PDA

View Full Version : TOC Responds To My Email About Premier Turf Club


trying2win
07-13-2007, 03:47 AM
I sent an email recently to Drew Couto of TOC. One of the questions I asked was about why they granted permission to a rebate shop like LINK2BET.COM to carry CALIFORNIA FAIR circuit and Del Mar races, but wouldn't grant the same permission to Premier Turf Club. Here's a large part of the response I got:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It really is a shame that offshore, unregulated outfits somehow manage to entice honest players to engage in illegal wagering activity. By that I mean, if you are a CA resident, and LINK2BET.com has opened an account for you, it would -- in essence -- be enabling you place illegal wagers as defined by CA law. Not only are such wagers illegal, but the act of simply advertising such wagers is illegal, and further exposes that company to criminal liability in this state.

Let me assure you that TOC has not authorized LINK2BET.com to accept wagers on any CA TB races, including Del Mar. Therefore, asserting that TOC is discriminating against Premier is inaccurate. Since LINK2BET.com is not an approved wagering site, every time it accepts a wager on a CA TB race it is misappropriating the property of the CA racing industry. That act is in effect a theft, analogous to the illegal download of music, the unlawful copying of movies, etc.

As for the issue of rebating in general, I disagree with you, but very much do appreciate your perspective.

From what we have seen, there is an abundance of evidence demonstrating that "rebates" do not increase overall handle, but rather simply enable those players with access to such rebates to enjoy a competitive advantage not afforded ordinary players. The net effect is to substantially increase the effective takeout rate for all other players, artificially reducing payouts, and reducing the overall amount of churn through the systematic siphoning of so-called "profits" from the pools. Despite what some say, this is not founded on a "winners not welcomed" philosophy, but upon earnest recognition of the fact that rebates simply create a competitive advantage for some, with little or no benefit to the pool, handle, or associated revenues.

On the other hand, when rebates are made available only to those who wager significant amounts -- greater than $1 million/year -- they arguably serve as "volume discounts," warranted by play. However, when they are made available by those who do not contribute to the pools, to any player regardless of size of play, then they simply serve as a means to redirect needed revenues away from the industry, and undercut the regulated pricing mechanism by which the industry is funded, and must operate.

This debate obviously has two sides. You are most welcome to come by, sit down, and go over the issues and facts in more detail. Your interest in our views is very much appreciated!"

Regards,

Drew J. Couto
President
Thoroughbred Owners of California
dcouto@toconline.com
(626) 574-6620

------------------------------------------------------------------------

--Any comments from PA members?

BillW
07-13-2007, 04:26 AM
Let me assure you that TOC has not authorized LINK2BET.com to accept wagers on any CA TB races, including Del Mar. Therefore, asserting that TOC is discriminating against Premier is inaccurate.

This is logic I've seen used in "Off Topic" before. :lol:

As for the issue of rebating in general, I disagree with you, but very much do appreciate your perspective.

From what we have seen, there is an abundance of evidence demonstrating that "rebates" do not increase overall handle, but rather simply enable those players with access to such rebates to enjoy a competitive advantage not afforded ordinary players. The net effect is to substantially increase the effective takeout rate for all other players, artificially reducing payouts, and reducing the overall amount of churn through the systematic siphoning of so-called "profits" from the pools. Despite what some say, this is not founded on a "winners not welcomed" philosophy, but upon earnest recognition of the fact that rebates simply create a competitive advantage for some, with little or no benefit to the pool, handle, or associated revenues.

He doesn't understand paramutuel wagering and is confusing stories he has heard about off shore rebate shops that coattail onto successful bettors only, thus having the effect that he describes. A "rebate" from a domestic ADW is essentially lowering the takeout and there is no way that lowering takeout can "artificially reduce payouts, and reducing the overall amount of churn through the systematic siphoning of so-called "profits" from the pools."

On the other hand, when rebates are made available only to those who wager significant amounts -- greater than $1 million/year -- they arguably serve as "volume discounts," warranted by play. However, when they are made available by those who do not contribute to the pools, to any player regardless of size of play, then they simply serve as a means to redirect needed revenues away from the industry, and undercut the regulated pricing mechanism by which the industry is funded, and must operate.

Odd train of thought switch. He is confused about the difference between a US based ADW and an off shore outfit.

I'm not familiar with this guy. Is he just a political appointee? He seems to be parroting things he has heard but doesn't really understand how they relate.

BillW
07-13-2007, 04:45 AM
T2W,

Maybe his reply seemed odd to me because I didn't read the question that you asked. I assumed that you were asking about PTC and only parenthetically mentioned the LINK2BET offshore. Rereading it, it seems that he is justifying not dealing with offshore outfits and his response has nothing to do with domestic ADW's (with the exception of the 2nd sentence of the 2nd paragraph).

Bill

rrbauer
07-13-2007, 04:52 AM
So, is he saying that TOC members are turning down handle from large-volume bettors or anyone that they perceive to have an advantage over the general population? :lol:

The only way for horseplayers to counter this arrogance is to withhold their business from any racetrack that is affiliated with the TOC (read: California).

Do you see TOC-affiliated racetracks doing anything that is remotely in the horseplayers best interests? Like reducing takeout? Like revamping breakage? Like refusing to participate in races with 4- and 5-horse fields? TOC takes its cues from OPEC. Next time you play a carryover at Hollywood (or other Calif track) these are the guys that are getting your handle.

