Marina District Finance Company, Inc. - FORM 10-Q

Marina District Finance Company, Inc. - FORM 10-Q - November 14, 2012

Attached files

Attached files

Marina District Finance Company, Inc. Reports

file	filename
EXCEL - IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT - Marina District Finance Company, Inc.	Financial_Report.xls
EX-31.1 - SOX 302 CERTIFICATION CEO - Marina District Finance Company, Inc.	mdfc10q93012ex311.htm
EX-32.1 - SOX 906 CERTIFICATION CEO - Marina District Finance Company, Inc.	mdfc10q93012ex321.htm
EX-32.2 - SOX 906 CERTIFICATION CFO - Marina District Finance Company, Inc.	mdfc10q93012ex322.htm
EX-31.2 - SOX 302 CERTIFICATION CFO - Marina District Finance Company, Inc.	mdfc10q93012ex312.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

____________________________________________________

FORM 10-Q

____________________________________________________

(Mark One)



x	QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2012



o	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

Commission file number: 333-173275

____________________________________________________

Marina District Finance Company, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

____________________________________________________



New Jersey		22-3767829
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

One Borgata Way, Atlantic City, New Jersey 08401

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

(609) 317-1000

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

__________________________________________________

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No x

All of the common equity interests of Marina District Finance Company, Inc. are held by Marina District Development Company, LLC. All of the common equity interests of Marina District Development Company, LLC are held by Marina District Development Holding Company, LLC.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q

FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS



		Page No.
	PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.	Financial Statements (Unaudited)	3
	Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011	4
	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011	5
	Condensed Consolidated Statement of Changes in Member Equity for the nine months ended September 30, 2012	6
	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011	7
	Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements	8
Item 2.	Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	18
Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk	31
Item 4.	Controls and Procedures	31

	PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1.	Legal Proceedings	31
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	31
Item 6.	Exhibits	47
Signature Page		48

PART I. Financial Information


Item 1.	Financial Statements

Unless otherwise indicated, all historical consolidated financial information in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q is information regarding Marina District Development Company, LLC, a New Jersey limited liability company (“MDDC”), the parent of Marina District Finance Company, Inc., a New Jersey corporation (“MDFC”). MDFC is a 100% owned finance subsidiary of MDDC. MDDC has fully and unconditionally guaranteed MDFC's securities; and accordingly, the consolidated financial statements of MDDC (as parent) are included herein. Unless otherwise indicated or required by the context, the terms “we,” “our,” “us” and the “Company” refer to MDDC and MDFC.

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of MDDC have been prepared in accordance with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X and, therefore, do not include all information and footnote disclosures necessary for complete financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States ("GAAP").

The results for the periods indicated are unaudited, however, such results reflect all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) that management considers necessary for a fair presentation of financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Results of operations and cash flows for the interim periods presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the results that would be achieved during a full year of operations or in future periods.

The financial information, included in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q, should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, included in MDFC's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on March 30, 2012.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________



	September 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In thousands)
	(Unaudited)
ASSETS
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents	$	32,303	$	46,224
Accounts receivable, net	33,267		34,012
Inventories	4,144		4,303
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	18,823		6,685
Deferred income taxes	1,755		1,656
Total current assets	90,292		92,880
Property and equipment, net	1,269,530		1,282,459
Debt financing costs, net	4,560		5,350
Other assets, net	42,040		41,806
Total assets	$	1,406,422	$	1,422,495
LIABILITIES AND MEMBER EQUITY
Current liabilities
Accounts payable	$	4,174	$	8,459
Accrued liabilities	107,543		92,443
Income taxes payable, net	515		599
Total current liabilities	112,232		101,501
Long-term debt, net	786,054		809,808
Deferred income taxes	13,214		13,376
Other long-term tax liabilities	11,642		11,647
Other liabilities	15,925		16,227
Commitments and contingencies (Note 5)
Member equity	467,355		469,936
Total liabilities and member equity	$	1,406,422	$	1,422,495

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________



	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30,						September 30,
	2012			2011			2012			2011
	(In thousands)
	(Unaudited)
REVENUES
Operating revenues:
Gaming	$	162,360		$	176,738		$	470,285		$	490,732
Food and beverage	40,234			41,337			112,350			112,860
Room	34,220			33,069			91,048			89,177
Other	12,809			11,989			31,547			31,889
Gross revenues	249,623			263,133			705,230			724,658
Less promotional allowances	62,532			61,115			166,573			170,794
Net revenues	187,091			202,018			538,657			553,864
COSTS AND EXPENSES
Operating costs and expenses:
Gaming	67,592			68,944			195,225			199,368
Food and beverage	19,744			19,459			56,533			53,415
Room	3,990			4,106			10,944			10,996
Other	11,030			10,066			25,345			25,921
Selling, general and administrative	35,474			32,859			103,001			96,405
Maintenance and utilities	15,866			16,609			44,502			47,209
Depreciation and amortization	16,069			14,562			47,162			47,081
Other operating items, net	(1,602		)	(58		)	(3,529		)	963
Total operating costs and expenses	168,163			166,547			479,183			481,358
Operating income	18,928			35,471			59,474			72,506
Other expense
Interest expense, net	20,754			20,995			61,885			63,064
Total other expense	20,754			20,995			61,885			63,064
Income (loss) before state income taxes	(1,826		)	14,476			(2,411		)	9,442
State income taxes	14			(1,550		)	(170		)	(1,466		)
Net income (loss)	$	(1,812	)	$	12,926		$	(2,581	)	$	7,976

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN MEMBER EQUITY

for the nine months ended September 30, 2012

______________________________________________________________________________________________________



	Capital Contributions		Retained Earnings			Total Member Equity
	(In thousands)
	(Unaudited)
Balances, January 1, 2012	$	446,700	$	23,236		$	469,936
Net loss	—		(2,581		)	(2,581		)
Balances, September 30, 2012	$	446,700	$	20,655		$	467,355

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________



	Nine Months Ended
	September 30,
	2012			2011
	(In thousands)
	(Unaudited)
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Net income (loss)	$	(2,581	)	$	7,976
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization	47,162			47,081
Gain from insurance subrogation settlement	(3,809		)	—
Amortization of debt financing costs	1,007			1,132
Amortization of discounts on senior secured notes	2,746			2,507
Deferred income taxes	(261		)	(1,035		)
Provision for doubtful accounts	2,612			3,027
Noncash asset write-downs	41			924
Gain on early retirements of debt	—			(53		)
Other operating activities	27			1,010
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable	(1,867		)	(3,422		)
Inventories	159			402
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	(12,138		)	1,424
Income taxes receivable/payable	(84		)	1,707
Other long-term tax assets	521			161
Other assets, net	(1,099		)	(2,446		)
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	10,852			3,128
Other long-term tax liabilities	(5		)	632
Other liabilities	(302		)	449
Net cash provided by operating activities	42,981			64,604
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Capital expenditures	(33,994		)	(19,488		)
Insurance proceeds from subrogation settlement	3,809			—
Net cash used in investing activities	(30,185		)	(19,488		)
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
Borrowings under bank credit facility	515,300			574,700
Payments under bank credit facility	(541,800		)	(620,600		)
Repayments to repurchase senior secured notes	—			(8,198		)
Debt financing costs	(217		)	(937		)
Net cash used in financing activities	(26,717		)	(55,035		)
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents	(13,921		)	(9,919		)
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period	46,224			42,099
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period	$	32,303		$	32,180

Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information
Cash paid for interest, net of amounts capitalized	$	58,396		$	68,676

Supplemental Disclosure of Non-Cash Investing Activities
Payables for capital expenditures	$	150		$	245

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

NOTE 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Organization

Marina District Development Company, LLC, a New Jersey limited liability company (“MDDC”), is the parent of Marina District Finance Company, Inc., a New Jersey corporation (“MDFC”). MDFC is a 100% owned finance subsidiary of MDDC. MDDC has fully and unconditionally guaranteed MDFC's securities; and accordingly, the consolidated financial statements of MDDC (as parent) are included herein. Unless otherwise indicated or required by the context, the terms “we,” “our,” “us” and the “Company” refer to MDDC and MDFC.

MDDC was incorporated in July 1998 and has been operating since July 3, 2003. MDFC was incorporated in 2000 and has been a wholly-owned subsidiary of MDDC since its inception. We developed, own and operate Borgata Hotel Casino and Spa, including The Water Club at Borgata (collectively, "Borgata"). Borgata is located on a 45.6-acre site at Renaissance Pointe in Atlantic City, New Jersey. Borgata is an upscale destination resort and gaming entertainment property.

Borgata was developed as a joint venture between Boyd Atlantic City, Inc. (“BAC”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Boyd Gaming Corporation (“Boyd”), and MAC, Corp. (“MAC”), a second tier, wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International (the successor-in-interest to MGM MIRAGE) (“MGM”). The joint venture operates pursuant to an operating agreement between BAC and MAC (the “Operating Agreement”), in which BAC held a 50% interest and MAC originally held a 50% interest in Marina District Development Holding Company, LLC, MDDC's parent holding company (“MDDHC”).

As managing member of MDDHC pursuant to the terms of the Operating Agreement, BAC, through MDDHC, has responsibility for the oversight and management of our day-to-day operations. We do not presently record a management fee to BAC, as our management team performs these services directly or negotiates contracts to provide for these services. As a result, the costs of these services are directly borne by us and are reflected in our consolidated financial statements. Boyd, the parent of BAC, is a diversified operator of 16 wholly owned gaming entertainment properties. Headquartered in Las Vegas, Boyd has other gaming operations in Nevada, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi and Indiana.

On March 24, 2010, MAC transferred its 50% ownership interest (the “MGM Interest”) in MDDHC, and certain land leased to MDDC, into a divestiture trust, of which MGM and its subsidiaries are the economic beneficiaries (the “Divestiture Trust”), for sale to a third-party in connection with MGM's settlement agreement with the Division of Gaming Enforcement of the State of New Jersey (the “NJDGE”). MGM subsequently announced that it had entered into an amendment to the agreement with the NJDGE, as approved by the New Jersey Casino Control Commission ("NJCCC"). The amendment provides that the deadline for the mandated sale of the MGM Interest be increased by an additional 18 months to March 24, 2014. BAC has a right of first refusal on any sale of the MGM Interest. We continue to operate under normal business conditions throughout MGM's sales efforts, and do not believe that it has had or will have a material impact on our operations.

Upon the transfer of the MGM Interest into the Divestiture Trust, MGM relinquished all of its specific participating rights under the Operating Agreement, and Boyd effectively obtained control of Borgata. As a result, beginning on March 24, 2010, our financial position and results of operations have been included in the consolidated financial statements of Boyd. This resulting change in control required acquisition method accounting by Boyd in accordance with the authoritative accounting guidance for business combinations; however, there was no resulting direct impact on our consolidated financial statements. Accordingly, our financial position and results of operations as reported herein will differ from the results as consolidated with and separately reported by Boyd, as certain fair value and other acquisition method accounting adjustments have not been pushed down to our stand-alone consolidated financial statements.

Basis of Presentation

Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

As permitted by the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP, have been condensed or omitted, although we believe that the disclosures made are adequate to make the information reliable. These condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

In our opinion, the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments of normal recurring nature necessary to fairly present our financial position as of September 30, 2012 and the results of our operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 and our cash flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011. The condensed consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2012 is unaudited; however, the condensed consolidated balance sheet presented as of December 31, 2011 has been derived from our audited financial statements as of such date. Our operating results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, and our cash flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, are unaudited, and are not necessarily indicative of the results that would be achieved for the full year or future periods.

Principles of Consolidation

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with GAAP and include the accounts of MDDC and MDFC.

All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated.

Investment in unconsolidated subsidiary, which is less than 50% owned and does not meet the consolidation criteria of the authoritative accounting guidance for voting or variable interest models, is accounted for under the equity method. During the year ended December 31, 2011, we reclassified our investment in unconsolidated subsidiary to other assets based on the relative immateriality of such investment and to reflect the fact that the investment is presently being liquidated.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents include highly liquid investments with maturities of three months or less at their date of purchase on deposit with high credit quality financial institutions. The carrying values of these instruments approximate their fair values due to their short maturities.

Accounts Receivable, Net

Accounts receivable consist primarily of casino, hotel and other receivables. Accounts receivable are typically non-interest-bearing and are initially recorded at cost. Accounts are written off when management deems the account to be uncollectible. An estimated allowance for doubtful accounts is maintained to reduce our receivables to their carrying amount. The allowance is estimated based on specific review of customer accounts as well as management's experience with collection trends in the casino industry and current economic and business conditions. As a result, the net carrying value approximates fair value.

Property and Equipment, Net

Property and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets or, for leasehold improvements, over the shorter of the asset's useful life or term of the lease.

The estimated useful lives of our major components of property and equipment are:



Building and improvements	10 to 40 years
Furniture and equipment	3 to 7 years

Gains or losses on disposals of assets are recognized as incurred, using the specific identification method. Costs of major improvements are capitalized, while costs of normal repairs and maintenance are charged to expense as incurred.

We evaluate the carrying value of long-lived assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. For an asset that is to be disposed of, we recognize the asset at the lower of carrying value or fair market value, less costs of disposal, as estimated based on comparable asset sales, solicited offers, or a discounted cash flow model. For a long-lived asset to be held and used, we review the asset for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. We then compare the estimated undiscounted future cash flows of the asset to the carrying value of the asset. The asset is not impaired if the undiscounted future cash flows exceed its carrying value. If the carrying value exceeds the undiscounted future cash flows, then an impairment charge is recorded, typically measured using a discounted cash flow model, which is based on the estimated future results of the relevant reporting unit discounted using our weighted-average cost of capital and market indicators of terminal year free cash flow multiples. If an asset is under development, future cash flows include remaining construction costs. All resulting recognized impairment charges are recorded as operating expenses.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Capitalized Interest

Interest costs, primarily associated with our expansion projects, are capitalized as part of the cost of our constructed assets. Interest costs, which include commitment fees, letter of credit fees and the amortized portion of deferred financing fees, discounts and origination fees, are capitalized on amounts expended for the respective projects using our weighted-average cost of borrowing. Capitalization of interest will cease when the respective project, or discernible portions of the projects, are substantially complete. We amortize capitalized interest over the estimated useful life of the related asset. No interest was capitalized during the three months ended September 30, 2012. Capitalized interest during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 was $0.5 million. Capitalized interest during both the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 was $0.1 million.

Debt Financing Costs

Debt financing costs, which include legal and other direct costs related to the issuance of our outstanding debt, are deferred and amortized to interest expense over the contractual term of the underlying long-term debt using the effective interest method. In the event that our debt is modified, repurchased or otherwise reduced prior to its original maturity date, we ratably reduce the unamortized debt financing costs.

Long-Term Debt, Net

Long-term debt is reported at amortized cost. The discounts on the senior secured notes and the transaction costs paid to the initial purchasers upon issuance are recorded as adjustments to the face amounts of our outstanding debt. These resulting differences between the net proceeds upon issuance of the senior secured notes and the face amounts of the senior secured notes are accreted to interest expense using the effective interest method.

Income Taxes

As a single member LLC, MDDC is treated as a disregarded entity for federal income tax purposes. As such, it is not subject to federal income tax and its income is treated as earned by its member, MDDHC. MDDHC is treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes and federal income taxes are the responsibility of its members. In New Jersey, casino partnerships are subject to state income taxes under the New Jersey Casino Control Act; therefore, MDDC, considered a casino partnership, is required to record New Jersey state income taxes. In 2004, MDDC was granted permission by the state of New Jersey, pursuant to a ruling request, to file a consolidated New Jersey corporation business tax return with the members of its parent, MDDHC. The amounts reflected in the condensed consolidated financial statements are reported as if MDDC was taxed for state purposes on a stand-alone basis; however, MDDC files a consolidated state tax return with the members of MDDHC.

The amounts due to these members, are a result of the member's respective tax attributes included in the consolidated state tax return. A reconciliation of the components of our stand-alone state income taxes payable is presented below:



	September 30,			December 31,
	2012			2011
	(In thousands)
Amounts payable to members of MDDHC	$	1,642		$	1,642
Amounts receivable - State	(1,127		)	(1,043		)
Income taxes payable, net	$	515		$	599

Revenue Recognition

Gaming revenue represents the net win from gaming activities, which is the aggregate difference between gaming wins and losses. The majority of our gaming revenue is counted in the form of cash and chips and therefore is not subject to any significant or complex estimation procedures. Cash discounts, commissions and other incentives to customers related to gaming play are recorded as a reduction of gross gaming revenues as promotional allowances.

Room revenue recognition criteria are met at the time of occupancy.

Food and beverage revenue recognition criteria are met at the time of service.

Promotional Allowances

The retail value of accommodations, food and beverage, and other services furnished to guests on a complimentary basis is included in gross revenues and then deducted as promotional allowances. Promotional allowances also include incentives such as cash, goods and services (such as complimentary rooms and food and beverages) earned in our loyalty programs. We reward customers,

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

through the use of loyalty programs, with points based on amounts wagered that can be redeemed for a specified period of time, principally for restricted free play slot machine credits and complimentary goods and services. We record the estimated retail value of these goods and services as revenue and then record a corresponding deduction as promotional allowances.

