Moulin Rouge Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas

Moulin Rouge Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas

Earlier this week, approval was given to destroy what is left of the somewhat mysterious property, and the lot on which it sits is expected to be cleared shortly.

As much as I would love to regale you with anecdotes about my experiences at this property, I’ve obviously never been inside of the place.  Hell, even though I am surrounded by old-timers in this neighborhood, not a single one of them has a tale about visiting the Moulin Rouge.  The only thing I know about the place is what I have read online, and even that is not a whole hell of a lot.  There is so little known about the casino that it’s kind of spooky.

Last year, a fire raged through the property, and I was one of the first people to arrive on the scene. I saw smoke begin to billow as I was driving east on Fremont Street, and I followed the plumes and captured what was perhaps the beginning of the end for the structure.  As you can imagine, rumor around town was that the fire was intentionally started by the owners of the property, and this is probably still the prevailing belief, but it is just a rumor.

(Moulin Rouge: Interview with a Resident)

Until last year, I did not know much about the Moulin Rouge (I still don’t), but the little that I did learn fascinates me.

First of all, the Moulin Rouge was the nation’s first integrated hotel and casino.  All of the other hotels in Las Vegas were off-limits to black people unless they were workers in the hotels.

Second, and most interesting, even though it has been standing for over 50 years, it was only open for a few months.  The Moulin Rouge opened in May of ‘55, closed in November of ‘55, and declared bankruptcy in December of ‘55.  With the exception of a one-off event in 1960, the place has been closed ever since.  I guess the town wasn’t prepared to embrace diversity.

Lastly, word has it that our very own mayor, Oscar Goodman, celebrated his 78th birthday at the Moulin Rouge one short month before it declared bankruptcy.  (98er disclaimer:  It was a joke.  A joke about Oscar Goodman being old.)

“Dear Vegas Rex,

You said that Oscar Goodman celebrated his 78th birthday at the Moulin Rouge in 1955 but you lied because Oscar Goodman was born in 1939 and I love Oscar and don’t think you should make fun of him since you’re just jealous and you think you’re being funny but you are not funny at all Ellen DeGeneres is funny but not you because you never tell knock knock jokes and I’m never going to read you again because my wife says you’re sexist and you probably have a small dick and I am smarter than you because I graduated eighth in my class at Devry University and why can’t you be more like Jane Austen now there was a writer who really knew her stuff and she didn’t need to resort to using profanity to get her point across and watch your back Vegas Rex because next time I see you I WILL CUT YOU!”

Seriously, if Steve Wynn sends me the above email one more time, he’s going to have a lawsuit on his hands.   (98er disclaimer:  Steve Wynn doesn’t really email … never mind.)

West Las Vegas - Housing Projects

West Las Vegas - Housing Projects

West Las Vegas - Housing Projects

In any event, I stocked up on the last photos I will ever be able to take of the ill-fated property, and then drove home through the surprisingly attractive housing projects of West Las Vegas.  If you have any desire for some parting memorabilia from this iconic property shrouded in mystery (I think photos are all you get at this point), obtain them while you still can.  The last call has been sounded.

Moulin Rouge Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas

Rest in peace Moulin Rouge.

We hardly knew ye.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jun/22/12-billion-fontainebleau-construction-permits-pull/

Some $1.2 billion in construction permits were pulled for the idled Fontainebleau casino resort on the Las Vegas Strip this month — but no one is saying if that means construction will actually resume anytime soon.

Clark County Development Services, the county office that tracks the issuance of building permits, reported last week that a company that acquired the Fontainebleau property on the Strip pulled 47 permits for projects at the development’s 2777 Las Vegas Blvd. South address.

But county officials said today this may be just a procedural effort … (snip) …

All the permits were issued June 10 and the total value of all 47 permits exceeds $1.2 billion.

Representatives of Icahn Enterprises and Taylor International did not return calls clarifying whether there are any plans to resume construction at Fontainebleau … (click the article link to read more)

As we are all aware, Carl “Yes” Icahn acquired the F’ingBlew in January, and construction on the property has been idle since that time.  According to the above article, however, the pulled permits may actually be counterintuitive to the true intentions of the owner.  Since permits are only good for 6 months, and building code requirement changes are imminent, this could mean that new applications are in the works.

Or maybe not.

I read the article three times, and frankly, it was less than clear as to what the true probabilities for either scenario were.

Even though the article is far from conclusive, I personally find the prospect that things might restart to be quite heartening.  I’ve been following and photographing with great interest in the FBlue since it was a mere stump, and I was extremely disappointed when the project went belly-up.

Fontainebleau Las Vegas

Fontainebleau Las Vegas

Fontainebleau Las Vegas

The FBlue is an omnipresent fixture in Rexville, looming in the near-background of every home and business in the area, and it probably goes without saying that we all expected it to have been finished by now.  In a very real way, the place was going to be our City Center.

The consensus among my own neighbors now is that Icahn is merely going to use the place as a pawn in his larger empire, and that it will be many years until anyone buys it with the intent of turning it into a fully-functional property.  This is an opinion I share.

I think that for the foreseeable future, the property will be a plastic cube in a game of Monopoly played by wealthy old men with gigantic prostates and fake teeth, but I hope to be proven wrong.

Speaking of Rexville developments (or the lack thereof), I just realized that I have yet to see ANY progress on the upcoming Aspen Holdings project.

For those of you who do not remember, the corner of Sahara and Las Vegas Boulevard was supposed to be the site of a new “Times Square”-themed casino, and that casino was scheduled to open in the fall of 2010 (a few months from now).  I passed the intersection earlier today, and believe me when I tell you, it looks exactly the same as it did this time last year.  I do not see any hint of the 547′ LED sign that was proposed for the site.

Northeast Corner of Sahara Avenue and Las Vegas Boulevard

Now, I’m no construction expert, but my guess is that if they have yet to start building, then the chances of a fall opening are pretty slim.  My money is on the Times Square casino being more vaporware, but once again, I would be thrilled to be proven wrong.

Anyway, according to the mainstream press (which is 70%+ accurate), the Fontainebleau may or may not be resumed at some point in the future.

This may or may not be good news.

In 2010 Las Vegas, this is about as definitive as things get.

You know, I just got done lavishing praise on our local mainstream media (in my own way, of course) — and no sooner did the ink dry on the screen before my new daily newspaper of choice completely insulted me to my digital face.

