UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
__________________________________________________
Form 10-K
__________________________________________________
x | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013
or
¨ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 001-32373
__________________________________________________
LAS VEGAS SANDS CORP.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
__________________________________________________
Nevada | 27-0099920 | |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) | (IRS Employer Identification No.) | |
3355 Las Vegas Boulevard South Las Vegas, Nevada | 89109 | |
(Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip Code) | |
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code:
(702) 414-1000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of Each Class | Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered | |
Common Stock ($0.001 par value) | New York Stock Exchange | |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
__________________________________________________
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports); and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer | x | Accelerated filer | ¨ | |||
Non-Accelerated filer | ¨ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | Smaller reporting company | ¨ | |||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No x
As of June 28, 2013, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $20,743,792,754 based on the closing sale price on that date as reported on the New York Stock Exchange.
The Company had 812,566,265 shares of common stock outstanding as of February 27, 2014.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Description of document | Part of the Form 10-K | |
Portions of the definitive Proxy Statement to be used in connection with the registrant’s 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders | Part III (Item 10 through Item 14) | |
1
Las Vegas Sands Corp.
Table of Contents
Page | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
— | |||
2
PART I
ITEM 1. — BUSINESS
Our Company
Las Vegas Sands Corp. (“LVSC,” or together with its subsidiaries “we” or the “Company”) is a Fortune 500 company and the leading global developer of destination properties (integrated resorts) that feature premium accommodations, world-class gaming, entertainment and retail, convention and exhibition facilities, celebrity chef restaurants and other amenities.
We currently own and operate integrated resorts in Asia and the United States. We believe that our geographic diversity, best-in-class properties and convention-based business model provide us with the best platform in the hospitality and gaming industry to continue generating substantial cash flow while simultaneously pursuing new development opportunities. Our unique convention-based marketing strategy allows us to attract business travelers during the slower mid-week periods while leisure travelers fill our properties during the weekends. Our convention, trade show and meeting facilities combined with the on-site amenities offered at our Macao, Singapore and Las Vegas integrated resort properties provide flexible and expansive space for trade shows, conventions and other meetings.
In addition, our properties are differentiated by our important high-end gaming facilities and significant retail offerings. The Paiza Club located at our properties is an important part of our VIP gaming marketing strategy. Our Paiza Clubs are exclusive invitation-only clubs available to our premium players that feature high-end services and amenities, including luxury accommodations, restaurants, lounges and private gaming salons. We also offer players club loyalty programs at our properties, which provide access to rewards, privileges and members-only events. Additionally, we believe that being in the retail mall business and, specifically, owning some of the largest retail properties in Asia will provide meaningful value for us, particularly as the retail market in Asia continues to grow. With the completion of the remaining phase of Sands Cotai Central, we will own approximately 2.7 million square feet of gross retail space.
Through our 70.2% ownership of Sands China Ltd. (“SCL”), we own and operate a collection of integrated resort properties in the Macao Special Administrative Region (“Macao”) of the People’s Republic of China (“China”). These properties include The Venetian Macao Resort Hotel (“The Venetian Macao”), Sands Cotai Central, the Four Seasons Hotel Macao, Cotai Strip (the “Four Seasons Hotel Macao,” which is managed by Four Seasons Hotels, Inc.) and the Plaza Casino, which we own and operate (together with the Four Seasons Hotel Macao, the “Four Seasons Macao”) and the Sands Macao. We have also commenced construction activities on The Parisian Macao, which is currently expected to open in late 2015.
In Singapore, we own and operate the iconic Marina Bay Sands, which has become one of Singapore’s major tourist, business and retail destinations since its opening in 2010.
Our properties in the United States include The Venetian Resort Hotel Casino (“The Venetian Las Vegas”) and The Palazzo Resort Hotel Casino (“The Palazzo”), Five-Diamond luxury resorts on the Las Vegas Strip, as well as the Sands Expo and Convention Center (the “Sands Expo Center”) in Las Vegas, Nevada and the Sands Casino Resort Bethlehem (the “Sands Bethlehem”) in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
We pride ourselves on being an exemplary employer and an upstanding corporate citizen that helps improve the quality of life for our team members and the communities in which we operate. Through our Sands Foundation and other avenues, we are an active community partner offering assistance to charitable organizations and other worthy causes.
We are also committed to protecting the environment and to being a global leader in sustainable resort development. Through our Sands ECO 360 Global Sustainability program, we develop and implement environmental practices for our existing and future resort developments to protect our natural resources, offer our team members a safe and healthy work environment and enhance the resort experiences of our guests.
LVSC was incorporated as a Nevada corporation in August 2004. Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”) under the symbol “LVS.” Our principal executive office is located at 3355 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Las Vegas, Nevada 89109 and our telephone number at that address is (702) 414-1000. Our website address is www.sands.com. The information on our website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements and other Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filings, and any amendments to those reports and any other filings that we file with or furnish to the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 are made available free of charge on our website as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC and are
3
also available at the SEC’s internet site address at www.sec.gov or in the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington D.C., 20549. Information related to the operation of the SEC’s public reference room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain forward-looking statements. See “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”
Our principal operating and developmental activities occur in three geographic areas: Macao, Singapore and the United States. Management reviews the results of operations for each of its operating segments, which generally are our properties. In Macao, our operating segments are: The Venetian Macao; Sands Cotai Central; Four Seasons Macao; Sands Macao; and Other Asia (comprised primarily of our ferry operations and various other operations that are ancillary to our properties in Macao). In Singapore, our operating segment is Marina Bay Sands. In the United States, our operating segments are: The Venetian Las Vegas, which includes the Sands Expo Center; The Palazzo; and Sands Bethlehem. The Venetian Las Vegas and The Palazzo operating segments are managed as a single integrated resort and have been aggregated as one reportable segment (the “Las Vegas Operating Properties”), considering their similar economic characteristics, types of customers, types of services and products, the regulatory business environment of the operations within each segment and our organizational and management reporting structure. Management also reviews construction and development activities for each of its primary projects under development, in addition to its reportable segments noted above. See “Item 7 — Management Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Development Projects.” Our primary projects under development are The Parisian Macao and the remaining phase of Sands Cotai Central in Macao and our Las Vegas condominium project (which construction is currently suspended) in the United States. See “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 17 — Segment Information.”
Asia Operations
Macao
The Venetian Macao is the anchor property of our Cotai Strip development and is conveniently located approximately two miles from Macao’s Taipa Temporary Ferry Terminal on Macao’s Taipa Island. The Venetian Macao includes approximately 385,000 square feet of gaming space with approximately 660 table games and 2,200 slot machines. The Venetian Macao features a 39-floor luxury hotel tower with over 2,900 elegantly appointed luxury suites and the Shoppes at Venetian, approximately 923,000 square feet of unique retail shopping with more than 300 stores featuring many international brands and home to more than 50 restaurants featuring an international assortment of cuisines. In addition, The Venetian Macao has approximately 1.2 million square feet of convention facilities and meeting room space, a 1,800-seat theater, the 15,000-seat CotaiArena that hosts world-class entertainment and sporting events and a Paiza Club.
Sands Cotai Central is located across the street from The Venetian Macao and Four Seasons Macao and is our largest integrated resort on the Cotai Strip. We opened the Conrad and Holiday Inn tower and the first Sheraton tower, in April and September 2012, respectively, and the second Sheraton tower in January 2013. The property includes approximately 350,000 square feet of gaming space with approximately 460 table games and 1,900 slot machines. We have begun construction of the remaining phase of the project, which includes the St. Regis hotel and mixed-used tower. Upon completion, Sands Cotai Central will consist of a 13.7 million-square-foot 6,400-room integrated resort complex featuring rooms, suites and apart-hotel units, approximately 800,000 square feet of retail, entertainment and dining space, over 550,000 square feet of meeting facilities and a multipurpose theater (to open in 2014).
The Four Seasons Macao, which is located adjacent to The Venetian Macao, has approximately 113,000 square feet of gaming space with approximately 140 table games and 180 slot machines at its Plaza Casino. The Four Seasons Macao also has 360 elegantly appointed rooms and suites; several food and beverage offerings; and conference and banquet facilities. The Shoppes at Four Seasons includes approximately 260,000 square feet of retail space and is connected to the Shoppes at Venetian. The Four Seasons Macao also features our ultra-exclusive Paiza Mansions, which are individually designed and made available by invitation only.
The Sands Macao, the first U.S. operated Las Vegas-style casino in Macao, is situated near the Macao-Hong Kong Ferry Terminal on a waterfront parcel centrally located between Macao’s Gonbei border gate with China and Macao’s central business district. The Sands Macao includes approximately 260,000 square feet of gaming space with approximately 260 table games and 1,100 slot machines. The Sands Macao also includes a 289-suite hotel tower, spa facilities, several restaurants and entertainment areas, and a Paiza Club.
4
We operate the gaming areas within our Macao properties pursuant to a 20-year gaming subconcession that expires in June 2022. See “— Regulation and Licensing — Macao Concession and Our Subconcession.”
Singapore
Marina Bay Sands opened during 2010 and features approximately 2,600 rooms and suites located in three 55-story hotel towers. Atop the three towers is the Sands SkyPark, an extensive outdoor recreation area with a 150-meter infinity swimming pool and several dining options. The integrated resort offers approximately 160,000 square feet of gaming space with approximately 650 table games and 2,400 slot machines; The Shoppes at Marina Bay Sands, an enclosed retail, dining and entertainment complex with signature restaurants from world-renowned chefs; an event plaza and promenade; and an Art/Science museum. Marina Bay Sands also includes approximately 1.2 million square feet of meeting and convention space and two state-of-the-art theaters for top Broadway shows, concerts and gala events.
Asia Markets
Macao
Macao is the largest gaming market in the world and the only market in China to offer legalized casino gaming. According to Macao government statistics, annual gaming revenues reached $45.3 billion in 2013, an 18.5% increase over 2012.
We believe that Macao will continue to experience meaningful growth in both gaming and non-gaming revenues and the record 29.3 million visitors Macao welcomed in 2013 will continue to increase. We believe this growth will result from a variety of factors, including the movement of Chinese citizens to urban centers in China, the introduction of new transportation infrastructure and the coming increase in hotel room inventory.
Table games are the dominant form of gaming in Asia, with baccarat being the most popular game. With the increase in the mass gaming market, we have seen a significant increase in slot machine play and expect this business to continue to grow in Macao. We intend to continue to introduce more modern and popular products that appeal to the Asian marketplace and believe that our high-quality gaming product has enabled us to capture a meaningful share of the overall Macao gaming market, including the VIP player segment.
Proximity to Major Asian Cities
More than 1.0 billion people are estimated to live within a three-hour flight from Macao and more than 3.0 billion people are estimated to live within a five-hour flight from Macao.
Visitors from Hong Kong, southeast China, Taiwan and other locations in Asia can reach Macao in a relatively short time, using a variety of transportation methods, and visitors from more distant locations in Asia can take advantage of short travel times by air to Macao, Zhuhai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou or to Hong Kong (followed by a road, ferry or helicopter trip to Macao). In addition, numerous air carriers fly directly into Macao International Airport from many major cities in Asia.
Macao draws a significant number of customers who are visitors or residents of Hong Kong. One of the major methods of transportation to Macao from Hong Kong is the jetfoil ferry service, including our ferry service, CotaiJet. Macao is also accessible from Hong Kong by helicopter. In addition, the bridge linking Hong Kong, Macao and Zhuhai is expected to reduce the travel time between central Hong Kong and Macao and is expected be completed in 2016.
Competition in Macao
Gaming in Macao is administered by the government through concessions awarded to three different concessionaires and three subconcessionaires, of which we are one. No additional concessions have been granted by the Macao government since 2002; however, if the Macao government were to allow additional gaming operators in Macao through the grant of additional concessions or subconcessions, we would face additional competition.
Sociedade de Jogos de Macau S.A. (“SJM”) holds one of the three concessions and currently operates 21 facilities throughout Macao. Historically, SJM was the only gaming operator in Macao, with many of its gaming facilities being relatively small locations that are offered as amenities in hotels; however, some are large operations, including the Hotel Lisboa and The Grand Lisboa.
Wynn Resorts (Macau), S.A. (“Wynn Resorts Macau”), a subsidiary of Wynn Resorts Limited, holds a concession and owns and operates the Wynn Macau and Encore at Wynn Macau, which opened in September 2006 and April 2010, respectively. In 2006, Wynn Resorts Macau sold its subconcession right under its gaming concession to an affiliate of
5
Publishing and Broadcasting Limited (“PBL”), which permitted the PBL affiliate to receive a gaming subconcession from the Macao government. In May 2007, the PBL affiliate opened the Crown Macao, now known as Altira. In June 2009, the PBL affiliate opened the City of Dreams, an integrated casino resort located adjacent to our Sands Cotai Central, which includes Crown Towers, Hard Rock and Grand Hyatt hotels. In May 2012, the Macao government granted a land concession to Wynn Resorts Macau, allowing the casino operator to construct a full scale integrated resort in Cotai. The integrated resort will be located behind the City of Dreams and currently is expected to open in early 2016.
Galaxy Casino Company Limited (“Galaxy”) holds the third concession and has the ability to operate casino properties independent of our subconcession agreement with Galaxy and the Macao government. Galaxy currently operates five casinos in Macao, including StarWorld Hotel, which opened in October 2006, and Galaxy Macau, which is located near The Venetian Macao and opened in May 2011. In April 2012, Galaxy announced the development of a second phase of its Galaxy Macau property in Cotai. The expansion is expected to include an additional 1,300 hotel rooms, as well as additional retail and convention and exhibition facilities. The expansion is expected to be completed in 2015.
MGM Grand Paradise Limited, a joint venture between MGM Resorts International and Pansy Ho Chiu-King, obtained a subconcession from SJM in April 2005, allowing the joint venture to conduct gaming operations in Macao. The MGM Grand Macau opened in December 2007 and is located on the Macao Peninsula adjacent to the Wynn Macau. In October 2012, MGM Grand Paradise Limited received a land concession from the Macao government to develop an integrated resort on an 18-acre site located behind Sands Cotai Central.
Our Macao operations also face competition from other gaming and resort destinations, both in Asia and globally.
Singapore
Singapore is regarded as having the most developed financial and transportation infrastructure in the Southeast Asia region. Singapore has established itself as a destination for both business and leisure visitors, offering convention and exhibition facilities as well as world-class shopping malls and hotel accommodations. In 2006, after a competitive bid process, the Singapore government awarded two concessions to develop and operate two integrated resorts. We were awarded the concession for the Marina Bay site, which is adjacent to Singapore’s central business district, and Genting International was awarded the second integrated resort site, located on Singapore’s Sentosa Island.
Based on figures released by the Singapore Tourism Board (the “STB”), Singapore welcomed 15.5 million international visitors in 2013, a 6.7% increase compared to 2012. Tourism receipts are estimated to have reached 23.0 billion Singapore dollars (“SGD,” approximately $18.1 billion at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013) in 2012 (the latest information publicly available at the time filing), a 3.0% increase compared to 2011. The Casino Regulatory Authority (the “CRA”), the gaming regulator in Singapore, does not disclose gaming revenue for the market and thus no official figure exists.
We believe Marina Bay Sands is ideally positioned within Singapore to cater to both business and leisure visitors. The integrated resort is centrally located within a 20-minute drive from Singapore’s Changi International Airport and near the new Marina Bay Cruise Center, a deep-water cruise ship terminal that opened in October 2012, and Bayfront station, a mass rapid transit station. Marina Bay Sands is also located near several entertainment attractions, including the Gardens by the Bay botanical gardens, which opened in June 2012, and the planned Singapore Sports Hub, a sports complex that will feature a new 55,000-seat National Stadium.
To date, the overall gaming market consists of a balanced contribution from both the VIP and mass gaming segments. Consistent with our experience in Macao, baccarat is the preferred table game in both the VIP and mass gaming segments. Additionally, contributions from slot machines and from the mass gaming segment, including electronic table games offerings, have enhanced the early growth of the market. As Marina Bay Sands and the Singapore market as a whole continue to mature, we expect to broaden our visitor base to continue to capture visitors from around the world.
Proximity to Major Asian Cities
About 100 airlines operate in Singapore, connecting it to over 250 cities in 60 countries. In 2013, 53.7 million passengers passed through Singapore’s Changi Airport, a 5.0% increase as compared to 2012. The estimated population within a 5-hour flight of Singapore is more than 2.0 billion. Based on figures released by the STB, the largest source markets for visitors to Singapore for 2012 (the latest information publicly available at the time filing), were Indonesia and China. The STB’s methodology for reporting visitor arrivals does not recognize Malaysian citizens entering Singapore by land, although this method of visitation is generally thought to be substantial.
6
Competition in Singapore
Gaming in Singapore is administered by the government through the award of licenses to two operators, of which we are one. Pursuant to the request for proposals to develop an integrated resort at Marina Bay, Singapore (the “Request for Proposal”), the CRA is required to ensure that there will not be more than two casino licenses during a ten-year exclusive period (the “Exclusivity Period,” that began on March 1, 2007).
Resorts World Sentosa, which is 100% owned by Genting Singapore and located on Sentosa Island, began its phased opening on January 20, 2010, and is primarily a family tourist destination connected to Singapore via a 500-meter long vehicular and pedestrian bridge. Apart from the casino, the resort includes six hotels, a Universal Studios theme park, the Marine Life Park, the Maritime Experiential Museum & Aquarium, conventions and exhibitions facilities, restaurants, as well as a Malaysian food street, and retail shops.
U.S. Operations
Las Vegas
Our Las Vegas Operating Properties form an integrated resort that includes The Venetian Las Vegas, The Palazzo and the Sands Expo Center.
The Venetian Las Vegas has 4,028 suites situated in a 3,015-suite, 35-story three-winged tower rising above the casino and the adjoining 1,013-suite, 12-story Venezia tower. The casino at The Venetian Las Vegas has approximately 120,000 square feet of gaming space and includes approximately 110 table games and 1,250 slot machines. The Venetian Las Vegas features a variety of amenities for its guests, including a Paiza Club, several theaters and a Canyon Ranch SpaClub.
The Palazzo features modern European ambience and design, and is directly connected to The Venetian Las Vegas and Sands Expo Center. The casino at The Palazzo has approximately 105,000 square feet of gaming space and includes approximately 140 table games and 1,100 slot machines. The Palazzo has a 50-floor luxury hotel tower with 3,064 suites and includes a Canyon Ranch SpaClub, a Paiza Club and a world-class theater.
The Venetian Las Vegas and The Palazzo feature two enclosed retail, dining and entertainment complexes, currently referred to as the Grand Canal Shoppes. The complex located within The Venetian Las Vegas (previously known as “The Grand Canal Shoppes”) and the complex located within The Palazzo (previously known as “The Shoppes at The Palazzo”) were sold to GGP Limited Partnership (“GGP”) in 2004 and 2008, respectively.
Sands Expo Center is one of the largest overall trade show and convention facilities in the United States (as measured by net leasable square footage), with approximately 1.2 million gross square feet of exhibit and meeting space. We also own an approximately 1.1 million-gross-square-foot meeting and conference facility that links Sands Expo Center to The Venetian Las Vegas and The Palazzo. Together, we offer approximately 2.3 million gross square feet of state-of-the-art exhibition and meeting facilities that can be configured to provide small, mid-size or large meeting rooms and/or accommodate large-scale multi-media events or trade shows.
Pennsylvania
We own and operate the Sands Bethlehem, a gaming, hotel, retail and dining complex located on the site of the historic Bethlehem Steel Works in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. The Sands Bethlehem features approximately 145,000 square feet of gaming space that includes approximately 150 table games and more than 3,000 slot machines; a 300-room hotel tower; a 150,000-square-foot retail facility (“The Outlets at Sands Bethlehem”); an arts and cultural center; and a 50,000-square foot multipurpose event center.
We own 86% of the economic interest in the gaming, hotel and entertainment portion of Sands Bethlehem through our ownership interest in Sands Bethworks Gaming LLC (“Sands Bethworks Gaming”) and more than 35% of the economic interest in the retail portion of Sands Bethlehem through our ownership interest in Sands Bethworks Retail LLC (“Sands Bethworks Retail”).