The amounts included in promotional allowances are as follows:



	Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
	September 30,				September 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In thousands)
Rooms	$	20,857	$	19,367	$	55,764	$	53,976
Food and beverage	14,889		15,471		41,299		43,184
Other	26,786		26,277		69,510		73,634
Total promotional allowances	$	62,532	$	61,115	$	166,573	$	170,794

The estimated costs of providing such promotional allowances are as follows:



	Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
	September 30,				September 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In thousands)
Rooms	$	6,249	$	5,795	$	17,366	$	16,934
Food and beverage	11,199		11,217		31,866		31,728
Other	3,702		3,550		9,133		9,021
Total cost of promotional allowances	$	21,150	$	20,562	$	58,365	$	57,683

Gaming Taxes

We are subject to taxes based on gross gaming revenues in New Jersey. These gaming taxes are an assessment of our gaming revenues and are recorded as a gaming expense in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. These taxes were $11.2 million and $12.6 million during the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and $34.3 million and $35.9 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Significant estimates incorporated into our condensed consolidated financial statements include the estimated allowance for doubtful accounts receivable, the estimated useful lives for depreciable and amortizable assets, value of certain funds deposited with the New Jersey Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (the "CRDA"), estimated cash flows in assessing the recoverability of long-lived assets, certain tax liabilities, self-insured liability reserves, various loyalty point programs, fair values of assets and liabilities measured at fair value, fair values of assets and liabilities disclosed at fair value, contingencies and litigation, claims and assessments. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

NOTE 2. PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, NET

Property and equipment, net consists of the following:



	September 30,		December 31,
	2012		2011
	(In thousands)
Land	$	87,301	$	87,301
Buildings and improvements	1,408,724		1,396,312
Furniture and equipment	329,616		305,624
Construction in progress	10,354		17,370
Total property and equipment	1,835,995		1,806,607
Less accumulated depreciation	566,465		524,148
Property and equipment, net	$	1,269,530	$	1,282,459

Depreciation expense was $15.8 million and $14.5 million during the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and $46.8 million and $47.0 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Major items included in construction in progress at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 include various property improvement and capital projects currently in process. The decrease in construction in progress of $7.0 million at September 30, 2012, as compared to December 31, 2011, is primarily due to the timing of the room refurbishment at the Borgata hotel which commenced during the fourth quarter of 2011 and was completed during the nine months ended September 30, 2012. Construction in progress presented in the table above primarily relates to costs capitalized in conjunction with major improvements that have not yet been placed into service, and accordingly, such costs are not currently being depreciated.

We test certain of these property and equipment assets for recoverability if a recent operating cash flow loss, combined with a history of operating or cash flow losses or a projection or forecast that demonstrates continuing losses, is associated with the use of a long-lived asset.

Impairment is the condition that exists when the carrying value of a long-lived asset exceeds its fair value. An impairment loss shall be recognized only if the carrying amount of a long-lived asset is not recoverable and exceeds its fair value. The carrying value of a long-lived asset is not recoverable if it exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset. That assessment shall be based on the carrying amount of the asset at the date it is tested for recoverability. An impairment loss shall be measured as the amount by which the carrying value of a long-lived asset exceeds its fair value.

NOTE 3. ACCRUED LIABILITIES

Accrued liabilities consist of the following:



	September 30,		December 31,
	2012		2011
	(In thousands)
Accrued expenses and other liabilities	$	40,466	$	27,941
Payroll and related expenses	21,950		19,760
Gaming liabilities	22,718		22,068
Accrued interest	22,409		22,674
Total accrued liabilities	$	107,543	$	92,443

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

NOTE 4. LONG-TERM DEBT, NET

Long-term debt, net consists of the following:



	September 30, 2012
	Outstanding Principal		Unamortized Discount			Unamortized Origination Fees			Long-Term Debt, Net
	(In thousands)
Amended Credit Facility	$	13,700	$	—		$	—		$	13,700
9.50% Senior Secured Notes due 2015	398,000		(2,720		)	(6,387		)	388,893
9.875% Senior Secured Notes due 2018	393,500		(2,171		)	(7,868		)	383,461
	$	805,200	$	(4,891	)	$	(14,255	)	$	786,054

	December 31, 2011
	Outstanding Principal		Unamortized Discount			Unamortized Origination Fees			Long-Term Debt, Net
	(In thousands)
Amended Credit Facility	$	40,200	$	—		$	—		$	40,200
9.50% Senior Secured Notes due 2015	398,000		(3,271		)	(7,680		)	387,049
9.875% Senior Secured Notes due 2018	393,500		(2,366		)	(8,575		)	382,559
	$	831,700	$	(5,637	)	$	(16,255	)	$	809,808

Bank Credit Facility

Significant Terms

On August 6, 2010, MDFC announced that it had closed a $950 million debt financing, consisting of the establishment of a $150 million new payment priority secured revolving credit facility and the issuance of $800 million of aggregate principal amount of notes. The proceeds from the financing were used to (i) pay fees and expenses related to the financing; (ii) repay the former credit facility; and (iii) make a one-time distribution to our joint venture owners.

On November 11, 2011, MDFC entered into an amended credit facility among MDFC, MDDC, certain other financial institutions (each a "Lender", and collectively the "Lenders") and Wells Fargo, National Association ("Wells Fargo"), as administrative agent (in such capacity, "Administrative Agent") for the Lenders. The amendment modifies certain terms of the former credit facility among the Company, the Lenders from time to time party thereto, the Administrative Agent, and Wells Fargo.

The amended credit facility: (i) reduced the aggregate commitments under the amended credit facility to a maximum amount of $75 million; (ii) decreased the minimum Consolidated EBITDA (as defined in the amended credit facility) to $125 million for a trailing twelve-month period ending on the last day of a calendar quarter; (iii) eliminated the covenant requiring us to have a minimum amount of cash, cash equivalents, and unused commitments; and (iv) added a covenant prohibiting us from borrowing under the amended credit facility to purchase our senior secured notes at any time when the total amount outstanding under the amended credit facility is $65 million or more.

The amended credit facility provides for a $75 million senior secured revolving credit facility and matures in August 2014. The amended credit facility is guaranteed on a senior secured basis by MDDC and any future subsidiaries of MDDC and is secured by a first priority lien on substantially all of our assets, subject to certain exceptions. MDDC is also the guarantor of the senior secured notes. The obligations under our amended credit facility have priority in payment to the senior secured notes.

At September 30, 2012, the outstanding balance under the amended credit facility was $13.7 million, leaving contractual availability of $61.3 million. The interest rate on the outstanding borrowings at September 30, 2012 was 4.4%.

Guarantees

Neither BAC, its parent, its affiliates, nor the Divestiture Trust are guarantors of the amended credit facility.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Interest Rate

Outstanding borrowings under the amended credit facility accrue interest at a selected rate based upon either: (i) the highest of (a) the agent bank's quoted prime rate, (b) the one-month Eurodollar rate plus 1.00%, or (c) the daily federal funds rate plus 1.50%, and in any event not less than 1.50% (such highest rate, the "base rate"), or (ii) the Eurodollar rate, plus with respect to each of clause (i) and (ii) an applicable margin as provided in the amended credit facility. In addition, a commitment fee is incurred on the unused portion of the amended credit facility ranging from 0.50% per annum to 1.00% per annum.

Financial and Other Covenants

The amended credit facility contains certain financial and other covenants, including, without limitation, (i) establishing a minimum Consolidated EBITDA (as defined in the amended credit facility) of $125 million over each trailing twelve-month period ending on the last day of each calendar quarter; (ii) imposing limitations on MDFC's ability to incur additional debt; and (iii) imposing restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and make other distributions, make certain restricted payments, create liens, enter into transactions with affiliates, merge or consolidate, and engage in unrelated business activities.

Compliance with Financial Covenants

We believe that we were in compliance with the amended credit facility covenants, including the minimum Consolidated EBITDA, which, at September 30, 2012, was $145.5 million.

Debt Financing Costs

In conjunction with the amended credit facility, during both of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, we incurred $0.2 million incremental debt financing costs, and incurred approximately $0.3 million and $0.9 million during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively, in incremental debt financing costs, which have been deferred and are being amortized over the remaining term of the amended credit facility.

Senior Secured Notes

9.5% Senior Secured Notes Due 2015

Significant Terms

In August 2010, MDFC issued, through a private placement, $400 million principal amount of 9.5% senior secured notes due October 2015, at an issue price of 98.943%, resulting in a discount at issuance of $4.2 million. The notes require semi-annual interest payments on April 15 and October 15, which commenced on April 15, 2011. The notes are guaranteed on a senior secured basis by MDDC and any future restricted subsidiaries of MDDC. The notes contain covenants that, among other things, limit MDFC's ability and the ability of MDDC to (i) incur additional indebtedness or liens; (ii) pay dividends or make distributions; (iii) make certain investments; (iv) sell or merge with other companies; and (v) enter into certain types of transactions. We believe that we are in compliance with these covenants at September 30, 2012.

At any time prior to October 15, 2013, the notes may be redeemed at 100% of the principal amount thereof, plus a “make-whole premium” and accrued and unpaid interest. In addition, until October 15, 2013, MDFC may redeem up to 35% of the notes at a redemption price of 109.50% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the redemption date, with the net cash proceeds from certain equity offerings. In addition, at any time prior to October 15, 2013, MDFC may redeem up to an aggregate of 10% of the notes in each twelve month period at a redemption price of 103% of the principal amount thereof plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to, but not including, the redemption date. On or after October 15, 2013, MDFC shall have the option to redeem the notes, in whole or in part, at redemption prices (expressed as percentages of the principal amount) ranging from 104.75% beginning on October 15, 2013 to 102.375% beginning on October 15, 2014, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the applicable redemption date.

9.875% Senior Secured Notes Due 2018

Significant Terms

In August 2010, MDFC issued, through a private placement, $400 million principal amount of 9.875% senior secured notes due August 2018, at an issue price of 99.315%, resulting in an original issue discount of $2.7 million. The notes require semi-annual interest payments on February 15 and August 15, which commenced on February 15, 2011. The notes are guaranteed on a senior secured basis by MDDC and any future restricted subsidiaries of MDDC. The notes contain covenants that, among other things, limit MDFC's ability and the ability of MDDC to (i) incur additional indebtedness or liens; (ii) pay dividends or make distributions; (iii) make certain investments; (iv) sell or merge with other companies; and (v) enter into certain types of transactions. We believe that we are in compliance with these covenants at September 30, 2012.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

redemption price of 109.875% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the redemption date, with the net cash proceeds from certain equity offerings. In addition, at any time prior to August 15, 2013, MDFC may redeem up to an aggregate of 10% of the notes in each twelve month period at a redemption price of 103% of the principal amount thereof plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to, but not including, the redemption date. On or after August 15, 2013, MDFC shall have the option to redeem the notes, in whole or in part, at redemption prices (expressed as percentages of the principal amount) ranging from 104.938% beginning on August 15, 2014, to 102.469% beginning on August 15, 2015, to 100% beginning on August 15, 2016 and thereafter, plus accrued and unpaid interest, to the applicable redemption date.

Original Issue Discount

The original issue discounts have been recorded as offsets to the principal amounts of these notes and are being accreted to interest expense over the terms of the notes using the effective interest method. At September 30, 2012, the effective interest rates on the 9.50% notes due 2015 and the 9.875% notes due 2018 were 10.2% and 10.3%, respectively.

Indenture

The indenture governing both the 9.5% notes and the 9.875% notes allow for the incurrence of additional indebtedness, if after giving effect to such incurrence, our coverage ratio (as defined in the indenture, essentially a ratio of Consolidated EBITDA, as defined, to fixed charges, including interest) for a trailing four-quarter period on a pro forma basis would be at least 2.0 to 1.0. Such pro forma coverage ratio was above 2.0 to 1.0 at the dates in which these respective tranches of senior secured notes were issued; however, at September 30, 2012, our coverage ratio (as defined in the indenture) is below 2.0 to 1.0. Accordingly, the indenture prohibits us from incurring new indebtedness; however, we may still borrow under the $75 million senior secured credit facility.

NOTE 5. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Commitments

There have been no material changes to our commitments described under Note 6, Commitments and Contingencies, in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, filed with the SEC on March 30, 2012.

Atlantic City Tourism District

As part of the State of New Jersey's plan to revitalize Atlantic City, a new law was enacted in February 2011 requiring that a tourism district (the “Tourism District”) be created and managed by the CRDA. The Tourism District has been established to include each of the Atlantic City casino properties along with certain other tourism related areas of Atlantic City. The law requires that a public-private partnership be created between the CRDA and a private entity that represents existing and future casino licensees. The private entity, known as The Atlantic City Alliance (the “ACA”), has been established in the form of a not-for-profit limited liability company, of which MDDC is a member. The public-private partnership between the ACA and CRDA shall be for an initial term of five years and its general purpose shall be to revitalize the Tourism District. The law requires that a $5 million contribution be made to this effort by all casinos prior to 2012 followed by an annual amount of $30 million to be contributed by the casinos commencing January 1, 2012 for a term of five years. Each casino's share of the annual contributions will equate to a percentage representing its gross gaming revenue for the prior calendar year compared to the aggregate gross gaming revenues for that period for all casinos. As a result, we are expensing our pro rata share of the $155 million as incurred. As of December 31, 2011, we incurred expense of $0.9 million for the pro rata share of the initial contribution to the ACA. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, we incurred expense of $1.3 million and $4.1 million, respectively, related to our share of the 2012 contribution.

Contingencies

Legal Matters

We are subject to various claims and litigation in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, all pending legal matters are either adequately covered by insurance, or, if not insured, will not have a material adverse impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

NOTE 6. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

The authoritative accounting guidance for fair value measurements defines fair value, expands disclosure requirements around fair value and specifies a hierarchy of valuation techniques based on whether the inputs to those valuation techniques are observable or unobservable. Observable inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect the Company's market assumptions.

These inputs create the following fair value hierarchy:

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________


•	Level 1: Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets.


•	Level 2: Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs and significant value drivers are observable in active markets.


•	Level 3: Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable.

As required by the guidance for fair value measurements, financial assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Thus, assets and liabilities categorized as Level 3 may be measured at fair value using inputs that are observable (Levels 1 and 2) and unobservable (Level 3). Management's assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the valuation of assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.

Balances Measured at Fair Value

The fair value of our cash and cash equivalents was $32.3 million and $46.2 million as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The fair value of our cash and cash equivalents, classified in the fair value hierarchy as Level 1, is based on statements received from our banks at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011.

Balances Disclosed at Fair Value

The following tables present the fair value of our long-term debt at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011:



	September 30, 2012
	Outstanding Face				Estimated Fair		Fair Value
	Amount		Carrying Value		Value		Hierarchy
	(In thousands)
Amended Credit Facility	$	13,700	$	13,700	$	13,700	Level 2
9.50% Senior Secured Notes due 2015	398,000		388,893		408,010		Level 1
9.875% Senior Secured Notes due 2018	393,500		383,461		395,468		Level 1
Total long-term debt	$	805,200	$	786,054	$	817,178



	December 31, 2011
	Outstanding Face				Estimated Fair		Fair Value
	Amount		Carrying Value		Value		Hierarchy
	(In thousands)
Amended Credit Facility	$	40,200	$	40,200	$	40,200	Level 2
9.50% Senior Secured Notes due 2015	398,000		387,049		378,100		Level 1
9.875% Senior Secured Notes due 2018	393,500		382,559		358,085		Level 1
Total long-term debt	$	831,700	$	809,808	$	776,385

The estimated fair value of our amended credit facility at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 approximates its carrying value due to the short-term nature and variable repricing of the underlying Eurodollar loans comprising our amended credit facility. The estimated fair values of our senior secured notes are based on quoted market prices as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011.

There were no transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 measurements during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012.

NOTE 7. EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS

We contribute to multi-employer pension defined benefit plans under terms of collective-bargaining agreements that cover our union-represented employees. These unions cover certain of our culinary, hotel and other trade workers. We are obligated to make defined contributions under these plans.

MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

The significant risks of participating in multiemployer plans include, but are not limited to, the following:

•

We may elect to stop participating in our multi-employer plans. As a result of such election, we may be required to pay a withdrawal liability based on the underfunded status of the plan, as applicable. Our ability to fund such payments would be based on the results of our operations and subject to the risk factors that impact our business. If any of these risks actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected and it could affect our ability to meet our obligations to the multiemployer plan.


•	We may contribute assets to the multi-employer plan for the benefit of our covered employees that are used to provide benefits to employees of other participating employers.


•	We may be required to fund additional amounts if other participating employers stop contributing to the multiemployer plan.

Contributions, based on wages paid to covered employees, totaled $1.7 million and $1.4 million during the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively and $5.0 million and $4.2 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Our share of unfunded vested liabilities related to certain multi-employer pension plans was $68.3 million as of January 1, 2011.

We have a retirement savings plan under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code covering our non-union employees. The plan allows employees to defer up to the lesser of the Internal Revenue Code prescribed maximum amount or 100% of their income on a pre-tax basis through contributions to the plan. We expensed our voluntary contributions to the 401(k) plan of $0.4 million during each of the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, and $1.1 million during each of the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.

NOTE 8. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

We engage in transactions with BAC and MAC in the ordinary course of business. Related party balances are non-interest-bearing and are included in accounts receivable or accrued liabilities, as applicable, on the condensed consolidated balance sheets.

Compensation of Certain Employees

We reimburse BAC for compensation paid to employees performing services for us and for out-of-pocket costs and expenses incurred related to travel. BAC is also reimbursed for various payments made on our behalf, primarily related to third party insurance premiums and certain financing fees. The related amounts due to BAC for these types of expenditures paid by BAC were $0.4 million and $0.3 million at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. Reimbursable expenditures were $2.5 million and $2.4 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and $8.4 million and $7.1 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. In each case, reimbursable expenses are included in selling, general and administrative on the condensed consolidated statements of operations.

NOTE 9. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

We have evaluated all events or transactions that occurred after September 30, 2012. During this period, the following events occurred.