Even though we’re all a bunch of ad-centric tools as well, this my friends, is why real bloggers are still the reporters of the future:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jun/18/blackjack-paying-6-5-making-headway/

You see, I learned something today when I fired up my web browser.  Apparently, get this …. there is a new form of Blackjack sweeping Las Vegas, and this new variation offers lower payouts than the traditional game.

Yeah, I kid you not.

From what I hear, this new creation is called “6:5 Blackjack”

WHO KNEW???!!!

In related breaking news:  The Boardwalk Hotel will be demolished to make room for a new MGM/Mirage complex.

The Sun’s article begins, and I quote:

“In recent months, more than two dozen tables paying 6-5 for blackjacks have surfaced in Las Vegas, in some cases replacing games that paid the traditional 3-2. With the traditional payoff, a blackjack on a bet of $10 wins $15, but with 6-5 odds it wins only $12.”

Jesus Leaping Christ on a purple pogo stick, are the reporters at the Sun high on phenobarbital?

Who is the editor of the newspaper, Rip … Van … Fucking … Winkle?

Seriously, these guys are slower than Corky from Life Goes On.

“More than two dozen tables have surfaced in recent months”?

Really?

I mean … REALLY?

Sure, the statement that there are “more than two dozen” 6:5 tables in Las Vegas is technically accurate, just like the statement “five hundred is more than eight” is technically accurate.  Both statements understate the issue, though.

There aren’t twenty four 6:5 BJ tables in Las Vegas, there are hundreds of such tables.

Also, what, exactly, would one consider “recent months”?

We’re a solid 5 years into the 6:5 takeover.  By “recent months” does the Sun mean “the recent 72 months?”

Look, there is nothing wrong with the Sun doing an article about 6:5 Blackjack.  I very much welcome and appreciate it.  Printing it as if they are blowing the cover off of a new phenomenon is a little bit strange, however.

Hell, as a blogger who has been covering this issue for years, I think I’m going to sue the Sun for theft of intellectual property.  $75,000 sounds reasonable for damages.  Does anyone have the number for a good shuyster law firm?  Preferably, one incorporated as an LLC.  Oh, and one with a cryptic name beginning with a positive and affirming word such as “right”.  You know, so that when the whole legal thing goes to shit and people start making fun of the lawsuit, it won’t be my name which will be dragged through the mud.

“I swear it wasn’t me, I didn’t want the seventy five G’s, it was those goddamn greedy lawyers!”

Anyway, now that the Sun has let the cat out of the bag about this “6:5 Blackjack” thing, I will concede that the rest of the article made for an interesting read.  Parties from both sides of the issue offered their perspectives, and the main person who took the pre-6:5 side came off as quite dishonest in my opinion.

For instance, casino consultant Max Rubin offered the following:

“Major Las Vegas casinos have too much overhead to be able to afford 3-2 games at low limits of $1 or $5, Rubin says. The low house edge on blackjack, close to break-even for skilled players and 1.5 percent for beginners, isn’t enough to pay the staff and maintenance costs resulting from that casino traffic, he says”

What Rubin failed to explain, was how Las Vegas made it from the 1960’s through the mid-2000’s with 3:2 payouts.  The mid-90’s to the early 00’s alone was one of the largest boom periods in Vegas history, and this was accomplished with normal Blackjack odds.  The paper did not challenge Mr. Rubin on this fact, because Mr. Rubin is ostensibly an expert on the matter.  The great thing about being an expert, is that you can just throw any quote against the wall and it will typically stick lest the non-expert reporter embarrass himself by asking a silly followup question.

Not to be outdone by his own words, however, Rubin offers the most interesting quote of the entire article:

“One way to measure value is how much fun people are having,” he says. “Sometimes it’s OK to have sucker bets if the suckers are enjoying themselves.”

There you have it folks, a concession from someone in the industry that 6:5 Blackjack is indeed a game for suckers.

Why is 6:5 Blackjack more “fun” than 3:2 Blackjack?

Well, Rubin doesn’t say.  He implies that people are able to play at lower limits because of the crap payouts, but I played $1 and $3 normal Blackjack for years, and I usually lost whatever I bought in with.

Regardless, the main apologist for six five in the article concedes that the 6:5 bets are sucker bets.  For those of you who still routinely play it … that should mean something.  It should remove all doubt that you are suckers.

No longer should I get emails informing me that I am a condescending prick for making fun of people who pack 6:5 tables that are directly adjacent to 3:2 tables.  An expert has officially verified my claim that you are suckers, and all outrage should now be directed to him.

Unfortunately, for those who still enjoy the party pit vibe, regular Blackjack games are getting harder and harder to find.  The Golden Gate and Las Vegas Club still retain (mostly) normal limits, but my guess is that even they are waiting for an opportunity to make a wholesale switch.

In my opinion, it’s only a matter of time before every game under $25 pays 6:5.  Las Vegas is just waiting for intelligent gamblers to die off (it shouldn’t take long).  Simply put, for mere mortals of modest financial mean, the entire game of Blackjack is on borrowed time.  At least in Las Vegas.

Now that a major newspaper has spoken out on the matter, maybe, just maybe … more people will pay attention and ask the pits for normal odds games.

Dare to dream.

Sucker.

From Google News via the Associated Press (dear god please tell me an RJ writer did not contribute to the article) @ http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jxDJpplVAfwdW6DZWvawoRlw7b0QD9GC27F80

In summary:

Wynn Resorts Ltd. CEO Steve Wynn says his company has laid off 220 hourly and 41 salaried workers from its two Las Vegas hotel-casinos.

To say that Steve Wynn (or “Thugdog Nasty” as he is known in the ‘hood) has been a busy man is an understatement.  Stealing tips, hiding fees in fine print, opening pools, booking ringtone bands, laying folks off … homeboy deserves a break.

Perhaps he should take a few days off, chill by the pool, and drink some shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots shots.

Speaking of the aforementioned “fees”, I went through the booking process to see how well they were disclosed, and I found my answer:

Not very well.

You have to click a smallish-printed “Terms and Conditions” link at which point a window opens and displays the fee.  90% of people will never click the link.  Attached is evidence of the size of said link (lower right of image).  The website is copyrighted by Wynn Resorts International (which is why I blurred the prices and images on it), but I am using my own screenshot for the sole purpose of ridiculing and criticizing the disclosures on said site.

Wynn Terms and Conditions

They suck.

Balls.

