Golden Gate Close

[ldiatone]

from twitter: Ritvo: Golden Gate Could Close Over Simulcast Issue
https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/228043/ritvo-golden-gate-could-close-over-simulcast-issue?utm_source=BHTW&utm_medium=social

[dilanesp]

from twitter: Ritvo: Golden Gate Could Close Over Simulcast Issue
https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/228043/ritvo-golden-gate-could-close-over-simulcast-issue?utm_source=BHTW&utm_medium=social

This sounds like a bluff. Ritvo wants to control the simulcasting revenue so he is threatening the nuclear option.

Having said that, it would be very good long term for California racing if GGF closed and was not replaced. That would force those horsemen to run down here and would fill up our fields. California has enough thoroughbreds for one circuit, not two.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/1007032501439610880

[JustRalph]

The model has needed change for a long time

[Andy Asaro]

Story updated.

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/1007042890495737856

[Augenj]

This sounds like a bluff. Ritvo wants to control the simulcasting revenue so he is threatening the nuclear option.

Having said that, it would be very good long term for California racing if GGF closed and was not replaced. That would force those horsemen to run down here and would fill up our fields. California has enough thoroughbreds for one circuit, not two.
Couldn't agree more. :ThmbUp:

[AlsoEligible]

This situation has been brewing for a long time and I'm glad it's finally coming to a head, for better or for worse.

I do call BS on Baedeker's backtracking about having CARF fill the Golden Gate dates:

Ritvo also said the CHRB has made attempts to have the fair circuit fill Golden Gate's dates from Aug. 22-Oct. 2.

"CHRB has been in contact with CARF to run our dates. ... We have the CHRB unprofessionally going around and telling people we won't be getting our license if we don't operate the network," Ritvo said. "Even though we're legally within our right not to operate the network and fund it."

CHRB executive director Rick Baedeker called the accusations "not accurate." He also said his contact with Santa Rosa and CARF, regarding potentially filling Golden Gate's Aug. 22-Oct. 2 dates, was only to prepare for the possibility Golden Gate would not have its meet application approved by the CHRB at the board's next meeting June 21.

You're the director of the board, what "possibility" do you need to prepare for? You know damn well whether a meet application is getting approved or not, and if not, for what reason. Weak.

That aside, I think I mostly side with Ritvo on this. The state has way too many acronyms vying for power, too many organizations that don't work, too much bureaucracy. NCOTWINC is one, and TSG should not be forced to subsidize a broken model.

On the other hand, I also don't want to see GGF drive the fairs into extinction, which is clearly TSG's endgame here. And I agree with diane that just having GGF close and pushing those horses/trainers to SoCal might be a better outcome for the state.

Like I said, I'm just glad that everyone is done talking about it, and that people are finally going to get in a room and duke it out.

[dilanesp]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/1007032501439610880

Sounds about right.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/1007074983166656512

[NorCalGreg]

I can't even imagine how much the land under GGF is valued...right on the bay---views of both bridges.

Wow! It's worth far more than a race-track land. Next time your stuck in traffic right there, on the approach to the bridge...look over and take a guess what that land is worth.

[GaryG]

The Fairs offer some of the best racing in CA. Year round racing at GGF is not the answer. Many years ago CA was one circuit with 3 tracks in NoCal. That ended with Oak Tree in 1969. I would like to see GGF take either the spring or fall SA dates. There is no way to run year round in both the north and south. I agree with Greg, that is a beautiful location and it is surely valuable.

[Andy Asaro]

Fair Racing is outdated and they lose money. GG has an outstanding turf course so it doesn't make sense to lose summer months to fairs. Especially since turf racing is more popular than ever and is safer.

We're dealing with California. The State where people and bureaucrats don't care if they lose money as long as it's not theirs.

Will be interesting to follow.

[letswastemoney]

I'd hate to see Golden Gate go. It has the most beautiful parking lot to walk through, right on the Bay.

[Andy Asaro]

This mornings email blast.

Why is it that people are OK with doing things in racing that lose money? Oh I know. It's not their money.

CARF has to stop skimming money from the kitty. No more money to subsidize their politics.

Fairs are outdated and charge higher takeout.

The surfaces aren't as safe not to mention that people want more turf racing. Golden Gate should never be shut down while the turf course is usable.

And the last person on earth you want influencing anything is Baedecker.

And BTW if you wanted to limit the power of the Stronach Group you’re about 10 years too late.

The only Fair should be at Pomona. It should have a one mile turf course, a dirt course inside, a state of the art Vet Clinic, and a space where the Industry can display how it cares for retired racehorses. That’s what belongs at the L.A. County Fair at Pomona.

[dilanesp]

This mornings email blast.

Why is it that people are OK with doing things in racing that lose money? Oh I know. It's not their money.

CARF has to stop skimming money from the kitty. No more money to subsidize their politics.

Fairs are outdated and charge higher takeout.

The surfaces aren't as safe not to mention that people want more turf racing. Golden Gate should never be shut down while the turf course is usable.

And the last person on earth you want influencing anything is Baedecker.

And BTW if you wanted to limit the power of the Stronach Group you’re about 10 years too late.

The only Fair should be at Pomona. It should have a one mile turf course, a dirt course inside, a state of the art Vet Clinic, and a space where the Industry can display how it cares for retired racehorses. That’s what belongs at the L.A. County Fair at Pomona.

What belongs at the LA County Fair is cotton candy, a ferris wheel, a fun house, animal exhibitions, and impossible to win giant teddy bears.

Pomona got rid of racing because it is a money loser. And as much as I make fun of Los Al, at least it is 10 degrees colder there than in Pomona.

[Andy Asaro]

What belongs at the LA County Fair is cotton candy, a ferris wheel, a fun house, animal exhibitions, and impossible to win giant teddy bears.

Pomona got rid of racing because it is a money loser. And as much as I make fun of Los Al, at least it is 10 degrees colder there than in Pomona.

Corruption got rid of Horse Racing at Pomona. Los Al has no turf course and has been a complete failure. When H.P. closed down Liebau manipulated everyone into going to Los Al even though it was never a permanent solution. Pomona is being looked at again as we speak.

Head of L.A. County Fair Assn. quits after Times investigation

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-fair-assn-executive-quits-20160330-story.html

Excerpt:

Henwood's departure follows a Los Angeles Times investigation that found that he and other executives received lucrative pay and benefit packages despite several years of red ink at the association. The organization stages the annual fair and operates a number of year-round enterprises at the taxpayer-owned fairgrounds in Pomona.

In 2014, the most recent year for which figures are available, the association reported a loss of $3.44 million, federal tax returns show — its fifth straight year of negative results. During that period, compensation for Henwood and his top managers increased dramatically.

