Everyone, grab a seat if you would. The 2016 annual meeting of the stockholders of Las Vegas Sands Corp will please come to order. My name is Rob Goldstein. I'm the President and Chief Operating Officer of LVS. I'd like to welcome all of you and thank you for your interest in our company. As President of the company, I preside at this meeting. The agenda for this morning includes all formal business stated in the proxy statement. Following this meeting, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. Please note that this meeting will be webcast on our investor relations website, which can be accessed at www.sands.com. Also present at the meeting this morning are Sheldon G. Adelson, to my left, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.
Other members of our Board of Directors including Jason Ader, Irwin Chafetz, Micheline Chau, Charles Forman, Steven Gerard, George Jamieson, Charles Koppelman, and David Levy. Ira Raphaelson, our Executive Vice President and Global General Counsel, and Patrick Dumont, our Executive Vice President and CFO, are also here today. Mr. Raphaelson will act and serve as Secretary of the meeting. Each of you was given the rules of conduct when you entered the meeting 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 meeting, or the formal portion of the meeting, for question and discussion. Let's move on to part two, formal business as stated in the proxy statement.
Let us now proceed with the formal business of the meeting, namely, one, to elect four directors to the Board, each for a three-year term. Two, to consider and ratify the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the company's independent registered public accounting firm for the year ended December 31, 2016. To consider and act upon a non-binding advisory proposal on the compensation of named executive officers, and finally, to transact such other business as may properly come before this meeting or any adjournments thereof. Part three, notice and stockholders list. Will the Secretary please report on the mailing and notice of this meeting to all stockholders and the availability of the stockholders list?
Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Chairman, I have an affidavit of mailing of the notice of internet availability of the proxy materials to each stockholder of record as of the close of business on April 11, 2016. I also present an alphabetical list showing all persons who are holders of record of the company's common stock at the close of business on April 11, 2016, the date the Board of Directors fixed as the date for determining stockholders entitled to notice of and to vote at this meeting. The list has been duly certified by the American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, the transfer agent of the company's shares.
This list has been available for inspection for the 10 days prior to the meeting at the company's headquarters and is available for examination to 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 and internet availability of proxy materials transmitted to stockholders with the records of the meeting?
Yes, Mr. President.
Okay. Part four. Donna Ansbro of American Stock Transfer & Trust Company has been named to act as the Inspector of Election at this meeting. Ms. Ansbro is present and has submitted an oath of office, which will be filed with the minutes of this meeting. I now ask that all those present with proxies who have not already done so, please file their proxies with the inspector at this time. If there are any stockholders present in person who did not register at the door and have not filed a proxy, please provide your names and the number 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 at the record date, which are entitled to vote at this meeting, consist of 794,718,776 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.
Thank you. 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. The purpose of this stockholders meeting is for our stockholders to vote on the matters listed in the proxy statement I described a few minutes ago. Votes will be taken on those matters after all nominations and proposals have been introduced. Thereafter, the Inspector of Election will make a report on the outcome of the votes. Let's proceed to part five, formal business. Welcome. We'll 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 not already voted by proxy may vote on these matters.
The first order of business is the nomination of four individuals to stand for election to the board. All the company's nominees are present here today. I'd like to introduce them to you at this time. They are Sheldon G. Adelson to my left, Irwin Chafetz, who's in front of me, Charles A. Koppelman back at Irwin, and myself, Rob Goldstein. All the nominees are current members of our board. Is there a motion on the proposed election of the four nominees?
Yes, Mr. President, Mr. Chairman, I nominate Mr. Sheldon G. Adelson, Mr. Irwin Chafetz, Mr. Robert G. Goldstein, and Mr. Charles A. Koppelman for election to serve as directors for a three-year term and until their successors have been duly elected and qualified.
I second the motion. Are there any questions or comments with respect to the proposal for the nomination of directors? If not, 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. We will collect and tabulate the votes later in the 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 ended December 31, 2016. The audit committee of the board has selected Deloitte & Touche LLP. I am pleased to note the presence at the meeting today of Ed Ricks from Deloitte & Touche. Mr. Ricks is available to answer any questions that stockholders may care to ask. Any questions of Mr. Ricks? I will now entertain a resolution to ratify the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP to audit the books and records of the company for the year ended December 31, 2016.
Mr. President, Mr. Chairman, I move that the following resolution be adopted. Resolve that the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP to audit the books and records of the company for the year ended December 31, 2016, be confirmed, ratified, and approved.
I second the motion.
The motion is moved and seconded. We will collect and tabulate the votes later in the meeting. I will now entertain a resolution to act upon a non-binding advisory proposal on executive compensation.
Mr. President, Mr. Chairman, I move that the following resolution be adopted. Resolve that the stockholders approve the compensation of the named executive officers as disclosed pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC, which disclosure shall include the compensation discussion and analysis, compensation tables, and any related material disclosed in the proxy statement.
I second the motion.
The motion is 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 in the rear. If you've already filed your proxy, it would be simplified to count if you had not filled out a ballot unless you wish to change your vote. 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'd like to take an opportunity at this time to give Sheldon Adelson, our chairman of the board, our founder, and CEO of the Las Vegas Sands, an opportunity to say a few words about the company. Mr. Adelson?
