Magna-Churchill Seek to Stop Simulcast Signal Stealers

[Pace Cap'n]

"Signal pirates" hack into the live racing electronic feed, in some cases using little more than a cheap satellite dish, and set up everything from mom-and-pop bet shops to elaborate operations worthy of The Sting.

Every track depends on people betting somewhere else. According to The Jockey Club, only 11 percent of the $15.6 billion wagered on North American racing in 2006 came from people betting on races they watched live at the track.

www.kentucky.com/101/story/20194.html
(http://www.kentucky.com/101/story/20194.html)

[Premier Turf Club]

From the article in the Lexington-Herald Leader:

TrackNet Media "will invest significant resources to better monitor the entities that have access to the companies' racing content and wagering pools," according to the announcement.



We have been told by TrackNet that all the off-shores "for the time being will get contracts just like they have in the past" (their words not mine), though none of them has ever been through any meaningful (some of them none at all) due diligence (my observation NOT their words).

When you ask TrackNet specific questions on what due diligence will be done on the non-US outlets you get corporatespeak... 'we are looking into that very thing right now and will continue to monitor those simulcast outlets, carefully, yada, yada, yada'....

[cj]

I don't understand why the tracks think this simulcast signal has so much value anyway. Now that betting with off shore books is pretty much a thing of the past, giving the signal away free would only help business.

I understand in the past you didn't want to give it to people that were not betting into your pools. What is the big deal now?

[Premier Turf Club]

I don't understand why the tracks think this simulcast signal has so much value anyway. Now that betting with off shore books is pretty much a thing of the past, giving the signal away free would only help business.

I understand in the past you didn't want to give it to people that were not betting into your pools. What is the big deal now?

But if the off-shores DO end up getting cut off, and you refuse to give the signal to any other domestic rebaters....YOU HAVE A MONOPOLY ON YOUR TRACKS (at least as far as rebating goes).

We're beginning to think that is their intention.

[betovernetcapper]

I think monopoly is the operative word

[cj]

But if the off-shores DO end up getting cut off, and you refuse to give the signal to any other domestic rebaters....YOU HAVE A MONOPOLY ON YOUR TRACKS (at least as far as rebating goes).

We're beginning to think that is their intention.

If tracks have a monopoly on rebating, it of course means there won't be any rebates, i.e takeout reductions.

[Premier Turf Club]

If tracks have a monopoly on rebating, it of course means there won't be any rebates, i.e takeout reductions.

That would probably suit them just fine. It'd be a big hit with the off-shore bookmakers as well since that's where all the handle will go.

[betovernetcapper]

Forget about rebates-we might even see an increase in take and breakage. This is an evil cabal.

[Premier Turf Club]

Forget about rebates-we might even see an increase in take and breakage. This is an evil cabal.

We all need to do what we can to keep open the distribution channels. Anyone that thinks rebates won't decrease once they've eliminated the competition isn't thinking this through clearly. Here's an interesting concept, how about letting the market decide who thrives and who busts out. If I can't service all of you by providing you with competitive rebates, cutting edge technology, premium customer service, etc. I'll fail, and I'd deserve to. Bob Evans is the guest on Blood Horse chat this week. I think every concerned player that reads this board should pose a question about this.

One of the things (amongst others) that separates Premier is we are ALL players, so we're concerned about the same things you guys are; things like juice trainers, uncoupled entries, past-posting, short fields, alternate PK6 selections, etc. Anyone that's met me, or spoken to me over the past 3 months can confirm that I'm as big a racing degenerate (meaning this in the most flattering sense of the word) as anyone on the board. Having spoken to some other ADW (or soon to be ADW executives) I'm not sure any of them can even read a Form.

[cj]

Who is Bob Evans?

I agree, the handle of those getting rebates isn't going to return without them, at least most of it.

There are always ways around things, and these silly laws will wind up just being a bump in the road for offshore places if there is no competition stateside.

[Premier Turf Club]

Who is Bob Evans?

I agree, the handle of those getting rebates isn't going to return without them, at least most of it.

