Everybody, the 2012 annual meeting of the stockholders of Las Vegas Sands Corporation will please come to order. My name is Mike Leven, and I am the President Chief Operating Officer of Las Vegas Sands Corporation. I'd like to welcome you all and thank you for your interest in our corporation. As president of the company, I will preside at this meeting. The agenda for this afternoon includes all formal business stated in the proxy statement. Following this meeting, we will have a period during which we'll be happy to answer your questions. Please note that this meeting is being webcast on our investor relations website, so any question you ask is going to go to millions of people. Also present at the meeting today are Sheldon G. Adelson, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and other members of our board.
Our board of directors include Jason Ader, Irwin Chafetz, Charles Forman, George Koo, Charles Koppelman, Jeffrey Schwartz, and Alan Siegel. Rob Goldstein, our Executive Vice President and President of Global Gaming, is also here today, along with Chris Cahill, who joined us in April of this year, and we are very pleased to have him overseeing our global operations. Chris, where are you? Okay. How'd he get up to the table so fast? Okay. We are very pleased to have him overseeing our global operations as well. Ken Kay, our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, is also with us, as well as Ira Raphaelson, our Executive Vice President and General Counsel. Ira Raphaelson will act as the secretary of this meeting. Each of you was given the rules of conduct when you entered the meeting room this morning. Additional copies are available in the registration area.
It is our intention to conduct this meeting in accordance with the agenda and rules of conduct. Please remember that an opportunity will be provided immediately following the formal portion of the meeting for questions and discussion. Let us now proceed with the formal business of the meeting, namely, one, to elect three directors to the board, each for a three-year term; two, to consider and ratify the selection of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our company's independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2012; three, to consider and act upon a non-binding advisory proposal on executive compensation; and four, to transact such other business as may come properly before this meeting. Will the secretary please report on the mailing of the notice of this meeting to all stockholders and the availability of the stockholder list?
Thank you. I have here an affidavit of a mailing of the notice of availability by internet of the proxy materials to each shareholder of record at the close of business on April 13, 2012, the date the board of directors fixed as the date for determining such stockholders. I also have present an alphabetical list showing all persons who were holders of record of the company's common stock at the close of the business on April 13, 2012, those who are entitled to notice and to vote at this meeting. The list has been duly certified by the American Stock & Trust Company, which is the transfer agent for the company's shares.
The list has been available for inspection for the 10 days before this meeting at the company's headquarters and is available for examination by any stockholder of the company for any purpose germane to this meeting at any time during the meeting.
Will the secretary please file the list of stockholders, the affidavit of mailing, and copies of the notice of internet availability of proxy materials transmitted to stockholders with the records of this meeting?
I will, sir.
Bill Kennedy of the American Stock Transfer & Trust Company has been asked to act as inspector of the election at this meeting. Mr. Kennedy is present and has submitted an oath of office, which will be filed with the minutes of this meeting. I now ask that all of those present with proxies, who have not already done so, please file their proxies with the inspector. If there are any stockholders present in person who did not register at the door and have not filed a proxy, will they please give their names and the numbers of shares owned to the attendants at the door at this time? Okay. Will the inspector now report whether a quorum is present?
The shares outstanding on the record date, which are entitled to vote at this meeting, consist of 822,739,856 shares of common stock. From the count of the stockholders present in person or by proxy, a majority of those shares are represented at this meeting, either in person or by proxy, and a quorum is present.
On the basis of the report of the inspector, I declare a quorum present and the meeting duly convened and competent to proceed with the transaction of business. As noted in the proxy statement, the purpose of this stockholders meeting is the election of three directors to the board for a three-year term, the ratification of Pricewaterhouse LLP as our company's independent registered public accounting firm, and to act upon a non-binding advisory proposal on executive compensation. Votes will be taken on these matters after all nominations and proposals have been introduced, and the Inspector of Election will make a report on the outcome of these votes. We will now proceed with the formal business of the meeting.
