Can it get any more petty?

[PaceAdvantage]

I mean, seriously....what's next on the petty, screw the customer list?

Video for MEC Tracks Temporarily Unavailable (http://feeds.bloodhorse.com/~r/Bloodhorse/TopHeadlines/~3/111160092/viewstory.asp)
The video replay of races run at Magna Entertainment tracks is temporarily unavailable to some of Post Time Technologies business partners, which include The Blood-Horse and the National Thoroughbred Racing Association.http://feeds.bloodhorse.com/~r/Bloodhorse/TopHeadlines/~4/111160092

[JustRalph]

I mean, seriously....what's next on the petty, screw the customer list?

Five dollar beer? Oops..........never mind.......... :lol:

[john del riccio]

I mean, seriously....what's next on the petty, screw the customer list?

Minimum wagers bumped up to 10.00.....

I hope Screw-nach doesn't read this board or he may actually think about it.....

John

[Grits]

I mean, seriously....what's next on the petty, screw the customer list?

With 5 pages of replies to the betting woes, alone,--to this game, management and owners of racetracks, leading publications--editors, writers-- trainers and owners of horses--All, along with every fan involved in this game would do well and benefit from learning and reading here, how difficult it is to remain a fan and bettor of horseracing.

The thread addresses the core problem of the sport--there is no respect for the bettor. NONE. The one individual that, interactively, provides the money that fuels the continuation of the game.

[andicap]

Do the fans deserve respect?
All the other special interests in the game -- horsemen, breeders/owners, tracks, etc. have one thing in common: They are all organized.
But fans -- not only in horse racing but any sport -- have always resisted taking this step, largely out of selfishness.
Who wants to go on "strike" if need be by boycotting all betting until the fans
get noticed?
On another level you can't blame the lunch-pail player because for any organized action to work it has to be led by the big players, the Ernie Dahlmanns of the world because THEY can really make a difference.
If the major players (and everyone else as a sign of unity) agreed not to play on a designated Saturday you can bet the other interests in racing would think about inviting us to the table, not because a single boycott would destroy them but as a symbol of what we could do if united.
WHY SHOULD THEY TAKE US SERIOUSLY? What are we going to do, stop betting?
Yes people are leaving the game but in drips and drabs. What's needed is DRAMATIC action, a strong sign of protest.

Ernie Dahlmann has been on this board -- Would he agree to boycott one day (one of the Saturdays between the Preakness and Belmont when it would gain maximum attention from the media) as part of a protest against the outrages perpetrated by all the interests at large against us. Would others step up to the plate as well?

Perhaps as a first step what's needed is a Horseplayer's Bill of Rights, a list of grievances we would submit to the powers that be on the day of the boycott.

[highnote]

I love the idea of a Horseplayers Bill of Rights.

We should draft one up -- everyone can contribute.

Then we should send it around to all the influential racing writers and racing websites and big time bettors and ask them to support the cause.

If we can get the top 10 or 20 bettors to stop betting for one day that would be huge. Maybe we can even get some of the top ADW services to back our cause. After all, they should be on the side of the bettor -- although, they are kind of middlemen between us and the tracks.

Maybe we can get some horse owners who are also bettors agree to not enter their horses on boycott day.

It's true, that for one day, jocks, ADWs, bettors, etc. will lose some money, but in the big picture, everyone stands to gain -- even racetracks would gain -- even in they don't know it yet.

The big losers might be the politicians who haven't been listening to their gambling constituents. They may get voted out of a job.

[JustRalph]

I am with you Andi........... :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

Let me know what day you guys boycott....I might get some odds with all you sharpies out of the pools! :rolleyes:

Seriously, if Enie boycotts, I'll hold my 10 bucks back too! That'll show 'em!

[skate]

ah, go wash your Hot-Dog... look, its a joke.:D

gotta watch what ya say...

i think, PA, puts these issues out here to to piss- off- the -skate.

well, the skate is about as happy as ever. and im having a very poor year at the track.
thats not their fault. my fault...


if you keep looking far enough, you'll find problems much bigger than ours, anyplace you look.

hand in glove.
problems in people.

don't sweat the small stuff.
tis a growing pain.