Las Vegas Market
The Las Vegas hotel/casino industry is highly competitive. Hotels on the Las Vegas Strip compete with other hotels on and off the Las Vegas Strip, including hotels in downtown Las Vegas. In addition, there are large projects in Las Vegas currently suspended or in the development stage and when opened may target the same customers as we do. We also compete with casinos located on Native American tribal lands. The proliferation of gaming in California and other areas
7
located in the same region as our Las Vegas Operating Properties could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Our Las Vegas Operating Properties also compete, to some extent, with other hotel/casino facilities in Nevada and Atlantic City, hotel/casino and other resort facilities elsewhere in the country and the world, internet gaming websites and state lotteries.
In addition, certain states have legalized, and others may legalize, casino gaming in specific areas. The continued proliferation of gaming venues could have a significant and adverse effect on our business. In particular, the legalization of casino gaming in or near major metropolitan areas from which we traditionally attract customers could have a material adverse effect on our business. The current global trend toward liberalization of gaming restrictions and the resulting proliferation of gaming venues could result in a decrease in the number of visitors to our Las Vegas Operating Properties, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Also, on December 23, 2011, the U.S. Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) released an opinion on the application of the Wire Act to interstate transmission of wire communications, concluding that such communications that did not relate to a “sporting event or contest” fell outside the prohibition of the Wire Act. In concluding as such, the DOJ reversed earlier opinions that the Wire Act was not limited to such communications on sporting events or contests. Those states that permit these distribution channels may also expand the gaming offerings of their lotteries in a manner that could have an adverse effect on our business.
Las Vegas generally competes with trade show and convention facilities located in and around major U.S. cities. Within Las Vegas, the Sands Expo Center competes with the Las Vegas Convention Center (the “LVCC”), which currently has approximately 3.2 million gross square feet of convention and exhibit facilities. In addition to the LVCC, some of our Las Vegas competitors have convention and conference facilities that compete with our Las Vegas Operating Properties.
Competitors of our Las Vegas Operating Properties that can offer a hotel/casino experience that is integrated with substantial trade show and convention, conference and meeting facilities, could have an adverse effect on our competitive advantage in attracting trade show and convention, conference and meeting attendees.
Retail Mall Operations
We own and operate retail malls at our integrated resorts at The Venetian Macao, Four Seasons Macao, Sands Cotai Central, Marina Bay Sands and Sands Bethlehem. Upon completion of the remaining phase of Sands Cotai Central, we will own approximately 2.7 million square feet of gross retail space. As further described in “Agreements Relating to the Malls in Las Vegas” below, the Grand Canal Shoppes were sold to GGP and are not owned or operated by us. Management believes that being in the retail mall business and, specifically, owning some of the largest retail properties in Asia will provide meaningful value for us, particularly as the retail market in Asia continues to grow.
Our malls are designed to complement our other unique amenities and service offerings provided by our integrated resorts. Our strategy is to seek out desirable tenants that appeal to our customers and provide a wide variety of shopping options. We generate our mall revenue primarily from leases with tenants through base minimum rents, overage rents, management fees and reimbursements for common area maintenance ("CAM") and other expenditures. For further information related to the financial performance of our malls, see “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
The tables below set forth certain information regarding our mall operations as of December 31, 2013. These tables do not reflect subsequent activity in 2014.
Mall Name | Total GLA(1) | Selected Significant Tenants | |||
Shoppes at Venetian | 755,452(2) | Manchester United Experience, Piaget, Zara, Swarovski, Vertu, Victoria’s Secret, Tiffany & Co. | |||
Shoppes at Four Seasons | 241,895(3) | Versace, Brioni, Canali, Cartier, Gucci, Dior, Armani, Bottega Veneta, Hugo Boss | |||
Shoppes at Cotai Central | 210,143 | Kid’s Cavern, Zara, Omega, Gucci, Ralph Lauren, Chow Tai Fook | |||
The Shoppes at Marina Bay Sands | 642,241(4) | Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Fendi, BVLGARI, Prada, Gucci, Zara, Banana Republic, Adidas | |||
The Outlets at Sands Bethlehem | 134,830(5) | Coach, Lenox, Tommy Hilfiger, Nine West, Guess, Ultra Diamonds, Under Armour, Puma | |||
(1) | Represents Gross Leasable Area in square feet. |
8
(2) | Excludes approximately 166,000 square feet of space on the fifth floor and 1,500 square feet of space on the third floor currently not on the market for lease. |
(3) | Excludes approximately 20,000 square feet of space on the mezzanine level currently not on the market for lease. |
(4) | Excludes approximately 134,000 square feet of space operated by the Company. |
(5) | Excludes approximately 16,100 square feet of undeveloped space. |
The following table reflects our tenant representation by category for our mall operations as of December 31, 2013:
Category | Square Feet | % of Square Feet | Representative Tenants | |||||
Fashion (luxury, women’s, men’s, mixed) | 618,270 | 33 | % | Louis Vuitton, Dior, Gucci, Versace, Chanel, Fendi | ||||
Restaurants and lounges | 418,724 | 23 | % | CUT, db Bistro, Todai, North, Café Deco | ||||
Multi-Brands | 206,880 | 11 | % | Duty-free shops, The Atrium | ||||
Fashion accessories and footwear | 162,552 | 9 | % | Coach, Salvatore Ferragamo, Tumi, Rimowa | ||||
Jewelry | 147,378 | 8 | % | BVLGARI, Omega, Cartier, Rolex, Tiffany & Co. | ||||
Health and beauty | 108,927 | 6 | % | Sephora, The Body Shop, Sa Sa | ||||
Lifestyle, sports and entertainment | 55,478 | 3 | % | Manchester United Experience, Adidas, Ferrari | ||||
Banks and services | 47,303 | 3 | % | Bank of China, Citibank, ICBC | ||||
Home furnishing and electronics | 45,835 | 2 | % | Nokia, Vertu, Da Vinci | ||||
Specialty foods | 23,742 | 1 | % | The Chocolate Shop, Cold Storage Specialty | ||||
Arts and gifts | 17,321 | 1 | % | Emporio di Gondola | ||||
Total | 1,852,410 | 100 | % | |||||
Advertising and Marketing
We advertise in many types of media, including television, internet, radio, newspapers, magazines and other out-of-home advertising (e.g. billboards), to promote general market awareness of our properties as unique vacation, business and convention destinations due to our first-class hotels, casinos, retail stores, restaurants and other amenities. We actively engage in direct marketing as allowed in various geographic regions, which is targeted at specific market segments, including the premium slot and table games markets.
Development Projects
We are continuing to develop our properties in Macao and the U.S. We also continue to aggressively pursue a variety of new development opportunities around the world. See “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Development Projects.”
Regulation and Licensing
Macao Concession and Our Subconcession
In June 2002, the Macao government granted one of three concessions to operate casinos in Macao to Galaxy. During December 2002, we entered into a subconcession agreement with Galaxy, which was approved by the Macao government. The subconcession agreement allows us to develop and operate certain casino projects in Macao, including Sands Macao, The Venetian Macao, Four Seasons Macao, Sands Cotai Central and The Parisian Macao (once opened), separately from Galaxy. Under the subconcession agreement, we are obligated to operate casino games of chance or games of other forms in Macao. We were also obligated to develop and open The Venetian Macao and a convention center by December 2007, and we were required to invest, or cause to be invested, at least 4.4 billion patacas (approximately $550.9 million at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013) in various development projects in Macao by June 2009, which obligations we have fulfilled.
If the Galaxy concession is terminated for any reason, our subconcession will remain in effect. The subconcession may be terminated by agreement between Galaxy and us. Galaxy is not entitled to terminate the subconcession unilaterally;
9
however, the Macao government, with the consent of Galaxy, may terminate the subconcession under certain circumstances. Galaxy has developed, and may continue to develop, hotel and casino projects separately from us.
We are subject to licensing and control under applicable Macao law and are required to be licensed by the Macao gaming authorities to operate a casino. We must pay periodic fees and taxes, and our gaming license is not transferable. We must periodically submit detailed financial and operating reports to the Macao gaming authorities and furnish any other information that the Macao gaming authorities may require. No person may acquire any rights over the shares or assets of Venetian Macau Limited (“VML”), SCL’s wholly owned subsidiary, without first obtaining the approval of the Macao gaming authorities. Similarly, no person may enter into possession of its premises or operate them through a management agreement or any other contract or through step in rights without first obtaining the approval of, and receiving a license from, the Macao gaming authorities. The transfer or creation of encumbrances over ownership of shares representing the share capital of VML or other rights relating to such shares, and any act involving the granting of voting rights or other stockholders’ rights to persons other than the original owners, would require the approval of the Macao government and the subsequent report of such acts and transactions to the Macao gaming authorities.
Our subconcession agreement requires, among other things: (i) approval of the Macao government for transfers of shares in VML, or of any rights over or inherent to such shares, including the grant of voting rights or other stockholder’s rights to persons other than the original owners, as well as for the creation of any charge, lien or encumbrance on such shares; (ii) approval of the Macao government for transfers of shares, or of any rights over such shares, in any of our direct or indirect stockholders, provided that such shares or rights are directly or indirectly equivalent to an amount that is equal to or higher than 5% of VML’s share capital; and (iii) that the Macao government be given notice of the creation of any encumbrance or the grant of voting rights or other stockholder’s rights to persons other than the original owners on shares in any of the direct or indirect stockholders in VML, provided that such shares or rights are equivalent to an amount that is equal to or higher than 5% of VML’s share capital. The requirements in provisions (ii) and (iii) above will not apply, however, to securities listed as tradable on a stock exchange.
The Macao gaming authorities may investigate any individual who has a material relationship to, or material involvement with, us to determine whether our suitability and/or financial capacity is affected by this individual. LVSC and SCL shareholders with 5% or more of the share capital, directors and some of our key employees must apply for and undergo a finding of suitability process and maintain due qualification during the subconcession term, and accept the persistent and long-term inspection and supervision exercised by the Macao government. VML is required to notify the Macao government immediately should VML become aware of any fact that may be material to the appropriate qualification of any shareholder who owns 5% of the share capital, or any officer, director or key employee. Changes in licensed positions must be reported to the Macao gaming authorities, and in addition to their authority to deny an application for a finding of suitability or licensure, the Macao gaming authorities have jurisdiction to disapprove a change in corporate position. If the Macao gaming authorities were to find one of our officers, directors or key employees unsuitable for licensing, we would have to sever all relationships with that person. In addition, the Macao gaming authorities may require us to terminate the employment of any person who refuses to file appropriate applications.
Any person who fails or refuses to apply for a finding of suitability after being ordered to do so by the Macao gaming authorities may be found unsuitable. Any stockholder found unsuitable who holds, directly or indirectly, any beneficial ownership of the common stock of a company incorporated in Macao and registered with the Macao Companies and Moveable Assets Registrar (a “Macao registered corporation”) beyond the period of time prescribed by the Macao gaming authorities may lose their rights to the shares. We will be subject to disciplinary action if, after we receive notice that a person is unsuitable to be a stockholder or to have any other relationship with us, we:
• | pay that person any dividend or interest upon its shares; |
• | allow that person to exercise, directly or indirectly, any voting right conferred through shares held by that person; |
• | pay remuneration in any form to that person for services rendered or otherwise; or |
• | fail to pursue all lawful efforts to require that unsuitable person to relinquish its shares. |
The Macao gaming authorities also have the authority to approve all persons owning or controlling the stock of any corporation holding a gaming license.
In addition, the Macao gaming authorities require prior approval for the creation of liens and encumbrances over VML’s assets and restrictions on stock in connection with any financing.
The Macao gaming authorities must give their prior approval to changes in control of VML through a merger, consolidation, stock or asset acquisition, management or consulting agreement or any act or conduct by any person
10
whereby he or she obtains control. Entities seeking to acquire control of a Macao registered corporation must satisfy the Macao gaming authorities concerning a variety of stringent standards prior to assuming control. The Macao Gaming Commission may also require controlling stockholders, officers, directors and other persons having a material relationship or involvement with the entity proposing to acquire control, to be investigated and licensed as part of the approval process of the transaction.
The Macao gaming authorities may consider some management opposition to corporate acquisitions, repurchases of voting securities and corporate defense tactics affecting Macao gaming licensees, and the Macao registered corporations affiliated with such operations, to be injurious to stable and productive corporate gaming.
The Macao gaming authorities also have the power to supervise gaming licensees in order to:
• | assure the financial stability of corporate gaming operators and their affiliates; |
• | preserve the beneficial aspects of conducting business in the corporate form; and |
• | promote a neutral environment for the orderly governance of corporate affairs. |
The subconcession agreement requires the Macao gaming authorities’ prior approval of any recapitalization plan proposed by VML’s Board of Directors. The Chief Executive of Macao could also require VML to increase its share capital if he deemed it necessary.
The Macao government also has the right, after consultation with Galaxy, to unilaterally terminate the subconcession agreement at any time upon the occurrence of specified events of default, including:
• | the operation of gaming without permission or operation of business which does not fall within the business scope of the subconcession; |
• | the suspension of operations of our gaming business in Macao without reasonable grounds for more than seven consecutive days or more than fourteen non-consecutive days within one calendar year; |
• | the unauthorized transfer of all or part of our gaming operations in Macao; |
• | the failure to pay taxes, premiums, levies or other amounts payable to the Macao government; |
• | the failure to resume operations following the temporary assumption of operations by the Macao government; |
• | the repeated failure to comply with decisions of the Macao government; |
• | the failure to provide or supplement the guarantee deposit or the guarantees specified in the subconcession within the prescribed period; |
• | the bankruptcy or insolvency of VML; |
• | fraudulent activity by VML; |
• | serious and repeated violation by VML of the applicable rules for carrying out casino games of chance or games of other forms or the operation of casino games of chance or games of other forms; |
• | the grant to any other person of any managing power over VML; or |
• | the failure by a controlling shareholder in VML to dispose of its interest in VML following notice from the gaming authorities of another jurisdiction in which such controlling shareholder is licensed to operate casino games of chance to the effect that such controlling shareholder can no longer own shares in VML. |
In addition, we must comply with various covenants and other provisions under the subconcession, including obligations to:
• | ensure the proper operation and conduct of casino games; |
• | employ people with appropriate qualifications; |
• | operate and conduct casino games of chance in a fair and honest manner without the influence of criminal activities; |
• | safeguard and ensure Macao’s interests in tax revenue from the operation of casinos and other gaming areas; and |
11
• | maintain a specified level of insurance. |
The subconcession agreement also allows the Macao government to request various changes in the plans and specifications of our Macao properties and to make various other decisions and determinations that may be binding on us. For example, the Macao government has the right to require that we contribute additional capital to our Macao subsidiaries or that we provide certain deposits or other guarantees of performance in any amount determined by the Macao government to be necessary. VML is limited in its ability to raise additional capital by the need to first obtain the approval of the Macao gaming and governmental authorities before raising certain debt or equity.
If our subconcession is terminated in the event of a default, the casinos and gaming-related equipment would be automatically transferred to the Macao government without compensation to us and we would cease to generate any revenues from these operations. In many of these instances, the subconcession agreement does not provide a specific cure period within which any such events may be cured and, instead, we would rely on consultations and negotiations with the Macao government to give us an opportunity to remedy any such default.
The Sands Macao, The Venetian Macao, Four Seasons Macao and Sands Cotai Central are being, and The Parisian Macao will be, operated under our subconcession agreement. This subconcession excludes the following gaming activities: mutual bets, lotteries, raffles, interactive gaming and games of chance or other gaming, betting or gambling activities on ships or planes. Our subconcession is exclusively governed by Macao law. We are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Macao in case of any dispute or conflict relating to our subconcession.
Our subconcession agreement expires on June 26, 2022. Unless our subconcession is extended, on that date, the casinos and gaming-related equipment will automatically be transferred to the Macao government without compensation to us and we will cease to generate any revenues from these operations. Beginning on December 26, 2017, the Macao government may redeem our subconcession by giving us at least one year prior notice and by paying us fair compensation or indemnity. See “Item 1A — Risk Factors — Risks Associated with Our International Operations — We will stop generating any revenues from our Macao gaming operations if we cannot secure an extension of our subconcession in 2022 or if the Macao government exercises its redemption right.”
Under our subconcession, we are obligated to pay to the Macao government an annual premium with a fixed portion and a variable portion based on the number and type of gaming tables employed and gaming machines operated by us. The fixed portion of the premium is equal to 30.0 million patacas (approximately $3.8 million at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013). The variable portion is equal to 300,000 patacas per gaming table reserved exclusively for certain kinds of games or players, 150,000 patacas per gaming table not so reserved and 1,000 patacas per electrical or mechanical gaming machine, including slot machines (approximately $37,558, $18,779 and $125, respectively, at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013), subject to a minimum of 45.0 million patacas (approximately $5.6 million at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013). We also have to pay a special gaming tax of 35% of gross gaming revenues and applicable withholding taxes. We must also contribute 4% of our gross gaming revenue to utilities designated by the Macao government, a portion of which must be used for promotion of tourism in Macao. This percentage may be subject to change in the future.
Currently, the gaming tax in Macao is calculated as a percentage of gross gaming revenue; however, unlike Nevada, gross gaming revenue does not include deductions for credit losses. As a result, if we extend credit to our customers in Macao and are unable to collect on the related receivables from them, we have to pay taxes on our winnings from these customers even though we were unable to collect on the related receivables. If the laws are not changed, our business in Macao may not be able to realize the full benefits of extending credit to our customers. Although there are proposals to revise the gaming tax laws in Macao, there can be no assurance that the laws will be changed.
In October 2013, we received an additional 5-year exemption from Macao’s corporate income tax on profits generated by the operation of casino games of chance for the five-year period ending December 31, 2018. We entered into an agreement with the Macao government effective through 2013 that provided for an annual payment as a substitution for a 12% tax otherwise due from VML shareholders on dividend distributions. In November 2013, we requested an additional agreement with the Macao government through 2018 to correspond to the income tax exemption for gaming operations; however, there is no assurance that we will receive the agreement. See “Item 1A — Risk Factors — Risks Associated with our International Operations — We are currently not required to pay corporate income taxes on our casino gaming operations in Macao. This tax exemption expires at the end of 2018. The agreement with the Macao government that provided for a fixed annual payment that is a substitution for a 12% tax otherwise due from VML’s shareholders on dividends distributed from our Macao gaming operations expired at the end of 2013."
12
Development Agreement with Singapore Tourism Board
On August 23, 2006, our wholly owned subsidiary, Marina Bay Sands Pte. Ltd. (“MBS”), entered into a development agreement, as amended by a supplementary agreement on December 11, 2009 (the “Development Agreement”), with the STB to design, develop, construct and operate the Marina Bay Sands. The Development Agreement includes a concession for MBS to own and operate a casino within the integrated resort. In addition to the casino, the integrated resort includes, among other amenities, a hotel, a retail complex, a convention center and meeting room complex, theaters, restaurants and an art/science museum. MBS is one of two companies that have been awarded a concession to operate a casino in Singapore. Under the Request for Proposal, the Exclusivity Period provides that only two licensees will be granted the right to operate a casino in Singapore during the ten-year period. In connection with entering into the Development Agreement, MBS entered into a 60-year lease with the STB for the parcels underlying the project site and entered into an agreement with the Land Transport Authority of Singapore for the provision of necessary infrastructure for rapid transit systems and road works within and/or outside the project site. During the Exclusivity Period, the Company, which is currently the 100% indirect shareholder of MBS, must continue to be the single largest entity with direct or indirect controlling interest of at least 20% in MBS, unless otherwise approved by the CRA.
The term of the casino concession provided under the Development Agreement is for 30 years commencing from the date the Development Agreement was entered into, or August 23, 2006. In order to renew the casino concession, MBS must give notice to the STB and other relevant authorities in Singapore at least five years before its expiration in August 2036. The Singapore government may terminate the casino concession prior to its expiration in order to serve the best interests of the public, in which event fair compensation will be paid to MBS.