Thanks, Rob, and thanks to all of you for joining us today. I'm pleased to report to you, our shareholders, that 2015 was another successful year for the company. We continued to execute our operating strategies and fortify our position as the preeminent worldwide developer and operator of convention-based integrated resorts. For the full year 2015, we generated company-wide EBITDA of $4.2 billion against the backdrop of a 34% decline in Macau's gross gaming revenues. This industry-leading cash generation reflects both the strength of our business model and the geographic diversity of our cash flows and underpins our balance sheet strength. Accordingly, we can continue to return excess cash to shareholders while maintaining our ability to invest in new development opportunities.
While the Macau market is experiencing some headwinds today, I remain as confident now as I have ever been in the long-term opportunities for growth for our company, both in Macau and the wider Asian region. We still stay disciplined and continue to execute our growth strategy. First, we will maximize cash flow from our existing property portfolio while investing for future growth. Second, we will nurture new integrated resort development opportunities in new markets. Third, we will pay generous recurring dividends, which we have every intention of maintaining and growing in the future as our business and cash flows grow. In addition, we will return excess capital to shareholders opportunistically through our stock repurchase program. We believe that successful execution of these strategies will enable us to deliver strong growth and outstanding returns to shareholders in the years ahead.
I will discuss all three areas in a bit more detail, starting with the last one, which is an important one for all shareholders and a personal favorite of mine. The return of capital to shareholders. Since we initiated our capital return program in 2012, we have returned nearly $11 billion of capital to shareholders of Las Vegas Sands.
Thank you, Sheldon.
$11 billion. Isn't that a lot of money? In the form of dividends and share repurchases. In the fourth quarter of 2015, we announced that the Las Vegas Sands recurring dividend would increase by 11% to $2.88 per share, or $0.72 per quarter for the 2016 calendar year. I can safely say that we've been executing on our commitment to increase the return of capital to shareholders. Yay dividends. As I mentioned on our earnings conference call in April, I do see stabilization in gaming revenue trends in the mass segment in Macao, and particularly in the base mass segment. In the March quarter, we experienced our first sequential increase in mass gaming revenues in Macao since quarter one of 2014.
Our Macao portfolio-wide mass revenue per day was up 5% sequentially, and at The Venetian Macao, mass table revenue per day was up 10%, which is no small feat considering the arrival of new competition. Additionally, our share of EBITDA in the six-operator Macao market has continued to increase to around 37% in 2015, up from 35% in 2014, despite the entrance of new competition into the market. In Singapore, our share of normalized EBITDA in the duopoly market increased to 68% in 2015, up from 58% in 2014. Of our industry-leading investments in both Macao and Singapore, we are unique in the absolute scale of our cash flow. Scale, diversity of offerings, and critical mass allow us to outperform our competitors.
We're very proud that Marina Bay Sands in Singapore and The Venetian Macao on the Cotai Strip are the 2 most successful and profitable integrated resorts in the world. The Venetian Macao is today the iconic must-see integrated resort destination in Macao, welcoming over 30 million visitors annually. The Venetian Macao produced $1.1 billion of EBITDA for the year and was the only Macao property to exceed $1 billion in EBITDA for the year, and was the only Macao property to exceed $1 billion in EBITDA, despite all the headwinds and challenges of 2015. Indeed, the only other integrated resort property in the world that earned more than $1 billion in EBITDA for 2015 was our Marina Bay Sands. In Macao, we are very well positioned for future growth.
We have the diversity of product offering, the scale and critical mass to cater to every type of business and leisure visitor. Excuse me. Our integrated resort business model and unmatched investments clearly position the company well as travelers from China and in Asia more broadly increase their business and leisure travel and expenditures in the years ahead. I've not a shadow of a doubt that The Parisian, which is targeted to open in mid-September, not very long from now, will replicate the success of The Venetian as another themed, iconic, and must-see integrated resort destination for Macao's visitors. I believe the positioning of The Parisian Macao as a themed destination integrated resort caters well to both the current Macao market conditions and the long-term growth trends in Chinese outbound tourism.
Our existing portfolio has clearly enabled us to hold our own amidst new competition, and I'm extremely confident The Parisian will help drive growth in Macao in the future. With the opening of The Parisian Macao, we will have invested in excess of $13 billion to deliver on our promise to help Macao in its economic diversification and its continued evolution into the world's leading business and leisure tourism destination. Our industry-leading investments will feature nearly 13,000 hotel rooms, 2 million sq ft of retail mall offerings, and that's net, and nearly 2 million sq ft of MICE capacity. Importantly, the benefits of our integrated resort business model will always extend far beyond our own financial success.
The company's properties and service offerings featuring world-class dining, shopping, convention, group meeting, and entertainment experiences enhance the appeal of our host countries as business and leisure tourism destination, while helping to diversify their economies, attract outside investment, increase employment, and provide meaningful career development opportunities for our host communities. We're confident our integrated resort business model can provide meaningful economic benefits in additional countries in Asia, and particularly in Japan and Korea. We believe our unmatched track record of successful convention-based integrated resort development, coupled with our industry-leading financial strength positions us exceedingly well to secure and capitalize on the most promising global integrated resort development opportunities. In reviewing press accounts from the Bernstein conference earlier this week, it seems some of my remarks about Singapore were either taken out of context or misspoken by me. Let me quickly clarify some points.