There are always ways around things, and these silly laws will wind up just being a bump in the road for offshore places if there is no competition stateside.

Bob Evans is the President of CDI. He replaced Tom Meeker last year.

[garyoz]

But if the off-shores DO end up getting cut off, and you refuse to give the signal to any other domestic rebaters....YOU HAVE A MONOPOLY ON YOUR TRACKS (at least as far as rebating goes).

We're beginning to think that is their intention.


They own the content (e.g., the racing signal). Deciding how it is distributed is not a "monopoly," it is free enterprise.

Further, a "monopoly" has specific economic meaning, such as supranormal profits, no close product substitutes, and other evidence of "market failure" usually due to barriers to entry for new competition such as vertical integration or economies of scale.

An analogous model would be TV and cable networks, and they are highly concentrated in ownership and charge dearly for some of their product. For example, for each cable subscriber, Cox Cable had to pay ESPN about $2.60 per month in 2003 (see link)--an example that if you own the content, you set your terms for distribution. (Way off topic: These per subscriber monthly fees are the primary reason cable is so expensive--but also note that HRTV pays Dish Network for distribution--that is in the wrong direction and says alot about this sport)

http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/23/commentary/column_sportsbiz/sportsbiz/index.htm

[betovernetcapper]

Just to put this into perspective, I just got an email from YouBet offering double bonus point on Delta on Wednesday and Thursday nights. Now if I bet $864 in exotics at Delta YouBet will give me a $12.99 pen knife.

If I bet the same $864 with an offshore or Premier, I won't get the cheap pen knife, but I will get back a $69 cash rebate.

Let them have the monopoly for a year or so and I won't even get the cheap knife.

[Premier Turf Club]

They own the content (e.g., the racing signal).

Actually, they don't.

They own the right to accept wagers on-track. Under the terms of the Interstate Horse Racing Act no simulcasting can be conducted without the consent of the horsemen, who are far less interested in protecting a monopoly (legal or otherwise).

And my guess is a federal judge is going to be far less willing to cut them any slack given the exemption the industry (seemingly) has from the Wire Act that no other form of gambling was accorded.

[garyoz]

On what basis would a federal judge act (if your assertation about horsemen controlling the signal is correct--also probably any horseman input is deciding to distribute the signal--not deciding the negative, or excluding parties from receiving the signal)? Identify restraint of trade or some other violation of antitrust laws. Individuals throw around the term "monopoly" very loosely. There is well established case law.

[betovernetcapper]

Chat will go on in about an hour or so if anyone wants to ask a question-make a comment
http://www.bloodhorse.com/talkinhorses/RE032207.asp

[Indulto]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/talkinhorses/RE032207.asp (http://www.bloodhorse.com/talkinhorses/RE032207.asp)
Talkin’ Horses with Robert L. Evans Churchill Downs President
… Chicago, IL:
Like many bettors, I'd like to get the rebates formerly offered by Pinnacle in a legal way. Why are you not selling your signal to legal domestic operations like Premier Turf?
Evans:
Premier Turf is undergoing the due diligence investigation that we require of all ADW (advance deposit wagering) providers, including those that offer rebates. This is a primary function of TrackNet Media Group, which we launched with Magna Entertainment Corp. earlier this month.

... Lexington, KY:
Will the new Tracknet venture cut off all offshore rebaters, including Racing and Gaming Services and Youbet’s International Racing Group?
Evans:
TrackNet Media will treat any organization that wants to accept wagers on races at Magna and Churchill tracks with the same due diligence processes that have been used in the past. If distributors that offer rebates meet our criteria for wagering integrity and security, we will consider doing business with them.

[Premier Turf Club]

… Chicago, IL:
Like many bettors, I'd like to get the rebates formerly offered by Pinnacle in a legal way. Why are you not selling your signal to legal domestic operations like Premier Turf?
Evans:
Premier Turf is undergoing the due diligence investigation that we require of all ADW (advance deposit wagering) providers, including those that offer rebates. This is a primary function of TrackNet Media Group, which we launched with Magna Entertainment Corp. earlier this month.