Please note that after each of the matters to be considered has been formally proposed, we will circulate written ballots so that stockholders who have already voted for a proxy may vote on these matters. The first order of business is the nomination of three individuals to stand for election to the board. All three of the company's nominees are presently directors of the company. I would like to introduce them to you at this time. They are Jason Ader, please stand. Jeffrey Schwartz, please stand, and myself, Michael A. Levin. I'm not standing. You may be seated. Is there a motion on the proposed election of the three nominees?
I nominate Mr. Ader, Mr. Schwartz, and Mr. Levin for election to serve as directors for a three-year term until their successors have been duly elected and qualified.
I second the motion.
Are there any questions or comments with respect to the proposal? If there are no further nominations, a motion to close the nominations is in order.
I move that the nominations be closed.
I second the motion.
It has been moved and seconded that the nominations be closed, and we will collect and tabulate the votes later in this meeting. The next order of business is the consideration and ratification of the independent registered public accounting firm selected by the audit committee of the board to audit the books and records of the company for the year ending December 31, 2012. The audit committee of the board has selected PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. I am also pleased to note the presence at this meeting today of Kirk Thorell of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. Mr. Thorell is available to answer questions that the stockholders might like to ask. Please ask him a question. We'll see if we can get an answer.
He's being paid, might as well get something out of it.
Might pay a very significant amount of money as well, too.
It's always too much money.
Thank you, Kirk. I will now entertain a resolution to ratify the selection of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP to audit the books and records of the company for the year ending December 31, 2012.
I move that the following resolution be adopted. Resolved at the selection of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP to audit the books and records of the company for the year ending December 31, 2012, be confirmed, ratified, and approved in all respects.
I second the motion.
The motion has been moved and seconded, and we will collect and tabulate the votes later in this meeting. The next order of business is the consideration and acting upon a non-binding advisory proposal on executive compensation. Although the vote is advisory and non-binding on the Board of Directors, the Compensation Committee will take into account the outcome of the vote, and when considering future executive compensation decisions are made. I will now entertain a resolution to act upon a non-binding advisory proposal on the executive compensation.
I move that the following resolution be adopted. Resolved that stockholders approve the compensation of named executive officers as disclosed pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC, which disclosure shall include the compensation discussion analysis, the compensation tables, and any related material disclosed in the proxy statement.
I second the motion.
The motion has been moved and seconded. We will collect and tabulate the votes later in the meeting. I now declare the polls open for voting by ballot. All those who wish to vote by ballot should obtain a ballot from the attendant. If you have already filed your proxy, it would simplify the count greatly if you would not fill out a ballot unless you wish to change your vote. I would also like to point out that most of you who returned proxies authorized the individuals named in the proxy to vote on all proposals coming before this meeting. Has everyone voted who wishes to vote? Apparently, everyone has. I therefore declare the polls closed and ask the inspector to prepare a report on the voting. While the inspector is counting the ballots, I would like to, at this time, give Sheldon G.
Adelson, the Chairman of the Board of Directors, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Las Vegas Sands Corp., the opportunity to say a few words.
This is going to be a long time because there are 822 million shares. He's got to count them one by one. Just kidding. Good afternoon, everyone. Let me start by thanking all of our shareholders for being here with us in person today or for joining us via the webcast. I, and we, sincerely appreciate the confidence you have placed in us. I'm happy to say that 2011 was a landmark year for our company, and one in which we attained both company and industry records. Net revenue jumped 37% to reach a record $9.4 billion. That's billion with a B. While EBITDA grew 58% to an industry record in excess of $3.5 billion.
Two of our properties in two different markets produced more than $1 billion each in EBITDA. In fact, every single property in our portfolio saw meaningful increases in EBITDA in 2011 compared to the year before. At the bottom line, earnings per diluted share, EPS, more than doubled to reach $2.02 a share. That outstanding financial performance, together with our strong balance sheet and liquidity, allowed us to return some capital to you, our shareholders, through the declaration of a dividend. It was indeed a landmark year, but we're just getting started. In the first quarter of 2012, we again delivered record financial results for both our company and our industry. These achievements resulted not by accident, but from the steady and disciplined execution of our integrated resort business model and global growth strategy.
