit of maintenance. But they were all build to last for centuries.

I think our problem as Americans is that we don't think several generations into the future. We think about us and we think about us in the now.

Does it make sense to a business person to really fix up the Sahara only to sell it at a loss to someone else? Look at the Tonga Room. Does it make any financial sense to the owners of the Fairmont not to change it into condos?

Unless the public is willing to purchase the Sahara and maintain it, I really don't think there is much we can do. Someday, it will be Caesars Palace or the Bellagio that will be torn down.

You guys got way too much time on your hands or this is a very sensitive topic to you. Anyways, have fun debating and maybe I'll see you at Mojave Oasis.

It's really bad the Sahara is closing its doors, it was a good place to finish my Vegas vacations when I was getting run down.I will miss the Sahara.

Las Vegas Restaurant

[ Edited by: diane21 2011-04-18 01:43 ]