PlayersBoycott

Alert!

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Who's Taking Care of Horse Racing?

Currently the horse racing industry holds a virtual monopoly on online gaming. As stated by many business analysts and gambling experts, this should be a perfect time for us in racing. With technology allowing for a full-frontal assault on pricing and availability through economies of scale, as we have seen in many other industries, trying to maximize our online slice, through innovation and cutting pricing should be at the top of the list. However, instead we seem to twiddle our thumbs and try and put square pegs (high pricing, fighting over more of a shrinking pie, signal restriction and signal fee hikes, state by state regulations, infighting etc) into round holes (a competitive market).

Never is this more apparent to us as players than in the following. This shows the lobbying money spent in Q2 in the US.

The leader, Harrah's, is spending money on trying to get online gaming passed; a threat to horse racings slice of the online market.

"Internet gambling supporters spent the most to influence policy during the quarter, accounting for an estimated $3.37 million, or 80.1 percent of total spend. "

And this includes some heavy hitters.

"Significantly, a number of Las Vegas operators and federally recognized Indian tribes began reporting lobbying expenses for Internet gambling – including Boyd Gaming Corporation and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians – indicating increased interest in the issue among the United States’ top brick-and-mortar businesses."

As other gambling enterprises are spending money and time to attack our monopoly, we seem to be more concentrated on stopping innovation and raising takeout (see California), making our business even less competitive for the cutthroat future.

This is looking more and more like the mortgage bubble for racing. Our business and current business model of high prices and signal fee restriction is unsustainable. And if online gaming is passed, it would even be worse - much worse. But it appears no one is home.

Who is minding the store? Who is fighting for racing?

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

No one is fighting for racing. They are too busy wondering if they can get away with 25% takeout instead of 23% take, or if they can buy their own ADW to own a piece of the shrinking market, or if they can charge $2 for a past performance pdf which cost pennies.

Racing knows one thing and one thing only: How to protect their own little piece of the sport.

RG

Anonymous said...

You guys don't get it.

"Lobbying Spenders" aren't even relevent to what is important in connection with this topic.

The "monopoly" that racing has isn't even related directly to the internet either. Racing has had the important monopoly, relating to "The Wire Act", for more than 30 years.

Whether you transmit the signals and wagering via the internet, or via the phone lines, the monopoly remains the same.

The "monopoly" that matters in racing is the pari-mutuel wagering system, and "Harrahs" doesn't have a chance against that monopoly if only racing would ever wake-up and play its cards correctly.

I understand why people running the state lotto don't have paid advisers to Joe Sixpack perched at every gas station. Now you tell me why race tracks everywhere don't have advisers giving direct betting advice to everyone in any racing/simulcast venue where there are multiple signals coming in.

When simulcasting first started, everyone was happy to just plug in the phone/computer jack and just let outside money trickle in. The correct move would have been to do that as well as giving detailed racing advice like never before, to people doing pari-mutuel wagering with other venues.

Everybody in the house can theoretically win at the same time now and Harrah's can't offer that!!!

Why is this so difficult for racing to understand?????

Quit mumbling about this stuff which doesn't even matter and get right to the crux of racing's true monopoly.

Anonymous said...

Someone arguing for pari-mutuel betting? Wow!

It is on the way out virtually everywhere. The gambling market says it is completely broken, and so do people in racing.

In AUS they increased wagering by 35% and purses by 6% last year (so much for the economy angle!) and ALL THE GROWTH was in non-pari0mutuel avenues.

Take pari-mutuel and blow it up for any WPS betting and racing will be better off.

What a crappy, ancient system!

RG

HANA said...

I must agree with RG. Having a pari-mutuel monopoly is not an advantage. On a recent white paper I read on wagering and wagering systems, the author (rightfully, in my opinion) detailed the pitfalls of pari-mutuel

quote "However, the disparate totalisator pool betting systems are an anachronism that have been kept in place through a mixture of self interest,inertia and fiscal and technological constraints. The antiquated system has and is continuing to fail both the horse racing industry and those that bet on the sport."

It has its place, for pick 6's and other exotics, but for the WPS pools (with odds changing at the half and not offering any fixed prices for bettors who are demanding it), it is simply a dismal failure.

HANA

Scott Ferguson said...