On April 26, 2010, MBS was issued a casino license for a three-year period, which required payment of a license fee of SGD 37.5 million (approximately $29.6 million at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013). On April 19, 2013, MBS was granted a license for a further three-year period expiring on April 25, 2016, which required payment of SGD 57.0 million (approximately $44.9 million at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013) as part of the renewal process. The license is amortized over its three-year term and is renewable upon submitting a renewal application, paying the applicable fee and meeting the renewal requirements as determined by the CRA.
The Development Agreement contains, among other things, restrictions limiting the use of the leased land to the development and operation of the project, requirements that MBS obtain prior approval from the STB in order to subdivide the hotel and retail components of the project, and prohibitions on any such subdivision during the Exclusivity Period. The Development Agreement also contains provisions relating to the construction of the project and associated deadlines for substantial completion and opening; the location of the casino within the project site and casino licensing issues; insurance requirements; and limitations on MBS’ ability to assign the lease or sub-lease any portion of the land during the Exclusivity Period. In addition, the Development Agreement contains events of default, including, among other things, the failure of MBS to perform its obligations under the Development Agreement and events of bankruptcy or dissolution.
The Development Agreement required MBS to invest at least SGD 3.85 billion (approximately $3.04 billion at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013) in the integrated resort, which was to be allocated in specified amounts among the casino, hotel, food and beverage outlets, retail areas, meeting, convention and exhibition facilities, key attractions, entertainment venues and public areas. This minimum investment requirement, which has been fulfilled, must be satisfied in full upon the earlier of eight years from the date of the Development Agreement or three years from the issuance of the casino license, which was issued in April 2010.
MBS was required to complete the construction of the Marina Bay Sands by August 22, 2014, in order to avoid an event of default under the Development Agreement that could result in a forfeiture of the lease for the land parcels underlying the integrated resort. Pursuant to the Development Agreement, MBS was permitted to open Marina Bay Sands in stages and in accordance with an agreed upon schedule. This schedule was met by MBS as confirmed by an audit conducted on behalf of the STB.
Employees whose job duties relate to the operations of the casino are required to be licensed by the relevant authorities in Singapore. MBS also must comply with comprehensive internal control standards or regulations concerning advertising; branch office operations; the location, floor plans and layout of the casino; casino operations including casino related financial transactions and patron disputes, issuance of credit and collection of debt, relationships with and permitted payments to junket operators; security and surveillance; casino access by Singaporeans and non-Singaporeans; compliance functions and the prevention of money laundering; periodic standard and other reports to the CRA; and those relating to social controls including the exclusion of certain persons from the casino.
There is a goods and services tax of 7% imposed on gross gaming revenue and a casino tax of 15% imposed on the gross gaming revenue from the casino after reduction for the amount of goods and services tax, except in the case of
13
gaming by premium players, in which case a casino tax of 5% is imposed on the gross gaming revenue generated from such players after reduction for the amount of the goods and services tax. The tax rates will not be changed for a period of 15 years from March 1, 2007. The casino tax is deductible against the Singapore corporate taxable income of MBS. The provision for bad debts arising from the extension of credit granted to gaming patrons is not deductible against gross gaming revenue when calculating the casino tax, but is deductible for the purposes of calculating corporate income tax and the goods and services tax (subject to the prevailing law). MBS is permitted to extend casino credit to persons who are not Singapore citizens or permanent residents, but is not permitted to extend casino credit to Singapore citizens or permanent residents except to premium players.
The key constraint imposed on the casino under the Development Agreement is the total size of the gaming area, which must not be more than 15,000 square meters (approximately 161,000 square feet). The following are not counted towards the gaming area: back of house facilities, reception, restrooms, food and beverage areas, retail shops, stairs, escalators and lift lobbies leading to the gaming area, aesthetic and decorative displays, performance areas and major aisles. The casino located within Marina Bay Sands may not have more than 2,500 gaming machines, but there is no limit on the number of tables for casino games permitted in the casino.
On January 31, 2013, certain amendments to the Casino Control Act (the “Singapore Act”) became effective. Among the changes introduced by these amendments is a revision of the maximum financial penalty that may be imposed on a casino operator by way of disciplinary action on a number of grounds, including contravention of a provision of the Singapore Act or a condition of the casino license. Under the amended provisions, a casino operator may be subject to a financial penalty, for each ground of disciplinary action, of a sum not exceeding 10% of the annual gross gaming revenue (as defined in the Singapore Act) of the casino operator for the financial year immediately preceding the date the financial penalty is imposed.
The amendments to the Singapore Act also included an introduction of an additional factor to be considered by the CRA in determining future applications and/or renewals for a casino license. Applicants are required to be a suitable person to develop, maintain and promote the integrated resort as a compelling tourist destination that meets prevailing market demand and industry standards and contributes to the tourism industry in Singapore. The Singapore government is in the process of establishing an evaluation panel and standards for review. This change could have an effect on future licensing considerations for MBS. We believe MBS’ iconic tourist destination in Singapore and the far east is well-established at this time.
State of Nevada
The ownership and operation of casino gaming facilities in the State of Nevada are subject to the Nevada Gaming Control Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder (collectively, the “Nevada Act”) and various local regulations. Our gaming operations are also subject to the licensing and regulatory control of the Nevada Gaming Commission (the “Nevada Commission”), the Nevada Gaming Control Board (the “Nevada Board”) and the Clark County Liquor and Gaming Licensing Board (the “CCLGLB” and together with the Nevada Commission and the Nevada Board, the “Nevada Gaming Authorities”).
The laws, regulations and supervisory procedures of the Nevada Gaming Authorities are based upon declarations of public policy that are concerned with, among other things:
• | the prevention of unsavory or unsuitable persons from having a direct or indirect involvement with gaming at any time or in any capacity; |
• | the establishment and maintenance of responsible accounting practices and procedures; |
• | the maintenance of effective controls over the financial practices of licensees, including establishing minimum procedures for internal fiscal affairs and the safeguarding of assets and revenues, providing reliable record-keeping and requiring the filing of periodic reports with the Nevada Gaming Authorities; |
• | the prevention of cheating and fraudulent practices; and |
• | the establishment of a source of state and local revenues through taxation and licensing fees. |
Any change in such laws, regulations and procedures could have an adverse effect on our Las Vegas operations.
Las Vegas Sands, LLC (“LVSLLC”) is licensed by the Nevada Gaming Authorities to operate both The Venetian Las Vegas and The Palazzo as a single resort hotel as set forth in the Nevada Act. The gaming license requires the periodic payment of fees and taxes and is not transferable. LVSLLC is also registered as an intermediary company of Venetian Casino Resort, LLC (“VCR”). VCR is licensed as a manufacturer and distributor of gaming devices. LVSLLC and VCR
14
are collectively referred to as the “licensed subsidiaries.” LVSC is registered with the Nevada Commission as a publicly traded corporation (the “registered corporation”). As such, we must periodically submit detailed financial and operating reports to the Nevada Gaming Authorities and furnish any other information that the Nevada Gaming Authorities may require. No person may become a stockholder of, or receive any percentage of the profits from, the licensed subsidiaries without first obtaining licenses and approvals from the Nevada Gaming Authorities. Additionally, the CCLGLB has taken the position that it has the authority to approve all persons owning or controlling the stock of any corporation controlling a gaming licensee. We, and the licensed subsidiaries, possess all state and local government registrations, approvals, permits and licenses required in order for us to engage in gaming activities at The Venetian Las Vegas and The Palazzo.
The Nevada Gaming Authorities may investigate any individual who has a material relationship to or material involvement with us or the licensed subsidiaries to determine whether such individual is suitable or should be licensed as a business associate of a gaming licensee. Officers, directors and certain key employees of the licensed subsidiaries must file applications with the Nevada Gaming Authorities and may be required to be licensed by the Nevada Gaming Authorities. Our officers, directors and key employees who are actively and directly involved in the gaming activities of the licensed subsidiaries may be required to be licensed or found suitable by the Nevada Gaming Authorities.
The Nevada Gaming Authorities may deny an application for licensing or a finding of suitability for any cause they deem reasonable. A finding of suitability is comparable to licensing; both require submission of detailed personal and financial information followed by a thorough investigation. The applicant for licensing or a finding of suitability, or the gaming licensee by whom the applicant is employed or for whom the applicant serves, must pay all the costs of the investigation. Changes in licensed positions must be reported to the Nevada Gaming Authorities, and in addition to their authority to deny an application for a finding of suitability or licensure, the Nevada Gaming Authorities have jurisdiction to disapprove a change in a corporate position.
If the Nevada Gaming Authorities were to find an officer, director or key employee unsuitable for licensing or to have an inappropriate relationship with us or the licensed subsidiaries, we would have to sever all relationships with such person. In addition, the Nevada Commission may require us or the licensed subsidiaries to terminate the employment of any person who refuses to file appropriate applications. Determinations of suitability or questions pertaining to licensing are not subject to judicial review in Nevada.
We, and the licensed subsidiaries, are required to submit periodic detailed financial and operating reports to the Nevada Commission. Substantially all of our and our licensed subsidiaries’ material loans, leases, sales of securities and similar financing transactions must be reported to or approved by the Nevada Commission.
If it were determined that we or a licensed subsidiary violated the Nevada Act, the registration and gaming licenses we then hold could be limited, conditioned, suspended or revoked, subject to compliance with certain statutory and regulatory procedures. In addition, we and the persons involved could be subject to substantial fines for each separate violation of the Nevada Act at the discretion of the Nevada Commission. Further, a supervisor could be appointed by the Nevada Commission to operate the casinos, and, under certain circumstances, earnings generated during the supervisor’s appointment (except for the reasonable rental value of the casinos) could be forfeited to the State of Nevada. Limitation, conditioning or suspension of any gaming registration or license or the appointment of a supervisor could (and revocation of any gaming license would) have a material adverse effect on our gaming operations.
Any beneficial holder of our voting securities, regardless of the number of shares owned, may be required to file an application, be investigated, and have its suitability as a beneficial holder of our voting securities determined if the Nevada Commission has reason to believe that such ownership would otherwise be inconsistent with the declared policies of the State of Nevada. The applicant must pay all costs of investigation incurred by the Nevada Gaming Authorities in conducting any such investigation.
The Nevada Act requires any person who acquires more than 5% of our voting securities to report the acquisition to the Chairman of the Nevada Board. The Nevada Act requires that beneficial owners of more than 10% of our voting securities apply to the Nevada Commission for a finding of suitability within thirty days after the Chairman of the Nevada Board mails the written notice requiring such filing. Under certain circumstances, an “institutional investor” as defined in the Nevada Act, which acquires more than 10%, but not more than 25%, of our voting securities (subject to certain additional holdings as a result of certain debt restructurings), may apply to the Nevada Commission for a waiver of such finding of suitability if such institutional investor holds the voting securities only for investment purposes. Additionally, an institutional investor that has been granted such a waiver may acquire more than 25% but not more than 29% of our voting securities if such additional ownership results from a stock re-purchase program and such institutional investor does not purchase or otherwise acquire any additional voting securities that would result in an increase in its ownership percentage.
15
An institutional investor will be deemed to hold voting securities only for investment purposes if it acquires and holds the voting securities in the ordinary course of business as an institutional investment and not for the purpose of causing, directly or indirectly, the election of a majority of the members of our Board of Directors, any change in our corporate charter, by-laws, management, policies or our operations or any of our gaming affiliates, or any other action that the Nevada Commission finds to be inconsistent with holding our voting securities only for investment purposes. Activities that are deemed consistent with holding voting securities only for investment purposes include:
• | voting on all matters voted on by stockholders; |
• | making financial and other inquiries of management of the type normally made by securities analysts for informational purposes and not to cause a change in management, policies or operations; and |
• | such other activities as the Nevada Commission may determine to be consistent with such investment intent. |
If the beneficial holder of voting securities who must be found suitable is a corporation, partnership or trust, it must submit detailed business and financial information including a list of beneficial owners. The applicant is required to pay all costs of investigation.
Any person who fails or refuses to apply for a finding of suitability or a license within thirty days after being ordered to do so by the Nevada Commission or the Chairman of the Nevada Board may be found unsuitable. The same restrictions apply to a record owner if the record owner, after request, fails to identify the beneficial owner. Any stockholder found unsuitable who holds, directly or indirectly, any beneficial ownership of the common stock of a registered corporation beyond such period of time as may be prescribed by the Nevada Commission may be guilty of a criminal offense. We are subject to disciplinary action if, after we receive notice that a person is unsuitable to be a stockholder or to have any other relationship with us or a licensed subsidiary, we, or any of the licensed subsidiaries:
• | allow that person to exercise, directly or indirectly, any voting right conferred through securities held by that person; |
• | pay remuneration in any form to that person for services rendered or otherwise; or |
• | fail to pursue all lawful efforts to require such unsuitable person to relinquish his or her voting securities including, if necessary, the purchase for cash at fair market value. |
Our charter documents include provisions intended to help us comply with these requirements.
The Nevada Commission may, in its discretion, require the holder of any debt security of a registered corporation to file an application, be investigated and be found suitable to own the debt security of such registered corporation. If the Nevada Commission determines that a person is unsuitable to own such security, then pursuant to the Nevada Act, the registered corporation can be sanctioned, including the loss of its approvals, if without the prior approval of the Nevada Commission, it:
• | pays to the unsuitable person any dividend, interest, or any distribution whatsoever; |
• | recognizes any voting right by such unsuitable person in connection with such securities; or |
• | pays the unsuitable person remuneration in any form. |
We are required to maintain a current stock ledger in Nevada that may be examined by the Nevada Gaming Authorities at any time. If any securities are held in trust by an agent or by a nominee, the record holder may be required to disclose the identity of the beneficial owner to the Nevada Gaming Authorities and we are also required to disclose the identity of the beneficial owner to the Nevada Gaming Authorities. A failure to make such disclosure may be grounds for finding the record holder unsuitable. We are also required to render maximum assistance in determining the identity of the beneficial owner.
We cannot make a public offering of any securities without the prior approval of the Nevada Commission if the securities or the proceeds from the offering are intended to be used to construct, acquire or finance gaming facilities in Nevada, or to retire or extend obligations incurred for such purposes. On November 15, 2012, the Nevada Commission granted us prior approval to make public offerings for a period of three years, subject to certain conditions (the “shelf approval”). The shelf approval, however, may be rescinded for good cause without prior notice upon the issuance of an interlocutory stop order by the Chairman of the Nevada Board. The shelf approval does not constitute a finding, recommendation, or approval by the Nevada Commission or the Nevada Board as to the investment merits of any securities offered under the shelf approval. Any representation to the contrary is unlawful.
16
Changes in our control through a merger, consolidation, stock or asset acquisition, management or consulting agreement, or any act or conduct by any person whereby he or she obtains control, shall not occur without the prior approval of the Nevada Commission. Entities seeking to acquire control of a registered corporation must satisfy the Nevada Board and the Nevada Commission concerning a variety of stringent standards prior to assuming control of such registered corporation. The Nevada Commission may also require controlling stockholders, officers, directors and other persons having a material relationship or involvement with the entity proposing to acquire control, to be investigated and licensed as part of the approval process of the transaction.
The Nevada legislature has declared that some corporate acquisitions opposed by management, repurchases of voting securities and corporate defense tactics affecting Nevada gaming licensees, and registered corporations that are affiliated with those operations, may be injurious to stable and productive corporate gaming. The Nevada Commission has established a regulatory scheme to ameliorate the potentially adverse effects of these business practices upon Nevada’s gaming industry and to further Nevada’s policy to:
• | assure the financial stability of corporate gaming operators and their affiliates; |
• | preserve the beneficial aspects of conducting business in the corporate form; and |
• | promote a neutral environment for the orderly governance of corporate affairs. |
Approvals are, in certain circumstances, required from the Nevada Commission before we can make exceptional repurchases of voting securities above the current market price thereof and before a corporate acquisition opposed by management can be consummated.
The Nevada Act also requires prior approval of a plan of recapitalization proposed by the Board of Directors in response to a tender offer made directly to our stockholders for the purposes of acquiring control of the registered corporation.
License fees and taxes, computed in various ways depending upon the type of gaming or activity involved, are payable to the State of Nevada and to Clark County, Nevada. Depending upon the particular fee or tax involved, these fees and taxes are payable monthly, quarterly or annually and are based upon:
• | a percentage of the gross revenues received; |
• | the number of gaming devices operated; or |
• | the number of table games operated. |
The tax on gross revenues received is generally 6.75%. In addition, an excise tax is paid by us on charges for admission to any facility where certain forms of live entertainment are provided. VCR is also required to pay certain fees and taxes to the State of Nevada as a licensed manufacturer and distributor.
Any person who is licensed, required to be licensed, registered, required to be registered, or under common control with such persons (collectively, “licensees”), and who proposes to become involved in a gaming operation outside of Nevada, is required to deposit with the Nevada Board, and thereafter maintain, a revolving fund in the amount of $10,000 to pay the expenses of any investigation by the Nevada Board into their participation in such foreign gaming operation. The revolving fund is subject to increase or decrease at the discretion of the Nevada Commission. Thereafter, licensees are also required to comply with certain reporting requirements imposed by the Nevada Act. Licensees are also subject to disciplinary action by the Nevada Commission if they knowingly violate any laws of any foreign jurisdiction pertaining to such foreign gaming operation, fail to conduct such foreign gaming operation in accordance with the standards of honesty and integrity required of Nevada gaming operations, engage in activities that are harmful to the State of Nevada or its ability to collect gaming taxes and fees, or employ a person in such foreign operation who has been denied a license or a finding of suitability in Nevada on the ground of personal unsuitability or who has been found guilty of cheating at gambling.
The sale of alcoholic beverages by the licensed subsidiaries on the casino premises and at the Sands Expo Center is subject to licensing, control and regulation by the applicable local authorities. Our licensed subsidiaries have obtained the necessary liquor licenses to sell alcoholic beverages. All licenses are revocable and are not transferable. The agencies involved have full power to limit, condition, suspend or revoke any such licenses, and any such disciplinary action could (and revocation of such licenses would) have a material adverse effect on our operations.
17
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Sands Bethworks Gaming is subject to the rules and regulations promulgated by the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board (“PaGCB”) and the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue, the on-site direction of the Pennsylvania State Police and the requirements of other agencies.
On December 20, 2006, we were awarded one of two Category 2 “at large” gaming licenses available in Pennsylvania. A location in the Pocono Mountains was awarded the other Category 2 “at large” license. On the same day, two Category 2 licenses were awarded to applicants for locations in Philadelphia, a Category 2 license was awarded to an applicant in Pittsburgh, and six race tracks were awarded Category 1 licenses. One of the Philadelphia Category 2 licenses was revoked by the PaGCB in December 2010. The revocation was upheld in November 2011 by an intermediate appellate court in Pennsylvania and became final in March 2012 when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied a discretionary appeal from the intermediate appellate court’s ruling. Six applications were submitted for the revoked Philadelphia Category 2 license; however, there is no deadline for the selection of the new Category 2 license.
The principal difference between Category 1 and Category 2 licenses is that the former is available only to certain race tracks. A Category 1 or Category 2 licensee is authorized to open with up to 3,000 slot machines and to increase to up to 5,000 slot machines upon approval of the PaGCB, which may not take effect earlier than six months after opening. The PaGCB also is permitted to award three Category 3 licenses. A Category 3 licensee is authorized to operate up to 600 slot machines and 50 table games or up to 500 slot machines without table games. To date, two Category 3 licenses have been awarded: the Valley Forge Convention Center in suburban Philadelphia and the Nemacolin Woodlands Resort in Fayette County, Pennsylvania. An additional Category 3 license may be issued, but not before July 2017, following a formal application process.
In July 2007, we paid a $50.0 million licensing fee to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and, in August 2007, were issued our gaming license by the PaGCB. Just prior to the opening of the casino at Sands Bethlehem, we were required to make a deposit of $5.0 million, which was reduced to $1.5 million in January 2010 when the law was amended, to cover weekly withdrawals of our share of the cost of regulation and the amount withdrawn must be replenished weekly.
In February 2010, we submitted a petition to the PaGCB to obtain a table games operation certificate to operate table games at Sands Bethlehem, based on a revision to the law in 2010 that authorized table games. The petition was approved in April 2010, we paid a $16.5 million table game licensing fee in May 2010 and were issued a table games certificate in June 2010. Table games operations commenced on July 18, 2010.