You may not have a lot of choices about putting gasoline in your car, but you have plenty of choices about where you bet your money (except when the feds get involved and tell you where you can't bet YOUR MONEY).

trying2win
07-13-2007, 05:33 AM
In my opinion, Mr. Couto's email is a typical example of self-serving, Neanderthal-type thinking from a misguided person about the subject of rebates. I surmise from his words, that he suffers from poverty-consciousness, instead of the prosperity-consciousness angle. Plus, a little bit of bafflegab interspersed amongst his ramblings about rebates.

The way he's talking, makes it seem I live in California and that I should drop by his office to discuss some things with him...lol. Hello Drew!...the .ca behind my email address indicates I'm from Canada, not California.

One thing I don't understand. LINK2BET has been offering wagering on the CALIFORNIA FAIR circuit this year. LINK2BET sends bets to the host track's parimutuel system. Common sense tells me that the bets wouldn't have gone through to the CALIFORNIA FAIR tracks parimutuel pools, if they didn't have permission from someone in California. So, how can he say that TOC never gave LINK2BET permission to offer bets for the CALIFORNIA FAIR circuit? I'm stumped.

By the way, Drew...how about the rebates that horseplayers get from HPI for betting on the California races? Are you going to try and get their contract cancelled for that? Also, Drew... I saw during the last Santa Anita meet, either at the Santa Anita website or the XPRESS BET website (probably at the XPRESS bet site), where they were offering a 1 % cash rebate to bettors on Santa Anita races. I remember seeing them use an example "If you bet $20000 over the meet, we'll add $200 to your account". Are you going to try and cancel the XPRESS BET contract for the next Santa Anita race meet for them offering that rebate as well?

In conclusion, it seems Mr. Couto is full of baloney and hypocrisy on his views of cash rebates. Plus, I think he needs to take a course in Economics 101. Here's some more advice...I think he should revisit that great universal law..."YOU HAVE TO GIVE BEFORE YOU RECEIVE".

T2W

Premier Turf Club
07-13-2007, 08:24 AM
I thank Trying2Win for at least eliciting a response, something no else was able to do..."I won't even talk about why I won't talk about it."


"It really is a shame that offshore, unregulated outfits somehow manage to entice honest players to engage in illegal wagering activity. By that I mean, if you are a CA resident, and LINK2BET.com has opened an account for you, it would -- in essence -- be enabling you place illegal wagers as defined by CA law. Not only are such wagers illegal, but the act of simply advertising such wagers is illegal, and further exposes that company to criminal liability in this state.

Yeah, OK Drew. But every California player I know has an account with an off-shore bookmaker because you don't allow your residents to sign up with a LEGAL alternative. All your policies have done is drive handle to those types of places. Here's a thought, why don't you try to give people a legal alternative like the other 49 states (OK, maybe not 49 but ANYWHERE else where account wagering is allowed rebating is permissible).

Let me assure you that TOC has not authorized LINK2BET.com to accept wagers on any CA TB races, including Del Mar. Therefore, asserting that TOC is discriminating against Premier is inaccurate. Since LINK2BET.com is not an approved wagering site, every time it accepts a wager on a CA TB race it is misappropriating the property of the CA racing industry. That act is in effect a theft, analogous to the illegal download of music, the unlawful copying of movies, etc.


Congratulations, you at least managed to mention Premier once. You didn't answer Trying2Win's question, of course but you at least used the word Premier without bursting into flames. For the record, I have no experience with Link2Bet, good, bad or indifferent. Now who they are, or why they may or may not have TOC approval has anything to do with us, I have no idea.



As for the issue of rebating in general, I disagree with you, but very much do appreciate your perspective.

From what we have seen, there is an abundance of evidence demonstrating that "rebates" do not increase overall handle, but rather simply enable those players with access to such rebates to enjoy a competitive advantage not afforded ordinary players. The net effect is to substantially increase the effective takeout rate for all other players, artificially reducing payouts, and reducing the overall amount of churn through the systematic siphoning of so-called "profits" from the pools. Despite what some say, this is not founded on a "winners not welcomed" philosophy, but upon earnest recognition of the fact that rebates simply create a competitive advantage for some, with little or no benefit to the pool, handle, or associated revenues.


What evidence do you sight? Everything I read has been to the contrary. Let's try an example using California takes. Starting with a $100 bankroll if you lose just the take (16%) betting to win each race you'll bust out in 20 races having bet a total of $522. BUT, by providing a 5% rebate on all wagers (i.e. decreasing the effective take from 16% to 11%) a player can make that bankroll last through 33 races and churn $784. That's about a 50% increase over the amount wagered with no rebate. If you do the math, those rebate dollars generated a churn rate of 594% (increase in handle / total rebates). Every study I've seen has found about the same chrun rate. And again, California players, actually players throughout the US can get that rebate any time they want to. All they need to do is sign up with an off-shore bookmaker.



On the other hand, when rebates are made available only to those who wager significant amounts -- greater than $1 million/year -- they arguably serve as "volume discounts," warranted by play. However, when they are made available by those who do not contribute to the pools, to any player regardless of size of play, then they simply serve as a means to redirect needed revenues away from the industry, and undercut the regulated pricing mechanism by which the industry is funded, and must operate.



So you're saying that anyone that wagers less than a million annually isn't entitled to anything. Serious players that simply can't afford to wager that much get nothing? It's hard to believe given the low regard you have for your customers that you have any at all. Just wait a little bit, and you won't. This is the attitude we've gotten throughout the industry. You forgot to add the phrase "...THOSE kinds of players are degenerates. They'll bet no matter what the takeout." I hear that one a lot too. And for the record, we DO give volume discounts. Our schedules are scaled based upon wagering level. We just think that all our players deserve something back and don't mind sharing a cut of our gross with them. After all they make the mare go, no?


