UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549





FORM 10-K





(Mark One)



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

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010

OR



| ̈ | 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:
333-87202





CIRCUS AND ELDORADO JOINT VENTURE

SILVER LEGACY CAPITAL CORP.

(Exact name of registrants as specified in
their charters)







|                                                               |  |                                     
|-------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------
|Nevada                                                         |  | 88-0310787                          
|                                                               | 
|Nevada                                                         |  | 71-0868362                          
|(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization) |  | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
|                                                               | 
|407 North Virginia Street, Reno, Nevada                        |  | 89501                               
|(Address of principal executive offices)                       |  | (Zip Code)                          

Registrants telephone number, including area code:

800-687-7733

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:

None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None





Indicate by check mark if the registrants are well-known seasoned issuers, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act.    Yes   ̈    No  x

Indicate by check mark if the registrants are not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act.    Yes   ̈    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants (1) have 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 registrants were required to file such reports), and (2) have been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90
days.    Yes  x    No   ̈

Indicate by check mark whether the registrants have submitted electronically and posted on their 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   ̈    No   ̈



Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III
of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x

Indicate
by check mark whether the registrants are large accelerated filers, accelerated filers, non-accelerated filers, or smaller reporting companies. See definitions of large accelerated filer, accelerated filer, and smaller
reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):



|                            |  |                       |  |                                             |  |                             
|--------------------------- |  | --------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------
|Large accelerated filers   ̈ |  | Accelerated filers   ̈ |  | Non-accelerated filers  x                   |  | Smaller reporting company   ̈
|                            |  |                       |  | (Do not check if smaller reporting company) |  |                             

Indicate by check mark whether either of the registrants is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act).



|                                                     |  |                                               
|---------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------
|Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture    Yes   ̈    No  x |  | Silver Legacy Capital Corp.    Yes  x    No   ̈

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by
non-affiliates. None.

The number of shares of Silver Legacy Capital Corp.s common stock outstanding at March 31,
2011 was 2,500. All of these shares are owned by Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

None.









---

PART I



|ITEM 1. | BUSINESS
|------- | --------

Overview

Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture, a Nevada general partnership which is a joint venture between Eldorado Limited Liability Company and
Galleon, Inc., owns and operates the Silver Legacy Resort Casino, a nineteenth century silver mining themed hotel-casino and entertainment complex in Reno, Nevada. Eldorado Limited Liability Company is a 96% owned subsidiary of Eldorado Resorts LLC,
which owns the Eldorado Hotel & Casino, one of the two hotel casinos connected to Silver Legacy, and Galleon, Inc., the managing partner of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture, is a wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International, which
owns Circus Circus Hotel and Casino, the other hotel casino which is connected to Silver Legacy.

On April 25, 2005, a
wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International was merged with and into Mandalay Resort Group, a Nevada corporation (Mandalay), which owns all of the issued and outstanding common stock of Galleon, Inc. As a result of the merger,
Mandalay became a wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International.

The terms we,
our and us, as used in this annual report, refer to Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Silver Legacy Capital Corp, as a combined entity, except where it is clear that the terms mean only Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture
or Silver Legacy Capital Corp. When we use the term Partnership it refers only to Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture, and when we use the term Capital it refers only to Silver Legacy Capital Corp. Capital was established
solely for the purpose of serving as a co-issuer of $160 million principal amount 101/8% mortgage notes due 2012 co-issued by the Partnership and Capital and, as such, Capital does not have any operations, assets, or revenues. The term Silver Legacy refers to the Silver Legacy
Resort Casino. References to the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino refer to the hotel-casino by that name located in Reno, Nevada. When we use the term Reno market we are referring to the Reno and Sparks areas as delineated by the Nevada
Gaming Control Board.

Silver Legacy

We own and operate the Silver Legacy Resort Casino, a premier themed hotel-casino and entertainment complex designed based on Nevadas rich mining heritage, located in Reno, Nevada. Silver Legacy is
among the largest hotel-casinos in the Reno market. Silver Legacy offers a dynamic gaming environment and a wide variety of amenities delivered with special attention to personal service to appeal to our multiple customer segments, including
preferred casino players.

Silver Legacy opened in July 1995, with a capital investment of over $360 million, and is
strategically located on two city blocks in downtown Reno directly off Interstate 80, the principal highway connecting Reno with San Francisco, Sacramento and other cities in northern California. The casino and entertainment areas at Silver Legacy
are seamlessly connected to the Eldorado Hotel & Casino and the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino by approximately 200-foot wide skyway corridors. Together the three properties comprise the heart of Renos gaming area and room base.

Silver Legacy has approximately 87,300 square feet of gaming space situated on two levels. At
December 31, 2010, Silver Legacy featured 1,414 slot machines and 63 table games, including blackjack, craps, roulette, Pai Gow Poker, Let It Ride®, Baccarat and Pai Gow, in addition to keno, PokerPro, and a race and sportsbook. Star Rewards, Silver Legacys players club, offers customers
exciting special events and tournaments and convenient ways of earning complimentaries.

Silver Legacys hotel, the
tallest building in northern Nevada, is a Y-shaped structure with three wings, consisting of 37-, 34- and 31-floor tiers. An enclosed, climate controlled skywalk over North Sierra Street links the hotel to the main casino, restaurants
and additional public areas on the mezzanine level. The hotel currently offers 1,709 guest rooms, including 141 player spa suites, eight penthouse suites, and seven hospitality suites.

Silver Legacys dining options are offered in six venues:



| |  |  | Sterlings Seafood Steakhouse, which has a seating capacity of approximately 170, offering the finest in steaks and seafood along with an
extensive wine list, tableside desserts and an extravagant Sunday Brunch;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Flavors! The Buffet, which has a seating capacity of approximately 500;
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Fairchilds Oyster Bar, which has a seating capacity of approximately 55, offering specialized seafood dining;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Café Sedona, which has a seating capacity of approximately 330, offering an extensive menu that includes American classics and Chinese
cuisine 24-hours a day;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Fresh Express Food Court, which has a seating capacity of approximately 110, offering a range of options including a deli and grill, authentic
Asian cuisine and American classics; and
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



---

| |  |  | Sips Coffee House, situated in the hotel lobby, offering gourmet coffee and teas.
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Silver Legacy is downtown Renos leading convention destination, currently offering approximately 50,000 square feet of in-house
exhibit and convention space that includes an approximately 20,000 square-foot divisible ballroom and approximately 30,000 square feet of space for additional breakout rooms, all located within the casino complex. We believe the additional hotel
capacity and meeting space available at the adjoining Eldorado and Circus properties enhance our ability to attract conventions larger than those that can be serviced by the Silver Legacy alone. See Adjoining Properties below.

In addition to our in-house exhibit and convention space, we, Eldorado and Circus operate and manage a 50,000 square-foot
ballroom that is owned by the City of Reno and is located across North Virginia Street from the Silver Legacy. The ballroom complements the existing Reno Events Center and provides an elegant venue for large dinner functions and convention meeting
space along with concert seating for approximately 3,000 attendees.

Silver Legacys amenities also include retail shops,
exercise and spa facilities, a beauty salon, and an outdoor swimming pool and sundeck. Silver Legacys 10-story parking facility is capable of accommodating approximately 1,800 vehicles.

We carefully target our marketing programs to five segments of the gaming market:



| |  |  | free and independent travelers,
| | - |  | -------------------------------



| |  |  | preferred casino customers,
| | - |  | ---------------------------



| |  |  | convention groups,
| | - |  | ------------------



| |  |  | local patrons, and
| | - |  | ------------------



| |  |  | wholesale/specialty and Internet groups.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------

We attract our target customers through newspaper, radio, television, Internet, social media and direct mail campaigns locally and in northern California, the Pacific northwest and other regional travel
markets. Silver Legacy utilizes a broad special events calendar, along with our guest development program, including selective casino credit, to attract and retain our target customers. In addition, we utilize our hotel rooms, restaurants,
entertainment and other amenities to offer complimentaries to a broad spectrum of established casino guests. Star Rewards, Silver Legacys players club, offers customers exciting special events and tournaments and convenient ways of
earning and redeeming complimentaries and slot free play. The convention groups and wholesale/specialty market segments contribute to our hotel occupancy during slower mid-week periods. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 and 2009,
our average occupancy rate was 67.7% compared to 66.1% and 64.7%, respectively, for the Reno market (according to the Reno-Sparks Convention & Visitors Authority).

The primary source of our revenues is the casino, although the hotel, restaurants, bars, shops and other services are an important adjunct to the casino. The following table sets forth the respective
contributions to our net revenues on a dollar and percentage basis of our major activities at Silver Legacy for each of the three most recent fiscal years. For further information regarding our revenue, operating results and total assets and
liabilities, refer to Part II, Item 6  Selected Financial Data and Part II, Item 7  Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. For our consolidated
financial statements and accompanying footnotes, refer to Part II, Item 8  Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.



|                          |  |                        |         |   |      |  |       |      |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |   |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |  
|------------------------- |  | ---------------------- | ------- | - | ---- |  | ----- | ---- |  | - | ------- | - |  |  | ----- | - |  | - | ------- | - |  |  | ----- | -
|                          |  | 2010                   |         |   | 2009 |  |       | 2008 | 
|                          |  | (dollars in thousands) |        
|Revenues:                 |  |                        |         |   |      |  |       |      |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |   |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |  
|Casino(1)                 |  | $                      | 67,397  |   |      |  | 55.9  | %    |  | $ | 68,767  |   |  |  | 56.3  | % |  | $ | 74,834  |   |  |  | 53.7  | %
|Hotel(2)                  |  |                        | 31,009  |   |      |  | 25.7  |      |  |   | 31,009  |   |  |  | 25.4  |   |  |   | 36,551  |   |  |  | 26.2  |  
|Food and beverage(2)      |  |                        | 31,365  |   |      |  | 26.0  |      |  |   | 31,871  |   |  |  | 26.1  |   |  |   | 34,966  |   |  |  | 25.1  |  
|Other(2)                  |  |                        | 7,622   |   |      |  | 6.3   |      |  |   | 7,939   |   |  |  | 6.5   |   |  |   | 9,654   |   |  |  | 6.9   |  
|                          |  |                        |         |   |      |  |       |      |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |   |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |  
|                          |  |                        | 137,393 |   |      |  | 113.9 |      |  |   | 139,586 |   |  |  | 114.3 |   |  |   | 156,005 |   |  |  | 111.9 |  
|Less:                     |  |                        |         |   |      |  |       |      |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |   |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |  
|Promotional allowances(2) |  |                        | (16,764 | ) |      |  | (13.9 | )    |  |   | (17,482 | ) |  |  | (14.3 | ) |  |   | (16,530 | ) |  |  | (11.9 | )
|                          |  |                        |         |   |      |  |       |      |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |   |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |  
|Net revenues              |  | $                      | 120,629 |   |      |  | 100.0 | %    |  | $ | 122,104 |   |  |  | 100.0 | % |  | $ | 139,475 |   |  |  | 100.0 | %
|                          |  |                        |         |   |      |  |       |      |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |   |  |   |         |   |  |  |       |  



|(1) | Casino revenues are the net difference between the sums received as winnings and the sums paid as losses, less cash and free play incentives provided to customers.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | Hotel, food and beverage and other include the retail value of services which are provided to casino customers and others on a complimentary basis. Such amounts are
then deducted as promotional allowances to arrive at net revenue.
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



2



---

Methods of Competition

Silver Legacy competes for customers by offering our guests a fully integrated gaming, lodging, dining and entertainment experience in a convenient downtown Reno location. We believe the quality of our
amenities, Silver Legacys overall atmosphere and competitive pricing enable us to attract multiple customer segments from the local area, northern California, the Pacific northwest and other regional travel markets.

Premier Must See Attraction. We believe Silver Legacy is a must see attraction for Reno visitors and
residents. The propertys design is inspired by Nevadas rich mining heritage and the legend of Sam Fairchild, a fictitious silver baron who struck it rich on the site of the casino. Silver Legacys interior showcases a
casino built around Sam Fairchilds famed 120-foot tall mining rig. The rig is situated beneath a 180-foot diameter dome, which is a distinctive landmark on the Reno skyline. The interior surface of the dome features dynamic sound and laser
light shows, providing visitors with a unique experience when they enter the casino.

Center of Three-Property Destination
Resort. Silver Legacy, together with the Eldorado and Circus properties, comprises the heart of the Reno markets prime gaming area and room base, providing the most extensive variety of gaming, lodging, dining and entertainment
amenities in the Reno area. As of December 31, 2010, the three-property complex offered 4,095 rooms, 20 restaurants, 3,580 slot machines, 144 table games and parking to accommodate approximately 6,100 vehicles, representing approximately 26.6%
of the Reno markets total room base, 23.3% of the Reno markets total slot machines, and 33.4% of the Reno markets total table games. We believe that the centralized location and critical mass of these three properties, together
with the seamless connections between the facilities, provide Silver Legacy with significant advantages over other freestanding hotel-casinos in the Reno market.

Headliner Entertainment. Our customers are attracted to Silver Legacys entertainment and award-winning cuisine. For the year ended December 31, 2010, approximately 48 nights of
headliner entertainment were scheduled in our 1,600-seat Grande Exposition Hall making Silver Legacy a leading headliner entertainment venue in the Reno market. Entertainers who appeared at Silver Legacy during 2010 included Bill Cosby, Rodney
Carrington, Sheryl Crow, Dwight Yoakam, Martin Lawrence, Patti Labelle and Bill Maher. Silver Legacy also features Catch a Rising Star, a 220-seat, nationally recognized comedy club. Throughout 2010, we also utilized the city-owned Reno Events
Center as a venue for 13 nights of entertainment which we co-sponsored or produced with one or more other downtown properties. We were able to take advantage of this facilitys larger seating capacity and attract popular headliner acts
including Daughtry, Carrie Underwood, Justin Bieber, The Eagles, Brad Paisley and Jeff Dunham. In addition to the Grande Exposition Hall and the Reno Events Center, Silver Legacy co-sponsored or produced seven nights of entertainment in the Reno
Ballroom which offers seating for approximately 3,000 attendees. Reno Ballroom entertainers included Tony Bennett and various popular Asian headliners.

Quality Personal Service. We are committed to providing our customers with a high level of personal service, which we believe is an integral part of fostering customer loyalty and generating
repeat business. We continually strive to instill in each employee a dedication to superior service designed to exceed our guests expectations.

Experienced Management Team. Silver Legacy has an experienced management team with an average of more than 30 years each of experience in the Reno gaming market. All of our senior management
have been with Silver Legacy since it opened in July 1995. We have also benefited from the expertise of our joint venture partners and the leadership they have provided through our executive committee, which has included senior executives from
Eldorado Resorts LLC and MGM Resorts International.

Adjoining Properties

Enclosed, climate controlled corridors connect Silver Legacy with the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino and the Eldorado Hotel &
Casino, each of which is owned and independently operated by an affiliate of one of the Partnerships partners.

Circus Circus Hotel and Casino. The Circus Circus Hotel and Casino features 1,572 guestrooms and a 70,000 square-foot casino,
which, as of December 31, 2010, featured 919 slot machines and 35 table games. The property offers its guests a variety of circus acts performed daily, free of charge, under a Big Top above the casino. A mezzanine area has a circus
midway with carnival-style games and an arcade that offers a variety of amusement and electronic games. The property features three specialty restaurants, The Steakhouse at Circus, Kokopellis Sushi Bar, and Smokin Geckos BBQ, in
addition to a 464-seat buffet, coffee shop, deli/bakery, fast food snack bar, cocktail lounges, gift shop, specialty shops, parking facilities for approximately 3,200 vehicles, and approximately 37,000 square feet of convention space.

Eldorado Hotel & Casino. This property is a luxurious hotel-casino offering approximately 76,500 square feet of
gaming space. Its three hotel towers have a total of 814 guestrooms, including 17 specialty suites, 93 Eldorado Players Spa Suites with bedside spas and 26 one or two bedroom suites. As of December 31, 2010, this
propertys casino featured 1,247 slot machines and 46 table games, as well as poker, keno and a race and sports book. The property is renowned for its seven



3



---

restaurants, including Bistro Roxy, La Strada and a 340-seat buffet. Additional amenities include bars and lounges, parking facilities for approximately 1,100 vehicles, and approximately 12,400
square feet of convention space.

Reno Market

Reno is the second largest metropolitan area in Nevada, with a population of 421,000 according to the most recently available census data, and is located at the base of the Sierra Nevada Mountains along
Interstate 80, approximately 135 miles east of Sacramento, California and 225 miles east of San Francisco, California. Reno is a destination resort market that primarily attracts drive-in visitors by offering gaming as well as numerous
other summer and winter recreational activities. Management believes that approximately two-thirds of visitors to the Reno market arrive by some form of ground transportation. Popular special events include the National Championship Air Races, the
Reno-Tahoe Open PGA tour event, Street Vibrations, a motorcycle event, and Hot August Nights, a vintage car event. In addition, the National Bowling Stadium, located one block from Silver Legacy, is one of the largest bowling complexes in North
America and has been selected to host multi-month tournaments in Reno two out of every three years through 2018. Through one-time agreements, the National Bowling Stadium also will host multi-month bowling tournaments in 2011 and 2014, usually
off-years for Reno.

According to the Reno-Sparks Convention & Visitors Authority, the greater Reno area attracted an
estimated 4.4 million visitors during the twelve months ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. The following table sets forth certain statistical information for the Reno market for the years 2006 through 2010 as reported by the Reno-Sparks
Convention & Visitors Authority and the Nevada State Gaming Control Board.



|                                   |  |      |           |   |      |   |           |      |  |   |           |   |  |      |           |   |  |   |           |  
|---------------------------------- |  | ---- | --------- | - | ---- | - | --------- | ---- |  | - | --------- | - |  | ---- | --------- | - |  | - | --------- | -
|                                   |  | 2010 |           |   | 2009 |   |           | 2008 |  |   | 2007      |   |  | 2006 |          
|Gaming Revenues(000s)(1)(3)       |  | $    | 683,940   |   |      | $ | 715,234   |      |  | $ | 831,889   |   |  | $    | 928,500   |   |  | $ | 940,315   |  
|Gaming Positions(2)(3)             |  |      | 18,091    |   |      |   | 19,009    |      |  |   | 20,217    |   |  |      | 21,670    |   |  |   | 21,794    |  
|Hotel Rooms(2)(4)                  |  |      | 15,398    |   |      |   | 16,134    |      |  |   | 15,637    |   |  |      | 15,292    |   |  |   | 14,393    |  
|Average Hotel Occupancy Rate(1)(4) |  |      | 66.1      | % |      |   | 64.7      | %    |  |   | 66.6      | % |  |      | 75.4      | % |  |   | 76.6      | %
|Visitors(1)(4)                     |  |      | 4,406,270 |   |      |   | 4,354,423 |      |  |   | 4,583,298 |   |  |      | 5,097,591 |   |  |   | 5,121,119 |  



|(1) | For the twelve months ended December 31 for each period shown.
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | As of December 31 for each period shown.
|--- | ----------------------------------------

|(3) | Calculated from information provided by the Nevada State Gaming Control Board.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(4) | Calculated from information provided by the Reno-Sparks Convention & Visitors Authority.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marketing Strategy

We
target the following customer segments of the Reno gaming market: free and independent travelers, preferred casino customers, convention groups, local patrons, wholesale/specialty and Internet groups.

Free and Independent Travelers. This customer segment consists of persons who are not affiliated with travel groups and who
make arrangements for their accommodations directly or through independent travel agents. For Reno, free and independent travelers consist principally of persons who typically travel on weekends from northern California, Oregon, Washington and
western Canada. Silver Legacy targets this segment through advertising efforts, including television and newsprint exposure, emphasizing the exciting atmosphere and high level of relative value offered at Silver Legacy. Advertising efforts are
directed principally to existing Reno gaming customers, as well as to experienced gaming customers of Las Vegas and other markets. Additionally, utilizing the unique theming of Silver Legacy, the variety, quality, and attractive pricing of its food
and beverage outlets, and its close proximity to other hotel casinos in downtown Reno (including its connection with the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino and Eldorado Hotel & Casino), we target walk-in customers for Silver Legacy.

Preferred Casino Customers. Management targets valued gaming customers through an aggressive development program.
This program utilizes independent sales representatives to engage in one-on-one sales activities and marketing personnel trained to identify and target these individuals while they patronize Silver Legacy. We also use television advertisements
featuring the elegant image and exciting atmosphere at Silver Legacy to target preferred gaming customers. In addition, through specialized entertainment programs and special events, including boxing matches, and by highlighting Silver Legacys
player spa suites, penthouse suites (which have been designed specifically to cater to the needs of high end gaming customers), hospitality suites, and the propertys entertainment facilities, amenities and unique attractions, we seek to
capture a significant portion of Renos valued gaming business. Our marketing efforts for gaming customers include the provision of complimentary rooms, food and beverages, air transportation and the extension of credit to qualified persons.
Star Rewards, Silver Legacys players club, offers customers exciting special events and tournaments and convenient ways of earning complimentaries.



4



---

Convention Groups. Conventioneers and attendees of Reno area events are targeted
by Silver Legacy, depending on managements view of their relative propensity for gaming and the timing of the specific events or conventions relative to the historic seasonality of the gaming business in Reno. In so doing, we seek to increase
Silver Legacys mid-week occupancies and mitigate the effects of seasonality on our operations. For example, Silver Legacy targets competitors at the National Bowling Stadium in Reno and their guests. Other special events groups, generally
consisting of between 1,000 and 1,500 persons, are also targeted by Silver Legacy by invitations to concerts, shows, theme parties, boxing matches and other events.

Local Patrons. We seek to attract and retain local customers through frequent promotions that highlight our quality gaming and dining experience, as well as being an active supporter of
numerous Reno market events and organizations.

Wholesale/Specialty and Internet Groups. The wholesale/specialty
segment consists of customers who utilize packages to reduce the cost of travel, lodging and entertainment. These packages are produced by wholesalers (such as major airlines) and travel agents, and emphasize mid-week stays. This market
segment allows us to utilize our rooms during slower mid-week periods. In addition, Internet customers, which are encompassed in this segment, continue to expand as more customers utilize this option for its convenience and in an effort to obtain
the most competitive rate.

Competition

The gaming industry includes land-based casinos, dockside casinos, riverboat casinos, casinos located on Native American reservations and other forms of legalized gaming. There is intense competition
among companies in the gaming industry, many of which have significantly greater resources than we do. Certain states have legalized casino gaming and other states may legalize gaming in the future. Legalized casino gaming in these states and on
Native American reservations near our markets or changes to gaming laws in states surrounding Nevada could increase competition and could adversely affect our operations. We also compete, to a lesser extent, with gaming facilities in other
jurisdictions with dockside gaming facilities, state-sponsored lotteries, on-and-off track pari-mutuel wagering, Internet gaming, card clubs, riverboat casinos and other forms of legalized gambling.

Of the 29 casinos currently operating in the Reno market, we compete principally with the six other hotel-casinos that, like Silver
Legacy, each generates at least $36 million in annual gaming revenues. At this time, we cannot predict the extent to which new and proposed projects will be undertaken or the extent to which current hotel and/or casino space may be expanded. We
expect that any additional rooms added in the Reno market will increase competition for visitor revenue. There can be no assurance that any growth in Renos current room base or gaming capacity will not adversely affect our financial condition
or results of operations.

We also compete with hotel-casinos located in the nearby Lake Tahoe region as well as those in
other areas of Nevada, including Las Vegas. A substantial number of customers travel to both Reno and the Lake Tahoe area during their visits. Consequently, we believe that Silver Legacys success is influenced to some degree by the success of
the Lake Tahoe market. The number of visitors increased slightly during the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2010 compared with the same prior year period, and while we do not anticipate a decline in the popularity of either Reno or Lake
Tahoe as tourist destination areas in the foreseeable future, any such decline could adversely affect our operations.

Since
visitors from California comprise a significant portion of our customer base, we also compete with Native American gaming operations in California. In total, the State of California has signed and ratified compacts with 67 Native American tribes,
and there are currently 58 Native American casinos operating in California, including casinos located in Northern California, which we consider to be a significant target market. These Native American tribes are allowed to operate slot machines,
lottery games, and banking and percentage games on Native American lands. Although many existing Native American gaming facilities in northern California are modest compared to Silver Legacy, a number of Native American tribes have established
large-scale gaming facilities in California and some Native American tribes have announced that they are in the process of expanding, developing, or are considering establishing, large-scale hotel and gaming facilities in northern California.

Under their current compacts, most Native American tribes in California may operate up to 2,000 slot machines, and up to two
gaming facilities may be operated on any one reservation. However, under action taken by the National Indian Gaming Commission, gaming devices similar in appearance to slot machines, but which are deemed to be technological enhancements to bingo
style gaming, are not subject to such limits and may be used by tribes without state permission. The number of slot machines the tribes are allowed to operate may increase as a result of any new or amended compacts the tribes may enter into with the
State of California that receive the requisite approvals, such as has been the case with respect to a number of new or amended compacts which have been executed and approved.



5



---

As northern California Native American gaming operations have expanded, we believe the
increasing competition generated by these gaming operations has negatively impacted, and may continue to negatively impact, principally drive-in, day-trip visitor traffic from our main feeder markets in northern California.

In addition, land-based, riverboat or dockside casino gaming (other than that conducted on Native American-owned land) is currently legal
in 14 states and tribal gaming on Native American-owned land is legal in a number of states, including California, Washington, and Oregon. Management believes the Reno market draws over 50% of its visitors from California. In addition to gaming on
Native American-owned land, California allows other non-casino style gaming, including pari-mutuel wagering, a state-sponsored lottery, card clubs, bingo, and off-track betting.

Seasonality

Silver Legacys hotel-casino operations are subject to
seasonal variation, with the strongest operating results generally occurring in the second and third quarters of each year and the weakest results generally occurring during the period from November through February. Variations occur when weather
conditions make travel to Reno by visitors from northern California and the Pacific Northwest difficult and can also occur due to the timing of large conventions and bowling tournament periods within specific years. The following table shows our
percentage of gross revenues by quarter for each of 2010, 2009 and 2008.



|               |  |      |       |   |      |  |       |      |  |  |       |  
|-------------- |  | ---- | ----- | - | ---- |  | ----- | ---- |  |  | ----- | -
|               |  | 2010 |       |   | 2009 |  |       | 2008 | 
|First quarter  |  |      | 22.8  | % |      |  | 22.3  | %    |  |  | 23.3  | %
|Second quarter |  |      | 27.8  |   |      |  | 28.2  |      |  |  | 27.0  |  
|Third quarter  |  |      | 27.1  |   |      |  | 26.9  |      |  |  | 27.6  |  
|Fourth quarter |  |      | 22.3  |   |      |  | 22.6  |      |  |  | 22.1  |  
|               |  |      |       |   |      |  |       |      |  |  |       |  
|Total          |  |      | 100.0 | % |      |  | 100.0 | %    |  |  | 100.0 | %
|               |  |      |       |   |      |  |       |      |  |  |       |  

Employees

As of December 31, 2010, Silver Legacy employed approximately 1,800 persons, most of whom were full-time. Currently, none of our employees are employed pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement.
The number of people employed at any time is subject to seasonal fluctuation. We believe that our employee relations are excellent.

Intellectual Property

Our intellectual property (IP) portfolio consists of a combination of copyrights, contractual rights, domain names, trade
secrets, trademarks, service marks and trade names. Since our IP has the effect of developing brand identification, and because we believe that name recognition, reputation and image attract customers to Silver Legacy and contribute materially to
customer retention, we seek to protect the marks of material importance to our business. The marks we consider material include the name Silver Legacy. We intend to maintain our IP portfolio in a manner consistent with operating our business as it
is presently conducted and in light of our objectives of preserving and enhancing brand development, identification, reputation and image.

Environmental Matters

As is the case with any owner or operator of real property, we are subject to a variety of federal, state and local governmental
regulations relating to the use, storage, discharge, emission, and disposal of hazardous materials. Federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations also impose liability on potentially responsible parties, including the owners or
operators of real property, to clean up, or contribute to the cost of cleaning up, sites at which hazardous wastes or materials were disposed of or released. We do not have environmental liability insurance to cover these events.

During the excavation for construction of Silver Legacy, petroleum contamination of soil and groundwater was discovered on the property.
The apparent sources of this contamination were a former gasoline station and numerous abandoned heating oil tanks. Our contractors removed and disposed of contaminated soils, and we were successful in obtaining reimbursement and indemnification
from Chevron Company USA. In addition, we received reimbursement from the State of Nevada Petroleum Fund, which was established to reimburse parties for costs incurred in cleaning up contamination from certain underground storage tanks. With the
consent of the relevant county agency, the cleanup was completed leaving some contaminated soils in place (under structures and roads, for example), so that some additional soil contamination is known to remain in place. The Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection has not, however, required us to conduct any further investigation or remediation.



6



---

Groundwater in the vicinity of the Silver Legacy property is also contaminated by a
chlorinated solvent known as tetrachloroethene or PCE. This contaminant is widespread in the Reno/Sparks area. The Central Truckee Meadows Remediation District, encompassing much of the cities of Reno and Sparks, was established pursuant
to state legislation to address this contamination. The Central Truckee Meadows Remediation District is managed by Washoe County under the direction of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, and is currently conducting investigations and
developing a remediation plan. Funding for the Central Truckee Meadows Remediation District is provided through assessments to water customers which are calculated on the basis of water use. The most recent annual assessment to Silver Legacy was
approximately $25,000, with assessments in 2009 and 2008 of approximately $20,000 and $24,000, respectively. It is possible that additional assessments may be made against properties that receive special benefits from the Central Truckee Meadows
Remediation District, such as clean-up of contamination affecting a specific parcel. The legislation implementing this program exempts property owners who did not cause or contribute to the contamination from civil and criminal liability for the
cost of remediation and any related damages, except to the extent of unpaid assessments. We do not believe that we have contributed to this solvent contamination, however, we expect that we will be required to allow the Central Truckee Meadows
Remediation District access to our property for continued investigation, including access to monitoring wells.