First, we have been honored to be part of the dramatic tourism expansion in Singapore that our iconic Marina Bay Sands has helped develop. As we look to expand upon the success of our relationship with the Singapore government, we propose to build an iconic venue for entertainment and another hotel tower. This was, and is our proposal to the government for land use that we are seeking and not something they asked us to do. Our discussions are preliminary and confidential, but I will clarify that we have had no timetable on pricing discussions to this point. I apologize if there's been any confusion on these points. The government of Singapore speaks for itself, and they have not expressed a view on this proposal. Thank you once again for your support and for the confidence you continue to show in our company.
I would also like to take a moment to thank our nearly 50,000 team members worldwide for the hard work over the last year and congratulate them on a job well done. We look forward to sharing with you the ongoing success of the company in the years ahead, and we look forward to addressing your questions in just a few minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Adelson. Let us now proceed with the voting results. Is the inspector ready to report?
The results of the balloting are as follows. In the election of directors, Sheldon G. Adelson, Irwin Chafetz, Robert G. Goldstein, and Charles A. Koppelman have been elected directors of the company by the affirmative vote of a plurality of the votes cast at the meeting. With respect to the ratification of the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the company's independent registered public accounting firm for the year ended December 31st, 2016, the proxies and ballots representing a majority of the votes cast by stockholders present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at the meeting were voted in favor of the resolution, and therefore, the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the company's independent registered public accounting firm for the year ended December 31st, 2016 has been ratified.
With respect to the non-binding advisory proposal on the compensation of the named executive officers, the proxies and ballots representing a majority of the votes cast by stockholders present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at the meeting were voted in favor of the resolution, and therefore, the proposal has been approved.
Thank you. On the basis of the report of the inspector, I declare that the resolutions covering the election of four directors to the board of directors, the ratification of the selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the company's independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, and the non-binding advisory proposal on the compensation of the named executive officers have all been approved. I now request the inspector please prepare a written record to be filed with the records of the meeting. If there no other business to come before the meeting, a motion is in order that the meeting be adjourned.
Mr. President, Mr. Chairman, I move that the meeting be adjourned.
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, please say no, if you oppose. The motion is carried and the meeting is adjourned. At this point, we're happy to answer any and all questions about the company. If you have a question, please rise and identify yourself so that we may provide a complete record of the meeting. Please note that the question and answer period is being webcast on our investor relations website. Please, any questions we can answer, feel free. We've been that spectacular, not one question.
Gentleman right here. On the aisle.
Good morning. My name is Mike Zelin. I've been a shareholder since 2007. I'm also happy to say that I tripled down in 2008 and 2009 based upon the strength and clarity and consistency of your leadership. I thank you for that. I consider Las Vegas Sands to be one of my core holdings that I'll pass on to my heirs 30 years from now because I believe in the consistency of cash generation, the stability, and growth opportunity. It is with that perspective of a long-term shareholder that I have two questions. First, most of the cash used to pay the dividend is generated ex-U.S. Will there become a point in time where the cash flow is significantly reduced to cover taxes associated with repatriation to cover the dividends?
The second question is, how do you think, or how should I think as a long-term shareholder about the risk of not getting a licensing extension in Macao in 2022, given that the government can repatriate the assets with no compensation to the company? Thank you.
By the way, thank you very much for being a shareholder. We really appreciate it and your confidence in us. In regards to your first question, because of the assets that the chairman designed and built and that the company owns today, we have a diversity of cash flows. That actually there's no majority place where the earnings from the dividends actually come into the U.S. to pay. We're pretty evenly split. We take some money up from Singapore. We take some money up from Sands China. As you know, there's a dividend paid to public shareholders there as well, and some of that comes up to parent. Then we also have operations in the U.S. that generate cash flow. The dividend is actually geographically diversified.
The second question. I didn't know you were finished. The second question is about what do we feel about the renewal of the concession when ours expires in 2022. That's six years from now. The government has not given us any indication, but they've said publicly they're looking favorably upon those companies that are leaders and pioneers in the development of non-gaming activities that will attract other forms of tourism besides tourists for gaming. They have not made any statement on the basis. They haven't identified the basis of their thinking for the renewal. Since we have been recognized by the government and by most people, almost everybody who knows anything about Macao, as truly being the pioneer in the development of non-gaming activity. We have, particularly in the field of MICE, that's Meetings, Incentives, Conventions, and Exhibitions. We are the undisputed leader, and this is what they want.
Nobody has said to us that we've developed or intend to develop anything that they don't want. Everything that we do is pursuant to what they want. It's coincidental with our fundamental business model, which is MICE-based, and that's our specialty based upon my experience with what people think of as the COMDEX period of time, and I call it our trade show activity that I sold in 1995. It was not related to LVS. It was a separate company. We did have mostly common shareholders. Although we'd like to have an answer for you, we'd like to answer ourselves, there are no answers out there.
Only what they say they're going to make their decisions on, if that's the case, we should get a standing ovation from everybody concerned that we're doing the right thing to further attract and make a meaningful experience for both the leisure visitor and the MICE visitor. Ma'am, did you have a question? No. I answered it? Yes. Smart guy.
Thank you.
Thank you. Gentlemen.