This debate obviously has two sides. You are most welcome to come by, sit down, and go over the issues and facts in more detail. Your interest in our views is very much appreciated!"

I'm sure Trying2Win is going to take you up on that the next time he makes the 2000 mile trip from his home to Canada. I know it never really occurred to you that he's too far away to just "drop in." I know, everything in between New York and California is simply flyover country.




Of course, I'm very disappointed that you never had the time to think of an answer to Trying2Win's question about us. It's a good thing we have some people on the inside that tell us what's REALLY going on.:)

Perhaps you should come up with something better just in case you get deposed.;)



------------------------------------------------------------------------

--Any comments from PA members?[/QUOTE]

ezrabrooks
07-13-2007, 08:36 AM
BillW,

I respect passion, whether I agree with it or not. While I do not agree with your take on the laws and actions of those in charge in the State of California, I respect PTC's desire to do business there..and your support thereof. Your in Texas..right? A place where every account wager breaks Texas law. Why don't you direct your passion to changing the situation in Texas, and leave California, and those who want to do business there, to the people involved. Let's get our own house in order before throwing rocks at the West Coast.

Ez

parlay
07-13-2007, 09:03 AM
"From what we have seen, there is an abundance of evidence demonstrating that "rebates" do not increase overall handle, but rather simply enable those players with access to such rebates to enjoy a competitive advantage not afforded ordinary players. The net effect is to substantially increase the effective takeout rate for all other players, artificially reducing payouts, and reducing the overall amount of churn through the systematic siphoning of so-called "profits" from the pools. Despite what some say, this is not founded on a "winners not welcomed" philosophy, but upon earnest recognition of the fact that rebates simply create a competitive advantage for some, with little or no benefit to the pool, handle, or associated revenues."

completely parrots the company line espoused
by WEG, all the presentations they have made
at indusrty gatherings push this mindset.

With regards to the "points" programs and
minimal cash rebates offered by these same
organizations.There seems to be an acceptable
threshold, around 1%, that you can give back
to the degenerates. My observation though is
these programs are just another way to creat
overpaid jobs for insiders family members.
The most economical way of reducing takeout
is to reduce the takeout! I HOPE THIS IS A
LIGHTBULB MOMENT FOR SOMEONE :lol:

cj
07-13-2007, 09:31 AM
BillW,

I respect passion, whether I agree with it or not. While I do not agree with your take on the laws and actions of those in charge in the State of California, I respect PTC's desire to do business there..and your support thereof. Your in Texas..right? A place where every account wager breaks Texas law. Why don't you direct your passion to changing the situation in Texas, and leave California, and those who want to do business there, to the people involved. Let's get our own house in order before throwing rocks at the West Coast.

Ez

He is not in Texas. I simple visit to the home page will answer that question.

prospector
07-13-2007, 09:47 AM
"From what we have seen, there is an abundance of evidence demonstrating that "rebates" do not increase overall handle, but rather simply enable those players with access to such rebates to enjoy a competitive advantage not afforded ordinary players. The net effect is to substantially increase the effective takeout rate for all other players, artificially reducing payouts, and reducing the overall amount of churn through the systematic siphoning of so-called "profits" from the pools. Despite what some say, this is not founded on a "winners not welcomed" philosophy, but upon earnest recognition of the fact that rebates simply create a competitive advantage for some, with little or no benefit to the pool, handle, or associated revenues."

i can only look at my own daily bets to answer that..before pinnacle threw us out, i was averaging around $40-60 daily...after pinnacle, i did $20 plus daily on brisbet...now with Premiere i'm running in excess of $80 daily..even betting, of all things..harness racing
for me, rebates work..and i will NOT bet without them..
no delmar for me this year..not even at the local track
they control their signal...i control my wallet

ezrabrooks
07-13-2007, 09:51 AM
He is not in Texas. I simple visit to the home page will answer that question.

Oh...I guess the "Location - Houston" threw me.

Ez

Premier Turf Club
07-13-2007, 11:10 AM
"From what we have seen, there is an abundance of evidence demonstrating that "rebates" do not increase overall handle, but rather simply enable those players with access to such rebates to enjoy a competitive advantage not afforded ordinary players. The net effect is to substantially increase the effective takeout rate for all other players, artificially reducing payouts, and reducing the overall amount of churn through the systematic siphoning of so-called "profits" from the pools. Despite what some say, this is not founded on a "winners not welcomed" philosophy, but upon earnest recognition of the fact that rebates simply create a competitive advantage for some, with little or no benefit to the pool, handle, or associated revenues."

I'm sure the above quote reflects Drew's feelings about rebaters. It certainly reflects the sentiments of most track owners. But when it comes to Premier Turf Club, WE know the REAL reason we got turned down, and the TOC KNOWS WE know the REAL reason. It's one thing to bluff when there's still a chance no one will call you on it. But once the last card is dealt and you know all you've got is a busted straight and your opponent goes "all-in"...

Drew, you willing to "call" with the hand that you've got because we're prepared to go "all in."

pic6vic
07-13-2007, 11:24 AM
Just a note on this subject. If TOC and the rest of the industry does not do anything regarding take out or rebates, come Jan when my subscription to DRF runs out I will stop playing the races. I will be 62 later this year and I have been playing since Carryback won the derby(1961). i love the game. That said if PTC is not allowed to take the major tracks including Calif I am finished. I am not a big bettor, but if I told youwhat I bet at Pinnacle last year no one would be believe me. It goes with what Ian said about the churn factor. I am hoping they come to their senses. I know there are others that feel the same way. I have no solution, except to hope that PTC is able to take these tracks.