The
possibility exists that additional contamination, as yet unknown, may exist at the Silver Legacy property. In all cases, however, we believe that any such contamination would have arisen from activities of prior owners or occupants, or from offsite
sources and not as a result of any of our actions or operations. We do not believe that our expenditures for environmental investigations or remediation will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. Aside
from the assessments discussed in the preceding paragraph, we did not incur any costs in connection with environmental matters during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.

Regulation And Licensing

Silver Legacy, the partners of Circus and
Eldorado Joint Venture, and their parent entities are subject to extensive regulation under laws, rules and supervisory procedures primarily in the jurisdictions where their facilities are located or docked. Some jurisdictions, including Nevada,
empower their regulators to investigate participation by licensees in gaming outside their jurisdiction and require access to and periodic reports respecting those gaming activities. Violations of laws in one jurisdiction could result in
disciplinary action in other jurisdictions.

Under provisions of gaming laws in jurisdictions in which we, our partners or
their parent entities have operations and under our organizational documents certain of our securities are subject to restrictions on ownership which may be imposed by specified governmental authorities. The restrictions may require a holder of our
securities to dispose of the securities or, if the holder refuses, or is unable, to dispose of the securities, we may be required to repurchase the securities.

The indenture governing our
101/8% mortgage notes due 2012 (the
Notes) provides that each holder and beneficial owner of the Notes, by accepting or otherwise acquiring an interest in any of the Notes, will be deemed to have agreed that if the gaming authority of any jurisdiction in which we or either
of the Partnerships partners or their respective parents or other affiliated entities currently or in the future conduct or propose to conduct gaming requires that a person who is a holder or beneficial owner must be licensed, qualified or
found suitable under applicable gaming laws, the holder or beneficial owner will apply for a license, qualification or finding of suitability within the required time period. If the person fails to apply or become licensed or qualified or is found
unsuitable, we will have the right, at our option:



| |  |  | to require the person to dispose of his or her Notes or beneficial interest in the Notes within 30 days of receipt of notice of our election or any
earlier date that the relevant gaming authority may request or prescribe; or
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | to redeem the Notes (possibly within less than 30 days following the notice of redemption if requested or prescribed by the gaming authority) at a
redemption price equal to the lesser of:
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the persons cost;
| | - |  | ------------------



| |  |  | 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date or the date of the finding of unsuitability, whichever is
earlier; and
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | any other amount required by applicable law or by order of any gaming authority.
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We will not be responsible for any costs or expenses any holder or beneficial owner may incur in connection with its application for a license,
qualification or finding of suitability.

Nevada Gaming Laws

The ownership and operation of casino gaming facilities in the State of Nevada are subject to the Nevada Gaming Control Act and the regulations promulgated under this Act and various local regulations.
Silver Legacys operations are subject to the licensing and regulatory control of the Nevada Gaming Commission, the Nevada State Gaming Control Board and the City of Reno, which we refer to collectively as the Nevada Gaming
Authorities.



7



---

The laws, regulations and supervisory procedures of the Nevada Gaming Authorities are based
upon declarations of public policy that are concerned with, among other things:



| |  |  | the prevention of unsavory or unsuitable persons from having a direct or indirect involvement with gaming at any time or in any capacity;
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the establishment and maintenance of responsible accounting practices and procedures;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the maintenance of effective controls over the financial practices of licensees, including the establishment of minimum procedures for internal fiscal
affairs and the safeguarding of assets and revenues, providing reliable record keeping and requiring the filing of periodic reports with the Nevada Gaming Authorities;
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the prevention of cheating and fraudulent practices; and
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | providing a source of state and local revenues through taxation and licensing fees.
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes in these laws, regulations and procedures could have an adverse effect on our gaming operations.

Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture holds all licenses and approvals required to conduct its present gaming operations. The gaming license
requires the periodic payment of fees and taxes and is not transferable. The parent entities of Circus and Eldorado Joint Ventures partners, Eldorado Resorts LLC and MGM Resorts International, are required to be registered by the Nevada Gaming
Commission as, respectively, a privately owned holding company and as a publicly traded corporation, and are required periodically to submit detailed financial and operating reports to the Nevada Gaming Commission and to furnish any other
information that the Nevada Gaming Commission may require. No person may become a stockholder of, or receive any percentage of profits from, a licensed entity such as Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture without first obtaining licenses and approvals
from the Nevada Gaming Authorities. Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and its parent entities have obtained from the Nevada Gaming Authorities the various registrations, findings of suitability, approvals, permits and licenses required in order to
engage in gaming activities in Nevada.

The Nevada Gaming Authorities may investigate any individual who has a material
relationship to, or material involvement with us in order to determine whether the individual is suitable or should be licensed as a business associate of a gaming licensee. We and our officers, directors and key employees must file applications
with the Nevada Gaming Authorities and may be required to be licensed or found suitable by the Nevada Gaming Authorities. The Nevada Gaming Authorities may deny an application for licensing for any cause which they deem reasonable. A finding of
suitability is comparable to licensing, and both require submission of detailed personal and financial information followed by a thorough investigation. An applicant for licensing or an applicant for a finding of suitability must pay for all the
costs of the investigation. Changes in licensed positions must be reported to the Nevada Gaming Authorities and, in addition to their authority to deny an application for a finding of suitability or licensing, the Nevada Gaming Authorities have the
jurisdiction to disapprove a change in a corporate position.

If the Nevada Gaming Authorities were to find an officer,
director or key employee unsuitable for licensing or unsuitable to continue having a relationship with us, we would have to sever all relationships with that person. In addition, the Nevada Gaming Commission may require us to terminate the
employment of any person who refuses to file appropriate applications. Determinations of suitability or questions pertaining to licensing are not subject to judicial review in Nevada.

We are required to submit detailed financial and operating reports to the Nevada Gaming Commission. Substantially all material loans,
leases, sales of securities and similar financing transactions must be reported to, or approved by, the Nevada Gaming Commission.

If the Nevada Gaming Commission determined that we violated the Nevada Gaming Control Act or any of its regulations, it could limit, condition, suspend or revoke our gaming licenses. In addition, we and
the persons involved could be subject to substantial fines for each separate violation of the Nevada Gaming Control Act or of the regulations of the Nevada Gaming Commission at the discretion of the Nevada Gaming Commission. Further, a supervisor
could be appointed by the Nevada Gaming Commission to operate Silver Legacy and, under specified circumstances, earnings generated during the supervisors appointment (except for the reasonable rental value of the premises) could be forfeited
to the State of Nevada. Limitation, conditioning or suspension of any of our gaming licenses and the appointment of a supervisor could, or revocation of any gaming license would, have a material adverse effect on our gaming operations.

Any beneficial holder of an interest in Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture or of any of the equity securities of any partner of Circus and
Eldorado Joint Venture, or of any interest in the parent entities of Circus and Eldorado Joint Ventures members, regardless of the amount of interest owned or the number of shares held, may be required to file an application, be investigated,
and have that persons suitability as a beneficial holder of an equity interest determined if the Nevada Gaming Commission has reason to believe that the ownership would otherwise be inconsistent with the declared policies of the State of
Nevada. The applicant must pay all costs of the investigation incurred by the Nevada Gaming Authorities in conducting any investigation.



8



---

The partners of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture are required to obtain the prior approval
of the Nevada Gaming Commission prior to their pledge of their interests in Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture as collateral for payment of any of our indebtedness. Eldorado Limited Liability Company and Galleon, Inc., the partners of Circus and
Eldorado Joint Venture, obtained the required approvals of the Nevada Gaming Commission to pledge their interests in Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture as collateral for payment of the Notes. However, further approvals of the Nevada Gaming Commission
must be obtained by any person, including the trustee under the Indenture relating to the Notes, before any execution on or transfer of the pledged interests may occur.

Nevada law requires any licensed gaming entity, such as Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture which has one or more classes of securities registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the
provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, to additionally register with the Nevada Gaming Commission as a publicly traded corporation. Pursuant to the applicable provisions of Nevada gaming law, we received the requisite
approvals of the Nevada Gaming Commission to be registered as a publicly traded corporation and to make our public offering of the Notes.

If the beneficial holder of an interest in Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture or in the equity securities of any of Circus and Eldorado Joint Ventures partners, or of any interest in one of the
parent entities who must be found suitable is a corporation, partnership, limited partnership, limited liability company or trust, it must submit detailed business and financial information including a list of beneficial owners. The applicant is
required to pay all costs of investigation.

Any person who fails or refuses to apply for a finding of suitability or a
license within 30 days after being ordered to do so by the Nevada Gaming Commission or by the Chairman of the Nevada State Gaming Control Board, or who refuses or fails to pay the investigative costs incurred by the gaming authorities in connection
with the investigation of its application, may be found unsuitable. The same restrictions apply to a record owner if the record owner, after request, fails to identify the beneficial owner. Any person found unsuitable and who holds, directly or
indirectly, any beneficial ownership of an interest in Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture or in the voting securities of any of Circus and Eldorado Joint Ventures partners or of the parent entities beyond the period of time as may be prescribed
by the Nevada Gaming Commission may be guilty of a criminal offense. We will be subject to disciplinary action if, after we receive notice that a person is unsuitable to hold an equity interest or to have any other relationship with us, we:



| |  |  | pay that person any dividend or interest upon any partnership interest or other equity interest;
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | allow that person to exercise, directly or indirectly, any voting right held by that person relating to Silver Legacy;
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | pay remuneration in any form to that person for services rendered or otherwise; or
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | fail to pursue all lawful efforts to require the unsuitable person to relinquish his interest in Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture or in its voting
securities including, if necessary, the immediate purchase of the interest or voting securities for cash at fair market value.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Nevada Gaming Commission may, in its discretion, require the holder of any debt security of a licensee or registered corporation to file applications, be investigated, and be found suitable to own the
debt security of the licensee or registered corporation. If a holder of the Notes is required by the Nevada Gaming Commission to be found suitable, the burden of proving qualification to be found suitable as a holder of the Notes is at all times on
the applicant and requires a determination by the Nevada Gaming Commission that the applicant is a person of good character, honesty and integrity. When making this determination, the Nevada Gaming Commission must be satisfied that the applicant is
a person whose prior activities, criminal record (if any), reputation, habits and associations do not pose a threat to the interests of the State of Nevada, or to the effective regulation and control of gaming, or create or enhance the dangers of
unsuitable, unfair, or illegal practices. If the Nevada Gaming Commission determines that a person is unsuitable to own the security, then under the Nevada Gaming Control Act, the licensee or registered corporation can be sanctioned, including the
loss of its approvals, if without the prior approval of the Nevada Gaming Commission, it:



| |  |  | pays to the unsuitable person any dividend, interest or any distribution whatsoever;
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | recognizes any voting right by the unsuitable person in connection with the securities;
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | pays the unsuitable person remuneration in any form; or
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | makes any payment to the unsuitable person by way of principal, redemption, conversion, exchange, liquidation or similar transaction.
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our partners and their parent entities are required to maintain current stock ledgers in Nevada which may
be examined by the Nevada Gaming Authorities at any time. If any securities are held in trust by an agent or by a nominee, the record holder may be required to disclose the identity of the beneficial owner to the Nevada Gaming Authorities. A failure
to make the disclosure may be grounds for finding the record holder unsuitable. We are also required to render maximum assistance in determining the identity of the beneficial owner of any of our voting securities. The Nevada Gaming Commission has
the



9



---

power to require the stock certificates of any registered corporation to bear a legend indicating that the securities are subject to the Nevada Gaming Control Act.

We may not make a public offering of our securities without the prior approval of the Nevada Gaming Commission if we intend to use the
securities or the proceeds from the offering to construct, acquire or finance gaming facilities in Nevada, or to retire or extend obligations incurred for those purposes or for similar transactions.

We must obtain prior approval of the Nevada Gaming Commission with respect to a change in control through:



| |  |  | merger;
| | - |  | -------



| |  |  | consolidation;
| | - |  | --------------



| |  |  | stock or asset acquisitions;
| | - |  | ----------------------------



| |  |  | management or consulting agreements; or
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------



| |  |  | any act or conduct by a person whereby the person obtains control of us.
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Entities seeking to acquire control of a registered corporation must satisfy the Nevada State Gaming Control Board and Nevada Gaming
Commission with respect to a variety of stringent standards before assuming control of the registered corporation. The Nevada Gaming Commission may also require controlling stockholders, officers, directors and other persons having a material
relationship or involvement with the entity proposing to acquire control to be investigated and licensed as part of the approval process relating to the transaction.

The Nevada legislature has declared that some corporate acquisitions opposed by management, repurchase of voting securities and corporate defense tactics affecting Nevada gaming licenses, and registered
corporations that are affiliated with those operations, may be injurious to stable and productive corporate gaming. The Nevada Gaming Commission has established a regulatory scheme to ameliorate the potentially adverse effects of these business
practices upon Nevadas gaming industry and to further Nevadas policy to:



| |  |  | assure the financial stability of corporate gaming operators and their affiliates;
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | preserve the beneficial aspects of conducting business in the corporate form; and
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | promote a neutral environment for the orderly governance of corporate affairs.
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Approvals may be required from the Nevada Gaming Commission before we can make exceptional repurchases of voting securities above their
current market price and before a corporate acquisition opposed by management can be consummated. The Nevada Gaming Control Act also requires prior approval of a plan of recapitalization proposed by a registered corporations board of directors
in response to a tender offer made directly to its stockholders for the purpose of acquiring control.

License fees and taxes,
computed in various ways depending on the type of gaming or activity involved, are payable to the State of Nevada and to the counties and cities in which the licensed subsidiaries respective operations are conducted. Depending upon the
particular fee or tax involved, these fees and taxes are payable either monthly, quarterly or annually and are based upon either:



| |  |  | a percentage of the gross revenues received;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the number of gaming devices operated; or
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------



| |  |  | the number of table games operated.
| | - |  | -----------------------------------

A live entertainment tax is also paid by casino operations where entertainment is furnished in connection with the selling or serving of food or refreshments or the selling of merchandise.

Any person who is licensed, required to be licensed, registered, required to be registered, or is under common control with those persons
(collectively, licensees), and who proposes to become involved in a gaming venture outside of Nevada, is required to deposit with the Nevada State Gaming Control Board, and thereafter maintain, a revolving fund in the amount of $10,000
to pay the expenses of investigation of the Nevada State Gaming Control Board of the licensees participation in such foreign gaming. The revolving fund is subject to increase or decrease in the discretion of the Nevada Gaming Commission.
Thereafter, licensees are required to comply with the reporting requirements imposed by the Nevada Gaming Control Act. A licensee is also subject to disciplinary action by the Nevada Gaming Commission if it:



| |  |  | knowingly violates any laws of the foreign jurisdiction pertaining to the foreign gaming operation;
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | fails to conduct the foreign gaming operation in accordance with the standards of honesty and integrity required of Nevada gaming operations;
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



10



---

| |  |  | engages in activities or enters into associations that are harmful to the State of Nevada or its ability to collect gaming taxes and fees; or
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | employs, contracts with or associates with a person in the foreign operation who has been denied a license or finding of suitability in Nevada on the
ground of personal unsuitability.
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Internal Revenue Service Regulations

The Internal Revenue Service requires operators of casinos located in the United States to file information returns for U.S. citizens,
including names and addresses of winners, for keno, bingo and slot machine winnings in excess of stipulated amounts. The Internal Revenue Service also requires operators to withhold taxes on some keno, bingo and slot machine winnings of nonresident
aliens. We are unable to predict the extent to which these requirements, if extended, might impede or otherwise adversely affect operations of, and/or income from, the other games.

Regulations adopted by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Treasury Department (FINCEN) and the Nevada gaming
regulatory authorities require the reporting of currency transactions in excess of $10,000 occurring within a gaming day, including identification of the patron by name and social security number. This reporting obligation began in May 1985 and may
have resulted in the loss of gaming revenues to jurisdictions outside the United States which are exempt from the ambit of these regulations. In addition to currency transaction reporting requirements, suspicious financial activity is also required
to be reported to FINCEN.

Other Laws And Regulations

The sale of alcoholic beverages at Silver Legacy is subject to licensing, control and regulation by applicable local regulatory agencies. All licenses are revocable and are not transferable. The agencies
involved have full power to limit, condition, suspend or revoke any license, and any disciplinary action could, and revocation would, have a material adverse effect upon our operations.

The Silver Legacy Resort Casino is subject to extensive state and local regulations and, on a periodic basis, must obtain various
licenses and permits, including those required to sell alcoholic beverages. We believe that we have obtained all required licenses and permits and that our business is conducted in substantial compliance with applicable laws.

Forward-Looking Statements

(Cautionary
Statements Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995)

Certain information included in this annual report and
other materials filed or to be filed by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission (as well as information included in oral statements or other written statements made or to be made by us) contains or may contain forward-looking statements
within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. We have based these forward-looking statements on our
current expectations about future events. These forward-looking statements include statements with respect to our beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, anticipations, intentions, financial condition, results of operations, future
performance and business, including current and future operations. Additionally, such statements may include information relating to capital spending, financing sources and the effects of regulation (including gaming and tax regulation) and
competition. From time to time forward-looking statements are also included in our periodic reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K, press releases and other materials released to the public. Forward-looking statements can be identified by words such as
will, seek, may, could, should, would, believe, expect, anticipate, estimate, intend, plan and similar
expressions.

Any or all of the forward-looking statements in this annual report and in any other public statements we make
may turn out to be wrong. This can occur as a result of inaccurate assumptions or as a consequence of known or unknown risks and uncertainties. Many factors discussed in this annual report, such as government regulation and the competitive
environment in which we operate, will be important in determining our future performance. Consequently, actual results may differ materially from those that might be anticipated from our forward-looking statements, and we caution against relying on
any of these forward-looking statements.

We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements,
whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, and such forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Any disclosures we make on related subjects in our subsequent reports on Forms
10-K, 10-Q and 8-K, in addition to our other public filings and press releases, should also be consulted. The following factors imply risks, uncertainties and assumptions relevant to our business that could cause our actual results to differ
materially from historical results and from those contained in or implied by any forward-looking statements:



11



---

| |  |  | Our need to refinance our
101/8% mortgage notes on or before March 1,
2012;
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Our substantial indebtedness and significant financial commitments and the restraints imposed thereby on our business;
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | The highly competitive environment in which we operate, including competitive pressures from the growth of Native American gaming in northern
California and the northwestern United States;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | The fact that our gaming operations are highly regulated and the costs of complying or failing to comply with such regulations;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Changes in general economic and market conditions in the areas in which we operate and the locations in which our customers reside;
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Changes in discretionary consumer spending and leisure and business travel, including as a result of security concerns, terrorist activities and other
global geopolitical events;
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Weather conditions or climate change and the property damage or interruption in business operations that may be caused thereby;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | The fact that all of our operations are in Reno and that we are, consequently, less geographically diversified than other gaming companies;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Changes in tax laws, including proposals for a federal gaming tax;
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Claims brought against us from time to time in various legal proceedings;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | The need to attract and retain management and key employees in an intensely competitive labor market;
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Our management structure; and
| | - |  | -----------------------------



| |  |  | Other regional, national or global political, economic, business, competitive, market, and regulatory conditions, including those discussed in
Item 1A  Risk Factors.
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|ITEM 1A. | RISK FACTORS
|-------- | ------------

The
following is a discussion of certain factors that currently impact or may impact our business, operating results and/or financial condition.

Risks Related to Refinancing Our 101/8% Mortgage Notes

We must refinance our 101/8%
mortgage notes by March 1, 2012.

Our 101/8% mortgage notes mature on March 1, 2012. We are exploring
various alternatives for refinancing our obligations under the 101/8% mortgage notes. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be able to refinance the mortgage notes on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. If we are unable to refinance our obligations with
respect to the mortgage notes, the holders thereof will be entitled to exercise the remedies provided in the indenture governing the notes, including foreclosing on the assets securing the mortgage notes. If we are unable to refinance the notes by
March 1, 2012, it would have a material adverse effect on our business and our financial position.

Moreover, amounts outstanding under our notes will be classified as current obligations for financial reporting purposes
beginning March 31, 2011. In the event that we are unable to refinance such amounts by the time of the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2011, it would affect our independent registered public
accounting firms assessment of our ability to continue as a going concern, would have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position and would raise substantial doubt as to our ability to continue as a going concern.

The disruption of the capital and credit markets, as well as adverse changes in the global, national and regional
economies, may negatively impact our revenues and our ability to access financing, including financing necessary to refinance our
101/8% mortgage notes.

Over the past few years, a number of factors have contributed to diminished performance in the economy and increased
volatility in the capital and credit markets. These factors include the availability and cost of credit, declining business and consumer confidence and increased unemployment. These conditions have also affected lending institutions, resulting in
severely contracted credit markets. This has resulted in material increases in the cost and difficulty of obtaining credit and refinancing existing debt, which could have a material adverse affect on our ability to refinance our 101/8% mortgage notes, due March 1, 2012, on terms that are
acceptable to us, or at all. Further, if adverse regional, national and global economic conditions fail to improve significantly, persist or worsen, we could experience material decreases in revenues and cash flows



12



---

from our operations attributable to decreases in consumer spending levels and could fail to satisfy covenants imposed by our existing debt agreements.

Risks Related to Our Business

We face substantial competition in the hotel and casino industry.

The hotel and casino industry is very competitive. We compete for customers primarily on the basis of location, range and pricing of amenities and overall atmosphere. Of the 29 casinos currently operating
in the Reno market, we compete principally with the six other hotel-casinos that, like the Silver Legacy Resort Casino, each generate at least $36 million in annual gaining revenues.

According to statistics published by the Reno-Sparks Convention & Visitors Authority, there were approximately 15,400 hotel
rooms in the Reno area at December 31, 2010. At this time, we cannot predict the extent to which new and proposed projects will be undertaken or the extent to which current hotel and/or casino space may be expanded in the future. There can be
no assurance that any growth in Renos room base or gaming capacity will not adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations. See Competition in Item 1.

A substantial number of customers travel to both Reno and Lake Tahoe during their visits. Consequently, we believe that the Reno
markets visitation is influenced, to some degree, by the visitation of the Lake Tahoe market. The number of visitors increased slightly during the twelve-month period ended December 31, 2010 compared with the same prior year period and
while we do not anticipate a decline in the popularity of either Reno or Lake Tahoe as tourist destination areas in the foreseeable future, any such decline could adversely affect our operations.

Reno casinos, including our own, also compete with Native American gaming in California and the northwestern United States. We also
compete with hotel-casinos located in Las Vegas, Nevada and the Lake Tahoe area. To a lesser extent, we compete with hotel-casinos in other parts of the United States and with dockside gaming facilities, riverboat casinos, state-sponsored lotteries,
on-and-off track pari-mutuel wagering, Internet gaming, card clubs, riverboat casinos and other forms of legalized gaming. Land-based, dockside or riverboat casino gaming, other than that conducted on Native American-owned land, is currently legal
in 14 states and gaming on Native American-owned land is legal in a number of states, including California, Washington and Oregon.

Management believes the Reno market draws over 50% of its visitors from California. California allows other non-casino style gaming, including pari-mutuel wagering, a state-sponsored lottery, card clubs,
bingo and off-track betting. Certain constituencies have proposed ballot initiatives from time to time in California that would legalize casino-style gaming generally. As a result, there can be no assurance that casino-style gaming in California
will not be expanded beyond the currently legal Native American gaming. Any such expansion could have a material adverse effect on our operations.

The competitive impact on Nevada gaming establishments, in general, and our operations, in particular, from the continued growth of gaming outside Nevada cannot be determined at this time. We believe that
the further expansion of casino gaming in markets close to Nevada, such as California, and to a lesser extent Washington and Oregon, could have a material adverse affect on our operations depending on the nature, location and scope of those
operations.

Native American gaming in California has adversely affected the Reno market, including our operations at Silver Legacy, and
continued growth of Native American gaming in California could have a material adverse effect beyond that experienced to date.

Since visitors from California comprise a significant portion of our customer base, we also compete with Native American gaming operations in California. In total, the State of California has signed and
ratified compacts with 67 Native American tribes, and there are currently 58 Native American casinos operating in California. These Native American tribes are allowed to operate slot machines, lottery games, and banking and percentage games on
Native American lands. Although many existing Native American gaming facilities in northern California are modest compared to Silver Legacy, a number of Native American tribes have established large-scale gaming facilities in California and some
Native American tribes have announced that they are in the process of expanding, developing, or are considering establishing, large-scale hotel and gaming facilities in northern California.

Under their current compacts, most Native American tribes in California may operate up to 2,000 slot machines, and up to two gaming
facilities may be operated on any one reservation. However, under action taken by the National Indian Gaming Commission, gaming devices similar in appearance to slot machines, but which are deemed to be technological enhancements to bingo style
gaming, are not subject to such limits and may be used by tribes without state permission. The number of slot machines the tribes are allowed to operate may increase as a result of any new or amended compacts the tribes may enter into



13



---

with the State of California that receive the requisite approvals, such as has been the case with respect to a number of new or amended compacts which have been executed and approved.

Increased competition from Native American gaming, including increases in competition attributable to additional gaming licenses being
granted to Native American tribes and Native American gaming operations in northern California, may result in a decline in our revenues and have a material adverse effect on our business. While we cannot predict the precise extent of any future
effects, they could be significant.

Our operations are particularly sensitive to reductions in discretionary consumer spending and may be
negatively affected by general economic conditions.

Consumer demand for casino hotel properties, such as ours, is
particularly sensitive to downturns in the economy and the associated impact on discretionary spending on leisure activities. Any adverse change in general economic conditions, such as the current recession, can adversely affect consumer spending,
which can have a negative impact on our ability to generate revenues from our operations. Increases in gasoline prices, including increases prompted by global political and economic instabilities, can adversely affect our operations because most of
our patrons travel to Reno by car or on airlines that may pass on increases in fuel costs to their passengers in the form of higher ticket prices.

We are also a large consumer of electricity. Consequently, an increase in the cost of electric power increases our operating costs and, depending on the extent of any increase, could adversely affect our
results of operations.

The current global, national and regional economic downturn, including the housing crisis, credit
crisis, lower consumer confidence, and other related factors which impact discretionary consumer spending and other economic activities that have direct effects on our business, have resulted in a decline in the tourism industry that has adversely
impacted our operations. We cannot be sure how long these factors will continue to impact our operations in the future or the extent of the impact.

Because we are entirely dependent upon the Silver Legacy Resort Casino for all of our revenues, we are subject to greater risks than a gaming company that is geographically or otherwise diversified.

We are entirely dependent upon the Silver Legacy Resort Casino for all of our revenues. Therefore, we are subject to
greater degrees of risk than a gaming company that is geographically or otherwise diverse. The risks to which we have a greater degree of exposure include the following:



| |  |  | local economic and competitive conditions;
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------



| |  |  | inaccessibility due to weather conditions, road construction or closure of primary access routes;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | changes in local and state governmental laws and regulations, including gaming laws and regulations;
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | natural and other disasters, including acts of terrorism and global geopolitical events that impact leisure and business travel and discretionary
consumer spending;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | a decline in the number of residents near, or visitors to, the Silver Legacy Resort Casino; and
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | a decrease in gaming activities at the Silver Legacy Resort Casino.
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------

Any of the factors outlined above could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
These risks, were any of them to pertain, could also impact our ability to generate sufficient cash flow to make payments on our
101/8% mortgage notes and our other obligations and
may adversely affect our ability to refinance our 101/8% mortgage notes.

The hotel-casinos in the Reno market, including the Silver
Legacy Resort Casino, historically have been subject to seasonal variations and quarterly fluctuations in operating results and we can expect to experience such variations and fluctuation in the future.

Historically, hotel-casino operations in the Reno market, including the Silver Legacy Resort Casino, have been subject to seasonal
variations. Traditionally, the strongest operating results have occurred in the second and third quarters and the weakest results have occurred during the period from November through February when weather conditions have adversely affected
operating results. Excessive snowfall during the winter months can make travel to the Reno area more difficult. This often results in significant declines in traffic on major highways, particularly on routes to and from northern California, and
causes a downturn in customer volume. Furthermore, management believes that approximately two-thirds of visitors to the Reno market arrive by some form of ground transportation. Therefore, even normal winter weather may cause our revenues and cash
flows to be adversely affected.

We expect the highest level of customer visits to occur during the summer months, because of
the more favorable weather conditions. A poor summer season, due to any reason, including events outside our control, would adversely affect our business. Congestion on the roads leading to Reno, common during the peak summer season, holidays and
other times, may



14



---

discourage potential customers from traveling to our hotel-casino, particularly if road construction is in process. See Seasonality in Item 1.

Security concerns, terrorist attacks and other geopolitical events could have a material adverse effect on our future operations.

Security concerns, terrorist attacks and other geopolitical events can have a material adverse effect on leisure and business travel,
discretionary spending and other areas of economic behavior that directly impact the gaming and entertainment industries in general and our business in particular. We cannot predict the extent to which any future security alerts, terrorist attacks
or other geopolitical events might impact our business, results of operations or financial condition.

The hotel-casinos in the Reno
market, including the Silver Legacy Resort Casino, are highly dependent on surrounding market areas.

Management believes
that visitors from California, Washington and Oregon account for approximately two thirds of the visitors to the Reno market. We are primarily dependent upon the gaming activities of customers visiting the Reno market from these areas for our
revenues. A decline in the economies of any one or more of these areas such as the economic decline in each of these states associated with the current recession, or a decline in the number of gaming customers traveling to Reno from these areas for
any reason, including increased competition, such as Native American gaming in California, Washington and Oregon, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Significant conflicts of interest may arise in the performance of the duties of the members of our executive committee and our executive officers.