My name is Howard Levine. I'm a longtime stockholder, also successfully invested in Las Vegas Sands. My question is the suit that was brought against Las Vegas Sands by a former officer of the corporation. Unfortunately, I was not able to attend the meeting last year. I was in Las Vegas, but I've attended all the previous years in New York. As I remember clearly, the position of Las Vegas Sands was that the man was a fraud. You would litigate it to the point that it would go to trial. You would be successful. In the last couple of days, I've read that a settlement has been made with the gentleman. It was reported, I don't know, of course, reported $70 million. I just wondered why-
$7 billion?
$70 million.
Yep.
$70 million. I just wondered why such a definitive stand was taken by Las Vegas Sands then not pursued.
Not what?
Not pursued.
I was the first and last person to want to pursue the case because there was no development. He blew the whistle to the SEC and the DOJ. That's the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice. After over a five-year investigation, there hasn't been one of his hundreds of allegations that were validated. Everything he said was an outright lie. The settlement was not based upon any recognition that what he said was true. As is the case in all settlements of disputes, the agreement underlying the settlement prohibits us from talking about the detail, the amount of money. The only thing I could tell you is that the decision was made not having any recognition whatsoever of any of his allegations. He was an employee only for nine months.
From my standpoint, this is not easy for me because I was personally the subject of his accusations. The man only worked for the company for nine months. Nine months. The other man who brought him in kept certain things away from me, the chairman, and the board of directors that are here. We didn't learn about some of those things until later. To continue the case at this time had a great likelihood of having a lot of the company's irrelevant issues, and statutorily privileged information would have been disclosed and spread out all over the newspapers throughout the world. As tough a bullet as it was for me to bite, and believe me, it was really tough to bite, we had to settle it.
Any other questions?
My name is Arnold Cohen. I attended the LVS-
Excuse me, I forgot to say one thing. Many years ago, in the 1950s, I went to school there. I was stationed in the army on Governors Island, this little island 3,000 miles out of San Francisco called Governors Island in New York Harbor. Why did I say
Let's come back to that.
He doesn't know. If he doesn't know, I don't know.
It was a great stay at Governors Island, I believe.
It was a good stay at Governors Island.
We'll come back to it.
I'll come back to it.
Sir, your question. We'll come back to it.
I got it. I'm there.
Here we go. We're back.
While I was stationed in the Army, I went to school at night. I went to a school called CCNY, which was then the Bernard Baruch School of Business Administration at the City College of New York. Now it's a city university. First thing I learned, first sentence wasn't good evening. It wasn't, "Hello, everybody, welcome to the class." It was, "Remember, there is nothing as dead as yesterday's newspaper." What you asked about the Jacobs News, I hope we will forget about it, because the interest in that subject is as dead as yesterday's newspaper.
We're thrilled to move on. Sir.
My name is Arnold Cohen. I attended the Las Vegas meeting a couple of years ago. I also am a long-term shareholder, and I appreciate the dividend very much. It's very important for my grandchildren, to send them to college.
My grandchildren, too.
Okay. My question is, you had mentioned in previous years the involvement in trying to expand into Japan and into Korea and possibly places in Europe, I heard, I believe you say one time. Where do we stand with Japan and where do we stand with Korea at this moment?
Japan, Prime Minister Abe embraced the concept of an integrated resort to stimulate the growth of their tourism activity. I'm not going to talk about governments. I got in trouble the last time I did it. They set up an Interparty Gaming Commission. That Interparty Gaming Commission studied the subject matter of legalizing casino gaming. Now, they have a lot of gaming in Japan, probably the largest number and diversity of gaming opportunities, such as the pachinko parlors, which they don't consider gambling. Because the 2020 Olympics is coming to Tokyo, that was the impetus for them to plan for and accomplish the development of one or more integrated resorts. Because of their scheduling for their Diet, their parliament, the parliamentary schedule, they take everything into great detail consideration.
The time to take to debate that was caught up by sales tax increase considerations, by the considerations on getting the 2020 Olympics built, the facilities for that. Recently, the Interparty Gaming Commission was dissolved I suspect that Prime Minister Abe wants to reinstate this subject matter, but he has not made the statement with the same passion and strength that he had before. In South Korea, there are 17 casinos. 16 of them are foreigners only. Only one, called Kangwon Land, K-A-N-G-W-O-N Land. It's approximately a three hours drive from the biggest city, Seoul, and they make it sort of difficult to get there, but is the only one that brings in Korean nationals, and they do as much business with limitations.
You can only bet so much, and so many people can only go in, and I've never been there, but people who have say there are lines constantly, and they do very well. That was by a special act to rejuvenate a panned-out mining district. The experience they had with that wasn't that good. From my standpoint, you only put a casino in a place where people can afford to interact with the casino. Retired miners saw it as an opportunity to make a lot of money, and so they lost. We are pursuing the possibility of a special act of the legislature to open a casino in the city of Busan. Those of you who are my age or close, remember the names of Seoul and Incheon and Busan or Busan, in the Korean War, of which I'm a veteran. I'm a Korean War veteran, and you too.