In October 2012, the primary assets held by Atlantic City Express Services ("ACES"), a nonconsolidated joint venture, were liquidated, and we received $2.8 million representing our share of the proceeds. The dissolution efforts of the joint venture continue with the further liquidation of the remaining miscellaneous assets. Our net investment in ACES is currently less than $0.1 million at November 14, 2012.

The Borgata was ordered to close from October 28, 2012 to November 2, 2012 by the NJDGE due to a post-tropical storm. As a result of the storm, the property suffered minor property damage, and the financial impact is still in the process of being assessed.

Item 2. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with, and is qualified in its entirety by, the condensed consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Unless the context otherwise requires, all references herein to “we,” “our,” “us” and the “Company,” or similar terms, refer to Marina District Development Company, LLC (“MDDC”) and Marina District Finance Company, Inc. (“MDFC”).

Overview

We developed, own and operate Borgata Hotel Casino and Spa, including The Water Club at Borgata (collectively, "Borgata"), located on a 45.6-acre site at Renaissance Pointe within the Marina District of Atlantic City, New Jersey. Since its opening on July 3, 2003, our property has been the leading hotel, casino and spa in the Atlantic City market. The property is an upscale destination resort that features a 160,000 square foot casino and 2,767 guest rooms and suites, comprised of 1,969 guest rooms and suites at the Borgata hotel and 798 guest rooms and suites at The Water Club. Borgata features six fine-dining restaurants, six casual dining restaurants, eight quick dining options, 16 retail boutiques, two European-style spas, two nightclubs and over 8,200 parking spaces. In addition, the property contains approximately 88,000 square feet of meeting and event space, as well as two entertainment venues. Its location at Renaissance Pointe provides guests with convenient access to the property via the Atlantic City Expressway Connector tunnel, without the delays associated with driving to competing casinos located on the Boardwalk of Atlantic City.

Borgata was developed as a joint venture between Boyd Atlantic City, Inc. (“BAC”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Boyd Gaming Corporation (“Boyd”), and MAC, Corp. (“MAC”), a second tier, wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International (the successor-in-interest to MGM MIRAGE) (“MGM”). The joint venture operates pursuant to an operating agreement between BAC and MAC (the “Operating Agreement”), under which BAC and MAC each originally held a 50% interest in Marina District Development Holding Co., LLC, MDDC's parent holding company (“MDDHC”).

As managing member of MDDHC pursuant to the terms of the Operating Agreement, BAC, through MDDHC, has responsibility for the oversight and management of our day-to-day operations. We do not presently record a management fee to BAC, as our management team performs these services directly or negotiates contracts to provide for these services. As a result, the costs of these services are directly borne by us and are reflected in our condensed consolidated financial statements. Boyd, the parent of BAC, is a diversified operator of 16 wholly owned gaming entertainment properties. Headquartered in Las Vegas, Boyd has other gaming operations in Nevada, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi and Indiana.

On March 24, 2010, MAC transferred its 50% ownership interest (the “MGM Interest”) in MDDHC, and certain land leased to MDDC, into a divestiture trust, of which MGM and its subsidiaries are the economic beneficiaries (the “Divestiture Trust”), for sale to a third-party in connection with MGM's settlement agreement with the Division of Gaming Enforcement Office of the Attorney General of the State of New Jersey (the “NJDGE”). MGM has subsequently announced that it has entered into an agreement with the NJDGE, as approved by the New Jersey Casino Control Commission ("NJCCC"). The amendment provides that the deadline for the mandated sale of the MGM Interest be increased by an additional 18 months to March 24, 2014. BAC has a right of first refusal on any sale of the MGM Interest. We continue to operate under normal business conditions throughout MGM's sales efforts, and do not believe that it has had or will have a material impact on our operations.

Overall Outlook

We continually work to position Borgata for greater success by strengthening our existing operations and growing through capital investment and other strategic initiatives. For instance, our second hotel, The Water Club, opened in June 2008. The Water Club is a 798-room hotel, featuring five swimming pools, a spa, and additional meeting room space. We incurred $6.1 million of capital expenditures in 2011 as part of our efforts to keep the gaming floor up-to-date and completed a $4 million renovation to our slot floor in 2010. Additionally, we have completed the process of renovating and refurbishing all of the Fiore suites and remaining rooms at the Borgata hotel during the nine months ended September 30, 2012. As part of our ongoing efforts to position Borgata as the premiere hotel and casino in Atlantic City, our estimated capital expenditures for full year 2012 are expected to be approximately $38 million and are primarily comprised of our room and suite renovation at the Borgata hotel and various maintenance capital projects.

We also continue to focus on further improving our operating margins to generate strong and stable cash flow.

We continue to be the leader in table games and slot market share in the Atlantic City market. We achieved 23.4% of the table game drop and 19.8% of the slot handle market share respectively, for the nine months ended September 30, 2012, which reflects the success of our focus on managing existing operations, growing non-gaming revenue streams, and reinvesting in our business to retain our position as the leading resort in the market.

We use several key performance indicators to evaluate the operations of our business. These key performance indicators include the following:


•	Gaming revenue indicators:


◦	Slot handle means the dollar amount wagered in slot machines and table game drop means the total amount of cash deposited in table games drop boxes, plus the sum of markers issued at all table games. Slot handle and table game drop are indicators of volume and/or market share.


◦	Slot win and table game hold means the difference between customer wagers and customer winnings on slot machines and table games, respectively. Slot win and table game hold percentages represent the relationship between slot handle and table game drop to gaming wins and losses.


•	Food and beverage revenue indicators: average guest check is the average amount spent per customer visit and is an indicator of volume and product offerings; number of guests served is an indicator of volume; and the cost per guest served is an indicator of operating margin.


•	Room revenue indicators: hotel occupancy rate is an indicator of volume measuring the utilization of our available rooms; and average daily rate ("ADR") is a price indicator.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Summary of Operating Results

Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

The following provides a summary of certain key operating results:



	Three Months Ended					Nine Months Ended
	September 30,					September 30,
	2012			2011		2012			2011
	(In thousands)
Net revenues	$	187,091		$	202,018	$	538,657		$	553,864
Operating income	18,928			35,471		59,474			72,506
Net income (loss)	(1,812		)	12,926		(2,581		)	7,976

Revel Entertainment formally opened a new property on the boardwalk in Atlantic City earlier this year, and a property in the Marina District was remodeled and rebranded. However, these projects did not generate incremental growth in the market. Rather, they simply shifted existing business from other properties, including Borgata. Regardless, we continue to be the leader in the Atlantic City market, reflecting the quality of our amenities, as well as the hospitality and service we provided to our customers. Although maintaining our table games results at historical levels has been challenging, we continue to grow other areas in our business, as hotel revenue, slot drop and slot win increased over the nine months ending September 30, 2012, compared to the same period in the prior year.

Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

Net revenues

Due to increased local and regional competition, net revenues decreased $14.9 million, or 7.4%, during the three months ended September 30, 2012, compared to the same period in the prior year. The decrease in net revenues is primarily due to a $14.4 million decrease in gaming revenues, a $1.1 million decrease in food and beverage revenues, and a $1.4 million increase in promotional allowances that were slightly offset by an $1.2 million increase in room revenues. On May 25, 2012, Revel Entertainment formally opened a new property in Atlantic City which competes with us for gaming customers. We will continue to analyze the impact of the new competition on our business, including the impact on our promotional allowances within our cost containment measures.

Operating income

Operating income decreased $16.5 million, or 46.6%, during the three months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to the corresponding period of the prior year, and was negatively impacted by the flow-through effect of decreased gaming and food and beverage revenues. The decreases in gaming and food and beverage revenues were offset by a $1.6 million gain on a subrogated insurance settlement related to the fire that occurred on September 23, 2007 during the construction of the Water Club.

Net income (loss)

Net loss was $1.8 million during the three months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to net income of $12.9 million in the corresponding period of the prior year, due primarily to the flow-through effect of the decreased gaming and food and beverage revenues. Despite the increase in local and regional competition, we remain committed to containing costs and targeted spend. Our promotional allowances as a percentage of gross revenues increased to 25.1% from 23.2%, for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the same period in the prior year, largely due to the impact of lower gross gaming revenues.

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

Net revenues

Net revenues decreased $15.2 million, or 2.7%, during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, compared to the same period in the prior year, as we experienced weaker than expected second and third quarter results that were offset by relatively strong performance during the three months ended March 31, 2012. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we experienced a decrease of $20.4 million in gross gaming revenues as compared to the prior year period, largely driven by an 8.3% decrease in table game drop due to increased local and regional competition.

Operating income

Operating income decreased $13.0 million, or 18.0%, during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to the corresponding period of the prior year, and was primarily driven by the flow-through effects of the $20.4 million decrease in gaming revenues due to increased local and regional competition, and was positively impacted by a $3.8 million gain from proceeds on a subrogated insurance settlement related to the fire that occurred on September 23, 2007, during the construction of the Water Club.

Net income (loss)

During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we realized a net loss of $2.6 million, as compared to net income of $8.0 million in the corresponding period of the prior year, primarily due the decrease in gaming revenues. Gaming revenues were negatively impacted by a $95.9 million and $85.0 million decrease in table games drop and slot drop, respectively. The decrease in table games drop and slot drop resulted in a $16.4 million and $5.1 million decrease in table game win and slot win, respectively. These decreases were partially offset by a $3.8 million gain from insurance proceeds related to the fire that occurred on September 23, 2007, during the construction of the Water Club. Additionally, there was an increase of $6.6 million in selling, general and administrative primarily related to property taxes. We continue to focus on our cost containment measures and lower customer reinvestment as promotional allowances as a percentage of gross revenues remained unchanged at 23.6% of gross revenues during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, compared to the corresponding period of the prior year.

Operating Revenues

We derive the majority of our gross revenues from our gaming operations, which produced approximately 65% and 67% of gross revenues for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and 67% and 68% of gross revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Gaming revenues are significantly comprised of the net win from our slot machine operations and from table game wins. Food and beverage gross revenues represent the next most significant revenue source, which produced approximately 16% of gross revenues for each of the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, and each of the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011. Rooms produced approximately 14% and 13% of gross revenues for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and 13% and 12% of gross revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Other revenues (including our spa, retail, entertainment and ancillary services) contributed approximately 5% of gross revenues during each of the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, and each of the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.

The following table presents our gross revenues and expenses for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.



	Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
	September 30,				September 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In thousands)
GROSS REVENUES
Gaming	$	162,360	$	176,738	$	470,285	$	490,732
Food and beverage	40,234		41,337		112,350		112,860
Room	34,220		33,069		91,048		89,177
Other	12,809		11,989		31,547		31,889
	$	249,623	$	263,133	$	705,230	$	724,658
OPERATING COSTS AND EXPENSES
Gaming	$	67,592	$	68,944	$	195,225	$	199,368
Food and beverage	19,744		19,459		56,533		53,415
Room	3,990		4,106		10,944		10,996
Other	11,030		10,066		25,345		25,921
	$	102,356	$	102,575	$	288,047	$	289,700
MARGINS
Gaming	58.4%		61.0%		58.5%		59.4%
Food and beverage	50.9%		52.9%		49.7%		52.7%
Room	88.3%		87.6%		88.0%		87.7%
Other	13.9%		16.0%		19.7%		18.7%

Three Months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

Overall, gross revenues during the three months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $13.5 million, or 5.1%, as compared to the corresponding period of the prior year. The decrease in gross revenues was primarily driven by a $14.4 million, or 8.1%, decrease in gaming revenues and a $1.1 million, or 2.7% decrease in food and beverage revenues. Promotional spend increased to $62.5 million, or 25.1% of gross revenues during the three months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to 23.2% for the three months ended September 30, 2011, due to a decrease in gross gaming revenues and higher promotional spend related to an increase in local competition. Costs and expenses related to gaming, food and beverage, room and other decreased slightly during the three months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to the corresponding period of the prior year due to lower gaming activity and our focus on cost containment measures.

Gaming

Gaming revenues decreased $14.4 million, or 8.1%, during the three months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to the corresponding period of the prior year. Table game win decreased $15.9 million, or 28.6%, driven by a $46.1 million or 10.9% decrease in table game drop and a 250 basis point decrease in table games hold percentage compared to the corresponding period in the prior year. Slot win increased $1.6 million, or 1.4%, driven by a 20 point basis increase in slot hold percentage, while slot handle remained relatively unchanged as compared to the corresponding period of the prior year. We continue to be the leader in table games and slot market share and achieved 23.5% of the table game drop market share and 19.9% of the slot handle market share for the three months ended September 30, 2012. Gaming expenses decreased $1.4 million, but were more than offset by the $14.4 million decrease in gaming revenues, resulting in a decrease in the gaming margin to 58.4% during the three months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to 61.0% during the corresponding period of the prior year.

Food and Beverage

Food and beverage revenues decreased by $1.1 million, or 2.7%, during the three months ended September 30, 2012, compared with the corresponding period of the prior year. The decrease was primarily driven by a 1.0% decrease in the average guest check despite a less than 1.0% increase in the number of guests served. However, overall margins decreased to 50.9% during the three months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to 52.9% during the corresponding period of the prior year, primarily due to the decrease in gross revenues while the cost per guest served remained relatively unchanged.

Room

During the three months ended September 30, 2012, we had 244,807 occupied rooms, representing an average occupancy rate of 96.2% at an ADR of $137.68, compared to 236,324 occupied rooms, representing an average occupancy rate of 95.9% at an ADR of $137.65 during the comparable period in the prior year, the net effect of which resulted in an increase of $1.2 million, or 3.5%, in room revenue. Room margins increased to 88.3% from 87.6%, due to a $1.2 million increase in revenues, while cost per room remained relatively unchanged compared to the same period in the prior year.

Nine Months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

Overall, gross revenues during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $19.4 million, or 2.7%, as compared to the corresponding period of the prior year. The decrease in gross revenues was primarily driven by a $20.4 million, or 4.2% decrease in gaming revenues. Promotional spend decreased to $166.6 million, representing 23.6% of gross revenues during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, and 2011, due to our targeted marketing efforts and focus on operating margins. Costs and expenses related to gaming, food and beverage, room and other decreased by $1.7 million, or 0.6%, during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the corresponding period of the prior year.

Gaming

Gaming revenues decreased $20.4 million, or 4.2%, during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to the corresponding period of the prior year. Table game win decreased $16.4 million, or 11.1%, due to a $95.9 million, or 8.3% decrease in table game drop and a 40 basis point decrease in table games hold percentage. Slot win decreased $5.1 million, or 1.6%, primarily due to a $85.0 million, or 2.2%, decrease in slot drop while slot hold remained relatively unchanged. We continue to be the leader in table games and slot market share and achieved 23.4% of the table game drop market share and 19.8% of the slot handle market share for the nine months ended September 30, 2012. Gaming margins decreased to 58.5% during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, from 59.4% in the corresponding period of the prior year despite our targeted promotional spend, as the decrease in gaming revenues more than offset the decrease in gaming costs. We remain committed to cost containment efforts and effective marketing spend, and we reduced promotional allowances by $4.2 million while keeping our promotional allowances as a percentage of gross revenues at 23.6% for each of the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.

Food and Beverage

Food and beverage revenues decreased $0.5 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, compared with the corresponding period of the prior year, primarily due to a slight decrease in the number of guests served. Food and beverage margins decreased to 49.7% during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to 52.7% during the corresponding period of the prior year, due to a 2.9% increase in the cost per guest served.

Room

During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we had 665,372 occupied rooms, representing an average occupancy rate of 87.8% at an ADR of $134.80, compared to 652,192 occupied rooms, representing an average occupancy rate of 87.9% at an ADR of $134.36 during the comparable period in the prior year, the net effect of which resulted in a increase of $1.9 million, or 2.1%, in room revenue.

Other Costs and Expenses

The following costs and expenses are discussed below:



	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30,						September 30,
	2012			2011			2012			2011
	(In thousands)
Selling, general and administrative	$	35,474		$	32,859		$	103,001		$	96,405
Maintenance and utilities	15,866			16,609			44,502			47,209
Depreciation and amortization	16,069			14,562			47,162			47,081
Other operating items, net	(1,602		)	(58		)	(3,529		)	963

Three Months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

Selling, General and Administrative

Selling, general and administrative expenses, as a percentage of gross revenues, were 14.2% and 12.5% during the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Selling, general and administrative expenses increased $2.6 million, or 8.0%, primarily due to an increase in property taxes and other fees associated with the Tourism District and Atlantic City Alliance, ("ACA"), and an increase in advertising due to new competition compared to the same period in the prior year.

Maintenance and Utilities

Maintenance and utilities expenses, as a percentage of gross revenues, were fairly consistent at 6.4% and 6.3% during the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. There were no major maintenance projects undertaken compared to the same period in the prior year.

Depreciation and Amortization

Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $1.5 million, or 10.3%, during the three months ended September 30, 2012, compared to the same period in 2011. The increase was due to the timing of the completion of the room remodel, as there were no other significant expansion capital projects placed into service during the comparable period in the prior year.

Other Operating Items, Net

Other operating items, net, generally includes gains on insurance settlements, losses on the disposal or impairment of certain assets, costs associated with property damage from natural disasters and costs for preopening expenses. During the three months ended September 30, 2012, we recorded a gain from insurance settlement of $1.6 million for a subrogation claim related to the fire that occurred in 2007 during the construction of the Water Club.

Nine Months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

Selling, General and Administrative

Selling, general and administrative expenses, as a percentage of gross revenues, were 14.6% and 13.3% during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Selling, general and administrative expenses increased $6.6 million, or 6.8%, primarily due to an increase in property taxes and other fees associated with the Tourism District and ACA, and an increase in advertising due to new competition compared to the same period in the prior year.