The Silver Legacy Resort Casino is situated between the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino, which is wholly owned by MGM
Resorts International, and the Eldorado Hotel & Casino, which is wholly owned by Eldorado Resorts LLC. Our partners are a wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International and a 96%-owned subsidiary of Eldorado Resorts LLC, and their
respective personnel who participate in decisions that affect the Silver Legacy Resort Casino may be deemed to be in a conflict of interest position, to the extent they participate in decisions relating to the Silver Legacy Resort Casino that
affect, or may be perceived to affect, the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino and/or the Eldorado Hotel & Casino. The potential for these conflicts of interest may be exacerbated by the design of the Silver Legacy Resort Casino, which connects
its casino and core entertainment center with the Circus and Eldorado properties by enclosed skyways.

Each member of the
executive committee of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture is currently an employee of, and/or holds an executive position with, MGM Resorts International or Eldorado Resorts LLC or one of their affiliates, and the majority of our executive officers
had a similar relationship before assuming his present position with Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture. Accordingly, these individuals may be deemed to be in a conflict of interest position with respect to business decisions they make that affect,
or may be perceived to affect, the Circus or Eldorado properties. Furthermore, a conflict of interest may be deemed to exist by reason of the access any of these individuals has to information or business opportunities that may be useful to the
Eldorado or Circus properties. No specific procedures for resolving these conflicts of interest have been developed and there can be no assurance that effective procedures for addressing these matters can be developed. See Directors and
Executive Officers of the Registrants in Item 10 and Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation in Item 11.

We are subject to extensive state and local regulation, and licensing and gaming authorities have significant control over our operations, which could have an adverse effect on our business.

The ownership and operation of casino gaming facilities are subject to extensive state and local regulation. Circus and
Eldorado Joint Venture currently holds all state and local licenses and related approvals necessary to conduct its present gaming operations. Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture is required by the State of Nevada, as well as the applicable local
authorities, to comply with all applicable gaming laws and regulations and to maintain its various licenses and registrations, findings of suitability, permits and approvals in good standing. The gaming authorities in Nevada may deny, limit,
condition, suspend or revoke a gaming license or related approval for violations of applicable gaming laws and regulations and may 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 laws or regulations are adopted, these regulations could impose restrictions or costs that could have a significant adverse effect on us. See Regulation and
Licensing in Item 1.

The Nevada Gaming Commission may, in its discretion, require the holder
of any securities that we issue, including our
101/8% mortgage notes, to file applications, be
investigated, and be found suitable to own our securities if it has reason to believe that the security ownership would be inconsistent with the declared policies of the State of Nevada. Further, the costs of any investigation conducted by the
Nevada Gaming Commission under these circumstances must be paid by the applicant and refusal or failure to pay these charges may constitute grounds for a finding that the applicant is unsuitable to own the securities. If the Nevada Gaming Commission
determines that a person is unsuitable to own our securities, then, under the Nevada



15



---

Gaming Control Act and the regulations promulgated under this Act, we can be sanctioned, including the loss of our approvals, if, without the prior approval of the Nevada Gaming Commission, we:



| |  |  | pay to the unsuitable person any dividend, interest or any distribution whatsoever;
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | recognize any voting right by the unsuitable person in connection with the securities;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | pay the unsuitable person remuneration in any form; or
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | make any payment to the unsuitable person including any principal, redemption, conversion, exchange, liquidation or similar payment.
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We may not make a public offering of our securities without prior approval of the Nevada Gaming Commission
if we intend to use the securities or proceeds from the offering to:



| |  |  | construct, acquire or finance gaming properties in Nevada; or
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | retire or extend obligations incurred for these purposes or for similar transactions.
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the Nevada gaming authorities were to find an officer, director or key employee unsuitable for licensing or unsuitable to continue
having a relationship with us, we would have to sever all relationships with that person. Furthermore, the Nevada Gaming Commission may require us to terminate the employment of any person who refuses to file appropriate applications. Either result
could materially adversely affect our gaming operations.

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

We have incurred and
may continue to 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 properties affected by hazardous
substances. Under these and other environmental requirements, we, as an owner of the property on which the Silver Legacy Resort Casino is situated, may be required to investigate and clean up hazardous or toxic substances or chemical releases at
that 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 for investigation and cleanup costs incurred by them in connection with the 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 and 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 adversely affect our ability to rent or otherwise utilize our property. In addition, environmental requirements address the impacts of development on wetlands.

Petroleum and chlorinated solvent contamination of soil and groundwater is known to exist at and in the vicinity of the Silver Legacy
Resort Casino. No action in regard to these contaminants is currently required of us, however we are required to pay assessments averaging approximately $20,000 annually in contribution to a Washoe County special assessment district which is
undertaking community wide remediation of groundwater solvent contamination. These assessments may increase in the future. State law exempts property owners who did not cause or contribute to the solvent contamination from civil and criminal
liability for the cost of remediation and any related damages, except to the extent of unpaid assessments. This provision would not be effective to shield us from liability under federal laws.

The Silver Legacy Resort Casino site was previously required to be cleaned up under environmental laws to address petroleum contamination
from leaking underground storage tanks and other sources. At the conclusion of that cleanup, with the permission of the relevant regulatory county authority, certain contaminated soils were permitted to remain in place. The Washoe County District
Health Department issued a no further action letter with respect to that cleanup on February 20, 1996. The possibility exists that additional contamination, as yet unknown, may exist on the Silver Legacy Resort Casino site. Although
we believe that any remaining contamination arose from activities of prior owners or occupants, or from offsite sources and not as a result of any of our actions or operations, we cannot make any assurances that we will not incur expenditures for
environmental investigations or remediation in the future. See Environmental Matters in Item 1.

An earthquake or other
natural disaster could adversely affect our business.

The Reno area has been, and may in the future be, subject to
earthquakes and other natural disasters. Depending upon the magnitude and location of such an event, the Silver Legacy Resort Casino could be severely damaged, which could adversely affect our business and operations. We currently maintain
earthquake and flood insurance for the Silver Legacy Resort Casino and the resulting business interruption. However, there is no assurance that our coverage will be sufficient if there is a major earthquake. In addition, upon the expiration of our
current policies, which expire in July 2011, we cannot assure that adequate coverage will be available at economically justifiable rates, if at all.



16



---

We rely on our key personnel.

Our future success will depend upon, among other things, our ability to keep our senior executives and highly qualified employees. We
compete with other potential employers for employees, and we may not succeed in hiring or retaining the executives and other employees that we need. We do not have employment contracts with any of our senior executives and we do not maintain key-man
insurance policies for any of our executives. A sudden loss of or inability to replace key employees could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operation.

We may face difficulties in attracting and retaining qualified employees for our casino.

The operation of our business requires qualified executives, managers and skilled employees with gaming industry experience and
qualifications who are able to obtain the requisite licenses and approval from the Nevada Gaming Commission. While not currently the case, there has from time to time been a shortage of skilled labor in the Reno area. In addition to limitations that
may otherwise exist in the supply of skilled labor, the continued growth of Native American gaming in northern California may make it more difficult for us to attract qualified individuals. While we believe that the Silver Legacy Resort Casino will
continue to be able to attract and retain qualified employees, shortages of skilled labor will make it increasingly difficult and expensive to attract and retain the services of a satisfactory number of qualified employees, and we may incur higher
costs than expected as a result.

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

From time to time, we are named in lawsuits or other legal proceedings
relating to our business. In particular, 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 legal
proceedings, no assurances can be given as to the outcome of these matters. Moreover, legal proceedings can be expensive and time consuming, and we may not be successful in defending or prosecuting these lawsuits, which could result in settlements
or damages that could significantly impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to our Capital
Structure

Our substantial indebtedness could adversely affect our financial results and prevent us from
fulfilling our obligations, including our obligations under our 101/8% mortgage notes.

The amount of our total indebtedness at
December 31, 2010 was $142.8 million.

This is a significant amount of indebtedness that could have important
consequences for us, such as:



| |  |  | limiting our ability to satisfy our obligations, including our obligations under our 101/8% mortgage notes;
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | limiting our ability to refinance our 101/8% mortgage notes at or before their maturity on March 1, 2010, on terms that are satisfactory to us, or at all;
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | limiting our ability to obtain additional financing to fund our working capital requirements, capital expenditures, debt service, general corporate and
other obligations;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | limiting our ability to use operating cash flow in other areas of our business because we must dedicate a significant portion of these funds to
principal and/or interest payments on our indebtedness;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | causing our failure to comply with the financial and restrictive covenants contained in the indenture covering our 101/8% mortgage notes or any new credit facility we may secure, which
could cause a default under those instruments and which, if not cured or waived, could have a material adverse effect on us;
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | placing us at a competitive disadvantage to our competitors who are not as highly leveraged;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | affecting our ability to renew gaming and other licenses necessary to conduct our business; and
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | increasing our vulnerability to, and limiting our ability to react to, changing market conditions, changes in our industry and economic downturns such
as the one we are currently experiencing.
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The indenture governing our 101/8% mortgage notes contains restrictive covenants, but does not fully
prohibit us from incurring additional debt under any new credit facility we may secure or otherwise. If additional debt is added to our current level of indebtedness, related risks that we face, including those described above, could increase.

If we do not generate sufficient cash from our operations to make scheduled payments on our 101/8% mortgage notes or to meet our other obligations, we
will need to take one or more actions, including the refinancing of our debt, obtaining additional financing, selling assets, obtaining additional equity capital, or reducing or delaying capital expenditures, and our ability to take one or more of
these actions may be limited by the restrictive covenants contained in the indenture governing our
101/8%



17



---

mortgage notes or the financial and other restrictive covenants in any new credit facility we may secure. We cannot assure that our business will continue to generate cash flow or that we will be
able to obtain funding sufficient to satisfy our debt service requirements.

The indenture governing the notes contains covenants that
restrict our ability to engage in certain transactions.

The indenture governing our 101/8% mortgage notes imposes operating and financial restrictions
on us. The restrictions imposed under the indenture include, among other things, limitations on our ability to:



| |  |  | incur additional debt;
| | - |  | ----------------------



| |  |  | create liens or other encumbrances;
| | - |  | -----------------------------------



| |  |  | pay dividends or make other restricted payments;
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | prepay subordinated indebtedness;
| | - |  | ---------------------------------



| |  |  | make investments, loans or guarantees;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------



| |  |  | sell or otherwise dispose of a portion of our assets; or
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | make acquisitions or merge or consolidate with another entity.
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------

In addition, under any new senior secured credit facility we may secure, we may be required to satisfy certain financial covenants,
including maintaining certain debt to earnings and earnings to fixed charges ratios. Our ability to comply with these provisions may be affected by general economic conditions, industry conditions and other events beyond our control. We cannot
assure that we will be able to comply with these covenants. If we fail to comply with a financial covenant or other restriction contained in the indenture or any future credit facility or other financing agreements, an event of default could occur.
An event of default could result in acceleration of some or all of our indebtedness and the inability to borrow additional funds. We would not have, and are not certain we would be able to obtain, sufficient funds to repay our indebtedness if it is
accelerated, including our payments on the notes.

Servicing our debt requires a significant amount of cash, and our ability to generate
sufficient cash depends on many factors, some of which are beyond our control.

Our ability to make payments on and
refinance our indebtedness and to fund our capital expenditures depends upon our ability to generate cash flow and secure financing in the future. Our ability to generate future cash flow depends upon:



| |  |  | our future operating performance;
| | - |  | ---------------------------------



| |  |  | the demand for services we provide;
| | - |  | -----------------------------------



| |  |  | general economic conditions;
| | - |  | ----------------------------



| |  |  | competition; and
| | - |  | ----------------



| |  |  | legislative and regulatory factors affecting our operations and business.
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some of these factors are beyond our control, and we cannot assure that our business will generate cash flow from
operations or that we will be able to borrow an amount sufficient to enable us to pay our indebtedness, including our 101/8% mortgage notes, or to fund other liquidity needs. As a result, we may need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness, including our 101/8% mortgage notes, on or before maturity. We cannot assure that we
will be able to refinance any of our indebtedness on favorable terms, or at all. Any inability to generate sufficient cash flow or refinance our indebtedness on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

Our partnership agreement contains a buy-sell provision which, if exercised by either of our partners, could adversely
affect our management and operations.

Our partnership agreement contains a buy-sell provision pursuant to which either of
our partners may elect to offer to purchase the entire interest of our other partner. If either partner makes such an offer, our partnership agreement requires the other partner to either sell its partnership interest or purchase the partnership
interest of the offering partner, in each case at the price proposed by the offering partner. An election by either of our partners to exercise its buy-sell right, which would result in the buy-out of one of our partners, could adversely effect the
continuity of our management as well as any existing affiliate arrangements and agreements with the partner who had been bought out.



|ITEM 1B. | UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
|-------- | -------------------------

None.



18



---

|ITEM 2. | PROPERTIES
|------- | ----------

The Silver Legacy Resort Casino is located on two neighboring parcels of land, located at 407 North Virginia Street and 411 North Sierra Street in Reno, Nevada. We own both parcels, comprising 118,167 and
119,927 square feet, respectively. As of December 31, 2010, both parcels and the improvements located thereon were encumbered by liens securing the indebtedness evidenced by our 101/8% mortgage notes. At December 31, 2010, the aggregate principal amount of the indebtedness secured by these
liens totaled $142.8 million. For information concerning the Silver Legacy Resort Casino, reference is made to the discussion under the caption Silver Legacy in Item 1 of this annual report, which is incorporated herein by this
reference.



|ITEM 3. | LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
|------- | -----------------

We are
from time to time involved in litigation arising in the ordinary course of our business. We do not believe that any litigation to which the Partnership or Capital is a party or of which any of our property is the subject will, individually or in the
aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our financial position or the results of our operations.



|ITEM 4. | REMOVED AND RESERVED
|------- | --------------------

PART II



|ITEM 5. | MARKET FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS, AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Capital is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Partnership, which is owned 50% by Galleon, Inc. and 50% by Eldorado Limited Liability
Company. Accordingly, there is no established public trading in the equity securities of Capital or the Partnership.

Other than the distributions permitted or required to be made by the terms of the Partnerships partnership agreement, which are subject to the terms of the indenture relating to our 101/8% mortgage notes, we historically have not paid cash dividends
to our equityholders and do not intend to pay such dividends in the foreseeable future.

During the fiscal quarter ended
December 31, 2010 neither the Partnership nor Capital issued any equity securities and, during such period, neither the Partnership nor Capital, nor any affiliated purchaser (as defined in Rule 10b-18(a)(3) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934) purchased any of the equity securities of the Partnership or Capital.

Equity Compensation Plans

The following tables set forth certain information relating to equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2010 for the Partnership
and Capital, respectively.

Equity Compensation Plan InformationThe Partnership



|                                                           |  |                                                                                            |  |                                                                             |  |                                                                                                                                          
|---------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Plan category                                              |  | Number of securitiesto be issued
uponexercise ofoutstanding
options,warrants and rights(a) |  | Weighted-averageexercise price 
ofoutstandingoptions, warrantsand
rights(b) |  | Number of securitiesremaining available
forfuture issuance underequity compensation plans(excluding securitiesreflected in column (a))(c)
|Equity compensation plans approved by security holders     |  | None                                                                                       |  |                                                                            |  | None                                                                                                                                     
|Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders |  | None                                                                                       |  |                                                                            |  | None                                                                                                                                     
|Total                                                      |  | None                                                                                       |  |                                                                            |  | None                                                                                                                                     

Equity
Compensation Plan InformationCapital



|                                                           |  |                                                                                            |  |                                                                            |  |                                                                                                                                          
|---------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Plan category                                              |  | Number of securitiesto be issued
uponexercise ofoutstanding
options,warrants and rights(a) |  | Weighted-averageexercise price
ofoutstandingoptions, warrantsand
rights(b) |  | Number of securitiesremaining available
forfuture issuance underequity compensation plans(excluding securitiesreflected in column (a))(c)
|Equity compensation plans approved by security holders     |  | None                                                                                       |  |                                                                           |  | None                                                                                                                                     
|Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders |  | None                                                                                       |  |                                                                           |  | None                                                                                                                                     
|Total                                                      |  | None                                                                                       |  |                                                                           |  | None                                                                                                                                     



19



---

|ITEM 6. | SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
|------- | -----------------------



|                          |  |                                  |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |   |  |      |         |  |  |   |         | 
|------------------------- |  | -------------------------------- | ------- | - | ---- | - | ------- | ---- |  | - | ------- | - |  | ---- | ------- |  |  | - | ------- | 
|                          |  | For the years ended December 31, |        
|                          |  | 2010                             |         |   | 2009 |   |         | 2008 |  |   | 2007    |   |  | 2006 |        
|                          |  | (in thousands)                   |        
|Operating Results:        |  |                                  |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |   |  |      |         |  |  |   |         | 
|Net operating revenues    |  | $                                | 120,629 |   |      | $ | 122,104 |      |  | $ | 139,475 |   |  | $    | 161,980 |  |  | $ | 159,197 | 
|Operating income          |  |                                  | 5,390   |   |      |   | 5,007   |      |  |   | 7,342   |   |  |      | 23,737  |  |  |   | 25,475  | 
|Net income (loss) (1)     |  |                                  | (9,594  | ) |      |   | (4,724  | )    |  |   | (8,778  | ) |  |      | 8,496   |  |  |   | 9,322   | 
|                          |  |                                  |         |   |     
|Balance Sheet Data:       |  |                                  |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |   |  |      |         |  |  |   |         | 
|Cash and cash equivalents |  | $                                | 31,654  |   |      | $ | 35,042  |      |  | $ | 43,765  |   |  | $    | 52,501  |  |  | $ | 47,179  | 
|Total assets              |  |                                  | 275,251 |   |      |   | 284,266 |      |  |   | 307,321 |   |  |      | 327,816 |  |  |   | 323,329 | 
|Long-term debt            |  |                                  | 142,735 |   |      |   | 142,679 |      |  |   | 159,803 |   |  |      | 159,741 |  |  |   | 159,679 | 
|Partners equity          |  |                                  | 105,830 |   |      |   | 115,538 |      |  |   | 120,478 |   |  |      | 138,750 |  |  |   | 135,596 | 



|(1) | The Partnership is not subject to income taxes and the partners include their respective shares of partnership taxable income (loss) in their income tax returns.
Therefore, a provision for income taxes is not included in our selected financial information. The partnership agreement requires the Partnership to make distributions to its partners in an amount equal to the maximum marginal federal income tax
rate applicable to any partner multiplied by the income of the Partnership for the applicable period. See Item 5 of this annual report for additional information concerning this provision of the Partnership agreement.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|ITEM 7. | MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
|------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overview

Effective March 1, 1994, Eldorado
Limited Liability Company (ELLC), a Nevada limited liability company owned and controlled by Eldorado Resorts LLC, and Galleon, Inc. (Galleon), a Nevada corporation now owned and controlled by MGM Resorts International,
entered into a joint venture agreement to establish the Partnership for the purpose of constructing, owning and operating Silver Legacy. Capital, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Partnership, was incorporated for the sole purpose of serving as a
co-issuer of the $160 million principal amount of 101/8% mortgage notes due 2012 co-issued by the Partnership
and Capital, and does not have any operations, assets or revenues.

On July 28, 1995, Silver Legacy commenced
operations as a hotel-casino in downtown Reno, Nevada. Silver Legacy is a leader within the Reno market, offering the largest number of table games and the second largest number of slot machines and hotel rooms of any property in the Reno market.
Silver Legacys net operating revenues and income are derived largely from our gaming activities. In an effort to enhance our gaming revenues, we attempt to maximize the use of our gaming facilities at Silver Legacy by providing a well-balanced
casino environment that contains a mix of games attractive to multiple market segments. Rooms, food and beverage also contribute a large portion of our net revenues.

Our operating results are highly dependent on the volume of customers visiting and staying at our resort, which in turn impacts the price we can charge for our hotel rooms and other amenities. Key volume
indicators include table games drop and slot handle, which refer to amounts wagered by our customers. The amount of volume we retain, which is not fully controllable by us, is recognized as casino revenues and is referred to as our win or hold. In
addition, hotel occupancy and price per room designated by average daily rate (ADR) are key indicators for our hotel business.

Significant Factors Affecting Results of Operations

Global, National and Regional Economic Conditions

The economic recession
and the slow pace of recovery continue to adversely influence consumers confidence, discretionary spending levels and travel patterns. We believe the weak demand, high unemployment, record number of home foreclosures, increased competition and
volatility of the economy have had a significant negative impact on the gaming and tourism industries, and, as a result, our operating performance during the last three years compared to previous years. In response to the difficult economic
environment, our management has implemented cost savings measures and will continue to review our operations to look for opportunities to further reduce expenses and maximize cash flows. We believe the current economic conditions will continue to
negatively affect our operating results for some period of time; however, we are uncertain as to the duration and magnitude of the impact on our operations.



20



---

Expansion of Native American Gaming

A significant portion of Silver Legacys revenues and results of operations are generated from patrons who are residents of northern
California, and, as such, our results of operations have been adversely impacted by the growth in Native American gaming in northern California. Many existing Native American gaming facilities in northern California are modest compared to Silver
Legacy. However, a number of Native American tribes have established large-scale gaming facilities in California and some Native American tribes have announced that they are in the process of expanding, developing, or are considering establishing,
large-scale hotel and gaming facilities in northern California. As northern California Native American gaming operations have expanded, we believe the increasing competition generated by these gaming operations has negatively impacted principally
drive-in, day-trip visitor traffic from our main feeder markets in northern California.

Under their current compacts, most
Native American tribes in California may operate up to 2,000 slot machines, and up to two gaming facilities may be operated on any one reservation. However, under action taken by the National Indian Gaming Commission, gaming devices similar in
appearance to slot machines, but which are deemed to be technological enhancements to bingo style gaming, are not subject to such limits and may be used by tribes without state permission. The number of slot machines the tribes are allowed to
operate may increase as a result of any new or amended compacts the tribes may enter into with the State of California that receive the requisite approvals, such as has been the case with respect to a number of new or amended compacts which have
been executed and approved.

We believe the continued growth of Native American gaming establishments, including the addition
of hotel rooms and other amenities, could continue to place additional competitive pressure on our operations. While we cannot predict the extent of any future impact, it could be significant.

Bowling Tournaments Within the Reno Market

The National Bowling Stadium, located one block from Silver Legacy, is one of the largest bowling complexes in North America and has been selected to host multi-month tournaments in Reno two out of every
three years through 2018, including 2010. Through one-time agreements, the National Bowling Stadium will also host the United States Bowling Congress (USBC) Open Tournament in Reno in 2011 and 2014, usually off-years for Reno.
Historically, these multi-month bowling tournaments have attracted a significant number of visitors to the Reno market and have benefited business in the downtown area, including Silver Legacy. There was not a major bowling tournament in Reno in
2008. As a result, the absence of the incremental visitation had an adverse effect on our operations during the first half of 2008. The USBC Womens Tournament, which attracted approximately 55,000 women bowlers to the Reno market in 2006,
returned in late March 2009. This tournament continued through the end of June 2009 and brought approximately 40,500 women bowlers during the 2009 period. While the traffic generated by this tournament benefited the Reno market during the second
quarter of 2009, the positive impact was not as significant as in previous years due to a decline in bowler attendance combined with general decreases in consumers discretionary spending. The USBC Open Tournament, which attracted approximately
80,000 bowlers in 2007, returned to the Reno market and attracted approximately 68,500 men and women bowlers to the Reno area during the period from late-February through the end of June. The increase in the number of bowlers visiting downtown Reno
contributed to our improved operating results during the first half of 2010 compared to the same period in 2009.

Results of Operations

The following table highlights the results of our operations (dollars in thousands):



|                   |  |                             |         |   |                  |  |       |                             |  |   |                  |   |  |                             |       |    |  |   |         |  
|------------------ |  | --------------------------- | ------- | - | ---------------- |  | ----- | --------------------------- |  | - | ---------------- | - |  | --------------------------- | ----- | -- |  | - | ------- | -
|                   |  | Year endedDecember 
31,2010 |         |   | PercentageChange |  |       | Year endedDecember 
31,2009 |  |   | PercentageChange |   |  | Year endedDecember 
31,2008 |      
|Net revenues       |  | $                           | 120,629 |   |                  |  | (1.2  | )%                          |  | $ | 122,104          |   |  |                             | (12.5 | )% |  | $ | 139,475 |  
|Operating expenses |  |                             | 115,239 |   |                  |  | (1.6  | )                           |  |   | 117,097          |   |  |                             | (11.4 | )  |  |   | 132,133 |  
|Operating income   |  |                             | 5,390   |   |                  |  | 7.6   |                             |  |   | 5,007            |   |  |                             | (31.8 | )  |  |   | 7,342   |  
|Net loss           |  |                             | (9,594  | ) |                  |  | 103.1 |                             |  |   | (4,724           | ) |  |                             | (46.2 | )  |  |   | (8,778  | )

Net Revenues.
During 2010 compared to 2009, net revenues decreased slightly. Rooms revenues remained flat in 2010 compared to 2009 while casino, food and beverage revenues, other revenues and promotional allowances experienced declines. The challenging economic
environment and more intense competition for a reduced number of visitors, both from Native American gaming and within the Reno market, continued to be negative factors impacting business levels throughout 2010.



21



---

The first half of 2010 benefited from the return of the USBC Open Tournament which drove room nights and brought approximately 28,000 more bowlers to the Reno market in 2010 compared to the USBC
Womens Tournament in 2009. However, the second half of 2010 was adversely impacted by a decline in hotel occupancy and ADR as a result of fewer convention room nights.

Net revenues decreased during 2009 compared to 2008 mainly due to the previously discussed economic factors which negatively impacted Renos gaming and tourism market as a whole and resulted in
significant reductions in visitor volumes and customer spending. Declines in city-wide convention room nights and the continued increase in competition generated by Native American gaming in northern California also contributed to the decreases in
net revenues.

Operating Income and Net Loss.Despite the lack of growth in net revenues, we were able to achieve
higher operating income during 2010 compared to the same prior year period. Changes were implemented in 2009 resulting from initiatives to identify opportunities for operational efficiencies, reduce costs and maximize operating income. These savings
programs, along with further efforts to lower total operating expenses, continued throughout 2010. However, declines in selling, general and administrative costs, casino expenses and promotional allowances were partially offset by increases in food
and beverage costs and hotel operating expenses associated with our hotel room remodel in 2010 compared to 2009.

During 2009
compared to 2008, operating income decreased primarily due to declines in revenues. Substantial savings were realized during 2009 as a result of cost control measures implemented to lower payroll among all departments, both in terms of staffing
levels and reductions in salaried management positions, benefits, advertising media expenditures, general and administrative expenses and other variable and fixed operating costs. These savings were partially offset by higher group health insurance
claims and increased promotional allowance costs allocated to the casino department, both in absolute dollars and as a percentage of revenues. Lower room rates also adversely impacted our operating results and profit margins in 2009 compared to
2008. Depreciation expense rose during 2009 compared to 2008 due to additional depreciation associated with new capital purchases. The increase in the fair value of life insurance contracts that informally fund a portion of our supplemental
executive retirement plan partially offset the declines in operating income in 2009 compared to 2008.

Our
net loss fluctuated in 2009 compared to 2010 and 2008 due to a $5.5 million gain in 2009, net of unamortized debt issuance costs and discounts, on the early retirement of $17.2 million principal amount of our 101/8% mortgage notes.

Revenues

The following
table highlights our sources of net revenues (dollars in thousands):



|                       |  |                             |        |  |                  |  |      |                             |  |   |                  |  |  |                             |       |    |  |   |        | 
|---------------------- |  | --------------------------- | ------ |  | ---------------- |  | ---- | --------------------------- |  | - | ---------------- |  |  | --------------------------- | ----- | -- |  | - | ------ | 
|                       |  | Year endedDecember 
31,2010 |        |  | PercentageChange |  |      | Year endedDecember 
31,2009 |  |   | PercentageChange |  |  | Year endedDecember 
31,2008 |      
|Casino                 |  | $                           | 67,397 |  |                  |  | (2.0 | )%                          |  | $ | 68,767           |  |  |                             | (8.1  | )% |  | $ | 74,834 | 
|Rooms                  |  |                             | 31,009 |  |                  |  | (0.0 | )                           |  |   | 31,009           |  |  |                             | (15.2 | )  |  |   | 36,551 | 
|Food and beverage      |  |                             | 31,365 |  |                  |  | (1.6 | )                           |  |   | 31,871           |  |  |                             | (8.9  | )  |  |   | 34,966 | 
|Other                  |  |                             | 7,622  |  |                  |  | (4.0 | )                           |  |   | 7,939            |  |  |                             | (17.8 | )  |  |   | 9,654  | 
|Promotional allowances |  |                             | 16,764 |  |                  |  | (4.1 | )                           |  |   | 17,482           |  |  |                             | 5.8   |    |  |   | 16,530 | 

Casino Revenues.During 2010 compared to 2009, table games drop increased 0.7% while slot handle declined 5.1%. An increase in our table games hold percentage in 2010 compared to 2009 contributed to higher table games revenues. Table games drop benefited from
the increased visitation generated by the USBC Open Tournament from late February through June of 2010. Historically, the USBC Open Tournament has attracted table games players, as compared to the USBC Womens Tournament, and has typically had
a greater positive impact on table games volume during associated tournament periods. While table games cash play benefited from the traffic generated by the bowlers during the first half of the year, table games credit play and high end slot volume
declined during 2010 compared to 2009. We believe the decreases in slot volume and high end play during 2010 compared to 2009 were associated with the previously discussed economic factors which continue to negatively influence the spending levels
of our customers combined with the overall negative impact of increased competition.

During 2009 compared to 2008, our casino
revenues declined due to lower table games drop and slot handle which declined 11.8% and 8.8%, respectively. Historically, the USBC Womens Tournament has attracted more slot players, as compared to the USBC Open Tournament, and has typically
had a greater positive impact on slot volume during associated tournament periods. As a result, slot handle benefited during the second quarter of 2009 compared to the same prior year period from the increased visitation generated by the USBC
Womens Tournament. However, this positive impact was offset by the decreases in casino volume and revenues during the remaining 2009 periods compared to the same periods in 2008. These



22



---

decreases in volume were associated with the previously discussed factors affecting net revenues which negatively impacted the number of trips and spending levels of our customers throughout
2009.