Good luck

rrbauer
07-13-2007, 12:13 PM
Just a note on this subject. If TOC and the rest of the industry does not do anything regarding take out or rebates, come Jan when my subscription to DRF runs out I will stop playing the races. I will be 62 later this year and I have been playing since Carryback won the derby(1961). i love the game. That said if PTC is not allowed to take the major tracks including Calif I am finished. I am not a big bettor, but if I told youwhat I bet at Pinnacle last year no one would be believe me. It goes with what Ian said about the churn factor. I am hoping they come to their senses. I know there are others that feel the same way. I have no solution, except to hope that PTC is able to take these tracks.

Good luck

I would believe you Vic because I KNOW how much you bet! Isn't it strange that since the Feds got involved and started screwing with what we can do with our money and interfering with where we can transfer our money that handle at US racetracks in total has DROPPED. Based on what the suits at the tracks and the miscellaneous other mucky-mucks were putting out you would've thought that the handle would've shown nice increases.

Not so, and I think a lot of players like Vic (and myself) have just had enough of this game where the third partner in the racetrack, horse owner, horseplayer triangle continues to suck hind tit.

BillW
07-13-2007, 12:29 PM
BillW,

I respect passion, whether I agree with it or not. While I do not agree with your take on the laws and actions of those in charge in the State of California, I respect PTC's desire to do business there..and your support thereof. Your in Texas..right? A place where every account wager breaks Texas law. Why don't you direct your passion to changing the situation in Texas, and leave California, and those who want to do business there, to the people involved. Let's get our own house in order before throwing rocks at the West Coast.

Ez
Where in hell did you get all of that? I was simply commenting on what appeared to be a confused answer to T2W's inquiry. BTW, Youbet, what used to be AmericaTAB and PTC have been accepting accounts in Tx. from day one. :rolleyes:

DeanT
07-13-2007, 12:35 PM
Just a note on this subject. If TOC and the rest of the industry does not do anything regarding take out or rebates, come Jan when my subscription to DRF runs out I will stop playing the races. I will be 62 later this year and I have been playing since Carryback won the derby(1961). i love the game. That said if PTC is not allowed to take the major tracks including Calif I am finished. I am not a big bettor, but if I told youwhat I bet at Pinnacle last year no one would be believe me. It goes with what Ian said about the churn factor. I am hoping they come to their senses. I know there are others that feel the same way. I have no solution, except to hope that PTC is able to take these tracks.

Good luck

I believe you too, because your story is common knowledge to those who live it. It is amazing when you actually live it. My wagering went up over 800% when getting a rebate. I keep all my bets in bettorkeeptrack. I sent a spreadsheet to a track VP, showing him this. I know he had seen it before. David Cuscuna and Maury Wolff have both shown simulations and hard stats based on betting with and without a rebate. He implied that my numbers were fabricated.

What can you do? I showed him something, he didnt believe me. Hundreds of others have shown him the same thing. A University of Colorado study showed him the same thing.

In 2004 thoroughbred racing commissioned the "Cummings Report" asking what to do about rebaters. The report concluded that they should embrace them. What did they do? Climb right back into their shell, and do the opposite of what the report recommended, because they didnt like the answer.

It is impossible to change a monopolists thinking, in my opinion, because marginal cost pricing is foreign to a monopolist. Ron Geary at Ellis Park understands that average cost pricing is the death-knell for racetracks, because he lived it. He bets. He is the only track owner that has stepped up to the plate. It is not surprising to me that he was a massive success outside racing before being a track owner. He understands that you can not average cost price in a perfectly competitive business - and that isn't something "way out there". A first year economics student can tell you that. People like Drew, and others, in my opinion are "trying to hold on to the monopoly, until you pry it out of their cold dead hands."

CapperLou
07-13-2007, 12:53 PM
Just a note on this subject. If TOC and the rest of the industry does not do anything regarding take out or rebates, come Jan when my subscription to DRF runs out I will stop playing the races. I will be 62 later this year and I have been playing since Carryback won the derby(1961). i love the game. That said if PTC is not allowed to take the major tracks including Calif I am finished. I am not a big bettor, but if I told youwhat I bet at Pinnacle last year no one would be believe me. It goes with what Ian said about the churn factor. I am hoping they come to their senses. I know there are others that feel the same way. I have no solution, except to hope that PTC is able to take these tracks.

Good luck

I too, like Rich do know what you did last year--since we are acquaintances and I know you are for real. I have not been playing much since pinny went south. Just don't know what to do(where to play). Using brisbet, but must use phone for certain tracks (CRC-home track) and it is just too crazy--not to mention New York and Arlington and the others that I have played for years. I've got a few years on you Vic and love the game--been playing since 1958 while in college etc. Any suggestions; PM me guys!!! I use JCapper as you know and could do fine, but trying to get all my plays in today has become a nightmare!

CapperLou

NoCal Boy
07-13-2007, 12:58 PM
I guess I am confused. Why don't some of these big players simply use IRG? They take the California tracks and are licensed out of Oregon. IRG does not cater to the smaller player and this is where I presume PTC comes in, but the larger players have IRG as an option unless they live in California.