[Indulto]

Do the fans deserve respect?
All the other special interests in the game -- horsemen, breeders/owners, tracks, etc. have one thing in common: They are all organized.
But fans -- not only in horse racing but any sport -- have always resisted taking this step, largely out of selfishness.
Who wants to go on "strike" if need be by boycotting all betting until the fans
get noticed?Why would a whale waste/risk his leverage to help Remoras achieve what he already has and/or doesn’t need?

What percentage of whales actually bet through commercial ADWs like Atab, Ubet, etc.?

Chances are that most professional and/or successful bettors are already satisfied with the status quo and would not consider it in their interest to rock the boat.

At the other extreme is the casual fan who could care less about any of these issues.

So how large do you think this core of ADW bettors that would benefit is, and what do you think its collective impact on handle would be as compared with whales?

When exactly would their absence from the pools most likely to be noticed?

What incentives exactly would make them willing to expose their wagering accounts to scrutiny they might not be otherwise?

I don’t think widespread organization is the answer. Rather I believe that, once the preceding questions have been answered, satisfactorily, it will take a small, but significant group of determined and dedicated activists capable of coordinating their efforts, communicating them to the core group in advance, and convincing them to strategically refrain from wagering, collectively, without sacrificing, individually.

[The Hawk]

I love the idea of a Horseplayers Bill of Rights.

We should draft one up -- everyone can contribute.

Then we should send it around to all the influential racing writers and racing websites and big time bettors and ask them to support the cause.

If we can get the top 10 or 20 bettors to stop betting for one day that would be huge. Maybe we can even get some of the top ADW services to back our cause. After all, they should be on the side of the bettor -- although, they are kind of middlemen between us and the tracks.

Maybe we can get some horse owners who are also bettors agree to not enter their horses on boycott day.

It's true, that for one day, jocks, ADWs, bettors, etc. will lose some money, but in the big picture, everyone stands to gain -- even racetracks would gain -- even in they don't know it yet.

The big losers might be the politicians who haven't been listening to their gambling constituents. They may get voted out of a job.

This might have been a good idea at one time, but due to a variety of reasons it never happened, and it's now probably too late. It turns out that the old argument some guys used to make, the one where we were the most important piece of the puzzle, that there would be no game without us, that it would be polo without the bettors, etc., no longer applies. They don't really need us anymore, and to me, it's becoming more and more obvious [see Park, Gulfstream].

Sure, they'll keep running the races in order to keep the slots rooms open, but does it really matter to racinos how much is bet on the races, if the slots money keeps pouring in? The only boycott that would be recognized would be at the slots. If we thought we were treated like shit before...

[Kelso]

Why would a whale waste/risk his leverage to help

An important reason would be to keep/attract the negative ROI small-fry (such as yours truly) in the game. Without us, they'd have to cannibalize each other ... or find honest work. :D




does it really matter to racinos how much is bet on the races, if the slots money keeps pouring in?

It should, if their managements have any concept at all of a bottom line.

So long as THEY HAVE TO HAVE RACING IN ORDER TO HAVE SLOTS they will incur the attendant, and substantial, expenses of operating tracks and running races. The take goes a long way to subsidizing ... and I'll wager, at some tracks, completely covers ... those expenses. Revenues count when expenses can't be reduced.

[Indulto]

An important reason would be to keep/attract the negative ROI small-fry (such as yours truly) in the game. Without us, they'd have to cannibalize each other ... or find honest work. :D I considered that possibility, but these guys are so competitive they might prefer venison to beef. ;) ... So long as THEY HAVE TO HAVE RACING IN ORDER TO HAVE SLOTS they will incur the attendant, and substantial, expenses of operating tracks and running races. The take goes a long way to subsidizing ... and I'll wager, at some tracks, completely covers ... those expenses. Revenues count when expenses can't be reduced.http://www.drf.com/news/article/84256.html (http://www.drf.com/news/article/84256.html)
Handle tumbles 9.7 percent By MATT HEGARTY

Average daily all-sources handle for Gulfstream Park's races dropped by 9.7 percent this year compared with last year's meet, according to figures supplied by Gulfstream on Monday.

… The meet, which ended Sunday, was the first the track has operated with slot machines.

[Kelso]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/84256.html (http://www.drf.com/news/article/84256.html)

Average daily all-sources handle for Gulfstream Park's races dropped by 9.7 percent this year compared with last year's meet

[FROM THE ARTICLE]
Average all-sources wagering during the 88-day meet was $6,450,900, compared with $7,141,181 during last year's 88-day meet.