A business model fueled by the convention and trade show industry, and the amenities that support it ensures that multiple revenue sources contribute to our growth. Retail, hotel, and entertainment offerings, including gaming, all make meaningful contributions to our outstanding revenue, EBITDA, and EPS growth. We have noticed that certain of our competitors are now calling themselves integrated resort developers, but there's only one original integrated resort leader. We're the first and the original. None of the imitators can deliver the convention and exhibition expertise that is the cornerstone of our model. That expertise truly sets us apart in every jurisdiction in which we operate, in Macau, Singapore, and Las Vegas. Our global strategy will drive our success in the years ahead. We were the first American-based integrated resort developer to operate in either Macau or Singapore.
This geographic diversity places ahead of our competitors in the most promising consumer markets. It also secures our leadership position for the future. A $9 billion investment in Macau, encompassing the largest asset base in the special administrative region, gives us tremendous opportunity for expansion in the world's fastest-growing gaming and entertainment market. Sands Cotai Central, at the center of Macau's Cotai Strip, debuted on April the 11th, a little less than two months ago. The first phase of the property, which included only 30% of the property's room and suite offerings, and just a portion of its future gaming and retail capacity, is ramping up consistent with our expectations. Sands Cotai Central is our largest integrated resort development to date, complete with world-class shopping, dining, and entertainment, and 6,400 rooms upon completion with world-class shopping, dining, and entertainment.
We are confident that Sands Cotai Central will drive revenue and profit growth in the years ahead while advancing Macau's status as a leading business and leisure travel destination. We'll likewise continue benefiting from our premier integrated resort in Singapore, where we're fortunate to operate in a duopoly environment. As the country's government continues to invest in transportation infrastructure and entertainment amenities, including the recently opened Marina Bay Cruise Ship Terminal, less than one kilometer from Marina Bay Sands, and the Gardens by the Bay, a 101-hectare botanical garden and tourism attraction adjacent to Marina Bay Sands, we will enjoy additional growth from increased leisure and business visitation. In addition, we're continuing to aggressively pursue and evaluate integrated resort development opportunities elsewhere around the world, including in Asia, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam, in Europe, in Canada, Toronto, and even right here in New York City.
Our track record of successful integrated resort development, coupled with our strong balance sheet and senior leadership team, position us to win new development agreements in emerging gaming jurisdictions. The predictability and reliability of the cash flow models generated by our IR business model, together with our strong balance sheet and liquidity, will allow us to both pursue outstanding growth opportunities and continue to return cash to shareholders in the future. As we continue to execute our proven business model and global growth strategy, I believe the coming year will be our most prosperous year. I want to thank you for the trust you placed in our company, and I look forward to working even harder on your behalf in the future. As long as it says over here, as long as I get Carnegie Deli for lunch. I want to add one item.
I am very pleased to announce that Michael Leven, during the board meeting preceding this meeting, signed an additional Two-year contract to expire in December of 2014. Mike has brought a very high level of professionalism. He's brought a lot of good people. He's recruited a lot of good people like Chris Cahill here, and I'm very happy to be working with him. He is not only the nicest guy, he's probably the most competent and the most productive and wonderful businessman I've worked with my entire life, and that's been a long time in business. 66 years in business. Not as long as I know Irwin Chafetz here, but close. I'm very glad to have Mike on board. Thank you for doing that, Mike. Now I'll turn it back to you.
Let us now proceed with the voting results. Is the inspector ready to report?
I'm ready. The preliminary results of the balloting are as follows. In the election of directors, Jason N. Ader, Jeffrey H. Schwartz, and Michael A. Leven have been elected directors of the company by an affirmative vote of a plurality of the votes cast at the meeting. With respect to the ratification and the selection of Pricewaterhouse LLP as the company's independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2012, the proxies and ballots representing a majority of the votes cast by the stockholders present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at the meeting were voted in favor of the resolution. Therefore, the selection of Pricewaterhouse LLP as the company's independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2012, has been ratified.