Back to the topic at hand … the Wynn/Encore is laying off 261 people (3% of their work force), and obviously this is a shame.  Then again, 2,300 people are about to make more money with their hours restored.  Frankly, I’m not sure how to call this one.  It’s kind of a mixed bag.

Deep down, I’m certain that a man of Steve Wynn’s wealth could easily afford to keep on these 261 people and raise the salaries of every other worker.  When you have more money than God, and you’re damn near 70 years old, why not dig into your own pocket and pay your people?  I mean, what the hell else are you going to do with it?  Buy Garth a Space Shuttle so he can spend an extra seventeen minutes per week with the family?

When you are 68, statistically, you have 10 more years until you take the ultimate dirtnap.  Be good to people.  Forgo the extra ten million dollars.  Take a loss for the benefit of 200 working people with families who are going to face record NV Energy bills this summer.  What is money at this point?

Your people are your company.  Why would you steal their tips and lay them off when you have plenty?  Capitalism does not equal greed.  It simply means the private ownership of capital.  It saddens me to see a man of enormous means deciding whether to lay people off or cut hours, when he really doesn’t have to do either.

I understand that the shareholders ultimately help make these decisions, but this is when a CEO should cash in some AAPL stock and make sure his people are covered.

It’s an easy thing to say, but that is exactly what I would do.

Then again, with my attitude, I could never become as wealthy as Steve in the first place.  I would cave at the first employee sob story.  I simply do not have a level of psychopathy that would enable me to get to such a level of wealth.  I use the word “psychopath” in a literal sense, not as a pejorative.  It is my firmly held belief that most highly successful businessmen and elected officials are almost certainly psychopaths.  You simply cannot succeed in either of these endeavors without ruthlessness and a pathological lack of empathy.

It is nothing short of a national tragedy that these are the people we worship in this country.  These are our idols.  This mentality is a large part of our decline.  Fuck the other guy until his rear end bleeds simply to add a little more to the existing mountain of bling.  I digress.

I’ve been camped bedside for the last 40 hours due to yet another case of tourist flu.  Before I moved here, I rarely, if ever got sick.  Now, it’s a once a month ordeal due to the various strains of rice flu from China, dingo flu from Australia, Alanis Morrisette Flu from Canada , and idiot flu from Texas.

I still don’t feel 100%, but screw it.  I’m heading out to play some cards.

Nothing makes a person feel better than winning money.

At least that’s what I’ve been told.

Someday, I hope to experience it first-hand.

I rarely have this opportunity, however.

Take for example, tip stealing.  When the Wynn began the practice of stealing dealer’s tokes some years ago, I was certain that it would only be a matter of time before other casinos followed suit.

Well, it looks like that day is nigh:

Italicized quotes in this article are from the Las Vegas Sun @ http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jun/14/daily-memo-gaming-caesars-looking-change-tips-wynn/ (NOT the Review Journal)

“… Caesars Palace — a property where union-represented dealers are at loggerheads with management about changes in benefits and working conditions they don’t like — recently adopted language in its contract with dealers that allows the casino to impose the same tip-sharing policy as Wynn.

We have always maintained that we had the authority to manage the tip pool,” even before Wynn enacted his plan, said Marybel Batjer, vice president of public policy and communications for Harrah’s. “When Wynn acted upon it, we had not even contemplated it.”

But the world has changed since 2006. The following year, dealers — angered by the tip policy and its reduction in their take-home pay — made Wynn the first major casino since 2001 to see a successful vote for union representation.

Inspired by their counterparts at Wynn, Caesars dealers, who also feared a redistribution of tips but were more concerned about other matters such as job security and benefits, voted for union representation in December 2007. In a memo to dealers days before the election, Harrah’s executive Tom Jenkin urged them to vote against the union, adding that “Wynn made a bad decision in sharing tokes (tips) with supervisors.”

“To be as clear as possible, your tokes are your tokes,” he wrote …”

Read that last line again.  And again.  And once more.

That, my friends, is what you call a “Las Vegas Promise”.  I put more trust in my bowel movements than what I am told in this town.

Speaking as to his motivation:

“Wynn says the tips have motivated supervisors to provide better customer service to gamblers, making them deserving of tips that historically went to frontline workers in nonmanagement jobs. Dealers have disputed that, calling it Wynn’s way of avoiding paying managers higher salaries by taking the money out of the pockets of the frontline workers.”

Wait … what?

How have tips motivated supervisors to provide better customer service to gamblers?

Does this mean that every non-Wynn pit boss is currently providing shitty service to gamblers?

How is this lack of supervisor motivation manifested?

Seriously, I don’t know about the rest of you, but the pit bosses are rarely the source of my “service” in this town.  Sometimes they are friendly, and sometimes they are downright adversarial.  What is it, exactly, that Wynn is so convinced that his supervisors are not motivated to do?  Is he afraid that they will let me say “fuck” without a reprimand unless they get a 15% pay increase?  Is he afraid that they are going to cheat or overlook collusion?  The case has simply never been made for tipping a pit boss other than “they just want the dealer’s money”.

Tip pooling is bad enough, and it’s a practice that I detest, but this addition is just a travesty.

Don’t these people realize that in order to motivate the pit bosses in this manner, it requires de-motivating the dealers.  Personally I’d rather have a motivated dealer than a motivated pit boss.

Anyway, it appears that Caesars will also begin stealing its dealers’ tips at some point in the future, and of course, many more casinos will quickly follow suit until the practice is standard at all Vegas casinos.

Caesars Palace

Caesars Palace

Now, I get a lot, and I mean A LOT of flak for calling this practice tip stealing.  People have been getting angry with me about the term since I started using it three years ago.

These people can get pissed until they are blue in the face, however, because I 100% stand by the term.

What Steve Wynn and the other casinos will be doing is absolutely theft.

If I walk up to you and hand you $10, and that ten dollars is completely voluntary, then it is a gift.  Your employer has no claim to it.

“But Rex, waitresses have been sharing their tips with bus boys forever and dealers have been pooling their tips for years.”

I know, and I think it’s wrong.

If I wanted to tip the bus boy, I would hand the bus boy money.  If I wanted to tip someone else’s dealer, I would walk over and tip them.  The fact that a business does not pay its employees a living wage does not justify their robbing of Peter to pay Paul.  If a business owner is outraged that their bus boys or shift managers make less money than do other employees … then it is up to the owner to pay those people more.

