In an auction in which he was the only bidder, Carl Icahn became owner of perhaps the second worst named (Vdara being the winner) project on the Strip, Fontainebleau. My guess is the former owner of Arizona Charlie’s and Stratosphere is not likely to keep that fancy name. Above is a commercial for what the deluded original planners of the resort hoped to create.
Apparently, they sunk a couple billion into the project before the plug was pulled by bankers last April. Since then the partially finished building has simply sat there decaying. Icahn paid $150 million for the project with only $105 million in cash.
This may seem like a great deal for the investor, unless you walk by the building, which is expected to take a billion to complete on a Strip already packed with rooms no one is using. There is a reason he was the only bidder. What you see on the outside is even more apparent in interior photos and video leaked after construction stopped. Taking it all in, the claim that the building is already 70% complete seems as fanciful as the above commercial.
Icahn certainly will not begin building again until the economy comes back. But like Phil Ruffin, who purchased TI, the smart investors now know it is better to wait to buy a property (or, partly built property) on the Strip than to start one on empty land. Harrah’s move on Planet Hollywood shows even the big companies have figured this out. The last two casinos torn down to build the future, Stardust and New Frontier, remain a partial metal shell and an empty lot, respectively.
Still, I see an opportunity here. If Icahn can abandon all the pretensions of this project and reposition his purchase toward appealing to the more bargain minded tourists, the Strip might be able to assimilate a completed Fontainbleau quicker than anyone suspects. There have been few new places on the Strip for tourists concerned about cost. But our tourists are demanding; they still want something new in Vegas that they can afford. This project could be the answer. As a new resort, this would be a far superior choice to rundown spots like Imperial Palace, Sahara or Circus, Circus. And, having bought it so cheaply, Icahn will not be burdened by the massive debt faced by some of his competitors and so can afford everything from marketing to a price war on rooms.
Bad name is right. I bet that name goes!
But everyone is soo happy fountainebleau went bankrupt. So now Joe Lopez’ fat ass is trapped in Miami!
He has to keep the name! It’s synonymous with sexiness and general “coolness” because of how popular the Miami Beach location is. It would be unwise to change it – especially when people call it the “fountain blue” anyway….lol
Fountainebleau … worst name ever?
Richard, if you had the ability to get on a flight to Miami, you might have discovered that Fontainebleau is a famous resort in South Beach. It was in the movie Goldfinger. You can walk to the beach and the Atlantic in one direction, Collins Ave. in another direction, plus Ocean Drive.
But go ahead and keep pecking on your laptop about things you know nothing about.
Thanks for reading, Martin. There is also a Plaza Hotel in New York that is pretty famous but the Vegas version is an empty lot where once stood New Frontier. I am glad the hotel in Miami has such a fine location and was in a James Bond movie from another century. You must have misunderstood. I am talking about the falling apart yet not finished thing on Las Vegas Boulevard. And, it is a lousy name for Vegas and, if you think otherwise, explain why that great hotel in Miami did not stave off bankruptcy on the Strip with the brand. Vegas is not Miami. Vegas is not New York. Am I missing something? Yrs.. Richard
Hey Richard (or may I call you Dick for short)? You seem to be very misinformed, first of all what, gives you the idea that the current Fontainebleau is falling apart? Have you even been inside the structure? I doubt it. That is far from the truth! Secondly, the Miami location and corporation have nothing to do with the Vegas location. The affairs of one location doesnt affect the other. As far as the name is concerned, I agree with you, they should change the name at the Vegas location but not because its a lousy name as you stated but only because as an owner, I would not want to be associated with anything from the prior owner. And may I ask why is someone named Abowitz, criticizing anothers name (hmmmmm)?