With respect to the acting upon a non-binding advisory proposal on the executive compensation, the proxies and ballots representing a majority of the votes cast by the stockholders present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at the meeting were voted in favor of the resolution. Therefore, the proposal has been approved.
Did the shareholders vote to reduce the fees paid to PwC? If not, I think we ought to take up another motion.
Thank you, Bill. On the basis of the report of the inspector, I declare that the resolutions covering the election of the three directors to the board of directors, the ratification of the selection of Pricewaterhouse LLP as the company's independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2012, the non-binding advisory proposal on executive compensation have all been approved. Will the inspector please prepare a written record to be filed with the records of the meeting? If there is no other business to come before the meeting, a motion is in order for the meeting to be adjourned.
I move for the meeting be adjourned.
I second the motion.
It has been moved and seconded that the meeting be adjourned. All those stockholders in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Those stockholders opposed by saying no. The motion is carried, and the meeting is officially adjourned. At this point, we would be glad to answer questions that you might have regarding the company. If you have a question, please rise, identify yourself so that we may have a complete record of this meeting. Please note that the question and answer period is being webcast, as I mentioned before, on our investor relations website. Okay, we won't forget. Yes, sir.
I was looking at the statement just recently on, what do you call it, on AOL, and you said that seven and eight lots are no longer viable. But I heard that somebody said that you spent close to $100 million to get those lots. Are we going to get the money back on that?
Let me answer.
I can answer. Sure.
Whatever.
The company invested.
One from column A, one from column B.
The company invested up to $100 million actually involved in seven and eight slots in architectural drawings and other materials to work. Basically, we have given up in a legal appeal to the Government of Macau, seven and eight. We don't have any expectation at receiving the money back at this time. It will be an impairment charge on the books, which will possibly not affect our earnings or our EBITDA. The money has already gone out years ago. The decision was made to give up the suit in order to better our relationships with the Government of Macau. We have multiple other projects waiting in the wings in Macau, and we thought that it was a prudent decision on behalf of the company to make that decision.
Okay. One other question.
Can I add something on to that?
Sure.
The government, since they took seven and eight, or around the same time, lost seven and eight. They have implemented new rules limiting the number of gaming tables to everybody, not just us. We're one of 6 "concessionaires," and they've all limited the number of tables to the other concessionaires. We determined that fighting this and potentially embarrassing the government isn't going to get us what we want, because having seven and eight, besides having to pay for it just to keep it up and maintain it, would cost money when there's little or no likelihood that they're going to give us additional approval for additional tables. They've made it abundantly clear that they're only going to allow 3% increase in the number of tables for the next 10 years.
We have reason to believe that they're going to give out all those tables in the first year, or at least commit those tables. Some of the properties won't be built for 3 to 5 years, most of them. I think they want to give the tables. There is no assurance. Well, I won't say there's an assurance, but the likelihood is they're not going to increase that over the next 10 years. What are we holding on for? There doesn't seem to be any logical reason or any rationale to push and alienate the government by embarrassing them by winning the appeal. It's a Pyrrhic victory. We decided that we're waiting for other things that we could do a lot sooner, that we don't have to depend upon them changing their policy for us.
We're hopeful that we will get some value, that we will not have to take an impairment charge, because otherwise we would have to. Correct. If we get other things, then we think we will have done the right thing. I'd like 1 more question. You're planning on going to Spain now. We like Spanish food. You like Spanish food, right. We like tapas. Let me ask you something. If the banks go belly up or whatever, they don't get a Euro bond. Is it set already that you're going to go into Spain, or is this just preliminary? We're investigating a European venture in a Spanish location. It's really a European venture. There is nothing firm, nothing solid at this particular time. Those investigations go on as we do with every other destination.