The fact that everyone steals from their employees does not make it right.  ”Everyone does it” … doesn’t mean anything at all.  It’s the refrain of the brainwashed masses who comfort themselves with the warm mental opiate that is acquiescence to the status-quo.

“Well Rex, when the employee is on the clock, whatever property they get during that time belongs to their boss.”

Bullshit.

We abolished slavery in this country.  At least in theory.

You get paid to perform a task, not cede your personal property on demand.

If your kid is working at Burger King on her 16th birthday, and you decide to surprise her by driving the new car you bought her into the Burger King parking lot, the store manager is not entitled to any interest in the car whatsoever.  They cannot take possession of it, or redistribute it in any way.  If they did, it would be called “theft”.  If the manager told your kid that he would fire her unless she handed over the keys to the car, this would be called “extortion”.  Making either of the above scenarios a condition of employment is patently unconscionable.

Unfortunately, laws are applied unequally in this country.  You can actually buy a license to steal here.

Not only will the courts look the other way, but so will the press.

In Las Vegas, our mainstream media insists on calling this particular brand of employee extortion “tip sharing”.

Steve Wynn could mercilessly club baby seals, and our local media would call it “Steve Wynn’s crusade to solve the crisis of seal overpopulation”.  When you’re a member of the corporate media, you can’t bite the advertising hands that feed you.  In this town, those hands belong to the casinos.  Being intellectually dishonest is part of the job, and the working man/woman of Las Vegas is always going to be abused by our supposed 4th branch of government.

The rest of us, those who don’t have to eat the shit we are being shoveled by casino CEO’s, really need to get over these cutesy “sharing” labels when the practice is nothing more than extortion.  The casinos are saying to dealers “gimme 15% of the gifts you receive, or you will be terminated, blackballed, and never work in this town again.  You will lose your home, your kids will not be able to see a doctor, and you will starve.”  Frankly, I do not know how anyone can call this “sharing” with a straight face.

In any event, I feel that the town is making another grave mistake.

I think the Wynn’s new “resort fee” is going to turn off a lot of visitors, and I think Harrah’s new tip stealing policy (assuming they implement it) will further diminish the morale of an already recession-worn group of dealers.

Whether you realize it or not, this will have an affect on all of us, visitor, local, and worker alike.

Once again, color me disappointed.

I watch with a heavy heart as the corporate plutocracy of Las Vegas continues to make greedy decisions which will eventually result in the further decline of a town which once held great promise.

Vegas baby.

Wynn and Encore Hotel and Casino

Wynn and Encore Hotel and Casino

Yesterday, both Wynn Las Vegas and the Encore Las Vegas began implementing a $20/night “resort fee”.

What does the “resort fee” include?

Apparently, it gets you the following:

• In-room Internet Access
• Local Phone Calls
• Use of the fitness center
• The ability to print your boarding pass at the hotel

Oddly enough, what it does not get you, is entrance to the new Encore Beach Club.  That will still run you $70/day for a husband and wife combo.

This latest move also means that, were I to check into the Wynn tomorrow, I would personally be paying an extra $20 for absolutely nothing.

I have a cellphone, I have my own wireless internet connection, I don’t use fitness centers, and I can print my boarding pass in any number of inexpensive places.  Even if I did want the pass printed at the end of my stay, why would I be charged each night?  Whether I stay one night or ten nights, I’m only flying home once.

Supposedly, resort fees are not subject to room taxes, so in addition to gouging you, the customer, with an unexpected fee … Steve will also have to remit less of your dollars to the LVCVA.  This may or may not be the only positive aspects of the entire situation.

Now, I’ve been over the resort fee issues many times before.  Whether it was Stations or the M Resort (who has since done away with the fee), I have railed against them ad-nauseum since the day I started blogging.  I’ve always felt that they were among the very worst practices of our local properties … even more wrong and insidious than 6:5 Blackjack.

They are deceitful, contemptuous of the customer, and have no place in a city which is so heavily dependent on public relations as is Las Vegas.  Hell, they are so bad that even Harrah’s got rid of them and proudly advertises as much.

Just how bad does a source of income have to be for Harrah’s beancounters to publicly distance themselves from it?

Pretty goddamn bad, that’s how bad.

This latest move by Wynn also means that we are still very much a city of fine print.

“Welcome to Camp Vegas … What Happens Here Stays Here*”

*As long as what happens here does not involve consensual sex for money, contact with strippers, drug use, or anything you can’t do in South Bend, Indiana.

Ripping you off has now become our #1 priority, and you better read your hotel reservation terms and conditions with the same magnifying glass you used to reserve for your extended warranty from Best Buy.

Yes, that is how bad things have gotten in this town, and they are probably about to get worse.

Steve Wynn is to Las Vegas what Steve Jobs is to the tech world.  Love the guy or hate the guy, almost everyone here watches what he does closely, and they take his cues as to how to proceed.  This new revelation by Wynn means that we are probably likely to see a whole new wave of resort fees city-wide, or at the very least … the fees that already exist are definitely here to stay.

When my own guests come in from out of town, the Wynn is actually one of the more frequent hotels at which they stay.  I personally altered my own behavior at the property many years ago when the tip-stealing scheme began (in particular, I nearly cut out my table gaming at the property), but despite the jokes and metrosexual ribbing, the rooms have always come highly recommended by yours truly.  The property is very convenient to Rexville, the room rates were pretty reasonable for the overall quality, and the complaints I have heard from my own visitors are few and far between.

Now … I don’t know.  It appears as though even that recommendation will need to be re-assessed.  For a two night stay, an extra $40 for nothing is more than a little insulting.  It seems as though even the mighty have fallen to new lows.

For once, I don’t have anything particularly smart-assed to say about Steve Wynn or his latest move.

I’m just disappointed.

The R-J’s latest actions have provoked much thought by yours truly, and I have come to a few conclusions.

First of all, I think the R-J is seriously damaging their brand with these lawsuits.

In my opinion, these suits are going to be a PR catastrophe.  Sometimes being technically right is not enough, and this is one of those situations.  I don’t care how right you think you are, suing a non-commercial cat blog for $75,000 makes you look like an anus.

This is especially true when you realize that the R-J is unlikely to actually get paid if they win.  How many bloggers have $75K laying around during the great recession?  A victorious lawsuit isn’t worth the paper it is printed on if you can’t collect the judgement, and I’m sure that in some of these cases a $75K judgment might as well be a billion dollar judgment when it comes time to collect them.