Stop worrying about others entering the online gaming market and get racing's house in order. Casinos and racing betting should not be competing with each other, they are vastly different products and failure to recognise that means racing administrators only want to screw punters out of every penny on 'games' of chance, rather than building a sustainable form of sporting entertainment, clearly differentiated from random luck and random flashing number generators.

Grow the market share for WAGERING, stop worrying about fighting the casinos.

Anonymous said...

My god... so this is what racing is up against. You people don't have a clue!!

...and this is, supposedly the voice of "HANA" as a group??? What a laugh. This organization is similar to NTRA, which does nothing more than carve out a job for those of whom the NTRA is comprised.

Pari-mutuel wagering gives horse racing and only horse racing a much greater edge as an entity than the internet ever could. This has nothing to do with the internet, and everything to do with the basic, core element that has existed ever since remote wagering via phone lines commenced.

Once we came to an era where tracks and other outlets began wagering en masse on full cards from other tracks, two things should have happened:


One - lazy industry leaders with a lack of foresight effectively just plugged in a bunch of cords and cables from all over the rest of society along which new and different bets came trickling in at what people thought was an awe-inspiring rate. In reality it was nothing, except when relatively speaking (relative to handle numbers previously achieved on-track alone).

Two - Racing should have, but completely neglected to take the giant crevass of opportunity to offer extreme, almost invasive assistance to anyone in each separate wagering audience who chose to accept it. A partial result of this extreme neglect over more than 20 years now is the unimaginable circumstance where the guy who stays at home, and away from the live racing venue has a greater edge (via computer and intricate data therein) than do those who bother to turn up in person to watch live racing.

(Just imagine the huge upward impact on handle of simply bringing the on-site crowd as a whole up to the same level of "competitive" as are the savy players and computer users who have far more data and convenience available to them)

The first people who would take or accept the offered free assistance via up-to-the-minute data and from in-house handicappers would be those who need it the most. This includes brand new people who too often wander in for a day at the races with a group knowing absolutely nothing about how to bet or even feel comfortable at a racing venue. These people go through the motions, seldom profit on a race, and walk away saying things like: "we don't know enough...", "the insiders know everything and we don't...".

Their handle contribution alone would increase exponentially upon implementing just a small segment of the common sensical reaction to what we call "full-card simulcasting". This should have happened more than 20 years ago, and people like yourselves are unquestionably the reason why racing has almost imploded upon itself while waiting for the supposed 'bright lights' in the industry to fill-in the rest of what should have been obvious to them decades ago!

It is time to simply do things correctly in the racing industry, perhaps for the first time since racing's dark ages. It is too easy to sit back and take the path of least effort, as racing has been doing since at least the 1980's.

Fewer race days, lower handle, lower purses, lower yearling prices, lower wages in the industry, fewer starters, etc. - that's the implosion!!!

It's time for racing to make the fix!!!

... and it's obvious

Anonymous said...

My god... so this is what racing is up against. You people don't have a clue!!

...and this is, supposedly the voice of "HANA" as a group??? What a laugh. This organization is similar to NTRA, which does nothing more than carve out a job for those of whom the NTRA is comprised.

Pari-mutuel wagering gives horse racing and only horse racing a much greater edge as an entity than the internet ever could. This has nothing to do with the internet, and everything to do with the basic, core element that has existed ever since remote wagering via phone lines commenced.

Once we came to an era where tracks and other outlets began wagering en masse on full cards from other tracks, two things should have happened:


One - lazy industry leaders with a lack of foresight effectively just plugged in a bunch of cords and cables from all over the rest of society along which new and different bets came trickling in at what people thought was an awe-inspiring rate. In reality it was nothing, except when relatively speaking (relative to handle numbers previously achieved on-track alone).

Two - Racing should have, but completely neglected to take the giant crevass of opportunity to offer extreme, almost invasive assistance to anyone in each separate wagering audience who chose to accept it. A partial result of this extreme neglect over more than 20 years now is the unimaginable circumstance where the guy who stays at home, and away from the live racing venue has a greater edge (via computer and intricate data therein) than do those who bother to turn up in person to watch live racing.