We must notify the PaGCB if we become aware of any proposed or contemplated change of control including more than 5% of the ownership interests of Sands Bethworks Gaming or of more than 5% of the ownership interests of any entity that owns, directly or indirectly, at least 20% of Sands Bethworks Gaming, including LVSC. The acquisition by a person or a group of persons acting in concert of more than 20% of the ownership interests of Sands Bethworks Gaming or of any entity that owns, directly or indirectly, at least 20% of Sands Bethworks Gaming, with the exception of the ownership interest of a person at the time of the original licensure when the license fee was paid, would be defined as a change of control under applicable Pennsylvania gaming law and regulations. Upon a change of control, the acquirer of the ownership interests would be required to qualify for licensure and to pay a new license fee of $50.0 million or a lesser “change of control” fee as determined by the PaGCB. In December 2007, the PaGCB adopted a $2.5 million fee to be assessed on an acquirer in connection with a change in control unless special circumstances dictate otherwise. The PaGCB retains the discretion to eliminate the need for qualification and may reduce the license fee upon a change of control. The PaGCB may provide up to 120 days for any person who is required to apply for a license and who is found not qualified to completely divest the person’s ownership interest.
Any person who acquires beneficial ownership of 5% or more of our voting securities will be required to apply to the PaGCB for licensure, obtain licensure and remain licensed. Licensure requires, among other things, that the applicant establish by clear and convincing evidence the applicant’s good character, honesty and integrity. Additionally, any trust that holds 5% or more of our voting securities is required to be licensed by the PaGCB and each individual who is a grantor, trustee or beneficiary of the trust is also required to be licensed by the PaGCB. Under certain circumstances and under the regulations of the PaGCB, an “institutional investor” as defined under the regulations of the PaGCB, which acquires beneficial ownership of 5% or more, but less than 10%, of our voting securities, may not be required to be licensed by the PaGCB provided the institutional investor files an Institutional Notice of Ownership Form with the PaGCB Bureau of Licensing and has filed, and remains eligible to file, a statement of beneficial ownership on Schedule 13G with the SEC as a result of this ownership interest. In addition, any beneficial owner of our voting securities, regardless of the number of shares beneficially owned, may be required at the discretion of the PaGCB to file an application for licensure.
18
In the event a security holder is required to be found qualified and is not found qualified, the security holder may be required by the PaGCB to divest of the interest at a price not exceeding the cost of the interest.
Employees
We directly employ approximately 48,500 employees worldwide and hire temporary employees on an as-needed basis. Our employees are not covered by collective bargaining agreements, except as discussed below with respect to our Sands Expo Center employees. We believe that we have good relations with our employees.
Certain unions have engaged in confrontational and obstructive tactics at some of our properties, including contacting potential customers, tenants and investors, objecting to various administrative approvals and picketing, and may continue these tactics in the future. Although we believe we will be able to operate despite such tactics, no assurance can be given that we will be able to do so or that the failure to do so would not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Although no assurances can be given, if employees decide to be represented by labor unions, management does not believe that such representation would have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Certain culinary personnel are hired from time to time for trade shows and conventions at Sands Expo Center and are covered under a collective bargaining agreement between Local 226 and Sands Expo Center. This collective bargaining agreement expired in December 2000, but automatically renews on an annual basis. As a result, Sands Expo Center is operating under the terms of the expired bargaining agreement with respect to these employees.
Intellectual Property
Our intellectual property (“IP”) portfolio currently consists of copyrights, domain names and domain name system configurations, patents, trade secrets, trademarks, service marks and trade names. We believe that the name recognition, brand identification and image that we have developed through our intellectual properties attract customers to our facilities, drive customer loyalty and contribute to our success. We register and protect our intellectual property in the jurisdictions in which we operate or significantly advertise, as well as in countries in which we may operate in the future.
Agreements Relating to the Malls in Las Vegas
The Grand Canal Shoppes
In May 2004, we completed the sale of The Grand Canal Shoppes and leased to GGP 19 retail and restaurant spaces on the casino level of The Venetian Las Vegas for 89 years with annual rent of one dollar, and GGP assumed our interest as landlord under the various leases associated with these 19 spaces. In addition, we agreed with GGP to:
• | continue to be obligated to fulfill certain lease termination and asset purchase agreements; |
• | lease the portion of the theater space located within The Grand Canal Shoppes from GGP for a period of 25 years, subject to an additional 50 years of extension options, with initial fixed minimum rent of $3.3 million per year; |
• | lease the gondola retail store and the canal space located within The Grand Canal Shoppes from GGP (and by amendment the extension of the canal space extended into The Shoppes at The Palazzo) for a period of 25 years, subject to an additional 50 years of extension options, with initial fixed minimum rent of $3.5 million per year; and |
• | lease certain office space from GGP for a period of 10 years, subject to an additional 65 years of extension options, with initial annual rent of approximately $0.9 million. |
The lease payments relating to the theater, the canal space within The Grand Canal Shoppes and the office space from GGP are subject to automatic increases of 5% in the sixth lease year and each subsequent fifth lease year.
The Shoppes at The Palazzo
We contracted to sell The Shoppes at The Palazzo to GGP pursuant to a purchase and sale agreement dated as of April 12, 2004, as amended (the “Amended Agreement”). Under the Amended Agreement, we also leased to GGP certain restaurant and retail space on the casino level of The Palazzo for 89 years with annual rent of one dollar and GGP assumed our interest as landlord under the various space leases associated with these spaces. On June 24, 2011, we reached a settlement with GGP regarding the final purchase price. Under the terms of the settlement, we retained the $295.4 million of proceeds previously received and participate in certain potential future revenues earned by GGP.
19
Cooperation Agreement
Our business plan calls for each of The Venetian Las Vegas, The Palazzo, Sands Expo Center, the Grand Canal Shoppes and the high-rise residential condominium tower that was being constructed on the Las Vegas strip between The Palazzo and The Venetian Las Vegas (the “Las Vegas Condo Tower”), though separately owned, to be integrally related components of one facility (the “LV Integrated Resort”). In establishing the terms for the integrated operation of these components, the cooperation agreement sets forth agreements regarding, among other things, encroachments, easements, operating standards, maintenance requirements, insurance requirements, casualty and condemnation, joint marketing, and the sharing of some facilities and related costs. Subject to applicable law, the cooperation agreement binds all current and future owners of all portions of the LV Integrated Resort and has priority over the liens securing LVSLLC’s senior secured credit facility and in some or all respects any liens that may secure any indebtedness of the owners of any portion of the LV Integrated Resort. Accordingly, subject to applicable law, the obligations in the cooperation agreement will “run with the land” if any of the components change hands.
Operating Covenants. The cooperation agreement regulates certain aspects of the operation of the LV Integrated Resort. For example, under the cooperation agreement, we are obligated to operate The Venetian Las Vegas continuously and to use it exclusively in accordance with standards of first-class Las Vegas Boulevard-style hotels and casinos. We are also obligated to operate and use the Sands Expo Center exclusively in accordance with standards of first-class convention, trade show and exposition centers. The owners of the Grand Canal Shoppes are obligated to operate their property exclusively in accordance with standards of first-class restaurant and retail complexes. For so long as The Venetian Las Vegas is operated in accordance with a “Venetian” theme, the owner of the Grand Canal Shoppes must operate The Grand Canal Shoppes in accordance with the overall Venetian theme.
Maintenance and Repair. We must maintain The Venetian Las Vegas and The Palazzo as well as some common areas and common facilities that are to be shared with the Grand Canal Shoppes. The cost of maintenance of all shared common areas and common facilities is to be shared between us and the owners of the Grand Canal Shoppes. We must also maintain, repair and restore Sands Expo Center and certain common areas and common facilities located in Sands Expo Center. The owners of the Grand Canal Shoppes must maintain, repair and restore the Grand Canal Shoppes and certain common areas and common facilities located within.
Insurance. We and the owners of the Grand Canal Shoppes must maintain minimum types and levels of insurance, including property damage, general liability and business interruption insurance. The cooperation agreement establishes an insurance trustee to assist in the implementation of the insurance requirements.
Parking. The cooperation agreement also addresses issues relating to the use of the LV Integrated Resort’s parking facilities and easements for access. The Venetian Las Vegas, The Palazzo, Sands Expo Center and the Grand Canal Shoppes may use the parking spaces in the LV Integrated Resort’s parking facilities on a “first come, first served” basis. The LV Integrated Resort’s parking facilities are owned, maintained and operated by us, with the operating costs proportionately allocated among and/or billed to the owners of the components of the LV Integrated Resort. Each party to the cooperation agreement has granted to the others non-exclusive easements and rights to use the roadways and walkways on each other’s properties for vehicular and pedestrian access to the parking garages.
Utility Easement. All property owners have also granted each other all appropriate and necessary easement rights to utility lines servicing the LV Integrated Resort.
Consents, Approvals and Disputes. If any current or future party to the cooperation agreement has a consent or approval right or has discretion to act or refrain from acting, the consent or approval of such party will only be granted and action will be taken or not taken only if a commercially reasonable owner would do so and such consent, approval, action or inaction would not have a material adverse effect on the property owned by such property owner. The cooperation agreement provides for the appointment of an independent expert to resolve some disputes between the parties, as well as for expedited arbitration for other disputes.
Sale of the Grand Canal Shoppes by GGP. We have a right of first offer in connection with any proposed sale of the Grand Canal Shoppes by GGP. We also have the right to receive notice of any default by GGP sent by any lender holding a mortgage on the Grand Canal Shoppes, if any, and the right to cure such default subject to our meeting certain net worth tests.
ITEM 1A. — RISK FACTORS
You should carefully consider the risk factors set forth below as well as the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K in connection with evaluating the Company. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that
20
we currently deem to be immaterial may also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Certain statements in “Risk Factors” are forward-looking statements. See “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”
Risks Related to Our Business
Our business is particularly sensitive to reductions in discretionary consumer and corporate spending as a result of downturns in the economy.
Consumer demand for hotel/casino resorts, trade shows and conventions and for the type of luxury amenities we offer is particularly sensitive to downturns in the economy and the corresponding impact on discretionary spending on leisure activities. Changes in discretionary consumer spending or corporate spending on conventions and business travel could be driven by many factors, such as: perceived or actual general economic conditions; any further weaknesses in the job or housing market, additional credit market disruptions; high energy, fuel and food costs; the increased cost of travel; the potential for bank failures; the weakened job market; perceived or actual disposable consumer income and wealth; fears of recession and changes in consumer confidence in the economy; or fears of war and future acts of terrorism. These factors could reduce consumer and corporate demand for the luxury amenities and leisure activities we offer, thus imposing additional limits on pricing and harming our operations.
The terms of our debt instruments and our current debt service obligations may restrict our current and future operations, particularly our ability to finance additional growth, respond to changes or take some actions that may otherwise be in our best interests.
Our current debt instruments contain, and any future debt instruments likely will contain, a number of restrictive covenants that impose significant operating and financial restrictions on us, including restrictions on our ability to:
• | incur additional debt, including providing guarantees or credit support; |
• | incur liens securing indebtedness or other obligations; |
• | dispose of assets; |
• | make certain acquisitions; |
• | pay dividends or make distributions and make other restricted payments, such as purchasing equity interests, repurchasing junior indebtedness or making investments in third parties; |
• | enter into sale and leaseback transactions; |
• | engage in any new businesses; |
• | issue preferred stock; and |
• | enter into transactions with our stockholders and our affiliates. |
In addition, our Macao, Singapore and U.S. credit agreements contain various financial covenants. See “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 8 — Long-Term Debt” for further description of these covenants.
As of December 31, 2013, we had $9.38 billion of long-term debt outstanding. This indebtedness could have important consequences to us. For example, it could:
• | make it more difficult for us to satisfy our debt service obligations; |
• | increase our vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions; |
• | impair our ability to obtain additional financing in the future for working capital needs, capital expenditures, development projects, acquisitions or general corporate purposes; |
• | require us to dedicate a significant portion of our cash flow from operations to the payment of principal and interest on our debt, which would reduce the funds available for our operations and development projects; |
• | limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in the business and the industry in which we operate; |
• | place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less debt; and |
• | subject us to higher interest expense in the event of increases in interest rates as a significant portion of our debt is, and will continue to be, at variable rates of interest. |
21
Subject to applicable laws, including gaming laws, and certain agreed upon exceptions, our debt is secured by liens on substantially all of our assets, except for our equity interests in our subsidiaries.
We may elect to arrange additional financing to fund the balance of our Cotai Strip developments. If such additional financing is necessary, we cannot assure you that we will obtain all the financing required for the construction and opening of our remaining planned projects on suitable terms, if at all.
We are subject to extensive regulation and the cost of compliance or failure to comply with such regulations that govern our operations in any jurisdiction where we operate may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We are required to obtain and maintain licenses from various jurisdictions in order to operate certain aspects of our business, and we are subject to extensive background investigations and suitability standards in our gaming business. We also will become subject to regulation in any other jurisdiction where we choose to operate in the future. There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain new licenses or renew any of our existing licenses, or that if such licenses are obtained, that such licenses will not be conditioned, suspended or revoked, and the loss, denial or non-renewal of any of our licenses could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Our gaming operations and the ownership of our securities are subject to extensive regulation by the Nevada Commission, the Nevada Board and the CCLGLB. The Nevada Gaming Authorities have broad authority with respect to licensing and registration of our business entities and individuals investing in or otherwise involved with us.
Although we currently are registered with, and LVSLLC and VCR currently hold gaming licenses issued by, the Nevada Gaming Authorities, these authorities may, among other things, revoke the gaming license of any corporate entity or the registration of a registered corporation or any entity registered as a holding company of a corporate licensee for violations of gaming regulations.
In addition, the Nevada Gaming Authorities may, under certain conditions, revoke the license or finding of suitability of any officer, director, controlling person, stockholder, noteholder or key employee of a licensed or registered entity. If our gaming licenses were revoked for any reason, the Nevada Gaming Authorities could require the closing of our casinos, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. In addition, compliance costs associated with gaming laws, regulations or licenses are significant. Any change in the laws, regulations or licenses applicable to our business or gaming licenses could require us to make substantial expenditures or could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
A similar dynamic exists in all jurisdictions where we operate and a regulatory action against one of our operating entities in any gaming jurisdiction could impact our operations in other gaming jurisdictions where we do business. For a more complete description of the gaming regulatory requirements that have an effect on our business, see “Item 1 — Business — Regulation and Licensing.”
We are subject to regulations imposed by the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the “FCPA”), which generally prohibits U.S. companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. On February 9, 2011, LVSC received a subpoena from the SEC requesting that we produce documents relating to our compliance with the FCPA. We have also been advised by the DOJ that it is conducting a similar investigation. Any violation of the FCPA could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. See “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 13 — Commitments and Contingencies — Litigation” for further description of the current status of this matter.
We also deal with significant amounts of cash in our operations and are subject to various reporting and anti-money laundering regulations. Any violation of anti-money laundering laws or regulations, or any accusations of money laundering or regulatory investigations into possible money laundering activities, by any of our properties, employees, customers could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
There are significant risks associated with our ongoing and future construction projects, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows from these planned facilities.
Our ongoing and future construction projects, such as our Cotai Strip projects, entail significant risks. Construction activity requires us to obtain qualified contractors and subcontractors, the availability of which may be uncertain. Construction projects are subject to cost overruns and delays caused by events outside of our control or, in certain cases, our contractors’ control, such as shortages of materials or skilled labor, unforeseen engineering, environmental and/or geological problems, work stoppages, weather interference, unanticipated cost increases and unavailability of construction materials or equipment. Construction, equipment or staffing problems or difficulties in obtaining any of the requisite materials, licenses, permits, allocations and
22
authorizations from governmental or regulatory authorities could increase the total cost, delay, jeopardize, prevent the construction or opening of our projects, or otherwise affect the design and features. In addition, the number of ongoing projects and their locations throughout the world present unique challenges and risks to our management structure. If our management is unable to manage successfully our worldwide construction projects, it could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
The anticipated costs and completion dates for our current projects are based on budgets, designs, development and construction documents and schedule estimates that we have prepared with the assistance of architects and other construction development consultants and that are subject to change as the design, development and construction documents are finalized and as actual construction work is performed. A failure to complete our projects on budget or on schedule may have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. The estimated costs to complete and open our remaining planned projects are currently not determinable with certainty and therefore may have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. See also “— Risks Associated with Our International Operations — We are currently required to complete Sands Cotai Central by May 2014 and build and open The Parisian Macao by April 2016. If we are unable to meet the applicable deadlines and the deadlines for either development are not extended, we may lose the respective land concession, which would prohibit us from operating any facilities developed under such land concession.”
Because we are currently dependent primarily upon our properties in three markets for all of our cash flow, we are subject to greater risks than competitors with more operating properties or that operates in more markets.
We currently do not have material operations other than our Macao, Singapore and Las Vegas properties. As a result, we are primarily dependent upon these properties for all of our cash.
Given that our operations are currently conducted primarily at properties in Macao, Singapore and Las Vegas and that a large portion of our planned future development is in Macao, we will be subject to greater degrees of risk than competitors with more operating properties or that operates in more markets. The risks to which we will have a greater degree of exposure include the following:
• | local economic and competitive conditions; |
• | inaccessibility due to inclement weather, road construction or closure of primary access routes; |
• | decline in air passenger traffic due to higher ticket costs or fears concerning air travel; |
• | changes in local and state governmental laws and regulations, including gaming laws and regulations; |
• | natural or man-made disasters, or outbreaks of infectious diseases; |
• | changes in the availability of water; and |
• | a decline in the number of visitors to Macao, Singapore or Las Vegas. |
Our insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover all possible losses that our properties could suffer. In addition, our insurance costs may increase and we may not be able to obtain the same insurance coverage in the future.
We have comprehensive property and liability insurance policies for our properties in operation, as well as those in the course of construction, with coverage features and insured limits that we believe are customary in their breadth and scope. Market forces beyond our control may nonetheless limit the scope of the insurance coverage we can obtain or our ability to obtain coverage at reasonable rates. Certain types of losses, generally of a catastrophic nature, such as earthquakes, hurricanes and floods, or terrorist acts, or certain liabilities may be uninsurable or too expensive to justify obtaining insurance. As a result, we may not be successful in obtaining insurance without increases in cost or decreases in coverage levels. In addition, in the event of a substantial loss, the insurance coverage we carry may not be sufficient to pay the full market value or replacement cost of our lost investment or in some cases could result in certain losses being totally uninsured. As a result, we could lose some or all of the capital we have invested in a property, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the property, and we could remain obligated for debt or other financial obligations related to the property.
Our debt instruments and other material agreements require us to maintain a certain minimum level of insurance. Failure to satisfy these requirements could result in an event of default under these debt instruments or material agreements.
We depend on the continued services of key managers and employees. If we do not retain our key personnel or attract and retain other highly skilled employees, our business will suffer.
Our ability to maintain our competitive position is dependent to a large degree on the services of our senior management team, including Sheldon G. Adelson and our other executive officers. The loss of Mr. Adelson’s services or the services of our
23
other senior managers, or the inability to attract and retain additional senior management personnel could have a material adverse effect on our business. Mr. Adelson’s employment agreement is scheduled to expire in December 2014 and is subject to extensions.
The interests of our principal stockholder in our business may be different from yours.
Mr. Adelson, his family members and trusts and other entities established for the benefit of Mr. Adelson and/or his family members (collectively our “Principal Stockholder’s family”) beneficially own approximately 53% of our outstanding common stock as of December 31, 2013. Accordingly, Mr. Adelson exercises significant influence over our business policies and affairs, including the composition of our Board of Directors and any action requiring the approval of our stockholders, including the adoption of amendments to our articles of incorporation and the approval of a merger or sale of substantially all of our assets. The concentration of ownership may also delay, defer or even prevent a change in control of our company and may make some transactions more difficult or impossible without the support of Mr. Adelson. The interests of Mr. Adelson may differ from your interests.
We are a parent company and our primary source of cash is and will be distributions from our subsidiaries.
We are a parent company with limited business operations of our own. Our main asset is the capital stock of our subsidiaries. We conduct most of our business operations through our direct and indirect subsidiaries. Accordingly, our primary sources of cash are dividends and distributions with respect to our ownership interests in our subsidiaries that are derived from the earnings and cash flow generated by our operating properties. Our subsidiaries might not generate sufficient earnings and cash flow to pay dividends or distributions in the future. Our subsidiaries’ payments to us will be contingent upon their earnings and upon other business considerations. In addition, our subsidiaries’ debt instruments and other agreements limit or prohibit certain payments of dividends or other distributions to us. We expect that future debt instruments for the financing of our other developments will contain similar restrictions.
Our business is sensitive to the willingness of our customers to travel. Acts of terrorism, regional political events and developments in the conflicts in certain countries could cause severe disruptions in air travel that reduce the number of visitors to our facilities, resulting in a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We are dependent on the willingness of our customers to travel. Only a small amount of our business is and will be generated by local residents. Most of our customers travel to reach our Macao, Singapore, Las Vegas and Pennsylvania properties. Acts of terrorism may severely disrupt domestic and international travel, which would result in a decrease in customer visits to Macao, Singapore, Las Vegas and Pennsylvania, including our properties. Regional conflicts could have a similar effect on domestic and international travel. Management cannot predict the extent to which disruptions in air or other forms of travel as a result of any further terrorist act, outbreak of hostilities or escalation of war would have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We extend credit to a large portion of our customers and we may not be able to collect gaming receivables from our credit players.
We conduct our gaming activities on a credit and cash basis. Any such credit we extend is unsecured. Table games players typically are extended more credit than slot players, and high-stakes players typically are extended more credit than patrons who tend to wager lower amounts. High-end gaming is more volatile than other forms of gaming, and variances in win-loss results attributable to high-end gaming may have a significant positive or negative impact on cash flow and earnings in a particular quarter.
During the year ended December 31, 2013, approximately 27.9%, 29.3% and 74.2% of our table games drop at our Macao properties, Marina Bay Sands and our Las Vegas properties, respectively, was from credit-based wagering, while table games play at our Pennsylvania property is primarily conducted on a cash basis. We extend credit to those customers whose level of play and financial resources warrant, in the opinion of management, an extension of credit. These large receivables could have a significant impact on our results of operations if deemed uncollectible.
While gaming debts evidenced by a credit instrument, including what is commonly referred to as a “marker,” and judgments on gaming debts are enforceable under the current laws of Nevada, and Nevada judgments on gaming debts are enforceable in all states under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution, other jurisdictions around the world, including jurisdictions our gaming customers may come from, may determine that enforcement of gaming debts is against public policy. Although courts of some foreign nations will enforce gaming debts directly and the assets in the U.S. of foreign debtors may be reached to satisfy a judgment, judgments on gaming debts from courts in the U.S. and elsewhere are not binding on the courts of many foreign nations.
24
Win rates for our gaming operations depend on a variety of factors, some beyond our control, and the winnings of our gaming customers could exceed our casino winnings.
The gaming industry is characterized by an element of chance. In addition to the element of chance, win rates are also affected by other factors, including players’ skill and experience, the mix of games played, the financial resources of players, the spread of table limits, the volume of bets played and the amount of time played. Our gaming profits are mainly derived from the difference between our casino winnings and the casino winnings of our gaming customers. Since there is an inherent element of chance in the gaming industry, we do not have full control over our winnings or the winnings of our gaming customers. If the winnings of our gaming customers exceed our winnings, we may record a loss from our gaming operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
We face the risk of fraud and cheating.
Our gaming customers may attempt or commit fraud or cheat in order to increase winnings. Acts of fraud or cheating could involve the use of counterfeit chips or other tactics, possibly in collusion with our employees. Internal acts of cheating could also be conducted by employees through collusion with dealers, surveillance staff, floor managers or other casino or gaming area staff. Failure to discover such acts or schemes in a timely manner could result in losses in our gaming operations. In addition, negative publicity related to such schemes could have an adverse effect on our reputation, potentially causing a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
A failure to establish and protect our IP rights could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We endeavor to establish and protect our IP rights and our goods and services through trademarks and service marks, copyrights, patents, trade secrets, domain names, licenses, other contractual provisions, nondisclosure agreements, and confidentiality and information-security measures and procedures. There can be no assurance, however, that the steps we take to protect our IP will be sufficient. Our inability to adequately obtain, maintain or defend our IP rights for any reason may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Examples include: (1) if one of our marks becomes so well known by the public that its use is deemed generic, we may lose exclusive rights to such mark or be forced to rebrand; (2) if a third party claims our IP has infringed, currently infringes, or could in the future infringe upon its IP rights, we may need to cease use of such IP, defend our rights or take other steps; (3) if third parties violate their obligations to us to maintain the confidentiality of our proprietary information or there is a security breach or lapse, our business may be affected; or (4) if third parties misappropriate or infringe upon our IP, our business could be affected.
Conflicts of interest may arise because certain of our directors and officers are also directors of SCL.
In November 2009, our subsidiary, SCL, listed its ordinary shares on The Main Board of The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited (the “SCL Offering”). We currently own 70.2% of the issued and outstanding ordinary shares of SCL. As a result of SCL having stockholders who are not affiliated with us, we and certain of our officers and directors who also serve as officers and/or directors of SCL may have conflicting fiduciary obligations to our stockholders and to the minority stockholders of SCL. Decisions that could have different implications for us and SCL, including contractual arrangements that we have entered into or may in the future enter into with SCL may give rise to the appearance of a potential conflict of interest.
Changes in tax laws and regulations could impact our financial condition and results of operations.
We are subject to taxation and regulation by various government agencies, primarily in Macao, Singapore and the U.S. (federal, state and local levels). From time to time, U.S. federal, state, local and foreign governments make substantive changes to tax rules and the application of these rules, which could result in higher taxes than would be incurred under existing tax law or interpretation. In particular, government agencies may make changes that could reduce the profits that we can effectively realize from our non-U.S. operations. Like most U.S. companies, our effective income tax rate reflects the fact that income earned and reinvested outside the U.S. is taxed at local rates, which are often lower than U.S. tax rates. If changes in tax laws and regulations were to significantly increase the tax rates on non-U.S. income, these changes could increase our income tax expense and liability, and therefore, could have an adverse effect on our effective income tax rate, financial condition and results of operations.
Disruptions in the financial markets could have an adverse effect on our ability to raise additional financing.
Severe disruptions in the commercial credit markets in the recent past have resulted in a tightening of credit markets worldwide. Liquidity in the global credit markets was severely contracted by these market disruptions, making it difficult and costly to obtain new lines of credit or to refinance existing debt. The effect of these disruptions was widespread and difficult to quantify. While economic conditions have recently improved, that trend may not continue and the extent of the current economic
25
improvement is unknown. Any future disruptions in the commercial credit markets may impact liquidity in the global credit market as greatly, or even more, than in recent years.
Our business and financing plan may be dependent upon completion of future financings. If the credit environment worsens, it may be difficult to obtain any additional financing on acceptable terms, which could have an adverse effect on our ability to complete our remaining planned development projects, and as a consequence, our results of operations and business plans. Should general economic conditions not improve, if we are unable to obtain sufficient funding or applicable government approvals such that completion of our planned projects is not probable, or should management decide to abandon certain projects, all or a portion of our investment to date in our planned projects could be lost and would result in an impairment charge.
Natural or man-made disasters, an outbreak of highly infectious disease, terrorist activity or war could adversely affect the number of visitors to our facilities and disrupt our operations, resulting in a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
So called “Acts of God,” such as typhoons, particularly in Macao, and other natural disasters, man-made disasters, outbreaks of highly infectious diseases, terrorist activity or war may result in decreases in travel to and from, and economic activity in, areas in which we operate, and may adversely affect the number of visitors to our properties. Any of these events also may disrupt our ability to staff our business adequately, could generally disrupt our operations and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Although we have insurance coverage with respect to some of these events, we cannot assure you that any such coverage will be sufficient to indemnify us fully against all direct and indirect costs, including any loss of business that could result from substantial damage to, or partial or complete destruction of, any of our properties.
Our failure to maintain the integrity of our customer or company data could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows, and/or subject us to costs, fines or lawsuits.
We face global cybersecurity threats, which may range from uncoordinated individual attempts to sophisticated and targeted measures directed at us. Cyber-attacks and security breaches may include, but are not limited to, attempts to access information, including customer and company information, computer viruses, denial of service and other electronic security breaches.
Our business requires the collection and retention of large volumes of customer data, including credit card numbers and other personally identifiable information in various information systems that we maintain and in those maintained by third-parties with whom we contract to provide data services. We also maintain important internal company data such as personally identifiable information about our employees and information relating to our operations. The integrity and protection of that customer and company data is important to us. Our collection of such customer and company data is subject to extensive regulation by private groups such as the payment card industry as well as domestic and foreign governmental authorities, including gaming authorities. Our systems may be unable to satisfy applicable regulations or employee and customer expectations.
In addition, we have experienced a sophisticated criminal cybersecurity attack in the past, including a recent breach of our information technology systems, referred to in “Item 3 — Legal Proceedings,” in which customer and company information was compromised and certain company data may have been destroyed, and we may experience additional cybersecurity attacks in the future, potentially with more frequency or sophistication. Our information systems and records, including those we maintain with our third-party service providers, may be subject to cybersecurity breaches, system failures, viruses, operator error or inadvertent releases of data. Our third-party information system service providers face risks relating to cybersecurity similar to ours, and we do not directly control any of such parties’ information security operations. A significant theft, loss or fraudulent use of customer or company data maintained by us or by a third-party service provider could have an adverse effect on our reputation, cause a material disruption to our operations and management team, and result in remediation expenses, regulatory penalties and litigation by customers and other parties whose information was subject to such attacks, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and cash flows.
Risks Associated with Our International Operations
Conducting business in Macao and Singapore has certain political and economic risks, which may have an adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of our Asian operations.
Our operations in Macao include The Venetian Macao, Four Seasons Macao, Sands Cotai Central and Sands Macao. We plan to open and operate additional hotels, gaming areas and meeting space within the Cotai Strip in Macao, including The Parisian Macao, which is currently expected to open in late 2015. We also own and operate the Marina Bay Sands in Singapore. Accordingly, our business development plans, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows may be materially and adversely affected by significant political, social and economic developments in Macao and Singapore, and by changes in policies of the governments or changes in laws and regulations or their interpretations. Our operations in Macao and Singapore are also exposed to the risk of changes in laws and policies that govern operations of companies based in those countries. Jurisdictional tax laws and regulations
26
may also be subject to amendment or different interpretation and implementation, thereby having an adverse effect on our profitability after tax. These changes may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
As we expect a significant number of consumers to continue to come to our Macao properties from mainland China, general economic conditions and policies in China could have a significant impact on our financial prospects. Any slowdown in economic growth or changes to China’s current restrictions on travel and currency movements could disrupt the number of visitors from mainland China to our casinos in Macao as well as the amounts they are willing to spend in our casinos. See “— The number of visitors to Macao, particularly visitors from mainland China, may decline or travel to Macao may be disrupted.”
Current Macao and Singapore laws and regulations concerning gaming and gaming concessions and licenses are, for the most part, fairly recent and there is little precedent on the interpretation of these laws and regulations. We believe that our organizational structure and operations are in compliance in all material respects with all applicable laws and regulations of Macao and Singapore. These laws and regulations are complex and a court or an administrative or regulatory body may in the future render an interpretation of these laws and regulations, or issue regulations, which differs from our interpretation and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
In addition, our activities in Macao and Singapore are subject to administrative review and approval by various government agencies. We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain all necessary approvals, which may have a material adverse effect on our long-term business strategy and operations. Macao and Singapore laws permit redress to the courts with respect to administrative actions; however, such redress is largely untested in relation to gaming issues.
Recently, the Macao Government approved smoking control legislation, which prohibited smoking in casinos starting on January 1, 2013. The legislation, however, permits casinos to maintain designated smoking areas of up to 50% of the areas opened to the public, which must have been created on or before January 1, 2013, and comply with the conditions set out in a Dispatch of the Chief Executive, which came into effect on November 1, 2012. The implementation of such legislation may deter potential gaming customers who are smokers from frequenting casinos in Macao, which could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We are currently required to complete Sands Cotai Central by May 2014 and build and open The Parisian Macao by April 2016. If we are unable to meet the applicable deadlines and the deadlines for either development are not extended, we may lose the respective land concession, which would prohibit us from operating any facilities developed under such land concession.
We received land concessions from the Macao government covering parcels 1, 2, 3 and 5 and 6, the sites on which The Venetian Macao (parcel 1), Four Seasons Macao (parcel 2) and Sands Cotai Central (parcels 5 and 6) are located and The Parisian Macao (parcel 3) will be located. The land concession for Sands Cotai Central requires that the corresponding development be completed by May 2014 (48 months from the date the land concession became effective). The Macao government granted us two extensions of the development deadline under the land concession for The Parisian Macao. Under the terms of the land concession, we must complete The Parisian Macao by April 2016. See “— Risks Related to Our Business — Disruptions in the financial markets could have an adverse effect on our ability to raise additional financing,” “— Risks Related to Our Business — There are significant risks associated with our ongoing and future construction projects, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows from these planned facilities” and “— Conducting business in Macao and Singapore has certain political and economic risks, which may have an adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of our Asian operations.” We have applied for an extension from the Macao government to complete Sands Cotai Central, as we will be unable to meet the May 2014 deadline. Should we determine that we are unable to complete The Parisian Macao by April 2016, we would then also expect to apply for an extension from the Macao government. If we are unable to meet The Parisian Macao deadline and the deadlines for either development are not extended, the Macao government has the right to unilaterally terminate our respective land concessions for Sands Cotai Central or The Parisian Macao. A loss of the land concession would prohibit us from operating any properties developed under the land concession for Sands Cotai Central or The Parisian Macao. As a result, we could record a charge for all or some portion of our $4.15 billion and $376.0 million in capitalized costs and land premiums (net of amortization), as of December 31, 2013, for Sands Cotai Central or The Parisian Macao, respectively.
Our Macao subconcession can be terminated under certain circumstances without compensation to us, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
The Macao government has the right, after consultation with Galaxy, to unilaterally terminate our subconcession in the event of VML’s serious non-compliance with its basic obligations under the subconcession and applicable Macao laws. Upon termination of our subconcession, our casinos and gaming-related equipment would automatically be transferred to the Macao government without compensation to us and we would cease to generate any revenues from these operations. The loss of our subconcession
27
would prohibit us from conducting gaming operations in Macao, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Our Singapore concession can be terminated under certain circumstances without compensation to us, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
The Development Agreement between MBS and the STB contains events of default that could permit the STB to terminate the agreement without compensation to us. If the Development Agreement is terminated, we could lose our right to operate the Marina Bay Sands and our investment in Marina Bay Sands could be lost.
For a more complete description of the Singapore gaming regulatory requirements applicable to beneficial owners of our voting securities, see “Item 1 — Business — Regulation and Licensing — Development Agreement with Singapore Tourism Board.”
We will stop generating any revenues from our Macao gaming operations if we cannot secure an extension of our subconcession in 2022 or if the Macao government exercises its redemption right.
Our subconcession agreement expires on June 26, 2022. Unless our subconcession is extended, all of VML’s casino premises and gaming-related equipment will automatically be transferred to the Macao government on that date without compensation to us and we will cease to generate revenues from these gaming operations. Beginning on December 26, 2017, the Macao government may redeem the subconcession agreement by providing us at least one year prior notice. In the event the Macao government exercises this redemption right, we are entitled to fair compensation or indemnity. The amount of this compensation or indemnity will be determined based on the amount of gaming and non-gaming revenue generated by The Venetian Macao during the tax year prior to the redemption multiplied by the number of remaining years before expiration of the subconcession. We cannot assure you that we will be able to renew or extend our subconcession agreement on terms favorable to us or at all. We also cannot assure you that if our subconcession is redeemed, the compensation paid will be adequate to compensate us for the loss of future revenues.
The number of visitors to Macao, particularly visitors from mainland China, may decline or travel to Macao may be disrupted.
Our VIP and mass market gaming customers typically come from nearby destinations in Asia, including mainland China, Hong Kong, South Korea and Japan. Increasingly, a significant number of gaming customers come to our casinos from mainland China. Any slowdown in economic growth or changes of China’s current restrictions on travel and currency movements could disrupt the number of visitors from mainland China to our casinos in Macao as well as the amounts they are willing and able to spend while at our properties.
Policies and measures adopted from time to time by the Chinese government include restrictions imposed on exit visas granted to residents of mainland China for travel to Macao and Hong Kong. These measures have, and any future policy developments that may be implemented may have, the effect of reducing the number of visitors to Macao from mainland China, which could adversely impact tourism and the gaming industry in Macao.
Our Macao operations face intense competition, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
The hotel, resort and casino businesses are highly competitive. Our Macao operations currently compete with numerous other casinos located in Macao. Our Macao operations will also compete to some extent with casinos located elsewhere in Asia, including Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and elsewhere in the world, including Las Vegas. In addition, certain countries have legalized, and others may in the future legalize, casino gaming, including Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Thailand.
The proliferation of gaming venues, especially in Southeast Asia, could have a significant and adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
The Macao and Singapore governments could grant additional rights to conduct gaming in the future, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We hold a subconcession under one of only three gaming concessions authorized by the Macao government to operate casinos in Macao. No additional concessions have been granted since 2002; however, if the Macao government were to allow additional gaming operators in Macao through the grant of additional concessions or subconcessions, we would face additional competition, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We hold one of two licenses granted by the Singapore government to develop an integrated resort, including a casino. Under the Request for Proposal, the CRA is required to ensure that there will not be more than two casino licenses during a ten-year
28
exclusive period that began on March 1, 2007. If the Singapore government were to license additional casinos, we would face additional competition, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We may not be able to attract and retain professional staff necessary for our existing and future operations in Macao and Singapore.
Our success depends in large part upon our ability to attract, retain, train, manage and motivate skilled employees at our properties. In addition, the Macao government requires that we only hire Macao residents as dealers in our casinos. There is significant competition in Macao and Singapore for employees with the skills required to perform the services we offer and competition for these individuals in Macao is likely to increase as we open the remaining phase of Sands Cotai Central and The Parisian Macao, and as other competitors expand their operations. There can be no assurance that a sufficient number of construction labor and skilled employees will be available or that we will be successful in training, retaining and motivating current or future employees. If we are unable to obtain, attract, retain and train skilled employees, our ability to adequately manage and staff our existing and planned casino and resort properties in Macao and Singapore could be impaired, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We are dependent upon gaming junket operators for a significant portion of our gaming revenues in Macao.
Junket operators, which promote gaming and draw high-roller customers to casinos, are responsible for a significant portion of our gaming revenues in Macao. With the rise in gaming in Macao, the competition for relationships with junket operators has increased. There can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain, or grow, our relationships with junket operators. If we are unable to maintain or grow our relationships with junket operators, or if the junket operators experience financial difficulties or are unable to develop or maintain relationships with our high-roller customers, our ability to grow our gaming revenues will be hampered.
If junket operators attempt to negotiate changes to our operational agreements, including higher commissions, it could result in higher costs for us, loss of business to a competitor or loss of relationships with junket operators, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
In addition, the quality of junket operators is important to our reputation and our ability to continue to operate in compliance with our gaming licenses. While we strive for excellence in our associations with junket operators, we cannot assure you that the junket operators with whom we are associated will meet the high standards we insist upon. If a junket operator falls below our standards, we may suffer reputational harm, as well as worsening relationships with, and possible sanctions from, gaming regulators with authority over our operations.
Our business could be adversely affected by the limitations of the pataca exchange markets and restrictions on the export of the renminbi.
