We’re back…… Using home equity as ATM’s!!!!

[earlyretirement]

Yeah BG. I saw that. It sounds like they will get made whole and admittedly if she really does have a brain tumor and she only has a few years to live then jail probably isn’t the best place for her. I can’t see any scenarios where she will do jail time. These kind of people typically get off.

It’s sad the fall from grace. Oh well….just another example of someone squandering their inheritance.

[bearishgurl]

I’m not “gullible” re: gambling addiction, ER. I’ve had several longtime friends and also relatives that have succumbed to it (online poker included). I understand everything.

It’s sad to see them go from `having it all’ to rock bottom (and even having their paychecks garnished).

But Mayor Mo had a brain tumor. We don’t know for how long. Her lawyer states she had been gambling for 10(+?) years. It appears that she spent a LOT of time at (local) Barona Casino in Lakeside (esp since video poker had been suspended from internet subscribers in the US for a number of recent months – not sure how many).

Her husband died in ’94 and she (apparently) didn’t start gambling heavily until 2002(?).

I just see this whole debacle as very sad. She had everything going for her and could have been VERY secure for life and botched it.

The brain tumor is the only thing that explains this bizarre behavior.

What sickens me is why the casinos allow an account for chips in the first place … no matter WHO you are! They shouldn’t extend credit and there should be a law against it, in NJ and NV, as well as a BIA law (for tribal lands).

[bearishgurl]

I have many childhood memories on the coastline near the Heritage House and I really can’t get the area out of my mind …. even though I can’t afford to retire anywhere near there, lol …

[earlyretirement]

[quote=bearishgurl]

The brain tumor is the only thing that explains this bizarre behavior.

.[/quote]

I thought your last post BG was great and I agree wholeheartedly with you except for this part above.

Actually I’d disagree that “a brain tumor is the only thing that explains this bizarre behavior”.

Like you, I’ve known several people that got addicted to gambling of some form. I don’t know all the details but personally I don’t think you need a brain tumor to get addicted like she did and squander it.

Yes, it’s VERY sad to see her fall from grace. But I still say that there are people like her with very big fortunes that take risks and “gamble” it all away. Whether it’s in a casino or Wall Street. There are people that squander large fortunes. Happens everyday. This is just a high profile version of it.

I’m actually surprised to read on a few blogs where people trying to explain this away as “it had to have been a brain tumor”. Man, this was before my time but she must have really had people in their hearts with that attitude.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=earlyretirement]…Man, this was before my time but she must have really had people in their hearts with that attitude.[/quote]

ER, Mayor Mo was a SD Native and loved SD. Everybody that knew of her accomplishments knows that.

[earlyretirement]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=earlyretirement]…Man, this was before my time but she must have really had people in their hearts with that attitude.[/quote]

ER, Mayor Mo was a SD Native and loved SD. Everybody that knew of her accomplishments knows that.[/quote]

Yeah. I get that. That’s my point. I think they are letting that cloud their judgment on this.

[SK in CV]

[quote=earlyretirement] NO, no way the Jack in the Box fortune was anything like a billion. [/quote]

Just a bit of SD history. Robert Peterson sold Jack in the Box to Ralston Purina more than 45 years ago. By that time, he’d already opened a bank, (I’m pretty sure it was Southern California First National Bank) one of the more successful local banks in SD history. After a few name changes, it’s currently Union Bank. Peterson gave away 10’s of millions during his lifetime. Otherwise, the Jack in the Box fortune could very easily have been worth $1B today.

[bearishgurl]

ER, when a patron is visibly drunk at a bar, the vast majority of bartenders will refuse to serve them and call them a cab. It should be ditto for casinos. Why are casinos “extending credit for chips” to “known regular gamblers?”

That’s bullsh!t !!

CA Indian casinos, in particular, are supposed to be contributing a certain percentage of their profits to state-sponsored “gambling addiction education.”

I don’t understand how someone can continue to gamble on a “margin” or a “future-borrowed” acct at a casino in the US, without leaving collateral.