Room Revenues. During 2010 compared to 2009, our room revenues remained flat. Our ADR and occupancy percentages
were $66.47 and 67.68%, respectively, compared to $66.83 and 67.74%, respectively, in 2009. Despite strong competition, both locally and within our feeder markets, we were able to sustain ADR and occupied room nights during 2010 compared to 2009 as
a result of effective room rate yield management, demand created by the additional bowler room nights, increased convention room nights during the first half of 2010 compared to the same prior year period and aggressive email promotional campaigns
targeted at slower booking periods. Additionally, our room remodel project impacted our ability to achieve 100% occupancy on weekends, which also typically yields the highest room rates. Our room remodel began on July 5, 2010 and continued
through mid-December 2010. In addition to impacting room rates, the room remodel project had a moderate adverse effect on occupancy during the second half of the year compared to the same prior year period as a result of rooms being out of service
during peak periods.

During 2009, our ADR and occupancy percentages were $66.83 and 67.74%, respectively, compared to $75.77
and 70.22%, respectively in 2008. While the USBC Womens Tournament drove hotel occupancy during the second quarter of 2009, this growth was offset by declines in hotel occupancy during the first, third and fourth quarters of 2009 compared to
the same prior year periods. Additionally, our ADR declined throughout 2009 compared to 2008 as a result of efforts to maximize occupancy levels during slow periods. These decreases in occupancy and ADR resulted from increased competition, both
locally and within our feeder markets, along with lower tourism visitor counts and convention room nights associated with the weak economy.

Food and Beverage Revenues. Although restaurant guest counts were flat in 2010 compared to 2009, food revenues declined among the majority of our restaurants due a decrease in our average
restaurant check. This decrease was associated with selective menu price revisions and special offers in an effort to promote our restaurants and incentivize customers which also contributed to the decrease in revenues during the current year.
Additionally, reductions in customer spending levels and a significant decline in food complimentaries also adversely impacted food revenues during 2010 as compared to 2009. Beverage revenues remained flat during 2010 compared to 2009.

Food and beverage revenues declined during 2009 compared to 2008 as a result of decreases in guest counts at a majority of our food
outlets which we believe was attributable to the same factors affecting net revenues. Our average restaurant check decreased during 2009 compared to 2008 due to selective menu pricing revisions in an effort to promote our restaurants and incentivize
customers which also contributed to the decline in food and beverage revenues.

Other Revenues. Other revenues are
comprised of revenues generated by our retail outlets, entertainment, other miscellaneous items, and our share of ballroom revenues. During 2010 compared to 2009, other revenues decreased mainly due to declines in retail revenues as a result of
decreased retail complimentary revenues. The declines in retail revenues were partially offset by increases in entertainment revenues due to an increase in scheduled concert dates in 2010 compared to 2009. Ballroom revenues remained flat in 2010
compared to 2009.

Other revenues decreased during 2009 compared to 2008 principally due to lower entertainment revenues
associated with a decline in scheduled concert dates in 2009. Ballroom revenues declined during 2009 compared to 2008 as a result of fewer conventions utilizing the facility during 2009. The ballroom, which opened in mid-February 2008, is operated
and managed by Silver Legacy together with the adjoining Eldorado and Circus Circus properties. Retail revenues remained flat in 2009 compared to 2008.

Promotional Allowances. Promotional allowances, expressed as a percentage of gross revenues, decreased to 12.2% in 2010 compared to 12.5% in 2009. These decreases were primarily attributable
to declines in food and retail complimentaries redeemed by our casino customers during 2010 compared to 2009 as a result of efforts to eliminate less profitable direct mail offers and promotions. Additionally, revisions to our players club
were implemented in January of 2010 with the introduction of downloadable free slot play which reduced complimentaries redeemed by our customers during 2010 compared to 2009.

Promotional allowances, expressed as a percentage of gross revenues, increased to 12.5% in 2009 compared to 10.6% in 2008. This year-over-year growth was primarily attributable to increases in
complimentary rooms, food, concert tickets and retail promotional offers to our casino customers in an effort to drive visitation to Silver Legacy, utilize available room inventory, reward customer loyalty, and attract new players.



23



---

Operating Expenses

The following table highlights our operating expenses (dollars in thousands):



|                                                 |  |                             |        |   |                  |  |       |                             |  |   |                  |   |  |                             |        |    |  |   |        | 
|------------------------------------------------ |  | --------------------------- | ------ | - | ---------------- |  | ----- | --------------------------- |  | - | ---------------- | - |  | --------------------------- | ------ | -- |  | - | ------ | 
|                                                 |  | Year endedDecember 
31,2010 |        |   | PercentageChange |  |       | Year endedDecember 
31,2009 |  |   | PercentageChange |   |  | Year endedDecember 
31,2008 |       
|Casino                                           |  | $                           | 35,712 |   |                  |  | (2.9  | )%                          |  | $ | 36,791           |   |  |                             | (7.8   | )% |  | $ | 39,909 | 
|Rooms                                            |  |                             | 9,471  |   |                  |  | (0.1  | )                           |  |   | 9,484            |   |  |                             | (13.3  | )  |  |   | 10,937 | 
|Food and beverage                                |  |                             | 21,311 |   |                  |  | 1.5   |                             |  |   | 21,002           |   |  |                             | (14.7  | )  |  |   | 24,614 | 
|Other                                            |  |                             | 5,529  |   |                  |  | 10.1  |                             |  |   | 5,022            |   |  |                             | (29.3  | )  |  |   | 7,107  | 
|Selling, general and administrative              |  |                             | 27,665 |   |                  |  | (4.5  | )                           |  |   | 28,977           |   |  |                             | (10.3  | )  |  |   | 32,302 | 
|Depreciation                                     |  |                             | 15,749 |   |                  |  | (4.1  | )                           |  |   | 16,414           |   |  |                             | 4.9    |    |  |   | 15,642 | 
|Change in fair value of life insurance contracts |  |                             | (589   | ) |                  |  | 15.0  |                             |  |   | (693             | ) |  |                             | (145.4 | )  |  |   | 1,528  | 
|Loss on disposition of assets                    |  |                             | 391    |   |                  |  | 291.0 |                             |  |   | 100              |   |  |                             | 6.4    |    |  |   | 94     | 

Casino Expenses.During 2010 compared to 2009, casino expenses declined as a result of lower departmental benefits along with decreases in other variable costs including taxes and licenses and bad debt expense. Reductions in special event and promotional
expenditures resulting from efforts to lower costs associated with less profitable promotional offers and special events also contributed to the overall decrease in casino expenses. Additionally, a decline in promotional allowances related to the
cost of food and retail complimentaries allocated to the casino department was a primary contributor to the declines during 2010 compared 2009.

Casino expenses declined during 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to decreases in casino payroll, repairs and maintenance, gaming taxes, bad debt expense, special event costs, and the liability
associated with unredeemed players club complimentaries in conjunction with lower casino volume along with efforts to reduce variable expenditures. These decreases were partially offset by increased direct mail costs and promotional allowances
related to the cost of rooms, food, beverage and retail complimentaries allocated to the casino department which rose as a result of an increase in direct mail offers throughout 2009 compared to 2008 to customers within our casino database.

Room Expenses. Rooms expenses remained flat in 2010 compared to 2009 in conjunction with consistent hotel
occupancy during both years. Increased costs, including payroll and laundry, associated with placing newly remodeled rooms into service were offset by decreases in benefits, supplies and bad debt. Higher average daily rates during the first half of
the year along with efforts to reduce costs on a per occupied room basis produced an increase in the hotel departments profit margin during the first half of 2010 compared to 2009. Conversely, the increase in expenses associated with the room
remodel project combined with a lower average daily rate negatively impacted the hotel departments profit margin during the second half of 2010 compared to 2009.

Room expenses declined during 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to decreases in departmental payroll and laundry expense. Despite successful efforts to reduce costs on a per occupied room basis, the
annual profit margins in the rooms department were negatively impacted by declines in our ADR as competition increased for a reduced number of visitors to the Reno market throughout 2009 compared to 2008.

Food and Beverage Expenses. During 2010 compared 2009, food and beverage expenses rose primarily due to higher food and
beverage costs of sales, both in absolute dollars and as a percentage of revenues, which were not passed on to our customers via increased prices. The food and beverage departments profit margins were negatively impacted by these increases in
costs and were further adversely affected by the reduction in our average restaurant check. Beverage expenses decreased in 2010 compared to 2009 due to decreased beverage complimentaries allocated to the beverage department which declined as a
result of revisions to our beverage promotions.

During 2009 compared to 2008, food and beverage expenses decreased mainly due
to declines in food and beverage costs, both in absolute dollars and as a percentage of revenues. Successful cost reduction programs and improved efficiencies enabled the food department to increase its profit margin significantly in 2009 compared
to 2008. Beverage expenses decreased in 2009 compared to 2008 in conjunction with the declines in beverage revenues.

Other
Operating Expenses. Other operating expenses are comprised of expenses associated with the operation of our retail outlets and the ballroom along with the entertainment departments production costs and professional fees. Other operating
expenses increased during 2010 compared to 2009 as a result of increased entertainment expenses for professional entertainer fees and equipment rentals due to an increase in the number of concert dates during 2010 compared to 2009. These increases
were partially offset by declines in retail cost of sales associated with decreased retail revenues during 2010 compared to 2009.



24



---

Other operating expenses decreased during 2009 compared to 2008 primarily as a result of a
less aggressive concert schedule. Ballroom expenses decreased during 2009 compared to 2008 due to decreased payroll and supplies as a result of fewer conventions utilizing the facility. Retail expenses remained flat in 2009 compared to 2008.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses. During 2010 compared to 2009, selling, general and administrative
expenses decreased mainly due to substantial reductions in payroll benefits among our administrative departments and lower utility costs resulting from declines in usage and operational efficiencies. Another primary contributor to the declines in
expenses was a reduction in property taxes during 2010 compared to 2009. Marketing and advertising costs remained flat in 2010 compared to 2009. Savings were not realized in this expense category due to costs associated with implementing a new
branding strategy, inclusive of a new players club and website, and an allocation of advertising budget dollars to increase Internet traffic and social media marketing tools.

During 2009 compared to 2008, selling, general and administrative expenses decreased primarily due to substantial reductions in
advertising expenditures, lower payroll among administrative and facilities departments, fewer credit card discounts associated with declining room revenues, and declines in building repairs and maintenance, professional services and human resources
departmental expenditures. Additionally, significant declines in utilities costs and the elimination of bonus accruals also contributed to the decreases in 2009 compared to 2008.

Depreciation Expense. Depreciation expense decreased during 2010 compared to 2009 principally due to assets becoming fully
depreciated during the current year. Assets associated with the hotel room remodel were placed into service and depreciated beginning in July 2010 through the completion of the project in December 2010.

Depreciation expense increased during 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to additional depreciation associated with new capital
purchases.

Change in Fair Value of Life Insurance Contracts. These amounts relate to the change in fair value of life
insurance contracts that informally fund a portion of our supplemental executive retirement plan. During 2010 and 2009, the fair value of these life insurance contracts increased as a result of improvements in the underlying insurance investment
return as compared to 2008 in which the fair value declined.

Other (Income) Expense

Other (income) expense is comprised of interest expense, interest income and gain on the early retirement of debt. In February 2009, we
purchased and retired $17.2 million principal amount of our 10 1/8% mortgage notes. The total purchase price of the notes was approximately $11.4 million, resulting in a gain of approximately $5.5 million, net of unamortized offering costs and
discounts. As a result of this transaction, which reduced the principal amount of notes outstanding to $142.8 million, interest expense decreased during 2010 and 2009 compared to 2008. Interest income decreased in 2010 compared to 2009 due to a
decline in our invested cash reserves subsequent to the purchase of notes and lower interest rates throughout 2010. Interest income also decreased during 2009 compared to 2008 due to a decline in our invested cash reserves resulting from a $10.0
million partner distribution paid in March 2008.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Cash Flows from Operating Activities and Working Capital

During 2010, we generated cash flows from operating activities of $6.8 million compared to $6.0 million in 2009 and $12.5 million in 2008. The increase in cash flows from operating activities in 2010
compared to 2009 was primarily due to the increase in our operating income while the decline in 2009 compared to 2008 was primarily due to the reduction in our operating income. As of December 31, 2010, cash and cash equivalents were $31.7
million, sufficient for normal operating requirements.

Cash Flows from Investing Activities

Cash used in investing activities for 2010 was $10.2 million compared to $3.2 million for 2009 and $11.2 million for 2008, and related
primarily to capital expenditures for various renovation projects and equipment purchases. The increase during the current year was primarily due to purchases of furniture and fixtures for our hotel room remodel project which began in July 2010 and
cost $7.5 million. The capital expenditures in 2009 were less than 2008 due to the difficult economic environment and decisions to decrease spending. In future years, we expect to make capital expenditures to the extent



25



---

necessary to continue to maintain an attractive property and a competitive position in our marketplace. Our executive committee has approved $2.5 million in capital expenditures for 2011.

Cash Flows from Financing Activities

There was no cash used in financing activities during 2010. Cash used in financing activities for 2009 was $11.4 million which represented a payment for the purchase and retirement of $17.2 million
principal amount of our 10 1/8% mortgage notes. No tax distributions were paid to our partners in 2010, 2009 or 2008, and we do not anticipate any distributions with respect to 2010 in 2011 based on our expected final 2010 tax return. A special
distribution of $5.0 million to each partner was paid in 2008.

Other Items Affecting Liquidity

Insurance Renewal

In July 2010, we renewed our property and liability insurance policies each covering a 12-month period. Under these policies, the
Partnership and the owner of the adjacent Eldorado property, Eldorado Resorts LLC (which is an affiliate of ELLC), have combined per occurrence earthquake coverage of $186 million and combined aggregate flood coverage of $250 million. In the event
that an earthquake causes damage to the Partnerships property, the Partnership is eligible to receive up to the entire $186 million in coverage, depending on the replacement cost, regardless of the damage, if any, to the Eldorado property. In
the event that a flood causes damage only to the Partnerships property, the Partnership is eligible to receive up to $250 million in coverage, depending on the replacement cost. However, in the event that both properties are damaged, the
Partnership is entitled to receive, to the extent of any replacement cost incurred, up to $141 million of the coverage amount (based on our percentage of the total reported property values) and the portion of the other $109 million, if any,
remaining after satisfaction of the claim of Eldorado Resorts LLC with respect to its adjoining property.

Our
insurance policy also includes combined terrorism coverage for Silver Legacy and the adjoining Eldorado property up to $800 million. In the event that an act of terrorism causes damage only to the Partnerships property, the Partnership is
eligible to receive up to $800 million in coverage, depending on the replacement cost. However, in the event that both properties are damaged, the Partnership is entitled to receive, to the extent of any replacement cost incurred, up to $450 million
of the coverage amount (based on our percentage of the total reported property values) and the portion of the other $350 million, if any, remaining after satisfaction of the claim of Eldorado Resorts LLC with respect to its adjoining property. This
policy also covers an additional property located in Shreveport, LA which is owned by an affiliate of Eldorado Resorts LLC. In the event that an act of terrorism causes damage to all three properties, the Partnership is entitled to receive, to the
extent of any replacement cost incurred, up to $351 million of the coverage amount (based on our percentage of the total reported property values) and the portion of the other $449 million, if any, remaining after satisfaction of the claims with
respect to the other two properties.

Partnership Agreement

The Partnerships partnership agreement, as currently in effect, provides that, subject to any contractual
restrictions to which the Partnership is subject, including the indenture relating to the 101/8% mortgage
notes, and prior to the occurrence of a Liquidating Event, the Partnership will be required to make distributions to its partners as follows:

(i) The estimated taxable income of the Partnership allocable to each partner multiplied by the greater of the maximum marginal federal income tax rate applicable to individuals for such period or
the maximum marginal federal income tax rate applicable to corporations for such period (as of the date hereof both rates are 35%); provided, however, that if the State of Nevada enacts an income tax (including any franchise tax based on income),
the applicable tax rate for any tax distributions subsequent to the effective date of such income tax shall be increased by the higher of the maximum marginal individual tax rate or corporate income tax rate imposed by such tax (after reduction for
the federal tax benefit for the deduction of state taxes, using the maximum marginal federal individual or corporate rate, respectively).

(ii) Annual distributions of remaining Net Cash From Operations in proportion to the percentage interests of the partners.

(iii) Distributions of Net Cash From Operations in amounts or at times that differ from those described
in (i) and (ii) above, provided in each case that both partners agree in writing to the distribution in advance thereof.

As defined in the partnership agreement, the term Net Cash From Operations means the gross cash proceeds received by the Partnership, less the following amounts: (i) cash operating
expenses and payments of other expenses and obligations of the Partnership, including interest and scheduled principal payments on Partnership indebtedness, including indebtedness owed to



26



---

the partners, if any, (ii) all capital expenditures made by the Partnership, and (iii) such reasonable reserves as the partners deem necessary in good faith and in the best interests of
the Partnership to meet its anticipated future obligations and liabilities (less any release of reserves previously established, as similarly determined).

The Partnerships partnership agreement provides that the partners shall not be permitted or required to contribute additional capital to the Partnership without the consent of the partners, which
consent may be given or withheld in each partners sole and absolute discretion.

101/8% Mortgage Notes

On March 5, 2002, the Partnership and Capital co-issued $160.0 million principal amount of 101/8% senior secured mortgage notes due 2012. The notes are senior
secured obligations which rank equally with all of the Partnerships other outstanding senior debt and senior to any subordinated debt. The notes are secured by a security interest in the Issuers existing and future assets, other than
certain licenses which may not be pledged under applicable law. Each of the Partnerships partners executed a pledge of all of its partnership interests in the Partnership to secure the notes. The notes mature on March 1, 2012 and bear
interest at the rate of 101/8% per annum,
payable semi-annually in arrears on March 1 and September 1 of each year, commencing on September 1, 2002. At December 31, 2010, we were in compliance with all of the covenants in the indenture related to the notes.

In February 2009, the Partnership purchased and retired $17.2 million principal amount of
its 101/8% mortgage notes. The total purchase price
of the notes was approximately $11.4 million, resulting in a gain of approximately $5.5 million, net of unamortized debt issuance costs and discounts. The repurchase of the notes reduced the amount of notes outstanding to $142.8 million. The
transaction was funded by available invested cash reserves. The Partnerships executive committee has authorized the Partnership to spend up to an additional $8.6 million for the repurchase of notes. It is anticipated that any additional notes
acquired prior to their maturity will be through open market purchases.

We believe we have
sufficient capital resources to meet our obligations up to the March 1, 2012 maturity date of our
101/8% mortgage notes. These obligations include
existing cash obligations, funding of capital commitments and servicing our debt. Our future sources of liquidity are anticipated to be from our operating cash flow and cash reserves.

We are exploring various alternatives for refinancing our obligations under the 101/8% mortgage notes. There can be no assurance, however, that we will
be able to refinance the mortgage notes on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. If we are unable to refinance our obligations with respect to the mortgage notes, the holders thereof will be entitled to exercise the remedies provided in the
indenture governing the notes, including foreclosing on the assets securing the mortgage notes. If we are unable to refinance the notes by March 1, 2012, it would have a material adverse effect on our business and our financial position.

Moreover, amounts outstanding under our notes will be classified as current obligations for financial
reporting purposes beginning March 31, 2011. In the event that we are unable to refinance such amounts by the time of the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2011, it would affect our independent
registered public accounting firms assessment of our ability to continue as a going concern, would have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position and would raise substantial doubt as to our ability to continue as a going
concern.

Senior Secured Credit Facility

On March 30, 2010, our senior secured credit facility (the Credit Facility) that provided a $1.0 million revolving facility, which had been reduced from $10.0 million during the first
quarter of 2008, expired.

The Credit Facility was not extended beyond its March 30, 2010 maturity date since we had not
utilized our borrowing capacity under the Credit Facility since 2003 and did not anticipate utilizing the Credit Facility in the foreseeable future.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

The following table summarizes our
contractual obligations and commitments to make future payments under certain contracts, including long-term debt obligations and operating leases, as of December 31, 2010 (in thousands):



|                                    |  |      |        |  |      |   |         |      |  |   |      |  |  |      |     |  |            |   |     |  |  |   |       | 
|----------------------------------- |  | ---- | ------ |  | ---- | - | ------- | ---- |  | - | ---- |  |  | ---- | --- |  | ---------- | - | --- |  |  | - | ----- | 
|Description                         |  | 2011 |        |  | 2012 |   |         | 2013 |  |   | 2014 |  |  | 2015 |     |  | Thereafter |  
|Long-term debt                      |  | $    |       |  |      | $ | 142,735 |      |  | $ |     |  |  | $    |    |  |            | $ |    |  |  | $ |      | 
|Interest payments on long-term debt |  |      | 14,459 |  |      |   | 2,370   |      |  |   |     |  |  |      |    |  |            |   |    |  |  |   |      | 
|Operating leases                    |  |      | 162    |  |      |   | 158     |      |  |   | 23   |  |  |      |    |  |            |   |    |  |  |   |      | 
|SERP benefit payments               |  |      | 279    |  |      |   | 422     |      |  |   | 453  |  |  |      | 493 |  |            |   | 568 |  |  |   | 3,675 | 
|                                    |  |      |        |  |      |   |         |      |  |   |      |  |  |      |     |  |            |   |     |  |  |   |       | 
|Total                               |  | $    | 14,900 |  |      | $ | 145,685 |      |  | $ | 476  |  |  | $    | 493 |  |            | $ | 568 |  |  | $ | 3,675 | 
|                                    |  |      |        |  |      |   |         |      |  |   |      |  |  |      |     |  |            |   |     |  |  |   |       | 



27



---

The repayment of our long-term debt, which at December 31, 2010,
consisted of the indebtedness evidenced by our
101/8% mortgage notes, is subject to acceleration
upon the occurrence of an event of default under the indenture relating to the notes.

We made cash
interest payments of $14.5 million, $15.3 million and $16.2 million during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. We anticipate that cash payments for interest in 2011 will be approximately $14.5 million based on our
current outstanding debt balance. See Repurchase of 101/8% Mortgage Notes above.

No tax distributions of the Partnership to
its partners were paid in 2010, 2009 and 2008 and we do not anticipate any distributions in 2011 with respect to 2010 based on our expected final 2010 tax return. A special distribution was approved by the Partnerships executive committee and
paid by the Partnership in March 2008. The aggregate amount of the distribution was $10.0 million, of which $5.0 million was paid to each partner.

Critical Accounting Policies

Our discussion and analysis of our results of
operations and financial condition above are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial
statements requires that we apply significant judgment in defining the appropriate assumptions for calculating financial estimates. By their nature, these judgments are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty. Our judgments are based on our
historical experience, terms of existing contracts, our observance of trends in the industry, information provided by our customers and information available from other outside sources, as appropriate. Because of the uncertainty inherent in these
matters, there is no assurance that actual results will not differ from our estimates used in applying the following critical accounting policies.

Gross Revenues and Promotional Allowances

In accordance with industry
practice, we recognize as casino revenues the net win from gaming activities, which is the difference between gaming wins and losses. The retail value of food, beverage, rooms and other services furnished to customers on a complimentary basis is
included in gross revenues and then is deducted as promotional allowances.

Players Club Point Liability

Our players club allows customers to earn points based on the volume of their gaming activity. Under the terms of our
program, these points are redeemable for certain complimentary services, at the customers discretion, including rooms, food, beverage, retail and entertainment tickets. We accrue the expense for unredeemed complimentaries, after consideration
of estimated breakage, as they are earned. The value of the cost to provide the complimentaries is expensed as earned and is included in casino expense on our consolidated statement of operations. To arrive at the estimated cost associated with our
players club, estimates and assumptions are made regarding incremental marginal costs of the benefits, breakage rates and the mix of goods and services for which the points will be redeemed. We use historical data to assist in the
determination of estimated accruals. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, $0.4 million and $0.6 million, respectively, were accrued for the cost of the anticipated redemptions.

Property and Equipment and Other Long-Lived Assets

Property and equipment
is recorded at cost and is depreciated over its estimated useful life. Judgments are made in determining estimated useful lives and salvage values of these assets. The accuracy of these estimates affects the amount of depreciation expense recognized
in our financial results and whether we have a gain or loss on the disposal of assets. We review depreciation estimates and methods as new events occur, more experience is acquired, and additional information is obtained that would possibly change
our current estimates. Long-lived assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. The Partnership then compares the estimated future cash flows of
the asset, on an undiscounted basis, to the carrying amount of the asset. If the undiscounted cash flows exceed the carrying value, no impairment is indicated. If the undiscounted cash flows do not exceed the carrying amount then an impairment is
recorded based on the fair value of the asset, typically measured using a discounted cash flow model. If the asset is still under development, future cash flows include remaining construction costs. An estimate of undiscounted future cash flows
produced by the asset is compared to the carrying value to determine whether an impairment exists. If it is determined that the asset is impaired based on expected undiscounted future cash flows, a loss, measured by the amount by which the carrying
amount of the asset exceeds the fair value of the asset, would be recognized. As of December 31,



28



---

2010 and 2009, no events or changes in circumstances indicated that the carrying values of our long-lived assets may not be recoverable.

Reserve for Uncollectible Accounts Receivable

We make ongoing estimates
relating to the collectability of our accounts receivable and maintain a reserve for estimated losses resulting from the inability of our customers to make required payments. In determining the amount we reserve, we review our aged accounts
receivables, consider our historical level of credit losses and make judgments about the creditworthiness of customers based on ongoing credit evaluations and relationships. Since we cannot predict future changes in the financial stability of our
customers, actual future losses from uncollectible accounts may differ from our estimates.

Self-Insurance Reserves

Silver Legacy is self insured up to certain limits for our general liability, group health insurance and workmens compensation
programs. We analyze historical and current pending claims information to estimate amounts to be accrued. In order to mitigate our potential exposure, we have obtained certain stop loss policies. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, $0.6 million was
accrued for estimated pending claims.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

The Partnership adopted various accounting standards during 2010, none of which had a material effect on its consolidated financial
statements.

Certain amendments to Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 810 Consolidation
became effective for us beginning January 1, 2010. Such amendments include changes to the quantitative approach to determine the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity (VIE). An enterprise must determine if its variable
interest or interests give it a controlling financial interest in a VIE by evaluating whether 1) the enterprise has the power to direct activities of the VIE that have a significant effect on economic performance, and 2) the enterprise has
an obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits from the entity that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The amendments to ASC 810 also require ongoing reassessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a
VIE. The adoption of these amendments did not have a material effect on the Partnerships consolidated financial statements.

In April 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-16, Accruals for Casino Jackpot Liabilities. Specifically, the guidance clarifies that an entity should not accrue jackpot liabilities, or
portions thereof, before a jackpot is won if the entity can avoid paying the jackpot. Jackpots should be accrued and charged to revenue when an entity has the obligation to pay the jackpot. The guidance applies to both base and progressive jackpots.
The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The new guidance will be applied by recording a cumulative-effect adjustment to opening retained earnings in the period of adoption. The Partnership expects
to adopt the guidance in fiscal year 2011 and estimates the adjustment to retained earnings to be approximately $0.6 million.



|ITEM 7A. | QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURE ABOUT MARKET RISK
|-------- | ---------------------------------------------------------

We are potentially exposed to market risk in the form of fluctuations in interest rates and their potential impact upon our variable rate debt outstanding. We evaluate our exposure to this market risk by
monitoring interest rates in the marketplace and we have, on occasion, utilized derivative financial instruments to help manage this risk although we did not utilize any derivative financial instruments in 2010. As of December 31, 2010, we had
no variable rate debt outstanding.



|ITEM 8. | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
|------- | -------------------------------------------

Reference is made to the report of Deloitte & Touche LLP dated March 31, 2011 and the consolidated financial statements of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Silver Legacy Capital Corp.
appearing on pages 51 through 65 of this annual report, which are incorporated in this Item 8 by this reference.



|ITEM 9. | CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
|------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

None.



29



---

|ITEM 9A. | CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
|-------- | -----------------------

Disclosure
Controls and Procedures

As required by Rule 15d-15(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act), our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based
on that evaluation, our principal executive officer and our principal financial officer have concluded that as of the end of the period covered by this report our disclosure controls and procedures under the Exchange Act) were effective to ensure
that information required to be disclosed in our reports under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission rules and regulations and to provide that
such information is accumulated and communicated to management to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures.

Changes in
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

As required by Rule 15d-15(d) under the Exchange Act, our management, including
our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, has evaluated our internal control over financial reporting to determine whether any changes to our internal control over financial reporting occurred during the year ended
December 31, 2010 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting. Based on that evaluation, no such changes to our internal control over financial reporting occurred
during the year ended December 31, 2010.

Managements Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over our financial reporting. The
Partnerships internal control system was designed to provide reasonable assurance that information contained in the Partnerships consolidated financial statements is reliable, does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact, and fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows as of and for the periods presented in this annual report.

All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error and the
circumvention or overriding of controls. Accordingly, even effective internal controls provide only reasonable assurances with respect to financial statement preparation. In addition, the effectiveness of internal controls may vary over time due to
changes in conditions.

Our management evaluated the internal control over financial reporting using the criteria established
in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on our evaluation as of December 31, 2010, management has concluded that the
Partnerships internal control over financial reporting is effective based on those criteria.

This annual report does
not include an attestation report of the Partnerships registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Managements report was not subject to the attestation by the Partnerships registered
public accounting firm pursuant to rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Partnership to provide only managements report in this annual report.



|ITEM 9B. | OTHER INFORMATION
|-------- | -----------------

None.

