UAE: MGM Resorts sees ‘opportunity for gaming expansion in Dubai'
The US-based MGM Resorts International said it has an agreement to bring three of its brands to the UAE.
The multinational hospitality, entertainment and casino firm has a non-gaming management contract with a Dubai firm but sees a 'potential opportunity for gaming expansion in Dubai' following the establishment of the General Commercial Gaming Regulatory Authority (GCGRA) in the UAE.
In October 2024, Wynn Resorts was awarded a Commercial Gaming Facility Operator licence by the General Commercial Gaming Regulatory Authority (GCGRA) of UAE to develop the Wynn Al Marjan Island resort in Ras Al Khaimah. Wynn Al Marjan is the first entity to have the licence to operate an integrated gaming resort in the Middle East.
'In the UAE, we currently have a non-gaming management agreement with Wasl Hospitality to bring the Bellagio, Aria, and MGM Grand brands to Dubai. With the UAE's establishment of the General Commercial Gaming Regulatory Authority, tasked with creating a regulatory framework for commercial gaming, we are encouraged by the potential opportunity for gaming expansion in Dubai. We are continuously exploring new geographies for future development, including Thailand,' MGM Resorts said in its annual report.
Bill Hornbuckle, CEO and president of MGM Resorts International, last year said at Skift Global Forum 2024 that the US-based hotel operator has applied for a licence to operate a gaming facility in the UAE.
"Yes, we have (applied). We've done it in Abu Dhabi,' he said during the Forum.
Last week, Craig Billings, CEO of Wynn Resorts, dismissed any concerns around the UAE granting a licence to its competitors to build another integrated gaming resort in the country.
While speaking during an earning call after the fourth quarter results, Billings said it takes at least four years to design and build an integrated gaming resort, therefore, they have the advantage of being the first.
'We don't believe that every emirate will avail themselves of potential license by any means. And as we keep our ear to the ground with respect to what's going on… We're opening in March 2027, so think about the fact that it takes a minimum of four years to design and build an integrated resort. You can imagine that we're going to have a very, very healthy lead,' he said during a conference call with analysts.
Billings sees the UAE gaming market reaching $3-$5 billion (Dh11 to Dh18.35 billion) over time.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Etihad
4 hours ago
- Al Etihad
China vice premier to meet US delegation for trade talks: Beijing
7 June 2025 23:12 Beijing (AFP)Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng will meet a US delegation for talks next week in Britain, Beijing announced on Saturday amid a fragile truce in the trade dispute between the two will visit the United Kingdom from June 8 to 13 at the invitation of the British government, China's foreign ministry said in a said He and American representatives will co-chair the first meeting of the China-US economic and trade consultation President Donald Trump had already announced on Friday that a new round of trade talks with China would kick off in London beginning Monday, after he spoke by phone with Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in a bid to end a bitter battle over posted on his Truth Social platform that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer would meet the Chinese discussions will mark the second round of such negotiations between the world's two biggest economies since Trump launched his trade war shortly after returning to the White House in January.A first meeting, held in mid-May in Geneva, brought a pause to the US-China trade Thursday the Republican president finally discussed the issues with Xi for the first time since the trade tensions soared, assuring that the conversation had been positive. Xi for his part told Trump the two should "correct the course" of bilateral relations, according to remarks quoted by official Chinese media.