Using the numbers from the article, and at an average 20% takeout, the 9.7% drop cost Magna about $138K/day ... or more than 12 million bucks ... straight from the bottom line. That's gotta hurt!

It suggests to me that a boycott reducing handle by, say, only 20% (a really effective one should be a much higher %) ... and on a Saturday ... could cost a track such as (but not necessarily) Gulfstream more than $300K. Again, that would be entirely from profit. A few of them over the course of a meet, and now we're talking management's Christmas bonus!! That'll get their attention. :cool:

I think the boycott idea has potential, particularly if it is directed at the more influential (assuming there are such) tracks. Maybe hit only one or two at a time and try to break them away from the pack. (Get them to lobby for a PA rep at the table! :jump: )

[Indulto]

... It suggests to me that a boycott reducing handle by, say, only 20% (a really effective one should be a much higher %) ... and on a Saturday ... could cost a track such as (but not necessarily) Gulfstream more than $300K. Again, that would be entirely from profit. A few of them over the course of a meet, and now we're talking management's Christmas bonus!! That'll get their attention. :cool:

I think the boycott idea has potential, particularly if it is directed at the more influential (assuming there are such) tracks. Maybe hit only one or two at a time and try to break them away from the pack. (Get them to lobby for a PA rep at the table! :jump: )5X,
For someone it took 50 years to get to the track, you sure are making up for lost time. :lol:

Go get 'em, tiger!

[trigger]

[FROM THE ARTICLE]
Average all-sources wagering during the 88-day meet was $6,450,900, compared with $7,141,181 during last year's 88-day meet.
Using the numbers from the article, and at an average 20% takeout, the 9.7% drop cost Magna about $138K/day ... or more than 12 million bucks ... straight from the bottom line. That's gotta hurt!
It suggests to me that a boycott reducing handle by, say, only 20% (a really effective one should be a much higher %) ... and on a Saturday ... could cost a track such as (but not necessarily) Gulfstream more than $300K. Again, that would be entirely from profit. A few of them over the course of a meet, and now we're talking management's Christmas bonus!! That'll get their attention. :cool:
I think the boycott idea has potential, particularly if it is directed at the more influential (assuming there are such) tracks. Maybe hit only one or two at a time and try to break them away from the pack. (Get them to lobby for a PA rep at the table! :jump: )

Per the article, most of the handle drop was off track and Gulfstream's take out is much less on off track betting (NYOTB was paying Gulf less than 3%). Also, the horsemen get about 50% of the takeout via purses. So, the impact on Magna's bottom line is much less than a straight 20% of the total handle decline. The article also states that overnight purses were up by 17%.....presumedly due to the horsemen's 7.5% cut of slot income. The article doesn't say how much Gulf made on slots.
All that said, imho, a boycott reducing handle by 20% especially at a non- racino track would certainly get their attention.

[highnote]

The best thing to do is to keep the momentum going. Maybe the boycott won't happen today or tomorrow, but it's important to keep this topic going.

[Kelso]

Per the article, most of the handle drop was off track and Gulfstream's take out is much less on off track betting (NYOTB was paying Gulf less than 3%).
Good point. GP shared the pain to that extent.



Also, the horsemen get about 50% of the takeout via purses. So, the impact on Magna's bottom line is much less than a straight 20% of the total handle decline.

I think the purse has to be paid even if nobody at all bets on a race. It is almost a fixed cost ... controllable only by cancelling races (and risking the ire of connections). If I have this correct, then all lost takeout is lost profit.

[kenwoodallpromos]

It remains to be seen if this thread winds up like talk radio- a safety valve designed to keep people from getting active and really doing anything!
I will say again, if a players' boycott is to work it would have to be against 1 targeted track to send a message- not a major track. For example, maybe an annoucement of plans to boycott certain races, then a boycott of betting on Laurel and instead everyone betting Finger Lakes or Mountaineer, to try and make enough impact to sent a message.
What medium size track and what type race do most here bet?