I can understand suing Microsoft or Apple for that kind of money, but suing Joe’s Copy-and-Paste Las Vegas Blog is nothing more than legal masturbation.

Second, these suits make the R-J look weak … almost desperate.

Think about it.  If you are a strong newspaper, being quoted by one, or even one hundred obscure blogs is not going to hurt your business model.  Yet, here we have the R-J implying that a Boston “Cat Blog” is cutting into their revenue.  Such a revelation does not bode well for the newspaper.

In order to address the current situation at the R-J, Sherman “Stix” Frederick, the publisher of the R-J outlined his paper’s position in a blog post at http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/sherm/Copyright_theft_Were_not_taking_it_anymore.html

In it, he states:

“Look at this way. Say I owned a beautiful 1967 Corvette and kept it parked in my front yard.

And you, being a Corvette enthusiast, saw my Vette from the street. You stopped and stood on the sidewalk admiring it. You liked it so much you called friends and gave them my address in case they also wanted to drive over for a gander.

There’d be nothing wrong with that. I like my ‘67 Vette and I keep in the front yard because I like people to see it.

But then, you entered my front yard, climbed into the front seat and drove it away.

I’m absolutely, 100% not OK with that. In fact, I’m calling the police and reporting that you stole my car.

Every jury in the land would convict you.

Yet, when it comes to copyrighted material — news that my company spends money to gather and constitutes the essence of what we are as a business — some people think they can not only look at it, but also steal it. And they do. They essentially step into the front yard and drive that content away.

Well, we at Stephens Media have decided to do something about it. And, I hope other publishers will join me.”

Oh dear, I just pasted one hell of a big quote.  I’m going to have to ridicule the hell out of it just to keep the law on my side.  Let me see if I can manage.

Now, I appreciate Sherm taking time out of his day to detail his position with the public, but his example is patently stupid.

Car theft is a criminal matter, whereas fair use is civil matter.  This is the reason that Sherman “Tank” Frederick does not call the cops when he finds a website that has quoted his content.  Unlike reporting a car theft, the cops would laugh at him and/or arrest him for filing a false police report, or if he lives in Henderson … walk over to his favorite ice cream vendor and shoot her in the face.

You see, when someone quotes Sherman “Helmsley” Fredrick’s content, he has not been deprived of his use of that same content.

For instance, people steal my photos all the time, but aside from my inability to be a credit whore, it really doesn’t affect me at all since I am still free to use the photos on my own sites.  The plagiarists may be assholes, but they have not really deprived me of anything tangible.  I still have all of my content.  If someone steals my car, however, my car is gone and I cannot drive anywhere.  I cannot use the vehicle I paid for, and I will probably have to pay even more money to get it replaced.

Don’t get me wrong, I understand what “Ask” Sherman “Williams” Frederick is getting at, but the beautiful 1967 Corvette example is a bit ridiculous.  Equating copy-paste with breaking into someone’s yard and stealing their car makes it hard to take “General” Sherman Frederick seriously.

Also, in my opinion, the Review-Journal is going to suffer a backlash against these lawsuits from the Internet community.

As most people are aware, when a mainstream story breaks in the press, it is usually picked up and reported by a wide variety of publications.  Be it the Las Vegas Sun, San Jose Mercury News, or someone else, most bloggers have a pretty wide choice when it comes to attribution.  If people start abandoning links and quotes from the R-J in favor of LasVegasNow or the Las Vegas Sun (as I have done), I’m not really sure how the R-J benefits.

In addition, I frankly do not understand how Sherm can lecture anyone on ethics with a straight face.

Sherman runs a “news” paper that endorses candidates while covering those same candidates.  He runs a newspaper that takes a massive shit on the first amendment instead of protecting its readers.  He runs a newspaper that accepts bribes (they call it “advertising”) from a state-run monopoly in exchange for softball coverage of blatant violations of the Nevada Revised Statutes.

Say what you will about someone stealing Sherm Sherm The Dancing Worm’s hypothetical 1967 Corvette, but when NV Energy is allowed to financially rape every resident of Nevada without even the most cursory expose’ by the checks-and-balance press … the hundreds of millions of dollars that hurting R-J readers have to pay renders the R-J’s copyright losses inconsequential.  In my opinion, the press accepting bribes from a government-run monopoly is a far more heinous transgression than the errant cut-and-pasting of the Boston Catwoman.

Simply put, I don’t know that the publisher of the R-J is in a position to be giving anyone ethics lessons.

In the interest of fairness, I do understand what it feels like when someone copies your stuff, slaps a few ads on it, and calls it a day.  This happens to everyone, from the largest newspaper to the smallest (real) blog, and it can be annoying.

It is not, however, just a problem for the big guys.

Once, a major media company stole one of my photos and put it into print.  I’m talking on a printed paper page being sold throughout the country.  When we confronted them, they offered a very small amount of compensation and basically said “take it or leave it, you’ll never win in court because your photos were not copyrighted”.

After this incident, I began watermarking my photos, and readers started complaining to me that the watermarks ruined the photos.  I informed these complainers that if they wanted to be a free photographer for a national tabloid, to go buy a camera and get to work.

I understand the R-J’s frustration, but I also understand the harsh realities of posting content on the web.  Once you post something, you no longer have control over it.  All you can do is expect the worst and hope for the best.  It’s impossible to take on the Internet, and have it bend to your will.  It is an exercise in futility.  Many have tried, all have failed.  Just ask the RIAA.

When someone apes me or my site, I generally don’t bother them except for when I have a serious philosophical disagreement with the thief.  One time, a site called “God Hates Fags” direct linked to an image on my site, but instead of complaining to them, I replaced the image on my site with a textual jpg that read “God is Gay” in big, white letters on a black background.  Within minutes, my image was unlinked and they never stole anything of mine again.  The Internet is a weird place, but you cannot sue it into submission.

Last but certainly not least, since the R-J Story broke, a few people have asked me if I was afraid that the R-J would sue me.  The answer to that question is “no”.  I mean, I certainly don’t want them to, but if it happens, we will show up in court and vigorously defend our fair-use/parody positions.  Since fair-use would be up to a judge to decide (and it’s almost completely subjective), I don’t have the slightest idea if we would prevail or lose, but we would bust our ass to defend the rights of (real) bloggers to use excerpts for discussion, criticism, and commentary purposes.