This would be a compelling story had TrackNet President Scott Daruty not told us today "due diligence packages will be available in the next 7-10 days at which time YOU CAN APPLY for the signals." Funny, 10 days ago he said the same thing. These guys should get their stories straight. Boy, these due diligence packages must be really, really hard to put together. By the way, Magna and Churchill told the Blood Horse separately about 4 weeks ago that we were "still going through due diligence." By their watches, time runs backwards because we're further away than we were a month ago.

Good thing we figure on a COMPLETELY different calendar.

[ezrabrooks]

… Chicago, IL:
Like many bettors, I'd like to get the rebates formerly offered by Pinnacle in a legal way. Why are you not selling your signal to legal domestic operations like Premier Turf?
Evans:
Premier Turf is undergoing the due diligence investigation that we require of all ADW (advance deposit wagering) providers, including those that offer rebates. This is a primary function of TrackNet Media Group, which we launched with Magna Entertainment Corp. earlier this month.

This would be a compelling story had TrackNet President Scott Daruty not told us today "due diligence packages will be available in the next 7-10 days at which time YOU CAN APPLY for the signals." Funny, 10 days ago he said the same thing. These guys should get their stories straight. Boy, these due diligence packages must be really, really hard to put together. By the way, Magna and Churchill told the Blood Horse separately about 4 weeks ago that we were "still going through due diligence." By their watches, time runs backwards because we're further away than we were a month ago.

Good thing we figure on a COMPLETELY different calendar.


PTC..your whining is starting to play thin. The only way you plan to attract players is by giving a rebate... Why don't you just admit that fact? Onshore Rebates, on the scale you want, are a class action law suit waiting to happen.

[Premier Turf Club]

The only way you plan to attract players is by giving a rebate... Why don't you just admit that fact? Onshore Rebates, on the scale you want, are a class action law suit waiting to happen.

We absolutely plan to attract players by giving rebates. We never hid that, it's on page 1 of the business description we send to the tracks. That's the thrust of our business plan; to be able to service the lower volume players that can't or don't want to play off-shore at rates better than available through the bookmakers. It's is impossible to serve them properly, and cost-effectively without a 'net presence. As far as that being "the only way" to attract them, we thought then, and still think now that a website that was designed with players in mind (e.g. batch wagering, dutching, conditional wagering queues, custom interfaces) is a pretty compelling reason as well.

What we will all get with MEC/CD is plain vanilla websites, lower rebates, and weekly minimums on par with the off-shores (I know the last one because they told us they dont believe in rebates for players below $10,000 weekly). As far as the class action lawsuit goes, I have to admit I don't quite follow that one.

[NoCal Boy]

I don't see where your outfit will be very successful. If we take Evans at his word, one can pretty well conclude large operations like Youbet and the AmericaTab family will have access to the signals and rebate shops like IRG will also be in the mix. In fact, IRG facilitates CRW wagering that is very profitable for the CDI and MEC tracks. Where does Premier Turf fit in? I am serious, not bashing. But between Xpressbet, Twinspires, Youbet and a few others, where do you fit? That is assuming TVG does not somehow reenter into the mix, but that appears unlikely. I do agree with you about the plain vanilla website. Evans mentioned CDI is going to be more of a technology integrator than developer. Sounds like he did not like Xpressbet's site or they simply would have used it.

[Premier Turf Club]

We'll see how this shakes out. I personally have never backed down from competition. I think it's the best thing for the marketplace, whether we're one of the survivors or not.

As far as technology goes, it will be very interesting to see what they come up with. I don't know what there is out there to "integrate." We looked at everything off the shelf, it was awful. I much would have preferred not to build something from scratch.

[NoCal Boy]

I think it is a given that XpressBet, Twinspires, Youbet and probably winticket and brisbet of AmericaTab are survivors on the domestic side. On the rebate side, IRG has to be a survivor with their large whale handles and CRW, plus licensed out of Oregon. The interesting thing will be pricing. What do you expect to pay for signal fees, and what do you expect large distributors thatare important to CDI and MEC for handles like Youbet will pay CDI and MEC forcontent? I am thinking 6% on a blended rate.