[dilanesp]

Corruption got rid of Horse Racing at Pomona. Los Al has no turf course and has been a complete failure. When H.P. closed down Liebau manipulated everyone into going to Los Al even though it was never a permanent solution. Pomona is being looked at again as we speak.

Head of L.A. County Fair Assn. quits after Times investigation

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-fair-assn-executive-quits-20160330-story.html

Excerpt:

Henwood's departure follows a Los Angeles Times investigation that found that he and other executives received lucrative pay and benefit packages despite several years of red ink at the association. The organization stages the annual fair and operates a number of year-round enterprises at the taxpayer-owned fairgrounds in Pomona.

In 2014, the most recent year for which figures are available, the association reported a loss of $3.44 million, federal tax returns show — its fifth straight year of negative results. During that period, compensation for Henwood and his top managers increased dramatically.

Do you think Pomona was making a profit on racing greater than what they make on the concerts they hold there now? If your answer is "yes", how come a couple of other racing fairs have shut down in recent years?

[Andy Asaro]

Do you think Pomona was making a profit on racing greater than what they make on the concerts they hold there now? If your answer is "yes", how come a couple of other racing fairs have shut down in recent years?

All I can tell you is what I know from reading AND talking to people high up in the food chain. Do I think it will happen? No, I think California racing as we know it is done.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/ToddTVG/status/1007307902573400064

[CheckMark]

https://twitter.com/ToddTVG/status/1007307902573400064

I love Golden Gate. I also loved Hollywood Park, but they shut it down. Hopefully they do not do this to Golden Gate. :rip:

[Andy Asaro]

I love Golden Gate. I also loved Hollywood Park, but they shut it down. Hopefully they do not do this to Golden Gate. :rip:

I doubt they will shut it down.

[dilanesp]

All I can tell you is what I know from reading AND talking to people high up in the food chain. Do I think it will happen? No, I think California racing as we know it is done.

I think Fairplex was always a fantasy. The business model of the racing fairs- that horse racing is popular and brings people in who then spend money on the fair- has not worked for years. Stockton and Vallejo now use their racetracks for concerts at the fair, and so does Pomona. If horse racing at the fair were a moneymaker at the fair, none of those 3 would have ever given up their dates.

A lot of things were desperately thrown about by people who didn't want to confront the reality that California can only support one circuit. One of the ridiculous ideas- Los Al- got enacted, but it isn't going to last forever.

People hate Stronach, but he at least has been able to keep racing going. Might as well keep him happy rather than undertaking extravagant failures.

[AlsoEligible]

Apparently Ritvo didn't show at the GGF meeting today, but not a lot of new information came out of it anyway. Next week's CHRB meeting is where all the sparks will really fly.

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/golden-gates-future-still-unclear/#.WyLhtt33XnI.facebook

Ritvo did not attend the June 14 meeting, which was hosted by Golden Gate’s General Manager David Duggan and P.J. Campo, the Vice President of Racing for The Stronach Group. They spoke with local owners and trainers about Golden Gate’s future, urging them to attend the CHRB meeting June 21 at the Alameda County Fairgrounds.

“At the meeting we simply reiterated our position with regard to the model that exists in California,” Duggan said. “We told the horsemen that we wish to change the model, that it is broken and has been broken and documented since 2010. That is the message we delivered to the horsemen; they took it reasonably well.”

But at least one horseman feels uneasy.

“I don’t want us to be forced into the middle,” said trainer Blaine Wright, who is based out of Golden Gate. “This is between two companies, and we as horsemen shouldn’t have to stand up for one or the other. I would love to see year-round racing at Golden Gate, because I believe in racing where you are training, so I’m for The Stronach Group and support them. But it puts the horsemen in a bad bind to tell us to go to the meeting next week and speak up about this.”

Dates for the Northern California circuit have already been a contentious subject as The Stronach Group continues to seek year-round racing at Golden Gate, which could come at the expense of the fair circuit. The long-standing summer tradition sees racing bounce between Pleasanton, Cal Expo, Santa Rosa, Ferndale, Los Alamitos, and Fresno, which Wright notes can be logistically difficult for trainers and their staff.

“The fair circuit is fun, but it’s problematic because you’re limited in the racing,” Wright said. “But the fairs do offer a stakes schedule that Golden Gate can’t compete with.”

The Stronach Group has contended they would like to race concurrently with the fair circuit, but questions remain over the California horse population’s ability to support simultaneous racing in the area.

“I’m sure that the CHRB meeting next week will be interesting,” Duggan said. “They know what our stance is.”

[Fager Fan]

https://twitter.com/ToddTVG/status/1007307902573400064

I'm all for boycotts on important issues and such, but Todd is just like all the other handicappers who don't get that they are *only* the customer. The customer in racing has the very same amount of *say* in racing as the customer of any other service or product has over that company. The *say* is either buying the service or product or not, writing complaints or suggestions or not.

As someone who's made my living in the shampoo industry 30yrs, I've seen innumerable variations of disputes like this. I certainly get complexities. However, Industry needs to remember who's money they're dividing up; shampoo users. Yet,that group never has a say.

So what does Shrupp think? That people with hair should have seats on the Proctor & Gamble board? Maybe they get together and vote one of themselves in as the executive vice president of product and marketing?

Exactly what *say* does Shrupp think the customers of any product should have, and how should that *say* be implemented?

[Andy Asaro]

I'm all for boycotts on important issues and such, but Todd is just like all the other handicappers who don't get that they are *only* the customer. The customer in racing has the very same amount of *say* in racing as the customer of any other service or product has over that company. The *say* is either buying the service or product or not, writing complaints or suggestions or not.

As someone who's made my living in the shampoo industry 30yrs, I've seen innumerable variations of disputes like this. I certainly get complexities. However, Industry needs to remember who's money they're dividing up; shampoo users. Yet,that group never has a say.

So what does Shrupp think? That people with hair should have seats on the Proctor & Gamble board? Maybe they get together and vote one of themselves in as the executive vice president of product and marketing?

Exactly what *say* does Shrupp think the customers of any product should have, and how should that *say* be implemented?

Shrupp speaks out about low takeout and other issues when he can. He helped expose the photo finish debacle at Del Mar last year. Don't know anyone on air who does that at least once in a while. I appreciate it.

[alhattab]

Apparently Ritvo didn't show at the GGF meeting today, but not a lot of new information came out of it anyway. Next week's CHRB meeting is where all the sparks will really fly.

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/golden-gates-future-still-unclear/#.WyLhtt33XnI.facebook

I'm not very close to this story but it sounds a bit like Gulfstream/Calder, Part Deaux.