[Indulto]

It remains to be seen if this thread winds up like talk radio- a safety valve designed to keep people from getting active and really doing anything!
I will say again, if a players' boycott is to work it would have to be against 1 targeted track to send a message- not a major track. For example, maybe an annoucement of plans to boycott certain races, then a boycott of betting on Laurel and instead everyone betting Finger Lakes or Mountaineer, to try and make enough impact to sent a message.
What medium size track and what type race do most here bet?KW,
I disagree. I think it depends on what issues are being dealt with. If it is against a particular ADW, then it has to be a major track whose handle is dependent upon that ADW's contribution a) to demonstrate the impact, and b) to make sure the track understands which side of the bread its butter is on.

Wish there weren't two concurrent threads on this topic.

[Hosshead]

I love Andy's idea of a bettor's bill of rights.

Trouble is, people like Stronach would use it as a roll of Charmin.

[highnote]

I love Andy's idea of a bettor's bill of rights.

Trouble is, people like Stronach would use it as a roll of Charmin.


As long as a Bill of Rights benefits bettors he can use it however he wants.

[horseplayer7776]

Has anyone noticed that their stock keeps going in the toilet?

[point given]

Since Tracknet has set the time and day as the Kentucky Derby, wouldn't that be the optimal time for a boycott ? Sure it would be a drop in the bucket, but if there were a 5-10% drop in handle , it would be noticed.

Just as they noticed the drop in handle for the Gulfstream meet. I wonder how, say, Tampa Bay did ? I'd suggest that Tampa has taken away business from Gulfstream, along with Fairgrounds opening as well. This was supposed to be a BIG year for them, but TAmpa took $$$ , core customers were turned off and left the building. And I think Mardi Gras casino has kicked some butt as well, and now the Pompano track casino will open to take more $$ away. Their corporate arrogance in dictating how things will be turns alot of people off to the product, and those are the core audience base.

Personally, I would have no problem simply kicking back , not betting and enjoy the Derby on TV with a bowl of popcorn and a couple of brews. I've grown tired of their BS. !

[Donnie]

Ladies and gentleman-
A boycott of the Derby would mean 2 things...an insignifigant drop in handle that the "powers" would explain away as a result of a weak economy, which it trully isn't, and the opportunity to deprive yourselves of one of the best money making days of the year! Damned stupid on our part AGAIN if you ask me!

So who's bow do you wish to fire the message across? Magna. Fine Everyone agrees?
Now how do you fire the message that everyone will take note of? Which is Magna's smallest handle track? The whales will not be playing there...the water is too shallow. A signifigant drop will make that track take notice. But more people will take notice if it is pre-announced AND (this is big) it works. I think that all facets of this discussion need to come into play. Grass roots. Education. Need for change. Education. Action.
You need to forget the öne day "idea". Every horseplayer you know needs to make a conscience effort to not bet that target track. Not just one day. EVERYDAY! The message must be strong. It must be CONSISTANT! Or else you are doing nothing but whistling into the wind.
And if enough participate, there will be nothing in the pools for anyone else to go after. Others will follow suite (not play that track) cause there will be nothing to take out of the pools.

The questions are:
1. How do you get the grass roots involved?
2. What track do you target?
3. When do you start?
4. When do you end?

Everyone talks that it is pure economics. Which it is. Somebody (us) needs to prove it. So if we hurt the little guy (the lowest handle Magna track), the impact will be much larger than if we withhold our bets on one day at the tune of .1% of the handle. I think Step #1 will be the hardest!
Put up or shut up.

[Indulto]

Ladies and gentleman-
A boycott of the Derby would mean 2 things...an insignifigant drop in handle that the "powers" would explain away as a result of a weak economy, which it trully isn't, and the opportunity to deprive yourselves of one of the best money making days of the year! Damned stupid on our part AGAIN if you ask me!

So who's bow do you wish to fire the message across? Magna. Fine Everyone agrees?
Now how do you fire the message that everyone will take note of? Which is Magna's smallest handle track? The whales will not be playing there...the water is too shallow. A signifigant drop will make that track take notice. But more people will take notice if it is pre-announced AND (this is big) it works. I think that all facets of this discussion need to come into play. Grass roots. Education. Need for change. Education. Action.
You need to forget the öne day "idea". Every horseplayer you know needs to make a conscience effort to not bet that target track. Not just one day. EVERYDAY! The message must be strong. It must be CONSISTANT! Or else you are doing nothing but whistling into the wind.
And if enough participate, there will be nothing in the pools for anyone else to go after. Others will follow suite (not play that track) cause there will be nothing to take out of the pools.