[betovernetcapper]

Didn't YouBet lose 2 million last year?

[NoCal Boy]

It looks like there were a lot of one time charges in the second half of the year. 4th quarter alone had $5MM of one time charges. They had an arbitration with TVG in which they won for the most part but still cost them a few million. They guided on making .17/share in 2007, which means net income of $7 million.

[betovernetcapper]

PTC.. The only way you plan to attract players is by giving a rebate...
As a player I find the idea of legal safe rebates really attractive. :)

[betovernetcapper]

I got the $2 million loss fig from a 3-14-2007 DRF article by Matt Hegarty titled
YouBet posts $2M loss for 2006 :)

[Valuist]

PTC..your whining is starting to play thin. The only way you plan to attract players is by giving a rebate... Why don't you just admit that fact? Onshore Rebates, on the scale you want, are a class action law suit waiting to happen.

That is simply not true. IRG is onshore, and offers significant rebates.

Do you work for Magna or CDI? Why would any player want to side against Premier Turf in this? Makes zero sense.

[Valuist]

We'll see how this shakes out. I personally have never backed down from competition. I think it's the best thing for the marketplace, whether we're one of the survivors or not.

As far as technology goes, it will be very interesting to see what they come up with. I don't know what there is out there to "integrate." We looked at everything off the shelf, it was awful. I much would have preferred not to build something from scratch.

Keep the good fight going. We all (or at least 99% of us) appreciate what you are doing.

[Premier Turf Club]

Keep the good fight going. We all (or at least 99% of us) appreciate what you are doing.

Thanks for the kind words. The bottom line is there are people at some of the biggest tracks that just don't want to see PTC (or anyone like us) succeed. Most of those don't give a damn about the horseplayers; a lot of them can't even read a racing form. As for those who think that we're doing this only for ourselves, we have standing offers to sell shares in our business to TOBA, The Jockey Club, National HBPA and a handful of racetracks. The only thing we ever asked for was two years to get this up and running the right way. After that time the "industry" (in whatever form it takes) can buy all of this or part of it for a pre-determined price. We've told them we'd be willing to stay on and help run it, or get out of the way if they want that.

To show what an uphill fight this can be, we approached one track and proposed to take their signals at a profit margin of 0.50% (i.e. everything above our costs plus the rebate to customers plus 1/2% would be returned to this track). Their response, "we don't rebate."

[Indulto]

PTC..your whining is starting to play thin. The only way you plan to attract players is by giving a rebate...EB,
I welcome “calling ‘em as one sees ‘em” commentary, but I don’t understand why you don’t share PTC’s frustration unless you are a whale who already receives preferential treatment.

While I’m opposed to the concept of lowering takeout selectively, the tracks and whales together force any player capable of qualifying for any rebates to do so until some issue can unite the smaller players to forego betting and exert their influence.

Even if the powers-that-be aren’t afraid that PTC-like operations might facilitate organized resistance, clearly they believe they will not attract new handle, but simply divert business that would otherwise be theirs.

Not a lawyer. Not an accountant. Just a no-account, ADW-wise, but I suspect PTC will have to sue to get those signals. PTC would get my new business -- if he legally could accept CA wagers for tracks I bet on – because 1) his interface is superior, 2) his customer service promises to be superior, and 3) he is accessible here for suggestions and complaints so he can be given the business in other ways if necessary. Who do you contact now when something goes awry with your account and you can’t get satisfaction through normal channels?

I think his straightforwardness and unflappable demeanor in responding to you -- and his belated diplomatic response to a post of mine in tlg’s YouBet thread -- demonstrate his competence even if he CAN read the Racing Form. ;)

Until I can bet there, PTC might consider offering annual threshhold qualifying options such as retroactive and continuing rebates once one has churned say, $6k since Jan. 1 of the current year. As a weekend/holiday warrior, the only month's I'd be likely to qualify at the $2k level would be when SAR, DMR, AP, and MTH are all open.