Maintenance and Utilities

Maintenance and utilities expenses, as a percentage of gross revenues, were fairly consistent at 6.3% and 6.5% during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. There were no major maintenance projects undertaken compared to the same period in the prior year.

Depreciation and Amortization

Depreciation and amortization expense increased slightly by less than $0.1 million, or 0.2%, during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. The increase in depreciation associated with the completion of the room remodel during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, was offset by the full depreciation of certain assets since the prior period, and the fact that no significant capital expenditures were placed into service in the prior year period.

Other Operating Items, Net

Other operating items, net, generally includes gains on insurance settlements, losses on the disposal or impairment of certain assets, costs associated with property damage from natural disasters and costs for preopening expenses. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012 we recorded a gain from insurance settlement of $3.8 million, partially offset by preopening expenses of $0.2 million and loss on the disposals of assets during the normal course of business.

Other Expenses

Three and Nine Months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011

Interest Expense

The following table summarizes information with respect to our interest expense on outstanding indebtedness:



	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30,						September 30,
	2012			2011			2012			2011
	(In thousands)
Interest expense, net	$	20,754		$	20,995		$	61,885		$	63,064
Average outstanding long-term debt	811,650			789,911			816,700			809,548
Weighted average interest rate	10.2		%	9.6		%	10.1		%	9.6		%

Interest expense decreased 1.1% and 1.9%, respectively, during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, as compared to the respective periods in the prior year due to an increase in capitalized interest from the refurbishment of the hotel rooms as compared to corresponding periods in the prior year when there was no capitalized interest, and a decrease in interest expense on the revolver from the reduction of the credit facility from $150 million to $75 million as a result of the amendment to the credit facility entered into on November 11, 2011. During the three and nine months ended September 2012 and 2011, average outstanding

balances and average interest rates increased; however, interest expense was partially offset by the increase in capitalized interest from the refurbishment of the hotel rooms as compared to the corresponding periods in the prior year when there was less capitalized interest.

State Income Taxes

The following table presents our state income tax provision (benefit) and effective tax rate as a percentage of pre-tax income.



	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30,						September 30,
	2012			2011			2012			2011
	(In thousands)
State income tax provision (benefit)	$	(14	)	$	1,550		$	170		$	1,466
Income (loss) before state income taxes	(1,826		)	14,476			(2,411		)	9,442
Effective state income tax rate	0.8		%	10.7		%	(7.1		)%	15.5		%

The effective state income tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 was 0.8% and 10.7%, respectively, and the effective state income tax rate for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 was (7.1)% and 15.5%, respectively. The change in the effective tax rate results primarily from the shift in profit and loss before income tax for the respective periods, as well as the impact of certain recurring permanent tax adjustments and accrued interest on uncertain tax benefits.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

Financial Position

There were no significant changes in our financial position since December 31, 2011.

Working Capital

Historically, we have operated with minimal levels of working capital in order to minimize borrowings and related interest costs under our amended credit facility. As of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, we had balances of cash and cash equivalents of $32.3 million and $46.2 million, respectively; however, we had a working capital deficit of $21.9 million and $8.6 million as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The increase in our working capital deficit during the current period is primarily due to a decrease in our cash balance as of September 30, 2012, reflecting repayments of borrowings under our amended credit facility since December 31, 2011.

Our amended credit facility generally provides us with necessary funds for our day-to-day operations and interest payments, as well as capital expenditures. On a daily basis, we evaluate our cash position and adjust the balance under our amended credit facility as necessary, by either borrowing or paying it down with excess cash. We also plan the timing and the amounts of our capital expenditures. We believe that our cash and cash equivalents balance, our cash flows from operations and our existing financing sources will be sufficient to meet our normal operating requirements and to fund capital expenditures during at least the next twelve months. The source of funds for the repayment of our debt or our capital expenditures is derived primarily from cash flows from operations and availability under our amended credit facility, to the extent availability exists after we meet our working capital needs, and subject to restrictive covenants.

If availability does not exist under our amended credit facility, or we are not otherwise able to draw funds on our amended credit facility, additional financing may not be available to us, and if available, may not be on terms favorable to us.

Liquidity

Our property has historically generated significant operating cash flow, with the majority of our revenue being cash-based. Our industry is capital intensive; we rely heavily on the ability of our property to generate operating cash flows in order to repay debt financing and associated interest costs, pay income taxes, fund maintenance capital expenditures, and provide excess cash for future improvements and payment of limited distributions, subject to restrictive covenants related to our debt obligations.

We generate substantial cash flows from operating activities. We use the cash flows generated by our operations to fund debt service, to reinvest in existing facilities for both refurbishment and expansion projects, to pursue additional growth opportunities and to pay allowable distributions to the members of MDDHC, subject to restrictive covenants related to our debt obligations. When necessary, we supplement the cash flows generated by our operations with funds provided by financing activities to balance our cash requirements.

Our ability to fund our operations, pay our debt obligations and fund planned capital expenditures depends, in part, upon economic and other factors that are beyond our control, and disruptions in capital markets and restrictive covenants related to our debt could impact our ability to secure additional funds through financing activities.

We cannot provide assurances that our business will generate sufficient cash flows from operations, or that future borrowings will be available to us, to fund our liquidity needs and pay our indebtedness. If we are unable to meet our liquidity needs or pay our indebtedness when it is due, we may have to reduce or delay refurbishment and expansion projects, reduce expenses, sell assets or attempt to restructure our debt. In addition, we have pledged substantially all of our assets as collateral for our senior secured notes and our amended credit facility, and if the obligation to repay such debt is accelerated, for any reason, there can be no assurance that we will have sufficient assets to repay our indebtedness.

Indebtedness

Bank Credit Facility

Significant Terms

On November 11, 2011, MDFC entered into an amended credit facility among MDFC, MDDC, certain other financial institutions and Wells Fargo, as administrative agent for the Lenders. The amendment modifies certain terms of the former credit facility among the Company, the Lenders from time to time party thereto, the Administrative Agent, and Wells Fargo.

The amended credit facility: (i) reduced the aggregate commitments under the amended credit facility to a maximum amount of $75 million; (ii) decreased the minimum Consolidated EBITDA (as defined in the amended credit facility) to $125 million for a trailing twelve-month period ending on the last day of a calendar quarter; (iii) eliminated the covenant requiring us to have a minimum amount of cash, cash equivalents, and unused commitments; and (iv) added a covenant prohibiting us from borrowing under the amended credit facility, to purchase our senior secured notes at any time when the total amount outstanding under the amended credit facility is $65 million or more.

Guarantees

Neither BAC, its parent, its affiliates, nor the Divestiture Trust are guarantors of the amended credit facility.

Interest Rate

Outstanding borrowings under the amended credit facility accrue interest at a selected rate based upon either: (i) the highest of (a) the agent bank's quoted prime rate, (b) the one-month Eurodollar rate plus 1.00%, or (c) the daily federal funds rate plus 1.50%, and in any event not less than 1.50% or (ii) the Eurodollar rate, plus with respect to each of clause (i) and (ii) an applicable margin as provided in the amended credit facility. In addition, a commitment fee is incurred on the unused portion of the amended credit facility ranging from 0.50% per annum to 1.00% per annum.

Financial and Other Covenants

Compliance with Financial Covenants

We believe that we were in compliance with the amended credit facility covenants, including the minimum Consolidated EBITDA, which, at September 30, 2012, was $145.5 million.

Debt Financing Costs

Senior Secured Notes

9.5% Senior Secured Notes Due 2015

Significant Terms

9.875% Senior Secured Notes Due 2018

Significant Terms

At any time prior to August 15, 2014, the notes may be redeemed at 100% of the principal amount thereof, plus a “make-whole premium” and accrued and unpaid interest. In addition, until August 15, 2013, MDFC may redeem up to 35% of the notes at a redemption price of 109.875% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the redemption date, with the net cash proceeds from certain equity offerings. In addition, at any time prior to August 15, 2013, MDFC may redeem up to an aggregate of 10% of the notes in each twelve month period at a redemption price of 103% of the principal amount thereof plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to, but not including, the redemption date. On or after August 15, 2013, MDFC shall have the option to redeem the notes, in whole or in part, at redemption prices (expressed as percentages of the principal amount) ranging from 104.938% beginning on August 15, 2014, to 102.469% beginning on August 15, 2015, to 100% beginning on August 15, 2016 and thereafter, plus accrued and unpaid interest, to the applicable redemption date.

Original Issue Discount

Indenture

facility.

Cash Flows Summary



	Nine Months Ended
	September 30,
	2012			2011
	(In thousands)
Net cash provided by operating activities	$	42,981		$	64,604
Cash flows from investing activities:
Capital expenditures	(33,994		)	(19,488		)
Insurance proceeds from subrogation settlement	3,809			—
Net cash used in investing activities	(30,185		)	(19,488		)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Borrowings under amended credit facility	515,300			574,700
Payments under amended credit facility	(541,800		)	(620,600		)
Payments to repurchase senior secured notes	—			(8,198		)
Debt financing costs, net	(217		)	(937		)
Net cash used in financing activities	(26,717		)	(55,035		)
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents	$	(13,921	)	$	(9,919	)

Cash Flows from Operating Activities

During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we generated operating cash flow of $43.0 million, compared to $64.6 million during the same period of the prior year. Operating cash flow decreased primarily due to a $10.6 million decrease in net income resulting from a $13.6 million change in prepaid expenses and other current assets and $7.7 million change in accounts payable and accrued liabilities, which were offset by a $3.8 million gain from the settlements of a subrogated insurance claims.

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

Capital expenditures during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 were $34.0 million and $19.5 million, respectively. Cash paid for capital expenditures during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 included amounts spent for our hotel room and suite renovation, slot products and food and beverage facilities. Cash paid for capital expenditures during the nine months ended September 30, 2011, included an energy management initiative at the Borgata hotel, the purchase of gaming equipment and other renovation projects at the hotel. There were more significant projects during the nine months ended September 30, 2012, including the hotel room and suite renovation, compared to the same period in the prior year. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we received $3.8 million in proceeds from subrogated insurance settlements related to the fire that occurred on September 23, 2007 during the construction of the Water Club.

Cash Flows from Financing Activities

We have significant uses for our cash flows, including interest payments, the repayment of debt, and distributions to our member, although limited by the restrictive covenants related to our amended credit facility.

Depending on our cash flow needs, we borrow and repay amounts under our amended credit facility to manage our overall cash position.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2012 we repaid a net $26.5 million on our amended credit facility, compared to net repayments of $45.9 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2011. We also repaid $8.2 million for the retirement of our senior secured notes during the nine months ended September 30, 2011.

Other Items Affecting Liquidity

There have been significant disruptions in the global capital markets that have adversely impacted the ability of borrowers to access capital, and we expect such disruptions to continue for the foreseeable future. Despite these disruptions, we anticipate the ability to fund our capital requirements using cash flows from operations and availability under our amended credit facility, to the extent availability exists after we meet our working capital needs for the next twelve months. Any additional financing that is needed may not be available to us or, if available, may not be on terms favorable to us. The outcome of the following specific matters, including our commitments and contingencies, may also affect our liquidity.

Capital Spending and Development

We continually perform on-going refurbishment and maintenance at our facilities to maintain our standards of quality. Certain of these maintenance costs are capitalized, if such improvement or refurbishment extends the life of the related asset, while other maintenance costs that do not so qualify are expensed as incurred. Although we do not have any present future expansion projects, if any opportunities arise, such projects will require significant capital commitments. The commitment of capital and the related timing thereof are contingent upon, among other things, negotiation of final agreements and receipt of approvals from the appropriate regulatory bodies. We must also comply with covenants and restrictions set forth in our debt agreements.

Our estimated total capital expenditures for 2012 are expected to be approximately $38 million and are primarily comprised of our room and suite renovation at the Borgata hotel and various maintenance capital projects. We intend to fund such capital expenditures through our amended credit facility and operating cash flows.

Commitments and Contingencies

There have been no material changes to our commitments described under Part II. Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, filed with the SEC on March 30, 2012.

Atlantic City Tourism District

As part of the State of New Jersey's plan to revitalize Atlantic City, a new law was enacted in February 2011 requiring that a tourism district (the “Tourism District”) be created and managed by the CRDA. The Tourism District has been established to include each of the Atlantic City casino properties along with certain other tourism related areas of Atlantic City. The law requires that a public-private partnership be created between the CRDA and a private entity that represents existing and future casino licensees. The private entity, known as the ACA, has been established in the form of a not-for-profit limited liability company, of which MDDC is a member. The public-private partnership between the ACA and CRDA shall be for an initial term of five years and its general purpose shall be to revitalize the Tourism District. The law requires that a $5 million contribution be made to this effort by all casinos prior to 2012 followed by an annual amount of $30 million to be contributed by the casinos commencing January 1, 2012 for a term of five years. Each casino's share of the annual contributions will equate to a percentage representing its gross gaming revenue for the prior calendar year compared to the aggregate gross gaming revenues for that period for all casinos. As a result, we are expensing our pro rata share of the $155 million as incurred. As of December 31, 2011, we incurred expense of $0.9 million for the pro rata share of the initial contribution to the ACA. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, we incurred expense of $1.3 million and $4.1 million, respectively, related to our share of the 2012 contribution.

Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

Our off balance sheet arrangements mainly consist of the following:

Atlantic City Express Services

We previously entered into an agreement with two other Atlantic City casinos to form ACES. With each member having a 33.3% interest, this New Jersey limited liability company was formed for the purpose of contracting with New Jersey Transit to operate express rail service between Manhattan and Atlantic City. Each member had guaranteed, jointly and severally, liability for all terms, covenants and conditions of the ACES agreement with New Jersey Transit consisting primarily of the necessary operating and capital expenses of ACES. ACES suspended services in September 2011, and accordingly, the joint venture agreement terminated in January 2012, and we recorded a non-cash impairment charge related to our investment in ACES of $1.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2011, representing the amount by which the carrying value of the investment exceeded its estimated liquidation value.

In October 2012, the primary assets held by ACES, a nonconsolidated joint venture, were liquidated, and we received $2.8 million representing our share of the proceeds. The dissolution efforts of the joint venture continue with the further liquidation of the remaining miscellaneous assets. Our net investment in ACES is currently less than $0.1 million at November 14, 2012.

Indemnification Obligations

We have entered into certain agreements that contain indemnification provisions. In addition, our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Restated Bylaws (in the case of MDFC) and our Operating Agreement (in the case of MDDC) contain provisions that provide for indemnification of our directors, officers, employees and other agents to the maximum extent permitted by law.

Critical Accounting Policies

Our discussion and analysis of our results of operations and liquidity and capital resources are based on our consolidated financial statements which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or GAAP. In accordance with GAAP, we are required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts included

in our consolidated financial statements. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. On an ongoing basis, management reviews and refines those estimates, the following of which materially impact our consolidated financial statements: the recoverability of long-lived assets; determination of self-insured reserves; and provisions for deferred tax assets, certain tax liabilities and uncertain tax positions.

Judgments are based on information including, but not limited to, historical experience, industry trends, conventional practices, expert opinions, terms of existing agreements and information from outside sources. Judgments are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty, and therefore actual results could differ from these estimates.

A description of our critical accounting policies can be found in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, as originally filed with the SEC on March 30, 2012.

Important Information Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a “safe harbor” for forward-looking statements. Certain information included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains statements that are forward-looking, including, but not limited to, statements relating to our business strategy and development activities as well as other capital spending, financing sources, the effects of regulation (including gaming and tax regulations), expectations concerning future operations, margins, profitability and competition. Any statements contained in this report that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in some cases you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology containing works such as “may,” “will,” “might,” “expect,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “outlook,” “could,” “would,” “estimate,” “continue,” “pursue,” “target,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “seek,” “estimate,” “should,” “may,” “assume,” and “continue,” or the negative thereof or comparable terminology. Such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the following:


•	Our efforts to strengthen existing operations and growth through capital investment and other strategic initiatives.


•	The effect of our ongoing litigation on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.


•	Our expectations with respect to the effect that the anticipated sale of the MGM Interest will have on our operations.


•	Our belief that the length of the recovery from the severe economic recession may continue to have a profound effect on consumer spending.


•	Our expectation that the significant disruptions in the U.S. and global capital markets that have adversely impacted the ability of borrowers to access capital will continue for the foreseeable future.


•	Our ability to fund our capital requirements using cash flows from operations and availability under our amended credit facility.


•	The sufficiency of our cash and cash equivalents balance, our cash flows from operations and existing financing sources to fund normal operating requirements and to fund capital expenditures during at least the next twelve months.


•	Our estimated total capital expenditures for 2012, our expectation that they will be primarily comprised of our room and suite renovation project and various maintenance capital projects and our intention to fund such capital expenditures through our amended credit facility and operating cash flows.


•	The effect of fluctuations in interest rates on our results.


•	The intense competition in our industry and the possibility of expansion of gaming facilities in the Atlantic City market and nearby states, including the anticipated timing and scope of the development plans of our competitors, and its potential effect on our business.


•	The estimates underlying our critical accounting policies and that assumptions made in the preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP may differ from actual results.


•	That operating results for previous periods are not necessarily indicative of future performance.


•	The effect of recently enacted and proposed legislation, including without limitation, legislation concerning the regulation of gaming, the creation of a tourism district in New Jersey, bans on smoking and increases and decreases in tax rates on the Atlantic City market.


•	The effects of adverse weather conditions on our operations.


•	Our estimated exposure with respect to the culinary and hotel workers' union Local 54/UNITE HERE National Retirement Fund, and other funds to which we contribute, and the impact of the associated rehabilitation plans on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.


