Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: How did the rise of casinos in Maryland and New York contribute to the decline of Atlantic City's casino industry?
Executive Summary
The rise of casinos in New York and Maryland contributed to Atlantic City’s decline primarily by expanding proximate options for bettors and leisure travelers, fragmenting a once-regional monopoly and enabling operators to compete on price, loyalty and convenience, while online gaming growth amplified those effects [1] [2] [3]. However, the impact is uneven: constraints on access, political pushback, operator strategy shifts, and recent license withdrawals mean New York’s threat has been both significant and overstated at different times [4] [5] [6].
1. How Nearby Markets Broke Atlantic City’s Regional Grip
New casino projects in New York and Maryland eroded Atlantic City’s dominance by creating alternative destinations closer to dense population centers, reducing travel time and cost for gamblers who once had few regional choices. Developers in New York pursued large-scale investments and national brands, promising amenities and cross-marketing synergies that appeal to the same customer segments Atlantic City relied upon [2] [1]. The cumulative effect was a diffusion of Atlantic City’s day-trip and weekend market share, particularly among northern New Jersey and metropolitan New York patrons who previously supplied large volumes of visitation and spend [1] [3].
2. Shared Operators, Shared Customers, and Loyalty Program Tug-of-War
Major casino operators increasingly hold footprints in multiple states, enabling integrated loyalty programs and cross-promotions that can route customers to the most convenient property, undercutting Atlantic City’s ability to retain regional customers. Reports note overlapping operator strategies and integrated marketing as a clear mechanism for customer diversion, where the company incentives favor nearer properties or newer resorts in New York and Maryland [1] [2]. This dynamic converted competitor expansion into a corporate optimization problem: operators allocate demand across assets to maximize margins, not to prop up Atlantic City revenues.
3. The Online Gaming Surge: An Accelerant, Not the Sole Cause
Atlantic City’s challenges are compounded by the rapid growth of online gaming and sports betting, which reduces the need for physical visits and channels spend to platforms accessible statewide or across state lines. State-reported data show internet gaming win rising sharply even as in-person metrics fluctuate, meaning digital channels amplify the reach of neighboring markets and national operators without requiring travel [7] [3]. This technological shift changed consumer behavior and lowered barriers for Maryland and New York operators to capture New Jersey customers remotely, pressuring brick-and-mortar revenue.
4. Access Realities and the Limits of New York’s Threat
Not all analyses conclude an existential crisis for Atlantic City; geographic and logistical frictions matter. Some reporting highlights that ease of access to New York gaming parlors for northern New Jersey residents is not uniform, giving Atlantic City time and tactical levers to respond [5]. Political and community resistance to casino projects in New York also created delays and constraints, muting short-term impacts and leaving Atlantic City opportunities to reinforce its offering and loyalty relationships while the New York market develops [4] [5].
5. License Approvals, Withdrawals, and the Shifting Competitive Landscape
Regulatory outcomes in New York have been decisive in shaping the competitive threat: unanimous approvals for major operators suggested an incoming wave of competition, yet later strategic withdrawals show market recalibration. The CAC’s approvals for MGM and Genting indicated material near-term capacity to draw visitors away, but MGM’s later withdrawal reflected altered economic assumptions that may blunt Atlantic City’s losses, at least relative to worst-case forecasts [2] [6]. These regulatory swings demonstrate that Atlantic City’s fortunes hinge on both new supply and operator decisions.
6. Financial Results Tell a Mixed Story of Decline and Resilience
State gaming reports reveal mixed metrics: some months show record highs for certain categories like internet gaming, while others demonstrate declines in net gambling revenue and operating profit for Atlantic City. Headlines citing drops in visitation and substantial EBITDA declines exist alongside data pointing to record online gains, indicating a sector in transition rather than uniform collapse [7] [3]. This duality underscores that competition from Maryland and New York interacts with secular digital trends and local operational performance to determine outcomes.
7. Strategic Takeaways and What Was Often Omitted
Analyses emphasize competition and shared customer bases but sometimes underplay Atlantic City’s strategic responses—marketing, renovation, and product differentiation—and the timeline for New York and Maryland projects to reach full scale. Political resistance, construction timelines, and operator redeployments create windows for Atlantic City to adapt; policy and corporate strategy thus matter as much as raw new-capacity figures [4] [5] [6]. The big picture: neighboring-state casinos accelerated Atlantic City’s decline by fragmenting demand and leveraging digital channels, but the magnitude and permanence of that decline depend on regulatory outcomes, operator choices, and Atlantic City’s countermeasures [1] [2] [3].