[Prioress Ply]

“I don’t want us to be forced into the middle,” said trainer Blaine Wright, who is based out of Golden Gate. “This is between two companies, and we as horsemen shouldn’t have to stand up for one or the other. I would love to see year-round racing at Golden Gate, because I believe in racing where you are training, so I’m for The Stronach Group and support them. But it puts the horsemen in a bad bind to tell us to go to the meeting next week and speak up about this.”


I'll bet he wants to see year round racing of 5 and 6 horse fields so the club can continue.

Look at the cars these clowns roll up to the track in the morning in. Real eye opener.

[dilanesp]

“I don’t want us to be forced into the middle,” said trainer Blaine Wright, who is based out of Golden Gate. “This is between two companies, and we as horsemen shouldn’t have to stand up for one or the other. I would love to see year-round racing at Golden Gate, because I believe in racing where you are training, so I’m for The Stronach Group and support them. But it puts the horsemen in a bad bind to tell us to go to the meeting next week and speak up about this.”


I'll bet he wants to see year round racing of 5 and 6 horse fields so the club can continue.

Look at the cars these clowns roll up to the track in the morning in. Real eye opener.

As I said upthread, I am not a fan of separate year round Northern and Southern circuits. But if Wright wants that, giving Stronach what he wants is his best hope for it.

[Valuist]

There's no reason why both circuits can't exist. Many of the Bay area horses aren't good enough to compete down south. The Bay area is one of the biggest metro areas in the country. They SHOULD be able to support year round racing. Another example of synthetic racing killing the product. Put real dirt in at GGF and they probably thrive. Absolutely no reason for an all-weather surface in California.

[dilanesp]

There's no reason why both circuits can't exist. Many of the Bay area horses aren't good enough to compete down south. The Bay area is one of the biggest metro areas in the country. They SHOULD be able to support year round racing. Another example of synthetic racing killing the product. Put real dirt in at GGF and they probably thrive. Absolutely no reason for an all-weather surface in California.

1. BM, the dirt track up there, didn't even manage to last as long as GGF. Tapeta has probably helped save the NCal circuit.

2. The main problem is a shortage of horses, resulting in small unbettable fields. The size of the Bay area market has nothing to do with that.

3. SA now has MCL16000 and CLM6250 races,and they draw 6 horse fields. We are ready to absorb GGF's cheaper horses.

[AndyC]

1. BM, the dirt track up there, didn't even manage to last as long as GGF. Tapeta has probably helped save the NCal circuit.

2. The main problem is a shortage of horses, resulting in small unbettable fields. The size of the Bay area market has nothing to do with that.

3. SA now has MCL16000 and CLM6250 races,and they draw 6 horse fields. We are ready to absorb GGF's cheaper horses.

The Bay Area circuit is 400-500 miles away from So Cal. Why not absorb AZ cheaper horses? or OK, or NM? The shortage of horses is not a geographical problem, it's a horse problem.

There is this ridiculous assumption that fewer tracks would result in more horses. It will actually lead to a lower demand for horses resulting in a much lower foal crop. Not to mention fewer owners, trainers, grooms jockeys, etc.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/1danross/status/1007776125370523648

But Ritvo appears keen to institute change as quickly as possible, and if the matter heads to court, “we hope the judge will review it quickly, and see which side is right and which side is wrong,” he said.

[dilanesp]

The Bay Area circuit is 400-500 miles away from So Cal. Why not absorb AZ cheaper horses? or OK, or NM? The shortage of horses is not a geographical problem, it's a horse problem.

There is this ridiculous assumption that fewer tracks would result in more horses. It will actually lead to a lower demand for horses resulting in a much lower foal crop. Not to mention fewer owners, trainers, grooms jockeys, etc.

Arizona horsemen have lower costs. So do New Mexico.

And the assumption is that fewer races = bigger fields.

[VigorsTheGrey]

The land Golden Gate is sitting on is worth ALOT...and it is a very large parcel in a prime location in the most expensive real estate market in the USA...who knows maybe skyscrapers could be built there with awesome views of the bay and nearby San Francisco...I wonder if that option was Plan B in the original calculations and now that real estate has soared, deemed advisable by financial gurus...?

[thespaah]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/1007074983166656512

Permit my ignorance, but what is NOTWINC?

[Andy Asaro]

Permit my ignorance, but what is NOTWINC?

Northern Ca. off track betting locations. Many of which are on fairgrounds.

[thespaah]

Arizona horsemen have lower costs. So do New Mexico.

And the assumption is that fewer races = bigger fields.

Im going to politely disagree with that assertion.
There have been many track closings as well as shortened meets. Fields are not getting larger. In fact it seems the breeding industry reaction has been to produce fewer , far fewer foals.
In this chart.
http://www.jockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=FB&area=2
the stats are daunting.
1990 . Number of lives foals dropped was over 44,000
In 2018 the live foal estimate is 21,500.
In 29 seasons ( inclusive) that is a whopping 52.3% fewer foals.
For California breds, the news is equally as alarming.
In 2002 there were 3800 live foals dropped. The last total available is 2016. Live foals, 1700.

[dilanesp]

Im going to politely disagree with that assertion.
There have been many track closings as well as shortened meets. Fields are not getting larger. In fact it seems the breeding industry reaction has been to produce fewer , far fewer foals.
In this chart.
http://www.jockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=FB&area=2
the stats are daunting.
1990 . Number of lives foals dropped was over 44,000
In 2018 the live foal estimate is 21,500.
In 29 seasons ( inclusive) that is a whopping 52.3% fewer foals.
For California breds, the news is equally as alarming.
In 2002 there were 3800 live foals dropped. The last total available is 2016. Live foals, 1700.

The sport is contracting.

What your analysis overlooks is how much money would be being lost if all those tracks stayed open.

The simulcasting model concentrates handle in a few tracks. Unless you can solve that problem, the sport will continue to shrink.

[Thomas Roulston]

After losing Bay Meadows, no way can NoCal afford to lose Golden Gate Fields.

[dilanesp]

After losing Bay Meadows, no way can NoCal afford to lose Golden Gate Fields.

I think Northern California, with Silicon Valley and San Francisco, would do just fine without us

[JustRalph]

After losing Bay Meadows, no way can NoCal afford to lose Golden Gate Fields.

Now that’s funny!

[Appy]

The Bay Area circuit is 400-500 miles away from So Cal. Why not absorb AZ cheaper horses? or OK, or NM? The shortage of horses is not a geographical problem, it's a horse problem.

There is this ridiculous assumption that fewer tracks would result in more horses. It will actually lead to a lower demand for horses resulting in a much lower foal crop. Not to mention fewer owners, trainers, grooms jockeys, etc.