•	Our estimates of future liability with respect to our self-insurance reserves and the sufficiency of our tax reserves to cover uncertain tax positions.


•	The likelihood of interruption to our rights in the land we lease under long-term leases.


•	Our estimated annual energy costs.

Forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially from those discussed in any such statement. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to the following:


•	Our ability to comply with debt covenants and generate sufficient cash flow to service our substantial debt.


•	The current economic downturn and its impact on consumer and discretionary spending, and the risk that a continuation or deepening of the economic downturn will result in further decreases in the number of visitors to Atlantic City and the amount they spend on gaming, dining, entertainment and other travel and leisure activities at Borgata.


•	The effects of volatility and weakness in worldwide credit and financial markets.


•	Our dependence on Borgata for all of our cash flow, which subjects us to greater risks than a gaming company with more operating properties or that is more geographically diverse.

•

The effects of intense competition that exists in the gaming industry and the risk of increased competition arising from, among other things, new casino development and construction activities in Atlantic City and other states in the mid-Atlantic region from which we attract most of our customers; aggressive marketing, promotional and other actions taken by our competitors in reaction to adverse economic conditions; and changes to gaming regulations or gaming taxes that expand gaming, lower the gaming tax rate in other nearby states or that otherwise result in increased competition to us.


•	The risk that our casino, hotel and other operations could be halted for a temporary or extended period of time, as a result of casualty, flooding, forces of nature, snowstorms, hurricanes and other adverse weather conditions, mechanical failure, extended or extraordinary maintenance, government shutdowns, labor disputes or regulatory compliance issues, among other causes.


•	The effects of events adversely impacting the mid-Atlantic region from which we draw most of our customers, including the effects of the current economic downturn, war, terrorist or similar activity or adverse weather conditions and other natural disasters or the outbreak of an infectious disease impacting the mid-Atlantic region.


•	The possibility that our insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover the losses that our property could suffer.


•	The effects of the extensive governmental gaming regulation and taxation policies that we are subject to, as well as any changes in laws and regulations, including increased taxes and smoking restrictions, which could harm our business and increase competition.


•	The risk that our substantial indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health and prevent us from fulfilling our obligations under our amended credit facility and senior secured notes.

•

The risk associated with the anticipated sale of MAC's 50% interest in MDDHC, which is required to take place no later than March 24, 2014, and its potential effects on our business and operations if our other joint venture partner, BAC, elects not to exercise its right of first refusal to purchase such interest. Other than its right of first refusal, BAC generally does not have the ability to select the new venture partner and the ongoing operations of Borgata could change if, for example, a new operating agreement is entered into with the new venture partner.


•	The risk that our existing gaming license is not renewed, or that we may not receive gaming or other necessary licenses for new projects or that Gaming Authorities may revoke, suspend, condition or limit our gaming licenses and casino alcoholic beverage licenses, impose substantial fines and take other adverse actions against us.


•	The risk relating to legal proceedings.


•	Our dependence on key members of existing management and our ability to attract, retain and motivate employees.


•	Our ability to obtain capital commitments to fund our capital improvement projects on terms favorable to us, if at all.


•	The risks relating to compliance with extensive environmental regulation, which creates uncertainty regarding future environmental expenditures and liabilities.


•	The risk inherent by virtue of our ownership by Boyd (through its ownership of BAC) and the Divestiture Trust, and the possibility that their interests as equity holders may compete or otherwise may conflict with our interests or the interests of a holder of the notes as a creditor.


•	The risk that instability in the financial condition of our lenders could have on our amended credit facility and the impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition.


•	The risks related to our participation in multi-employer pension plans.


•	The risks related to initiatives to legalize gaming in certain jurisdictions, and voter challenges to gaming in existing jurisdictions.

Additional factors that could cause actual results to differ are discussed in Part II. Item 1A. Risk Factors of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012 and in other current and periodic reports provided by us from time to time. All forward-looking statements in this document are made as of the date hereof, based on information available to us as of the date hereof, and we assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statement.


Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

As of September 30, 2012, there were no material changes to the information previously reported under Item 7A. in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the SEC on March 30, 2012.

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

As of the end of the period covered by this Report, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)). Our disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC's rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information we are required to disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Based on the evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period covered by this Report.

There has been no change in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act) that occurred during our most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected or is reasonably likely to materially affect our internal control over financial reporting.

PART II. Other Information


Item 1.	Legal Proceedings

We are subject to various claims and litigation in the normal course of business. Management believes all pending legal matters are either adequately covered by insurance, or if not insured, will not have a material adverse impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.


Item 1A.	Risk Factors

The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. If this were to happen, the value of our senior secured notes could decline significantly, and investors could lose all or part of their investment. You should carefully consider the risks described below together with all of the other information included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. We encourage investors to review the risks and uncertainties relating to our business disclosed under Part I. Item 1A. Risk Factors, in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the SEC on March 30, 2012.

Risks Related to our Business

Our business is particularly sensitive to reductions in discretionary consumer spending as a result of downturns in the economy.

Consumer demand for entertainment and other amenities at casino hotel properties, such as ours, are particularly sensitive to downturns in the economy and the corresponding impact on discretionary spending on leisure activities. Changes in discretionary consumer spending or consumer preferences brought about by factors such as perceived or actual general economic conditions, effects of the current decline in consumer confidence in the economy, including the current housing, employment and credit crisis, the impact of high energy and food costs, the increased cost of travel, the potential for continued bank failures, decreased disposable consumer income and wealth, or fears of war and future acts of terrorism could further reduce customer demand for the amenities that we offer, thus imposing practical limits on pricing and negatively impacting our results of operations and financial condition.

Weak economic conditions have adversely affected tourism and spending in Atlantic City. Since our business model relies on consumer expenditures on entertainment, luxury and other discretionary items, continuation or deepening of the economic downturn will further adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Intense competition exists in our gaming market, and increased competition may have an adverse effect on our business results of operations and financial condition.

The gaming industry is highly competitive for both customers and employees, including those at the management level. We compete

with numerous casinos and hotel casinos of varying quality and size in market areas where our properties are located. We also compete with other non-gaming resorts and vacation destinations, and with various other casino and other entertainment businesses, and could compete with any new forms of gaming that may be legalized in the future. The casino entertainment business is characterized by competitors that vary considerably in their size, quality of facilities, number of operations, brand identities, marketing and growth strategies, financial strength and capabilities, level of amenities, management talent and geographic diversity. In most markets, we compete directly with other casino facilities operating in the immediate and surrounding market areas. In some markets, we face competition from nearby markets in addition to direct competition within our market areas.

In recent years, with fewer new markets opening for development, competition in existing markets has intensified. We have invested in expanding existing facilities and developing new facilities including a $200 million casino and non-gaming expansion completed in early 2006 and the opening of The Water Club, a 798-room upscale boutique hotel, in June 2008. Our competitors have also invested in expanding their existing facilities and developing new facilities. For example, in early 2009, Trump Entertainment completed the construction of the Chairman Tower, a 782-room hotel tower at the Taj Mahal. In addition, MGM owns land adjacent to Borgata, a portion of which consists of common roads, landscaping and master plan improvements, and a portion of which was planned for a wholly-owned development, MGM Grand Atlantic City. As part of MGM's settlement agreement with the NJDGE and the NJCCC (together, the "Gaming Authorities"), MGM has agreed that an affiliate of MGM would withdraw its license application for this development. Competition could significantly increase if a developer acquires MGM's interest in such land and succeeds in developing and opening a competing casino property adjacent to Borgata. We may also face increased competition from postponed, ongoing and future projects in Atlantic City. For example, on May 25, 2012, Revel Entertainment formally opened a new property in Atlantic City which will compete with us for customers. Competition also may intensify if our competitors commit additional resources to aggressive pricing and promotional activities in order to attract customers. The expansion of existing casino entertainment properties, the increase in the number of properties and the aggressive marketing strategies of many of our competitors have increased competition in the Atlantic City market, and this intense competition can be expected to continue. For example, on May 25, 2012, Revel Entertainment formally opened a new property in Atlantic City which competes with us for gaming customers. In addition, competition may intensify if our competitors commit additional resources to aggressive pricing and promotional activities in order to attract customers.

If our competitors operate more successfully than we do, if they attract customers away from us as a result of aggressive pricing and promotion, if they are more successful than us in attracting and retaining employees, if their properties are enhanced or expanded, if they operate in jurisdictions that give them operating advantages due to differences or changes in gaming regulations or taxes, or if additional hotels and casinos are established in and around the location in which we conduct business, we may lose market share or the ability to attract or retain employees. In particular, the expansion of casino gaming in or near any geographic area from which we attract or expect to attract a significant number of our customers could have a significant adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The expansion of casino gaming in or near the mid-Atlantic region from which Borgata attracts and expects to attract most of its customers has had an adverse effect on its business, results of operations and financial condition. In January 2010, table game legislation was signed into Pennsylvania law which allows up to 250 table games at each of the twelve largest authorized casinos and up to 50 table games at each of the remaining two smaller authorized casinos. Table games became operational at the existing casinos in the Philadelphia region in mid-July 2010. In addition, other states near New Jersey, including New York and Delaware, either have or are currently contemplating gaming legislation. In January 2010, Delaware legalized table games, which became operational in June 2010 at all three Delaware casinos. Convenience may be a more important factor than amenities for some customers, especially mid-week and repeat customers. These customers may prefer the convenience of a closer drive to a nearby casino rather than dealing with a longer drive to enjoy the amenities that Borgata has to offer. Expansion of gaming facilities in Pennsylvania and other nearby states therefore has resulted in fewer customer visits to Borgata, which has adversely impacted Borgata's business, results of operations and financial condition.

Ballot measures or other voter-approved initiatives to allow gaming in jurisdictions where gaming, or certain types of gaming (such as slots), was not previously permitted could be challenged, and, if such challenges are successful, these ballot measures or initiatives could be invalidated. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that there will not be similar or other challenges to legalized gaming in existing or current markets in which we may operate or have development plans, and successful challenges to legalized gaming could require us to abandon or substantially curtail our operations or development plans in those locations, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Increased competition also may result from changes to existing gaming regulations. For example, in January 2011, legislation was passed into law in New Jersey that changes the minimum room requirements and size of casino hotels. Instead of 500-room hotels with casinos of at least 60,000 square feet that New Jersey law previously required, developers will be able to build smaller, 20,000 square foot, casinos at hotels with at least 200 rooms. The new smaller casinos will be required to pay a tax rate of more than 14 percent on their gross gaming revenues to compensate for the reduced investment compared to existing, larger casinos, which pay

just over 9 percent on such revenues. A day after the legislation's introduction, a developer announced an agreement to build a $300 million Hard Rock Casino Hotel next to the Atlantic City Hilton, a project that is anticipated to take advantage of the new legislation. The legislation may result in the development of additional smaller, boutique hotel-casinos in the Atlantic City market, which will further increase competition. In addition, competition could further increase if, as has been contemplated in the past, the State of New Jersey approves the installation of video lottery terminals ("VLTs") at horse racing facilities in New Jersey.

We also compete with legalized gaming from casinos located on Native American tribal lands. Expansion of Native American gaming in the Northeast or mid-Atlantic region from which we draw most of our customers, could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Native American gaming facilities typically have a significant operating advantage over our property due to lower gaming taxes, allowing those facilities to market more aggressively and to expand or update their facilities at an accelerated rate. These competing Native American properties could continue to have an adverse impact on our operations.

The global financial crisis and decline in consumer spending may have an effect on our business and financial condition in ways that we currently cannot accurately predict.

The significant economic distress affecting financial institutions has had, and may continue to have, far-reaching adverse consequences across many industries, including the gaming industry. Volatility in the financial markets and the weakened global economy, together with the recent downgrade of the United States credit rating and ongoing European debt crisis, has contributed to the current uncertain economic climate. The ongoing credit and liquidity crisis has greatly restricted the availability of capital and has caused the cost of capital (if available) to be much higher than it has traditionally been. Therefore, we have no assurance that we will have further access to credit or capital markets at desirable times or at rates that we would consider acceptable, and the lack of such funding could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition, including our ability to refinance our or Borgata's indebtedness, our flexibility to react to changing economic and business conditions and our ability or willingness to fund new development projects.

We are not able to predict the duration or severity of the economic downturns, and the resulting impact on the solvency or liquidity of our lenders. If a large percentage of our lenders were to file for bankruptcy or otherwise default on their obligations to us, we may not have the liquidity under our amended credit facility to fund our current projects. There is no certainty that our lenders will continue to remain solvent or fund their respective obligations under our amended credit facility. If we were otherwise required to renegotiate or replace our amended credit facility, there is no assurance that we would be able to secure terms that are as favorable to us, if at all.

In addition, our amended credit facility matures in August 2014. At the time of maturity, if we are unable to refinance our amended credit facility on favorable terms, additional credit support and/or capital contributions in the form of equity may be necessary to fund the ongoing operations. This additional credit and/or equity may need to be contributed by us or a new partner, if any, or from both. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing in a timely manner, or at all, we may be unable to meet the operating cash flow needs and our investment would be at risk. Moreover, if any new partner does not have the financial resources to meet its share of the obligations, or subsequently declares bankruptcy, BAC could be required to fund more than their 50% share.

Continued weakness and further weakening in global economic conditions may adversely affect consumer spending and tourism trends, resulting in additional deterioration in our business, results of operations and financial conditions.

As a result of the present weak economic conditions in the United States, Europe and much of the rest of the world, the uncertainty over the duration of such weakness and the prospects for recovery, consumers are continuing to curb discretionary spending, which is having an effect on the Atlantic City gaming market. The number of annual visitors to Atlantic City has decreased from a peak of 34.9 million visitors in 2005, to 34.5 million in 2006, 33.3 million in 2007, 31.8 million in 2008, 30.4 million in 2009, 29.3 million in 2010 and 28.5 million in 2011. In addition, after reaching a peak of $5.22 billion in total casino wins in 2006, total casino wins in the Atlantic City market has since declined to $4.92 billion in 2007, $4.55 billion in 2008, $3.94 billion in 2009, $3.57 billion in 2010 and $3.32 billion in 2011. Reduced consumer demand and regional competition contributed to a 13.7%

decrease in our net revenues, from approximately $830.5 million for 2008 to approximately $730.3 million for 2011. Since our business model relies on significant expenditures on entertainment, luxury and other discretionary items, continuation or deepening of the economic downturn could further adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may incur impairments to long-lived assets.

In accordance with the provisions of the authoritative accounting guidance for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets, we test long-lived assets for impairment if a triggering event occurs. We believe our actual results have been adversely impacted by increased regional competition, and that in addition, our projected future results could be further impacted by cannibalization of our business from Revel Entertainment, a new property that formally opened in Atlantic City,on May 25, 2012. We also believe the refinancing of Borgata's debt and recapitalization of its member equity contributed to the results of this impairment test.

We own facilities that are located in areas that experience extreme weather conditions.

Extreme weather conditions may interrupt our operations, damage our property and reduce the number of customers who visit our facilities.

In addition, we have been forced to close due to hurricanes and other storms. The Borgata was ordered to close from October 28, 2012 to November 2, 2012 by the NJDGE due to a post-tropical storm. In August 2011, Borgata was closed for three days due to Hurricane Irene. Moreover, Borgata is located in an area that has been identified by the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) as a special flood hazard area, which, according to the FEMA statistics, has a 1% chance of a flood equal to or exceeding the base flood elevation (a 100-year flood) in any given year.

In addition to the risk of flooding and hurricanes, snowstorms and other adverse weather conditions may interrupt our operations, damage our property and reduce the number of customers who visit our facilities. For example, during January and February 2011, much of the country was impacted by some of the worst winter weather in decades, particularly in the Midwest. Additionally, February 2010 was the snowiest month ever recorded in Atlantic City, which generally kept would-be gamblers from traveling to Borgata, contributing to a drop in Borgata's monthly revenues from January to February. The 2010 winter season was the worst on record, and travel throughout the entire Northeast was extremely difficult. The residual impact from these record winter storms resulted in day trip visitations to Atlantic City that were reduced or delayed as regional school calendars were extended in order to make up for prior school closures. Additionally, extreme heat and low precipitation levels in the latter half of the first six months of 2010, particularly in the month of June, had an adverse impact on visitation and spending at Borgata. If there is a prolonged disruption at Borgata due to natural disasters, terrorist attacks or other catastrophic events, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

While we maintain insurance coverage that may cover certain of the costs and loss of revenue that we incur as a result of some extreme weather conditions, our coverage is subject to deductibles and limits on maximum benefits. There can be no assurance that we will be able to fully collect, if at all, on any claims resulting from extreme weather conditions. If our property is damaged or if operations are disrupted as a result of extreme weather in the future, or if extreme weather adversely impacts general economic or other conditions in the areas in which our property is located or from which we draw our patrons, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Our expansion and renovation projects may face significant risks inherent in construction projects .

We regularly evaluate expansion and renovation opportunities. Our current and future projects could experience:


•	delays and significant cost increases;


•	shortages of materials;


•	shortages of skilled labor or work stoppages;


•	poor performance or nonperformance by any of our joint venture partners or other third parties on whom we place reliance;


•	unforeseen construction scheduling, engineering, environmental, permitting, construction or geological problems; and


•	weather interference, floods, fires or other casualty losses.

The completion dates of any of our projects could differ significantly from expectations for construction-related or other reasons.

In addition, actual costs and construction periods for any of our projects can differ significantly from initial expectations. Our initial project costs and construction periods are based upon budgets, conceptual design documents and construction schedule estimates prepared at inception of the project in consultation with architects and contractors. Many of these costs can increase over time as the project is built to completion. The cost of any project may vary significantly from initial budget expectations and we may have a limited amount of capital resources to fund cost overruns. If we cannot finance cost overruns on a timely basis, the completion of one or more projects may be delayed until adequate funding is available. We can provide no assurance that any project will be completed on time, if at all, or within established budgets, or that any project will result in increased earnings to

us. Significant delays, cost overruns, or failures of our projects to achieve market acceptance could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The failure to obtain necessary government approvals in a timely manner, or at all, can adversely impact our various expansion and renovation projects.

Certain permits, licenses and approvals necessary for some of our current or anticipated projects have not yet been obtained. The scope of the approvals required for expansion, development, investment or renovation projects can be extensive and may include gaming approvals, state and local land-use permits and building and zoning permits. Unexpected changes or concessions required by local, state or federal regulatory authorities could involve significant additional costs and delay the scheduled openings of the facilities. We may not obtain the necessary permits, licenses and approvals within the anticipated time frames, or at all.

If we are unable to finance our expansion and renovation projects, as well as other capital expenditures, through cash flow from operations, borrowings under our amended credit facility and additional financings, our expansion, development, investment and renovation efforts will be jeopardized.

We intend to finance our current and future expansion, development, investment and renovation projects, as well as our other capital expenditures, primarily with cash flow from operations, borrowings under our amended credit facility, and equity or debt financings. If we are unable to finance our current or future expansion, development, investment and renovation projects, or our other capital expenditures, we will have to adopt one or more alternatives, such as reducing, delaying or abandoning planned expansion, development, investment and renovation projects as well as other capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring debt, reducing the amount or suspending or discontinuing the distribution of dividends, obtaining additional equity financing or joint venture partners, or modifying our amended credit facility. These sources of funds may not be sufficient to finance our expansion, development, investment and renovation projects, and other financing may not be available on acceptable terms, in a timely manner, or at all. In addition, our existing indebtedness contains certain restrictions on our ability to incur additional indebtedness.

In the past few years there have been significant disruptions in the global capital markets that have adversely impacted the ability of borrowers to access capital. We anticipate that these disruptions may continue for the foreseeable future. We anticipate that funding for any of our expansion projects would come from cash flows from operations and availability under our amended credit facility (to the extent that availability exists under our amended credit facility, as applicable, after we meet our working capital needs).

If availability under our amended credit facility does not exist or we are otherwise unable to make sufficient borrowings thereunder, any additional financing that is needed may not be available to us or, if available, may not be on terms favorable to us. As a result, if we are unable to obtain adequate project financing in a timely manner, or at all, we may be forced to sell assets in order to raise capital for projects, limit the scope of, or defer such projects, or cancel the projects altogether. In the event that capital markets do not improve and we are unable to access capital with more favorable terms, additional equity and/or credit support may be necessary to obtain construction financing for the remaining cost of the project.

We are entirely dependent on Borgata for all of our cash flows, which subjects us to greater risks than a gaming company with more operating properties.

We are entirely dependent upon Borgata for all of our cash flow. As a result, we are subject to a greater degree of risk than a gaming company that has more operating properties or is more geographically diverse. The risks to which we have a greater degree of exposure include the following:


•	local economic and competitive conditions in the Atlantic City gaming market;


•	changes in New Jersey governmental laws and regulations, including gaming laws and regulations;


•	snowstorms, hurricanes, flooding and other adverse weather conditions, natural and other disasters affecting the mid-Atlantic region;


•	a decline in the number of visitors to Atlantic City;


•	a decrease in gaming and non-gaming activities at our properties; and


•	the outbreak of public health threats at our property or in Atlantic City, or the perception that such threats exist, including pandemic health threats such as the avian influenza, SARS or the H1N1 flu, among others.

In particular, our continued success depends upon our ability to draw customers from New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland and other nearby Northeast and mid-Atlantic states. Adverse weather conditions, road construction, high gasoline prices, disruption in air travel and other factors could make it more difficult for potential customers to travel to Borgata and deter customers from visiting our property. Specifically, adverse weather conditions have had and may continue to have damaging effects on our operations. Since we operate only in the Atlantic City market, these and other risks common to the Atlantic City gaming industry

may have a greater impact on us than on a gaming company with more properties or that is more geographically diversified. A prolonged disruption at our property due to any such conditions could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may become involved in legal proceedings that, if adversely adjudicated or settled, could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

From time to time, we are defendants in various lawsuits relating to matters incidental to our business. The nature of our business subjects us to the risk of lawsuits filed by customers, past and present employees, competitors, business partners and others in the ordinary course of business. As with all litigation, no assurance can be provided as to the outcome of these matters and in general, litigation can be expensive and time consuming. We may not be successful in the defense or prosecution of these lawsuits, which could result in settlements or damages that could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The loss of the services of key personnel could have a material adverse effect on our business.

The leadership of the key members of our existing management team has been a critical element of our success. Our other executive officers and other members of senior management have substantial experience and expertise in our business and have made significant contributions to our growth and success. The unexpected loss of services of one or more of these individuals could also adversely affect us. We are not protected by key man or similar life insurance covering members of our senior management.

If we are unable to attract, retain and motivate employees, we may not be able to compete effectively and will not be able to expand our business.

Our success and ability to grow are dependent, in part, on our ability to hire, retain and motivate a sufficient number of talented people, with the increasingly diverse skills needed to serve clients and expand our business. Competition for highly qualified, specialized technical and managerial, and particularly consulting personnel, is intense. Recruiting, training, retention and benefit costs place significant demand on our resources. Additionally, the recent downturn in the gaming, travel and leisure sectors has made recruiting executives to our business more difficult. The inability to attract qualified employees in sufficient numbers to meet particular demands or the loss of a significant number of our employees could have an adverse effect on us.

Work stoppages and other labor problems could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Approximately 2,398 of our employees were represented by four labor unions as of December 31, 2011. A lengthy strike or other work stoppage could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. From time to time, we have also experienced attempts to unionize certain of our non-union employees. While these efforts have not resulted in any success to date, we cannot provide any assurance that we will not experience additional and more successful union activity in the future. There has been a trend towards unionization for employees in Atlantic City. The impact of this union activity is undetermined and could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We are a participant in multi-employer pension plans, and the plans have been certified in critical status by the funds' actuary.

In connection with our collective bargaining agreement with the culinary and hotel workers' union, Local 54/UNITE HERE, we participate in the UNITE HERE National Retirement Fund pension plan (the “Fund”). On March 31, 2010, as a result of the extraordinary decline in the financial markets and downturn in the economy, the Fund was certified in critical status by the Fund's actuary under the federal multiemployer plan funding laws pursuant to the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (the “PPA”). In connection with the certification, the Fund's board of trustees has adopted a rehabilitation plan effective on April 1, 2010 (the “Rehabilitation Plan”) with the goal of enabling the Fund to emerge from critical status by January 1, 2023.

The Rehabilitation Plan provides for certain increases in employer contributions and, in some cases, a reduction in participant benefits. We are required to agree with Local 54/UNITE HERE on the adoption of one of three schedules of future accrual and contribution rates proposed under the Rehabilitation Plan, all of which provide for increased monthly contributions. On May 28, 2010, we agreed upon a schedule with Local 54/UNITE HERE pursuant to which we began making increased monthly contributions to the Fund on October 1, 2011.

Our current monthly pension contributions to the Fund range from $0.4 million to $0.5 million, and our unfunded vested liability to the Fund is $68.3 million for the plan year beginning on January 1, 2011.

Additionally, in connection with our collective bargaining agreement with the Local 68 Engineers Union Pension Plan and the NJ Carpenters Pension Fund, we participate in other multiemployer pension plans that have been certified in critical status under the federal multiemployer plan funding laws pursuant to the PPA. The boards of trustees of these plans have adopted rehabilitation plans and we are currently in discussions with the boards regarding our level of participation in the rehabilitation plans. The impact of the rehabilitation plans is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Effective as of July 1, 2011, the Local 68 Engineers Union Pension Plan was no longer certified as endangered or in critical status. Our current monthly pension contributions to the funds associated with these plans approximate less than $0.1 million per

month in the aggregate. As of January 1, 2011, our aggregate unfunded vested liability to these funds was approximately $4.5 million.

A renewed economic decline could have a significant adverse effect on the financial condition of the Fund, or other funds to which we contribute, which may require us to make contributions in addition to those already contemplated. Any such increases in our required contributions could adversely affect our results of operations. Under applicable federal law, any employer contributing to a multiemployer pension plan that completely ceases participating in the plan while it is underfunded is subject to payment of such employer's assessed share of the aggregate unfunded vested benefits of the plan. In certain circumstances, an employer can also be assessed withdrawal liability for a partial withdrawal from a multiemployer pension plan. In April 2010, the Fund provided an estimate to us of our exposure, assuming a hypothetical immediate and complete withdrawal from the Fund at the time of such estimate. Based on that estimate, the pre-tax withdrawal liability in that scenario could have been in excess of $47 million. In addition, we estimate that the pre-tax withdrawal liability for the other funds to which we contribute to be approximately $4.0 million. However, we are not able to determine the exact amount of our potential exposure with respect to the Fund, or other funds to which we contribute, because the amount of that exposure could be higher or lower than the estimate, depending on, among other things, the nature and timing of any triggering events and the funded status of the Fund, or other funds to which we contribute, at that time. If, in the future, we elect to withdraw from the Fund, or other funds to which we contribute, additional liabilities would need to be recorded. While it is possible that this would occur in the future, we have not made any decision to incur a partial or complete withdrawal from the Fund or other funds to which we contribute. If any of these adverse events were to occur in the future, it could result in a substantial withdrawal liability assessment that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Risks Related to our Industry

We are subject to extensive governmental regulation, as well as federal, state and local laws affecting business in general, which may harm our business.

We are subject to a variety of regulations in New Jersey. In addition, regulatory authorities at the federal, state and local levels have broad powers with respect to the licensing of casino operations and may revoke, suspend, condition or limit our gaming or other licenses, impose substantial fines and take other actions, any one of which could have a significant adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. If additional gaming regulations are adopted in New Jersey, such regulations could impose restrictions or costs that could have a significant adverse effect on us. From time to time, various proposals are introduced in the legislatures that, if enacted, could adversely affect the tax, regulatory, operational or other aspects of the gaming industry and our Company.

Regulation of smoking

On January 15, 2006, the New Jersey legislature adopted laws that significantly restrict, or otherwise ban, smoking at our property which could materially impact our results of operations.

On April 15, 2007, an ordinance in Atlantic City became effective which extended smoking restrictions under the New Jersey Smoke-Free Air Act. This ordinance mandated that casinos restrict smoking to designated areas of up to 25% of the casino floor. During April 2008, Atlantic City's City Council unanimously approved an amendment to the ordinance, banning smoking entirely on all casino gaming floors and casino simulcasting areas, but allowing smoking in separately exhausted, non-gaming, smoking lounges. The amendment to the ordinance became effective on October 15, 2008, however, on October 27, 2008, Atlantic City's City Council voted to postpone the full smoking ban for at least one year due to, among other things, the weakened economy and increased competition in adjoining states. The postponement of the full smoking ban became effective on November 16, 2008. In December 2009, Atlantic City's City Council announced that it would not consider a full smoking ban in casinos pending further review.

Regulation of directors, officers, key employees and partners

Our directors, officers, key employees and joint venture partners must meet approval standards of certain state regulatory authorities. If state regulatory authorities were to find a person occupying any such position or a joint venture partner unsuitable, we would be required to sever our relationship with that person or the joint venture partner may be required to dispose of their interest in the joint venture. State regulatory agencies may conduct investigations into the conduct or associations of our directors, officers, key employees or joint venture partners to ensure compliance with applicable standards.

Certain public and private issuances of securities and other transactions that we are party to also require the approval of gaming authorities.

Regulations affecting businesses in general

In addition to gaming regulations, we are also subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations affecting businesses in general. These laws and regulations include, but are not limited to, restrictions and conditions concerning alcoholic beverages,

environmental matters, smoking, employees, currency transactions, taxation, zoning and building codes, and marketing and advertising. Such laws and regulations could change or could be interpreted differently in the future, or new laws and regulations could be enacted.

We operate in a highly taxed industry and may be subject to higher taxes in the future. If the New Jersey state legislature increases gaming taxes and fees, our results could be adversely affected.

Atlantic City casinos, including Borgata, currently pay a 9.25% effective tax rate on gross gaming revenues. We also pay property taxes, sales and use taxes, payroll taxes, franchise taxes, room taxes, parking fees, various license fees, investigative fees and our proportionate share of regulatory costs. Our profitability depends on generating enough revenues to pay gaming taxes and other largely variable expenses, such as payroll and marketing, as well as largely fixed expenses, such as property taxes and interest expense. Borgata is treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes and therefore federal income taxes are the responsibility of its members. Casino partnerships in New Jersey, however, are subject to state income taxes under the Casino Control Act. Therefore, we are required to record New Jersey state income taxes. We can provide no assurances that the State of New Jersey will not enact legislation that increases gaming tax rates.

Risks Related to our Property

Terrorism and the uncertainty of military conflicts, natural disasters and contagious diseases, as well as other factors affecting discretionary consumer spending, may harm our operating results.

The strength and profitability of our business depends on consumer demand for hotel casino resorts in general and for the type of upscale amenities Borgata offers. Changes in consumer preferences or discretionary consumer spending could harm our business. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, other terrorist activities in the United States and elsewhere, military conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and in the Middle East, outbreaks of, or the perception of, public health threats and pandemics, adverse weather conditions and natural disasters, among other things, have had negative effects on travel and leisure expenditures. In addition, other factors affecting travel and discretionary consumer spending, including general economic conditions, disposable consumer income, fears of further economic decline and reduced consumer confidence in the economy, may negatively impact our business. We cannot predict the extent to which similar events and conditions may continue to affect us in the future. An extended period of reduced discretionary spending and/or disruptions or declines in tourism could significantly harm our operations.

Furthermore, our facilities are subject to the risk that operations could be halted for a temporary or extended period of time, as a result of casualty, flooding, forces of nature, adverse weather conditions, mechanical failure, or extended or extraordinary maintenance, among other causes. In particular, Borgata is located in a flood zone and is subject to disruption from hurricanes, snow storms and other adverse weather conditions. For example, Borgata was closed for five days in October 2012 due to a post-tropical storm. Borgata was also closed for three days in August 2011 which was mandated by civil authorities and the Division of Gaming Enforcement as Hurricane Irene approached the coastline. In addition, severe weather conditions during the first half of 2010 made it very difficult for many of our customers to travel to Borgata, contributing to a decline in revenues during the period. The residual impact from these record winter storms resulted in day trip visitations to Atlantic City that were reduced or delayed as regional school calendars were extended in order to make up for prior school closures. Additionally, extreme heat and low precipitation levels in the second quarter of 2010, particularly in the month of June, had an adverse impact on visitation and spending at our property. If there is a prolonged disruption at our property due to natural disasters, terrorist attacks or other catastrophic events, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

While we maintain insurance coverage that may cover certain of the costs and loss of revenue that we incur as a result of some extreme weather conditions, our coverage is subject to deductibles and limits on maximum benefits. There can be no assurance that we will be able to fully collect, if at all, on any claims resulting from extreme weather conditions. If any of our properties are damaged or if their operations are disrupted as a result of extreme weather in the future, or if extreme weather adversely impacts general economic or other conditions in the area in which our properties are located or from which they draw their patrons, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially affected.

Our insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover all possible losses that our property could suffer. In addition, our insurance costs may increase and we may not be able to obtain similar insurance coverage in the future.

Although we have “all risk” property insurance coverage for our property, which covers damage caused by a peril (such as fire, natural disasters, acts of war, or terrorism), each policy has certain exclusions. In addition, our property insurance coverage is in an amount that may be significantly less than the expected replacement cost of rebuilding the entire facility if there was a total loss. We have all risk property damage insurance with a $1.0 million deductible and coverage up to $1.5 billion, flood damage insurance with a $10 million deductible and coverage up to $200 million and named windstorm insurance with a 5% deductible on total insured values, subject to a cap of $50 million, and coverage up to $200.0 million. In addition, we are self-insured up to $0.25 million with respect for each general liability claim and $0.20 million for each non-union employee medical claim. We accrued $6.6 million and $8.1 million for such claims at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively, and incurred expenses for such insurance claims of approximately $12.1 million and $9.1 million for the nine months ended September 30,

2012 and 2011, respectively.

Borgata is located in an area that has been identified by the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”) as a special flood hazard area. According to the FEMA statistics, this area has a 1% chance of a flood equal to or exceeding the base flood elevation (a 100-year flood) in any given year. Over a 30-year period, the risk of a 100-year flood in a special flood hazard area is 26%. We currently maintain $200 million of flood insurance coverage.

Our level of insurance coverage also may not be adequate to cover all losses in the event of a major casualty. In addition, certain casualty events, such as labor strikes, nuclear events, acts of war, loss of income due to cancellation of room reservations or conventions due to fear of terrorism, deterioration or corrosion, insect or animal damage and pollution, may not be covered at all under our policies. Therefore, certain acts could expose us to substantial uninsured losses.

In addition to the damage caused to our property by a casualty loss, we may suffer business disruption as a result of these events or be subject to claims by third parties that may be injured or harmed. While we carry business interruption insurance and general liability insurance, this insurance may not be adequate to cover all losses in any such event.

On September 23, 2007, The Water Club, then under construction, sustained a fire that caused damage to property with a carrying value of approximately $11.4 million. Our insurance policies included coverage for replacement costs related to property damage, with the exception of minor amounts principally related to insurance deductibles and certain other limitations. In addition, we had “delay-in-completion” insurance coverage for The Water Club for certain costs, subject to various limitations and deductibles. On August 10, 2009, we reached a final settlement of $40.0 million with our insurance carrier and recognized a gain of $28.7 million, representing the amount of insurance recovery in excess of the $11.3 million carrying value of assets damaged and destroyed by the fire (after our $0.1 million deductible). During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we recognized a $3.8 million gain on the insurance subrogation settlement from the fire that occurred at the Water Club in 2007.

We renew our insurance policies on an annual basis. The cost of coverage may become so high that we may need to further reduce our policy limits or agree to certain exclusions from our coverage. Our debt instruments and other material agreements require us to meet certain standards related to insurance coverage. Failure to satisfy these requirements could result in an event of default under these debt instruments or material agreements.

Our owned and leased real property are subject to land use and environmental regulations.

We are subject to land use regulations and future development is subject to possible restrictions. Future development may also be subject to coastal land use requirements in accordance with the Coastal Area Facility Review Act. We are also subject to certain environmental requirements. The property is constructed on the site of a former municipal landfill. Other historical operations at the site include a former incinerator, a dredge spoils area, facilities operated by the Atlantic City Department of Public Works (garage and maintenance shop, traffic signal building, police repair/body shop and tow lot) and a parking lot. The landfill was capped and the property remediated, resulting in the issuance of a conditional soils only no further action letter on December 3, 2009 by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (the “NJDEP”). The property is subject to institutional controls including a Ground Water Classification Exception Area and Deed Notices that impose certain restrictions on the property. The property is also subject to engineering controls to maintain the landfill cap and operate storm water controls and a landfill gas venting, monitoring and alarm system. Biennial reports are required to certify that the institutional and engineering controls continue to be protective. If changes in future ground water data no longer support the NJDEP soils no further action conclusion, additional soil remediation and excavation could be required. The facility also generates limited amounts of common hazardous wastes that are subject to proper disposal requirements.

We will incur costs to comply with environmental requirements, such as those relating to permitting, monitoring, reporting, or remediation.

We own real property and are subject to extensive environmental regulation, which creates uncertainty regarding future environmental expenditures and liabilities.

We may incur costs to comply with environmental requirements, such as those relating to discharges into the air, water and land, the handling and disposal of solid and hazardous waste and the cleanup of our property affected by hazardous substances. Under these and other environmental requirements we may be required to investigate and clean up hazardous or toxic substances or chemical releases at our property. As an owner or operator, we could also be held responsible to a governmental entity or third parties for property damage, personal injury and investigation and cleanup costs incurred by them in connection with any contamination. These laws typically impose cleanup responsibility and liability without regard to whether the owner or operator knew of or caused the presence of the contaminants. The liability under those laws has been interpreted to be joint and several unless the harm is divisible and there is a reasonable basis for allocation of the responsibility. The costs of investigation, remediation or removal of those substances may be substantial, and the presence of those substances, or the failure to remediate a property

properly, may impair our ability to use our property.

We do not own or control the land underlying the ground leases MDDC has entered into with the landowners.

MDDC, as lessee, has entered into a series of ground leases with MAC, as lessor, for a total of approximately 19.6 acres of land underlying the public space expansion, the rooms expansion, a parking structure, a surface parking lot, and a proposed alternative parking structure. Except for the surface parking lot, the term of each ground lease entered into with MAC expires on December 31, 2070. The surface parking lot ground lease is on a month-to-month term and may be terminated by either party effective on the last day of the month that is six months after notice is given. In addition, the surface parking lot ground lease will terminate on any termination of the Divestiture Trust, unless the NJCCC approves an extended term of such lease. MGM has transferred ownership of the underlying land and each of these ground leases to the Divestiture Trust pursuant to the terms of its settlement agreement with the NJDGE and the NJCCC.

As a ground lessee, we have the right to use the leased land; however, we do not retain fee ownership in the underlying land. Accordingly, with respect to the leased land, we will have no interest in the land or improvements thereon at the expiration of the ground leases. Moreover, since we do not completely control the land underlying our property, the Divestiture Trust (or any third party to which the leased land is sold) could take certain actions to disrupt our rights in the land leased under the long term leases. While we do not think such interruption is likely, such events are beyond our control. If the entity owning the leased land chose to disrupt our use either permanently or for a significant period of time, then the value of our assets could be impaired and our business and operations could be adversely affected. Additionally, if we default on the terms of any of the long term ground leases, we may be liable for damages and could lose our leasehold interest in the applicable property or portion thereof and any improvement on the land. If any of these events were to occur, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

In addition, we may lose 900 parking spaces available on the surface parking lot upon termination of the surface parking lot ground lease and the sale of the underlying land to a third party. In such event, MDDC has the option to build a parking garage, if necessary, to replace the lost parking spaces on the leased land underlying the proposed alternative parking structure. Our business and operations, however, could be disrupted if we are unable to replace the lost parking spaces in a timely manner to meet our parking demands and satisfy applicable zoning requirements.

On July 6, 2010, MDDC received a notice from MAC that the trustee of the Divestiture Trust had entered into an agreement with a third party to sell the land contributed by MAC to the Divestiture Trust in connection with MAC's settlement agreement with the NJDGE, except the land underlying the surface parking lot ground lease. On November 4, 2010, MGM announced that it had closed the sale of the land leased to MDDC pursuant to four ground leases, all of which remain in effect following the closing of the sale of the underlying land. Other than MDDC's obligation to pay rent (in an amount equal to the amount paid per square foot under the parking structure ground lease) and property taxes pursuant to the alternative parking structure ground lease, our obligations under the ground leases were not modified by the sale.

Energy price increases may adversely affect our cost of operations and our revenues.

Our operations use significant amounts of electricity, natural gas and other forms of energy. While no shortages of energy or fuel have been experienced to date, substantial increases in energy and fuel prices in the United States have, and may continue to, negatively affect our results of operations. The extent of the impact is subject to the magnitude and duration of the energy and fuel price increases, of which the impact could be material. In addition, energy and gasoline price increases could result in a decline of disposable income of potential customers, an increase in the cost of travel and a corresponding decrease in visitation and spending at Borgata, which could have a significant adverse effect on our cost of operations and our revenues.

We have executory contracts with a wholly-owned subsidiary of a local utility company with terms that extend until 2028. The utility company provides us with electricity and thermal energy (hot water and chilled water). Obligations under the thermal executory energy contract contain both fixed fees and variable fees based upon usage rates. The fixed fee components under the thermal executory energy contract were estimated at approximately $11.6 million per annum as of December 31, 2011. We are also obligated to purchase a certain portion of our electricity demand at essentially a fixed rate which is estimated at approximately $1.7 million per year. Electricity demand in excess of the commitment is subject to market rates based on our tariff class.

Risks Related to our Significant Indebtedness

Our substantial indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health and prevent us from fulfilling our debt obligations.

As of September 30, 2012, we had total consolidated long-term debt, net of current maturities, of approximately $786.1 million of net indebtedness which was comprised of $13.7 million outstanding under our amended credit facility and $772.4 million, net of amortized discounts and debt financing costs, outstanding under our secured notes. This indebtedness could have important consequences, including:


•	difficulty in satisfying our obligations under our current indebtedness;


•	increasing our vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions;


•	requiring us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flows from operations to payments on our indebtedness, which would reduce the availability of our cash flows to fund working capital, capital expenditures, expansion efforts and other general corporate purposes;


•	limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate;


•	placing us at a disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less debt; and


•	limiting, along with the financial and other restrictive covenants in our indebtedness, our ability to borrow additional funds, among other things.

Our debt instruments contain, and any future debt instruments likely will contain, a number of restrictive covenants that impose significant operating and financial restrictions on us, including restrictions on our ability to, among other things:


•	incur additional indebtedness;


•	make restricted payments (including paying dividends on, redeeming, repurchasing or retiring the capital stock of MDFC or the membership interests of MDDC);


•	make investments;


•	create, incur or suffer to exist liens;


•	dispose of assets;


•	enter into agreements restricting our subsidiaries' ability to pay dividends, make loans or transfer assets to us;


•	engage in transactions with affiliates; and


•	consolidate, merge or sell all or substantially all of our assets.

Failure to comply with these covenants could result in an event of default, which, if not cured or waived, could have a significant adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In addition, our amended credit facility provides for a $75 million senior secured revolving credit facility and matures in August 2014. Our amended credit facility is guaranteed on a senior secured basis by MDDC and any future subsidiaries of MDDC and is secured by a first priority lien on substantially all of our assets, subject to certain exceptions. The obligations under our bank credit facility have priority in payment to our senior secured notes.

Our ability to make payments on and to refinance our indebtedness and to fund planned capital expenditures and expansion efforts will depend upon our ability to generate cash in the future. This, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control.

We may be unable to refinance our indebtedness.

In August 2010, we entered into a $150 million bank credit facility that matures in August 2014 and issued $800 million in senior secured debt, $400 million of which matures in October 2015 and $400 million of which matures in August 2018. On November 11, 2011, MDFC entered into an amendment to the former credit facility among MDFC, MDDC, certain other financial institutions and Wells Fargo as the Administrative Agent for the Lenders. The amendment modifies certain terms of the former bank credit facility, among the Company, the Lenders from time to time party thereto, the Administrative Agent, and Wells Fargo.

The amended credit facility: (i) reduces the aggregate commitments under the amended credit facility, as amended to a maximum amount of $75 million; (ii) decreases the minimum Consolidated EBITDA (as defined in the amended credit facility) to $125 million for a trailing twelve-month period ending on the last day of a calendar quarter; (iii) eliminates the covenant requiring us to have a minimum amount of cash, cash equivalents, and unused commitments; and (iv) adds a covenant prohibiting us from borrowing under the amended credit facility, to purchase our senior secured notes at any time when the total amount outstanding under our amended credit facility is $65 million or more.

Our ability to refinance our indebtedness will depend on our ability to generate future cash flow and we are entirely dependent on the operations of Borgata, including the Water Club, for all of our cash flow. Our ability to generate cash in the future, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control.

It is unlikely that our business will generate sufficient cash flows from operations in amounts sufficient to enable it to pay the principal on our indebtedness at maturity and to fund our other liquidity needs. We believe we will need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness before maturity, and we cannot provide assurances that we will be able to repay or refinance our indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. We may have to adopt one or more alternatives, such as reducing or delaying planned expenses and capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring debt, or obtaining additional equity or debt financing or joint venture partners. These financing strategies may not be affected on satisfactory terms, if at all. In addition, New Jersey laws and regulations contain restrictions on the ability of companies engaged in the gaming business to undertake certain financing transactions. Such restrictions may prevent us from obtaining necessary capital.

Holders or beneficial owners of our senior secured notes may be required to dispose of, or we may be permitted to redeem, the senior secured notes pursuant to gaming laws.

A Gaming Authority may require that a holder of our senior secured notes be licensed, qualified or found suitable, or comply with any other requirement under applicable New Jersey gaming laws, rules, regulations and supervisory procedures to which we are subject (collectively, the “Gaming Laws”). By the terms of the indenture governing the senior secured notes, holders of the notes will agree to comply with all Gaming Law requirements, including to apply for a license, qualification or a finding of suitability, within the required time period, as provided by the Gaming Authority. We will not be responsible for any costs or expenses such holder may incur in connection with such holder's application for a license, qualification or a finding of suitability, or compliance with any other requirement of a Gaming Authority.

In particular, under recent amendments to the Casino Control Act, a casino licensee must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence the good character, honesty and integrity of all financial backers, including holders of the notes, which bear any relation to a casino project who hold 25% or more of such financial instruments or evidences of indebtedness; provided, however, in circumstances of default, any person holding 10% of such financial instruments or evidences of indebtedness shall be required to establish and maintain such qualification; and further provided, that the applicable Gaming Authority may in its discretion require qualification in any event at a lower threshold. The recent amendments to the Casino Control Act raised the threshold at which licensure or qualification will generally be required. Banking and other licensed lending institutions that make a loan or hold a mortgage or other lien acquired in the ordinary course of business are generally exempt from this requirement. The Gaming Laws also contain provisions that permit waiver if the holder of securities is an “institutional investor” as defined under the Gaming Laws and certain other conditions are met.

Prior approval of the transfer of publicly traded securities is generally not necessary. However, licensure, qualification, exemption or waiver of the purchaser as described herein may be necessary. There is no guarantee that the holders of the senior secured notes will be found exempt or will be waived from qualification. There is also no assurance that if qualification of a holder of the senior secured notes or its affiliates is required by a Gaming Authority, that the NJCCC will deem such holder or its affiliates qualified.

The Gaming Laws contain a provision for the placement of securities into an interim casino authorization trust with a trustee appointed by the Gaming Authorities during the time any security holder is being qualified.

In addition to the indebtedness under the senior secured notes and the amended credit facility, we may be able to incur substantially more indebtedness. This could exacerbate the risks associated with our substantial indebtedness.

We and our future subsidiaries may be able to incur substantially more debt in the future provided we are in compliance with the amended credit facility financial covenants or the indenture governing the senior secured notes. Although the indenture and the amended credit facility contain restrictions on our incurrence of additional indebtedness, these restrictions are subject to a number of qualifications and exceptions and, under certain circumstances, indebtedness incurred in compliance with these restrictions could be substantial. The terms of the indenture permit us to incur additional indebtedness, including additional secured indebtedness. If we incur any additional indebtedness secured by liens on the collateral that rank equally with those securing the senior secured notes, the holders of that additional indebtedness will be entitled to share ratably with noteholders in any proceeds distributed in connection with any foreclosure, insolvency, liquidation, reorganization, dissolution or other similar proceedings.

To service our indebtedness, we will require a significant amount of cash. Our ability to generate cash depends on many factors beyond our control.

Our ability to make payments on, or repay or refinance, our indebtedness, including the senior secured notes, and to fund planned capital expenditures, will depend largely upon our future operating performance. Our future performance, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control.

In particular, if adverse regional and national economic conditions persist, worsen, or fail to improve significantly, we could experience decreased revenues from our operations attributable to decreases in consumer spending levels and could fail to generate sufficient cash to fund our liquidity needs or fail to satisfy the financial and other restrictive covenants that we are subject to under our indebtedness. In addition, our ability to borrow funds in the future to make payments on our indebtedness will depend on the

satisfaction of the covenants in the indenture, the amended credit facility and our other debt agreements, and other agreements we may enter into in the future. We cannot provide assurance that our business will generate sufficient cash flow from operations or that future borrowings will be available to us under the amended credit facility or from other sources in an amount sufficient to enable us to pay our indebtedness, including the senior secured notes, or to fund our other liquidity needs.

We cannot provide assurance that we will be able to refinance any of our indebtedness, including the amended credit facility, on commercially reasonable terms or at all. In particular, the amended credit facility matures prior to the maturity of the senior secured notes. If we were unable to make payments or refinance our indebtedness or obtain new financing under these circumstances, we would have to consider other options, such as the sale of assets, the sales of equity and/or negotiations with our lenders to restructure the applicable indebtedness. The indenture governing the senior secured notes, the amended credit facility and our other debt instruments may restrict, or market or business conditions may limit, our ability to take some or all of these actions.

If we default on our obligations to pay our other indebtedness, we may not be able to make payments on the senior secured notes.

If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow and are otherwise unable to obtain funds necessary to meet required payments of principal or premium, if any, and interest on our indebtedness, or if we otherwise fail to comply with the various covenants, including financial and operating covenants, in the instruments governing our indebtedness, we could be in default under the terms of the agreements governing such indebtedness. In the event of such default, the holders of such indebtedness could elect to declare all the funds borrowed thereunder to be due and payable, together with accrued and unpaid interest, cease making further loans and institute foreclosure proceedings against our assets, and we could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation. Any default under the agreements governing our indebtedness, including a default under our amended credit facility that is not waived by the required lenders, and the remedies sought by the holders of such indebtedness, could render us unable to pay the principal or premium, if any, and interest on the senior secured notes and substantially decrease the market value of the senior secured notes.

The value of the collateral securing the senior secured notes may not be sufficient to satisfy all our obligations under the senior secured notes.

In the event of a foreclosure on the collateral (or a distribution in respect thereof in a bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding), the proceeds from the collateral securing our amended credit facility and the senior secured notes may not be sufficient to satisfy the senior secured notes because such proceeds would, under the inter-creditor agreement, first be applied to satisfy our priority payment obligations under our amended credit facility. Only after all of our priority payment obligations under our amended credit facility have been satisfied will proceeds from such collateral be applied to satisfy our obligations under the senior secured notes.

The value of the collateral at any time will depend on market and other economic conditions, including the availability of suitable buyers for the collateral. By its nature, some or all of the collateral may be illiquid and may have no readily ascertainable market value. The value of the assets pledged as the collateral for the senior secured notes could be impaired in the future as a result of changing economic conditions, competition or other future trends. In the event of a foreclosure, liquidation, bankruptcy or similar proceeding, no assurance can be given that the proceeds from any sale or liquidation of the collateral securing our obligations under our amended credit facility and the senior secured notes will be sufficient to pay our obligations under the senior secured notes, in full or at all, after first satisfying our priority payment obligations in full under our amended credit facility. There also can be no assurance that the collateral will be salable, and, even if salable, the timing of its liquidation would be uncertain. Accordingly, there may not be sufficient collateral to pay all or any of the amounts due on the senior secured notes. Any claim for the difference between the amount, if any, realized by holders of the senior secured notes from the sale of the collateral securing the senior secured notes and the obligations under the senior secured notes rank equally in right of payment with all of our other unsecured unsubordinated indebtedness and other obligations, including trade payables.