(Just imagine the huge upward impact on handle of simply bringing the on-site crowd as a whole up to the same level of "competitive" as are the savy players and computer users who have far more data and convenience available to them)

The first people who would take or accept the offered free assistance via up-to-the-minute data and from in-house handicappers would be those who need it the most. This includes brand new people who too often wander into a race track with a group and while knowing absolutely nothing about how to bet or even feel comfortable at a racing venue. These people go through the motions, seldom profit on a race, and walk away saying things like: "we don't know enough...", "the insiders know everything and we don't...".

Their handle contribution alone would increase exponentially upon implementing just a small segment of the common sensical reaction to what we call "full-card simulcasting". This should have happened more than 20 years ago, and people like yourselves are unquestionably the reason why racing has almost imploded upon itself while waiting for the supposed 'bright lights' in the industry to fill-in the rest of what should have been obvious to them decades ago!

It is time to simply do things correctly in the racing industry, perhaps for the first time since racing's dark ages. It is too easy to sit back and take the path of least effort, as racing has been doing since at least the 1980's.

Fewer race days, lower handle, lower purses, lower yearling prices, lower wages in the industry, fewer starters, etc. - that's the implosion!!!

It's time for racing to make the fix!!!

... and it's obvious

Anonymous said...

My god... so this is what racing is up against. You people don't have a clue!!

...and this is, supposedly the voice of "HANA" as a group??? What a laugh. This organization is similar to NTRA, which does nothing more than carve out a job for those of whom the NTRA is comprised.

Pari-mutuel wagering gives horse racing and only horse racing a much greater edge as an entity than the internet ever could. This has nothing to do with the internet, and everything to do with the basic, core element that has existed ever since remote wagering via phone lines commenced.

Once we came to an era where tracks and other outlets began wagering en masse on full cards from other tracks, two things should have happened:


One - lazy industry leaders with a lack of foresight effectively just plugged in a bunch of cords and cables from all over the rest of society along which new and different bets came trickling in at what people thought was an awe-inspiring rate. In reality it was nothing, except when relatively speaking (relative to handle numbers previously achieved on-track alone).

Two - Racing should have, but completely neglected to take the giant crevass of opportunity to offer extreme, almost invasive assistance to anyone in each separate wagering audience who chose to accept it. A partial result of this extreme neglect over more than 20 years now is the unimaginable circumstance where the guy who stays at home, and away from the live racing venue has a greater edge (via computer and intricate data therein) than do those who bother to turn up in person to watch live racing.

(Just imagine the huge upward impact on handle of simply bringing the on-site crowd as a whole up to the same level of "competitive" as are the savy players and computer users who have far more data and convenience available to them)

The first people who would take or accept the offered free assistance via up-to-the-minute data and from in-house handicappers would be those who need it the most. This includes brand new people who too often wander into a race track with a group and while knowing absolutely nothing about how to bet or even feel comfortable at a racing venue. These people go through the motions, seldom profit on a race, and walk away saying things like: "we don't know enough...", "the insiders know everything and we don't...".

Their handle contribution alone would increase exponentially upon implementing just a small segment of the common sensical reaction to what we call "full-card simulcasting". This should have happened more than 20 years ago, and people like yourselves are unquestionably the reason why racing has almost imploded upon itself while waiting for the supposed 'bright lights' in the industry to fill-in the rest of what should have been obvious to them decades ago!

It is time to simply do things correctly in the racing industry, perhaps for the first time since racing's dark ages. It is too easy to sit back and take the path of least effort, as racing has been doing since at least the 1980's.

Fewer race days, lower handle, lower purses, lower yearling prices, lower wages in the industry, fewer starters, etc. - that's the implosion!!!

It's time for racing to make the fix!!!

... and it's obvious

Anonymous said...

My god... so this is what racing is up against. You people don't have a clue!!

...and this is, supposedly the voice of "HANA" as a group??? What a laugh. This organization is similar to NTRA, which does nothing more than carve out a job for those of whom the NTRA is comprised.

Pari-mutuel wagering gives horse racing and only horse racing a much greater edge as an entity than the internet ever could. This has nothing to do with the internet, and everything to do with the basic, core element that has existed ever since remote wagering via phone lines commenced.

Once we came to an era where tracks and other outlets began wagering en masse on full cards from other tracks, two things should have happened:


One - lazy industry leaders with a lack of foresight effectively just plugged in a bunch of cords and cables from all over the rest of society along which new and different bets came trickling in at what people thought was an awe-inspiring rate. In reality it was nothing, except when relatively speaking (relative to handle numbers previously achieved on-track alone).