If something were to happen that would dislocate the Euro, dislocate other situations that would make it financially non-viable, we have plenty of time to make the decision, negative or positive, depending on what happens. There's nothing absolutely firm about that location today. Okay. It's part of our process of development. We do that every place, and all of these investigations can take 1 year or more to be able to firm up. What's happening today may not be happening tomorrow, but there's no decision today about that location. From a practical viewpoint, we've established a radius that it is no more difficult to get to EuroVegas, that we sort of have a working title for, or Europa Vegas. That is no more than the amount of time it takes to fly from here in New York City to go to Las Vegas.
In the strong winds, that's about five and a half hours. A five-and-a-half-hour radius takes us to about, excluding the North African countries, which we don't see a lot of business coming from, except maybe a handful of people, to over 40 countries. That encompass, depends upon which part of the country you cover, between 700 million to 800 million to 1 billion people. This is not a Spanish project. This is a project for all of Europe. Traditionally, Western Europe and what's known as what I call the former Warsaw Pact countries, Eastern Europe, Poland, Czech, Bulgaria, Romania, all those countries. We would go further to the former Western countries of the former Soviet Union, and then we would even go to Moscow and St. Petersburg, where we could send our own airplanes in or charter aircraft to bring people in.
This has been probably one of the most studied projects ever, certainly by us. I don't think we've gotten 12 different reports. In each category of an integrated resort, we've gotten, I think in all categories, we've gotten at least two different reports, one to validate the opinions of the other. We had a good feeling how it was going to come out. It's come out pretty much like we thought it would be. We're not relying upon the Spanish banks at all. We have banks with whom we work all over the world. We have relationships as far away as Singapore, China, mainland China. No, it's not a question of the banks. If they go belly up, in other words, if Europe, if the economy goes belly up.
Anything that would prevent us from achieving our stated goal, which the whole development is contingent upon, of a 20% cash on cash return, will cause us not to proceed forward with the project. If we can't make 20% of the money that we put out, we're not going to proceed forward. If anything, any dislocation of the euro, that's going to be a deal breaker as well. Yes, sir.
The question is, in the last few months, there's been a lot of talk on the East Coast about you may going up to Boston and elsewhere. Right now, New York or Manhattan has had some problems with NYRA, which is New York Racing Association. The governor is looking for alternatives to set up some type of a casino, possibly somewhere. Have you been approached by many people?
We've had numerous conversations here in New York and in Albany, along with many others, our competitors as well. We are investigating opportunities in New York, in the city, as well as in Queens and other places. Those situations that would essentially give us an opportunity to use our integrated resort model. That's a long process. It takes, once again, a while to investigate it, and also that requires legislation to be passed here in New York as well. That's one of the areas that we are investigating.
You're probably aware of everybody in the NYRA has been fired by the governor because of the new casino they have out in Queens. It's been very successful.
Well, it is successful, that particular casino is not in our model and has a very, very difficult tax situation involved there, too. The kind of investments we make require a multitude of facilities, either by us or by partners, et cetera. That's what we're investigating. We do have an opportunity, and we'll be looking at it very carefully. Thank you.
We took a strong look at Boston. I'm from Boston.
Me too.
I still have a home there. Mike is originally from Boston, too. It was a bitter pill for me to take to make the decision that Boston was too saturated, too diluted for casinos. Within 100 miles of Boston, there are about 12. It doesn't have to be within the borders of the small state of Massachusetts. Within 100 miles, there's 12 full-fledged casinos. There's just not enough of a radius to capture what we need to justify a 20% return on the amount of money we need to build the kind of IR that we're specialists at.
On the Indian reservation.
No.
No. There'll be one. There'll be one Indian casino that doesn't have "a reservation" that we understand could pick a location within 50 miles of where they're living.
Okay.
They've been talking about Long Island. Well, that's New York is. That's the Shinnecock.
Right.
Yeah. There's a golf course there. I know Shinnecock, they're talking about that, too. I hope it doesn't happen because I think the Hamptons ought to stay the way they are myself, that's my own personal opinion. Yes, sir.
I noticed in the papers and elsewhere that a unit of Cantor Fitzgerald has begun to manage poker rooms and sports betting facilities in Las Vegas. I wonder how you feel about that and what your strategy is and whether it affects either your risk or your bottom line.