Our revenues in Macao are denominated in patacas, the legal currency of Macao, and Hong Kong dollars. The Macao pataca and the Hong Kong dollar are linked to each other and, in many cases, are used interchangeably in Macao. Although currently permitted, we cannot assure you that patacas will continue to be freely exchangeable into U.S. dollars. Also, because the currency market for patacas is relatively small and undeveloped, our ability to convert large amounts of patacas into U.S. dollars over a relatively short period may be limited. As a result, we may experience difficulty in converting patacas into U.S. dollars.
We are currently prohibited from accepting wagers in renminbi, the legal currency of China. There are also restrictions on the export of the renminbi outside of mainland China and the amount of renminbi that can be converted into foreign currencies, including the pataca and Hong Kong dollar. Restrictions on the export of the renminbi may impede the flow of gaming customers from mainland China to Macao, inhibit the growth of gaming in Macao and negatively impact our gaming operations.
On July 21, 2005, the People’s Bank of China announced that the renminbi will no longer be pegged to the U.S. dollar, but will be allowed to float in a band (and, to a limited extent, increase in value) against a basket of foreign currencies. The Macao pataca is pegged to the Hong Kong dollar. Certain Asian countries have publicly asserted their desire to eliminate the peg of the Hong Kong dollar to the U.S. dollar. As a result, we cannot assure you that the Hong Kong dollar and the Macao pataca will continue to be pegged to the U.S. dollar or that the current peg rate for these currencies will remain at the same level. The floating of the renminbi and possible changes to the peg of the Hong Kong dollar may result in severe fluctuations in the exchange rate for these currencies. Any change in such exchange rates could have a material adverse effect on our operations and on our ability to make payments on certain of our debt instruments. We do not currently hedge for foreign currency risk; however, we maintain a significant amount of our operating funds in the same currencies in which we have obligations, thereby reducing our exposure to currency fluctuations.
29
Certain Nevada gaming laws apply to our gaming activities and associations in other jurisdictions where we operate or plan to operate.
Certain Nevada gaming laws also apply to our gaming activities and associations in jurisdictions outside the State of Nevada. We are required to comply with certain reporting requirements concerning our proposed gaming activities and associations occurring outside the State of Nevada, including Macao, Singapore and other jurisdictions. We will also be subject to disciplinary action by the Nevada Commission if:
• | we knowingly violate any laws of the foreign jurisdiction pertaining to the foreign gaming operation; |
• | we fail to conduct the foreign gaming operation in accordance with the standards of honesty and integrity required of Nevada gaming operations; |
• | we engage in any activity or enter into any association that is unsuitable for us because it poses an unreasonable threat to the control of gaming in Nevada, reflects or tends to reflect discredit or disrepute upon the State of Nevada or gaming in Nevada, or is contrary to the gaming policies of Nevada; |
• | we engage in any activity or enter into any association that interferes with the ability of the State of Nevada to collect gaming taxes and fees; or |
• | we employ, contract with or associate with any person in the foreign gaming operation who has been denied a license or a finding of suitability in Nevada on the ground of personal unsuitability, or who has been found guilty of cheating at gambling. |
Also, as we are required to provide any other information that the Nevada Commission may require concerning our gaming activities and associations in jurisdictions outside the State of Nevada, we could be subject to disciplinary action by the Nevada Commission if our current reporting is determined to be unsatisfactory due to Macao regulations regarding personal data protection prohibiting us from satisfying certain reporting requirements of the Nevada Commission.
In addition, if the Nevada Board determines that one of our actual or intended activities or associations in a foreign gaming operation may violate one or more of the foregoing, we can be required to file an application with the Nevada Commission for a finding of suitability of such activity or association. If the Nevada Commission finds that the activity or association in the foreign gaming operation is unsuitable or prohibited, we will either be required to terminate the activity or association, or will be prohibited from undertaking the activity or association. Consequently, should the Nevada Commission find that our gaming activities or associations in Macao or certain other jurisdictions where we operate are unsuitable, we may be prohibited from undertaking our planned gaming activities or associations in those jurisdictions.
The gaming authorities in other jurisdictions where we operate or plan to operate, including in Macao and Singapore, exercise similar powers for purposes of assessing suitability in relation to our activities in other gaming jurisdictions where we do business.
We may not be able to monetize some of our real estate assets.
Part of our business strategy in Macao and Singapore relies upon our ability to profitably operate, sell and/or grant rights of use over certain of our real estate assets once developed, including retail malls and apart-hotels. Our ability to monetize these assets will be subject to market conditions, applicable legislation, the receipt of necessary government approvals and other factors. If we are unable to profitably operate and/or monetize these real estate assets, it may have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
VML may have financial and other obligations to foreign workers managed by its contractors under government labor quotas.
The Macao government has granted VML a quota to permit it to hire foreign workers. VML has effectively assigned the management of this quota to its contractors for the construction of our Cotai Strip projects. VML, however, remains ultimately liable for all employer obligations relating to these employees, including for payment of wages and taxes and compliance with labor and workers’ compensation laws. VML requires each contractor to whom it has assigned the management of part of its labor quota to indemnify VML for any costs or liabilities VML incurs as a result of such contractor’s failure to fulfill employer obligations. VML’s agreements with its contractors also contain provisions that permit it to retain some payments for up to one year after the contractors’ complete work on the projects. We cannot assure you that VML’s contractors will fulfill their obligations to employees hired under the labor quotas or to VML under the indemnification agreements, or that the amount of any indemnification payments received will be sufficient to pay for any obligations VML may owe to employees managed by contractors under VML’s quotas. Until we make final payments to our contractors, we have offset rights to collect amounts they may owe us, including amounts owed under the indemnities relating to employer obligations. After we have made the final payments, it may be more difficult for us to enforce any unpaid indemnity obligations.
30
The transportation infrastructure in Macao may need to be expanded to meet increased visitation in Macao.
Macao is in the process of expanding its transportation infrastructure to service the increased number of visitors to Macao. If the planned expansions of transportation facilities to and from Macao are delayed or not completed, and Macao’s transportation infrastructure is insufficient to meet the demands of an increased volume of visitors to Macao, the desirability of Macao as a business and leisure tourism destination, as well as the results of operations of our Macao properties, could be negatively impacted.
We are currently not required to pay corporate income taxes on our casino gaming operations in Macao. This tax exemption expires at the end of 2018. The agreement with the Macao government that provided for a fixed annual payment that is a substitution for a 12% tax otherwise due from VML’s shareholders on dividends distributed from our Macao gaming operations expired at the end of 2013.
We have had the benefit of a corporate tax exemption in Macao, which exempts us from paying the 12% corporate income tax on profits generated by the operation of casino games. This exemption does not apply to our non-gaming activities. We will continue to benefit from this tax exemption through the end of 2018. Additionally, we entered into an agreement with the Macao government in February 2011, effective through the end of 2013 that provides for an annual payment that is a substitution for a 12% tax otherwise due from VML shareholders on dividend distributions paid from VML gaming profits. During November 2013, VML requested an additional agreement with the Macao government through 2018 to correspond to the income tax exemption for gaming operations; however, there is no assurance that the agreement will be granted, which could have a significant impact on our tax obligation in Macao and a material adverse effect on our financial condition or cash flows.
Risks Associated with Our U.S. Operations
We face significant competition in Las Vegas, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. In addition, any significant downturn in the trade show and convention business could have a significant and adverse effect on our mid-week occupancy rates and business.
The hotel, resort and casino businesses in Las Vegas are highly competitive. We also compete, to some extent, with other hotel/casino facilities in Nevada and Atlantic City, as well as hotel/casinos and other resort facilities and vacation destinations elsewhere in the United States and around the world. In addition, various competitors on the Las Vegas Strip periodically expand and/or renovate their existing facilities. If demand for hotel rooms does not keep up with the increase in the number of hotel rooms, competitive pressures may cause reductions in average room rates.
We also compete with legalized gaming from casinos located on Native American tribal lands, including those located in California. While the competitive impact on our operations in Las Vegas from the continued growth of Native American gaming establishments in California remains uncertain, the proliferation of gaming in California and other areas located in the same region as our Las Vegas Operating Properties could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.
In addition, certain states have legalized, and others may legalize, casino gaming in specific areas, including metropolitan areas from which we traditionally attract customers. A number of states have permitted or are considering permitting gaming at “racinos” (combined race tracks and casinos), on Native American reservations and through expansion of state lotteries.
Certain states within the U.S. have also legalized, and others in the future may legalize, online gaming. There are a number of established, well capitalized companies producing and operating online gaming offerings that compete with us. Online gaming is a new and evolving industry and is potentially subject to significant future development, including legal and regulatory development.
The current global trend toward liberalization of gaming restrictions and resulting proliferation of gaming venues could result in a decrease in the number of visitors to our Las Vegas facilities by attracting customers close to home and away from Las Vegas, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Also, on December 23, 2011, the DOJ released an opinion on the application of the Wire Act to interstate transmission of wire communications, concluding that such communications that did not relate to a “sporting event or contest” fell outside the prohibition of the Wire Act. In concluding as such, the DOJ reversed earlier opinions that the Wire Act was not limited to such communications on sporting events or contests. Those states that permit these distribution channels may also expand the gaming offerings of their lotteries in a manner that could have an adverse effect on our business.
The Sands Expo Center provides recurring demand for mid-week room nights for business travelers who attend meetings, trade shows and conventions in Las Vegas. The Sands Expo Center presently competes with other large convention centers, including convention centers in Las Vegas and other cities. To the extent that these competitors are able to capture a substantially larger portion of the trade show and convention business, there could be a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
31
Certain beneficial owners of our voting securities may be required to file an application with, and be investigated by, the Nevada Gaming Authorities, and the Nevada Commission may restrict the ability of a beneficial owner to receive any benefit from our voting securities and may require the disposition of shares of our voting securities, if a beneficial owner is found to be unsuitable.
Any person who acquires beneficial ownership of more than 10% of our voting securities will be required to apply to the Nevada Commission for a finding of suitability within thirty days after the Chairman of the Nevada Board mails a written notice requiring the filing. Under certain circumstances, an “institutional investor” as defined under the regulations of the Nevada Commission, which acquires beneficial ownership of more than 10%, but not more than 25%, of our voting securities (subject to certain additional holdings as a result of certain debt restructurings or stock repurchase programs under the Nevada Act), may apply to the Nevada Commission for a waiver of such finding of suitability requirement if the institutional investor holds our voting securities only for investment purposes. In addition, any beneficial owner of our voting securities, regardless of the number of shares beneficially owned, may be required at the discretion of the Nevada Commission to file an application for a finding of suitability as such. In either case, a finding of suitability is comparable to licensing and the applicant must pay all costs of investigation incurred by the Nevada Gaming Authorities in conducting the investigation.
Any person who fails or refuses to apply for a finding of suitability or a license within thirty days after being ordered to do so by the Nevada Gaming Authorities may be found unsuitable. The same restrictions apply to a record owner if the record owner, after request, fails to identify the beneficial owner. Any stockholder found unsuitable who holds, directly or indirectly, any beneficial ownership of the common stock of a registered corporation beyond such period of time as may be prescribed by the Nevada Commission may be guilty of a criminal offense. We are subject to disciplinary action if, after we receive notice that a person is unsuitable to be a stockholder or to have any other relationship with us or a licensed subsidiary, we, or any of the licensed subsidiaries:
• | allow that person to exercise, directly or indirectly, any voting right conferred through securities held by that person; |
• | pay remuneration in any form to that person for services rendered or otherwise; or |
• | fail to pursue all lawful efforts to require such unsuitable person to relinquish his or her voting securities including, if necessary, purchasing them for cash at fair market value. |
For a more complete description of the Nevada gaming regulatory requirements applicable to beneficial owners of our voting securities, see “Item 1 — Business — Regulation and Licensing — State of Nevada.”
Certain beneficial owners of our voting securities may be required to file a license application with, and be investigated by, the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board, the Pennsylvania State Police and other agencies.
Any person who acquires beneficial ownership of 5% or more of our voting securities will be required to apply to the PaGCB for licensure, obtain licensure and remain licensed. Licensure requires, among other things, that the applicant establish by clear and convincing evidence the applicant’s good character, honesty and integrity. Additionally, any trust that holds 5% or more of our voting securities is required to be licensed by the PaGCB and each individual who is a grantor, trustee or beneficiary of the trust is also required to be licensed by the PaGCB. Under certain circumstances and under the regulations of the PaGCB, an “institutional investor” as defined under the regulations of the PaGCB, which acquires beneficial ownership of 5% or more, but less than 10%, of our voting securities, may not be required to be licensed by the PaGCB provided the PaGCB grants a waiver of the licensure requirement. In addition, any beneficial owner of our voting securities, regardless of the number of shares beneficially owned, may be required at the discretion of the PaGCB to file an application for licensure.
Furthermore, a person or a group of persons acting in concert who acquire(s) more than 20% of our securities, with the exception of the ownership interest of a person at the time of original licensure when the license fee was paid, would trigger a “change in control” (as defined under applicable law). Such a change in control could require us to re-apply for licensure by the PaGCB and incur a $50.0 million license fee.
In the event a security holder is required to be found qualified and is not found qualified, or fails to apply for qualification, such security holder may be required by the PaGCB to divest of the interest at a price not exceeding the cost of the interest.
For a more complete description of the Pennsylvania gaming regulatory requirements applicable to beneficial owners of our voting securities, see “Item 1 — Business — Regulation and Licensing — Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.”
32
If GGP (or any future owner of the Grand Canal Shoppes) breaches any of its material agreements with us or if we are unable to maintain an acceptable working relationship with GGP (or any future owner), there could be a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We have entered into agreements with GGP under which, among other things, GGP has agreed to operate the Grand Canal Shoppes subject to, and in accordance with, the cooperation agreement. Our agreements with GGP could be adversely affected in ways that could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows if we do not maintain an acceptable working relationship with GGP or its successors. For example, the cooperation agreement that governs the relationships between the Grand Canal Shoppes and The Palazzo and The Venetian Las Vegas requires that the owners cooperate in various ways and take various joint actions, which will be more difficult to accomplish, especially in a cost-effective manner, if the parties do not have an acceptable working relationship.
There could be similar material adverse consequences to us if GGP breaches any of its agreements with us, such as its agreement under the cooperation agreement to operate the Grand Canal Shoppes consistent with the standards of first-class restaurant and retail complexes and the overall Venetian theme in the section formerly referred to as The Grand Canal Shoppes, and its various obligations as our landlord under the leases described above. Although our agreements with GGP provide us with various remedies in the event of any breaches by GGP and include various dispute resolution procedures and mechanisms, these remedies, procedures and mechanisms may be inadequate to prevent a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows if breaches by GGP occur or if we do not maintain an acceptable working relationship with GGP.
ITEM 1B. — UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
ITEM 2. — PROPERTIES
We have received concessions from the Macao government to build on a six-acre land site for the Sands Macao and parcels 1, 2, 3 and 5 and 6 on the Cotai Strip, the sites on which The Venetian Macao (parcel 1), Four Seasons Macao (parcel 2) and Sands Cotai Central (parcels 5 and 6) are, and The Parisian Macao (parcel 3) will be, located. We do not own these land sites in Macao; however, the land concessions grant us exclusive use of the land. Land concessions in Macao generally have an initial term of 25 years with automatic extensions of 10 years thereafter in accordance with Macao law. As specified in the land concessions, we are required to pay premiums, which are either payable in a single lump sum upon acceptance of our land concessions by the Macao government or in seven semi-annual installments, as well as annual rent for the term of the land concession, which may be revised every five years by the Macao government. In October 2008, the Macao government amended our land concession to separate the retail and hotel portions of the Four Seasons Macao parcel and allowed us to subdivide the parcel into four separate components, consisting of retail, hotel/casino, Four Seasons Apartments and parking areas. In consideration for the amendment, we paid an additional land premium of approximately $17.8 million and will pay adjusted annual rent over the remaining term of the concession, which increased slightly due to the revised allocation of parcel use. See “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 5 — Leasehold Interests in Land, Net” for more information on our payment obligation under these land concessions.
Under our land concession for Sands Cotai Central, we are required to complete the development by May 2014 (48 months from the date the land concession became effective). The land concession for The Parisian Macao contains a similar requirement, which was extended by the Macao government in July 2012, that the development be completed by April 2016. We have applied for an extension from the Macao government to complete Sands Cotai Central, as we will be unable to meet the May 2014 deadline. Should we determine that we are unable to complete The Parisian Macao by April 2016, we would then also expect to apply for an extension from the Macao government. If we are unable to meet The Parisian Macao deadline and the deadlines for either development are not extended, we could lose our land concessions for Sands Cotai Central or The Parisian Macao, which would prohibit us from operating any facilities developed under the respective land concessions. As a result, we could record a charge for all or some portion of the $4.15 billion or $376.0 million in capitalized construction costs, as of December 31, 2013, related to Sands Cotai Central or The Parisian Macao, respectively.
Under the Development Agreement with the STB, we paid SGD 1.2 billion (approximately $946.1 million at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013) in premium payments for the 60-year lease of the land on which the Marina Bay Sands is located plus an additional SGD 105.6 million (approximately $83.3 million at exchange rates in effect on December 31, 2013) for various taxes and other fees.
We own an approximately 63-acre parcel of land on which our Las Vegas Operating Properties are located and an approximately 19-acre parcel of land located to the east of the 63-acre parcel. We own these parcels of land in fee simple, subject
33
to certain easements, encroachments and other non-monetary encumbrances. LVSLLC’s credit facility, subject to certain exceptions, is collateralized by a first priority security interest (subject to permitted liens) in substantially all of LVSLLC’s property.
The Sands Bethlehem resort is located on the site of the historic Bethlehem Steel Works in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, which is about 70 miles from midtown Manhattan, New York. In September 2008, our joint venture partner, Bethworks Now, LLC, contributed the land on which Sands Bethlehem is being developed to Sands Bethworks Gaming and Sands Bethworks Retail, a portion of which was contributed through a condominium form of ownership.
In March 2004, we entered into a long-term lease with a third party for the airspace over which a portion of The Shoppes at The Palazzo was constructed (the “Leased Airspace”). We acquired fee title from the same third party to the airspace above the Leased Airspace (the “Acquired Airspace”) in order to build the Las Vegas Condo Tower in January 2008. In February 2008, in connection with the sale of The Shoppes at The Palazzo, GGP acquired control of the Leased Airspace. We continue to retain fee title to the Acquired Airspace in order to resume building the Las Vegas Condo Tower when market conditions improve.
ITEM 3. — LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In addition to the matters described at “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 13 — Commitments and Contingencies — Litigation,” we are party to various legal matters and claims arising in the ordinary course of business. Management has made certain estimates for potential litigation costs based upon consultation with legal counsel. Actual results could differ from these estimates; however, in the opinion of management, such litigation and claims will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
ITEM 4. — MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not applicable.
34
PART II
ITEM 5. — MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
Market Information
The Company’s common stock trades on the NYSE under the symbol “LVS.” The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices for the common stock on the NYSE for the fiscal quarter indicated:
High | Low | ||||||
2012 | |||||||
First Quarter | $ | 59.85 | $ | 41.77 | |||
Second Quarter | $ | 62.09 | $ | 41.28 | |||
Third Quarter | $ | 47.59 | $ | 34.72 | |||
Fourth Quarter | $ | 48.10 | $ | 40.28 | |||
2013 | |||||||
First Quarter | $ | 56.83 | $ | 47.99 | |||
Second Quarter | $ | 60.54 | $ | 47.95 | |||
Third Quarter | $ | 67.35 | $ | 50.67 | |||
Fourth Quarter | $ | 79.25 | $ | 63.49 | |||
2014 | |||||||
First Quarter (through February 27, 2014) | $ | 85.86 | $ | 69.15 | |||
As of February 27, 2014, there were 812,566,265 shares of our common stock outstanding that were held by 457 stockholders of record.
Dividends
Our ability to declare and pay dividends on our common stock is subject to the requirements of Nevada law. In addition, we are a parent company with limited business operations of our own. Accordingly, our primary sources of cash are dividends and distributions with respect to our ownership interest in our subsidiaries that are derived from the earnings and cash flow generated by our operating properties.
Our subsidiaries’ long-term debt arrangements place restrictions on their ability to pay cash dividends to the Company. This may restrict our ability to pay cash dividends other than from cash on hand. See “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Restrictions on Distributions” and “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 8 — Long-Term Debt.”