PART III



|ITEM 10. | DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANTS
|-------- | ---------------------------------------------------

Overview

The current managing partner of the Partnership is Galleon, Inc.
(Galleon). Under the terms of the partnership agreement, the managing partner is responsible for the day-to-day management of the business affairs of the Partnership. The managing partner has delegated a substantial portion of its duties
to the general manager of Silver Legacy. Although the Partnership is a general partnership between Galleon, which is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International, and Eldorado Limited Liability Company (ELLC), which
is a 96%-owned subsidiary of Eldorado Resorts LLC, the Partnership employs its own separate management team to operate Silver Legacy. An executive committee of the



30



---

Partnership is responsible for consulting with, reviewing, monitoring and overseeing the performance of the management of Silver Legacy. The executive committee, which functions in a capacity
similar to a corporations board of directors, does not have any separately designated committees other than an audit committee.

The
Managing Partner

The Partnerships partnership agreement (the Partnership Agreement) designates Galleon
as the Partnerships managing partner with responsibility and authority for the day-to-day management of the business affairs of the Partnership, including overseeing the day-to-day operations of Silver Legacy and other Partnership business,
preparation of the Partnerships budgets and implementation of the decisions made by the partners. The managing partner is also responsible for the preparation and submission of the Partnerships annual business plan for review and
approval by the Partnerships executive committee, utilizing the special voting procedures and the procedure for resolving deadlocks described below.

The Partnership Agreement provides that the managing partner shall appoint the general manager, subject to approval of the appointment by the executive committee, utilizing the special voting procedures
and the procedure for resolving deadlocks described below. Under the terms of the Partnership Agreement, the general manager may be removed by either of the Partnerships partners upon 30 days written notice. The Partnership Agreement also
provides that the managing partner shall appoint the other principal senior management of the Partnership and Silver Legacy, subject to approval of such appointments by the executive committee in the case of the general manager, who is the
Partnerships chief executive officer, and the controller, who is the Partnerships chief financial officer and accounting officer. The Partnerships senior management performs such functions, duties, and responsibilities as the
managing partner may assign, and serves at the direction and pleasure of the managing partner.

The Partnership Agreement
provides that the unanimous approval of both partners is required for certain actions, including the admission of an additional partner, the purchase of additional real property, encumbrances on Silver Legacy, sales or other dispositions of all or
substantially all of the assets of the Partnership, refinancing or incurrence of indebtedness involving in excess of $250,000 other than in the ordinary course of business, capital improvements involving more than $250,000 that are not included in
an approved annual business plan, and any obligation, contract, agreement, or commitment with a partner or an affiliate of a partner which is not specifically permitted by the Partnership Agreement.

Replacement of the Managing Partner

If the actual net operating results of the business of the Partnership for any four consecutive quarters are less than 80% of the projected amount as set forth in the Partnerships annual business
plan, after appropriate adjustments for factors affecting similar business in the vicinity of the Silver Legacy, ELLC may require Galleon to resign from its position as managing partner.

In the event Galleon resigns as managing partner, ELLC will have the right and option to become the managing partner of the Partnership
and assume all the obligations of the managing partner under the Partnership Agreement, or the partners are required to attempt to appoint a third party to manage the day-to-day business affairs of the Partnership. In that event, if the partners are
unable to agree on a manager, then the Partnership shall be dissolved and liquidated in accordance with the provisions of the Partnership Agreement.

The Executive Committee

The executive committee of the Partnership is
authorized to review, monitor and oversee the performance of the management of Silver Legacy. The executive committee of the Partnership consists of five members, with three members appointed by the managing partner and two members appointed by the
other partner. In the event that neither of the partners is the managing partner, then the executive committee shall consist of five members, with two members appointed by each partner and a fifth member appointed by a third party manager selected
by the partners. Each partner may, at any time, appoint alternate members to the executive committee and the alternates will have all the powers of a regular committee member in the absence or inability of a regular committee member to serve. With
the exception of the special voting procedures described below, each member of the executive committee is entitled to one vote on each matter decided by the executive committee and each action of the executive committee must be approved by a
majority of all of the members of the executive committee, who may be present or voting by proxy.

The current members of the
executive committee are James J. Murren, Donald D. Thrasher, and Corey I. Sanders, each of whom was appointed by Galleon, and Robert M. Jones and Gene R. Carano, each of whom was appointed by ELLC.

Each member of the executive committee is selected and may be removed in the sole discretion of one of the Partnerships two
partners, with no role of the Partnership or the executive committee in that selection process. Because the business of the Partnership is the same as that of each of its partners and because the structure of the Partnership gives the sole



31



---

authority to designate each member of the executive committee to one of the partners, the Partnership believes that the attribute that best qualifies each member of its executive committee to
hold his position on the committee is the confidence in such member of the partner that designates him to serve.

Subject to
the requirement of unanimous approval of the partners for certain actions, the duties of the executive committee include, but are not limited to, (i) reviewing, adjusting, approving, developing, and supervising the Partnerships annual
business plan, (ii) reviewing and approving the terms of any loans made to the Partnership, (iii) approving all material purchases, sales, leases or other dispositions of Partnership property, other than in the ordinary course of business,
and (iv) approving the appointment of the general manager, who is the Partnerships chief executive officer, and the controller, who is the Partnerships chief financial officer and accounting officer, and determining the compensation
of the general manager and the controller.

The Partnership Agreement provides special voting procedures for the executive
committees approval of the annual business plan, the appointment of the general manager and the determination of the general managers compensation. In voting on these matters, the members of the executive committee appointed by the
managing partner shall have a total of two votes and the members of the executive committee appointed by the other partner shall have a total of two votes. The managing partner shall designate which two of the three members of the executive
committee appointed by the managing partner are to exercise the two votes. If the executive committee is deadlocked in deciding any matter which is subject to the special voting procedures, then the meeting may be adjourned to another meeting date.
If the executive committee remains deadlocked with respect to its approval of an annual business plan until the end of the second month of the fiscal year described in the annual business plan, then either partner may by written notice cause the
approval of the annual business plan to be submitted to a nationally recognized accounting firm mutually agreeable to the partners (the Accountant) for resolution. The Accountant shall consider the positions of the members of the
executive committee and the partners, and shall decide whether to approve the annual business plan, or to modify the annual business plan and approve it with such modifications. The decision of the Accountant on these matters shall have the same
effect as the approval of the annual business plan by the executive committee. If the executive committee remains deadlocked with respect to its approval of the appointment of a general manager for a period of one month following the effective date
of the resignation or removal of the previous general manager, then the executive committee shall assume the duties of the general manager until such time as the executive committee can reach a decision on the appointment and compensation of a new
general manager. In exercising the duties of the general manager, the executive committee shall act and vote in accordance with the special voting procedures described above. If the executive committee remains deadlocked on the determination of the
compensation of the general manager for a period of one month following the first meeting on the proposed compensation, then either partner may by written notice cause the determination of such compensation to be submitted to the Accountant for
resolution. In that event, the Accountant shall consider the positions of the executive committee, and shall adopt a compensation arrangement consistent with the position advocated by at least one member of the executive committee. The decision of
the Accountant on any matter which is subject to the special voting procedures shall be final and binding on the executive committee and the partners.

Audit Committee Financial Expert

The Partnerships executive
committee and Capitals Board of Directors have each determined that Robert M. Jones, who is a member of the executive committee and Capitals Board of Directors, and also serves on their audit committee, is an audit committee
financial expert in that he has the following attributes:



| |  |  | an understanding of generally accepted accounting principles and financial statements;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the ability to assess the general application of such principles in connection with the accounting for estimates, accruals and reserves;
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | experience preparing, auditing, analyzing or evaluating financial statements that present a breadth and level of complexity of accounting issues that
are generally comparable to the breadth and complexity of issues that can reasonably be expected to be raised by the Partnerships financial statements, or experience actively supervising one or more persons engaged in such activities;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | an understanding of internal control over financial reporting; and
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | an understanding of audit committee functions.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------

Mr. Jones is not independent as that term is defined under current rules of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). None of the Partnerships or Capitals securities are listed on
the NYSE or any other national securities exchange or any national securities association, nor is there any current intention to so list any securities of the Partnership or Capital in the future.



32



---

Executive Officers, Members of the Executive Committee and Directors

The following table sets forth certain information concerning our current executive officers, the executive officers of our managing
partner, Galleon, the members of the Partnerships executive committee and the members of the board of directors of Capital.



|                    |  |     |    |  |           |                                                                                                                                                                                        
|------------------- |  | --- | -- |  | --------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Name                |  | Age |    |  | Positions
|Gary L. Carano      |  |     | 58 |  |           | General Manager of Silver Legacy, Chief Executive Officer of the Partnership, and President and Chief Executive Officer of Capital                                                     
|                    |  |    
|Glenn T. Carano     |  |     | 55 |  |           | Executive Director of Marketing of Silver Legacy and Secretary of the Partnership and Capital                                                                                          
|                    |  |    
|Bruce C. Sexton     |  |     | 57 |  |           | Assistant General Manager of Silver Legacy and Vice President of Capital                                                                                                               
|                    |  |    
|Stephanie D. Lepori |  |     | 40 |  |           | Chief Financial Officer of Silver Legacy, Controller and Chief Accounting and Financial Officer of the Partnership, and Treasurer and Chief Accounting and Financial Officer of
Capital
|                    |  |    
|Gene R. Carano      |  |     | 55 |  |           | Member of the Partnerships Executive Committee and Director of Capital                                                                                                                
|                    |  |    
|Robert M. Jones     |  |     | 67 |  |           | Member of the Partnerships Executive Committee, Audit Committee and Director of Capital                                                                                               
|                    |  |    
|James J. Murren     |  |     | 49 |  |           | Member of the Partnerships Executive Committee, Director of Capital and President of Galleon                                                                                          
|                    |  |    
|Corey I. Sanders    |  |     | 47 |  |           | Member of the Partnerships Executive Committee and Director of Capital                                                                                                                
|                    |  |    
|Donald D. Thrasher  |  |     | 56 |  |           | Member of the Partnerships Executive Committee, Audit Committee and Director of Capital                                                                                               
|                    |  |    
|Daniel J. DArrigo  |  |     | 42 |  |           | Treasurer of Galleon                                                                                                                                                                   
|                    |  |    
|John M. McManus     |  |     | 44 |  |           | Secretary of Galleon                                                                                                                                                                   

Gary L.
Carano. Mr. Carano has served as General Manager of Silver Legacy and Chief Executive Officer of the Partnership since January 1995 and President and Chief Executive Officer of Capital since its incorporation in August 2001. He is also
President and Chief Operating Officer, and a member of the board of managers, of Eldorado Resorts LLC and Treasurer of Recreational Enterprises, Inc. Previously, he served as Assistant General Manager, General Manager and Chief Operating Officer of
Eldorado Hotel & Casino from 1980 to 1994. Eldorado Resorts LLC and Recreational Enterprises, Inc. are affiliates of the Partnership and Capital. Gary L. Carano, Glenn T. Carano and Gene R. Carano are brothers.

Glenn T. Carano. Mr. Carano has been the Director of Marketing of Silver Legacy since January 1995, Secretary of the
Partnership since August 2001 and Secretary of Capital since November 2001. Prior to 1995, he served as Director of Marketing at the Eldorado Hotel & Casino for eight years. Mr. Carano has served as chairman of the board of directors
of the Airport Authority of Washoe County and is a member of the board of the Reno-Sparks Convention & Visitors Authority. He is also presently Secretary of Recreational Enterprises, Inc. From 1977 to 1983, Mr. Carano was a quarterback
for the Dallas Cowboys football team. Eldorado Resorts LLC, the owner of Eldorado Hotel & Casino, and Recreational Enterprises, Inc. are affiliates of the Partnership and Capital.

Bruce C. Sexton. Mr. Sexton has been the Assistant General Manager of Silver Legacy and Vice President of Capital since June
2006. From January 1995 to June 2006, Mr. Sexton was the Chief Financial Officer or Director of Finance and Administration of Silver Legacy and Controller and Chief Accounting and Financial Officer of the Partnership. He was Treasurer of
Capital from its incorporation in August 2001, and its Chief Accounting and Financial Officer from November 2001 to June 2006. Mr. Sexton began working at the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino in Reno in 1978 as chief accountant and, before
joining Silver Legacy, held the position of Controller at that property for eight years. Circus Circus Hotel and Casino is an affiliate of the Partnership and Capital.



33



---

Stephanie D. Lepori. Ms. Lepori has been the Chief Financial Officer of Silver
Legacy, Controller and Chief Accounting and Financial Officer of the Partnership, and Treasurer and Chief Accounting and Financial Officer of Capital since June 2006. Ms. Lepori was the Director of Finance or Controller of Silver Legacy from
March 1995 until June 2006. From 1992 until she joined Silver Legacy, Ms. Lepori was employed by Arthur Andersen LLP, serving that firm in various positions. Ms. Lepori is a Certified Public Accountant.

Gene R. Carano. Mr. Carano has been a member of the executive committee of the Partnership since December 2000 and a director
of Capital since November 2001. Since June 2007, he has been the General Manager of Eldorado Hotel & Casino, a position he previously held between 1998 and June 2002. Mr. Carano served as Assistant General Managers of Eldorado
Hotel & Casino from July 2002 to June 2007. In addition, he has served as Vice President of Eldorado Resorts LLC or its predecessor since 1993, the Secretary of Eldorado Resorts LLC from June 1996 to June 2007, and Vice President of
Recreational Enterprises, Inc. since 1983. From 1993 until July 1998, Mr. Carano served as a Co-General Manager of Eldorado Hotel & Casino and served as its Director of Gaming. Prior to joining Eldorado Resorts LLC, Mr. Carano
held various positions at another major casino in northern Nevada, including slot floor supervisor and pit boss. Eldorado Resorts LLC, the owner of Eldorado Hotel & Casino, and Recreational Enterprises, Inc. are affiliates of the
Partnership and Capital. Mr. Carano was selected to serve as a member of the executive committee of the Partnership due to his extensive industry knowledge and leadership experience, including his experience in numerous executive and senior
management positions at casino and gaming companies.

Robert M. Jones. Mr. Jones has been a member of the
executive committee of the Partnership since November 1995 and a director of Capital since November 2001. He has been the Chief Financial Officer of Eldorado Resorts LLC or its predecessor since 1989. Prior to joining Eldorado Resorts LLC in 1984,
Mr. Jones spent fourteen years in public accounting, ten of which were as an audit principal with the international accounting firm of Arthur Young & Company. Mr. Jones is a former Certified Public Accountant. Eldorado Resorts LLC
is an affiliate of the Partnership and Capital. Mr. Jones was selected to serve as a member of the executive committee of the Partnership due to his extensive industry knowledge and leadership experience, including his experience as a principal
financial officer of Eldorado Resorts LLC and his background at a major international accounting firm.

James J.
Murren. Mr. Murren has been a member of the executive committee of the Partnership and a director of Capital since November 2007 and President of Galleon since December 2008. Mr. Murren has served as Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of MGM Resorts International since December 2008 and as President since December 1999. He has served as Chief Operating Officer of MGM Resorts International from August 2007 to December 2008, Chief Financial Officer from January 1998 to
August 2007, and Treasurer from November 2001 to August 2007. Mr. Murren is also a member of the Board of Directors of Delta Petroleum Corporation. MGM Resorts International is an affiliate of the Partnership and Capital. Mr. Murren was
selected to serve as a member of the executive committee of the Partnership due to his extensive industry knowledge and leadership experience, including his experience in various executive positions at public gaming companies.

Corey I. Sanders. Mr. Sanders has been a member of the executive committee of the Partnership and a director of Capital since
February 2010. Mr. Sanders has served as the Chief Operating Officer for MGM Resorts International since September 2010. He served as the Chief Operating Officer for the Core Brand Properties of MGM Resorts International from August 2009 to
September 2010. Previously, Mr. Sanders served as Executive Vice President of operations for MGM Resorts International since August 2007. Mr. Sanders held the position of Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for MGM Grand
Resorts from April 2005 to August 2007. Mr. Sanders served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for MGM Grand from August 1997 to April 2005. MGM Resorts International is an affiliate of the Partnership and Capital.
Mr. Sanders was selected to serve as a member of the executive committee of the Partnership due to his extensive industry knowledge and leadership experience, including his experience in various executive and senior management positions at
public gaming companies.

Donald D. Thrasher. Mr. Thrasher has been a member of the executive committee of the
Partnership and a director of Capital since December 2009 and was appointed as a member of the Partnerships audit committee in February 2010. Mr. Thrasher has served as President and Chief Operating Officer of Circus Circus Las Vegas
since August 2009 and additionally has oversight responsibilities for Circus Circus Reno, Gold Strike-Jean, and Railroad Pass, all of which are located in Nevada. Mr. Thrasher held the position of Vice President and General Manager of Circus
Circus Las Vegas from April 1998 until August 2009. Mr. Thrasher is a Certified Public Accountant. MGM Resorts International, the owner of Circus Circus Las Vegas, Circus Circus Reno and Railroad Pass, is an affiliate of the Partnership and
Capital. Mr. Thrasher was selected to serve as a member of the executive committee of the Partnership due to his extensive industry knowledge and leadership experience, including his experience in various executive and senior management
positions and his background in accounting.

Daniel J DArrigo. Mr. DArrigo has been Treasurer of
Galleon since September 2009. Mr. DArrigo has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of MGM Resorts International since August 2007 and Treasurer since September 2009. He served as Senior Vice
PresidentFinance of MGM Resorts International from February 2005 to



34



---

August 2007 and as Vice PresidentFinance of MGM Resorts International from December 2000 to February 2005. MGM Resorts International and Galleon are affiliates of the Partnership
and Capital.

John M. McManus. Mr. McManus has been Secretary of Galleon since December 2009 and previously served
as Assistant Secretary of Galleon from July 2009 until December 2009. Mr. McManus has served as Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of MGM Resorts International since July 2010. He served as Senior Vice President, Acting
General Counsel and Secretary of MGM Resorts International from December 2009 to July 2010. He served as Senior Vice President, Deputy General Counsel and Assistant Secretary of MGM Resorts International from September 2009 to December 2009. He
served as Senior Vice President, Assistant General Counsel and Assistant Secretary of MGM Resorts International from July 2008 to September 2009. He served as Vice President and General Counsel for CityCenters residential and retail divisions
from January 2006 to July 2008. Prior thereto, he served as General Counsel or Assistant General Counsel for various operating subsidiaries of MGM Resorts International from May 2001 to January 2006. MGM Resorts International is an affiliate of the
Partnership and Capital.

Code of Ethics

The Partnerships executive committee and Capitals Board of Directors have adopted a code of ethics that applies to the Partnerships and Capitals principal executive officer,
principal financial officer, principal accounting officer, or persons performing similar functions. The code of ethics, a copy of which is incorporated by reference as Exhibit 14 to this report, is a written standard designed to deter wrongdoing and
to promote:



| |  |  | honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships;
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | full, fair, accurate, timely, and understandable disclosure in reports and documents that the Partnership files with, or submits to, the SEC and in
other public communications made by the Partnership;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | compliance with applicable governmental laws, rules and regulations;
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the prompt internal reporting of violations of the code to an appropriate person identified in the code; and
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | accountability for adherence to the code.
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------

A printed copy of the code of ethics will be delivered on request by writing to the corporate treasurer at Silver Legacy Resort Casino, c/o Corporate Treasurer, 407 North Virginia Street, Reno, Nevada
89501.



|ITEM 11. | EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
|-------- | ----------------------

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

Overview of Compensation Program

Under the terms of the Partnerships
partnership agreement, the executive committee of the Partnership determines the compensation of the general manager, who is the Partnerships chief executive officer (CEO), and the controller, who is the Partnerships chief
financial officer and accounting officer (CFO). The Partnership does not have a separate compensation committee. With the exception of the compensation of the CEO and CFO, which requires the executive committees approval, the CEO
has responsibility for fixing the compensation of the other named executive officers. The Partnerships executive committee approves any new elements or significant changes to the existing compensation program. In 2010, the Partnership did not
grant any plan-based awards. The Partnership does not have publicly traded equity. Accordingly, it does not award any equity-based compensation or utilize any equity-based guidelines in determining the compensation of its named executive officers.
There are currently no employment contracts with any of the named executive officers.

Compensation Objectives

Each of the named executive officers has been with the Partnership since Silver Legacy opened in 1995. With the exception of Stephanie
Lepori, each of the named executive officers has over 30 years of experience in the Reno gaming market. Stephanie Lepori has over 15 years of experience in the Reno gaming market. The Partnership has benefited from this experience and expertise, and
its compensation objective is to retain its named executive officers in an effort to support its overall long-term strategic and performance goals. The Partnership attempts to retain its named executive officers by paying total compensation that is
fair, competitive and reasonable and by using continued service as one of the determinates of total compensation through the utilization of its supplemental executive retirement program (SERP). As a result, the Partnerships
compensation of its named executive officers is designed to reward their continued service and their respective contributions to the maintenance of Silver Legacys position as an industry leader within the Reno market through its annual
compensation and the utilization of its SERP.



35



---

Executive Compensation Components

During the year ended December 31, 2010, the components of compensation for the Partnerships named executive officers, as well
as a summary of the reasons why the named executive officers were paid such components, were as follows:



|                                        |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                   
|--------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Component of Compensation               |  | Principal Reason(s) for Paying Such Component                                                                                                                                                     
|                                        | 
|Base Salary                             |  | Provide a fixed level of cash compensation in consideration of performing day-to-day responsibilities
 Provide consistent income security at competitive levels to encourage sustained
performance
|                                        | 
|Health and Life Insurance               |  | Attract and retain executive talent by providing competitive insurance programs and coverage levels                                                                                               
|                                        | 
|Retirement Benefits                     |  | Provide minimum levels of income security for retirement                                                                                                                                          
|                                        | 
|Perquisites and Other Personal Benefits |  | Enhance productivity by providing reasonable and customary perquisites and other personal benefits                                                                                                

Base Salary

The Partnerships original executive committee approved
the compensation amounts for Gary Carano, the Partnerships CEO, and Glenn Carano, the Partnerships Executive Director of Marketing, when the Partnership was established in 1995. Their base salaries were determined taking into account
their extensive knowledge of the Reno market and prior experience in the operation of the adjoining Eldorado Hotel & Casino, which is majority-owned by members of the Carano family, over a period of more than 15 years. The base salaries
paid to these two individuals have not changed since 1995 other than a reduction of their base salaries applied across the board to the compensation of all salaried employees, discussed under Cost Savings Actions.

The salaries paid in 2010 to the other two named executive officers, Bruce Sexton, the Partnerships Assistant General Manager, and
Stephanie Lepori, the Partnerships CFO, were determined by the CEO, and approved by the Executive Committee in the case of Stephanie Lepori, on a subjective basis taking into account the salaries for comparable positions at the adjoining
properties of our affiliates, Eldorado Hotel & Casino and Circus Circus Hotel-Casino, and other available compensation comparables within our market (and reduced by the aforementioned reduction of the salaries of all salaried employees). In
determining their salaries, consideration of his or her responsibility and experience were also taken into account.

All of
the salaries of the named executive officers were paid in cash. With the exception of the salaries of Gary Carano and Glenn Carano, salary levels are typically considered annually as part of the Partnerships performance review process as well
as upon a promotion or other change in job responsibility. Any merit based increase in salary is based on a subjective evaluation that, in addition to the factors discussed earlier, takes into account the individuals performance.

Bonuses

The
Partnerships Chief Executive Officer, along with the Partnerships executive committee, determined to continue to pay no bonuses in 2010 based on the Partnerships financial results in 2010.

Health and Life Insurance

The Partnership offers health insurance benefits as a tool to attract and retain qualified employees. Health insurance is available to all
employees who meet certain length of service and hours worked requirements. All covered employees, including our named executive officers, are required to contribute amounts via a payroll deduction which is tiered based on the salary level of the
employee and the type of insurance coverage selected to cover a portion of the cost of the coverage.

The Partnership pays
premiums for term life and accidental death insurance for all of its employees. The benefit amounts range from $10,000 to $50,000 based on the level of position of the employee. The premium paid for each of our named executive officers is for the
maximum benefit of $50,000.



36



---

Retirement Benefits

The Partnership offers retirement benefits designed to retain employees and motivate long-term performance. All employees, including our named executive officers, are eligible to participate in the
Partnerships employee savings plan. In addition, certain named executive officers are entitled to participate in the Partnerships SERP.

SERP

The Partnership established its SERP in 2002 as an important
retention tool. The design of the Partnerships SERP is intended to compensate participants upon retirement at a level equivalent to a percentage of their highest annual compensation received during the last five full calendar years preceding
retirement. The percentages were set based on competitive data at the time the plan was implemented, and are evaluated by the Partnerships retirement consultant and actuary on an annual basis. The Partnership balances the effectiveness of this
plan as a compensation and retention tool with the cost to the Partnership of providing the plan. Based on budget and cost constraints, no newly hired or promoted key employees have been admitted to the SERP since its inception date in 2002. The
SERP is an unfunded, unsecured obligation of the Partnership and is not qualified for tax purposes. The benefit formula under this plan is described in the section Pension Benefits. Management believes the SERP is a strong retention tool
because the benefits generally increase with the named executive officers continued employment. The executive committee believes the retention objective of the SERP is enhanced by the fact that plan benefits are forfeited should a covered
named executive officer enter into employment with a competitor of the Partnership after retirement or termination for cause.

Employee
Savings Plan

The Partnership offers a defined contribution 401(k) plan which covers all employees who meet certain age
and length of service requirements. Until suspended in February 2009 due to the significant decline in the Partnerships financial results in 2008, employer matching contributions up to 1.5 percent of each participating employees
compensation were made pursuant to the plan. The plan is qualified under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Partnership maintains the plan to attract and retain qualified employees, including the named executive officers, and to
encourage employees to save some percentage of their cash compensation for their eventual retirement.

Perquisites and Other Personal
Benefits

The Partnership provides limited perquisites intended to serve specific business needs such as the entertainment
of significant customers or other individuals doing business with the Partnership; however, it is understood that some perquisites may include a personal as well as a business element. In 2010, the perquisites provided to the Partnerships
named executive officers consisted of dues for country club memberships, executive medical physicals, complimentary personal meals, and complimentary personal tickets for various events.

Cost Savings Actions

Based on the current recession which began to impact
the Partnerships financial performance in the latter half of 2008, the Partnership implemented various cost savings measures in February of 2009 that impacted the Partnerships overall compensation program. Effective February 15,
2009, the salary of each salaried employee, including each named executive officer, was reduced by three percent and the matching contribution offered under the Partnerships 401(k) savings plan was suspended in February 2009. Additionally,
salary increases for management employees were suspended at the same time. Annual merit increases were reinstituted in March 2010 with a maximum set at 1.5%. Bruce Sexton and Stephanie Lepori each received an annual merit increase of 1.5% in 2010.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The following report of the Executive Committee does not constitute soliciting material and should not be considered filed with the SEC, nor shall such information be
incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that such report is specifically incorporated by reference into such filing.

The executive committee of the Partnership, which functions in a manner similar to the board of directors of a corporation and does not
have a separate compensation committee, has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of the Securities and Exchange Commissions Regulation S-K with management. Based on the review and
discussions referred to in the preceding sentence, the Partnerships executive committee has recommended that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.

Respectfully submitted by the members of the executive committee.





37



---

|                                                                                                           
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
 Gene R. Carano
Robert M. Jones
James J. Murren
Corey I. Sanders
Donald D. Thrasher

Summary Compensation Table

The following table summarizes the
total compensation paid to or earned by each of the Partnerships named executive officers for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008. During the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, none of the directors or
officers of Capital received any remuneration for their services in those capacities.



|                                                                                                                      |  |      |          |  |           |  |                |          |  |  |                                                                             |  |  |                              |               |  |          |  |              |     |  |  |                | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | -------- |  | --------- |  | -------------- | -------- |  |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  | ---------------------------- | ------------- |  | -------- |  | ------------ | --- |  |  | -------------- | 
|Name and Principal Position                                                                                           |  | Year |          |  | Salary($) |  |                | Bonus($) |  |  | Change in PensionValue and NonqualifiedDeferred CompensationEarnings
(1)($) |  |  | All
OtherCompensation (2)($) |               |  | Total($) | 
|Gary L. Carano                                                                                                        |  |      | 2010     |  |           |  | 388,000        |          |  |  |                                                                            |  |  |                              | 284,956       |  |          |  | 132          | (3) |  |  | 673,088        | 
|General Manager of Silver Legacy and ChiefExecutive Officer of the Partnership                                        |  |      | 20092008 |  |           |  | 389,500400,000 |          |  |  |                                                                           |  |  |                              | 582,33430,392 |  |          |  | 13,18016,688 |     |  |  | 985,014447,080 | 
|                                                                                                                      |  |      |          |  |           | 
|Glenn T. Carano                                                                                                       |  |      | 2010     |  |           |  | 388,000        |          |  |  |                                                                            |  |  |                              | 182,183       |  |          |  | 21,342       | (4) |  |  | 591,525        | 
|Executive Director ofMarketing of SilverLegacy and Secretary ofthe Partnership                                        |  |      | 20092008 |  |           |  | 389,500400,000 |          |  |  |                                                                           |  |  |                              | 306,50519,982 |  |          |  | 33,43736,767 |     |  |  | 729,442456,749 | 
|                                                                                                                      |  |      |          |  |           | 
|Bruce C. Sexton                                                                                                       |  |      | 2010     |  |           |  | 220,160        |          |  |  |                                                                            |  |  |                              | 107,147       |  |          |  | 132          | (5) |  |  | 327,439        | 
|Assistant GeneralManager of SilverLegacy                                                                              |  |      | 20092008 |  |           |  | 219,094225,000 |          |  |  |                                                                           |  |  |                              | 131,58772,161 |  |          |  | 4132,373     |     |  |  | 351,094299,534 | 
|                                                                                                                      |  |      |          |  |           | 
|Stephanie D. Lepori                                                                                                   |  |      | 2010     |  |           |  | 149,577        |          |  |  |                                                                            |  |  |                              |              |  |          |  | 132          | (6) |  |  | 149,709        | 
|Chief Financial Officer of
Silver Legacy and Controller and Chief Accounting and Financial Officer of the Partnership |  |      | 20092008 |  |           |  | 150,931155,000 |          |  |  |                                                                           |  |  |                              |             |  |          |  | 2771,286     |     |  |  | 151,208156,286 | 



|(1) | This column sets forth the change in pension value in 2010, 2009 and 2008 for each of the names executive officers participating in the SERP. The value for each year
was calculated as the difference between the present value of the names officers accrued benefit as of the end of the year, less the value calculated as of the end of the prior year. The present values were calculated using the same discount
rate and mortality table that were used in our financial disclosures on those dates. Stephanie Lepori is not covered by the SERP.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | The Partnership provides limited perquisites and personal benefits intended to serve specific business needs such as the entertainment of significant customers or other
individuals doing business with the Partnership; however, it is understood that some may be used for personal reasons as well. In 2010 the perquisites and personal benefits provided to the Partnerships named executive officers consisted of
dues for country club memberships, executive medical physicals, complimentary personal meals, and complimentary personal tickets for various events. The incremental cost to the Partnership of the perquisites and personal benefits received by Glenn
Carano during each year and Gary Carano in 2009 and 2008 are included in the table. The value of the perquisites and personal benefits received by each of the two other named executive officers in each year and Gary Carano in 2010 is not included in
the table because the perquisites and personal benefits received by each of these individuals involved an aggregate incremental cost to the Partnership of less than $10,000. The incremental cost to the Partnership of each perquisite and personal
benefit is intended to capture the entire cost to the Partnership of the benefit less any amount which would have otherwise been incurred had the perquisite or benefit not been received.
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(3) | Includes $132 in premiums paid by the Partnership for life and accidental death insurance for the benefit of Gary Carano.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



38



---

|(4) | Includes $132 in premiums paid by the Partnership for life and accidental death insurance for the benefit of Glenn Carano and $21,210 of perquisites and personal
benefits received in 2010. These perquisites and personal benefits include golf membership dues for which the Partnership incurred a cost of $19,684 in 2010, representing the full amount of dues paid by the Partnership on account of Glenn
Caranos golf membership.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(5) | Includes $132 in premiums paid by the Partnership for life and accidental death insurance for the benefit of Bruce Sexton.
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(6) | Includes $132 and in premiums paid by the Partnership for life and accidental death insurance for the benefit of Stephanie Lepori.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pension Benefits

The Partnership offers the SERP to five of its current employees, including three of its named executive officers, to provide each
participating employee a targeted income on retirement relative to the employees highest annual compensation (base salary and bonus) amount within the last five full calendar years preceding retirement. The plan is unfunded and is not
qualified for tax purposes. Also, the participants benefits are subject to the claims of general creditors should the Partnership become insolvent.