Cantor manages the sports books in both of our facilities in Las Vegas now. We believe that it was better for our bottom line to have Cantor run those facilities for us. The arrangements we made with them essentially assured us the minimum we would get is what we were making on those, we have a chance to improve profitability. In the sports book business, I'm not an expert in it. I could ask Rob to explain it. He's been in it a lot longer than me, just to simplify it's not a long conversation. Volume is very, very important as you lay off different bets from when you get large bets. When you're running your own sports book, it's harder to maintain profitability and the skill sets that you need.
Cantor wants to get more and more sports betting facilities so that they can use that particular leverage from one to the other. We made that decision to make more money for us and eliminate our risk. I think you've seen others in Las Vegas doing the same thing. Was that right? I don't bet, so I don't know when Rob does.
Thought you got married.
It's the only bet I ever won, actually. Yes, sir.
I think we're all very happy to have received a very nice dividend this year from Las Vegas. Do you contemplate continuing the dividend? Is it going to be an annual dividend? Is it going to be a quarterly, semi-annual? What can we look forward to?
It's a quarterly dividend. If I want to keep my job, which I just signed up for, I have to keep increasing that dividend and maintaining it because the person who owns 52% of his shares gets a very substantial dividend, sir. My job is to make sure there's enough capital available to not only maintain it but to increase it over time. You're in good shape. Yes, sir.
Could you talk in more detail about the Cotai opening and just some of the things that have been better than you expected, some of the things that have been not as good as you expected?
Sure. Rob, you want to make some comments about Cotai? Sure.
You have an SEC, the new property?
Yes, sir. He's talking about Sands Cotai Central.
I think it's been a nice open. Keep in mind, it's a small portion of the property. It's not fully open yet. There's just a portion of the rooms in the casino. If we had to critique it, we wish we had more slot machines, ETGs. We've done very well in the junket space. We've outperformed our expectations there. I think we'll continue to ramp up. It's just beginning. It's a long race. I think we're doing well. We'll do a lot better in time. In Macau, the focus is always on the revenues, the gross gaming revenues. It shouldn't be. If you focus on the mass and premium mass growth, that's been growing by 25%, that's a strength of that property. We'll be participatory in all three segments, mass tables and slots and ETGs, et cetera.
The real opportunity for that property is all those rooms that are open, all that gaming spaces dominate Cotai in the mass market and premium mass, along with a fair share of junket. We're off to a good start. It'll get better. It'll grow with time. The ingredients of that property are exactly what we want in Macau, which is all three segments identified. Fabulous room product, eventually 6,000 keys. Phase 2 this fall, final phase in 2013.
Yes, Tom.
We're going to open the remaining two towers. There's three remaining, but of the two that are almost completed, one will open on September 20th, and we're looking to the government to give us a partial certificate of occupancy to open up. It's about either, I forget which tower is 2,200 and one's 2,000 rooms. It'll be the Sheraton, like the hotel we're sitting in right now. They'll be managing that. It'll be the largest Sheraton in the world. It'll be 4,200, and I think the St. Regis will be the fourth tower, which we've just built the lower levels, what we call the podium, and then we'll build the room tower above that. That will be about 450, 500 rooms. It'll give us about 4,700 rooms under Sheraton Corporation management. Not Sheraton, Starwood.
We decided we're going to try to open 1,000 or 1,500 more rooms. There are three components to the casino. One is Lot 5, which is open now. The second component is Lot 6, which is larger, and we're expanding that. We're going to take another 40,000 feet and add that, formerly reserved for the theater in Lot 6. That will open in September as well. We're going to open the last tower in the first quarter, but I think we're going to partially open it with 1,000 or 1,500 rooms in September. It will be a ramp-up period. A serious ramp-up period will be on the way by September. We're already ramping up, but we only have one tower to ramp up.
The VIP casino space. Well, actually, the demand was so high from the junket reps that we had to expand it, and that expansion is going to take place. We're starting to expand now. Come September, we'll have a much more robust return on the casino space.