I agree with Andy C. Costs are the same for horses that win as for horses than can't. Horses that can't won't pay the bills won't be around the racing barn long.
Hate to hear about prospect of losing GG. I've only recently taken an interest in it as a year round option.

[Denny]

Isn't TSG's business model to eliminate the competition and consolidate operations.

See, SoCal, NoCal, SoFla, Md.

[Thomas Roulston]

It looks as if certain unnamed people at Golden Gate Fields are wielding the same "nuclear option" as certain unnamed people at Colonial Downs did - and we all saw how that turned out: A beautiful, unique track, with no horses at all now running there.

[dilanesp]

I agree with Andy C. Costs are the same for horses that win as for horses than can't. Horses that can't won't pay the bills won't be around the racing barn long.
Hate to hear about prospect of losing GG. I've only recently taken an interest in it as a year round option.

If this is true, the sport is basically dead with the only three exceptions being perhaps an elite circuit of TC/BC style racing, a few "vacation" tracks, and slot-supported tracks.

Because when the sport has worked economically, there were ALWAYS big fields. Which means that most horses didn't win their races. That's how it works in Europe. That's how it works in Hong Kong. That's how it works in Australia. And that's how it worked at successful tracks in the US back in the day.

The reason it can't work with smaller fields is smaller fields crush betting handle. Indeed, for all that people say about takeout on this board (some of which is certainly true), the biggest, most handle destroying factor in all of racing is a card full of short fields. Bettors see a bunch of 5 and 6 horse fields, they figure there's no value, and they look at a different track. Especially the exotic bettors who bet far more money than the win/place/show bettors at this point. Most bettors will prefer a card full of 12 horse fields with a 19 percent takeout to a card full of 6 horse fields with a 15 percent takeout.

So somehow, where the sport has been successful, owners figure out a way to pay bills even though most of their horses are losing. And I suspect the answer to that is that when the sport is successful, and the racetracks are teeming with people, the experience of owning horses is more fun and it historically attracted more rich folks with disposable income.

[Andy Asaro]

WPS takeout = 16.77% as opposed to 15.43%

Exacta Takeout = 24.2% as opposed to 22.68%

Tri and Super Takeout = 25.02% as opposed to 23.68%

Daily Double Takeout = 24.02% as opposed to 20%

P3, P4, P5, and P6 takeout = 25.02% as opposed to 23.68%

Fairs are NOT NTRA accredited, have surfaces that are less safe for horses and jockeys, and charge abusively higher takeout rates.

[AlsoEligible]

Isn't TSG's business model to eliminate the competition and consolidate operations.

See, SoCal, NoCal, SoFla, Md.

Sure, but what corporation's business model doesn't include consolidating operations and minimizing competition in order to maximize profit? That's capitalism 101.

The idea that GGF should continue operating at a loss to help subsidize the rest of Northern California is ridiculous. They've already been doing that for years, no one at the CHRB or any other acronym gave a shit about fixing the broken model, and now TSG is saying enough is enough.

Now guys like Avioli and Baedeker are saying "let's just keep going with the model we have, and then we'll figure out a way to make it work for everyone", but that's bullshit. People have been talking about this issue since at least 2010 (Source (https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/143826/words-of-warning-for-california-satellites)), and nothing has been done. These bureaucrats have, and will continue, to kick this can down the road for as long as they're able to.

Personally I applaud Ritvo for finally drawing a line in the sand. If the whole thing blows up and NorCal racing goes under, I'm blaming the entities that had decades to address this, and neglected their responsibilities....not the guy who's just trying to run a business.

EDIT: More from the article I linked (2010):

Jack Liebau, president of Hollywood Park, said both SCOTWINC and the Northern California off-track wagering system, NCOTWINC, "have problems as far as solvency is concerned."

The situation in the north isn't much better. A NCOTWINC report estimated its deficit at $2.7 million from 2005 to 2009, an amount that has been carried so far by Golden Gate Fields.

That's the same Lieabau who is now spearheading a lawsuit against the CHRB, arguing that GGF shouldn't be allowed to race without utilizing an OTB network that he admitted is insolvent.

[dilanesp]

Sure, but what corporation's business model doesn't include consolidating operations and minimizing competition in order to maximize profit? That's capitalism 101.

The idea that GGF should continue operating at a loss to help subsidize the rest of Northern California is ridiculous. They've already been doing that for years, no one at the CHRB or any other acronym gave a shit about fixing the broken model, and now TSG is saying enough is enough.

Now guys like Avioli and Baedeker are saying "let's just keep going with the model we have, and then we'll figure out a way to make it work for everyone", but that's bullshit. People have been talking about this issue since at least 2010 (Source (https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/143826/words-of-warning-for-california-satellites)), and nothing has been done. These bureaucrats have, and will continue, to kick this can down the road for as long as they're able to.

Personally I applaud Ritvo for finally drawing a line in the sand. If the whole thing blows up and NorCal racing goes under, I'm blaming the entities that had decades to address this, and neglected their responsibilities....not the guy who's just trying to run a business.

+1

[Andy Asaro]

Sure, but what corporation's business model doesn't include consolidating operations and minimizing competition in order to maximize profit? That's capitalism 101.

The idea that GGF should continue operating at a loss to help subsidize the rest of Northern California is ridiculous. They've already been doing that for years, no one at the CHRB or any other acronym gave a shit about fixing the broken model, and now TSG is saying enough is enough.

Now guys like Avioli and Baedeker are saying "let's just keep going with the model we have, and then we'll figure out a way to make it work for everyone", but that's bullshit. People have been talking about this issue since at least 2010 (Source (https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/143826/words-of-warning-for-california-satellites)), and nothing has been done. These bureaucrats have, and will continue, to kick this can down the road for as long as they're able to.

Personally I applaud Ritvo for finally drawing a line in the sand. If the whole thing blows up and NorCal racing goes under, I'm blaming the entities that had decades to address this, and neglected their responsibilities....not the guy who's just trying to run a business.

EDIT: More from the article I linked (2010):



That's the same Lieabau who is now spearheading a lawsuit against the CHRB, arguing that GGF shouldn't be allowed to race without utilizing an OTB network that he admitted is insolvent.

Liebau is a real piece of work. He's in his twilight years and still can't resist working against the best interest of California Racing to please his buddies.

[Denny]

AE,

Granted I'm speaking as an outsider, an Easterner not very knowledgeable with how things work in California.

Sure it's Business 101 in capitalistic America. I'm not naive.