Arabian Post
6 hours ago
- Arabian Post
PumpFun's Revenue Redistribution Plan Sparks Debate Amid $4bn Valuation
PumpFun, a Solana-based memecoin launchpad, has announced plans to distribute protocol revenue to $PUMP token holders through a buyback mechanism. This move marks a significant shift from the typical speculative nature of memecoins, aiming to provide tangible value to its community. However, the platform's ambitious $4 billion valuation and a targeted $1 billion raise have raised questions about the feasibility and sustainability of its revenue model. Since its inception in January 2024, PumpFun has facilitated the creation of over 6 million memecoins, positioning itself as a central player in the Solana ecosystem's resurgence following the FTX collapse. The platform's user-friendly interface allows individuals to launch tokens with minimal effort, contributing to a surge in activity that saw Solana's Total Value Locked surpass $5 billion by mid-2025. The proposed buyback strategy involves using a portion of the platform's revenue to repurchase $PUMP tokens from the open market, thereby reducing supply and potentially increasing token value. This approach is intended to reward long-term holders and align the interests of the community with the platform's growth. However, the lack of clarity regarding the specific revenue streams and the proportion allocated for buybacks has led to skepticism among investors and analysts. ADVERTISEMENT PumpFun's revenue primarily stems from a 1% swap fee on all token trades and a 1.5 SOL fee when a token 'graduates' by reaching a market cap of $90,000. While these mechanisms have generated substantial income—estimated at over $380 million—the sustainability of such revenue in the volatile memecoin market remains uncertain. The platform's reliance on continuous user engagement and token creation raises concerns about the long-term viability of its financial model. The announcement of the $1 billion raise at a $4 billion valuation has further intensified scrutiny. Critics argue that the valuation may be inflated, given the speculative nature of the memecoin market and the platform's nascent stage. Comparisons have been drawn to other DeFi projects that have faced challenges in maintaining high valuations without robust and diversified revenue streams. Community members have expressed mixed reactions to the buyback plan. Some view it as a positive step towards creating a more sustainable and value-driven ecosystem, while others question the timing and transparency of the initiative. The absence of detailed information about the buyback schedule, funding sources, and governance mechanisms has fueled debates about the platform's commitment to accountability and investor protection. PumpFun's leadership, including founders Noah Tweedale, Alon Cohen, and Dylan Kerler, has yet to provide comprehensive details addressing these concerns. The platform's history of rapid growth and controversial features, such as the now-suspended livestreaming service that allowed for unmoderated content, adds to the apprehension surrounding its governance and operational practices. The broader context of the DeFi and memecoin markets also plays a role in shaping perceptions of PumpFun's strategy. The memecoin sector has experienced explosive growth, with market capitalizations reaching unprecedented levels. However, this growth has often been accompanied by high volatility, regulatory scrutiny, and instances of market manipulation, leading to caution among institutional investors and regulators.
Gulf Today
7 hours ago
- Gulf Today
How badly could Donald Trump hurt Elon Musk?
Io Dodds, The Independent Even for Elon Musk, this is — to use the precise technical term — bonkers. Barely one week after leaving the Trump administration with every semblance of amity, the world's richest person is going scorched earth against the leader of the world's richest nation. Insults and threats. Calls for impeachment. Sinister references to Jeffrey Epstein. Somehow, Kanye West is also involved. It's like the messiest online influencer drama you've ever seen, except the parties are two of the most powerful people on Earth. But when it comes down to brass tacks, what exactly does Musk stand to lose in this titanic celebrity divorce? If Trump were to follow through on all his threats, and use every available weapon against Musk's business empire, how badly could it hurt him? The short answer is: pretty badly. In fact, with some admittedly quick and dirty math, we can put a price tag on some of it. SpaceX and the $68bn black hole. Elon Musk's estimated $388bn fortune — already $26.6bn smaller than it was before this frank exchange of thermonuclear warheads — depends on the success of two companies which are both intertwined with the US political system. One is Tesla, which makes electric vehicles; the other is SpaceX, which builds rockets, spacecraft, and satellites. X, formerly Twitter, can be left aside for now; having bought the social network 2022 for $44bn, Musk is still struggling to recoup his investment and has almost certainly lost money overall. Let's start with Space Exploration Technologies Corp., aka