Indulto
07-13-2007, 02:20 PM
I guess I am confused. Why don't some of these big players simply use IRG? They take the California tracks and are licensed out of Oregon. IRG does not cater to the smaller player and this is where I presume PTC comes in, but the larger players have IRG as an option unless they live in California.Is that true? Whereas DragNet says OK to some rebaters (though NOT IRG), it sounds as if TOC is saying NYET to all rebaters. ;)

Premier Turf Club
07-13-2007, 02:24 PM
Is that true? Whereas DragNet says OK to some rebaters (though NOT IRG), it sounds as if TOC is saying NYET to all rebaters. ;)

Drew has happily given his approval to IRG, RGS and Elite and some others so we KNOW that isn't the issue.

I'm sure he has his reasons. Just that sharing them might generate a lot of press he REALLY doesn't want.:)

Jeff P
07-13-2007, 03:36 PM
but the larger players have IRG as an option unless they live in California.
Bingo.

This has been my point all along. The TOC cares nothing for the serious horse player.

They apparently have decided how I am to conduct my daily business as a horseplayer:

Go to a CA track, pay ridiculous prices for parking, admission, food & beverage... and focus my betting on CA races only. They must want me to pretend that rebates and racing outside of the state of CA do not exist because only a very limited number of out of state races are offered for wagering on track. So If I DO decide to bet out of state races I need to sign up with an ADW. But they have decided which ADWs I can use. And NONE of the ADWs they have approved offer a rebate.

So if I want a rebate I can:

1. Play Offshore

2. "Move" to a state where some degree of intelligence prevails.


I really love living in San Diego. And don't want to move... because (so far) I've enjoyed everything about living in CA except two things: freeway traffic and the TOC.


-jp

.

Premier Turf Club
07-13-2007, 03:54 PM
This is a great thread. I think someone should print it out and send to TOC, DRF, Blood Horse, etc.:)

bigmack
07-13-2007, 04:14 PM
So if I want a rebate I can:

1. Play Offshore
Jeff - Is it really that terrible of a thing to play offshore?

Indulto
07-13-2007, 04:55 PM
Jeff - Is it really that terrible of a thing to play offshore?BgM,
Would you rather be treated terribly at the track or tracked like a trafficker or a terrorist? :bang:

Premier Turf Club
07-13-2007, 05:14 PM
BgM,
Would you rather be treated terribly at the track or tracked like a trafficker or a terrorist? :bang:

Yeah, this whole terrorist connection is bad for the industry. Frank Angst from the Thoroughbred Times called this morning to ask me about it for his story. I think the article is coming out today.

LaughAndBeMerry
07-13-2007, 05:37 PM
Yeah, this whole terrorist connection is bad for the industry. Frank Angst from the Thoroughbred Times called this morning to ask me about it for his story. I think the article is coming out today.

Do you think it would help if you gave an interview to any industry magazines on obstacles you have found?

Jeff P
07-13-2007, 05:46 PM
Jeff - Is it really that terrible of a thing to play offshore? No it's not that terrible of a thing. IMHO the terrible thing is that playing offshore or moving are my only real choices. Given a chance, if they offered me an ADW where I was rebated AND my own handle benefited the industry, I'd gladly do that. But they don't offer that to me and others like me. That's the real tragedy here. They want me to pretend that rebates don't even exist. Until they wake the F up... my business goes elsewhere.

-jp

.

trying2win
07-13-2007, 06:47 PM
Okay...I've done my part by sendng emails to Joe Harper of Del Mar, plus Drew Couto of TOC. Others have "talked the talk"...I'm curious who else has "walked the walk" and sent emails to either of them expressing your opinion? And are there any other PA members willing to "walk the walk" and do likewise?

~"There are these two things in life...REASONS or RESULTS...REASONS DON'T COUNT!"

--Dr. Robert Anthony

Topcat
07-13-2007, 07:14 PM
I sent an email recently to Drew Couto of TOC. One of the questions I asked was about why they granted permission to a rebate shop like LINK2BET.COM to carry CALIFORNIA FAIR circuit and Del Mar races, but wouldn't grant the same permission to Premier Turf Club. Here's a large part of the response I got:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

"This debate obviously has two sides. You are most welcome to come by, sit down, and go over the issues and facts in more detail. Your interest in our views is very much appreciated!"

Regards,

Drew J. Couto
President
Thoroughbred Owners of California
dcouto@toconline.com
(626) 574-6620

------------------------------------------------------------------------

--Any comments from PA members?

We should take him up on his offer and present calm fact based argument that show that the handle does go up with rebates. They obviously do not care about bettors-assuming that any wagers on CA racing is their "property" reveals a lot about their attitude . Here’s a link with some indirect proof –I don’t mean to start a political debate but this is from Investors Business Daily and shows how the federal deficit is shrinking with tax cuts being the driver of GDP growth of 3%
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=269046723427126

I nominate Richard Bauer as a knowledgeable ambassador to sit down with Drew J. Couto and persuade him.

ryesteve
07-13-2007, 09:35 PM
We should take him up on his offer and present calm fact based argument that show that the handle does go up with rebates.
A good argument to show that horseplayers are value-conscious would be to witness the growth of the Ellis Park pick-4 pools since they sliced the takeout.

JustRalph
07-13-2007, 11:05 PM
2. "Move" to a state where some degree of intelligence prevails.

This is where the hard work starts. They all have some kind of screwed up rules......if you find a state that is friendly to online play.....and makes sense in a few other areas.........you find out they want $2500 bucks a year to register your 10 year old car............. :bang:

Indulto
07-14-2007, 12:24 AM
Yeah, this whole terrorist connection is bad for the industry. Frank Angst from the Thoroughbred Times called this morning to ask me about it for his story. I think the article is coming out today.Here it is:

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/national-news/2007/July/13/New-York-report-questions-Grupo-Caliente.aspx
New York report questions Grupo Caliente
by Frank Angst

A New York report questions Thoroughbred racing’s dealings with Grupo Caliente, a simulcasting service based in Tijuana, Mexico, owned by that city’s controversial mayor, Jorge Hank Rhon.