Depending on a participating named executive officers tier and years of service, the following percentages are applied to his highest annual compensation (base salary and bonus) amount within the
last five full calendar years preceding retirement to determine the annual benefit payable upon retirement at or after age 60:



|                                         |  |                       |    |   |             |  |    |          |  |  |    |  
|---------------------------------------- |  | --------------------- | -- | - | ----------- |  | -- | -------- |  |  | -- | -
|Years of Service (1)                     |  | Tier I (2)            |    |   | Tier II (3) |  |    | Tier III | 
|                                         |  | Applicable Percentage |   
|Less than four (4)                       |  |                       | 0  | % |             |  | 0  | %        |  |  | 0  | %
|Four (4), but less than (6)              |  |                       | 20 |   |             |  | 15 |          |  |  | 5  |  
|Six (6), but less than eight (8)         |  |                       | 25 |   |             |  | 20 |          |  |  | 10 |  
|Eight (8), but less than ten (10)        |  |                       | 30 |   |             |  | 25 |          |  |  | 15 |  
|Ten (10), but less than twelve (12)      |  |                       | 40 |   |             |  | 30 |          |  |  | 20 |  
|Twelve (12), but less than fourteen (14) |  |                       | 50 |   |             |  | 35 |          |  |  | 25 |  
|Fourteen (14) or more                    |  |                       | 60 |   |             |  | 40 |          |  |  | 30 |  



|(1) | Each participating named executive officer had 16 years of service at December 31, 2010.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | Gary Carano is a Tier I participant.
|--- | ------------------------------------

|(3) | Glenn Carano and Bruce Sexton are Tier II participants.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------

Normal retirement under the plan is at age 65. Because each participating named executive officer has completed four years of service, early retirement benefits may commence for each upon attainment of
age 55 at a reduced annual benefit. The annual benefit payable at age 60 is reduced by 5% for each full or partial year the early retirement date precedes age 60. Benefits are not reduced for retirement at/or after age 60.



39



---

The following table sets forth for each named executive officer information with respect to
the SERP as of December 31, 2010:

Pension Benefits

As of December 31, 2010



|                        |  |                                                      |  |                                      |    |  |                                          |   |           |                                   |  |  |   | 
|----------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------------ | -- |  | ---------------------------------------- | - | --------- | --------------------------------- |  |  | - | 
|Name (a)                |  | Plan Name
(b)                                        |  | Number ofYears
ofCredited Service(c) |    |  | PresentValue ofAccumulatedBenefit (1)(d) |   |           | PaymentsDuring LastFiscal Year(e) | 
|Gary L. Carano          |  | Silver Legacy Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan |  |                                      | 16 |  |                                          | $ | 2,000,110 |                                   |  |  |  | 
|                        |  |                                                      |  |                                     
|Glenn T. Carano         |  | Silver Legacy Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan |  |                                      | 16 |  |                                          | $ | 1,126,013 |                                   |  |  |  | 
|                        |  |                                                      |  |                                     
|Bruce C. Sexton         |  | Silver Legacy Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan |  |                                      | 16 |  |                                          | $ | 723,694   |                                   |  |  |  | 
|                        |  |                                                      |  |                                     
|Stephanie D. Lepori (2) |  |                                                     |  |                                      |   |  |                                          |   |          |                                   |  |  |  | 



|(1) | The accumulated benefit is based on years of service and annual compensation (base salary and bonus) for the period through December 31, 2010. The present value is
calculated assuming the benefit commences at normal retirement age 65 and that the benefit is payable for life. It is also based on the assumptions included in the accompanying footnotes to the financial statements. As described in these footnotes,
the assumed interest rate is 5.05%. If the assumed retirement age were changed to age 60, the present value for each of the named executive officers would instead be $2,901,894, $1,632,603, and $1,049,671 for Gary Carano, Glenn Carano and Bruce
Sexton, respectively. The post-retirement mortality assumption is based on RP2000-Mortality Table-Projected 11 Years Using Projection Scale AA. All of the participating named executive officers were vested in the SERP as of December 31, 2010.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | Stephanie Lepori is not covered by the SERP.
|--- | --------------------------------------------

Under the SERP, plan benefits vary depending on the event which causes the employment termination. The following is a brief description of the benefits
payable upon different termination events:



| |  |  | In the event a named executive officer enters into competitive employment after termination or retirement, the named executive officers pension will be
forfeited. The forfeiture provision would be waived if the named executive officers termination occurs after a change in control.
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | In the event of termination for cause, the named executive officer will forfeit all rights to benefits under the plan.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | In the event of death before retirement, the named executive officers beneficiary will be entitled to receive the present value of the benefit,
if any, the named executive officer would have been entitled to receive on the date of death as an early retirement benefit.
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | In the event a disability occurs before retirement, the named executive officer will receive an annual income equal to the accumulated benefit at the
time the disability occurs, unreduced for the commencement of the benefit prior to age 65. The benefit will commence immediately if the named executive officer is 55 or older determined at the time the disability occurs, or, if the named executive
officer has not reached the age of 55, once the named executive officer attains age 55 and, in either case, will continue as long as the named executive officer remains disabled.
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



40



---

Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control

The following table sets forth for each named executive officer the respective amounts would be payable pursuant to the SERP upon the
event of a termination or change in control, assuming the termination or change in control event occurred on December 31, 2010. No potential payments, other than those listed below with respect to the SERP, would be made to any named executive
officer under any contract, agreement, plan or arrangement in the event of a termination or change in control.



|                        |  |                               |           |  |                                                             |   |         |                                                                              |  |   |                                           |  |  |  |   | 
|----------------------- |  | ----------------------------- | --------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------- | - | ------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | - | ----------------------------------------- |  |  |  | - | 
|Name (a)                |  | Lump-SumPayable 
UponDeath(b) |           |  | Annual IncomePayable 
UponDisability(Beginning atAge 55)(c) |   |         | Annual IncomePayable forLife UponVoluntaryTermination(Beginning atAge
60)(d) |  |   | Amount PayableUponTermination
forCause(e) | 
|Gary L. Carano          |  | $                             | 1,752,183 |  |                                                             | $ | 240,000 |                                                                              |  | $ | 240,000                                   |  |  |  |  | 
|Glenn T. Carano         |  | $                             | 955,544   |  |                                                             | $ | 160,000 |                                                                              |  | $ | 160,000                                   |  |  |  |  | 
|Bruce C. Sexton         |  | $                             | 628,229   |  |                                                             | $ | 91,079  |                                                                              |  | $ | 91,079                                    |  |  |  |  | 
|Stephanie D. Lepori (1) |  |                               |          |  |                                                             |   |        |                                                                              |  |   |                                          |  |  |  |  | 



|(1) | Stephanie Lepori is not covered by the SERP.
|--- | --------------------------------------------

Director Compensation

None of the members of the Partnerships executive committee, which functions in a manner similar to a board of directors of a corporation, the executive officer or director of our managing partner,
Galleon, or the members of the board of directors of Capital or its executive officers is compensated by the Partnership or Capital for his services in these capacities. The perquisites and personal benefits received by each member of the executive
committee who received perquisites or personal benefits in 2010, 2009, and 2008, consisting of complimentary personal meals and tickets for various events, involved an aggregate incremental cost to the Partnership in each such year of less than
$10,000.

Compensation Policies and Practices and Risk Management

In establishing and reviewing our executive compensation program, the Partnerships executive committee and the CEO review whether
the program encourages or facilitates excessive risk-taking conduct. The executive committee and the CEO have concluded that the program does not encourage or facilitate such behavior. Executive base salaries are fixed and do not encourage improper
risk-taking. Gary Carano and Glenn Carano have not had their base salaries raised since 1995 and, effective February 15, 2009, the salary of each salaried employee, including each named executive officer, was reduced by three percent and the
matching contribution offered under the Partnerships 401(k) savings plan was suspended in February 2009. Additionally, salary increases for management employees were suspended at the same time.

Annual merit increases were reinstituted in March 2010 with a maximum set at 1.5%, but no bonuses were paid in 2010 based on the
Partnerships financial results in 2010.

The Partnerships executive committee and management have also reviewed
our compensation programs for employees generally and concluded that these programs do not create risks that are likely to have a material adverse effect on our business or operations. We believe that we have implemented the appropriate mix of
competitive compensation components to ensure we retain quality employees and contribute to our overall success.

Compensation Committee
Interlocks and Insider Participation

The compensation of the Partnerships CEO and CFO is determined by the
Partnerships executive committee, and the compensation of the Partnerships other executives is determined by the Partnerships CEO. The only individuals who served on the Partnerships executive committee during the year ended
December 31, 2010 were Gene R. Carano, Robert M. Jones, James J. Murren, Corey I. Sanders and Donald D. Thrasher, each of whom is currently an executive committee member. None of the individuals who served on the executive committee during 2010
is or has ever been an officer or employee of the Partnership or any subsidiary of the Partnership, including Capital.



41



---

During the year ended December 31, 2010, Gary L. Carano, the Partnerships Chief
Executive Officer, served on the Board of Managers of Eldorado Resorts LLC, and Gene R. Carano, Vice President of Eldorado Resorts LLC, served on the Partnerships executive committee.

Transactions with Related Persons

Three-Property
Payments. Registered hotel guests at Silver Legacy have the ability to charge to their hotel rooms the costs incurred at the restaurants and shops located within Circus Circus Hotel and Casino, Eldorado Hotel & Casino and Silver
Legacy. In addition, registered hotel guests at the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino and the Eldorado Hotel & Casino may charge costs incurred at Silver Legacy outlets to their hotel rooms. Any of these charges that are incurred by a paying
guest are paid by the guest when he or she checks out and Silver Legacy remits to the other two properties, and the other two properties remit to Silver Legacy, the respective amounts collected for charges incurred at the other properties. In the
case of registered guests who are provided room, food, beverage and other services on a complimentary basis, the property where the guest is registered pays the other property the respective amounts of any charges to the guests room for
services provided on a complimentary basis by the other property. The following table sets forth for the year ended December 31, 2010, the respective amounts paid for such complimentary charges by Silver Legacy to the Circus and Eldorado
properties and the respective amounts received by Silver Legacy from the Circus and Eldorado properties.



|              |  |               |  |        |        | 
|------------- |  | ------------- |  | ------ | ------ | 
|Payor         |  | Payee         |  | Amount |       
|Silver Legacy |  | Circus Circus |  | $      |       | 
|Silver Legacy |  | Eldorado      |  |        | 25,100 | 
|Circus Circus |  | Silver Legacy |  |        | 600    | 
|Eldorado      |  | Silver Legacy |  |        | 900    | 

The Eldorado
Hotel & Casino is owned by Eldorado Resorts LLC, which is 51.0% owned directly or indirectly by members of the Carano family, including Gary L. Carano, the Partnerships Chief Executive Officer, Glenn T. Carano, Secretary of the
Partnership, and Gene R. Carano, a member of the Partnerships executive committee.

James J. Murren has been an
executive officer of MGM Resorts International since 1998 which acquired Mandalay Resort Group on April 25, 2005 and, as a result of such acquisition, now owns and operates the Circus Circus Hotel and Casino through a wholly owned subsidiary.
Corey I. Sanders has since 2007 been an executive officer of MGM Resorts International. Gene R. Carano is currently General Manager of Eldorado Hotel & Casino and was their general manager from 1998 through 2002. In addition, he has served
as Vice President of the Eldorado Resorts LLC or its predecessor since 1993 and, since July 1996, he and Robert M. Jones have been executive officers of Eldorado Resorts LLC, which owns 96% of ELLC.

Eldorado Limited Liability Company and Galleon, Inc. Subject to any contractual restrictions to which the
Partnership is subject, including the indenture relating to the 101/8%
mortgage notes due 2012 co-issued by the Partnership and Capital (the Notes), and prior to the occurrence of a Liquidating Event, the Partnership is required by the Agreement of Joint Venture of Circus and Eldorado Joint
Venture dated as of March 1, 1994 (the Original Partnership Agreement, as the same was amended concurrent with the issuance of the Notes and subsequently amended in April 2002, the Partnership Agreement) to make distributions
to its partners as follows:

(a) For each year, an amount equal to the estimated taxable income of
the Partnership allocable to each partner multiplied by the greater of the maximum marginal federal income tax rate applicable to individuals for such period or the maximum marginal federal income tax rate applicable for corporations for such
period; provided, however, that if the State of Nevada enacts an income tax (including any franchise tax based on income), the applicable tax rate for any tax distributions subsequent to the effective date of such income tax shall be increased by
the higher of the maximum marginal individual tax rate or corporate income tax rate imposed by such tax (after reduction for the federal tax benefit for the deduction of state taxes, using the maximum marginal federal individual or corporate rate,
respectively).

(b) Annual distributions of remaining Net Cash From Operations in proportion
to the percentage interests of the partners.

(c) Distributions of Net Cash From Operations in
amounts or at times that differ from those described in (a) and (b) above, provided in each case that both partners agree in writing to the distribution in advance thereof.

As defined in the Partnership Agreement, the term Net Cash From Operations means the gross cash proceeds received by the
Partnership, less the following amounts: (i) cash operating expenses and payments of other expenses and obligations of the Partnership, including interest and scheduled principal payments on Partnership indebtedness, including indebtedness owed
to the partners, if any, (ii) all capital expenditures made by the Partnership, and (iii) such reasonable reserves as the partners deem necessary in good faith and in the best interests of the Partnership to meet anticipated future
obligations and liabilities of the Partnership (less any release of reserves previously established, as similarly determined). As defined in the Partnership Agreement, the term Liquidating Event means the first to occur of any of
(i) January 1, 2053, (ii) the sale of all or



42



---

substantially all of the Partnership property, (iii) the unanimous vote of the partners to dissolve, wind up, and liquidate the Partnership, (iv) the happening of any other event that
makes it unlawful or impossible to carry on the business of the Partnership, (v) the occurrence of an Event of Bankruptcy (as defined the Partnership Agreement) of a partner, or (vi) the partners are unable to agree upon a replacement
managing partner as provided in the Partnership Agreement.

No payments were made to the Partnerships partners during
the year ended December 31, 2010. ELLC is 96% owned by Eldorado Resorts LLC, which is 51.0% owned directly or indirectly by members of the Carano family, including Gary L. Carano, the Partnerships Chief Executive Officer, Glenn T. Carano,
Secretary of the Partnership, and Gene R. Carano, a member of the Partnerships executive committee.

Recreational
Enterprises, Inc. From time to time, Silver Legacy has utilized an aircraft owned by Recreational Enterprises, Inc. (REI), for the purpose of providing air service to select customers. During the year ended December 31,
2010, the Partnership paid $24,800 for such services. We believe the terms on which we have utilized this service are at least as favorable to us as those that would be available from an unrelated third party. Although there is no agreement
obligating the Partnership to utilize the plane or entitling it to do so, it is anticipated that the Partnership will continue to utilize this service from time to time in the future on terms mutually acceptable to the parties. REI, which owns 47.8%
of Eldorado Resorts LLC, is owned by various members of the Carano family, including Gary L. Carano, Silver Legacys General Manager, Glenn T. Carano, Secretary of the Partnership, and Gene R. Carano, a member of the Partnerships
executive committee, each of whom owns an approximately 10.1% beneficial interest in REI, and Donald L. Carano, the father of Gary, Glenn and Gene Carano, who owns an approximately 49.5% interest in REI.

Sierra Adventure Equipment Leasing, Inc. From time to time, Silver Legacys marketing and sales departments have
utilized a yacht owned by Sierra Adventure Equipment Leasing, Inc. (Sierra Leasing) for various promotional events. The payments made by the Partnership to Sierra Leasing for the use of the yacht during the year ended December 31,
2010 were based on a flat rate per trip of $3,000 ($2,500 if the trip was shared with our partner, ELLC) and totaled $7,500. Although there is no agreement obligating the Partnership to utilize the yacht or entitling it to do so, it is anticipated
that the Partnership will continue to utilize this service from time to time in the future on terms mutually acceptable to the parties. Sierra Leasing is owned by Donald L. Carano, the father of Gary L. Carano, Silver Legacys General Manager,
Glenn T. Carano, Silver Legacys Executive Director of Marketing, and Gene R. Carano, a member of the Partnerships executive committee.

Eldorado Resorts LLC. Eldorado Resorts LLC owns the skywalk that connects Silver Legacy with the Eldorado Hotel & Casino. The charges from the service provider for the utilities
associated with this skywalk are billed to the Partnership together with the charges for the utilities associated with Silver Legacy. Such charges are paid to the service provider by the Partnership, and the Partnership is reimbursed by Eldorado
Resorts LLC for the portion of the charges allocable to the utilities provided to the skywalk. The charges for the utilities provided to the skywalk during the year ended December 31, 2010 totaled $52,200.

In October 2005, the Partnership began providing on-site laundry services for Eldorado Resorts LLC related to the cleaning of certain
types of linens. Although there is no agreement obligating Eldorado Resorts LLC to utilize this service, it is anticipated that the Partnership will continue to provide these laundry services in the future. The Partnership charges Eldorado Resorts
LLC for labor and laundry supplies on a per unit basis which totaled $131,000 during the year ended December 31, 2010. We believe the terms on which the Partnership provided these services were at least as favorable to it as those that would
have been obtained in comparable transactions with an unaffiliated third party.

Since 1998, the Partnership has purchased
from Eldorado Resorts LLC homemade pasta and other products for use in the restaurants at Silver Legacy and it is anticipated that the Partnership will continue to make similar purchases in the future. For purchases of these products during the year
ended December 31, 2010, which are billed to the Partnership at cost plus associated labor, the Partnership paid Eldorado Resorts LLC $54,400. ELLC, which owns 50% of the Partnership, is 96% owned by Eldorado Resorts LLC.

In April 2008, the Partnership and Eldorado Resort LLC began combining certain back-of-the-house and administrative departmental
operations including purchasing, advertising, information systems, surveillance and various shared management positions of the Eldorado Hotel & Casino and Silver Legacy in an effort to achieve payroll cost savings synergies at both
properties. Payroll costs associated with the combined operations are shared equally and are billed at cost plus an estimated allocation for related benefits and taxes. During 2010, the Partnership reimbursed Eldorado Resorts LLC $647,300 for the
Partnerships allocable portion of the shared administrative services costs associated with the operations performed at the Eldorado Hotel & Casino, and Eldorado Resorts LLC reimbursed the Partnership $249,500 for Eldorados
allocable portion of the shared administrative services costs associated with the operations performed at Silver Legacy.

MGM Resorts International. Silver Legacy utilizes 235 spaces in the parking garage at Circus Circus Hotel and Casino-Reno.
The spaces are utilized to provide parking for employees of Silver Legacy. In consideration for its use of the spaces, the



43



---

Partnership pays Circus Circus Hotel and Casino-Reno rent in the amount of $5,000 per month. In May 2009, the Partnership also began utilizing an uncovered parking lot located adjacent to Circus
Circus Hotel and Casino-Reno for oversize vehicles. In consideration for its use of the space, the Partnership pays Circus Circus Hotel and Casino-Reno rent in the amount of $800 per month. Although there is no agreement obligating the Partnership
to continue utilizing the spaces or entitling it to do so, it is anticipated that the Partnership will continue this agreement for the foreseeable future. The Circus Circus Hotel and Casino is owned by a wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts
International.



|ITEM 12. | SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
|-------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shown below is certain information with respect to beneficial ownership, as that term is defined in Rule 13d-3 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, of the voting securities of Capital and the Partnership.

Capital



|               |  |                                                                                 |  |                
|-------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------
|Title of Class |  | Name and Address                                                                |  | Percent ofClass
|Common Stock   |  | Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture 407 North Virginia Street, Reno, Nevada 89501 |  | 100%           

The Partnership

The Partnership is a joint venture in the form of a general partnership in which Galleon, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts
International and the Partnerships managing partner, and Eldorado Limited Liability Company, a 96% owned subsidiary of Eldorado Resorts LLC, each owns a 50% equity interest.

The following table sets forth certain information as of the date hereof with respect to the beneficial ownership of partnership
interests in the Partnership by (i) each person known by the Partnership to be a beneficial owner of a greater than 5% interest in the Partnership, (ii) each partner in the Partnership, (iii) each member of the executive committee of
the Partnership, (iv) each director of Capital, (v) each executive officer of the Partnership and Capital, (vi) each executive officer of Galleon, (vii) all executive committee members and executive officers of the Partnership,
as a group, and (viii) all directors and executive officers of Capital, as a group. Except as otherwise indicated in the footnotes to the table below, Galleon, Inc. and Eldorado Limited Liability Company each has sole voting and dispositive
power with respect to its interest in the Partnership.



|                                                                                      |  |                                                                      
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                      |  | Percentage of Partnership Interestin
Circus and EldoradoJoint Venture
|Galleon, Inc.(1)                                                                      |  | 50%                                                                  
|Eldorado Limited Liability Company(2)                                                 |  | 50%                                                                  
|MGM Resorts International(1)                                                          |  | 50%                                                                  
|Eldorado Resorts LLC(2)                                                               |  | 50%                                                                  
|Donald L. Carano(3)                                                                   |  |                                                                     
|Gary L. Carano(3)                                                                     |  |                                                                     
|Glenn T. Carano(3)                                                                    |  |                                                                     
|Bruce C. Sexton(3)                                                                    |  |                                                                     
|Stephanie D. Lepori(3)                                                                |  |                                                                     
|Gene R. Carano(3)                                                                     |  |                                                                     
|Robert M. Jones(3)                                                                    |  |                                                                     
|James J. Murren(3)                                                                    |  |                                                                     
|Corey I. Sanders(3)                                                                   |  |                                                                     
|Donald D. Thrasher(3)                                                                 |  |                                                                     
|Daniel J. DArrigo(3)                                                                 |  |                                                                     
|John M. McManus(3)                                                                    |  |                                                                     
|All executive officers and executive committee members of the Partnership, as a group |  |                                                                     
|All executive officers and directors of Capital, as a group                           |  |                                                                     



44



---



|(1) | Galleon, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International. Under Rule 13d-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, MGM Resorts International may be
deemed to be an indirect beneficial owner of the interest in the Partnership owned by Galleon, Inc. by virtue of its ownership of Galleon, Inc. The address of Galleon, Inc. and MGM Resorts International is 3600 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Las Vegas,
Nevada 89109.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | Eldorado Limited Liability Company is a 96% owned subsidiary of Eldorado Resorts LLC. Under Rule 13d-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Eldorado Resorts LLC may
be deemed to be an indirect beneficial owner of the interest in the Partnership owned by Eldorado Limited Liability Company by virtue of direct and/or indirect controlling interests in Eldorado Limited Liability Company. The address of Eldorado
Limited Liability Company and Eldorado Resorts LLC is P.O. Box 3399, Reno, Nevada 89505.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(3) | The mailing address of this person is c/o Silver Legacy Resort Casino, 407 North Virginia Street, Reno, Nevada 89501.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transfer of Partnership Interests

Except as expressly permitted by the Partnership Agreement, neither partner may transfer all or any portion of its interest in the Partnership or any rights therein without the unanimous consent of both
partners. The Partnership Agreement provides that a partner may transfer or convey all or any portion of its interest in the Partnership to an affiliate of such partner (subject to certain limitations), members of the partners family (which
includes the partners spouse, natural or adoptive lineal descendants, and trusts for their benefit), another partner, a personal representative of the partner or any person or entity approved by the unanimous consent of the partners.

Unless otherwise agreed by Galleon, Donald L. Carano or a member of his immediate family acceptable to Galleon, which
acceptance may not be unreasonably withheld, or an affiliate controlled by Donald L. Carano or a member of his immediate family acceptable to Galleon, which acceptance may not be unreasonably withheld, is required to be the manager of and control
ELLC (or, if applicable, any entity that is a permitted transferee and to which ELLC has transferred its interest in the Partnership). Unless otherwise agreed by ELLC, which may not be unreasonably withheld, Galleon (or, if applicable, any entity
that is a permitted transferee and to which Galleon has transferred its interest in the Partnership) is required to be controlled by Mandalay Resort Group, a wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International. In the event the limitation in this
paragraph with respect to either partner is breached, the other partner will have the right (but not be required) to exercise the buy-sell provisions described below.

Incorporated herein by reference is the information concerning our partners pledges of their interests in the
Partnership to secure the repayment of the indebtedness incurred pursuant to our 101/8% mortgage
notes included under the caption 101/8% Mortgage Notes in our Managements Discussion and
Analysis of our Financial Condition and Results of Operations included in Item 7 of this report.

Limitation on Partners
Actions

The Partnership Agreement includes each partners covenant and agreement not to (i) take any action to
require partition or to compel any sale with respect to its Partnership interest, (ii) take any action to file a certificate of dissolution or its equivalent with respect to itself, (iii) take any action that would cause a bankruptcy of
such partner, (iv) withdraw or attempt to withdraw from the Partnership, (v) exercise any power under the Nevada Uniform Partnership Act to dissolve the Partnership, (vi) transfer all or any portion of its interest in the Partnership
(other than as permitted hereunder), (vii) petition for judicial dissolution of the Partnership, or (viii) demand a return of such partners contributions or profits (or a bond or other security for the return of such contributions or
profits) without the unanimous consent of the partners. The Partnership Agreement also provides that if a partner attempts to (A) cause a partition or (B) withdraw from the Partnership or dissolve the Partnership, or otherwise take any
action in breach of its aforementioned agreements, the Partnership shall continue and (1) the breaching partner shall immediately cease to have the authority to act as a partner, (2) the other partner shall have the right (but shall not be
obligated unless it was so obligated prior to such breach) to manage the affairs of the Partnership, (3) the breaching partner shall be liable in damages, without requirement of a prior accounting, to the Partnership for all costs and
liabilities that the Partnership or any partner may incur as a result of such breach, (4) distributions to the breaching partner shall be reduced to 75% of the distributions otherwise payable to the breaching partner and (5) the breaching
partner shall continue to be liable to the Partnership for any obligations of the Partnership pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, and to be jointly and severally liable with the other partners for any debts and liabilities (whether actual or
contingent, known or unknown) of the Partnership existing at the time the breaching partner withdraws or dissolves.

Buy-Sell Provision

Either partner (provided such partner is not in default of any of the provisions of the Partnership Agreement) may make an
offer to purchase (Offer) the interest of the other partner, which will constitute an irrevocable offer by the partner giving the Offer either to (i) purchase all, but not less than all, of the interest in the Partnership of the
other partner free of liens and encumbrances for the amount specified in the Offer (the Sales Price), or (ii) sell all, but not less than all, of its interest in the Partnership free of liens and encumbrances to the other partner
for the amount specified in the Offer (the Purchase Price).



45



---

The partner receiving an Offer will have a period of two months to accept the Offer to sell at the Sales Price or, in the alternative, to require that the offering partner sell its interest to
the other partner at the Purchase Price. The closing of the transaction for the sale or purchase of the Partnership interest shall occur not later than six months after the notice of election or at such other time as may be required by the Nevada
Gaming Authorities. Subject to any agreements to which the Partnership is a party, the partner purchasing the Partnership interest (the Purchasing Partner) shall be entitled to encumber the Partnership property in order to finance the
purchase, provided that the other partner (the Selling Partner) will have no liability, contingent or otherwise, under such financing. The Purchasing Partner may assign all or part of its right to purchase the Partnership interest of the
Selling Partner to an affiliate of the Purchasing Partner, provided that no such assignment relieves the Purchasing Partner of its obligations in the event of a default by the affiliate.