But, let me ask this?
Why does everyone think Stronach is such a fan of Thoroughbred racing, when really all he's interested in as a businessman is eliminating competition?
Why do people think he's good for the sport?

His vision of the sport is entirely about himself controlling a good portion of it.

I'm no fan of Bay Meadows closing, Hollywood Park closing, Calder selling out to Stronach and only racing for one month to give GP a break, Pimlico down to a few weeks with it's future existence in question.

There's a recurring pattern evident, and Stronach is why IMO.

[AndyC]

Arizona horsemen have lower costs. So do New Mexico.

And the assumption is that fewer races = bigger fields.

So it sounds like you think that all of California should end racing and relocate to AZ or NM. The field sizes would be enormous.

In the good ole days No. Cal was essentially the minor leagues and So Cal the majors. Now So Cal has taken a deep dive into the minor leagues creating a high demand for cheap horses that doesn't help either circuit. While consolidation can be good for many businesses I can't see horse quality or quantity being increased as a result.

[AlsoEligible]

AE,

Granted I'm speaking as an outsider, an Easterner not very knowledgeable with how things work in California.

Sure it's Business 101 in capitalistic America. I'm not naive.

But, let me ask this?
Why does everyone think Stronach is such a fan of Thoroughbred racing, when really all he's interested in as a businessman is eliminating competition?
Why do people think he's good for the sport?

His vision of the sport is entirely about himself controlling a good portion of it.

I'm no fan of Bay Meadows closing, Hollywood Park closing, Calder selling out to Stronach and only racing for one month to give GP a break, Pimlico down to a few weeks with it's future existence in question.

There's a recurring pattern evident, and Stronach is why IMO.

I won't argue that Stronach is ego-driven, and at the end of the day he is running a business, not a charity. But I'll take him over a group like Churchill, who (aside from one weekend a year) just want to turn their tracks into casinos. There's a reason why Calder gave their dates to TSG/Gulfstream so willingly....because CDI has zero interest in running races there, even for a month.

Pimlico/Laurel is a whole different issue, and basically boils down to Pimlico being a crumbling track in a long-ago crumbled neighborhood. On its biggest day of the year, the roof was literally falling apart with water leaks throughout the track. They only run 1-2 weeks now because no one, patrons and employees alike, want to be caught dead in that area outside of Preakness weekend. I used to work night shifts there, and I don't blame them.

It would take an estimated $300-$500m to renovate and/or rebuild Pimlico, and it makes no business sense for TSG to spend that money when they already have a nicer facility 20 miles down the road (where they've already spent $30m and counting on renovations).

As for NorCal specifically, I would argue that year-round racing at GGF would be better for the sport. A number of the horsemen who have spoken up on this have stated that they would rather stay at one location than have to move around the state all summer; so it's better for them. GGF is a safer racing surface, so it's better for horses and jockeys. And GGF has lower takeouts than the fairs, so it's better for players.

[dilanesp]

So it sounds like you think that all of California should end racing and relocate to AZ or NM. The field sizes would be enormous.

In the good ole days No. Cal was essentially the minor leagues and So Cal the majors. Now So Cal has taken a deep dive into the minor leagues creating a high demand for cheap horses that doesn't help either circuit. While consolidation can be good for many businesses I can't see horse quality or quantity being increased as a result.

The only reason we shouldn't end racing in California is because Del Mar is still reasonably profitable and Santa Anita is marginally profitable. I.e., we still have enough fans to occasionally fill up our tracks and produce revenue, and we can still draw handle.

But understand, our costs for horsemen and tracks are very high (especially our labor and tax environments), and we definitely can't compete very well for cheap horses with localities that have lower costs and lower taxes.

[dilanesp]

AE,

Granted I'm speaking as an outsider, an Easterner not very knowledgeable with how things work in California.

Sure it's Business 101 in capitalistic America. I'm not naive.

But, let me ask this?
Why does everyone think Stronach is such a fan of Thoroughbred racing, when really all he's interested in as a businessman is eliminating competition?
Why do people think he's good for the sport?

His vision of the sport is entirely about himself controlling a good portion of it.

I'm no fan of Bay Meadows closing, Hollywood Park closing, Calder selling out to Stronach and only racing for one month to give GP a break, Pimlico down to a few weeks with it's future existence in question.

There's a recurring pattern evident, and Stronach is why IMO.

Here's the problem. In economics there's something called a "natural monopoly". This happens when it doesn't make any economic sense given the conditions of the market for there to be a second supplier.

A classic example is an electrical utility. Many municipalities have public utilities. But even if the electricity system is set up and run by a private company, it makes no sense to have a competitor. You only want one set of power lines running everywhere, you want a single company to be held accountable and who can be called on to fix outages, etc. So instead of encouraging competition, you just accept there's going to be a monopoly and regulate it.

Horse racing, because it has declined and is no longer a sport that a lot of people care about, has become closer and closer to a natural monopoly. When it was a healthy sport bringing in tons of money, sure, nothing wrong with having several track owners competing with each other. When I was a kid, the management teams of Santa Anita and Hollywood Park hated each other and almost never cooperated on anything. But they were both very profitable tracks. That competition was healthy for racing and arguably brought out a lot of innovations such as swag giveaways, exotic wagers, etc.

But nowadays, the most likely result of separate ownership is to increase the probability that the remaining tracks fail. I am not convinced there's any economic viability in running horse races in Northern California year round at all, but if there is, Stronach-- a person who is actually committed to trying to get racing to work-- will find it. You are far less likely to find it with separate owners.

Understand, as well, that because the general public doesn't care about our sport very much anymore, and because of the economics of simulcasting, contraction is inevitable. Closing Pimlico, to choose sort of the obvious example, is probably necessary for the long-term health of the sport. Pimlico sits on very valuable land, makes money only two race days a year, has great difficulty competing with other east coast racetracks some of which get slot revenues, and would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to renovate. It's a lost cause. So if you like having racing in Maryland, consolidation at Laurel is a no-brainer. Stronach has a better chance of making it work if he only has to maintain and improve one track rather than two.

[Afleet]

Here's the problem. In economics there's something called a "natural monopoly". This happens when it doesn't make any economic sense given the conditions of the market for there to be a second supplier.

A classic example is an electrical utility. Many municipalities have public utilities. But even if the electricity system is set up and run by a private company, it makes no sense to have a competitor. You only want one set of power lines running everywhere, you want a single company to be held accountable and who can be called on to fix outages, etc. So instead of encouraging competition, you just accept there's going to be a monopoly and regulate it.

