Competition and Coopetition for City of Amsterdam
Update: Story also in Mohawk Valley Compass : (OTB seeks county support for East Greenbush casino site)
Here’s an interesting story from the Recorder (Rensselaer casino interests seeking support from Montgomery County) :
Three weeks after losing a bid for a proposed casino off Thruway Exit 27, the Montgomery County Legislature may consider putting its support behind another casino project being proposed in the capital region.
What the legislators are considering is to support Rensselaer COunty’s casino bid in the hope that it will give Rensselaer’s proposal some lift politically and economically.
After the loss of the casino for Montgomery County in terms of job creation, I thought it might be more of a positive for Amsterdam if the bid were awarded to Schenectady with my simplistic reasoning being that Schenectady was closer to Amsterdam and thereby make Amsterdam viable for commuting for either current or future residents.
I see some positives and negatives with endorsing one of the competitive casinos. On the plus side, we might see some revenue and we might see broader opportunities to collaborate with other locales. On the negative side, we are possibly alienating other players who may make sense to collaborate with on a very visible project. For example, if we endorse Rensselaer , Schenectady will feel less likely to collaborate in the future especially given the high visibility of the casino.
Still, it’s an interesting area to explore of when and how it makes sense to cooperate with other groups who are also our competitors and especially on how to generate revenues versus the usual pablum around “sharing services” and “consolidation” in the delusion of cutting costs as the only answer.