Inside Asian Gaming

Inside Asian Gaming

July 2008 | INSIDE ASIAN GAMING 5 Core Ranking Methodology Inside Asian Gaming’s first attempt to rank the 50 most influential people in Asian gaming was a challenging task.The list is bound to create controversy and lead to charges that it is subjective in nature, despite the application of a rigorous analytical methodology involving voting by a panel of 12 independent gaming industry executives and analysts from around the region to arrive at the results. Even measuring the objective criteria posed difficulties because many of Asia’s biggest gaming companies remain in private hands, making it difficult—if not impossible—to obtain accurate financial records. Therefore, market share and other business KPIs were estimated after extensive discussions with peers, competitors, suppliers and customers. Another consideration is that Asia’s gaming sector can often be particularly country specific, so we endeavoured to select panellists from not only high profile casino jurisdictions such as Macau,but also emerging gaming markets around the region. We sought feedback from various gaming sectors including parimutuels and Japan’s massive pachinko industry—omitting pachinko just because the Japanese government does not technically consider it gambling would, in our view, be a misrepresentation.We also included online operators, who are making an ever greater impact in the region, regardless of the official status of their businesses. Even though government agencies ultimately control and influence all regulated gaming in Asia, after much discussion we decided to exclude individuals such as Macau Chief Executive Edmund Ho and senior officers of the Culture,Welfare, Sports and Finance Ministries in China, who set out the framework that gaming takes place in. One exception to the exclusion of government officials was made for the Chairman of PAGCOR, however, for reasons explained in his bio. The twelve panellists were instructed to nominate individuals for the Asian Gaming 50 . The initial list of 93 individuals was put through a scoring process to arrive at the final rankings. The panellists gave each of the nominated individuals a score of The Asian Gaming 50 The inaugural ranking of the industry’s most influential people If Asia’s gaming sector had to be described in one word,it would be“dynamic.”Who would have imagined five years ago that sleepy Macau would now be well on its way to recreating a glitzy Vegas-style strip of mega resorts, or that squeaky-clean Singapore would legalise casinos? Fortunes have been made on the back of the industry’s dynamism, with Sheldon Adelson in particular owing his spectacular climb up Forbes’ billionaires list to his success in Macau since 2004. In an effort to highlight the achievements of those driving the industry’s dynamism, we created the Asian Gaming 50 , with the final rankings derived after tallying votes on thirteen individual criteria by twelve independent panellists from around the region. The methodology—described in detail below—and panellists were carefully selected to ensure the Asian Gaming 50 is as representative as possible, spanning various Asian countries and forms of gaming, including the nascent regional online gaming sector and quasi-gaming in the shape of Japan’s massive pachinko industry. The Asian Gaming 50 provides a concise‘who’s who’reference of the industry’s movers and shakers,and we hope it will also generate lively debate. As soon as the results were compiled, a heated discussion ensued among our panellists, and we are sure many of you will have strong views on the rankings. We invite you to be part of the debate by emailing your comments to feedback@asgam.com . We will also shortly allow all our readers to vote on the rankings at our website, www.asgam.com . From next year, all readers will be able to submit their nominations for the Asian Gaming 50 and public submissions will form part of the weighting in final selection. The industry’s dynamismmeans that this time next year,we may find ourselves publishing a rather different ranking of the most influential people in Asian gaming.This year, however, the list is topped by a man known as “The King of Gambling” throughout the region for decades. Asian Gaming 50 between 1 and 10 on the following criteria: 1. How well known is the individual within the gaming sector in Asia? 2. How well known is the individual generally in Asia—i.e. outside the gaming sector? 3. How successful has the individual been historically in the gaming sector? 4. How fast has their business grown over the last 5 years? 5. What is their potential for future growth in their current gaming sub- sector and other gaming sub-sectors in Asia? 6. How successful are they financially (individually and/or company or individual together with company, where relevant)? 7. How influential are they with the government and regulators within their jurisdictions of operations? 8. How influential are they internationally within the gaming industry (individually and/or company or individual together with company, where relevant)? 9. How much of an innovator within the gaming industry are they? 10. How well are their products and/or services marketed and promoted? 11. How much do they own of their principal business and/or how much control do they have over their company? 12. How well positioned are they to cope with competition within their existing jurisdictions of operation and from overseas competition? 13. How do you perceive their dominance in their current major markets of operation? Feedback from the panellists led to each question being given a specific weighting—between 90% and 115%. Further weightings were applied relating to the company the nominated individual either works for or controls. These include the company’s status (public or private), financial performance and size (in terms of both operations and market capitalisation/value), as well as the size/importance of the markets it operates in. Finally, panellists applied a further weighting for each nominated individual with respect to his or her perceived personal integrity, effectiveness in management, overall track record and foresight. Sponsored by:

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTIyNjk=