Hey fellas. I know this board is for very serious questions. I've developed a serious question lately, mostly centered about Part 2, but contextually some answers could be gleamed from I and III as well.

I've always been interested in the estate in Tahoe. I think we all know it. There was a thread recently about how some of the series' best plotting takes place off screen (Sollozzo and Tattaglia, Barzini and Tessio, and more). I was thinking about how so much of the family business in the Western US takes place offscreen too. In I, Michael talks pretty explicity, literally, in illuminating terms, about a move to Nevada. Carlo is in the room. Obviously we can assume the family is after the crown jewel of Las Vegas. In II, the cast never sets foot in Vegas proper. The rackets, vice, gambling, and brother physically appear to be spread out between the Reno era, generally around Nevada, and possibly northern rinky dink California. I believe Fredo refers to some of his rackets as Mickey Mouse clubs.

What I'm wondering is, what does the geography of the Corleone family look like in the West? Do you think they controlled an even distribution of Las Vegas down and west to San Jose? Do you think there were a few regimes in Las Vegas proper and then button men every few towns or so? Coppola and Puzo and the creative heads spent so much time describing the business at the top that the geography of the family is difficult to pin down. We know back in the heart of New York Tessio and Clemenza had specific regimes in specific areas. Maybe in the west there were a few made men every few towns, a regime in Reno, and a bulk of men near Vegas led by Neri?

I'm speculating and looking for a good discussion. Thanks!

To top it off, there were made men as far as Northern and even possibly Central California that belonged to the five families. Interesting stuff!

When Geary meets with Michael in his office during Anthony's party, he says "You [Michael] own or control three hotels--two in Vegas, one in Reno....now you're planning a move on the Tropigala" [he doesn't say where that hotel was]..

But, to your broader point, the movie never identifies any other businesses or rackets Michael might have had in Nevada, other than Fredo's brothel. This is a bit of a mystery: On the one hand, it would have been dangerous to Michael's "legitimate" front to have button men and rackets all over Nevada, or California, or elsewhere in the West, and it could have resulted in the Gaming Commission investigating him and yanking his licenses. On the other hand, he appears to have been a billionaire by the time of GF III, and I can't believe he made all that money from just four casinos.

TB, I've always assumed that Michael would have been receiving the proceeds from any number of Mafia connected activities in the east and west. In addition, he may have been quite an investor. Afterall, as the novel states, the Corleone family under Vito owned valuable real estate in New York and at least parts of brokerage firms. I would think that Michael was just as good an investor as Vito if not better. Of course, we don't know how Michael "owned" any casinos. I'm sure that such ownership may have been suspected but was quite opaque to any prying eyes. Thus, in GFIII, he is able to distribute to the dons the profits from the sale of the casinos and there's no hint of any associated problems with the law.

It is also worth noting that Michael's opportunities for investment would have been much greater than Vito's given the tremendous expansion of the US and world economies during his tenure as Don (ITT & IBM to name a few)..

All good points, Oli. Also, he was probably receiving tribute from the "Olive oil business" in NYC.

As Geary said “The Corleone family has done very well here in Nevada” and moving Klingman out and taking over the Tropigala would be quite an expansion

It seems to me the only “button men and rackets” Michael had was Pentangeli's Family still called Corleone! their "Olive oil business" in NYC

Sure thing Turnbull “it would have been dangerous to Michael's "legitimate" front” to have button men and rackets” elsewhere indeed
Besides “Nobody wants another war”! if Michael burrowed into other Dons' territory

Why did Michael share the proceeds from the sale of his casinos with the other Dons?
If it was a goodwill gesture! why leave Joey Zasa out creating all that acrimony

It's part of the generally poor scripting of III. You're right: there was no real reason for him to have the other Dons as investors-- it would have been even more dangerous to his "legitimate" front than having button men all over the West. As for leaving Zasa out: it was a device for setting up the helicopter attack--except that Zasa had to have arranged the attack well in advance of having been left out of the divvying up of the casino assets.

Michael shared the casino profits with the other Dons because they were investors.
In the Atlantic City meeting scene,he states that each Don would receive money commensurate with the amount of their original investment,plus the length of time that they had been in.
One Don even asks another "how much did you invest" to which the Don replied "I don't remember"
Since one of the men gets a payout of 50 million dollars.and assuming the others are either above or below that amount,I would imagine that there was some serious money in the casino business.
It should be noted that Michael tells the Dons that their business is now finished,which I believe is because he wants Immobiliare (as he tells Altobelli) to be completely legitimate.

I think that Michael is tracking along behind Roth, becoming a money-laundering operation for the rough gangs on one hand while loosening the direct control he has over them with the other. The Tropigala is a flashpoint where the Roth and Corleone interests have grown so that they can't help but conflict with each other, and both react by pretending it's of no concern in order to put the other to sleep. But deal or no, I think that Michael is turning into Roth - a dirty/legitimate financial group that has the allegiance of certain rough gangs because he always makes money for his friends.

Pete, as I and some others have opined over the years, both Vito and Michael had their own definition for legitimate. Despite his protestations to the contrary, Michael never gave up ultimate control and some of that control was exercised through the Family's regimes whether in New York or Nevada. I have stated several times that Michael was like Tony Accardo in Chicago who supposedly retired as Don of the Outfit, but retained considerable power behind the scenes. That power eventually resulted in Giancana's removal as the Outfit's boss.

Although there was Pentangeli and Zasa (and probably others) in NY, Michael could pull the strings anytime he wanted.

I don't think snubbing Zasa was a plot device to explain the helicopter attack. As you note, that was clearly worked out well in advance.

I actually don't think Zasa had much of a gripe. He was too young and new to the scene to have any long-standing casino investments. He just wanted to be taken care of in some way, which Michael pointedly didn't do, probably as payback for Zasa badmouthing him and also to remind Zasa who's boss.

Zasa reacted so strongly because he had to create a pretext to get out of the room before the helicopter attack. Michael gave him an opening and he took full advantage.

I agree Woltz. I do not understand (since the film's dialogue did not provide an explanation) what Zasa meant when he said that his family did much of the hard work.

Yes, Zasa's reaction was simply a cover to get him and Altobello out of the room. Of course, I question his purpose. By murdering all of the Dons did he intend to become the Cosa Nostra's boss? Was it purely revenge? Why was Altobello Michael's enemy?

...and several dozen other questions that the script raises and never answers...

That's one of the many, many script weaknesses--it's so obvious that he had to have worked it out in advance.


Yessiree, split second timing--just like Roth used to have that cop come into Richie's bar and interrupt Pentangeli's garrotting, as some here probably still believe.

Mustachepete and olivant both have good answers. Michael as an Accardo analogue, and Michael as a launderer for the rougher groups in New York. Two very interesting angles.

This year it came up from some researchers that there were made men who acted as local congressmen and local judges in a ludicrous place - Wyoming. And following the real world even further, there were made men in every state, men from each family in Nevada, button men in Reno (around the time of the Godfather series there were). Even stranger things like Bonanno members in Rochester, NY.

I always imagined in my head that Corleone men from Fredo, Neri, and Rocco operate the roadside brothels and gambling joints. Michael being a businessmen might not turn down an easy nickel in his new fiefdom.

He wouldn't risk his legitimacy!