Horse racing, because it has declined and is no longer a sport that a lot of people care about, has become closer and closer to a natural monopoly. When it was a healthy sport bringing in tons of money, sure, nothing wrong with having several track owners competing with each other. When I was a kid, the management teams of Santa Anita and Hollywood Park hated each other and almost never cooperated on anything. But they were both very profitable tracks. That competition was healthy for racing and arguably brought out a lot of innovations such as swag giveaways, exotic wagers, etc.

But nowadays, the most likely result of separate ownership is to increase the probability that the remaining tracks fail. I am not convinced there's any economic viability in running horse races in Northern California year round at all, but if there is, Stronach-- a person who is actually committed to trying to get racing to work-- will find it. You are far less likely to find it with separate owners.

Understand, as well, that because the general public doesn't care about our sport very much anymore, and because of the economics of simulcasting, contraction is inevitable. Closing Pimlico, to choose sort of the obvious example, is probably necessary for the long-term health of the sport. Pimlico sits on very valuable land, makes money only two race days a year, has great difficulty competing with other east coast racetracks some of which get slot revenues, and would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to renovate. It's a lost cause. So if you like having racing in Maryland, consolidation at Laurel is a no-brainer. Stronach has a better chance of making it work if he only has to maintain and improve one track rather than two.

Pimlico is in a ghetto-doubt the land is very valuable

[GaryG]

Pimlico is in a ghetto-doubt the land is very valuableSo is Inglewood....that land was valuable and they are building a football stadium there. Pimlico neighborhood is worse though IMO.

[gheuks]

The only value in the Pimlico land would be the fact that it’s close to Sinai hospital. Pretty sure they sold them a piece of land last year that they use for parking.

[Denny]

I'd like to hear an African-American point of view on the neighborhood around Pimlico.

Unless you've lived or worked, as I have, in poorer neighborhoods most whites are afraid to be in predominant ly black neighborhoods.

I went to that track only once, was in Baltimore to see Camden Yards when it was first built. I thought the track was pretty much what I'd call a dump.
But, it looked like a lack of upkeep more than anything else was the reason.

I had no problem with the neighbourhood, either before or after the races.
And I'm a Caucasian - and was by myself. I've seen far worst in my travels in and out of just about every neighborhood in NYC.

I think lily white Frank Stronach and others in control are using the neighborhood as an excuse to shut down the track instead of spending some money on it.

That's my opinion on it.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/1008911212157915136

[Dave Schwartz]

Andy, unless DMR and SA have rolled back, they've been 16.43% for years.

[dilanesp]

Andy, unless DMR and SA have rolled back, they've been 16.43% for years.

We're at 15.43 percent according to the Racing Form.

http://www.publichandicapper.com/takeout.cfm

It should also be listed on the CHRB-17 forms filed by the tracks, but I can't seem to find them on the CHRB website now.

[AlsoEligible]

I think lily white Frank Stronach and others in control are using the neighborhood as an excuse to shut down the track instead of spending some money on it.

To the contrary, Frank has spoken at length about using Pimlico to help the neighborhood.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/horse-racing/bs-sp-frank-stronach-preakness-pimlico-0606-story.html

Specifically, Stronach would like to see part of the Pimlico site redeveloped into an urban farm that would create jobs for residents of the surrounding neighborhood and dispense fresh produce to the rest of the city. He said such a plan could coexist with a state-of-the-art racing facility, though he acknowledged “it would take a huge amount of money.”

At Pimlico, he envisions pairing with a Maryland university to create an organic food program that would employ neighborhood residents and improve nutrition by distributing locally grown food. He said the project could include farmland, affordable housing and recreation, daycare and school facilities. The Pimlico community could be granted a 20 percent ownership stake in the reimagined facility, he added.

“I spoke with the mayor, a nice lady, last year, and she feels very strongly about the Preakness,” he said. “And I said, ‘Look, I feel strongly about both. I feel strongly about the poverty and I feel strongly about meaningful jobs.’ I think it’s such an important issue. It’s not only the racing, it’s the poverty.”

One can argue whether this is the best use of the land, but Frank's definitely not using the neighborhood as an excuse to shut down the track.

[Andy Asaro]

Andy, unless DMR and SA have rolled back, they've been 16.43% for years.

WPS has been 15.43 not 16.43

[Dave Schwartz]

WPS has been 15.43 not 16.43

Then they rolled it back because it went to 16.43 like a decade ago.

[Thomas Roulston]

I'd like to hear an African-American point of view on the neighborhood around Pimlico.

Unless you've lived or worked, as I have, in poorer neighborhoods most whites are afraid to be in predominant ly black neighborhoods.

I went to that track only once, was in Baltimore to see Camden Yards when it was first built. I thought the track was pretty much what I'd call a dump.
But, it looked like a lack of upkeep more than anything else was the reason.

I had no problem with the neighbourhood, either before or after the races.
And I'm a Caucasian - and was by myself. I've seen far worst in my travels in and out of just about every neighborhood in NYC.

I think lily white Frank Stronach and others in control are using the neighborhood as an excuse to shut down the track instead of spending some money on it.

That's my opinion on it.



You're right about older white people, but not younger whites, who in New York City are perfectly willing to live in Harlem, Bedford-Stuyvesant, and the South Bronx.

As for Pimlico, its track design is a total joke - no distances on the dirt between 6 furlongs and 1 1/16 miles, and they can just barely get 6 furlongs in, with a 5-foot run-up, resulting in a track record of 1:09 for the distance, which gives Pimlico a Mickey Mouse aura.

[Andy Asaro]

Then they rolled it back because it went to 16.43 like a decade ago.

No.

In 2010 they raised exotic takeout significantly. And the plan was to go to 17% if the exotic takeout hike didn't hurt business. Then the boycott was so bad they never raised WPS.

[dilanesp]

You're right about older white people, but not younger whites, who in New York City are perfectly willing to live in Harlem, Bedford-Stuyvesant, and the South Bronx.

As for Pimlico, its track design is a total joke - no distances on the dirt between 6 furlongs and 1 1/16 miles, and they can just barely get 6 furlongs in, with a 5-foot run-up, resulting in a track record of 1:09 for the distance, which gives Pimlico a Mickey Mouse aura.

You are completely right. If y'all know about baseball, Pimlico is like Ebbetts Field- completely hemmed in to cramped dimensions by the shape of the property and the neighborhood location.

Compare it to Laurel which is surrounded by a forest.

[Denny]

AE,

if Franz truly has such goals for the pimlico neighborhood, then I'll have to change my opinion of him.

I thought they just wanted to shut it down, sell the land, and move the preakness to laurel.

Let's see what happens.

[chrisl]

I can't even imagine how much the land under GGF is valued...right on the bay---views of both bridges.