Actually, now that I think about it, since the plaintiff would be the largest newspaper in the state, I imagine that the judge would try to please the newspaper.  You never know when you are going to be found passed out in a hotel room with a dead hooker, and it helps to have some favors in reserve at the local mega-paper.

Of course, I would blog the hell out of the case from beginning to end, which in and of itself would be very educational and informative to entire legions of people, and I would let the chips fall where they may.  As a result, perhaps the legal effort could effect change or clarify the rules for alternative media.  Again, I would greatly prefer to not have to do this, but I don’t fear it whatsoever.

With that being said, I should also note that I will no longer be quoting the Review-Journal going forward.  This is not because I think quoting them is wrong, it is because I think quoting them has an unacceptable risk/reward ratio at this point.  When you are aware that a company is aggressively looking for a reason to sue people, making yourself an easy target for that company is extraordinarily unwise.

The only exception to my “no quote R-J” policy will be if they do something extremely stupid, funny, or noteworthy.

Such as publish geriatric porn.

http://www.vegasrex.com/2008/07/10/the-las-vegas-review-journal-finally-sinks-to-my-level/

I’m so getting sued.

Read: When Newspapers Attack (Part 1/2)

I’m not going to re-tell the story from beginning to end because it’s already been told.  But if you need to be brought up to speed, I urge you to read the following article:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jun/05/8-more-websites-sued-over-r-j-copyrights-34-total/

To sum up the situation very succinctly, as of today, the Las Vegas Review-Journal has sued 34 bloggers, and by all accounts, they will almost certainly sue more.  In their suits, the R-J is alleging copyright infringement against a variety of blogs who have either cut-and-pasted R-J articles, or who have excerpted from those articles too much … “too much” being at the sole discretion of the R-J’s hired suing company.

Some of the targets of the suits have appeared to be legitimate defendants, while others have left people scratching their heads, such as a non-commercial blog about cats authored by a Massachusetts resident.

Since this story has broken, I’ve been asked for an on-the-record comment by one mainstream outlet, and in that time I’ve been approached by a couple of bloggers seeking my opinion.  To all of them, I replied that when I have a comment, I will post it on my own blog.  It’s a complex issue and it’s almost impossible to give a soundbite answer.

Now, before I go any further, I should probably clarify my own position on “borrowing” content and “blogs” in general.

I have always had a very specific ethic for my blog, and that ethic has always dictated that I cannot depend on anyone other than myself for my blog’s content.  For the most part, I think I author blogs that definitely accomplish this goal.  If the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Las Vegas Sun, Las Vegas Weekly, Associated Press, and every other mainstream media outlet were to go belly-up tomorrow, I could continue writing without any interruption, whatsoever.  My blog would not be all that different than it is right now.

As opposed to most “blogs” which are in actuality news-clipping services, I actually write a highly-personal “web log” of my day-to-day life, thoughts and opinions … a “blog” if you will.  I mention the news in the context that it interests me, or when I have something to say about it, but I hardly depend on it.  Were the R-J to fold tomorrow, it would kind of suck because there would be few people left to call me “30% accurate”, but it would have no direct effect on my blog content.

Instead of yammering about the latest headline, I would go Downtown to the Summer of the 70’s, take pictures, and write about it.  I would go to the Adult Entertainment Expo, take pictures, and write about it.  I would get a thought about some completely inane topic (such as cellphones), take pictures, and write about it.  I would spend a week just stumbling around Las Vegas, observe what was going on around me, take pictures, and write about it.

I almost always use my own photographs or derivatives that I have taken my own time to create (such as on this page), and I NEVER cut-and-paste something penned by someone else and pass it off as my own writing.  I don’t need to.  I have more than enough to say on my own.  Hell, there are over 1,000 blog posts on my hard drive that I never published because I simply lost interest or didn’t have the time to finish them.  If you don’t have something to say damn near every day, then starting a blog is probably ill-advised.

Of course, not everyone subscribes to this particular blogging philosophy.

If you find a Las Vegas-related press release online, and paste the first sentence of that release into Google … you will find 20-50 so-called “Las Vegas blogs” re-printing that press release verbatim as if it were their own story.  Some of these “bloggers” will mix a couple of their own stories in with the press releases, but the amount of overt plagiarism is astounding.

This is a large part of why I have always been hesitant to self-identify myself as a “blogger”.  Due to the widespread overuse/abuse of the term, it’s almost become a pejorative.  In a world where everybody, including infants and dogs, have a blog, what does that term really mean?  Think about it.

What does it take to become a “blogger”?

In case you really don’t know, I’ll tell you what it takes.  It takes a $10 domain name from GoDaddy, a few cut-and-pasted lines of text in a Wordpress database, and BLAM … welcome to the fraternity.  Now, you too can walk around with an undeserved sense of self-importance.  You have an identity which impresses hipsters and confounds the technologically illiterate.

Before writing your first article, you might even find that you can completely bamboozle the PR departments of large casino conglomerates:

“Hello, Mirage, yes, I read in the paper that you will be installing a new fish tank tomorrow and I would like to drop by and see it.  9am?  Yes, that sounds good … but here’s the thing … I’m a blogger, and I’m afraid that people will not be aware of this fact when I show up.  Can you print up some badges so that I am not mistaken for a filthy, stinking non-blogger when I get there?  I dunno, something that says ‘Media’, ‘VIP’, or ‘Press’ would be lovely.  You can do that?  Great.  See you at 9.”

Bloggers have always been bad enough, but now with the Twitterati staking their claim as well:

“Hello, Mirage, I have 10,000 Twitter followers, what can you do for me?  Sure, they are reciprocal follows and perhaps 1% of those people actually read my fifteen word masterpieces on any consistent basis, but I’m a social media expert and if you want an amazing tweet you’ll make good with the media pass and the room upgrade.”

What can I tell you, the alternative press has become an enormous parody of itself.

As someone who has always put a huge amount of time and effort into creating my own content (be it text, photos, or videos), I feel that being lumped in with “bloggers” is sometimes a bit insulting.  If bloggers were required to created X% of their own content, I would feel differently, but in 2010, copying and plagiarizing have become standard practice in the blogosphere.

Because of everything I have said above, there is a small part of me that cheers on the Review-Journal in their Don Quixote-esque pursuit of copyright infringement.  There is a little voice in the back of my head that says “Right on R-J.  Fuck those uncreative, recycling plagiarists.  It’s time to wipe the Internet’s ass and finally knock off these parasitic dingleberrys.  Make them sit down, and put pen to paper.  If they want to call themselves writers, make them fucking write.”