SpaceX. Not many people can afford to rent a rocket, so a lot of its business comes from government contracts, and U.S. government contracts most of all. As of writing, according to federal data, the Texas-based company has been paid or promised just under $21bn by Uncle Sam since 2008. The total potential value of all SpaceX's existing contracts, however, is much higher: $89.2bn. If Trump cancelled every contract tomorrow, that would mean a theoretical maximum of $68bn in lost potential income. For context, that's more than four times SpaceX's entire forecasted revenue for 2025, and nearly 15 times its revenue from 2022. Of course, there's no way to know if those maximum payments would ever actually have been made. So we could also get a rough sense of what SpaceX stands to lose by looking at the actual cash it received from federal coffers every year. In 2022 that was $2.8bn; in 2023, $3.1bn; and in 2024, $3.8bn. On the plus side for Musk, the US government is so dependent on SpaceX that some critics have called it a monopoly in the making. SpaceX ferries our astronauts to and from the International Space Station, is heavily involved in Nasa's moon landing program, and manages an increasing share of government satellite communications as well. Still, that does not guarantee safety. Would you really, in all soberness, bet against Donald Trump doing something that hurts the country merely to punish his personal enemies? In fact, as Talking Points Memo editor-in-chief Josh Marshall argues, SpaceX's critical role might actually put it in greater danger, because it leaves the feds with few options except "expropriation or nationalisation". Tesla in regulators' crosshairs?Like SpaceX, Tesla has benefited greatly from taxpayer money, mostly in the form of emission trading payments from non-electric carmakers and tax credits or consumers buying electric vehicles. An analysis by The Washington Post put Tesla's total income from emission credits since 2007 at $11.4bn as of this February. Its gain from tax credits, which allow more people to buy its cars at higher prices, has been estimated at $3.4bn. Those emission credit schemes are run by US states, not by the federal government. Nevertheless, Trump and the Republican Party have tried to undermine such schemes by contesting states' ability to set their own emissions rules. The wider impact is difficult to calculate. In contrast to SpaceX, Tesla sells to ordinary people, who tend to have their own opinions independent of government. In reputational terms, splitting noisily with Trump could reverse some of its recent sales losses; on the other hand, it might just make Tesla hated on both sides of politics. The biggest risk may be regulatory. At the time of Trump's second inauguration, Tesla was being investigated by numerous federal agencies including the Justice Department, the National Labor Relations Board, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration — which by itself had six pending probes. During his time at DOGE, Democrats feared Musk could use his power to influence or cancel these cases. But Trump's unabashed willingness to wield state power to punish those who displease him while rewarding loyalists cuts both ways. Live by the chainsaw, die by the chainsaw. How much that costs Tesla would depend on how far Trump is willing to go, and on the outcome of any ensuing court battle. But when U.S. stock exchanges closed on Thursday its share price had crashed by nearly 12 percent, wiping $122bn off its market value. Potential deportation — or worseSo far we've only addressed Elon Musk's finances. Yet there are other, more personal ways that Trump could hurt him if the former reality TV star truly isn't here to make friends. For example, Trump's old advisor Stephen Bannon — who has previously branded Musk a "parasitic illegal immigrant" — urged the administration to investigate Musk's immigration history, and potentially deport him. Unlike some of the feverish allegations that emanate from the extended Trump-o-sphere, this one actually has some substance. An investigation by The Washington Post last year alleged that Musk had worked illegally in the US while launching his Silicon Valley career in the mid-90s. Musk has denied this, and in any case he has been a US citizen since 2002. Still, legal experts have said his citizenship could technically be revoked if he were proven to have lied to immigration authorities. And while those laws have only rarely been enforced in the past 25 years, some Trump aides and allies have said they want that to change. Nor is that anywhere close to the only alleged skeleton in Musk's closet. What is his relationship with ecstasy, Adderall, ketamine, or magic mushrooms? Has he ever been in regular contact with Vladimir Putin? Did his colleagues at DOGE rigorously follow information security laws when extracting sensitive data from federal systems? What happened to all that data after it was obtained? At least we can probably can rule out plain old assassination by government special forces. Although, to be fair, that is literally something that Trump and his lawyers have argued should be protected by presidential immunity.