… reveals all of the North American-based applicants have some dealings with Grupo Caliente. The report says United States and Mexican law enforcement authorities have suspected Rhon of money laundering and drug trafficking.

… “To the extent that Grupo Caliente may be involved in money laundering, it could easily exploit its status as a licensed bookmaker to launder illicit proceeds through U.S. tracks’ pari-mutuel wagering pools,” the report says. “It is a relatively simple matter for a licensed out-of-country bookmaker to partner with an offshore rebate shop with access to pari-mutuel pools in the United States.”

… The New York Racing Association, … , sells its signal to Grupo Caliente’s Hipodromo de Agua Caliente for a flat monthly charge of $4,125. … Grupo Caliente’s bookmaking customers do not enter NYRA’s pari-mutuel pool because the outlet is authorized to use the signal only for bookmaking operations.

… Churchill said it conducted a limited due diligence review of Grupo Caliente and, as a result, does business with the entity.

… William Johnston Jr., whose Johnston family is one of the key members of Excelsior’s bid, allow Grupo Caliente simulcast signals …

… The Nevada Gaming Control Board, one of the country’s preeminent gaming regulators, has cited Grupo Caliente in three different public hearings relative to licensing suitability. Essentially, companies were directed to end business with Grupo Caliente.It occurred to me when I originally read the report that they didn't attempt to quantify how much money could be expected to be laundered in this way and compare it with how much traffickers are expected to try to launder in other specific ways.

trying2win
07-14-2007, 12:59 AM
A few things I'm wondering about after clicking the Thoroughbred Times link and reading the article:

1.Is Grupo Caliente the type of outfit that Drew Couto of TOC was railing about, because it says Magna Entertainment has dealings with this outfit?

2. Does that mean Magna Entertainment sells it signal to Grupo Caliente and has a similar deal like the NYRA has with this outfit? ...http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/39.gif...hmmm... The article wasn't specific in some areas. I'm just curious.

T2W

trying2win
07-14-2007, 01:05 AM
I noticed that LINK2BET was still offering wagering on the NORTHERN CALIFORNIA FAIR races on Fri. July 13/07. What happened to Drew Couto's tough talk about LINK2BET taking bets on these races? Again...http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/39.gif....hmmm.

T2W

Kelso
07-14-2007, 02:35 AM
I'm not familiar with this guy. Is he just a political appointee? He seems to be parroting things he has heard but doesn't really understand how they relate.

My take on the guy is that he's desperately trying to cover up things he understands entirely too well ... and from first-person involvement. He's on my short list for "most likely to be ambushed by 20-20."

BillW
07-14-2007, 02:41 AM
My take on the guy is that he's desperately trying to cover up things he understands entirely too well ... and from first-person involvement. He's on my short list for "most likely to be ambushed by 20-20."

I didn't want to jump to any conclusions ;) . Thanks for the input.

Kelso
07-14-2007, 02:55 AM
I didn't want to jump to any conclusions ;) .


This is what I do. :D

Premier Turf Club
07-14-2007, 08:08 AM
Do you think it would help if you gave an interview to any industry magazines on obstacles you have found?

We are asked to tell our story at least once a week.

Premier Turf Club
07-14-2007, 09:17 AM
My take on the guy is that he's desperately trying to cover up things he understands entirely too well ... and from first-person involvement. He's on my short list for "most likely to be ambushed by 20-20."

You're instincts are right on. Someone phoned me just yesterday with an interesting tale about Mr. Couto, a former TOC commrade of his now working elsewhere in the industry, a 3rd gentleman, a consultant we'll call JG, and a little island somewhere in the Caribbean. :)

yak merchant
07-14-2007, 09:24 AM
My take on the guy is that he's desperately trying to cover up things he understands entirely too well ... and from first-person involvement. He's on my short list for "most likely to be ambushed by 20-20."


I don't know I'm going with him being a r-tard. Find the transcript where he was arguing against a professional gambler at the symposium. I believe it was 2003 and it was against Ron Nichol (Playing in the Pool?). He makes a quote in there that is absolutely the most asinine thing I've ever read.

trying2win
06-03-2008, 09:09 PM
Since there has been some discussion again recently at PACE ADVANTAGE re California thoroughbred racing, plus ADW availability to California residents, TOC involvement etc. I thought I'd repost this thread again, since there have been new developments on PLAYERS ASSOCIATIONS, recent talk of internet gambling reforms etc.

If there were some PLAYER ASSOCIATION war room meetings lately. Sorry I missed them. Was there any discussion on the California racing scene, for example? .

I'm not a big fan of betting artificial dirt surface tracks, but confess I have bet some Hollywood Park races this meet. However, since I can't bet that track through PTC, due mainly I suspect to the arrogance of some the executives at the TOC, I've bet Hollywood Park offshore at PINNACLE SPORTS. I wonder how that is benefitting California tracks and horsemen, Mr. Couto? I also suspect many California horsemen disagree with the views of "Quick Drew' Couto, but have had their views silenced in many ways by the TOC.

By the way, I still don't buy 'Quick Drew's' theory that ADW'S offering bettors rebates doesn't increase a racetrack's handle.