It seems as if some casinos are just allowing credit to those whom they think are “good for the money” without any vetting to see if this is really so :=0

[bearishgurl]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=earlyretirement] NO, no way the Jack in the Box fortune was anything like a billion. [/quote]

Just a bit of SD history. Robert Peterson sold Jack in the Box to Ralston Purina more than 45 years ago. By that time, he’d already opened a bank, (I’m pretty sure it was Southern California First National Bank) one of the more successful local banks in SD history. After a few name changes, it’s currently Union Bank. Peterson gave away 10’s of millions during his lifetime. Otherwise, the Jack in the Box fortune could very easily have been worth $1B today.[/quote]

Thank you, SK. Union Bank (now Japanese owned) was formerly Union Bank of CA, which was formerly California First Bank (yes, the fourth tallest bldg in dtn SD at the time, which I’ve been with for nearly 33 years). They’ve never issued any sub-prime mortgages to my knowledge, thus weren’t affected by the “subprime mortgage crisis.”

Absolutely agree with you that “net worth” assumptions of the Jack-in-the-Box empire . . . (considering that their HQ is STILL in SD) could be worth between $750M and $1B today.

[earlyretirement]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=earlyretirement] NO, no way the Jack in the Box fortune was anything like a billion. [/quote]

Just a bit of SD history. Robert Peterson sold Jack in the Box to Ralston Purina more than 45 years ago. By that time, he’d already opened a bank, (I’m pretty sure it was Southern California First National Bank) one of the more successful local banks in SD history. After a few name changes, it’s currently Union Bank. Peterson gave away 10’s of millions during his lifetime. Otherwise, the Jack in the Box fortune could very easily have been worth $1B today.[/quote]

Interesting and fascinating.

I also read that he filed for divorce in 1985 but they reconciled. I never really believed in fate and that our lives/futures are pre-destined but maybe ultimately she was destined not to have this fortune.

[earlyretirement]

[quote=bearishgurl]
I don’t understand how someone can continue to gamble on a “margin” or a “future-borrowed” acct at a casino in the US, without leaving collateral.

It seems as if some casinos are just allowing credit to those whom they think are “good for the money” without any vetting to see if this is really so :=0[/quote]

Believe it. It’s very easy for known gamblers to get very high markers at most casinos. The more known of a big gambler they are, the higher markers they will get. No collateral needed if they know you.

I agree with you that it’s bull$hit that the casinos kept letting her gamble. But they don’t care about people that are addicted to gambling. Also, for all we know, she probably told them she had much more so she could keep gambling so they thought she had almost unlimited funds.

Imagine if you have a reputation of losing millions upon millions of dollars to the casino. They will embrace you, not shun you. That’s how the gambling industry works. You can’t blame them for her losing $50 million.

The entire concept of a casino is to get the “whale” (which she was) to keep betting and coming back over and over. Sure, whales will have their up days. But if you keep gambling long enough, you will always give it back to the house. That’s how the casinos work.

It’s very difficult for people like this to quit while they are ahead and stay away. You will almost NEVER see that happen. And if the numbers are anywhere even close to correct in the newspapers (which who knows if it is) it sounds like she won quite a bit of the time as well but just turned around and lost it. Win/lose/win/lose cycles.

I have friends that are big time gamblers in Vegas. They aren’t addicted to it but I remember one birthday weekend my buddy who was a big time lawyer back home (but a nobody in Vegas) at the time was playing blackjack with me.

He was on the mother of all good luck streaks. He was probably up about $150,000. We had to have been sitting there maybe 10 hours straight. I was up a few thousand and left the table early in the morning. I went to go take a nap and came back a few hours later.

He was still there at the table. Not only did he lose the $150,000 but he got a marker for another $50,000 that he lost. He said he only showed a business card to get the marker. I’m not sure if that was true or not. The casino was just happy that he lost it all and more.

I guess the upside is we did comped for a few free dinners. LOL.

[Author]

Posts