Wow! It's worth far more than a race-track land. Next time your stuck in traffic right there, on the approach to the bridge...look over and take a guess what that land is worth.


I am running a building project right next to GGF in Richmond. I was speaking with ownership about GGF. They stated that that area has been in the sights of many developers for many years. They felt it is only a matter of time.

[Denny]

Thomas R.,

Just for perspective, I'm in my 60's now.

You're right about the gentrification of NYC neighborhoods. My daughters friend live in one of those neighborhoods in brooklyn. Can't remember if it's Bed Sty or Brownsville. I used to work there and in Fort Greene, Flatbush, East NY and all over Brooklyn for a few years.
(all over the Bronx too, South Bronx included).
I live upstate in NY for years now and have no desire to go back to the city, not because of the diversity, but, because it's just too damn crowded.

The white youths seem to have no trouble filling Pimlico every Preakness day despite it's location either. Maybe it's whites that aren't exposed to people of color very often that have a problem.

That said, agree that the track needs a major overhaul. It is imo, like I said before in other words, a second-rate racetrack and you makean excellent point about the distances they can run.

[Valuist]

I can't even imagine how much the land under GGF is valued...right on the bay---views of both bridges.

Wow! It's worth far more than a race-track land. Next time your stuck in traffic right there, on the approach to the bridge...look over and take a guess what that land is worth.

Agreed. I went there for the first time about a year ago and have been there several times since. Not only is the view great, but weather wise, it might be the best spot in the Bay area. Seems like it is always 68-72 degrees at GGF.

[Jeff P]

Andy, unless DMR and SA have rolled back, they've been 16.43% for years.

I asked someone at the CHRB.

A CHRB staffer who knows where to look in the CA Business and Professions Codes confirmed WPS takeout in CA for thoroughbreds at Del Mar, Santa Anita, and Golden Gate is: 15.43%

After looking at the relevant sections in the statutes - their best estimate is that it's been that way since 1993.




-jp

.

[Dave Schwartz]

Thanks, Jeff.

[Andy Asaro]

CHRB Meeting 9:30 AM Pacific time. Will Politics supersede Sanity?

Can’t wait for this one. All eyes/ears on Baedecker.

Click the link to listen live.

http://www.selectstreaming.com/live/chrb/audio.php

[ronsmac]

You're right about older white people, but not younger whites, who in New York City are perfectly willing to live in Harlem, Bedford-Stuyvesant, and the South Bronx.

As for Pimlico, its track design is a total joke - no distances on the dirt between 6 furlongs and 1 1/16 miles, and they can just barely get 6 furlongs in, with a 5-foot run-up, resulting in a track record of 1:09 for the distance, which gives Pimlico a Mickey Mouse aura.The short 6f runup may be the best thing about Pimlico.

[AlsoEligible]

CHRB Meeting 9:30 AM Pacific time. Will Politics supersede Sanity?

Can’t wait for this one. All eyes/ears on Baedecker.

Click the link to listen live.

http://www.selectstreaming.com/live/chrb/audio.php

For those wondering where the stream is, today's meeting is structured a little differently. It started at 10 PT, with a closed session that should last about an hour, and the open meeting (with webcast) starting somewhere between 11:15-11:30.

Typically the closed session takes place at the end of the meeting. But with everything going on in the past two weeks, I imagine there are a lot of back door discussions taking place right now before they go in front of the public.

http://www.chrb.ca.gov/Board/board_meeting_agendas/2018_06_jun_agenda2.pdf

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/1009865607238438912

[AlsoEligible]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/1009876115710619648

Seems that TSG only sent this one guy to defend their position and he's getting beat up pretty bad by the board, TOC, etc.

Seems likely that CHRB will deny GGF's application and wait for the courts to figure out what is legally required regarding the OTB network.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/1009876115710619648

Seems that TSG only sent this one guy to defend their position and he's getting beat up pretty bad by the board, TOC, etc.

Seems likely that CHRB will deny GGF's application and wait for the courts to figure out what is legally required regarding the OTB network.

Very weak. Unbelievable.

[AlsoEligible]

CHRB approves the GGF application, contingent on receipt of a simulcast agreement with each off-track facility, as required per law. They would also need an agreement with the TOC, which Avioli stated would be "impossible to envision" without GGF supporting the off-track network. Those agreements must be provided to the board by close of business on July 2nd.

TSG response is that they don't see a need to comply with that.

So, the can is kicked to next month. Who would have thought? Tune in next time (7/12, 9:30 PT) for the next episode. :rolleyes:

[dilanesp]

CHRB approves the GGF application, contingent on receipt of a simulcast agreement with each off-track facility, as required per law. They would also need an agreement with the TOC, which Avioli stated would be "impossible to envision" without GGF supporting the off-track network. Those agreements must be provided to the board by close of business on July 2nd.

TSG response is that they don't see a need to comply with that.

So, the can is kicked to next month. Who would have thought? Tune in next time (7/12, 9:30 PT) for the next episode. :rolleyes:

Interesting. So if TSG doesn't comply, will the CHRB refuse to let them race? And if so, does GGF just close and get sold to developers?

This reminds me of when the baseball umpires went on strike. Never assume the other side will never dare exercise the nuclear option.

[AlsoEligible]

Interesting. So if TSG doesn't comply, will the CHRB refuse to let them race? And if so, does GGF just close and get sold to developers?

This reminds me of when the baseball umpires went on strike. Never assume the other side will never dare exercise the nuclear option.

My guess is that July 2nd will come and go, and TSG will provide no agreements. At the next CHRB meeting (7/12), the board will formally deny their application for failing to comply.

At that point both sides will wait to see what comes from the current lawsuit filed by Los Al, which will determine if there is actually a legal requirement for GGF to have a simulcast agreement with the OTBs. Greg Avioli made mention of knowing the answer to that within 30 days, so I assume the case is being expedited.

If the court rules in favor of Los Al (i.e. GGF must work with the OTBs), then either TSG caves, or they stop racing.

If the court rules against Los Al, then the only hurdle remaining is GGF getting a horseman's agreement with the TOC and CTT. Per Avioli, that will require a plan from TSG on how they're going to maintain current purse levels, and TSG had no answer to that today. Maybe TSG agrees to pay the difference out of pocket while they work on a new NorCal ADW model? Not sure.

If those agreements are made, then the CHRB has no grounds to deny the application, and GGF gets to run while the OTBs probably start shutting their doors.

I know that's a lot of "ifs", so I don't think this situation is much clearer after today than it was two weeks ago.