I think a good step would be for Player Association/PACE ADVANTAGE members to send Mr. Couto an email telling them they will be betting California tracks at offshore racebooks. Let's speak with our wallets. If there is enough commitment from PACE ADVANTAGE members, plus California horsemen reading these posts to put pressure on the TOC executives to change things to allow Caliornia thoroughbred track signals for PTC, that Mr. Couto will have a paradigm shift and welcome PTC to take bets on their California tracks.

----------------------------------------------------------------------






~"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing, because he could only do a little".


-- Edmund Burke

chickenhead
06-03-2008, 11:19 PM
email (a masterwork of logic and erudition) sent.

chickenhead
06-03-2008, 11:34 PM
Drew has happily given his approval to IRG, RGS and Elite and some others so we KNOW that isn't the issue.

I hope you are correct about this, as this played a central role in part of my gambit regarding the effect of parimutuel based rebating on the average customer..

.....If rebates at any level are allowed, the only logical stance is that rebates at every level must be allowed and encouraged, in an effort to reduce the very inequity you claim to want to guard against.

A ubiquitous rebate available to everyone would be a lowered takeout, certainly that is not unfair. It is only to the degree that rebates are rare, and inaccessible, that they are unfair. Yet the TOC stance is to make them precisely rare and inaccessible, to all but the wealthiest customers.

It is the TOC stance itself that is unfair....

trying2win
06-04-2008, 02:29 AM
Here is a copy of a paragraph from the opening post in this thread. In it, Drew Couto, the executive director of TOC, explains his 'reasons' for being against rebates:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"From what we have seen, there is an abundance of evidence demonstrating that "rebates" do not increase overall handle, but rather simply enable those players with access to such rebates to enjoy a competitive advantage not afforded ordinary players. The net effect is to substantially increase the effective takeout rate for all other players, artificially reducing payouts, and reducing the overall amount of churn through the systematic siphoning of so-called "profits" from the pools. Despite what some say, this is not founded on a "winners not welcomed" philosophy, but upon earnest recognition of the fact that rebates simply create a competitive advantage for some, with little or no benefit to the pool, handle, or associated revenues".

__________________________________________________ ______________

Sorry Drew...you may have had the intention to make your views against ADWS giving rebates to appear as 'GOOD SOUND REASONS'. In my view, they are just 'REASONS THAT SOUND GOOD'. It seems there are some hidden agendas. Why would a horsemen's association want to turn down substantial more revenue from derived from customers' bets at a legitimate ADW like PTC, by employing all these roadblocks and smoke screens to block access by PTC to the signals from California thoroughbred tracks? I have my theories and they are a lot different than 'Quick Drew' Cuoto's alleged 'reasons'. They involve things like special interest groups, lobbying, and market share of the lucrative California horse racing market. Time will tell if my intuition is right about certain theories.

If we believe Mr. Couto's 'reason' that giving rebates to a small group of customers gives them an unfair advantage....then, along that line of
reasoning, then certain handicappers without a rebate ADW, but have developed expert handicapping and/or wagering skills gained through study and hard work, also have an unfair advantage over the 'average Joe' at the track according to Drew Cuoto's logic. And how about some handicappers who have top-of-the line handicapping software and have 'paid the price' with a lot of hard work in using the tools of the software to gain an edge...will Drew Cuoto complain that that gives them an unfair advantage too over the average fan at the track?. Would Mr. Cuoto want all three of these 'unfair advantage' group of handcappers banned from betting on California thoroughbred races then?

Read some of Drew Cuoto's comments in the initial post of this thread again, and see if you can deduce what his real reasons are from keeping PTC from gaining the signal from California thoroughbred tracks. I'd be interested in your comments.

Thanks,

T2W

trying2win
06-04-2008, 02:56 AM
I found this interesting article online from the year 2004. It was about a conflict involving rebates and the TOC:

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/national-news/2004/March/06/California-owners-squelch-rebating-by-Magnas-XpressBet.aspx



T2W

trying2win
06-04-2008, 03:15 AM
In the first paragraph of that 2004 Thoroughbred Times article it reads:

"Magna Entertainment Corp. has shut down a betting syndicate amidst complaints by the Thoroughbred Owners of California who said that the syndicate was receiving rebates through Magna's account-wagering company XpressBet, Daily Racing Form reports."

--Hmmm...I'm wondering about the part where it states "amidst complaints by the Thoroughbred Owners of California". So what? Why would horsemen complain?...but if that part had read..."amidst complaints by some executives of the Thoroughbred Owners of California"....then that line would have made more sense to me.


T2W

Cangamble
06-04-2008, 07:26 AM
If rebates don't increase betting, they might as well increase takeouts to the 50% level or even higher. It is just a nonsensical premise.
And as I've pointed out on another thread. I'm pretty certain that WEG (HPI) gives a small rebate (they call a takeout adjustment) on California wagering.
How come California allows this? It is a clear violation of their rules.

HUSKER55
06-04-2008, 07:57 AM
Maybe the Handicappers Association should do something. Be a start.

husker55
:)

Premier Turf Club
06-04-2008, 09:00 AM
In the first paragraph of that 2004 Thoroughbred Times article it reads:

"Magna Entertainment Corp. has shut down a betting syndicate amidst complaints by the Thoroughbred Owners of California who said that the syndicate was receiving rebates through Magna's account-wagering company XpressBet, Daily Racing Form reports."

--Hmmm...I'm wondering about the part where it states "amidst complaints by the Thoroughbred Owners of California". So what? Why would horsemen complain?...but if that part had read..."amidst complaints by some executives of the Thoroughbred Owners of California"....then that line would have made more sense to me.