I remember the name Busan very well. I've met with the mayor more than once. The mayor changed, and I met with the new mayor, and there's the possibility they will look for a special act of the legislature to allow a gaming facility. We made a proposal for a cluster of three integrated resorts comprising over 8,000 sleeping rooms and one of the most beautiful, iconic buildings ever designed. We call it the Pearl Building. It's circular, and there's a hole in the middle. It originally started out like a donut, and I moved the hole up, and I call it the Handbag Building because it looks like a woman's handbag. All gold with a silver sphere in the middle, hence the name The Pearl. If we can get that on the former 1988 Olympic site, it would be undoubtedly the most iconic complex in the world.
We don't know. I've met with many members of the parliament. I've not met yet with the president of South Korea, but that will change anyway in 2017. I do have a close personal friend who is very close to the president, and we've not been able to get a final answer on it. We're looking at Vietnam. We're looking at Thailand. Vietnam is allowing foreigners-only casinos, but they're all in the boonies. That's an American term that only Americans seem to understand. It's not in the highly populated area. In our business model of a MICE-based destination resort, we need fundamental and strong tourism infrastructure to bring conventions to any place. Our next step there is to meet with the party secretary of Ho Chi Minh City, known as Saigon. By the way, a lot of people in Vietnam still call it Saigon.
We'll see whether or not he will allow it or recommend it. I've met with the past president, I met with the past prime minister, and about two or three weeks ago, I met with the minister of planning and investment. I'm a very persistent guy, and if I see a possibility, I'm not going to let it go. I continue to go there. Our head of development for Asia, George Tanasijevich, based in Marina Bay Sands, he's constantly looking to integrate our desires and our wishes with what they want to accomplish in their own country. The last thing is that we are now looking at Brazil because there was a group of parliamentarians from Brazil came up to Vegas.
I personally met with them in our boardroom at The Venetian, and they were very impressed after we took them around and showed them what an integrated resort looks like. Our complex, there are three towers. There's the Venezia tower above the garage, The Venetian Las Vegas tower, and then there is The Palazzo tower. That is the largest building combined in the world. It's 18.5 million square feet, three times the size of the Pentagon, which is widely perceived to be the world's largest building. It's not. It's only 6 million. We have 18.5 million square feet, and it's a business model. If Brazil legalizes casino gaming, we will look to build in São Paulo and in Rio de Janeiro. We keep sending our government relations guy down there, we're going to pursue that.
I just talked to one of our directors who thought there was another European, outside of Europe possibility, it's just a thought, and there's nothing really to say about it. We are looking very hard to find an opportunity for development of a full-sized, iconic integrated resort opportunity. Did I answer your question? Thank you. Yes, ma'am.
My name is Tsipi Ben-Haim. I'm a very happy shareholder. Actually, these are the only.
Sure are.
Thank you. The only stocks I have, and I keep. I heard you mention something about career development in Macao and anywhere else that you are. It sounds great, especially because so many companies are looking now into civic responsibility and so on. How much is this point stressed when you are going to develop new opportunities, new resorts, new convention centers?
What?
Career development.
Career development
Civil opportunities.
Yes. When we developed The Venetian Macao, we put in what we call the Adelson Academy, which is a series of classrooms. We put through tens of thousands of our employees to learn new subjects that we teach them to move from whatever department they're in to look at other opportunities for individual personal growth within the company to develop their careers. Our policy always has been and will continue to be that we go to hire local people first and foremost, then somebody from the next town or the next country after that. Career development is something that we really practice. Most countries don't think of that as the first thing. They think first about the potential for employment and the potential for both business that is convention-based and leisure travel. Those are the things they want.
There's no country in the world that doesn't want the MICE business. No country in the world. There's nobody else in our industry that could potentially compete with us. Thank you. There's no country in the world that doesn't want MICE business. That happens to be one of my specialties, and everybody knows it. We, in Macao for many years, had the largest exhibition center outside of the Canton business, Canton Fair grounds. We had larger than either Beijing or Shanghai. They've built much larger facilities. The convention portion of it, that is meeting rooms and ballrooms. Our smallest meeting room is not much smaller than this one we're sitting in today. We have in Las Vegas, the largest complex, namely 330 meeting rooms like this. There's no place in the world that could accommodate meetings like that.
Career development is not the first words on the lips of the investment and economic development people in various countries. Just bring us more conventions and bring us more tourism. Later they talk about when we're successful, about career development for their own employees.
John Masco. Two years ago in Jersey, you mentioned the high-dollar gamblers, of flying them into the various casinos and that there were some restrictions on that, as well as smoking in the casino, which has cut into the gaming income. Could you comment on that?
Smoking in our business is prevalent, as you well know, and all of our jurisdictions have smoking to various degree. Macao and Singapore have been restrictive in terms of how much smoking we have in certain areas. Recently, the government in Macao relaxed the proposed smoking room ban, and they've now reinstituted the fact we can have smoking areas in the casino, which is great for the business because whether you're pro or anti-smoking, the fact is, a lot of gamblers in Asia do smoke. We're relieved recently that the government of Macao has relaxed the regulation as of the last 10 days. Very positive for us. Smoking is part of our world. It may not be a good health decision by the smoker, but that's freedom of what you want to do with your life.