Dissolution, Winding Up and Liquidation

The Partnership Agreement provides
that the Partnership shall dissolve and commence winding up and liquidating upon the first to occur of any of (i) January 1, 2053, (ii) the sale of all or substantially all of the Partnership property, (iii) the unanimous vote of
the partners to dissolve, wind up, and liquidate the Partnership, (iv) the happening of any other event that makes it unlawful or impossible to carry on the business of the Partnership, (v) the occurrence of an Event of Bankruptcy (as
defined the Partnership Agreement) of a partner, or (vi) the partners are unable to agree upon a replacement managing partner as provided in the Partnership Agreement (each, a Liquidating Event).

The Partnership Agreement also includes the partners agreement that the Partnership shall not dissolve prior to the occurrence of a
Liquidating Event, notwithstanding any provision of the Nevada Uniform Partnership Act to the contrary. If it is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction that the Partnership has dissolved prior to the occurrence of a Liquidating Event, the
partners have agreed to continue the business of the Partnership without a winding up or liquidation.

Upon the occurrence of
a Liquidating Event, the Partnership will continue solely for the purpose of winding up its affairs in an orderly manner, liquidating its assets, and satisfying the claims of its creditors and partners. The managing partner will be responsible for
overseeing the winding up and liquidation of the Partnership, taking full account of the Partnerships liabilities and assets, causing the assets to be liquidated as promptly as is consistent with obtaining the fair market value thereof, and
causing the proceeds therefrom, to the extent sufficient therefore, to be applied and distributed (i) first, to the payment and discharge of all of the Partnerships debts and liabilities to creditors other than partners, (ii) second,
to the payment and discharge of all of the Partnerships debts and liabilities to partners, and (iii) the balance, if any, to the partners in the amount of their respective capital accounts, after giving effect to all contributions,
distributions, and allocations for all periods or portions thereof.



|ITEM 13. | CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
|-------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------

For information concerning certain transactions, including transactions with entities of which a member of the Partnerships executive committee is an executive officer or owns a beneficial interest
in excess of 10%, see the discussion under the heading Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation in Item 11 of this annual report, which is incorporated herein by reference.

None of the members of the Partnerships executive committee or its audit committee is independent as that term is defined under the
current rules of the NYSE. None of the Partnerships and Capitals securities are listed on the NYSE or any other national securities exchange or any national securities association, nor is there any current intention to so list any
securities of the Partnership or Capital in the future.

The Partnership has written policies and procedures related to the
identification, review and approval of related party transactions. Related party transactions typically involve various transactions with our affiliates, or subsidiaries of our affiliates, which generally provide the Partnership with an opportunity
to obtain favorable terms and/or premium products. However, pursuant to the Partnerships policies and procedures, all related party transactions are reviewed by the executive committee to ensure that the terms are at least as favorable as
those obtainable from an unaffiliated third party. Since the beginning of the Partnerships last fiscal year, there has not been any transaction required to be reported pursuant to Item 404(a) of Securities and Exchange Commission
Regulation S-K that was not subject to the prior review and approval of the executive committee, or not so reviewed and approved, pursuant to the Partnerships policies and procedures.



46



---

|ITEM 14. | PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
|-------- | --------------------------------------

The following table summarizes amounts billed by our auditors, Deloitte & Touche LLP, for accounting fees and services for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.



|                   |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|------------------ |  | ---- | ------- |  | ---- | - | ------- | 
|                   |  | 2010 |         |  | 2009 |  
|Audit fees         |  | $    | 158,000 |  |      | $ | 161,000 | 
|Audit-related fees |  |      |        |  |      |   |        | 
|Tax fees           |  |      |        |  |      |   |        | 
|All other fees     |  |      |        |  |      |   |        | 

Audit fees include
the aggregate fees billed for professional services rendered for the audit of our annual financial statements and the review of financial statements included in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q.

We have an established policy which requires the prior approval by our audit committee of any services provided by our auditors,
Deloitte & Touche LLP. All of the services provided by Deloitte & Touche LLP for 2010 and 2009 were approved by our audit committee in accordance with our prior approval policy.

PART IV



|ITEM 15. | EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|-------- | ------------------------------------------



|       |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|------ |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|       | 
|(a)(1) |  | Consolidated Financial Statements:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
|       | 
|       |  | Incorporated by reference in Item 8 of this annual report and included on pages 51 through 65 hereof are the following consolidated financial statements of Circus and
Eldorado Joint Venture and Silver Legacy Capital Corp. and the report thereon of independent registered public accounting firm:
|       | 
|       |  | Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|       | 
|       |  | Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2010 and 2009                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
|       | 
|       |  | Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|       | 
|       |  | Consolidated Statements of Partners Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008                                                                                                                                                                                                      
|       | 
|       |  | Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|       | 
|       |  | Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|       | 
|(a)(2) |  | Supplemental Financial Statement Schedules:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           



47



---

SCHEDULE IIVALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS

(in thousands)



|                                     |  |                            |       |  |                             |   |     |            |  |   |                      |  |  |   |       | 
|------------------------------------ |  | -------------------------- | ----- |  | --------------------------- | - | --- | ---------- |  | - | -------------------- |  |  | - | ----- | 
|                                     |  | Years ended December 31,   |      
|                                     |  | Balance atBeginningof Year |       |  | Charged toCosts andExpenses |   |     | Deductions |  |   | Balanceat Endof Year | 
|2010 Allowance for doubtful accounts |  | $                          | 783   |  |                             | $ | 267 |            |  | $ | 436                  |  |  | $ | 614   | 
|2009 Allowance for doubtful accounts |  |                            | 1,198 |  |                             |   | 449 |            |  |   | 864                  |  |  |   | 783   | 
|2008 Allowance for doubtful accounts |  |                            | 1,367 |  |                             |   | 578 |            |  |   | 747                  |  |  |   | 1,198 | 

(a)(3)     The
following exhibits are filed as part of this annual report or incorporated herein by reference:



|               |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|-------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Exhibit Number |  | Description                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
|               | 
|3.1            |  | Articles of Incorporation of Silver Legacy Capital Corp. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Registrants Form S-4 Registration StatementCommission File Nos.
333-87202 and 333-87202(01))                                                                                                                                                               
|               | 
|3.2            |  | Bylaws of Silver Legacy Capital Corp. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Registrants Form S-4 Registration StatementCommission File Nos. 333-87202 and
333-87202(01))                                                                                                                                                                                  
|               | 
|3.3            |  | Amended and Restated Agreement of Joint Venture of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture between Eldorado Limited Liability Company and Galleon, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.3 to the Registrants Form S-4 Registration StatementCommission File Nos. 333-87202 and 333-87202(01))                                                                      
|               | 
|4.1            |  | Indenture, dated as of March 5, 2002, among the Registrants and The Bank of New York, with respect to the 101/8% Mortgage Notes due 2012 (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10.1 to the Annual Report of Eldorado Resorts LLC
and Eldorado Capital Corp. (Commission File No. 333-11811) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001)                      
|               | 
|4.2            |  | Intercreditor Agreement, dated as of March 5, 2002, among Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent, The Bank of New York, as trustee, and the Registrants (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.9.9 to the Annual Report of Eldorado Resorts LLC and Eldorado Capital Corp. (Commission File No. 333-11811) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001)
|               | 
|10.1*          |  | Silver Legacy Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrants Form S-4 Registration StatementCommission File Nos.
333-87202 and 333-87202(01))                                                                                                                                                                  
|               | 
|14.1           |  | Financial Code of Ethics (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 14 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003Commission File Nos.
333-87202 and 333-87202(01))                                                                                                                                                                
|               | 
|21.1           |  | Subsidiaries of Registrants (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 21 to the Registrants Form S-4 Registration StatementCommission File Nos. 333-87202 and
333-87202(01))                                                                                                                                                                                             
|               | 
|31.1           |  | Certification of Gary L. Carano                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|               | 
|31.2           |  | Certification of Stephanie D. Lepori                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   
|               | 
|32.1           |  | Certification of Gary L. Carano pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|               | 
|32.2           |  | Certification of Stephanie D. Lepori pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                



|* | Constitutes a management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------



48



---

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrants have duly caused this report to be signed on their behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.



|                      |  |                                   |  |                                        
|--------------------- |  | --------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|                      |  | CIRCUS AND ELDORADO JOINT VENTURE
|                      |  |                                  
|Dated: March 31, 2011 |  | By:                               |  | /S/ Gary L. Carano                     
|                      |  |                                   |  |                                        
|                      |  |                                   |  | Gary L. Carano, Chief Executive Officer



|                      |  |                             |  |                                        
|--------------------- |  | --------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|                      |  | SILVER LEGACY CAPITAL CORP.
|                      |  |                            
|Dated: March 31, 2011 |  | By:                         |  | /S/ Gary L. Carano                     
|                      |  |                             |  |                                        
|                      |  |                             |  | Gary L. Carano, Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrants and in the capacities and on the dates
indicated.



|                                            |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |  |               
|------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------
|Signature                                   |  | Title(s)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             |  | Date          
|                                            |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|/S/ Gary L. Carano Gary L. Carano           |  | Chief Executive Officer of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and President and Chief Executive Officer of Silver Legacy Capital Corp. (Principal Executive Officer of each
Registrant)                                                                               |  | March 31, 2011
|                                            |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|/S/ Stephanie D. Lepori Stephanie D. Lepori |  | Controller and Chief Accounting and Financial Officer of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Treasurer and Chief Accounting and Financial Officer of Silver Legacy Capital Corp.
(Principal Accounting Officer and Principal Financial Officer of each Registrant) |  | March 31, 2011
|                                            |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|/S/ Gene R. Carano Gene R. Carano           |  | Member of the Executive Committee of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Director of Silver Legacy Capital Corp.                                                                                                                                                   |  | March 31, 2011
|                                            |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|/S/ Robert M. Jones Robert M. Jones         |  | Member of the Executive Committee of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Director of Silver Legacy Capital Corp.                                                                                                                                                   |  | March 31, 2011
|                                            |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|/S/ James J. Murren James J. Murren         |  | Member of the Executive Committee of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Director of Silver Legacy Capital Corp.                                                                                                                                                   |  | March 31, 2011
|                                            |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|/S/ Corey I. Sanders Corey I. Sanders       |  | Member of the Executive Committee of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Director of Silver Legacy Capital Corp.                                                                                                                                                   |  | March 31, 2011
|                                            |  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|/S/ Donald D. Thrasher Donald D. Thrasher   |  | Member of the Executive Committee of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture and Director of Silver Legacy Capital Corp.                                                                                                                                                   |  | March 31, 2011

SUPPLEMENTAL
INFORMATION TO BE FURNISHED WITH REPORTS FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 (the 1934 ACT) BY REGISTRANTS WHICH HAVE NOT REGISTERED SECURITIES PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE 1934 ACT.

Other than copies of its annual reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Form 10-K, the Partnership and Capital do
not provide annual reports to their security holders, and no proxy soliciting material has been sent, or is currently anticipated to be sent, to securities holders.



49



---

INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



|                                                                                                 |  |      |    | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | ---- | -- | 
|                                                                                                 |  | Page |   
|Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm                                          |  |      | 51 | 
|Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2010 and 2009                                     |  |      | 52 | 
|Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008       |  |      | 53 | 
|Consolidated Statements of Partners Equity for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008 |  |      | 54 | 
|Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008       |  |      | 55 | 
|Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements                                                       |  |      | 56 | 



50



---

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Partners of

| | Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture
| | ---------------------------------

| | (doing business as Silver Legacy Resort Casino) :
| | -------------------------------------------------

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture (doing business as Silver Legacy Resort Casino) and
subsidiary (collectively, the Joint Venture) as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of operations, partners equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2010. Our audits also included the consolidated financial statement schedule of Valuation and Qualifying Accounts included in Item 15(a)(2). These financial statements and financial statement schedule are the responsibility of
the Joint Ventures management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statements and financial statement schedule based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Joint Venture is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audit included
consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Joint Ventures internal
control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture (doing business as Silver Legacy Resort Casino)
and subsidiary as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America. Also, in our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth
therein.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Las Vegas, Nevada

March 31, 2011



51



---

CIRCUS AND ELDORADO JOINT VENTURE

(doing business as Silver Legacy Resort Casino)

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

As of December 31, 2010 and 2009

(In thousands)



|                                        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|--------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ------- |  | ---- | - | ------- | 
|                                        |  | 2010 |         |  | 2009 |  
|ASSETS                                  |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|CURRENT ASSETS:                         |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|Cash and cash equivalents               |  | $    | 31,654  |  |      | $ | 35,042  | 
|Accounts receivable, net                |  |      | 2,458   |  |      |   | 2,583   | 
|Inventories                             |  |      | 2,013   |  |      |   | 1,947   | 
|Prepaid expenses and other              |  |      | 2,692   |  |      |   | 2,638   | 
|                                        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|Total current assets                    |  |      | 38,817  |  |      |   | 42,210  | 
|PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, NET             |  |      | 229,119 |  |      |   | 234,886 | 
|OTHER ASSETS, NET                       |  |      | 7,315   |  |      |   | 7,170   | 
|                                        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|Total Assets                            |  | $    | 275,251 |  |      | $ | 284,266 | 
|                                        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|                                        |  |     
|LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS EQUITY        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|CURRENT LIABILITIES:                    |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|Accounts payable                        |  | $    | 4,493   |  |      | $ | 4,520   | 
|Accrued interest                        |  |      | 4,819   |  |      |   | 4,820   | 
|Accrued and other liabilities           |  |      | 9,198   |  |      |   | 9,079   | 
|                                        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|Total current liabilities               |  |      | 18,510  |  |      |   | 18,419  | 
|LONG-TERM DEBT                          |  |      | 142,735 |  |      |   | 142,679 | 
|OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES             |  |      | 8,176   |  |      |   | 7,630   | 
|                                        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|Total liabilities                       |  |      | 169,421 |  |      |   | 168,728 | 
|                                        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Note 10) |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|PARTNERS EQUITY                        |  |      | 105,830 |  |      |   | 115,538 | 
|                                        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|Total Liabilities and Partners Equity  |  | $    | 275,251 |  |      | $ | 284,266 | 
|                                        |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 

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



52



---

CIRCUS AND ELDORADO JOINT VENTURE

(doing business as Silver Legacy Resort Casino)

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

For the Years Ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

(In thousands)



|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|------------------------------------------------ |  | ---- | ------- | - | ---- | - | ------- | ---- |  | - | ------- | -
|                                                 |  | 2010 |         |   | 2009 |   |         | 2008 | 
|OPERATING REVENUES:                              |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Casino                                           |  | $    | 67,397  |   |      | $ | 68,767  |      |  | $ | 74,834  |  
|Rooms                                            |  |      | 31,009  |   |      |   | 31,009  |      |  |   | 36,551  |  
|Food and beverage                                |  |      | 31,365  |   |      |   | 31,871  |      |  |   | 34,966  |  
|Other                                            |  |      | 7,622   |   |      |   | 7,939   |      |  |   | 9,654   |  
|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|                                                 |  |      | 137,393 |   |      |   | 139,586 |      |  |   | 156,005 |  
|Less: promotional allowances                     |  |      | (16,764 | ) |      |   | (17,482 | )    |  |   | (16,530 | )
|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Net operating revenues                           |  |      | 120,629 |   |      |   | 122,104 |      |  |   | 139,475 |  
|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|OPERATING EXPENSES:                              |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Casino                                           |  |      | 35,712  |   |      |   | 36,791  |      |  |   | 39,909  |  
|Rooms                                            |  |      | 9,471   |   |      |   | 9,484   |      |  |   | 10,937  |  
|Food and beverage                                |  |      | 21,311  |   |      |   | 21,002  |      |  |   | 24,614  |  
|Other                                            |  |      | 5,529   |   |      |   | 5,022   |      |  |   | 7,107   |  
|Selling, general and administrative              |  |      | 27,665  |   |      |   | 28,977  |      |  |   | 32,302  |  
|Depreciation                                     |  |      | 15,749  |   |      |   | 16,414  |      |  |   | 15,642  |  
|Change in fair value of life insurance contracts |  |      | (589    | ) |      |   | (693    | )    |  |   | 1,528   |  
|Loss on disposition of assets                    |  |      | 391     |   |      |   | 100     |      |  |   | 94      |  
|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Total operating expenses                         |  |      | 115,239 |   |      |   | 117,097 |      |  |   | 132,133 |  
|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|OPERATING INCOME                                 |  |      | 5,390   |   |      |   | 5,007   |      |  |   | 7,342   |  
|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|OTHER (INCOME) EXPENSE:                          |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Interest expense                                 |  |      | 14,995  |   |      |   | 15,338  |      |  |   | 16,895  |  
|Interest income                                  |  |      | (11     | ) |      |   | (61     | )    |  |   | (775    | )
|Gain on early retirement of debt                 |  |      |        |   |      |   | (5,546  | )    |  |   |        |  
|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Total other expense                              |  |      | 14,984  |   |      |   | 9,731   |      |  |   | 16,120  |  
|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|NET LOSS                                         |  | $    | (9,594  | ) |      | $ | (4,724  | )    |  | $ | (8,778  | )
|                                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  

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



53



---

CIRCUS AND ELDORADO JOINT VENTURE

(doing business as Silver Legacy Resort Casino)

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS EQUITY

For the Years Ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

(In thousands)



|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|--------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------- | ------ | - | --------------------- | - | ------ | ----- |  | - | ------- | -
|                                                                |  | Galleon, Inc. |        |   | EldoradoResorts, 
LLC |   |        | Total | 
|BALANCE, January 1, 2008                                        |  | $             | 64,375 |   |                       | $ | 74,375 |       |  | $ | 138,750 |  
|Comprehensive loss:                                             |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Net loss                                                        |  |               | (4,389 | ) |                       |   | (4,389 | )     |  |   | (8,778  | )
|Other comprehensive income minimum pension liability adjustment |  |               | 253    |   |                       |   | 253    |       |  |   | 506     |  
|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Total comprehensive loss                                        |  |               | (4,136 | ) |                       |   | (4,136 | )     |  |   | (8,272  | )
|Partners distributions                                         |  |               | (5,000 | ) |                       |   | (5,000 | )     |  |   | (10,000 | )
|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Balance, December 31, 2008 (1)                                  |  |               | 55,239 |   |                       |   | 65,239 |       |  |   | 120,478 |  
|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Comprehensive loss:                                             |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Net loss                                                        |  |               | (2,362 | ) |                       |   | (2,362 | )     |  |   | (4,724  | )
|Other comprehensive income minimum pension liability adjustment |  |               | (108   | ) |                       |   | (108   | )     |  |   | (216    | )
|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Total comprehensive loss                                        |  |               | (2,470 | ) |                       |   | (2,470 | )     |  |   | (4,940  | )
|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Balance, December 31, 2009 (2)                                  |  |               | 52,769 |   |                       |   | 62,769 |       |  |   | 115,538 |  
|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Comprehensive loss:                                             |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Net loss                                                        |  |               | (4,797 | ) |                       |   | (4,797 | )     |  |   | (9,594  | )
|Other comprehensive income minimum pension liability adjustment |  |               | (57    | ) |                       |   | (57    | )     |  |   | (114    | )
|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|Total comprehensive loss                                        |  |               | (4,854 | ) |                       |   | (4,854 | )     |  |   | (9,708  | )
|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  
|BALANCE, December 31, 2010 (3)                                  |  | $             | 47,915 |   |                       | $ | 57,915 |       |  | $ | 105,830 |  
|                                                                |  |               |        |   |                       |   |        |       |  |   |         |  



|(1) | Balances include Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income totaling ($432,000) comprised of ($216,000) each for Galleon, Inc. and ELLC.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | Balances include Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income totaling ($648,000) comprised of ($324,000) each for Galleon, Inc. and ELLC.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(3) | Balances include Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income totaling ($762,000) comprised of ($381,000) each for Galleon, Inc. and ELLC.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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



54



---

CIRCUS AND ELDORADO JOINT VENTURE

(doing business as Silver Legacy Resort Casino)

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

For the Years Ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

(In thousands)



|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ------- | - | ---- | - | ------- | ---- |  | - | ------- | -
|                                                                                   |  | 2010 |         |   | 2009 |   |         | 2008 | 
|CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:                                              |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Net loss                                                                           |  | $    | (9,594  | ) |      | $ | (4,724  | )    |  | $ | (8,778  | )
|Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities:    |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Depreciation                                                                       |  |      | 15,749  |   |      |   | 16,414  |      |  |   | 15,642  |  
|Amortization                                                                       |  |      | 600     |   |      |   | 618     |      |  |   | 678     |  
|Loss on disposition of assets                                                      |  |      | 391     |   |      |   | 100     |      |  |   | 94      |  
|Gain on early retirement of debt                                                   |  |      |        |   |      |   | (5,546  | )    |  |   |        |  
|Increase in accrued pension cost                                                   |  |      | 432     |   |      |   | 796     |      |  |   | 990     |  
|Provision for doubtful accounts                                                    |  |      | (267    | ) |      |   | (449    | )    |  |   | 578     |  
|(Increase) decrease in cash value of insurance policies in excess of premiums paid |  |      | (589    | ) |      |   | (693    | )    |  |   | 1,528   |  
|Changes in current assets and current liabilities:                                 |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Accounts receivable                                                                |  |      | 392     |   |      |   | 948     |      |  |   | 1,607   |  
|Inventories                                                                        |  |      | (66     | ) |      |   | 73      |      |  |   | 200     |  
|Prepaid expenses and other                                                         |  |      | (84     | ) |      |   | 883     |      |  |   | (449    | )
|Accounts payable                                                                   |  |      | (271    | ) |      |   | (851    | )    |  |   | 321     |  
|Accrued interest                                                                   |  |      | (1      | ) |      |   | (581    | )    |  |   | (12     | )
|Accrued and other liabilities                                                      |  |      | 119     |   |      |   | (1,034  | )    |  |   | 80      |  
|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Net cash provided by operating activities                                          |  |      | 6,811   |   |      |   | 5,954   |      |  |   | 12,479  |  
|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:                                              |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Proceeds from sale of assets                                                       |  |      | 67      |   |      |   | 9       |      |  |   | 148     |  
|Increase (decrease) in other assets                                                |  |      | (179    | ) |      |   | 11      |      |  |   | (840    | )
|Purchase of property and equipment                                                 |  |      | (10,087 | ) |      |   | (3,249  | )    |  |   | (10,509 | )
|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Net cash used in investing activities                                              |  |      | (10,199 | ) |      |   | (3,229  | )    |  |   | (11,201 | )
|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:                                              |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Debt issuance costs                                                                |  |      |        |   |      |   | (10     | )    |  |   | (14     | )
|Payments on retirement of long-term debt                                           |  |      |        |   |      |   | (11,438 | )    |  |   |        |  
|Distributions to partners                                                          |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |      |  |   | (10,000 | )
|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Net cash used in financing activities                                              |  |      |        |   |      |   | (11,448 | )    |  |   | (10,014 | )
|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS:                                                         |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Net decrease for the year                                                          |  |      | (3,388  | ) |      |   | (8,723  | )    |  |   | (8,736  | )
|Balance, beginning of year                                                         |  |      | 35,042  |   |      |   | 43,765  |      |  |   | 52,501  |  
|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Balance, end of year                                                               |  | $    | 31,654  |   |      | $ | 35,042  |      |  | $ | 43,765  |  
|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION:                                                |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Cash paid during period for interest                                               |  | $    | 14,461  |   |      | $ | 15,300  |      |  | $ | 16,228  |  
|SUPPLEMENTAL SCHEDULE OF NON-CASH INVESTING ACTIVITIES:                            |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  
|Payables for purchase of property and equipment                                    |  | $    | 729     |   |      | $ | 580     |      |  | $ | 117     |  
|                                                                                   |  |      |         |   |      |   |         |      |  |   |         |  

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



55



---

CIRCUS AND ELDORADO JOINT VENTURE

(doing business as Silver Legacy Resort Casino)

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Note 1. Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies and Basis of Presentation

Principles of Consolidation/Operations

Effective March 1, 1994, Eldorado Limited Liability Company (a Nevada limited liability company owned and controlled by Eldorado
Resorts, LLC) (ELLC) and Galleon, Inc. (a Nevada corporation owned and controlled by MGM Resorts International and previously owned and controlled by Mandalay Resort Group (Mandalay) (Galleon and, collectively
with ELLC, the Partners), entered into a joint venture agreement to establish Circus and Eldorado Joint Venture (the Partnership), a Nevada general partnership. The Partnership owns and operates a casino and hotel located in
Reno, Nevada (Silver Legacy), which began operations on July 28, 1995. ELLC contributed land to the Partnership with a fair value of $25.0 million and cash of $26.9 million for a total equity investment of $51.9 million. Galleon
contributed cash to the Partnership of $51.9 million to comprise their total equity investment. Each partner has a 50% interest in the Partnership.

On April 25, 2005, a wholly owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International (MGM) was merged with and into Mandalay as a result of which Mandalay became a wholly owned subsidiary of MGM
Resorts International. With the consummation of the merger, Galleon, Inc. became an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International.

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Partnership and its wholly owned subsidiary, Silver Legacy Capital Corp. (Capital). Capital was established solely for the
purpose of serving as a co-issuer of $160.0 million principal amount of 101/8% mortgage notes due 2012 co-issued by the Partnership and Capital and, as such, Capital does not have any operations, assets, or revenues. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated
in consolidation. The Partnership operates as one segment.

Use of Estimates

The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of America. Those principles require the Partnerships 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 consolidated
financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Significant estimates incorporated into our consolidated financial statements include estimated useful lives for depreciable and amortizable assets,
the estimated allowance for doubtful accounts receivable, estimated cash flows in assessing the recoverability of long-lived assets, our self-insured liability reserves, players club liabilities, contingencies and litigation, claims and
assessments. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

Certain Concentrations of Risk

The Partnerships sole operations are in Reno, Nevada. Therefore, the Partnership is subject to risks inherent within the Reno
market. To the extent that new casinos enter into the market or hotel room capacity is expanded, competition will increase. The Partnership may also be affected by economic conditions in the United States and globally affecting the Reno market or
trends in visitation or spending in the Reno market.

Outstanding Chips and Tokens

The Partnership recognizes the impact on gaming revenues on an annual basis to reflect an estimate of the change in the value of
outstanding chips and tokens that are not expected to be redeemed. This estimate is determined by measuring the difference between the total value of chips and tokens placed in service less the value of chips and tokens in the inventory of chips and
tokens under our control. This measurement is performed on an annual basis utilizing methodology in which a consistent formula is applied to estimate the percentage value of chips and tokens not in custody that are not expected to be redeemed. In
addition to the formula, certain judgments are made with regard to various denominations and souvenir chips and tokens.

Cash and Cash
Equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, as well as investments purchased with maturities of three
months or less at the date of acquisition. The carrying values of these investments approximate their fair values due to their short-term maturities.



56



---

Accounts Receivable and Credit Risk

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Partnership to concentrations of credit risk consist principally of casino accounts
receivable. The Partnership issues markers to approved casino customers following background checks and assessments of creditworthiness. Trade receivables, including casino and hotel receivables, are typically non-interest bearing. Accounts are
written off when management deems the account to be uncollectible. Recoveries of accounts previously written off are recorded when received. An estimated allowance for doubtful accounts is maintained to reduce the Partnerships receivables to
their carrying amount, which approximates fair value. The allowance is estimated based on specific review of customer accounts as well as historical collection experience and current economic and business conditions. Management believes that as of
December 31, 2010, there are no significant concentrations of credit risk (See Note 2).

Inventories

Inventories consist of food and beverage, retail merchandise and operating supplies, and are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost
is determined primarily by the average cost method for food and beverage and operating supplies or the specific identification method for retail merchandise.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment and other long-lived assets
are stated at cost. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method, which approximates the effective interest method over the estimated useful life of the asset as follows:



|                                   |  |                       
|---------------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|                                   |  | Estimated Service Life
|                                   |  | (Years)               
|Building and other improvements    |  | 15-45                 
|Furniture, fixtures, and equipment |  | 3-15                  

Costs of major
improvements are capitalized, while costs of normal repairs and maintenance that neither materially add to the value of the property nor appreciably prolong its life are expensed as incurred. Gains or losses on dispositions of property and equipment
are included in the determination of operating income(loss).

The Partnership reviews its property and equipment and its
long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. The Partnership then compares the estimated future cash flows of the asset, on an undiscounted basis,
to the carrying amount of the asset. If the undiscounted cash flows exceed the carrying value, no impairment is indicated. If the undiscounted cash flows do not exceed the carrying amount then an impairment is recorded based on the fair value of the
asset, typically measured using a discounted cash flow model. If the asset is still under development, future cash flows include remaining construction costs. An estimate of undiscounted future cash flows produced by the asset is compared to the
carrying value to determine whether an impairment exists. If it is determined that the asset is impaired based on expected undiscounted future cash flows, a loss, measured by the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the fair
value of the asset, would be recognized. For assets to be disposed of, the Partnership recognizes the asset at the lower of carrying value or fair market value, less cost of disposal, as estimated based on comparable asset sales or solicited offers.
As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, no events or changes in circumstances indicated that the carrying values of our long-lived assets may not be recoverable.