Common Stock Dividends
On March 29, June 28, September 27 and December 31, 2013, we paid a dividend of $0.35 per common share as part of a regular cash dividend program. During the year ended December 31, 2013, we recorded $1.15 billion as a distribution against retained earnings (of which $604.2 million related to our Principal Stockholder’s family and the remaining $548.9 million related to all other stockholders).
On March 30, June 29, September 28 and December 28, 2012, we paid a dividend of $0.25 per common share as part of a regular cash dividend program. On December 18, 2012, we paid a special cash dividend of $2.75 per common share. During the year ended December 31, 2012, we recorded $3.09 billion as a distribution against retained earnings (of which $1.62 billion related to our Principal Stockholder’s family and the remaining $1.47 billion related to all other stockholders).
On January 28, 2014, our Board of Directors declared a quarterly dividend of $0.50 per common share (a total estimated to be approximately $409 million) to be paid on March 31, 2014, to shareholders of record on March 21, 2014. We expect this level of dividend to continue quarterly through the remainder of 2014. Our Board of Directors will continually assess the level and appropriateness of any cash dividends.
Preferred Stock Dividends
On February 15, May 16, August 15 and November 15, 2011, we paid a dividend of $2.50 per preferred share, totaling $75.3 million (of which $52.5 million was paid to our Principal Stockholder’s family).
35
As further described in “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 9 — Equity — Preferred Stock and Warrants — Redemption of Preferred Stock,” we redeemed all of the preferred shares outstanding on November 15, 2011.
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
There have not been any sales by the Company of equity securities in the last fiscal year that have not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933.
Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer
The following table provides information about share repurchases made by the Company of its common stock during the quarter ended December 31, 2013:
Period | Total Number of Shares Purchased | Weighted Average Price Paid per Share(1) | Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of a Publicly Announced Program | Approximate Dollar Value of Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Program (in thousands)(2) | ||||||||||
October 1, 2013 - October 31, 2013 | 1,052,928 | $ | 71.16 | 1,052,928 | $ | 1,578,899 | ||||||||
November 1, 2013 - November 30, 2013 | 1,059,298 | $ | 70.47 | 1,059,298 | $ | 1,504,246 | ||||||||
December 1, 2013 - December 31, 2013 | 978,454 | $ | 76.28 | 978,454 | $ | 1,429,609 | ||||||||
(1) | Calculated excluding commissions. |
(2) | On June 5, 2013, the Company announced a stock repurchase program pursuant to which the Company has been authorized to repurchase up to $2.0 billion of its outstanding common stock. As of December 31, 2013, approximately $1.43 billion of shares remained available for repurchase. The stock repurchase program will expire on June 5, 2015. All repurchases under the stock repurchase program are made from time to time at the Company’s discretion in accordance with applicable federal securities laws. All share repurchases of the Company’s common stock have been recorded as treasury shares. |
36
Performance Graph
The following performance graph compares the performance of our common stock with the performance of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index and the Dow Jones US Gambling Index, during the five years ended December 31, 2013. The graph plots the changes in value of an initial $100 investment over the indicated time period, assuming all dividends are reinvested. The stock price performance in this graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock price performance.
Cumulative Total Return | |||||||||||||||||||||||
12/31/2008 | 12/31/2009 | 12/31/2010 | 12/31/2011 | 12/31/2012 | 12/31/2013 | ||||||||||||||||||
Las Vegas Sands Corp. | $ | 100.00 | $ | 251.94 | $ | 774.87 | $ | 720.57 | $ | 844.54 | $ | 1,475.98 | |||||||||||
S&P 500 | $ | 100.00 | $ | 126.46 | $ | 145.51 | $ | 148.59 | $ | 172.37 | $ | 228.19 | |||||||||||
Dow Jones US Gambling Index | $ | 100.00 | $ | 155.72 | $ | 269.58 | $ | 250.58 | $ | 276.93 | $ | 475.61 | |||||||||||
The performance graph should not be deemed filed or incorporated by reference into any other Company filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent the Company specifically incorporates the performance graph by reference therein.
ITEM 6. — SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The following reflects selected historical financial data that should be read in conjunction with “Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations to be expected in the future.
37
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||
2013(1)(2)(3) | 2012(4)(5)(6) | 2011(7) | 2010(8) | 2009(9)(10) | |||||||||||||||
(In thousands, except per share data) | |||||||||||||||||||
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS DATA | |||||||||||||||||||
Gross revenues | $ | 14,494,436 | $ | 11,684,669 | $ | 9,862,334 | $ | 7,317,937 | $ | 4,929,444 | |||||||||
Less — promotional allowances | (724,551 | ) | (553,537 | ) | (451,589 | ) | (464,755 | ) | (366,339 | ) | |||||||||
Net revenues | 13,769,885 | 11,131,132 | 9,410,745 | 6,853,182 | 4,563,105 | ||||||||||||||
Operating expenses | 10,361,642 | 8,819,750 | 7,020,858 | 5,672,596 | 4,591,845 | ||||||||||||||
Operating income (loss) | 3,408,243 | 2,311,382 | 2,389,887 | 1,180,586 | (28,740 | ) | |||||||||||||
Interest expense, net | (254,874 | ) | (235,312 | ) | (268,555 | ) | (297,866 | ) | (310,748 | ) | |||||||||
Other income (expense) | 4,321 | 5,740 | (3,955 | ) | (8,260 | ) | (9,891 | ) | |||||||||||
Loss on modification or early retirement of debt | (14,178 | ) | (19,234 | ) | (22,554 | ) | (18,555 | ) | (23,248 | ) | |||||||||
Income (loss) before income taxes | 3,143,512 | 2,062,576 | 2,094,823 | 855,905 | (372,627 | ) | |||||||||||||
Income tax benefit (expense) | (188,836 | ) | (180,763 | ) | (211,704 | ) | (74,302 | ) | 3,884 | ||||||||||
Net income (loss) | 2,954,676 | 1,881,813 | 1,883,119 | 781,603 | (368,743 | ) | |||||||||||||
Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests | (648,679 | ) | (357,720 | ) | (322,996 | ) | (182,209 | ) | 14,264 | ||||||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to Las Vegas Sands Corp. | 2,305,997 | 1,524,093 | 1,560,123 | 599,394 | (354,479 | ) | |||||||||||||
Preferred stock dividends | — | — | (63,924 | ) | (92,807 | ) | (93,026 | ) | |||||||||||
Accretion to redemption value of preferred stock issued to Principal Stockholder’s family | — | — | (80,975 | ) | (92,545 | ) | (92,545 | ) | |||||||||||
Preferred stock inducement, repurchase and redemption premiums | — | — | (145,716 | ) | (6,579 | ) | — | ||||||||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders | $ | 2,305,997 | $ | 1,524,093 | $ | 1,269,508 | $ | 407,463 | $ | (540,050 | ) | ||||||||
Per share data: | |||||||||||||||||||
Basic earnings (loss) per share | $ | 2.80 | $ | 1.89 | $ | 1.74 | $ | 0.61 | $ | (0.82 | ) | ||||||||
Diluted earnings (loss) per share | $ | 2.79 | $ | 1.85 | $ | 1.56 | $ | 0.51 | $ | (0.82 | ) | ||||||||
Cash dividends declared per common share | $ | 1.40 | $ | 3.75 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | |||||||||
OTHER DATA | |||||||||||||||||||
Capital expenditures | $ | 898,111 | $ | 1,449,234 | $ | 1,508,493 | $ | 2,023,981 | $ | 2,092,896 | |||||||||
December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||
2013(2) | 2012(6) | 2011(7) | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | |||||||||||||||||||
BALANCE SHEET DATA | |||||||||||||||||||
Total assets | $ | 22,724,264 | $ | 22,163,652 | $ | 22,244,123 | $ | 21,044,308 | $ | 20,572,106 | |||||||||
Long-term debt | $ | 9,382,752 | $ | 10,132,265 | $ | 9,577,131 | $ | 9,373,755 | $ | 10,852,147 | |||||||||
Preferred stock issued to Principal Stockholder’s family | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 503,379 | $ | 410,834 | |||||||||
Total Las Vegas Sands Corp. stockholders’ equity | $ | 7,665,494 | $ | 7,061,842 | $ | 7,850,689 | $ | 6,662,991 | $ | 5,850,699 | |||||||||
_________________________
(1) | The second Sheraton tower of Sands Cotai Central opened in January 2013. |
(2) | On March 29, June 28, September 27 and December 31, 2013, we paid a dividend of $0.35 per common share as part of a regular cash dividend program. |
(3) | During the year ended December 31, 2013, we recorded a legal settlement expense of $47.4 million. |
(4) | The Conrad and Holiday Inn tower and the first Sheraton tower of Sands Cotai Central opened in April and September 2012, respectively. |
(5) | During the year ended December 31, 2012, we recorded an impairment loss of $143.7 million, consisting primarily of a $100.7 million write-off of capitalized construction costs related to our former Cotai Strip development (referred to as parcels 7 and 8) in Macao and a $42.9 million impairment due to the termination of the ZAiA show at The Venetian Macao. |
(6) | On March 30, June 29, September 28 and December 28, 2012, we paid a dividend of $0.25 per common share as part of a regular cash dividend program. Additionally, on December 18, 2012, we paid a special cash dividend of $2.75 per common share. |
38
(7) | During the year ended December 31, 2011, we repurchased, redeemed or induced holders to redeem all outstanding preferred stock, which resulted in a charge to retained earnings of $145.7 million and is also included in the calculation of net income attributable to common stockholders. |
(8) | Marina Bay Sands partially opened on April 27, 2010. |
(9) | Sands Bethlehem partially opened on May 22, 2009. |
(10) | During the year ended December 31, 2009, we recorded an impairment loss of $169.5 million, a legal settlement expense of $42.5 million and a valuation allowance against our U.S. deferred tax assets of $96.9 million. |
ITEM 7. — MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with, and is qualified in its entirety by, the audited consolidated financial statements, and the notes thereto and other financial information included in this Form 10-K. Certain statements in this “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” are forward-looking statements. See “— Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”
Operations
We view each of our casino properties as an operating segment. Our Macao operating segments consist of The Venetian Macao, Sands Cotai Central, Four Seasons Macao, Sands Macao and other ancillary operations that support these properties. Approximately 85.3% and 83.2% of the gross revenue at The Venetian Macao for years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, was derived from gaming activities, with the remainder derived from room, mall, food and beverage and other non-gaming sources. Approximately 85.7% and 86.6% of the gross revenue at Sands Cotai Central for the period ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, was derived from gaming activities, with the remainder derived primarily from room and food and beverage operations. Approximately 82.8% and 86.5% of the gross revenue at the Four Seasons Macao for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, was derived from gaming activities, with the remainder derived primarily from mall and room operations. Approximately 94.2% and 94.5% of the gross revenue at the Sands Macao for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, was derived from gaming activities, with the remainder derived primarily from food and beverage operations.
Our Singapore operating segment consists of the Marina Bay Sands. Approximately 74.6% and 74.4% of the gross revenue at the Marina Bay Sands for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, was derived from gaming activities, with the remainder derived from room, food and beverage, mall and other non-gaming sources.
Our operating segments in the U.S. consist of The Venetian Las Vegas, The Palazzo and Sands Bethlehem. The Venetian Las Vegas and The Palazzo operating segments are managed as a single integrated resort and have been aggregated into our Las Vegas Operating Properties, considering their similar economic characteristics, types of customers, types of services and products, the regulatory business environment of the operations within each segment and the Company’s organizational and management reporting structure. Approximately 63.8% and 65.2% of the gross revenue at our Las Vegas Operating Properties for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, was derived from room, food and beverage and other non-gaming sources, with the remainder derived from gaming activities. The percentage of non-gaming revenue reflects the integrated resort’s emphasis on the group convention and trade show business and the resulting high occupancy and room rates throughout the week, including during mid-week periods. Approximately 88.5% of the gross revenue at Sands Bethlehem for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, was derived from gaming activities, with the remainder derived primarily from food and beverage and other non-gaming sources.
39
Summary Financial Results
The following table summarizes our results of operations:
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||
2013 | Percent Change | 2012 | Percent Change | 2011 | |||||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | |||||||||||||||||
Net revenues | $ | 13,769,885 | 23.7 | % | $ | 11,131,132 | 18.3 | % | $ | 9,410,745 | |||||||
Operating expenses | 10,361,642 | 17.5 | % | 8,819,750 | 25.6 | % | 7,020,858 | ||||||||||
Operating income | 3,408,243 | 47.5 | % | 2,311,382 | (3.3 | )% | 2,389,887 | ||||||||||
Income before income taxes | 3,143,512 | 52.4 | % | 2,062,576 | (1.5 | )% | 2,094,823 | ||||||||||
Net income | 2,954,676 | 57.0 | % | 1,881,813 | (0.1 | )% | 1,883,119 | ||||||||||
Net income attributable to Las Vegas Sands Corp. | 2,305,997 | 51.3 | % | 1,524,093 | (2.3 | )% | 1,560,123 | ||||||||||
Percent of Net Revenues Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||
2013 | 2012 | 2011 | ||||||
Operating expenses | 75.2 | % | 79.2 | % | 74.6 | % | ||
Operating income | 24.8 | % | 20.8 | % | 25.4 | % | ||
Income before income taxes | 22.8 | % | 18.5 | % | 22.3 | % | ||
Net income | 21.5 | % | 16.9 | % | 20.0 | % | ||
Net income attributable to Las Vegas Sands Corp. | 16.7 | % | 13.7 | % | 16.6 | % | ||
Our historical financial results will not be indicative of our future results as we continue to develop and open new properties, including The Parisian Macao and the remaining phase of Sands Cotai Central.
Key Operating Revenue Measurements
Operating revenues at The Venetian Macao, Sands Cotai Central, Four Seasons Macao, Marina Bay Sands and our Las Vegas Operating Properties are dependent upon the volume of customers who stay at the hotel, which affects the price that can be charged for hotel rooms and our gaming volume. Operating revenues at Sands Macao and Sands Bethlehem are principally driven by casino customers who visit the properties on a daily basis.
The following are the key measurements we use to evaluate operating revenues:
Casino revenue measurements for Macao and Singapore: Macao and Singapore table games are segregated into two groups, consistent with the Macao and Singapore markets’ convention: Rolling Chip play (all VIP players) and Non-Rolling Chip play (mostly non-VIP players). The volume measurement for Rolling Chip play is non-negotiable gaming chips wagered and lost. The volume measurement for Non-Rolling Chip play is table games drop (“drop”), which is the sum of markers issued (credit instruments) less markers paid at the table, plus cash deposited in the table drop box. Rolling Chip and Non-Rolling Chip volume measurements are not comparable as the amounts wagered and lost are substantially higher than the amounts dropped. Slot handle (“handle”), also a volume measurement, is the gross amount wagered for the period cited.
We view Rolling Chip win as a percentage of Rolling Chip volume, Non-Rolling Chip win as a percentage of drop and slot hold as a percentage of slot handle. Win or hold percentage represents the percentage of Rolling Chip volume, Non-Rolling Chip drop or slot handle that is won by the casino and recorded as casino revenue. Based upon our mix of table games, our Rolling Chip win percentage (calculated before discounts and commissions) is expected to be 2.7% to 3.0%. Generally, slot machine play is conducted on a cash basis. In Macao and Singapore, 27.9% and 29.3%, respectively, of our table games play was conducted on a credit basis for the year ended December 31, 2013.
Casino revenue measurements for the U.S.: The volume measurements in the U.S. are table games drop and slot handle, as previously described. We view table games win as a percentage of drop and slot hold as a percentage of handle. Based upon our mix of table games, our table games are expected to produce a win percentage (calculated before discounts) of 20% to 22% at our Las Vegas Operating Properties and 14% to 16% at Sands Bethlehem. As in Macao and Singapore, slot machine play is generally conducted on a cash basis. Approximately 74.2% of our table games play at our Las Vegas Operating Properties, for the year ended
40
December 31, 2013, was conducted on a credit basis, while our table games play in Pennsylvania is primarily conducted on a cash basis.
Hotel revenue measurements: Performance indicators used are occupancy rate, which is the average percentage of available hotel rooms occupied during a period, and average daily room rate, which is the average price of occupied rooms per day. The calculations of the hotel occupancy and average daily room rates include the impact of rooms provided on a complimentary basis. Complimentary room rates are determined based on an analysis of retail (or cash) room rates by customer segment and type of room product to ensure the complimentary room rates are consistent with retail rates. Revenue per available room represents a summary of hotel average daily room rates and occupancy. Because not all available rooms are occupied, average daily room rates are normally higher than revenue per available room. Reserved rooms where the guests do not show up for their stay and lose their deposit may be re-sold to walk-in guests. These rooms are considered to be occupied twice for statistical purposes due to obtaining the original deposit and the walk-in guest revenue. In cases where a significant number of rooms are resold, occupancy rates may be in excess of 100% and revenue per available room may be higher than the average daily room rate.
Mall revenue measurements: Occupancy, base rent per square foot and tenant sales per square foot are used as performance indicators. Occupancy represents gross leasable occupied area (“GLOA”) divided by gross leasable area (“GLA”) at the end of the reporting period. GLOA is the sum of: (1) tenant occupied space under lease and (2) tenants no longer occupying space, but paying rent. GLA does not include space that is currently under development or not on the market for lease. Base rent per square foot is the weighted average base, or minimum, rent charge in effect at the end of the reporting period for all tenants that would qualify to be included in occupancy. Tenant sales per square foot is the sum of reported comparable sales for the trailing 12 months divided by the comparable square footage for the same period. Only tenants that have been open for a minimum of 12 months are included in the tenant sales per square foot calculation.
Year Ended December 31, 2013 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2012
Operating Revenues
Our net revenues consisted of the following:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
2013 | 2012 | Percent Change | ||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | ||||||||||
Casino | $ | 11,386,917 | $ | 9,008,158 | 26.4 | % | ||||
Rooms | 1,380,681 | 1,154,024 | 19.6 | % | ||||||
Food and beverage | 730,259 | 628,528 | 16.2 | % | ||||||
Mall | 481,400 | 396,927 | 21.3 | % | ||||||
Convention, retail and other | 515,179 | 497,032 | 3.7 | % | ||||||
14,494,436 | 11,684,669 | 24.0 | % | |||||||
Less — promotional allowances | (724,551 | ) | (553,537 | ) | (30.9 | )% | ||||
Total net revenues | $ | 13,769,885 | $ | 11,131,132 | 23.7 | % | ||||
Consolidated net revenues were $13.77 billion for the year ended December 31, 2013, an increase of $2.64 billion compared to $11.13 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase in net revenues was driven by an increase of $1.65 billion at Sands Cotai Central due to its progressive opening that commenced in April 2012, and an increase of $813.3 million at The Venetian Macao, primarily due to increased casino revenues.