You've mentioned limitations on table games. Are there similar limitations on slot machines in Macau?
No.
No.
No limitation on slots. Slots have been growing dramatically, Tom, over the years. You've seen it. I think you've been there. Tom Summers is a shareholder who moves around, goes to our properties, and sends me reports of how we're doing. He comes from Minnesota, I believe. Basically, I get his letters, they're handwritten, and takes the time to tell me what's going on, good and bad. I would ask anybody here who wants to do that, go around to our properties and write me letters. We're always happy to have them. It was great to see him and his wife here today, and thank you. He loves Singapore.
We'll be back.
I don't blame him.
We love Singapore, too.
That's right. Okay. Yes, sir.
Thank you. You own a lot more shares than I do, so you've probably noticed they've been off a little bit in the past month or two. Pundits would attribute that to a softer May in Macau than recent monthly numbers, and, of course, would imply that the sky is falling and there's more VIP competition and fewer VIPs coming and the world looks bleak. I guess the opposite point of view would be that a holiday in May was shorter this year than the previous year, and there was a large opening last year. I was just hoping you could give us your take as to what's really going on there, whether there's been any real diminished pace of appetite for gaming in the VIP segment or competition.
I think it's very unfair. I'll ask my colleagues to give their opinion, but I personally think it's terribly unfair for analysts or for any investors to make a determination about the second highest grossing month in the history of Macau. Only by a tiny bit. The highest, the record was MOP 26.8. That's the Macau currency. MOP 26.8 billion was the record, I think, from last October or November. May was MOP 26.2 billion. Depends on whether this is a typical glass half empty or glass half full. People were concerned about the GDP drop in China that went from 9.5% to 8.5% as the sky is falling scenario. Look at it from the other way. Look at it if the GDP was three or four or five or six. A jump to 8.5% would be celebrated.
How can somebody say it's the second highest month in the history, because the comparison of last year was a difficult comparison, they call it a difficult comp. People are out suggesting that June of last year was a favorable comp to come up with a higher percentage this year, the analysts are suggesting that the month of June will be up over 20%. I think it's just, I don't know, maybe it's just an excuse for people. Analysts come out there and they say, "My job is to call out all the cautions, all the cautionary interpretations of what's happening." I think it's insanity to say that everything's going to hell in a handbasket because we only have the second highest month on record, and we only grew 7%. I remember when we first got into Macau, there was MOP 2.5 billion of business done.
Before we opened in 2004, on May 18th, the Sands Macao on the Peninsula in Macau. From 2002 to 2004, the market, without adding a single table, a single slot machine, or a single chair at any table, went up to $5.5 billion. That's because somehow or other, some people think that the intervening $3 billion US dollar equivalent was hiding somewhere, and somebody found it, and they started to report it. My take on that is that the then monopolist knew that our figures were going to be transparent. He said, "Oh, well, I want to prove that because the Sands came in," and they ended up calling it the Sands effect, that the market went through the roof. Last year, there was $33 billion in gross gaming revenue, and we're probably going to hit $40 billion this year.
That sounds to me like a great growth market. Anybody else want to say anything?
I can add one thing to what Sheldon said. If you really want to look at our business, 25% of our EBITDA in Macau comes from non-gaming, 50% comes from the mass market gaming, and 25% comes from VIP gaming. We've improved our share in VIP gaming every month since January. We are the mass market leader in Macau. Mass market has not slipped. It continues to grow. The VIP has slipped a little bit. We're getting a higher share of a smaller growth, but that growth was, I think, in May, something around 16%, which is still a considerable amount of growth. We're in very good position because of our business model to weather any of those, what they would call dips in that environment. Any country in the world would be really happy to have those kind of growth numbers, including here.
We're not concerned about it, and we don't expect to be unhappy in Macau for what we have in position there. Any other questions? Well, if there are no other questions, let me thank you on behalf of our entire management team, and thank Sheldon for his very kind remarks about me and say how happy I am to have you. Thank you.