No sooner do I finish this thought, however, does it occur to me … “Oh, no.  Over the years, I have liberally excerpt from the Review-Journal myself”.

I mean, how could I not?

Sure, I mostly blog about my own life and my own opinions, but I read the news just like everyone else does, and when I find something interesting in the newspaper … I blog about it.  Most people don’t give a damn about my opinions, but some people do.  If I don’t provide relevant excerpts from the story that has grabbed my attention, then my article will not make sense.  Sometimes a mere link is not sufficient because it would require the reader to hit “forward” and “back” numerous times, and they would almost certainly lose context.  It would be like listening to one side of a telephone conversation in full, and then listening to a recording of the other side in full.  You would hear the entirety of both sides, but it would not have the same meaning.

For official information, I depend on the R-J, Sun, etc every bit as much as a non-blogger.  I don’t do “news” anymore.  I no longer try to be a cub reporter-cum-internet guy.  I no longer stand in line with fifty other eager “bloggers” sporting media passes trying to earn their chops.  I’ve been there and done that.  In my early 20’s with one of the largest circulation newspapers in the nation.  It was terrible.

Not to mention, within the last 12 months or so, when I have tried to cover a particular mass event … I’ve ended up becoming the event to some extent (I’m starting to write like Dr. Seuss).  Whispers, pointing, weird looks, staring, “Hey, are you VegasRex? Can I ask you a couple of things?”.  I don’t know if people are fascinated, amused, confused, or repulsed, but I tend to draw a fair amount of attention when I show up to public events.  You can’t cover the story when you are the story (at least to some small degree), and you have to begin adjusting the way you do things.  Showing up to openings was less stress and more fun when nobody had any idea who I was.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m no Robin Leach (I don’t understand why he still shows up to openings) or Oscar Goodman, but I am Vegas Fucking Rex, bitch … and that no longer means the absolutely nothing that it did three years ago.  These days, it means being the most popular of the unpopular.  The most famous of the un-famous.

The irony of it all is that nobody in my “real” life has any idea that I even have a blog.  This is why I am able to (honestly) refer to my friends and family as idiots without hurting their feelings.  Assuming they even knew what a “blog” was, they would recognize neither my name or my look (and you thought I just really liked goofy hats and silly sunglasses).

Hell, I don’t even have a strictly Las Vegas following anymore.  I’ve been approached to write technology articles, articles about politics and religion, and all kinds of shit that has absolutely zilch to do with Las Vegas.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I’m not a Las Vegas blogger, I’m a blogger who happens to live in Las Vegas.

What is my point?

My point is that, now that I have witnessed a few years of alt.media access to Las Vegas, my respect for the R-J, Sun, etc has actually risen drastically.  I really thought that the alternative press would set a new standard in online Vegas journalism, but with a few exceptions, it’s become the world’s largest dipped-in-Crisco handjob I’ve ever seen.  I’m beginning to pine for the days of thinly-disguised media bias written by journalists who didn’t piss all over themselves like newborn puppies every time they crossed paths with a D-list celebrity.

Even though I have spent the majority of my life railing against the mainstream media, I find myself coming back to it more often lately.  I used to read more blogs, but now, ironically, I find myself reading the newspaper more and more.  Sure, the mainstream media is pure regurgitated pandering corporate shit, but you know what?  So is 99% of the so-called “social” and “alternative” media.

I used to eagerly await the day for corporate media to completely disintegrate, but now I’m not so sure anymore.  Be careful what you ask for, because you might get it.

Maybe I don’t want the R-J to go bankrupt.  Maybe I don’t want the Sun to implode.  Maybe they really do serve a purpose.  Maybe, warts and all, they are way better than we are.  Even though they are corrupt tools, maybe they still deserve the right to make a buck since they still do offer a large amount of information.

Maybe, just maybe, I don’t want to live in a world where news is disseminated 140 characters at a time.

I digress.

Read: Dear Sherman (Part 2/2)

The Strip - Las Vegas Boulevard and Harmon

The Strip - Las Vegas Boulevard and Harmon

The Strip - Las Vegas Boulevard and Harmon

The Strip - Las Vegas Boulevard and Harmon

Today, however, I am happy to announce that this is all about to change.

This week, the owners of the land annnounced that they are going to build something new and amazing on this particular corner.

What, exactly, are they going to build?

Well, hold on to your hats, because this is going to be the most exciting news you’ve heard in the past sixty, or possibly seventy seconds.

Coming soon to the corner of Las Vegas Boulevard and Harmon will be ….

Drumroll please …

Wait for it …

Wait a little more for dramatic effect …

Can you feel the excitement …

Here comes the big announcement ….

A Walgreens.

Oh Hallelujah!  It’s like a dream come tr…

Wait, what?

Really?

Yes, it is true.  In the near future, Las Vegas Boulevard will get a new Walgreens.

Now, lest you think this will be just any Walgreens, please allow me to virtually slap you with my pecker until you repent your blasphemous ways.  This is Las F’ing Vegas, biznitch, and we don’t build lame single-story drugstores on the fabulous Vegas Strip. (*not counting the half dozen single-story drugstores that already exist on the fabulous Vegas Strip)

No, this is not going to be your grandmother’s Walgreens, this is going to be a 3 story Walgreens!

Are you feeling it now?

Okay, in all fairness, it’s not just going to be a Walgreens … it is going to be a “100,000 square foot retail center anchored by a 3-story Walgreens”.  Whatever that means.

According to a Walgreens spokesman:

“If a customer in another state is visiting, we want to make it convenient for them to fill their prescriptions at a pharmacy that knows their history, in addition to picking up the essentials, whether it be sunscreen or a bottle of water.”

Well, okay, this seems reasonable enough, but have you ever tried walking from the MGM Grand or the Aria pool to … anywhere?

Let’s face it, if you need sunscreen or a bottle of water, you’re looking at a 10 minute, quarter-mile walk just to get out of the damn hotel.  This store will only be “convenient” if you happen to be walking by it when you realize you need something.

Add this to the fact that there are already existing stores that serve the exact same purpose, and I can’t help but be a little skeptical.  For those of you who haven’t been to the Las Vegas Strip in the last ten or twenty years, a Walgreens currently exists a stone’s throw away next to Gameworks, and there is a CVS across the street from that.  This will be the third store within a two block radius.