41
Casino revenues increased $2.38 billion compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase is primarily attributable to an increase of $1.47 billion at Sands Cotai Central, due to its progressive opening, and a $786.5 million increase at The Venetian Macao, driven by an increase in Non-Rolling Chip drop. The following table summarizes the results of our casino activity:
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
2013 | 2012 | Change | |||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | |||||||||||
Macao Operations: | |||||||||||
The Venetian Macao | |||||||||||
Total casino revenues | $ | 3,415,327 | $ | 2,628,868 | 29.9 | % | |||||
Non-Rolling Chip drop | $ | 7,201,033 | $ | 4,482,318 | 60.7 | % | |||||
Non-Rolling Chip win percentage | 26.8 | % | 0.3 | % | 26.5 | pts | |||||
Rolling Chip volume | $ | 54,420,394 | $ | 48,825,435 | 11.46 | % | |||||
Rolling Chip win percentage | 3.32 | % | 3.05 | % | 0.27 | pts | |||||
Slot handle | $ | 4,781,911 | $ | 4,946,114 | (3.3 | ) | % | ||||
Slot hold percentage | 5.5 | % | 5.3 | % | 0.2 | pts | |||||
Sands Cotai Central | |||||||||||
Total casino revenues | $ | 2,432,952 | $ | 960,286 | 153.4 | % | |||||
Non-Rolling Chip drop | $ | 5,373,622 | $ | 1,863,923 | 188.3 | % | |||||
Non-Rolling Chip win percentage | 22.5 | % | 20.8 | % | 1.7 | pts | |||||
Rolling Chip volume | $ | 61,073,743 | $ | 26,046,168 | 134.5 | % | |||||
Rolling Chip win percentage | 2.66 | % | 2.83 | % | (0.17 | ) | pts | ||||
Slot handle | $ | 5,686,446 | $ | 2,939,426 | 93.5 | % | |||||
Slot hold percentage | 3.9 | % | 3.5 | % | 0.4 | pts | |||||
Four Seasons Macao | |||||||||||
Total casino revenues | $ | 922,743 | $ | 977,616 | (5.6 | ) | % | ||||
Non-Rolling Chip drop | $ | 899,627 | $ | 433,264 | 107.6 | % | |||||
Non-Rolling Chip win percentage | 27.5 | % | 40.8 | % | (13.3 | ) | pts | ||||
Rolling Chip volume | $ | 39,280,485 | $ | 41,604,458 | (5.6 | ) | % | ||||
Rolling Chip win percentage | 2.46 | % | 2.79 | % | (0.33 | ) | pts | ||||
Slot handle | $ | 900,836 | $ | 962,540 | (6.4 | ) | % | ||||
Slot hold percentage | 5.5 | % | 5.3 | % | 0.2 | pts | |||||
Sands Macao | |||||||||||
Total casino revenues | $ | 1,206,462 | $ | 1,219,400 | (1.1 | ) | % | ||||
Non-Rolling Chip drop | $ | 3,488,891 | $ | 2,872,468 | 21.5 | % | |||||
Non-Rolling Chip win percentage | 19.8 | % | 21.0 | % | (1.2 | ) | pts | ||||
Rolling Chip volume | $ | 23,242,588 | $ | 25,184,583 | (7.7 | ) | % | ||||
Rolling Chip win percentage | 2.77 | % | 3.14 | % | (0.37 | ) | pts | ||||
Slot handle | $ | 2,699,247 | $ | 2,476,673 | 9.0 | % | |||||
Slot hold percentage | 3.9 | % | 4.3 | % | (0.4 | ) | pts | ||||
Singapore Operations: | |||||||||||
Marina Bay Sands | |||||||||||
Total casino revenues | $ | 2,363,140 | $ | 2,271,869 | 4.0 | % | |||||
Non-Rolling Chip drop | $ | 4,650,105 | $ | 4,612,227 | 0.8 | % | |||||
Non-Rolling Chip win percentage | 23.7 | % | 23.1 | % | 0.6 | pts | |||||
Rolling Chip volume | $ | 60,095,322 | $ | 52,568,238 | 14.3 | % | |||||
Rolling Chip win percentage | 2.46 | % | 2.47 | % | (0.01 | ) | pts | ||||
Slot handle | $ | 11,118,021 | $ | 10,793,348 | 3.0 | % | |||||
Slot hold percentage | 5.1 | % | 5.3 | % | (0.2 | ) | pts | ||||
U.S. Operations: | |||||||||||
Las Vegas Operating Properties | |||||||||||
Total casino revenues | $ | 584,372 | $ | 512,647 | 14.0 | % | |||||
Table games drop | $ | 2,251,734 | $ | 2,084,490 | 8.0 | % | |||||
Table games win percentage | 23.3 | % | 21.1 | % | 2.2 | pts | |||||
Slot handle | $ | 2,024,147 | $ | 1,944,618 | 4.1 | % | |||||
Slot hold percentage | 8.7 | % | 8.7 | % | — | pts | |||||
Sands Bethlehem | |||||||||||
Total casino revenues | $ | 461,921 | $ | 437,472 | 5.6 | % | |||||
Table games drop | $ | 1,024,021 | $ | 885,359 | 15.7 | % | |||||
Table games win percentage | 16.1 | % | 15.3 | % | 0.8 | pts | |||||
Slot handle | $ | 4,129,171 | $ | 4,029,326 | 2.5 | % | |||||
Slot hold percentage | 7.0 | % | 7.2 | % | (0.2 | ) | pts | ||||
42
In our experience, average win percentages remain steady when measured over extended periods of time, but can vary considerably within shorter time periods as a result of the statistical variances that are associated with games of chance in which large amounts are wagered.
Room revenues increased $226.7 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase is attributable to an increase of $153.0 million at Sands Cotai Central, due to its progressive opening, an increase of $34.8 million at Marina Bay Sands, driven by an increase in average daily room rates, and an increase of $26.3 million at our Las Vegas Operating Properties, driven by an increase in occupancy. The suites at Sands Macao are primarily provided to casino patrons on a complimentary basis. The following table summarizes the results of our room activity:
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
2013 | 2012 | Change | |||||||||
(Room revenues in thousands) | |||||||||||
Macao Operations: | |||||||||||
The Venetian Macao | |||||||||||
Total room revenues | $ | 230,822 | $ | 224,177 | 3.0 | % | |||||
Occupancy rate | 91.3 | % | 91.9 | % | (0.6 | ) | pts | ||||
Average daily room rate | $ | 243 | $ | 237 | 2.5 | % | |||||
Revenue per available room | $ | 222 | $ | 218 | 1.8 | % | |||||
Sands Cotai Central | |||||||||||
Total room revenues | $ | 236,819 | $ | 83,833 | 182.5 | % | |||||
Occupancy rate | 78.5 | % | 83.4 | % | (4.9 | ) | pts | ||||
Average daily room rate | $ | 155 | $ | 155 | — | % | |||||
Revenue per available room | $ | 121 | $ | 129 | (6.2 | ) | % | ||||
Four Seasons Macao | |||||||||||
Total room revenues | $ | 43,626 | $ | 39,813 | 9.6 | % | |||||
Occupancy rate | 85.3 | % | 80.1 | % | 5.2 | pts | |||||
Average daily room rate | $ | 373 | $ | 362 | 3.0 | % | |||||
Revenue per available room | $ | 318 | $ | 290 | 9.7 | % | |||||
Sands Macao | |||||||||||
Total room revenues | $ | 25,150 | $ | 24,441 | 2.9 | % | |||||
Occupancy rate | 96.1 | % | 95.3 | % | 0.8 | pts | |||||
Average daily room rate | $ | 252 | $ | 245 | 2.9 | % | |||||
Revenue per available room | $ | 242 | $ | 234 | 3.4 | % | |||||
Singapore Operations: | |||||||||||
Marina Bay Sands | |||||||||||
Total room revenues | $ | 360,264 | $ | 325,470 | 10.7 | % | |||||
Occupancy rate | 98.6 | % | 98.9 | % | (0.3 | ) | pts | ||||
Average daily room rate | $ | 396 | $ | 355 | 11.5 | % | |||||
Revenue per available room | $ | 390 | $ | 351 | 11.1 | % | |||||
U.S. Operations: | |||||||||||
Las Vegas Operating Properties | |||||||||||
Total room revenues | $ | 472,518 | $ | 446,241 | 5.9 | % | |||||
Occupancy rate | 89.6 | % | 86.1 | % | 3.5 | pts | |||||
Average daily room rate | $ | 205 | $ | 203 | 1.0 | % | |||||
Revenue per available room | $ | 184 | $ | 175 | 5.1 | % | |||||
Sands Bethlehem | |||||||||||
Total room revenues | $ | 11,482 | $ | 10,049 | 14.3 | % | |||||
Occupancy rate | 73.6 | % | 65.1 | % | 8.5 | pts | |||||
Average daily room rate | $ | 142 | $ | 140 | 1.4 | % | |||||
Revenue per available room | $ | 104 | $ | 91 | 14.3 | % | |||||
Food and beverage revenues increased $101.7 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase was primarily attributable to a $62.3 million increase at Sands Cotai Central, due to its progressive opening, as well as a $26.3 million increase at our Las Vegas Operating Properties, driven by an increase in banquet operations.
43
Mall revenues increased $84.5 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase was primarily due to an $85.3 million increase at our Macao operating properties, driven by an increase in base rents as well as the progressive opening of Sands Cotai Central. For further information related to the financial performance of our malls, see"— Additional Information Regarding our Retail Mall Operations." The following table summarizes the results of our mall activity:
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
2013 | 2012 | Change | |||||||||
(Mall revenues in thousands) | |||||||||||
Macao Operations: | |||||||||||
Shoppes at Venetian | |||||||||||
Total mall revenues | $ | 169,151 | $ | 139,522 | 21.2 | % | |||||
Mall gross leasable area (in square feet) | 755,452 | 805,976 | (6.3 | ) | % | ||||||
Occupancy | 95.5 | % | 92.3 | % | 3.2 | pts | |||||
Base rent per square foot | $ | 179 | $ | 147 | 21.8 | % | |||||
Tenant sales per square foot | $ | 1,522 | $ | 1,214 | 25.4 | % | |||||
Shoppes at Cotai Central(1) | |||||||||||
Total mall revenues | $ | 42,116 | $ | 16,074 | 162.0 | % | |||||
Mall gross leasable area (in square feet) | 210,143 | 210,143 | — | % | |||||||
Occupancy | 100.0 | % | 100.0 | % | — | pts | |||||
Base rent per square foot | $ | 120 | $ | 112 | 7.1 | % | |||||
Tenant sales per square foot | $ | 1,277 | $ | — | — | % | |||||
Shoppes at Four Seasons(2) | |||||||||||
Total mall revenues | $ | 113,121 | $ | 83,477 | 35.5 | % | |||||
Mall gross leasable area (in square feet) | 241,895 | 239,718 | 0.9 | % | |||||||
Occupancy | 87.7 | % | 92.1 | % | (4.4 | ) | pts | ||||
Base rent per square foot | $ | 348 | $ | 150 | 132.0 | % | |||||
Tenant sales per square foot | $ | 4,726 | $ | 4,356 | 8.5 | % | |||||
Singapore Operations: | |||||||||||
The Shoppes at Marina Bay Sands(3) | |||||||||||
Total mall revenues | $ | 153,840 | $ | 156,319 | (1.6 | ) | % | ||||
Mall gross leasable area (in square feet) | 642,241 | 637,980 | 0.7 | % | |||||||
Occupancy | 90.7 | % | 96.0 | % | (5.3 | ) | pts | ||||
Base rent per square foot | $ | 217 | $ | 215 | 0.9 | % | |||||
Tenant sales per square foot | $ | 1,528 | $ | 1,393 | 9.7 | % | |||||
U.S. Operations: | |||||||||||
The Outlets at Sands Bethlehem(4) | |||||||||||
Total mall revenues | $ | 3,172 | $ | 1,535 | 106.6 | % | |||||
Mall gross leasable area (in square feet) | 134,830 | 129,216 | 4.3 | % | |||||||
Occupancy | 93.6 | % | 71.3 | % | 22.3 | pts | |||||
Base rent per square foot | $ | 23 | $ | — | — | % | |||||
Tenant sales per square foot | $ | 431 | $ | — | — | % | |||||
_________________________
(1) | The first and second phases of the Shoppes at Cotai Central opened in April and September 2012, respectively. |
(2) | Beginning in August 2013, a significant portion of the rent paid by the duty-free luxury shops was converted from overage rent to base rent in accordance with the respective lease agreements, resulting in an increase in base rent per square foot. |
(3) | The decrease in occupancy at The Shoppes at Marina Bay Sands is due to an ongoing repositioning of the mall that will bring in several new and expand many key luxury tenants. Approximately 37,000 square feet of gross leasable area is currently undergoing new fit-out or development and is not considered occupied as of December 31, 2013. |
(4) | A progressive opening of The Outlets at Sands Bethlehem began in November 2011. Base rent per square foot and tenant sales per square foot for the year ended December 31, 2012, are excluded from the table as certain co-tenancy requirements were not met during 2012 as the mall was only partially occupied. |
44
Operating Expenses
The breakdown of operating expenses is as follows:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
2013 | 2012 | Percent Change | ||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | ||||||||||
Casino | $ | 6,483,718 | $ | 5,128,036 | 26.4 | % | ||||
Rooms | 271,942 | 237,303 | 14.6 | % | ||||||
Food and beverage | 369,570 | 331,210 | 11.6 | % | ||||||
Mall | 73,358 | 68,763 | 6.7 | % | ||||||
Convention, retail and other | 317,869 | 304,263 | 4.5 | % | ||||||
Provision for doubtful accounts | 237,786 | 239,332 | (0.6 | )% | ||||||
General and administrative | 1,329,740 | 1,061,935 | 25.2 | % | ||||||
Corporate | 189,535 | 207,030 | (8.5 | )% | ||||||
Pre-opening | 13,339 | 143,795 | (90.7 | )% | ||||||
Development | 15,809 | 19,958 | (20.8 | )% | ||||||
Depreciation and amortization | 1,007,468 | 892,046 | 12.9 | % | ||||||
Amortization of leasehold interests in land | 40,352 | 40,165 | 0.5 | % | ||||||
Impairment loss | — | 143,674 | (100.0 | )% | ||||||
Loss on disposal of assets | 11,156 | 2,240 | 398.0 | % | ||||||
Total operating expenses | $ | 10,361,642 | $ | 8,819,750 | 17.5 | % | ||||
Operating expenses were $10.36 billion for the year ended December 31, 2013, an increase of $1.54 billion compared to $8.82 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase in operating expenses was primarily attributable to the progressive opening of Sands Cotai Central that commenced in April 2012.
Casino expenses increased $1.36 billion compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. Of the increase, $986.8 million was attributable to the 39% gross win tax on increased casino revenue across all of our Macao properties, as well as $211.5 million of additional casino expenses attributable to Sands Cotai Central.
Rooms and food and beverage expenses increased $34.6 million and $38.4 million, respectively, compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. These increases were driven by the associated increases in the related revenues described above.
The provision for doubtful accounts was $237.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to $239.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2012. The amount of this provision can vary over short periods of time because of factors specific to the customers who owe us money from gaming activities at any given time. We believe that the amount of our provision for doubtful accounts in the future will depend upon the state of the economy, our credit standards, our risk assessments and the judgment of our employees responsible for granting credit.
General and administrative expenses increased $267.8 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase was primarily attributable to a $122.2 million increase at Sands Cotai Central, a $72.7 million increase at our Las Vegas Operating Properties, driven by a $47.4 million legal settlement expense (see “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 13 — Commitments and Contingencies — Litigation”), as well as a $63.9 million increase at The Venetian Macao, driven by an increase in advertising expense.
Corporate expense decreased $17.5 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012, driven by a decrease in legal fees.
Pre-opening expenses were $13.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to $143.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2012. Pre-opening expense represents personnel and other costs incurred prior to the opening of new ventures, which are expensed as incurred. Pre-opening expenses for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, were primarily related to activities at Sands Cotai Central. Development expenses include the costs associated with the Company’s evaluation and pursuit of new business opportunities, which are also expensed as incurred.
Depreciation and amortization expense increased $115.4 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase was primarily attributable to a $146.6 million increase at Sands Cotai Central, partially offset by decreases at our Las Vegas Operating Properties and other Macao operating properties due to certain assets being fully depreciated.
The impairment loss of $143.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, consisted primarily of a $100.7 million write-off of capitalized construction costs related to our former Cotai Strip development (referred to as parcels 7 and 8) in Macao and a $42.9 million impairment due to the termination of the ZAiA show at The Venetian Macao.
45
Adjusted Property EBITDA
Adjusted property EBITDA is used by management as the primary measure of the operating performance of our segments. Adjusted property EBITDA is net income before royalty fees, stock-based compensation expense, legal settlement expense, corporate expense, pre-opening expense, development expense, depreciation and amortization, amortization of leasehold interests in land, impairment loss, loss on disposal of assets, interest, other income (expense), loss on modification or early retirement of debt and income taxes. The following table summarizes information related to our segments (see “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 17 — Segment Information” for discussion of our operating segments and a reconciliation of adjusted property EBITDA to net income):
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||
2013 | 2012 | Percent Change | ||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | ||||||||||
Macao: | ||||||||||
The Venetian Macao | $ | 1,499,937 | $ | 1,143,245 | 31.2 | % | ||||
Sands Cotai Central | 739,723 | 213,476 | 246.5 | % | ||||||
Four Seasons Macao | 305,040 | 288,170 | 5.9 | % | ||||||
Sands Macao | 362,858 | 350,639 | 3.5 | % | ||||||
Other Asia | (3,855 | ) | (15,950 | ) | 75.8 | % | ||||
2,903,703 | 1,979,580 | 46.7 | % | |||||||
Marina Bay Sands | 1,384,576 | 1,366,245 | 1.3 | % | ||||||
United States: | ||||||||||
Las Vegas Operating Properties | 351,739 | 331,182 | 6.2 | % | ||||||
Sands Bethlehem | 123,337 | 114,055 | 8.1 | % | ||||||
475,076 | 445,237 | 6.7 | % | |||||||
Total adjusted property EBITDA | $ | 4,763,355 | $ | 3,791,062 | 25.6 | % | ||||
Adjusted property EBITDA at our Macao operations increased $924.1 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase was primarily attributable to an increase of $526.2 million at Sands Cotai Central, due to its progressive opening that commenced in April 2012, as well as an increase of $356.7 million at The Venetian Macao, driven by an increase in casino activity.
Adjusted property EBITDA at Marina Bay Sands increased $18.3 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase was primarily attributable to a $82.2 million increase in net revenues driven by an increase in casino revenues, partially offset by increases in the associated operating expenses.
Adjusted property EBITDA at our Las Vegas Operating Properties increased $20.6 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. Net revenues increased $123.2 million (excluding intersegment royalty revenue), but was offset by increases in the associated operating expenses.
Adjusted property EBITDA at Sands Bethlehem increased $9.3 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase was primarily attributable to a $26.3 million increase in net revenues, driven by an increase in casino activity, partially offset by increases in the associated operating expenses.
Interest Expense
The following table summarizes information related to interest expense on long-term debt:
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||
2013 | 2012 | ||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | |||||||
Interest cost (which includes the amortization of deferred financing costs and original issue discounts) | $ | 260,704 | $ | 292,790 | |||
Add — imputed interest on deferred proceeds from sale of The Shoppes at The Palazzo | 15,168 | 15,123 | |||||
Less — capitalized interest | (4,661 | ) | (49,349 | ) | |||
Interest expense, net | $ | 271,211 | $ | 258,564 | |||
Cash paid for interest | $ | 212,903 | $ | 258,440 | |||
Weighted average total debt balance | $ | 9,788,457 | $ | 9,772,201 | |||
Weighted average interest rate | 2.7 | % | 3.0 | % | |||
46
Interest cost decreased $32.1 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012, resulting primarily from a decrease in our weighted average interest rate. Capitalized interest decreased $44.7 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2012, primarily due to the completion of the Conrad and Holiday Inn tower and the first and second Sheraton towers of Sands Cotai Central in April and September 2012 and January 2013, respectively.
Other Factors Effecting Earnings
Other income was $4.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to $5.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2012. The income during the year ended December 31, 2013, was primarily attributable to foreign exchange gains.
The loss on modification or early retirement of debt of $14.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, related to the the refinancing of our U.S. credit facility in December 2013 (see “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data — Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — Note 8 — Long-Term Debt — Senior Secured Credit Facility”).
Our effective income tax rate was 6.0% for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to 8.8% for the year ended December 31, 2012. The effective income tax rate for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, reflects a 17% statutory tax rate on our Singapore operations and a zero percent tax rate on profits generated by our Macao gaming operations due to our income tax exemption in Macao, which was extended in October 2013 through the end of 2018. We have recorded a valuation allowance related to deferred tax assets generated by operations in the U.S. and certain foreign jurisdictions; however, to the extent that the financial results of these operations improve and it becomes “more-likely-than-not” that these deferred tax assets or a portion thereof are realizable, we will reduce the valuation allowances in the period such determination is made.
The net income attributable to our noncontrolling interests was $648.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to $357.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2012. These amounts are primarily related to the noncontrolling interest of SCL.
Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2011
Operating Revenues
Our net revenues consisted of the following:
| < | ||||||||||