[Premier Turf Club]

I think his straightforwardness and unflappable demeanor in responding to you -- and his belated diplomatic response to a post of mine in tlg’s YouBet thread -- demonstrate his competence even if he CAN read the Racing Form. ;)

Indulto,

I apologize, for the less than timely response, I actually just saw that thread. I used to read nearly every new post, just don't have the time now.

As far as the 2K per month minimum, I will always try to work with people on that, especially PA members. Once we get up and running on-line if any PA member feels that that they can't meet the minimum contact me and we'll figure it out. I'm not so far removed from the days I used to go into the Suffolk OTB with $100 in my pocket because that's all the discretionary income I could spare. Sometimes I think I enjoyed the game more back then when a $200 win could make my month.

[Premier Turf Club]

The interesting thing will be pricing. What do you expect to pay for signal fees, and what do you expect large distributors that are important to CDI and MEC for handles like Youbet will pay CDI and MEC for content? I am thinking 6% on a blended rate.

There is upward pressure on signal fees everywhere. Even the mid-size tracks are above 3% these days. The local HPBA groups are getting organized and are attempting to reprice their signal fees. We have no problem with that. When negotiating with Louisiana Downs the other day I was informed that the horsemen wanted to bump up the rate for the next meet. I told the simulcast director that I had no issues with an increase as long as it was applied uniformly to everyone, which he assured me it would be. The tracks, trainers, owners, etc. sold the signal too cheaply in the past so it makes sense for them to increase the fees now. The real issue is that some ADWs pay much less than others, and no, it isn't always based on how important the tracks feel that business is. Some of those arrangements date back many years. I think you'll see more uniformity in pricing, with premium signals priced north of 7%. My guess is that's pretty much the upper limit of what the market will bare.

[Indulto]

Indulto,

I apologize, for the less than timely response, I actually just saw that thread. I used to read nearly every new post, just don't have the time now.PTC,
No apology necessary. You weren't directly addressed in that post. I was merely noting my surprise at the timing of yours. I miss many threads and sometimes only an odd reference will lead me back to a good one I would never have seen otherwise.

But since I've got your attention, I would like your response to this portion of my post in the “… offshore bet shops …” thread:
... Are handle minimums established for LGR and other rebate shops by the tracks as they are for individuals by ADWs? What additional tax advantages might there be for those able to wager as a corporate entity or as an/the owner of -- and primary wager source for -- an ADW? Could it be considered a vehicle for even further lowering of effective takeout, a subsidy, or just a bargain-priced convenience? Is the effect of IRS withholding alleviated in any way?

[ezrabrooks]

That is simply not true. IRG is onshore, and offers significant rebates.

Do you work for Magna or CDI? Why would any player want to side against Premier Turf in this? Makes zero sense.

What is not true?

Ez

[ezrabrooks]

EB,
I welcome “calling ‘em as one sees ‘em” commentary, but I don’t understand why you don’t share PTC’s frustration unless you are a whale who already receives preferential treatment.

While I’m opposed to the concept of lowering takeout selectively, the tracks and whales together force any player capable of qualifying for any rebates to do so until some issue can unite the smaller players to forego betting and exert their influence.

Even if the powers-that-be aren’t afraid that PTC-like operations might facilitate organized resistance, clearly they believe they will not attract new handle, but simply divert business that would otherwise be theirs.

Not a lawyer. Not an accountant. Just a no-account, ADW-wise, but I suspect PTC will have to sue to get those signals. PTC would get my new business -- if he legally could accept CA wagers for tracks I bet on – because 1) his interface is superior, 2) his customer service promises to be superior, and 3) he is accessible here for suggestions and complaints so he can be given the business in other ways if necessary. Who do you contact now when something goes awry with your account and you can’t get satisfaction through normal channels?