We have smoking in all of our casinos, and Macao will remain an element of smoking, very positive. Your reference to high rollers and flying them in, as you well know, all over the world today, anti-money laundering restrictions and other things have happened to make it more restricted, more difficult. Not just our business, but if you're on Fifth Avenue buying things, if you're a mainland resident or outside the country, it's more difficult to move money, and the government of China has made various restrictions on the ability to move money. That's been an impediment to our business in the U.S. and Macao and Singapore. It's a fact of life. Our competitors face that. The world's changing, and we embrace the regulatory climate we live in. It makes it more difficult for us to do the high-end business.
It's somewhat a big change from six years ago. That's the world we live in. We accept it. We embrace it. I think we've led, of any gaming company, we've been most compliant and want to be compliant in all the jurisdictions we operate. It's critical. It's part of the world today. We accept it, embrace it, and act accordingly. We're very compliant in our approach to all of our jurisdictions. That's part of our world. Well, it impacts all countries we work in, except for maybe any place we operate. Las Vegas, here in Bethlehem, two hours away, one and a half hours away, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. Obviously, Singapore and Macao. It's a negative for the gaming industry, including our company, whenever there's restrictions on the ability for a customer to smoke or to move money to pay debts, et cetera.
It makes it more restrictive. It's negative. There's no question about it. It's impacted Macao significantly. In the last two years, the entire market, the very high end of the market, the so-called junket and rolling chip business, has been down meaningfully, almost 50% in the last two years. Probably will continue. The nice thing about what our chairman put together a decade ago was a mass-based strategy for lots of sleeping rooms, lots of retail, lodging, and lots of gaming capacity. That's our trade today, is more mass. It's more stable. It's more sustainable. I think it's a great approach we're taking in Macao. It has hurt our income. Our income in Macao has gone down significantly in the last two years due to a lot of reasons. One of which is the money movement and junket restrictions.
We're on an even playing field. Our competitors and us all have to accept that policy. It's a negative thing for the industry, no question about it. The same way that here in New York, if you want to buy an expensive piece of jewelry or piece of art, there's all kinds of restrictions on how you move money. If you want to buy a house here in New York, you almost explain where the money came from. It's part of the world economy today. It's not going to change. It's going to continue that way forever. It's not just the gaming world, but all businesses that traffic in large amounts of money. It's a negative, but it is what it is.
I want to tell you that when I heard two years ago in 2014 excuse me, that we were conducting what's called phone betting or proxy betting. Somebody would sit at a table with a cell phone and get instructions from somebody on the other end of the cell phone. I thought it was morally and ethically wrong. I cut it out within minutes. I told my then new friend, Steve Wynn, that he should do the same thing, which he did for two months. He went back into phone betting. It's been in the last month or two that the Macao government has outlawed the phone betting completely. I'm very happy that we took the stand and were the first one to recognize its ills. We cut it out.
What Sheldon's referencing is
I don't have to
The Macao government banned it totally. They took his approach and banned it totally, no more phone betting in Macao. Which, again, it's a negative for the industry, that's the world we live in, we have to accept that.
We don't see the convention business as a major source of income comparable to the gaming, particularly in Asia. We do see it as fulfilling our obligation
To be the expert in attracting the MICE business and to the government. We have large bodies of salespeople to bring in conventions and exhibitions. It's our specialty.
Questions. Sir?
Hi, I'm Isaac Dimitrovsky, a shareholder. I just had a couple of quick questions about the U.S. operations. One of them is the reports about a couple of reports about stadiums in Las Vegas, first a music stadium, then the reports about possibly bringing an NFL team to Las Vegas. Could you talk a little bit about what opportunity you see there? The other question is about Bethlehem, which seems to be doing well, and what future plans you might have for that.
I'll
You want to answer?
Bethlehem. Well, there are two. I'll talk about the arena and the stadium, Rob will answer the other question. There were two gatherings. One is an arena, which is being planned in a joint venture between us and Madison Square Garden Entertainment Corp., a fellow by the name of Dolan. We have an excess piece of land that's adequate for an arena, not necessarily adequate to add more sleeping rooms. We could fill up, or they could fill up as many as 85 events during the course of the year. Some very high demand, about an 18,000-seat arena, specifically designed in a U-shape for entertainment. It's not designed for either basketball or for hockey or for boxing, but I suppose you can have a boxing match in there.
We made a deal that we get so many seats of whichever seats we want that has quality, and we will package them with rooms in our hotel that will give us a significant increase in our average daily rate, our ADR. The fellow that we hired at the beginning of this year from the Atlantis in the Bahamas was formerly in charge of rooms at Caesars Palace when the showroom for Celine Dion was built, and he's an expert at packaging the rooms and the tickets for the entertainment. We're optimistic that that will There's 365 days a year, and the 85 events might cover only 85 nights, but it might cover double that, 170 nights. That's a technique or a tactic to increase the average daily rate.
Our occupancy is okay, and we see that supporting the two weakest periods of the year: the summer and November, December. We're not going to operate it. Somebody else who are experts in artist promotion will be operating it and bringing in the artists. On the arena, sorry, on the stadium, 65,000-seat stadium, we need and want an NFL team, and we've had negotiations with the Oakland Raiders that seem to have a broader attendance base around the U.S. than all the other NFL teams. They don't have a stadium in Oakland and the municipality, which usually is the base of tax revenue to finance the stadium. We believe that we can get about half the cost of the stadium, which will be between $1.25 billion and $1.5 billion. Excuse me. I'm a two expert in this field of about two months.
