SHED NO TEARS FOR CASINO OWNERS

Michael J. Goodman’s “Highest Rollers” (Feb. 19) seems to imply that the casino owners are losing money. According to the article, many heavy bettors play baccarat, where the house edge is about 1%, but when the bettors win, they are paid in cash, and when they lose, they usually pay with markers (IOUs).

If these markers are discounted by an average of 2% or more, or if payment is delayed by 90 days or more (which is equivalent to about the same discount), then the house advantage has turned into a loss, and Goodman indicates that such discounts and delays are likely.

All this doesn’t even take into consideration the expense of comped rooms and transportation as well as the maintenance of special gambling facilities. Why are the casinos doing this?

Edward K. Conklin

Manhattan Beach

* Goodman responds: Although the correspondent’s arithmetic is correct, it fails to take into consideration that the house edge always gets the bettor--for plenty--in the long run. So even if the bettor’s lost millions are discounted, the house has won a ton of money.

The people at the Las Vegas Hilton, MGM Grande and Mirage didn’t mention that the “little joint,” the Desert Inn, is owned by big-board conglomerate ITT, whose holdings include all Caesar’s World properties. Perhaps that’s why the DI can offer all that credit to the high rollers.

Marion Victor Brancato

Glendale

THE WRIGHT RESTORATION

As a student involved in the Freeman House restoration project (“Can It Be Made Wright Again?” by Diane Haithman, Feb. 18), I contributed to a painstaking process of investigation, analysis and documentation of both what was built by Frank Lloyd Wright and the appropriate methods of preservation. One of the many important benefits of this process is that students can obtain a profound understanding of what was a pivotal landmark in Wright’s career and in the history of Los Angeles architecture. That was Harriet Freeman’s wish.

However, before the 1994 Northridge earthquake, the relative small portion of damage to the house was already irreversible--the legacy of experimental building techniques and more than 60 years of erosion. The actual work phase of the restoration had begun by that time but was halted by the earthquake.

Still, the article’s hysterical sky-is-falling theme was inappropriate. The idea that the house is eroding before our very eyes as a result of the project is at best oversimplistic and at worst painful to the many students, professionals and community volunteers who contributed.

A more hasty and superficial type of “restoration” could cover or destroy vital and unique historic information and would benefit only those interested in a slick imitation of the past. The scores of concrete-block buildings built throughout Wright’s career will be benefited incalculably by the work done at the Freeman House.

This arduous project has been brilliantly managed and is supported by such institutions as the Getty Trust and the National Endowment for the Arts and others.

Gregory Downs

Glendale

*

Haithman’s article states that the Ennis-Brown House has received substantial FEMA funds. While the Trust for Preservation of Cultural Heritage, which owns the house, is optimistic about obtaining significant FEMA funding, to date none has been received.

Janet S. Tani, Associate Curator

Ennis-Brown House

Los Angeles