Revenue Recognition and Promotional Allowances

In accordance with industry
practice, the Partnership recognizes as casino revenue the net win from gaming activities, which is the difference between gaming wins and losses. Hotel, food and beverage, and other operating revenues are recognized as services are performed.
Advance deposits on rooms and advance ticket sales are recorded as accrued liabilities until services are provided to the customer. Gaming revenues are recognized net of certain cash sales incentives and free play. The retail value of food,
beverage, rooms and other services furnished to customers on a complimentary basis is included in gross revenues and then deducted as promotional allowances. The Partnership rewards customers, through the use of our loyalty programs, with
complimentaries based on amounts wagered or won that can be redeemed for a specified time period. The retail value of complimentaries is recorded as revenue and then is deducted as promotional allowances as follows (in thousands):



|                  |  |                          |        |  |      |   |        |      |  |   |        | 
|----------------- |  | ------------------------ | ------ |  | ---- | - | ------ | ---- |  | - | ------ | 
|                  |  | Years ended December 31, |       
|                  |  | 2010                     |        |  | 2009 |   |        | 2008 | 
|Food and beverage |  | $                        | 9,082  |  |      | $ | 9,359  |      |  | $ | 9,134  | 
|Rooms             |  |                          | 5,764  |  |      |   | 5,565  |      |  |   | 4,622  | 
|Other             |  |                          | 1,918  |  |      |   | 2,558  |      |  |   | 2,774  | 
|                  |  |                          |        |  |      |   |        |      |  |   |        | 
|                  |  | $                        | 16,764 |  |      | $ | 17,482 |      |  | $ | 16,530 | 
|                  |  |                          |        |  |      |   |        |      |  |   |        | 



57



---

The estimated costs of providing such promotional allowances are included in casino expenses
and consist of the following (in thousands):



|                  |  |                          |       |  |      |   |        |      |  |   |        | 
|----------------- |  | ------------------------ | ----- |  | ---- | - | ------ | ---- |  | - | ------ | 
|                  |  | Years ended December 31, |      
|                  |  | 2010                     |       |  | 2009 |   |        | 2008 | 
|Food and beverage |  | $                        | 6,358 |  |      | $ | 6,511  |      |  | $ | 6,477  | 
|Rooms             |  |                          | 1,770 |  |      |   | 1,711  |      |  |   | 1,320  | 
|Other             |  |                          | 1,585 |  |      |   | 2,003  |      |  |   | 2,244  | 
|                  |  |                          |       |  |      |   |        |      |  |   |        | 
|                  |  | $                        | 9,713 |  |      | $ | 10,225 |      |  | $ | 10,041 | 
|                  |  |                          |       |  |      |   |        |      |  |   |        | 

Advertising

Advertising costs are expensed in the period the advertising initially takes place. Advertising costs included in selling, general and administrative expenses were $5.3 million, $5.4 million and $6.1
million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Federal Income Taxes

The Partnership is not subject to income taxes; therefore, no provision for income taxes has been made, as the Partners include their
respective share of the Partnership income (loss) in their income tax returns. The Partnership Agreement provides for the Partnership to make distributions to the Partners in an amount equal to the maximum marginal federal income tax rate applicable
to any Partner multiplied by the income (loss) of the Partnership for the applicable period (see Note 11).

Debt Issuance Costs

Debt issuance costs incurred in connection with the issuance of long-term debt are capitalized and amortized using the
straight-line method to interest expense over the term of the related debt agreement.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

Fair value is an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly
transaction between market participants. Accordingly, fair value is a market based measurement that is determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. As a basis for considering such assumptions,
there is a three-tier fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair values as follows:

Level
1: Inputs are based upon quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities which are accessible as of the measurement date.

Level 2: Inputs are based upon quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, and
model-derived valuations for the asset or liability that are derived principally from or corroborated by market data for which the primary inputs are observable, including forward interest rates, yield curves, credit risk and exchange rates.

Level 3: Inputs for the valuations are unobservable and are based on managements estimates of assumptions that
market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. The fair values are therefore determined using model-based techniques such as option pricing models and discounted cash flow models.

The Partnerships financial instruments consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable,
accounts payable and debt. Management believes that the carrying value of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, and accounts payable are representative of their respective fair values due to the short maturities of these instruments. We
determined the fair value of the Partnerships 101/8% mortgage notes using Level 1 inputs. The fair value of the Partnerships
101/8% mortgage



58



---

notes, based on quoted market prices, was approximately $139.0 million and $126.4 million as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Other comprehensive income (loss) consists of revenues, expenses, gains and losses which do not affect net income (loss) under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Other comprehensive income (loss) for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 includes an adjustment to the minimum pension liability and was computed as follows (in thousands):



|                                     |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |      |  |   |        |  
|------------------------------------ |  | ---- | ------ | - | ---- | - | ------ | ---- |  | - | ------ | -
|                                     |  | 2010 |        |   | 2009 |   |        | 2008 | 
|Net loss                             |  | $    | (9,594 | ) |      | $ | (4,724 | )    |  | $ | (8,778 | )
|Minimum pension liability adjustment |  |      | (114   | ) |      |   | (216   | )    |  |   | 506    |  
|                                     |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |      |  |   |        |  
|Comprehensive loss                   |  | $    | (9,708 | ) |      | $ | (4,940 | )    |  | $ | (8,272 | )
|                                     |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |      |  |   |        |  

The reconciliation of accumulated other comprehensive income as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 are as
follows (in thousands):



|                                                          |  |      |     |  |      |   |     | 
|--------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | --- |  | ---- | - | --- | 
|                                                          |  | 2010 |     |  | 2009 |  
|Accumulated other comprehensive income, beginning of year |  | $    | 648 |  |      | $ | 432 | 
|Minimum pension liability adjustment                      |  |      | 114 |  |      |   | 216 | 
|                                                          |  |      |     |  |      |   |     | 
|Accumulated other comprehensive income, end of year       |  | $    | 762 |  |      | $ | 648 | 
|                                                          |  |      |     |  |      |   |     | 

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

The Partnership adopted various accounting standards during 2010, none of which had a material effect on its consolidated financial statements.

Certain amendments to Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 810 Consolidation became effective for us
beginning January 1, 2010. Such amendments include changes to the quantitative approach to determine the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity (VIE). An enterprise must determine if its variable interest or interests
give it a controlling financial interest in a VIE by evaluating whether 1) the enterprise has the power to direct activities of the VIE that have a significant effect on economic performance, and 2) the enterprise has an obligation to
absorb losses or the right to receive benefits from the entity that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The amendments to ASC 810 also require ongoing reassessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a VIE. The adoption
of these amendments did not have a material effect on the Partnerships consolidated financial statements.

In
April 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-16, Accruals for Casino Jackpot Liabilities. Specifically, the guidance clarifies that an entity should not accrue jackpot liabilities, or portions thereof, before a jackpot is won if
the entity can avoid paying the jackpot. Jackpots should be accrued and charged to revenue when an entity has the obligation to pay the jackpot. The guidance applies to both base and progressive jackpots. The new guidance is effective for fiscal
years beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The new guidance will be applied by recording a cumulative-effect adjustment to opening retained earnings in the period of adoption. The Partnership expects to adopt the guidance in fiscal year
2011 and estimates the adjustment to retained earnings to be approximately $0.6 million.

Note 2. Accounts Receivable

Accounts receivable, net at December 31, 2010 and 2009 consisted of the following (in thousands):



|                                      |  |      |       |   |      |   |       |  
|------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ----- | - | ---- | - | ----- | -
|                                      |  | 2010 |       |   | 2009 |  
|Casino receivables                    |  | $    | 1,649 |   |      | $ | 1,798 |  
|Hotel receivables                     |  |      | 1,102 |   |      |   | 1,322 |  
|Other receivables                     |  |      | 321   |   |      |   | 246   |  
|                                      |  |      |       |   |      |   |       |  
|                                      |  |      | 3,072 |   |      |   | 3,366 |  
|Less: allowance for doubtful accounts |  |      | (614  | ) |      |   | (783  | )
|                                      |  |      |       |   |      |   |       |  
|Accounts receivable, net              |  | $    | 2,458 |   |      | $ | 2,583 |  
|                                      |  |      |       |   |      |   |       |  



59



---

The provision for bad debt expense for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008, was $0.3 million, $0.4 million and $0.6 million, respectively.

Note 3. Property and Equipment

Property and equipment at December 31, 2010 and 2009 consisted of the following (in thousands):



|                                          |  |      |          |   |      |   |          |  
|----------------------------------------- |  | ---- | -------- | - | ---- | - | -------- | -
|                                          |  | 2010 |          |   | 2009 |  
|Land and improvements                     |  | $    | 28,405   |   |      | $ | 28,405   |  
|Building and other leasehold improvements |  |      | 269,169  |   |      |   | 269,169  |  
|Furniture, fixtures, and equipment        |  |      | 104,935  |   |      |   | 106,278  |  
|Construction in progress                  |  |      |         |   |      |   | 171      |  
|                                          |  |      |          |   |      |   |          |  
|                                          |  |      | 402,509  |   |      |   | 404,023  |  
|Less: accumulated depreciation            |  |      | (173,390 | ) |      |   | (169,137 | )
|                                          |  |      |          |   |      |   |          |  
|Property and equipment, net               |  | $    | 229,119  |   |      | $ | 234,886  |  
|                                          |  |      |          |   |      |   |          |  

Substantially all property and equipment of the Partnership is collateralized by its long-term debt (see
Note 6).

Note 4. Other Assets

Other assets, net at December 31, 2010 and 2009 consisted of the following (in thousands):



|                                                |  |      |       |  |      |   |       | 
|----------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ----- |  | ---- | - | ----- | 
|                                                |  | 2010 |       |  | 2009 |  
|China, glassware and silverware                 |  | $    | 210   |  |      | $ | 210   | 
|Debt issuance costs, net                        |  |      | 631   |  |      |   | 1,174 | 
|Cash surrender value of life insurance policies |  |      | 6,286 |  |      |   | 5,697 | 
|Other                                           |  |      | 188   |  |      |   | 89    | 
|                                                |  |      |       |  |      |   |       | 
|                                                |  | $    | 7,315 |  |      | $ | 7,170 | 
|                                                |  |      |       |  |      |   |       | 

The initial inventory of china, glassware and silverware has been amortized to 50% of cost with the balance
kept as base stock. Additional purchases of china, glassware and silverware are placed into inventory and expensed as used.

The Partnership incurred costs in connection with the issuance of its
101/8% mortgage notes due March 2012 and its bank credit facility (see
Note 6). Debt issuance costs are capitalized when incurred and amortized to interest expense based on the related debt maturities using the straight-line method, which approximates the effective interest method. Debt issuance costs, net of
amortization, related to the completed offering of the 101/8% mortgage notes included in other assets totaled $0.6
million and $1.2 million at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Accumulated amortization of the debt issuance costs were $5.7 million and $5.1 million at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The amortization of debt issuance
costs included in interest expense was $0.6 million, $0.6 million and $0.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Life insurance contracts are purchased to informally fund the Partnerships Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan. Amounts included in other assets represent the cash surrender value of these life
insurance contracts at December 31, 2010 and 2009 (see Note 9).

Note 5. Accrued and Other Liabilities

Accrued and other liabilities at December 31, 2010 and 2009 consisted of the following (in thousands):



|                            |  |      |       |  |      |   |       | 
|--------------------------- |  | ---- | ----- |  | ---- | - | ----- | 
|                            |  | 2010 |       |  | 2009 |  
|Accrued payroll and related |  | $    | 1,524 |  |      | $ | 1,501 | 
|Accrued vacation            |  |      | 1,587 |  |      |   | 1,534 | 
|Accrued group insurance     |  |      | 618   |  |      |   | 631   | 
|Unclaimed chips and tokens  |  |      | 405   |  |      |   | 425   | 
|Accrued taxes               |  |      | 1,346 |  |      |   | 1,105 | 
|Advance room deposits       |  |      | 514   |  |      |   | 591   | 
|Progressive slot liability  |  |      | 1,463 |  |      |   | 1,739 | 
|Players club liability     |  |      | 419   |  |      |   | 618   | 
|Other                       |  |      | 1,322 |  |      |   | 935   | 
|                            |  |      |       |  |      |   |       | 
|                            |  | $    | 9,198 |  |      | $ | 9,079 | 
|                            |  |      |       |  |      |   |       | 



60



---

Note 6. Long-Term Debt

Long-term debt at December 31, 2010 and 2009 consisted of the following (in thousands):



|                                                                              |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ------- |  | ---- | - | ------- | 
|                                                                              |  | 2010 |         |  | 2009 |  
|101/8%
Mortgage Notes due 2012 (net of unamortized discounts of $65 and $121) |  | $    | 142,735 |  |      | $ | 142,679 | 
|Less current portion                                                          |  |      |        |  |      |   |        | 
|                                                                              |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 
|                                                                              |  | $    | 142,735 |  |      | $ | 142,679 | 
|                                                                              |  |      |         |  |      |   |         | 

Scheduled maturities of long-term debt are as follows at December 31, 2010 (in thousands):



|     |  |   |         | 
|---- |  | - | ------- | 
|2011 |  |   |        | 
|2012 |  |   | 142,735 | 
|     |  |   |         | 
|     |  | $ | 142,735 | 
|     |  |   |         | 

On March 5, 2002, the Partnership and Capital (collectively, the Issuers) co-issued $160.0
million principal amount of senior secured mortgage notes due 2012 (the Notes). Concurrent with issuing the Notes, the Partnership entered into a senior secured credit facility (the Credit Facility) for $40.0 million. The
Credit Facility originally provided for a $20.0 million senior secured revolving credit facility and a $20.0 million five-year term loan facility, each of which provided for the payment of interest at floating rates based on LIBOR plus a spread. The
proceeds from the Notes, together with $26.0 million in borrowings under the Credit Facility, were used to repay $150.2 million representing all of the indebtedness outstanding under a prior bank credit facility and to fund $30.0 million of
distributions to the Partners. In addition, the remaining proceeds along with operating cash flows were used to pay $6.3 million in related fees and expenses of the transactions. These fees were capitalized and are included in other assets. On
November 4, 2003, the Partnership, U.S. Bank, N.A. and Bank of America, N.A., executed an amendment to the Credit Facility which reduced the revolving facility to $10.0 million. On March 28, 2008, the Partnership and Bank of America, N.A.
executed an amendment reducing the revolving facility to $1.0 million. On January 28, 2009, the Partnership executed an amendment to extend the Credit Facilitys maturity date for an additional year to March 30, 2010. The Partnership
had not utilized its borrowing capacity under the Credit Facility since 2003. As a result, the Credit Facility was not extended beyond its March 30, 2010 maturity date.

The Notes are senior secured obligations which rank equally with all of the Partnerships outstanding senior
debt and are senior to any subordinated debt. The Notes are secured by a security interest in the Issuers existing and future assets and a pledge by each of the Partners of all of its partnership interest in the Partnership. The Notes mature
on March 1, 2012 and bear interest at the rate of 101/8% per annum, payable semi-annually in arrears on March 1 and September 1 of each year, commencing on September 1, 2002. The Partnership is exploring various alternatives for
refinancing its obligations under the Notes. There can be no assurance, however, that the Partnership will be able to refinance the Notes on terms that are acceptable to the Partnership, or at all. If the Partnership is unable to refinance its
obligations with respect to the Notes, the holders thereof will be entitled to exercise the remedies provided in the indenture governing the Notes, including foreclosing on the assets securing the Notes. If the Partnership is unable to refinance the
Notes by March 1, 2012, it would have a material adverse effect on the Partnerships business and its financial position.

Moreover, amounts outstanding under the Notes will be classified as current obligations for financial reporting purposes beginning March 31, 2011. In the event that the Partnership is
unable to refinance such amounts by the time of the filing of its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2011, it would affect the Partnerships independent registered public accounting firms assessment of its
ability to continue as a going concern, would have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position and would raise substantial doubt as to its ability to continue as a going concern.

The indenture relating to the Notes contains various restrictive covenants. The covenants require, and/or any covenants in any new credit
facility we may secure may require, the maintenance of certain financial ratios and impose limitations on the ability of the Partnership, among other things, to incur additional debt or liens, engage in transactions with affiliates, dispose of
property, make distributions to its partners or merge, consolidate or sell assets. As of December 31, 2010, the Partnership was in compliance with the covenants in the indenture relating to the Notes.



61



---

In February 2009, the Partnership repurchased and retired $17.2 million principal amount of
the Notes. The total purchase price of the Notes was approximately $11.4 million, resulting in a gain of approximately $5.5 million, net of unamortized debt issuance costs. The repurchase of the Notes reduced the amount of Notes outstanding to
$142.8 million. The transaction was funded by available invested cash reserves. The Partnerships executive committee has authorized the Partnership to spend up to an additional $8.6 million for the repurchase of Notes. It is anticipated that
any additional Notes acquired prior to maturity will be acquired through open market purchases.

Note 7. Other Long-term Liabilities

Other long-term liabilities at December 31, 2010 and 2009 consisted of the following (in thousands):



|                                  |  |      |       |  |      |   |       | 
|--------------------------------- |  | ---- | ----- |  | ---- | - | ----- | 
|                                  |  | 2010 |       |  | 2009 |  
|Accrued SERP liability (1)        |  | $    | 7,414 |  |      | $ | 6,982 | 
|SERP additional minimum liability |  |      | 762   |  |      |   | 648   | 
|                                  |  |      |       |  |      |   |       | 
|                                  |  | $    | 8,176 |  |      | $ | 7,630 | 
|                                  |  |      |       |  |      |   |       | 



|(1) | See Note 9 Employee Retirement Plans.
|--- | ---------------------------------------

Note 8. Related Parties

An affiliate of each of the Partners owns and
operates a casino attached and adjacent to Silver Legacy. Our Partners may be deemed to be in a conflict of interest position with respect to decisions they make relating to the Partnership as a result of the interests their affiliates have in the
Eldorado Hotel & Casino and Circus Circus Hotel & Casino-Reno, respectively.

The Partnership believes that
all of the transactions mentioned below are on terms at least as favorable to the Partnership as would have been obtained from an unrelated party.

Silver Legacy has utilized an aircraft owned by Recreational Enterprises, Inc. (REI), for the purpose of providing air service to select customers. During the years ended December 31,
2010, 2009 and 2008, the Partnership paid $24,800, $17,400 and $33,900, respectively, for such services. Although there is no agreement obligating the Partnership to utilize the plane or entitling it to do so, it is anticipated that the Partnership
will continue to utilize this service from time to time in the future on terms mutually acceptable to the parties. REI, which owns 47.8% of ELLC, is owned by various members of the Carano family, including Gary L. Carano, Silver Legacys
General Manager, Glenn T. Carano, Silver Legacys Executive Director of Marketing, and Gene R. Carano, a member of the Partnerships Executive Committee, each of whom owns an approximately 10.1% beneficial interest in REI, and Donald L.
Carano, the father of Gary, Glenn and Gene Carano, who owns approximately 49.5% interest in REI.

Silver Legacys
marketing and sales departments have utilized a yacht owned by Sierra Adventure Equipment Leasing, Inc. (Sierra Leasing) at a flat rate per trip of $3,000 ($2,500 if the trip was shared with our Partner, ELLC) for various promotional
events. The payments made by the Partnership to Sierra Leasing for the use of the yacht totaled $7,500, $2,500 and $5,000 during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Although there is no agreement obligating the Partnership to utilize the yacht or
entitling it to do so, it is anticipated that the Partnership will continue to utilize this service from time to time in the future on terms mutually acceptable to the parties. Sierra Leasing is owned by Donald L. Carano, the father of Gary L.
Carano, Silver Legacys General Manager, Glenn T. Carano, Silver Legacys Executive Director of Marketing, and Gene R. Carano, a member of the Partnerships executive committee.

Eldorado Resorts LLC owns the skywalk that connects Silver Legacy with the Eldorado Hotel & Casino. The charges from the service
provider for the utilities associated with this skywalk are billed to the Partnership together with the charges for the utilities associated with Silver Legacy. Such charges are paid to the service provider by the Partnership, and the Partnership is
reimbursed by Eldorado Resorts LLC for the portion of the charges allocable to the utilities provided to the skywalk. The charges for the utilities provided to the skywalk during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008 were $52,200,
$61,700 and $62,000, respectively.

Since 1998, the Partnership has purchased from Eldorado Resorts LLC homemade pasta and
other products for use in the restaurants at Silver Legacy and it is anticipated that the Partnership will continue to make similar purchases in the future. For purchases of these products during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008, which are billed to the Partnership at cost plus associated labor, the Partnership paid Eldorado Resorts LLC $54,400, $50,800 and $45,300, respectively.

Beginning in October 2005, the Partnership began providing on-site laundry services for Eldorado Resorts LLC related to the cleaning of certain types of linens. Although there is no agreement obligating
Eldorado Resorts LLC to utilize this service, it is anticipated that the Partnership will continue to provide these laundry services in the future. The Partnership



62



---

charges Eldorado Resorts LLC for labor and laundry supplies on a per unit basis which totaled $131,000, $113,100 and $72,300 during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The Partnership believes that the terms under which the Partnership provided these services were at least as favorable to it as those that would have been obtained in comparable transactions with an unaffiliated third party.

In April 2008, the Partnership and Eldorado Resort LLC began combining certain back-of-the-house and administrative
departmental operations, including purchasing, advertising, information systems, surveillance, engineering, and various shared management positions of the Eldorado Hotel & Casino and Silver Legacy in an effort to achieve payroll cost
savings synergies at both properties. Payroll costs associated with the combined operations are shared equally and are billed at cost plus an estimated allocation for related benefits and taxes. During 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Partnership reimbursed
Eldorado Resorts LLC $647,300, $515,000 and $129,200, respectively, for the Partnerships allocable portion of the shared administrative services costs associated with the operations performed at the Eldorado Hotel & Casino. During
2010, 2009 and 2008, Eldorado Resorts LLC reimbursed the Partnership $249,500, $142,000 and $30,100, respectively, for Eldorados allocable portion of the shared administrative services costs associated with the operations performed at Silver
Legacy.

In April 2001, the Partnership began utilizing 235 spaces in the parking garage at Circus Circus Hotel and
Casino-Reno. The spaces are utilized to provide parking for employees of Silver Legacy. In consideration for its use of the spaces, the Partnership pays Circus Circus Hotel and Casino-Reno rent in the amount of $5,000 per month. In May 2009, the
Partnership also began utilizing an uncovered parking lot adjacent to Circus Circus Hotel and Casino-Reno for oversize vehicles. In consideration for its use of the space, the Partnership pays Circus Circus Hotel and Casino-Reno rent in the amount
of $800 per month. Although there is no agreement obligating the Partnership to continue utilizing the spaces or entitling it to do so, it is anticipated that the Partnership will continue this agreement for the foreseeable future.

Note 9. Employee Retirement Plans

The Partnership instituted a defined contribution 401(k) plan in September 1995 which covers all employees who meet certain age and length of service requirements and allowed for an employer contribution
up to 25 percent of the first six percent of each participating employees compensation. Plan participants can elect to defer before tax compensation through payroll deductions. Those deferrals are regulated under Section 401(k) of the
Internal Revenue Code. In conjunction with implemented cost savings programs, the Partnership discontinued the employer matching contribution in February 2009. Due to this, the Partnership did not have any matching contributions for the year ended
December 31, 2010. The Partnerships matching contributions were $26,900 and $200,000, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008.

Effective January 1, 2002, the Partnership adopted a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (SERP) for a select group of highly compensated management employees. The SERP provides for a
lifetime benefit at age 65, based on a formula which takes into account a participants highest annual compensation, years of service, and executive level. The SERP also provides an early retirement benefit at age 55 with at least four years of
service, a disability provision, and a lump sum death benefit. The obligation is being funded informally through life insurance contracts on the participants and related cash surrender value. The Partnerships periodic pension costs were $0.7
million, $1.0 million and $1.0 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.



63



---

The following information summarizes activity in the SERP for the years ended
December 31, 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):



|                                                              |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---- | ------ | - | ---- | - | ------ | -
|                                                              |  | 2010 |        |   | 2009 |  
|Changes in Projected Benefit Obligation:                      |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Projected benefit obligation at beginning of year             |  | $    | 7,742  |   |      | $ | 6,618  |  
|Service cost                                                  |  |      | 18     |   |      |   | 310    |  
|Interest cost                                                 |  |      | 428    |   |      |   | 446    |  
|Actuarial loss                                                |  |      | 341    |   |      |   | 443    |  
|Benefits paid                                                 |  |      | (75    | ) |      |   | (75    | )
|                                                              |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Projected benefit obligation at end of year                   |  | $    | 8,454  |   |      | $ | 7,742  |  
|                                                              |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Fair Value of Plan Assets(1)                                  |  | $    |       |   |      | $ |       |  
|                                                              |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|                                                              |  |     
|                                                              |  | 2010 |        |   | 2009 |  
|Reconciliation of Funded Status:                              |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Funded status                                                 |  | $    | (8,454 | ) |      | $ | (7,742 | )
|Unrecognized actuarial loss                                   |  |      | 762    |   |      |   | 422    |  
|Unrecognized prior service cost                               |  |      |       |   |      |   | 226    |  
|                                                              |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Net amount recognized                                         |  | $    | (7,692 | ) |      | $ | (7,094 | )
|                                                              |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Amounts Recognized on the Consolidated Balance Sheet:         |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Accrued net pension cost                                      |  | $    | (7,692 | ) |      | $ | (7,094 | )
|Additional minimum liability                                  |  |      | (762   | ) |      |   | (648   | )
|Accumulated other comprehensive loss                          |  |      | 762    |   |      |   | 648    |  
|                                                              |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Net amount recognized                                         |  | $    | (7,692 | ) |      | $ | (7,094 | )
|                                                              |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Weighted Average Assumptions:                                 |  |      |        |   |      |   |        |  
|Discount rate used to determine benefit obligations (2)       |  |      | 5.05   | % |      |   | 5.73   | %
|Discount rate used to determine net periodic benefit cost (2) |  |      | 5.05   | % |      |   | 5.73   | %
|Expected long-term return on plan assets                      |  |      | N/A    |   |      |   | N/A    |  
|Rate of compensation increase                                 |  |      | 3.50   | % |      |   | 3.50   | %

The components of net
periodic pension cost were as follows for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 (in thousands):



|                                   |  |      |     |  |      |   |     |      |  |   |       | 
|---------------------------------- |  | ---- | --- |  | ---- | - | --- | ---- |  | - | ----- | 
|                                   |  | 2010 |     |  | 2009 |   |     | 2008 | 
|Components of Net Pension Cost:    |  |      |     |  |      |   |     |      |  |   |       | 
|Current period service cost        |  | $    | 18  |  |      | $ | 310 |      |  | $ | 395   | 
|Interest cost                      |  |      | 428 |  |      |   | 446 |      |  |   | 400   | 
|Amortization of prior service cost |  |      | 226 |  |      |   | 227 |      |  |   | 227   | 
|                                   |  |      |     |  |      |   |     |      |  |   |       | 
|Net expense                        |  | $    | 672 |  |      | $ | 983 |      |  | $ | 1,022 | 
|                                   |  |      |     |  |      |   |     |      |  |   |       | 

The following benefit payments, which reflect expected future service as appropriate, are expected to be
paid over the next ten years:



|          |  |                |       | 
|--------- |  | -------------- | ----- | 
|          |  | (in thousands) |      
|2011      |  | $              | 279   | 
|2012      |  |                | 422   | 
|2013      |  |                | 453   | 
|2014      |  |                | 493   | 
|2015      |  |                | 568   | 
|2016-2020 |  |                | 3,675 | 



|(1) | While the SERP is an unfunded plan, the Partnership is informally funding the plan through life insurance contracts on the participants. The life insurance contracts
had cash surrender values totaling $6.3 million and $5.7 million at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The life insurance contracts had a face value of $11.8 million at December 31, 2010 and $11.0 million at December 31, 2009.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



64



---

|(2) | The discount rate utilized was based on the Citigroup Pension Liability Index as of December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 with a maturity of 32 years.
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note 10. Commitments and Contingencies

Operating Leases

The Partnership leases land and equipment under operating
leases. Future minimum payments under noncancellable operating leases with initial terms of one year or more consisted of the following at December 31, 2010 (in thousands):



|           |  |   |     | 
|---------- |  | - | --- | 
|2011       |  | $ | 162 | 
|2012       |  |   | 158 | 
|2013       |  |   | 23  | 
|Thereafter |  |   |    | 
|           |  |   |     | 
|           |  | $ | 343 | 
|           |  |   |     | 

Total rental expense under operating leases was $0.5 million, $0.4 million and $0.4 million for the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively, which include rental payments associated with cancellable operating leases with terms less than one year.

Litigation

The Partnership is party to various litigation arising in the
normal course of business. Management is of the opinion that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not have a material effect on the financial position or the results of operations of the Partnership.

Sales and Use Tax

In
March 2008, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled, in a case involving another casino company, that food and non-alcoholic beverages purchased for use in providing complimentary meals to customers and to employees were exempt from sales and use tax. The
Partnership had previously paid use tax on these items and has generally filed for refunds for the periods from February 2000 to February 2008 related to this matter. The aggregate amount for which a refund claim is pending is approximately $1.5
million.

The Nevada Department of Taxation (the Department) filed a petition for rehearing, which the Nevada
Supreme Court announced in July 2008 it would not grant. Hearings before the Nevada Administrative Law Judge are currently being scheduled; however, the date of the Partnerships hearing is uncertain at this time. Due to uncertainty
surrounding the potential arguments that may be raised in the administrative process the Partnership will not record any gain until the tax refund is realized.

Note 11. Partnership Agreement

Concurrent with the issuance of the
Notes on March 5, 2002, the Partnerships original partnership agreement was amended and restated in its entirety and was further amended in April 2002 (the New Partnership Agreement). The New Partnership Agreement provides
for, among other items, profits and losses to be allocated to the Partners in proportion to their percentage interests, separate capital accounts to be maintained for each Partner, provisions for management of the Partnership and payment of
distributions and bankruptcy and/or dissolution of the Partnership. The April 2002 amendments were principally (i) to provide equal voting rights for ELLC and Galleon with respect to approval of the partnerships annual business plan and
the appointment and compensation of the general manager, and (ii) to give each Partner the right to terminate the general manager. In conjunction with issuance of the Notes, a $2.1 million distribution was paid to Galleon representing the
remaining Priority Allocation payment to MRG pursuant to the Partnerships original partnership agreement and a special distribution was paid to ELLC and Galleon of $10.0 million and $20.0 million respectively.

There were no distributions for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. No tax distributions of the Partnership to its partners
were made in 2010 or 2009 and are not anticipated to be owed based on the expected final 2010 tax return. Total distributions for the year ended December 31, 2008 totaled $10.0 million and included a distribution of $5.0 million each to ELLC
and Galleon representing a special distribution approved by the Partnerships executive committee. No tax distributions of the Partnership to its partners were made in 2008.



65