I'm a two-month expert in this field, and I'm getting smarter by the day, not in quantum leaps, but a little bit each day. One, the stadium makes no money. If you're a successful stadium, you make $30 million a year. We make that in our company in one or two nights. It's not something that the board of directors had said can move the needle on the value of our company. However, beside 10 NFL games, eight season games and two exhibition games. We can put in, depending upon who you talk to, an additional 45 to 55 events. Those events, we would have the selection of the 50-yard line seats, let's say. We sell off options to fans of NFL football, but on concerts, on mixed martial arts, on boxing, wrestling, and various entertainment, tractor pulls, and who knows what for Joe Sixpack.
That too will put the pressure on, particularly the stadium, because one of our two slow periods in occupancy and ADR is the busiest period for the football game. It's on either weekday or weekend, we can have college football, which can be brought in as an attraction by the boxing promoters or other promoters. We could take a weak period in occupancy and ADR, mainly November, December, and turn that into the busiest periods. That incremental increase over and above what I call a nut-cracking stage, meaning the fixed expenses, will add substantial amounts of money in room occupancy and room average daily rate above what we experience. The second biggest, we do have occupancy, but we don't have big spenders in the summertime. We're talking about either Major League Soccer or what they call friendly games with the English and European Premier League.
Like Manchester United would bring in exhibition games every weekend in, say, in a month, and we could then bring in Real Madrid, who will do the same for another month, and maybe Barcelona or Chelsea or Arsenal or one of those famous teams. It looks very good. It's not an activity that will move the profitability needle for the company. Being a resident of Las Vegas and caring about our community, I and my family are willing to take over the development of the stadium just for the good of the community, just as a community effort. I volunteered to do this. It's a risk. Could cost me a lot of money, a few hundred million dollars.
If it helps out the city, of course, I'm not going to do it if I'm going to lose money, but I still got to get it done. That's the arena and the stadium.
On the Bethlehem, just we opened that property a half a dozen years ago. We've been thrilled with the results because most of our money's been returned already. It makes roughly $35+ million a quarter. What we're looking, we probably would expand it, but that's contingent upon seeing what happens with legislation here in New Jersey. The pending legislation, from what I'm hearing, is close in terms of the North Jersey casino possibility. That would put a damper on our expansion plans because a lot of our business does come out of New York area, and we're concerned how it'll impact our business. It's a very solid, wonderful return, which we can get that in more jurisdictions. If New Jersey happened, we might not. We're looking at the possibility of adding more lodging, more keys, and also expand the casino, add more retail.
We'll wait and see how the fall turns out in New Jersey before making that decision. Bethlehem, a great little property for us, not in the big scheme of things. At $150 million a year, not going to drive a significant value to shareholders, but a nice investment and wait and see if we want to expand upon it. Thank you.
My Korean War comrade.
Fortunately, I was in Germany at that time.
Fortunately, I was in New York City.
Fortunately for me, many of my friends in basic training went the other way. However, being a sports fan, I know Las Vegas, the baseball hierarchy, I'll put it that way, will not permit baseball brought into Las Vegas. They've tried, because of gambling, et cetera. How we get a franchise from the NFL to bring in a football team, because this has been talked about many times, whether it's baseball or football, and the onus of gambling, the i.e. reputation, et cetera, that it's always been rejected.
There's 28 states that have legalized commercial gaming, either regular commercial like riverboats or Indian Native American gaming on casinos. There is no longer Las Vegas being the only place in the world, in the U.S., to wager on games. My dear friend and one of our directors, Mr. Schaefer, says, "Everybody has two favorite things, a Chinese restaurant and the bookmaker." Ever since I was a kid, people have been betting, including me, betting on football games out of my home in suburban Boston. It's a reality. Being in Vegas doesn't stimulate any more gambling. From us, our race and sportsbook we sold off. We may have a royalty or something. The race and sportsbook is not a significant needle mover for profitability in a casino.
It's only there as an accommodation so we could attract high rollers, medium rollers, and they want to bet on a race or an athletic contest, no problem. It's not a big deal for us. If somebody said to me, "All right, would you cut out sports betting?" I'd do it in a heartbeat.
Let me ask the question, please, sir. Can I help you with the question? I heard the question. Let me ask you, please.
The thinking is not like what it used to be.
Yeah. I heard you. Sir, I heard you. I get it. Let me answer your question. I heard you clearly. You're absolutely right. The NFL has been adamantly opposed to gambling in Las Vegas, putting a team there. I think what Sheldon's referencing, the world does change. There was a time when there wasn't a game. I grew up in the business when there was two jurisdictions in the whole country. Today, you drive by the stadium in Baltimore or by Cleveland or by Chicago, you've got to pass a casino to get there. The NFL owners have to make that consideration if Las Vegas is acceptable. Far, our informal feedback from some owners has been, if you read the press reports, Mr. Jones owns the Cowboys, Mr. Kraft that owns the Patriots, they indicated they're thinking or open-minded.
The commissioner himself said, "We would consider it." No one is saying it's a done deal. Let's be clear. We don't have NFL approval. What we have is people at the NFL who have communicated to the press, and the press clippings are out there saying, "We're open to Las Vegas. The world is changing." If you read Mr. Johnson's comments here in New York, who owns the Jets, there's been owners publicly stating in the last three months that NFL has changed its thinking. It would consider Las Vegas. That's what we're encouraged by. There's no reason to believe that it's a done deal. There's reason to believe it's possible that they'll rethink it. Like all things in life, 35 years ago, when I worked in Atlantic City, people never dreamed they'd be gambling in virtually every state. Today in the U.S., there's gambling virtually.