Two - Racing should have, but completely neglected to take the giant crevass of opportunity to offer extreme, almost invasive assistance to anyone in each separate wagering audience who chose to accept it. A partial result of this extreme neglect over more than 20 years now is the unimaginable circumstance where the guy who stays at home, and away from the live racing venue has a greater edge (via computer and intricate data therein) than do those who bother to turn up in person to watch live racing.

(Just imagine the huge upward impact on handle of simply bringing the on-site crowd as a whole up to the same level of "competitive" as are the savy players and computer users who have far more data and convenience available to them)

The first people who would take or accept the offered free assistance via up-to-the-minute data and from in-house handicappers would be those who need it the most. This includes brand new people who too often wander into a race track with a group and while knowing absolutely nothing about how to bet or even feel comfortable at a racing venue. These people go through the motions, seldom profit on a race, and walk away saying things like: "we don't know enough...", "the insiders know everything and we don't...".

Their handle contribution alone would increase exponentially upon implementing just a small segment of the common sensical reaction to what we call "full-card simulcasting". This should have happened more than 20 years ago, and people like yourselves are unquestionably the reason why racing has almost imploded upon itself while waiting for the supposed 'bright lights' in the industry to fill-in the rest of what should have been obvious to them decades ago!

It is time to simply do things correctly in the racing industry, perhaps for the first time since racing's dark ages. It is too easy to sit back and take the path of least effort, as racing has been doing since at least the 1980's.

Fewer race days, lower handle, lower purses, lower yearling prices, lower wages in the industry, fewer starters, etc. - that's the implosion!!!

It's time for racing to make the fix!!!

... and it's obvious

Anonymous said...

My god... so this is what racing is up against. You people don't have a clue!!

...and this is, supposedly the voice of "HANA" as a group??? What a laugh. This organization is similar to NTRA, which does nothing more than carve out a job for those of whom the NTRA is comprised.

Pari-mutuel wagering gives horse racing and only horse racing a much greater edge as an entity than the internet ever could. This has nothing to do with the internet, and everything to do with the basic, core element that has existed ever since remote wagering via phone lines commenced.

Once we came to an era where tracks and other outlets began wagering en masse on full cards from other tracks, two things should have happened:


One - lazy industry leaders with a lack of foresight effectively just plugged in a bunch of cords and cables from all over the rest of society along which new and different bets came trickling in at what people thought was an awe-inspiring rate. In reality it was nothing, except when relatively speaking (relative to handle numbers previously achieved on-track alone).

Two - Racing should have, but completely neglected to take the giant crevass of opportunity to offer extreme, almost invasive assistance to anyone in each separate wagering audience who chose to accept it. A partial result of this extreme neglect over more than 20 years now is the unimaginable circumstance where the guy who stays at home, and away from the live racing venue has a greater edge (via computer and intricate data therein) than do those who bother to turn up in person to watch live racing.

(Just imagine the huge upward impact on handle of simply bringing the on-site crowd as a whole up to the same level of "competitive" as are the savy players and computer users who have far more data and convenience available to them)

The first people who would take or accept the offered free assistance via up-to-the-minute data and from in-house handicappers would be those who need it the most. This includes brand new people who too often wander into a race track with a group and while knowing absolutely nothing about how to bet or even feel comfortable at a racing venue. These people go through the motions, seldom profit on a race, and walk away saying things like: "we don't know enough...", "the insiders know everything and we don't...".

Their handle contribution alone would increase exponentially upon implementing just a small segment of the common sensical reaction to what we call "full-card simulcasting". This should have happened more than 20 years ago, and people like yourselves are unquestionably the reason why racing has almost imploded upon itself while waiting for the supposed 'bright lights' in the industry to fill-in the rest of what should have been obvious to them decades ago!

It is time to simply do things correctly in the racing industry, perhaps for the first time since racing's dark ages. It is too easy to sit back and take the path of least effort, as racing has been doing since at least the 1980's.

Fewer race days, lower handle, lower purses, lower yearling prices, lower wages in the industry, fewer starters, etc. - that's the implosion!!!

It's time for racing to make the fix!!!

... and it's obvious

Anonymous said...

I often like when I read anonymous comments which start with "you people do not know what you are talking about" and then proceed to open mouth and insert foot.

Rich