It turned out that supportive arrangements of Beijing designed to help Macau seemed to be the other anti laundering regulations. They focus primarily on the VIP segment. They are intended to stimulate Wynn to double a bottom in October and January. However, this doubling decreased the Wynnís VIP turnover by 21.4% after a 50% decrease of 2014 and 2015. There is no sense for Wynn in doubling in this case.
New regulations are mainly useless. However, there is a good paragraph related to ìpolitically exposed personsî such as officials, executives of state-owned companies, members of the communist party. It is prohibited to lawmakers and owners of monopolies to move cash. Beijing is going to make its regulations against local authorities more severe in order to prevent money laundering.
In other words, money laundering in Macau may serve as a channel used by the Chinese officials to hide money from their state. As for Wynn, its debt is currently increasing. This is caused by requirements to provide funds for the new Wynn Palace that should be opened soon. A frustrating launch of the new casino will be a disaster. Galaxy Entertainment is in a better situation. At least its shares are not up 100% off their lows like Wynn.
Extra regulations include obligatory provision of information about any large-scale transactions. Such efforts donít seem to be effective in preventing money laundering, since the lower limit is $62,500. So, to avoid attracting attention of regulatory organizations, it is possible to set $62,499.99 as transaction amounts. This will make money laundering more troublesome but still possible. The U.S. State Department recommends that Macau should decrease the lower transaction limit to $3,000 to meet internationally accepted requirements.
It is important to note that Wynnís non-gambling related revenues are incredibly stable. They reached $264.9 million last quarter and $266.1 million in the first quarter of 2015. Taking into account the decrease in casino revenues by 31% from 2014 to 2015, reduction of non-gambling related revenues by 4% is insignificant. This means that casino visitors prefer spending not on gambling but rather on other activities available at casinos.