I went through Baltimore to get to the stadium. I had to pass the casino at the light. I said, "What's that?" He said, "That's a huge casino." In Chicago, in Cleveland, everywhere you go, gambling is prevalent. The world does change, and perhaps the NFL will rethink it. We have no guarantees. What Mr. Adelson is operating on is the assumption that we would first get approval of the stadium, then submit to the NFL. If they turn this down, we're done.
It's okay. I'm not desperate to do this. It's not a must-do for the company. The company doesn't want to do it because it's not a profit-making entity. We will be able to package good tickets and with room rates and package multi minimum number of nights. It's a good thing for business and to push the profitability on the hotel rooms. I could live with it. I could live without it.
John.
Have you given any consideration to the New York State opening up of gambling casino? Is there any interest on LVS's part?
You want me?
New York State is now.
We're not interested in the upstate casinos. They'll be too small. Our Bethlehem is probably the biggest profit-making non-urban casino in the country. To go up to Albany or some other town in the mountains up there, it's not going to help it. If New York does come into the New York City area, we'd be aggressively interested, and the same thing if New Jersey allows, because if northern New Jersey or New York City allows gaming, it's going to have an impact on Bethlehem, and why should we not go after it? We'll go after it.
Take one more question. Ma'am, in the back.
Mabel Ng. Las Vegas Sands has a huge portfolio in Asia. With the projected economy slowing down in China and market conditions in Asia getting challenging, do you anticipate that to affect the bottom line of Las Vegas Sands? Second question, do you see that the $12 billion return to shareholder value last year repeatable?
I didn't understand the second part. You do that.
It was $12 billion, not last year, but in the last several years. That was not last year only. That was over a period of years. I wish it was the last year, but no, we weren't that good. I think Sheldon Adelson addressed what's happening in Asia and the slowdown in the economy
I've been in business for 70 years. I've created, successfully, dozens of businesses. What I've learned about that is that everything in life is cyclical. Nothing is straight up, nothing is straight down. If business is going good and then it slows down, it's going to come back. There's nothing in the world that goes straight down, nothing in the world that goes straight up. There is the peaks and valleys. Yes, the economy they're talking about in China is not so good. Look at it from the standpoint of the U.S. We are running at less than 2% GDP growth. They're running at 7.5, 6.5. If they drop from 7.5 to 6.5, the press covers it as though it's a disaster. Look at it from our standpoint. If we went from 1.75 GDP growth to 6.5, we would consider it a miracle.
From our standpoint, I think it's cyclical. It was good before. It'll be good again.
Just add one thing on that issue, that as much as Macao has had a difficult couple of years, it's still by far, by a multiple of six or seven, the most important gaming market in the world. The Las Vegas Strip does $6 billion. Macao will do close to 30. It's an amazing place to operate. It's got huge potential to grow. There's all the Chinese people, obviously, in the mainland as well as the Macao. I think it's a little early to say that things aren't going to be great in China in the future. Singapore is truly an iconic piece of property that has made a lot of money for this company and for shareholders. Probably a lot of that $12 billion came out of Singapore, so we're delighted to be there.
To Sheldon's early reference about Asia, with 4 billion people in Macao, is still the most important place in the world for this company to grow and prosper. We have a lot of confidence in China, Singapore, and other jurisdictions. We'll be there, very happy if someplace else happens for us. A couple of bad years in Macao, still pretty good. We still made billions of dollars in the last couple of years in Macao. Still a wonderful place to operate for us. We're lucky to be there.
Sir?
Yeah.
We'll make this the last question.
Fishman. Mr. Adelson, I don't know whether you recently heard that MGM took an interest in Boyd Gaming in New Jersey, in the Borgata Hotel, if that's correct?
Yes.
Okay. In your business of running hotels in Las Vegas, for many, many years, if I'm not mistaken, you wouldn't have allowed Donald Trump to come into Vegas. Is that correct?
No, anybody can come to Vegas.
He's there.
At one time, he couldn't get in. Is that right?
No.
You always-
I never Las Vegas has the Gaming Control Board that evaluates property.
Right
how good people are. I've never heard of. They have the Gaming Commission, which is the parent regulatory agency.
Right
over the Gaming Control Board, the GCB. I've never heard that Mr. Trump applied for a licensure in Las Vegas, nor that he was ever turned down. I've not heard anything. I've been there, I've been licensed for almost 25 years.
As smart as you are, and as the last four or five years, my health has gone down, but your health looks better since I last saw you in the last four or five years. You look as wise as an owl. Can you tell me how you could support Donald Trump?
I'll say my guys don't want me to say anything.
We don't want to. This is not a political forum, sir.
I'll say one sentence.
Right.
I'm a Republican.
Right.
I got to support any Republican that receives the nomination. It's very simple. Because I have information about the opposite, about Clinton, I would never vote for Clinton.
Thank you very much.
Okay. I appreciate your comments, questions, and more importantly, your support, and thank you for coming today. Thank you.