Don’t get me wrong, I am thrilled that they are building something on this property.  In my opinion, this “retail thing” will actually solve a large problem.  Filled with porn slappers, trash, and scam purveyors, the northeast corner of LVB/Harmon has become arguably one of the biggest safety hazards and eyesores on the tourist strip.  It’s been an outright embarrassment for quite some time, and something … anything … is better than what currently sits there.

That being noted, I was kind of hoping that this prime real estate would be used to build something a little more … “Vegas-y”.  A independent casino, a park, a tower, or some kind of ride or attraction would have been at the top of my wish list.  I never pegged it to be the ideal location for a tri-level Walgreens.

Oh well, for those of you who have been putting off a trip to Vegas because it was just too damn inconvenient to purchase a 100 count bottle of generic ibuprofen (and really, haven’t we all been avoiding Las Vegas for this reason?) … you may want to get your travel agent on the phone because your prayers have just been answered.

Vegas Baby!

The person whom I was with had no idea, and when I later posed the question in my own forums, I realized that almost nobody had an answer.  The former home of the Wet n’ Wild amusement park has been sitting vacant since 2004, and like so many other projects around town, it’s devolved into little more than an eyesore.

Yesterday, on my way back from an absolutely thrilling hold ‘em session at Caesars Palace, I passed the vacant lot again and noticed a new fence which read “10,000 New Jobs For Nevada – Silver State Arena”.

Possible Silver State Arena Site

Possible Silver State Arena Site

Huh … what?!

Good god, how on earth had I managed to miss this development?  They are building a stadium in my own backyard and this was the first I was hearing about it?  Maybe the rumors are true.  Maybe I really do walk around with my head up my ass.

When I got home, I immediately began to research the “Silver State Arena” project and anything else I might have missed, such as the discovery of a new alien life form.

Of course, this being Las Vegas, what I learned to be the truth slightly deviated from what was being advertised on the sign.  You see, there currently is no stadium being built.  Some guys have an idea for a stadium on the North Strip site, but as of this moment, it has not yet been approved.

Apparently, this stadium is in competition with another group that wishes to build their version of an arena behind Harrah’s, but to their credit, the Silver State project already has a website.

I read through the site, considered what it might mean, and came to a conclusion:

On a personal level, I would love this thing.

Just think about it … the arena would be 10 minutes from my doorstep, and assuming it was not sold out, I could literally attend events on a whim.  There would be no accommodation considerations, parking considerations, or even traffic considerations.  When I say “10 minutes from my doorstep”, I mean 100% via foot.  I could walk over, watch, and walk home.  No fuss, no muss.  This is a convenience that few people enjoy in any city in the USA.  Even Madison Square Garden and the MCI Center typically required an extremey crowded subway ride.  Who knows, with such utter convenience, I might actually become a sports fan again.  Talk about rooting for the home team … the clubs would literally be playing in Rexvile.

Possible Silver State Arena Site

Not only would this benefit me from an entertainment standpoint, but property values in my neighborhood would almost certainly go up, more businesses would sprout to serve stadium visitors, and transit options would probably increase as well.  At the very least, the monorail would be re-tooled and probably even expanded.  I am so excited about this arena, that if they want me to, I’ll use my own cock as a shovel to break ground.  Hell, I might even do this without even being asked.

Now, with everything above noted, I have to unequivocally concede that my excitement over this stadium is purely selfish.  Deep down, I know that there exists no demand in Las Vegas for a new stadium.

I’m not even convinced that the “10,000 new jobs” being touted by the developers are a good thing.

First of all, when you build something solely to create jobs, then the assumption should be that whatever being built is not needed.  Jobs should not exist for the sake of jobs, they should exist because they fill a needed void.

Second, once the stadium has been completed … then what?

The building boom of the 2000’s has already shown us what happens to jobs when a project is finished.  It creates a new group of unemployed people who quickly become impoverished. One-off construction jobs are a temporary solution to a permanent problem. Also, since so many of our construction jobs are given to illegal aliens, the true benefit to the American worker is rarely what the numbers indicate.

Last but not least, I can count on zero fingers the number of people I know here in town who are pining for a sports team.  It’s obvious that I could not care less about professional sports, but even the sports fans I know have indicated that they have no real interest in a local team.  They are convinced that it will bleed the city of yet more money, and dare I say it … sports are just not that goddamn important.  They’re children’s games played by adults.

All things considered, I find myself having very mixed feelings about the prospects of this arena.

If it is built, I will probably see some modest personal benefits.  Not only that, but come on … it’s exciting.  Imagine having a new full-sized arena built just around the corner from your house.  This prospect would be a thrill for all but the most recalcitrant NIMBY’s.  The selfish optimist in me is very excited.

The problem is, the optimist in me is always having his ass kicked by the realist in me.

In 2010, with Las Vegas’ population on the decline and damn near half of the residents indicating that they want to move out of here, I just don’t see a market for a sports stadium.  I see a market for a concert arena.  After all, Sam Boyd Stadium and the Thomas & Mack Center are a bit off of the beaten path.  A sports venue, however, no.

What this means is that if the stadium were put to a vote, I would have to begrudgingly vote “no”.  It’s just not in the best interests of the city.

However, if despite my own wishes a new area is approved, I hope the north-strip location wins out over the mid-strip location.  The North Boulevard is almost equally accessible from both Downtown and the Las Vegas Strip, and it would also give a huge shot in the arm to a section of the resort corridor which desperately needs it.

Also, most importantly, it won’t be surrounded by Harrah’s properties.

Like most things in this town lately, my assumption is that the Silver State Arena will be more vaporware.  We’ve been down the “stadium” road before, and nothing has ever come of it.  If I was a betting man, I would put my money on this project never happening … but you never know.

Three years from now, it’s entirely possible that I will be sitting court-side with a big foam finger rooting for the Rexville Raiders as they trounce the Lakers in the Western Conference Finals.

“Hey Kobe, you suck!  Why don’t you go over to the Wynn and have non-consensual intercourse with the concierge, then compensate for your lack of judgment by buying your wife a ring the size of a house, then go on television and betray the trust of your dearest friend Shaquille O’Neal while making yet another shitty Gatorade commercial!’

I’m just getting my taunts ready.

As it stands, I think my rough drafts are a bit on the verbose side.

Oh well, the stadium is not scheduled to open until 2012.

I have plenty of time to practice.