I think his straightforwardness and unflappable demeanor in responding to you -- and his belated diplomatic response to a post of mine in tlg’s YouBet thread -- demonstrate his competence even if he CAN read the Racing Form. ;)

Until I can bet there, PTC might consider offering annual threshhold qualifying options such as retroactive and continuing rebates once one has churned say, $6k since Jan. 1 of the current year. As a weekend/holiday warrior, the only month's I'd be likely to qualify at the $2k level would be when SAR, DMR, AP, and MTH are all open.

Indulto,

Nothing against PTC...he is appears to be a gentlemen...trying to run a business. But, my complaint is that rebates are his only angle. I know PTC is going to give other "services"...but if you took a poll..Rebates are the bottom line. Why switch from Am Tab to PTC...unless rebates are the reason.

My objection to Rebate betting..is the fact that it (rebate bets) go into the pari-mutual pools. Call me naive...but it aint fair.. and when push comes to shove...it aint gonna be legal. Once the regulators are put on the spot...they (rebates) will be a problem for the tracks participating in them. Sharp lawyers are going to have a field day.

Thanks for the Whale compliment!

Ez

[betovernetcapper]

Why are rebates illegal ?

[ezrabrooks]

Why are rebates illegal ?


Why are kick backs illegal?

Ez

[betovernetcapper]

Kickbacks tend to be illegal when they involve government employees accepting bribes. In any event, a rebate is something entirely different, more along the line of a discount offered when buying in bulk or volume. Currently many tracks and otbs offer small rebates in the form of prizes or betting vouchers. At Pha Park if I bet $25,000 I'd qualify for a $25 wagering voucher. :sleeping: PTC is offering a much more generous incentive to small bettors like me. :)

[Dave Schwartz]

My objection to Rebate betting..is the fact that it (rebate bets) go into the pari-mutual pools. Call me naive...but it aint fair..


Ezra,

With all due respect for your opinion I submit the following:

Is it fair that Wal-Mart gets a better price on products for resale than your local mom and pop store?

Is it fair that the mom and pop store gets a better price than you do?

If you buy a fleet of trucks from a local car dealer should you expect a discount?



If you buy a year's supply of toilet paper should you pay the same price per roll as the guy who buys it four rolls at a time?


The entire capitalistic system is based upon the concept of the volume discount. Why should the high volume customer not get a "price break" in horse racing as everything else?


Remember this - Rebates do not cost you a single penny. They are all paid out of the bet-taker's portion.

Since it costs you nothing, why should it upset you if someone else gets a rebate?


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Indulto]

Indulto,

Nothing against PTC...he is appears to be a gentlemen...trying to run a business. But, my complaint is that rebates are his only angle. I know PTC is going to give other "services"...but if you took a poll..Rebates are the bottom line. Why switch from Am Tab to PTC...unless rebates are the reason.

My objection to Rebate betting..is the fact that it (rebate bets) go into the pari-mutual pools. Call me naive...but it aint fair.. and when push comes to shove...it aint gonna be legal. Once the regulators are put on the spot...they (rebates) will be a problem for the tracks participating in them. Sharp lawyers are going to have a field day.

Thanks for the Whale compliment!

EzYou’re welcome, your whaleness.

Who are the regulators, who will put them on the spot, and when do you see it happening? Will you work to lower takeout if rebates are eliminated?

I agree with you that rebates are unfair; almost as unfair as exotic wager minimums that are too high for the recreational player to attack competitively. Ideally, for both tracks and horsemen, there would be no independent ADWs. Instead the tracks would collectively operate a nationwide ADW that provided each track and applicable taxing authority with its appropriate share without being a profit center. That situation could be ideal for horseplayers as well if it compelled whales to join forces with minnows to get takeout lowered to a level where any positive effects on handle could be demonstrated and optimized.

However, if signal pricing continues to support ADWs and inefficient state OTBs, then whales will continue to exploit their perceived influence on handle and continue forcing smaller, but serious recreational players to seek relief where they can find it.

Another unfair practice is tying funding for race-viewing to race-betting. Again, tracks could collectively minimize the cost of providing basic live and replay video with accompanying audio staggered to permit viewing any of them live or on-demand through a minimal number of channels, sites, whatever. Any televised pre-race or post-race analysis should stand on its own and be supported by paying customers who find it useful and/or entertaining.