The questions are:
1. How do you get the grass roots involved?
2. What track do you target?
3. When do you start?
4. When do you end?

Everyone talks that it is pure economics. Which it is. Somebody (us) needs to prove it. So if we hurt the little guy (the lowest handle Magna track), the impact will be much larger than if we withhold our bets on one day at the tune of .1% of the handle. I think Step #1 will be the hardest!
Put up or shut up.D@,
You appear to agree with kenwoodallpromos that it should NOT be a major track, even on non-banner days.

You guys can still convince me, but I can't get it out my head that a low handle track is already getting too little play from the group likely to participate for the lack of it to be noticeable.

To me it seems the ideal track would not have to necesarily be a MEC track, but whichever one would normally take the highest percentage of boycotter action (especially ADW customers -- TVG track?) thus making the effect most visible.

Other than that, I think you're right on. :ThmbUp:

[Donnie]

To me it seems the ideal track would not have to necesarily be a MEC track, but whichever one would normally take the highest percentage of boycotter action (especially ADW customers -- TVG track?) thus making the effect most visible.

Point well taken Indulto...there will have to be a balance struck for it to be effective.

One day does not a point make. At first I thought "Oh the poor horsemen." But they win their purses. They would only be hurt if they are part of a betting stable. It does need to be a big enough % to be effective. Now if there was organization to it, maybe for one day EVERYBODY bets there to drive the handle. Next day NO ONE bets there to see the effect.

[jma]

Point well taken Indulto...there will have to be a balance struck for it to be effective.

One day does not a point make. At first I thought "Oh the poor horsemen." But they win their purses. They would only be hurt if they are part of a betting stable. It does need to be a big enough % to be effective. Now if there was organization to it, maybe for one day EVERYBODY bets there to drive the handle. Next day NO ONE bets there to see the effect.

I like that idea! The point is to show the power we as a group potentially have. We drive up the handle, then take it away. It should be done at a mid-sized track, so the group can have an impact. Makes sense to me.

[Niko]

Contact Jerry Brown at Thorograph, he was going to pick a track to boycott if they didn't start showing vet information and maybe some other stuff. He has enough customers and pull to make it work.

Look at UBET (youbet) stock after the news they may not be able to carry the Derby- took a bit hit yesterday on their stock (on yahoo).

Problem is tracks like Santa Anita and Keeneland have all source betting handle records--tracks won't change if they keep making money. They don't have to.

Until you stop betting or the people that matter stop betting you won't be getting any changes.

[andicap]

I disagree with the notion that a one-day boycott would not work -- as long as that one-time action really was effective. I would compare that kind of action to the one-day strikes unions are always pulling over in Europe.

You make it a media event and warn that if the industry doesn't listen to us there will be more and longer protests. You take out an ad in the DRF for that one day with our Bill of Rights front and center and a good web site for support.

You have to plan it carefully though, get press beforehand, and be damn sure you have enough support to make the group look credible. And it can't be a minor track because no one gives a damn. (Although it is easier to make a dent there so maybe you warm up with a small track before trying for the big time -- kind of a dress rehearsal.)

[Grits]

There are now three different threads on the woes of this stalemate, and what it's implications are doing to bettors.

A little bit difficult to keep track of so many comments. And having written only 2 posts I can say that I agree very much with this poster.

The most effective way to be listened to and garner respect, is going to come from hurting this industry on a day that it matters. Cutting, severely, into their handle, while plummeting their profits. Everyone here knows, this industry can't afford to many such days.

The sooner, and its way past due, the swells and the profiteers learn that THEY CANNOT CONTINUE TO BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS THEM. That we are through being jacked around, then we may all move forward with a better understanding of what it is going to take to keep this game running, literally.


I disagree with the notion that a one-day bycott would not work -- as long as that one-time action really was effective. I would compare that kind of action to the one-day strikes unions are always pulling over in Europe.

You make it a media event and warn that if the industry doesn't listen to us there will be more and longer protests. You take out an ad in the DRF for that one day with our Bill of Rights front and center and a good web site for support.

You have to plan it carefully though, get press beforehand, and be damn sure you have enough support to make the group look credible. And it can't be a minor track because no one gives a damn. (Although it is easier to make a dent there so maybe you warm up with a small track before trying for the big time -- kind of a dress rehearsal.)