The indenture governing the senior secured notes allows liens in favor of other secured creditors with priority over the liens securing the senior secured notes. There are also certain categories of property that are excluded from the collateral.

The indenture permits liens in favor of third parties to secure other obligations or additional debt, including purchase money indebtedness and capital lease obligations. In some cases, such liens could have priority over the liens granted to the collateral agent to secure the guarantees or the obligations under the senior secured notes. The scope of permitted liens and our ability to incur purchase money indebtedness and capital lease obligations are subject to certain limitations.

To the extent that liens permitted under the indenture encumber any of the collateral securing the senior secured notes and the guarantees, the other secured parties may have rights and remedies with respect to the collateral that could adversely affect the value of the collateral and the ability of the collateral agent, the trustee under the indenture or the holders of the senior secured notes to realize or foreclose on the collateral. Such liens and rights include, among other things, potential mechanics' liens that could be filed by suppliers, contractors or other parties in connection with our ongoing renovation projects at Borgata. Consequently, liquidating the collateral securing the senior secured notes may not result in proceeds in an amount sufficient to pay any amounts due under the senior secured notes after also satisfying the obligations to pay any creditors with superior liens and obligations under the payment priority contained in the amended credit facility. If the proceeds of any sale of the collateral are not sufficient to repay all amounts due on the senior secured notes, the holders of the senior secured notes (to the extent the senior secured notes are not repaid from the proceeds of the sale of the collateral) would have only an unsecured, unsubordinated claim against our and the guarantors' remaining assets.

Certain categories of assets are excluded from the collateral securing the senior secured notes and the guarantees. Excluded assets include (i) capital stock of any person, (ii) any right, title or interest of MDDC or any guarantor in any gaming license, (iii) certain non-assignable permits, licenses and contractual obligations, (iv) any real properties owned by us that are not material real properties and (v) any real properties leased by us that are not material leasehold interests. In addition, we will not be obligated to perfect the security interest in personal property other than deposit accounts with respect to which a lien cannot be perfected by the filing of a financing statement, up to an aggregate book value of $35 million at any time.

It may be difficult to realize the value of the collateral pledged to secure the senior secured notes.

Our obligations under the senior secured notes and the guarantees are secured by substantially all of our and each guarantor's property and assets. With respect to some of the collateral, the collateral agent's security interest and ability to foreclose will be limited by the need to meet certain requirements, such as obtaining third-party consents and governmental approvals, complying with state law requirements and making additional filings. If we are unable to obtain these consents and approvals, comply with such requirements or make such filings, we may not be able to realize the value of the collateral subject to such security interests. We can provide no assurances that any such required consents or approvals can be obtained on a timely basis or at all. These requirements may limit the number of potential bidders for certain collateral in any foreclosure and may delay any sale, either of which events may have an adverse effect on the sale price of the collateral. Therefore, without the appropriate consents, approvals and filings, the practical value of realizing on the collateral may be limited.

In addition, our business requires numerous federal, state and local permits and licenses. Continued operation of Borgata depends on the maintenance of such permits and licenses. Our business may be adversely affected if we are unable to comply with existing regulations or requirements or changes in applicable regulations or requirements. In the event of foreclosure, the transfer of such permits and licenses may be prohibited or may require us to incur significant cost and expense. Further, we cannot assure that the applicable governmental authorities will consent to the transfer of all such permits. If the regulatory approvals required for such transfers are not obtained or are delayed, the foreclosure may be delayed, a temporary shutdown of operations may result and the value of the collateral may be significantly impaired.

The security interest of the collateral agent, for the benefit of the trustee under the indenture or the holders of the senior secured notes, is subject to practical problems generally associated with the realization of security interests in collateral. For example, the collateral agent may need to obtain the consent of third parties to enforce a security interest in certain of the assets consisting of the collateral, and we can provide no assurances that the collateral agent will be able to obtain any such consent. Accordingly, the collateral agent may not have the ability to foreclose upon such assets, and the value of the collateral may significantly decrease.

Gaming Laws will impose additional restrictions on foreclosure.

The ability of the collateral agent under the inter-creditor agreement to foreclose upon the gaming assets that constitute a portion of the collateral is limited by applicable Gaming Laws. Specifically, MDDC's gaming license is not included as part of the collateral and neither the collateral agent nor any holder of the senior secured notes is permitted to operate or manage any gaming business or assets, including gaming devices, unless such person has been licensed under applicable Gaming Laws for such purpose. In addition, Gaming Laws generally require that all persons who propose to own interests in licensed gaming operations be found suitable or qualified by the NJCCC. Consequently, the collateral agent and, in certain circumstances, holders of the senior secured notes would be required to file applications with the Gaming Authorities for qualification or a petition for waiver or exemption with the NJDGE, as well as to file a petition requesting approval to enforce a security interest in gaming assets before they take steps to enforce the security interest. In addition, a prospective purchaser of the assets or properties comprising the gaming businesses of Borgata would also be required to file the necessary applications, be investigated, provide all information requested by the investigating body, pay all fees and costs charged by the Gaming Authorities for such investigations, and be found suitable by the NJCCC before acquiring the gaming assets that constitute a portion of the collateral through the foreclosure sale. Although the Gaming Laws permit interim qualification and the placement of the gaming assets into an interim casino authorization trust during the time an applicant is being fully qualified, these requirements may nonetheless limit the number of potential bidders

who would participate in any foreclosure or bankruptcy sale and may delay the sale of the gaming assets that constitute a portion of the collateral, either of which could have an adverse effect on the amount of proceeds received from such sales. Further, in the event of a bankruptcy of the gaming licensee or a foreclosure on a lien by a person holding a security interest for which gaming devices are security in whole or in part for the lien, the Gaming Authorities may authorize the disposition of the gaming devices; however, such disposition may only be made in the manner approved by the Gaming Authorities.

Rights of holders of senior secured notes in the collateral may be adversely affected by the failure to perfect liens on certain collateral acquired in the future.

Applicable law requires that certain property and rights acquired after the grant of a general security interest or lien can only be perfected at the time such property and rights are acquired and identified. There can be no assurance that the trustee or the collateral agent will monitor, or that we will inform the collateral agent or the trustee of, the future acquisition of property and rights that constitute collateral, and that the necessary action will be taken to properly perfect the lien on such after-acquired collateral. Neither the collateral agent nor the trustee for the holders of the senior secured notes has any obligation to monitor the acquisition of additional property or rights that constitute collateral or the perfection of any security interests therein. Such failure may result in the loss of the practical benefits of the liens thereon or of the priority of the liens on such property or assets.

Claims of creditors of subsidiaries which do not guarantee the senior secured notes are structurally senior and have priority over holders of the senior secured notes with respect to the assets and earnings of such subsidiaries.

While MDFC had no subsidiaries and MDDC had no subsidiaries other than MDFC at the time of issuance of the senior secured notes, subsidiaries we form or acquire in the future may not necessarily be guarantors under the indenture. All liabilities of such subsidiaries that do not guarantee the senior secured notes are effectively senior to the senior secured notes to the extent of the value of the assets of such non-guarantor subsidiaries.

Fraudulent conveyance laws may permit courts to void the guarantees of the senior secured notes in specific circumstances, which would interfere with the payment of the guarantees and realization upon collateral owned by the guarantors.

MDFC's issuance of the senior secured notes and the issuance of the guarantees by MDDC, and any of MDDC's future subsidiaries may be subject to review under federal and state fraudulent conveyance or similar laws. Under the federal bankruptcy laws and comparable provisions of state fraudulent transfer laws, any guarantee made by MDDC or any of MDDC's future subsidiaries could be voided, or claims under the guarantee made by MDDC or any of MDDC's future subsidiaries could be subordinated to all other obligations of MDDC or any such subsidiary, if MDDC or the subsidiary, at the time it incurred the obligations under any guarantee:

incurred the obligations with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors;


•	received less than reasonably equivalent value in exchange for incurring those obligations; and was insolvent or rendered insolvent by reason of that incurrence;


•	was engaged in a business or transaction for which such person's remaining assets constituted unreasonably small capital; or

•intended to incur, or believed that it would incur, debts beyond our ability to pay those debts as they mature.

A legal challenge to the obligations under any guarantee on fraudulent conveyance grounds could focus on any benefits received in exchange for the incurrence of those obligations. Because a portion of the proceeds from the offering of the senior secured notes were used to fund a dividend to the Joint Venture Partners, a court could conclude that the senior secured notes were issued for less than reasonably equivalent value. The obligations of each guarantor under its note guarantee contain a net worth limitation to reduce the risk that a note guarantee would constitute a fraudulent conveyance under applicable law.

The measures of insolvency for purposes of the fraudulent transfer laws vary depending on the law applied in the proceeding to determine whether a fraudulent transfer has occurred. Generally, however, an entity would be considered insolvent if:

•the sum of its debts, including contingent liabilities, is greater than the fair salable value of all of its assets;


•	the present fair salable value of its assets is less than the amount that would be required to pay its probable liabilities on its existing debts, including contingent liabilities, as they become absolute and mature; or

•it cannot pay its debts as they become due.

If a guarantee of the senior secured notes by MDDC or a future subsidiary were deemed void as a fraudulent transfer, holders of other indebtedness of, and trade creditors of, MDDC or that subsidiary would generally be entitled to payment of their claims from the assets of MDDC or the subsidiary that constitute a portion of the collateral before such assets could be made available for distribution to us to satisfy our own obligations, including the senior secured notes.

In the event of a bankruptcy, the ability of the holders of the senior secured notes to realize upon the collateral will be subject to certain bankruptcy law limitations.

In addition to limitations under the inter-creditor agreement, bankruptcy law could prevent the collateral agent from repossessing and disposing of, or otherwise exercising remedies in respect of, the collateral upon the occurrence of an event of default if a bankruptcy proceeding were to be commenced by or against us or the guarantors prior to the collateral agent having repossessed and disposed of, or otherwise exercised remedies in respect of, the collateral. Under the U.S. bankruptcy code, a secured creditor such as the collateral agent is prohibited from repossessing its security from a debtor in a bankruptcy case, or from disposing of security repossessed from such debtor, without bankruptcy court approval. Moreover, the bankruptcy code permits the debtor to continue to retain and to use collateral even though the debtor is in default under the applicable debt instrument; provided that the secured creditor is given “adequate protection.” The meaning of the term “adequate protection” may vary according to the circumstances, but it is intended in general to protect the value of the secured creditor's interest in the collateral. The court may find “adequate protection” if the debtor pays cash or grants additional security, if and at such times as the court in its discretion determines, for any diminution in the value of the collateral during the pendency of the bankruptcy case. In view of the lack of a precise definition of the term “adequate protection” and the broad discretionary powers of a bankruptcy court, it is impossible to predict how long payments with respect to the senior secured notes could be delayed following commencement of a bankruptcy case, whether or when the collateral agent could repossess or dispose of the collateral or whether or to what extent holders would be compensated for any delay in payment or loss of value of the collateral through the requirement of “adequate protection.”

Any future pledge of collateral might be avoidable in bankruptcy.

Any future pledge of collateral in favor of the collateral agent, including pursuant to mortgages and other security documents delivered after the date of the indenture governing the senior secured notes, might be avoidable by the pledgor (as debtor-in-possession) or by its trustee in bankruptcy if certain events or circumstances exist or occur, including, among others, if the pledgor is insolvent at the time of the pledge, the pledge permits the holders of the notes to receive a greater recovery than if the pledge had not been given and a bankruptcy proceeding in respect of the pledgor is commenced within 90 days following the pledge or, in certain circumstances, a longer period.

Risks Related to our Ownership

We are owned, indirectly, by the members of MDDHC, and their equity interests may conflict with our interests or the interests of our debt holders.

The members of MDDHC indirectly own 100% of MDDC's outstanding membership interests and will control all matters submitted for approval by MDDC's member. These matters could include the election of the members of MDFC's board of directors, amendments to our organizational documents, or the approval of any proxy contests, mergers, tender offers, sales of assets or other major corporate transactions. The interests of the members of MDDC may compete or otherwise conflict with our interests. For example, Boyd, as a diversified operator of 16 wholly-owned gaming entertainment properties, may from time to time develop or acquire and hold additional gaming businesses that compete directly or indirectly with us. Boyd may also pursue acquisition opportunities that may be complementary to our business, and as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us.

In addition, as of March 24, 2010, the date MAC transferred the MGM Interest and certain land, including land leased to MDDC, to the Divestiture Trust, Boyd effectively obtained control of us. In connection with the transfer, BAC and MAC entered into an amendment to the Operating Agreement, which provides, among other things, for the termination of MGM's participating rights in the operations of MDDHC, effective as of the date of the transfer. As a result, Boyd, through BAC, has effective control of MDDHC.

Boyd, through BAC's operational control of MDDHC, has the ability to significantly influence our affairs and policies, including the election of the board of directors of MDFC and, except as otherwise provided by law, approving or disapproving other matters submitted to a vote of the members of MDDC or the stockholder of MDFC, including a merger, consolidation, sale of assets or other extraordinary transactions.

Moreover, the interests of the members of MDDC may not in all cases be aligned with the interests of a holder of the notes. For example, the members of MDDC could cause us to make acquisitions that increase the amount of the indebtedness that is secured or senior to the notes or sell revenue-generating assets, impairing our ability to make payments under the notes. Additionally, the members of MDDC own and operate businesses that compete directly or indirectly with us. Accordingly, the members of MDDC may also pursue acquisition opportunities that may be complementary to our business, and as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us. In addition, the members of MDDC may have an interest in pursuing acquisitions, divestitures and other transactions that, in their judgment, could enhance their equity investment, even though such transactions might involve risks to holders of our notes.

MGM has transferred its ownership interest to the Divestiture Trust for sale to a third party.

As a result of the NJDGE's investigation of MGM's relationship with its joint venture partner in Macau, on March 24, 2010, MAC, a second tier, wholly-owned subsidiary of MGM, transferred its 50% ownership interest and certain land leased to MDDC into the Divestiture Trust, of which MGM and its subsidiaries are the economic beneficiaries, for sale to a third party. BAC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Boyd, has a right of first refusal to purchase the MGM Interest from the Divestiture Trust on the same terms as proposed by any third-party buyer.

As the managing member since our inception, BAC, through MDDHC, has been, and will continue to be, responsible for the oversight and management of our day-to-day operations. Based on the terms of the Operating Agreement between BAC and MAC, we anticipate that BAC will retain control of the operations of Borgata after the sale of the MGM Interest. If BAC elects not to exercise its right of first refusal, a new member may want to negotiate greater rights or different terms. A new member could have economic or business interests or goals that are inconsistent with our economic or business interests or goals. The ongoing operation of Borgata could change if BAC negotiates agreements with a new member that contain terms that differ from the existing Operating Agreement. In addition, we do not have any rights with respect to whether BAC exercises its right of first refusal or with respect to the selection of the new member.

On July 6, 2010, MDDC received a notice from MAC that the trustee of the Divestiture Trust had entered into an agreement with a third party to sell the land contributed by MAC to the Divestiture Trust in connection with MAC's settlement agreement with the NJDGE, except the land underlying the surface parking lot ground lease. On November 4, 2010, MGM announced that it closed the sale of the land leased to MDDC pursuant to four ground leases, all of which remain in effect following the closing. Other than MDDC's obligation to pay rent (in an amount equal to the amount paid per square foot under the parking structure ground lease) and property taxes pursuant to the alternative parking structure ground lease, our obligations under the ground leases are not modified by the sale.


Item 6.	Exhibits



Exhibit Number	Document of Exhibit	Method of Filing
31.1	Certification of the principal executive officer of the Registrant pursuant to Exchange Act rule 13a-14(a).	Filed electronically herewith

31.2	Certification of the principal financial officer of the Registrant pursuant to Exchange Act rule 13a-14(a).	Filed electronically herewith

32.1	Certification of the principal executive officer of the Registrant pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. § 1350.	Filed electronically herewith

32.2	Certification of the principal financial officer of the Registrant pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. § 1350.	Filed electronically herewith

101	The following materials from Marina District Finance Company Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, formatted in XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language): (i) Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, (ii) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, (iii) Condensed Consolidated Statement of Changes in Member Equity for the nine months ended September 30, 2012, (iv) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, and (vi) Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.*	Filed electronically herewith

* Pursuant to Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, the Interactive Data Files on Exhibit 101 hereto are deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, are deemed not filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and otherwise are not subject to liability under those sections.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereto duly authorized, on November 14, 2012.



		MARINA DISTRICT FINANCE COMPANY, INC.

	By:	/s/ Keith E. Smith
		Keith E. Smith
		President and Director
		Principal Executive Officer

	By:	/s/ Josh Hirsberg
		Josh Hirsberg
		Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
		Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

EXHIBIT LIST



Exhibit No.	Document of Exhibit	Method of Filing
31.1	Certification of the principal executive officer of the Registrant pursuant to Exchange Act rule 13a-14(a).	Filed electronically herewith

31.2	Certification of the principal financial officer of the Registrant pursuant to Exchange Act rule 13a-14(a).	Filed electronically herewith

32.1	Certification of the principal executive officer of the Registrant pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. § 1350.	Filed electronically herewith

32.2	Certification of the principal financial officer of the Registrant pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. § 1350.	Filed electronically herewith

101	The following materials from Marina District Finance Company Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, formatted in XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language): (i) Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, (ii) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, (iii) Condensed Consolidated Statement of Changes in Member Equity for the nine months ended September 30, 2012, (iv) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, and (vi) Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.*	Filed electronically herewith

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

x (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company