[Andy Asaro]

“The goal of the Stronach Group has been to create chaos,” Avioli said. “They have created chaos.”


http://www.drf.com/news/chrb-orders-golden-gate-reach-northern-california-otb-contracts-july-2

Excerpt:

Golden Gate Fields was ordered by the California Horse Racing Board on Thursday to reach contractual agreements with Northern California offtrack satellite locations, as well as horsemen’s organizations representing owners and trainers, by July 2 to be granted a license for a six-week race meeting from late August to early October.

[AlsoEligible]

TSG responds - https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/228174/stronach-group-headed-to-court-over-simulcasting-issue

Ritvo did not answer multiple requests for comment Thursday, but another executive with The Stronach Group, Scott Daruty, who was not at the CHRB meeting conducted at the Alameda County Fairgrounds, said the company will be "filing a court action to get a judge to interpret the law."

Daruty objected to the notion that NOTWINC was profitable, and pointed to the same "statutory distribution" Morey [Elizabeth Morey, TOC] referenced.

"Everybody at the meeting today was quoting California law and telling us that we are wrong in our interpretation," said Daruty, who listened to the meeting through streaming audio on the CHRB website. "We happen to think we're right, but we'll let a judge decide. While they're telling us we're wrong, they're ignoring the law in saying NOTWINC is profitable. NOTWINC cannot be funded by anything over and above the percentage (written in) the statute. What they're saying is we should voluntarily contribute over and above the statute to keep NOTWINC going."

Daruty responded to the criticism with an assurance that The Stronach Group is taking these measures to better the industry.

"For all the criticism that we're taking, the main point that I think everybody is missing is we're doing what we're doing to try to strengthen the industry," he said. "I haven't had a single person say to me the Northern California (simulcast) network is good, or it makes sense, or we should keep it the same way. Everybody I talk to acknowledges the problem and that it needs to be fixed, but nobody has any ideas or has made any effort to fix it."

We can debate TSG's intentions, but it's tough to argue with that last part. This can has been kicked down the road by these people for over a decade, and there's nothing to suggest it won't stop even if TSG gives in.

Even today, no one made any serious attempts to try and discuss a long term solution...or even to propose a subcommittee or "working group" (which the board hands out like candy) to start talking about it. Everyone just wanted to take the mic and slam TSG as "unconscionable" and "life threatening". Not surprising that they didn't bother showing up, aside from a single spokesperson.

[PaceAdvantage]

Look at the cars these clowns roll up to the track in the morning in. Real eye opener.Could you post dumber shit? Please?

[PaceAdvantage]

TOne can argue whether this is the best use of the land, but Frank's definitely not using the neighborhood as an excuse to shut down the track.Shush! Denny loves to think that he knows what he's talking about. Don't mess up the dream with facts.

[PaceAdvantage]

AE,

if Franz Tee hee hee! He called him Franz. Tee hee!!

[MooseDog]

Anyone who has been to the GGF simulcast since racing moved to the Fair Circuit can see that they are making some significant capital improvements to the paddock and part of the grandstand area.

I doubt it would be in the TSG DNA to spend money if they planned on seriously closing down GGF. But they do like to use lawyers and bully tactics to get what they want.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/BH_JBalan/status/1014195570959716352

[AlsoEligible]

...the parties have advised the CHRB of significant progress towards that goal.

Or not.

The Pacific Racing Association, which operates Golden Gate Fields in Albany, Calif., for The Stronach Group, has filed a lawsuit against the California Horse Racing Board in an effort to negate a law the CHRB says requires racetracks to contract with OTB facilities for simulcasting.

“We are seeking a court ruling invalidating that condition and give us the license without the requirement,” said Scott Daruty, a Stronach Group executive who serves as senior vice president or the Pacific Racing Association.

“We think the OTB network in Northern California is outdated, inefficient and ineffective. We have ideas how it can be better structured, but the CHRB has mandated that we have to do everything the old way. The purpose of the lawsuit is to get a court to interpret how the law works.”

https://www.paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/golden-gate-fields-sues-california-horse-racing-board-over-licensing-condition/

Apparently the crux of the issue is the text of the law that says an OTB network "may" be operated by an organization like NOTWINC. TSG sees "may" meaning optional, while the CHRB sees it as a mandate. Not a lawyer, but seems pretty clear that "may" is not the same as "shall" or "must", so I would think that TSG will prevail.

[dilanesp]

Or not.



https://www.paulickreport.com/news/the-biz/golden-gate-fields-sues-california-horse-racing-board-over-licensing-condition/

Apparently the crux of the issue is the text of the law that says an OTB network "may" be operated by an organization like NOTWINC. TSG sees "may" meaning optional, while the CHRB sees it as a mandate. Not a lawyer, but seems pretty clear that "may" is not the same as "shall" or "must", so I would think that TSG will prevail.

Well, CHRB has rulemaking power, and under Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Bd. of Equalization, that's entitled to some deference (although less deference than a federal court would give a federal agency's regulatory interpretation). So it isn't a purist issue of whether "may" means "must", but rather whether the CHRB's imposition of a mandate is permissible under the language of the statute with due deference to the agency's experties.

[Redbullsnation]

That would be terrible. The Horse Racing worlds needs MORE racecourses not less...

[Tom]

More?
You like three horse fields?
$400 claimers?

Way too much racing now.

[Redbullsnation]

More?
You like three horse fields?
$400 claimers?

Way too much racing now.
Not really my point. More racing courses LIKE GG. Need more big players in this game. We already lost Hialeah and CD

[Thomas Roulston]

Not really my point. More racing courses LIKE GG. Need more big players in this game. We already lost Hialeah and CD


We lost Churchill Downs?

[Tom]

We lost Churchill Downs?

Some would say yes. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

Not really my point. More racing courses LIKE GG. Need more big players in this game. We already lost Hialeah and CD

What benefit you think you will see from adding more whales to the game already under their thumbs?

[AlsoEligible]

CHRB meeting taking place right now. Currently in a closed session, then will start broadcasting. Agenda and webcast link below:

http://www.chrb.ca.gov/Board/board_meeting_agendas/2018_07_jul_agenda.pdf

http://www.selectstreaming.com/live/chrb/audio.php

Agenda item #5 is the Golden Gate application. During the June meeting, the board tentatively approved the application, with the condition that GG obtain agreements with all of the other OTB facilities by July 2nd. That did not happen.

Agenda item #6 is the potential reallocation of northern California race dates. In the event that the GG application is denied, this will be a fight over who gets to run GG's dates.

In the background of all of this is a pending lawsuit by Stronach against the CHRB to clarify exactly what the law requires. So even if their application is denied today, that doesn't necessarily mean that GG isn't running next month.

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/racetrackandy/status/1017528117387091968

[Zman179]

We lost Churchill Downs?

We lose any racetrack CD purchases.