Bo Bernhard, the vice president of economic development at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, has high hopes for the potential growth of the gaming industry in Thailand. According to Bernhard, if a single market in Thailand, specifically in Bangkok, were to emerge, it could surpass Singapore in terms of tourism and gross gaming revenue.
Singapore, with its two integrated resorts, currently ranks third in gross gaming revenue worldwide, following Macau and Las Vegas. In 2024, Marina Bay Sands and Resorts World Sentosa collectively generated $4.5 billion. The country is projected to reach $5 billion this year due to the recovery in tourism and new attractions at both integrated resorts.
Experts suggest that a well-established gaming industry in Thailand, with integrated resorts in Chiang Mai, Chonburi, Phuket, and Bangkok, could potentially yield up to $9.1 billion annually. However, analysts at CSLA are even more optimistic, forecasting revenues of $15 billion.
Bangkok Leading in Tourism
Bangkok stands to gain significantly due to its robust infrastructure, including a world-class airport, as stated by Bernhard in an interview with the Bangkok Post. With a population of 11.5 million, Bangkok attracted 32.4 million visitors last year, making it the most-visited city globally, as reported by The Thaiger in December.
Given these circumstances, Bernhard believes that with just two resorts, Bangkok alone could surpass Singapore and become one of the largest gaming destinations in Asia, as he mentioned in an interview with the Bangkok Post.
Bernhard, who is also a co-founder of the International Responsible Gaming Alliance, recently engaged with Thai legislators. Despite concerns in Thailand regarding gambling addiction and crime, he advocated for their support of the contentious Entertainment Complex Bill, which aims to legalize billion-dollar resorts featuring casinos.
Advocates of the bill argue that the new industry could increase tourism by up to 10% annually, create around 15,000 jobs, attract over $2.9 billion in new investments, and generate annual tax revenues ranging from $354 million to $1.1 billion.
Necessary Stringent Regulations
The bill, approved by the cabinet in March, was under review by the parliament until public demonstrations, including protests at Government House, led lawmakers to pause. In April, the Thai senate established a committee to scrutinize the legislation, with a report expected by the end of July.
On the other hand, critics, including opposition MP Rangsiman Rome, express concerns that introducing casinos could bring negative influences to Thailand, a predominantly Buddhist nation. They cite examples of countries like Myanmar, Laos, and Cambodia where criminal activities such as money laundering and human trafficking have thrived.
Bernhard concurs that stringent regulations are vital to attract major global gaming companies like MGM Resorts and Las Vegas Sands Corp.
“Reputable operators seek legal reinforcement,” he emphasized. “They desire strict gaming protocols, including anti-money laundering laws and know-your-customer regulations. They aim to ensure that all expenditures are legitimate, properly monitored, and taxed. The enforcement must be rigorous.”
Rare Opportunity of the Generation
Bernhard suggests that Thailand should act promptly, considering the increasing income levels worldwide.
“Currently, more than 50% of the global population are classified as middle class or above, a historical first. In a decade, this percentage will rise to two-thirds.
“Over the next 50 years, this figure will continue to grow. If Thailand remains stagnant, it risks losing out in the competitive landscape for tourism revenues.”
Supporters of the bill believe that legalizing casinos will benefit the economy overall and eliminate illicit gambling activities. However, as highlighted by The Diplomat, “Thailand remains a socially conservative nation where gambling is often viewed as a vice despite widespread underground gambling. There are concerns that the legislation is being rushed without adequate checks and balances.”
Moreover, there are worries that passing the bill without a public referendum could violate the constitution.