I have to tell you, EB, your response to my post appears much more genteel than many of your recent ones; suggesting Brooks Bros. suits rather than a brand of whiskey. I’m also impressed by your efforts to enlist my well-documented position on rebates to further impugn PTC. Since you so neatly side-stepped valuist’s question as if it were rhetorical, I’ll ask you, myself, directly: Do you have some connection to any of PTC's competitors other than as a bettor?

Today’s racing fan’s experience is unfortunately and unreasonably marred by the collective efforts of track operators, state and local governments, Federal regulations, predatory ADWs, and professional bettors. So when a reasonable-sounding individual seeks my business in innovative ways that suggest I won’t be treated as just another account number, I’ll listen. And if, in the process, he can legally help me to become more competitive when the industry won’t, then “you bet” I’ll become his customer.

On the other hand, I'm sure a whale such as yourself could reasonably expect a return call from Evans, Stronach, Champion, or Nathanson.

[JustRalph]

Why do I have an urge to run out to Costco?

[Indulto]

... The entire capitalistic system is based upon the concept of the volume discount. Why should the high volume customer not get a "price break" in horse racing as everything else?


Remember this - Rebates do not cost you a single penny. They are all paid out of the bet-taker's portion.

Since it costs you nothing, why should it upset you if someone else gets a rebate?


Regards,
Dave SchwartzDS,
So betting on horses is the equivalent of buying wholesale to sell retail and provide customer support?

I believe it does cost me money when large bankrolls are leveraged against me in the mutuel pools by enabling them to effectively purchase additional exotic combinations at no cost and to obtain a higher return rate on the same selection.

[Indulto]

And furthermore:… Is it fair that Wal-Mart gets a better price on products for resale than your local mom and pop store?

Is it fair that the mom and pop store gets a better price than you do?

If you buy a fleet of trucks from a local car dealer should you expect a discount?Walmart still has to pay for the physical resources (plus insurance and interest) to inventory them until they are sold. Same for the Mom and Pop stores given what they can profitably keep on hand. Do you keep a year’s supply of toilet paper in one of your closets?

Savvy and determined individuals can obtain significant discounts from dealers and even their Fleet Sales management for single quantities. Vehicle purchase transactions are relatively infrequent and are associated with other profit sources including insurance, loans, and maintenance. Even ongoing fleet sales to rental agencies are subsidized by carmakers as a form of advertising.

I have to assume your response to EB was tongue-in-cheek, because it’s hard for me to believe that someone as smart and successful as you appear to be would maintain there is no negative impact on the unrebated player. If there weren't, YOU would play without one, right?

[Dave Schwartz]

It was not tongue-in-cheek.

I am deadly serious.

Walmart still has to pay for the physical resources (plus insurance and interest) to inventory them until they are sold. Same for the Mom and Pop stores given what they can profitably keep on hand. Do you keep a year’s supply of toilet paper in one of your closets?

I believe the example is perfect.

The people we are discussing here also have physical resources they have to pay for, namely an office and employees.

IMHO, the bottom line is that there is an underlying principle in America: If I spend more I should get a better deal.

I do not see why should horse racing be any different.


If there weren't, YOU would play without one, right?

Absolutely! Someone else said it well in this thread or elsewhere: The goal of every player should be to increase their wagering enough to be able to qualify for a rebate.



Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Indulto]

... IMHO, the bottom line is that there is an underlying principle in America: If I spend more I should get a better deal.The last Republican-controlled Congress sure didn't agree with you regarding the parmaceutical companies in the Medicare Bill.... The goal of every player should be to increase their wagering enough to be able to qualify for a rebate.I guess that's consistent for someone whose business is supporting such individuals, but as you were serious, then IMO the following is either disingenuous or as clueless as that Congress:... why should it upset you if someone else gets a rebate?

[Dave Schwartz]

Let's just agree to disagree, shall we?