T2W
Relevant except for the fact that the TOC licenses the following rebating entities:

RGS
Elite
IRG (formerly) / Youbet
Lakes Region Greyhound Track
Lien Games
Tonkawa
Couer D'alene
Philly Park
NYRA Online
etc, etc.

Indulto
06-04-2008, 09:53 AM
Since there has been some discussion again recently at PACE ADVANTAGE re California thoroughbred racing, plus ADW availability to California residents, TOC involvement etc. I thought I'd repost this thread again, since there have been new developments on PLAYERS ASSOCIATIONS, recent talk of internet gambling reforms etc.

If there were some PLAYER ASSOCIATION war room meetings lately. Sorry I missed them. Was there any discussion on the California racing scene, for example? .

I'm not a big fan of betting artificial dirt surface tracks, but confess I have bet some Hollywood Park races this meet. However, since I can't bet that track through PTC, due mainly I suspect to the arrogance of some the executives at the TOC, I've bet Hollywood Park offshore at PINNACLE SPORTS. I wonder how that is benefitting California tracks and horsemen, Mr. Couto? I also suspect many California horsemen disagree with the views of "Quick Drew' Couto, but have had their views silenced in many ways by the TOC.

By the way, I still don't buy 'Quick Drew's' theory that ADW'S offering bettors rebates doesn't increase a racetrack's handle.

I think a good step would be for Player Association/PACE ADVANTAGE members to send Mr. Couto an email telling them they will be betting California tracks at offshore racebooks. Let's speak with our wallets. If there is enough commitment from PACE ADVANTAGE members, plus California horsemen reading these posts to put pressure on the TOC executives to change things to allow Caliornia thoroughbred track signals for PTC, that Mr. Couto will have a paradigm shift and welcome PTC to take bets on their California tracks. …T2W,
As the originator of “Quick Drew Magoo,” combining the speed-challenged talking and thinking cartoon canine sheriff, “Quick Draw McGraw” with the vision-challenged, oblivious cartoon gentleman, “Mr. Magoo,” it tickles me to see the name catch on with other posters. :ThmbUp: The way he's talking, makes it seem I live in California and that I should drop by his office to discuss some things with him...lol. Hello Drew!...the .ca behind my email address indicates I'm from Canada, not California. ...You are to be commended for contacting the man and stimulating a response, but the fact that we aren’t privy to his complete text -- nor that to which he responded – leaves any reader commentary you may elicit regarding that e-mail, open to the charge of taking his remarks out of context.

I suppose that could also be the case when he is quoted in news articles, but as I have never received an e-mail from Canada myself, I have to allow for the possibility that the “ca” for Canada in your e-mail may well have prompted him to think you were located in California if you didn’t specify otherwise. So that opens the door to speculation that other aspects of your e-mail may have confused or misled him as well. We really need to have the complete picture if the man’s own words are to be used against him.

Would he have responded in the fashion he did if he knew he would ultimately have a wider audience? While I too wish to see PTC doing business in California, I would hate to see the case thrown out of the court of public opinion.

Indulto
06-04-2008, 10:05 AM
… Let's try an example using California takes. Starting with a $100 bankroll if you lose just the take (16%) betting to win each race you'll bust out in 20 races having bet a total of $522. BUT, by providing a 5% rebate on all wagers (i.e. decreasing the effective take from 16% to 11%) a player can make that bankroll last through 33 races and churn $784. That's about a 50% increase over the amount wagered with no rebate. If you do the math, those rebate dollars generated a churn rate of 594% (increase in handle / total rebates). Every study I've seen has found about the same chrun rate. And again, California players, actually players throughout the US can get that rebate any time they want to. All they need to do is sign up with an off-shore bookmaker.PTC,
What sequence of 20 bets at what amounts with how many intervening winners at what price would permit a $100 bankroll to generate $522 in total bets? What reduction in net handle would those 33 bets involve if that 5% rebate were available directly from the tracks? What increase in gross rebated handle would be required to produce the same unrebated net handle?

What % of existing ADW customers in California would you estimate play at a level that would qualify them for your minimum rebate? What % of handle do they represent? What % of ADW customers and handle nationwide (including California) would qualify?

chickenhead
06-04-2008, 10:49 AM
that article is really poorly written. It's ridiculous that figuring out the rules is like reading tea leaves since they are never clearly stated. But it seems obvious that at the very least the CHRB and TOC are open to allowing rebating simulcast partners, so long as they do not rebate CA players. Which should open the door for PTC to carry CA tracks for it's current customers.

If that is the case, it only leaves the question of why CA players get punished so terribly (and why PTC cannot get simulcast agreement).

DeanT
06-04-2008, 12:58 PM
I hope you are correct about this, as this played a central role in part of my gambit regarding the effect of parimutuel based rebating on the average customer..

Ubiquitous, erudition?

Not only will Drew need a copy of a gambling economics journal article, now thanks to you, he'll need a dictionary. Damn you Chickenhead and your fancy book-learnin words :)

I don't think Mr. C can conceivably stick to his stance with both empirical and theoretical evidence that has been promoted and studied the past several years. He has read the gambling studies I would bet. If not one would think he certainly should in his position. JMO.

Cangamble
06-04-2008, 12:59 PM
If that is the case, it only leaves the question of why CA players get punished so terribly (and why PTC cannot get simulcast agreement).
....because

trying2win
06-04-2008, 02:42 PM
At the TOC website at http://www.toconline.com/ on the left-hand menu near the bottom of that column, there is a section called 'TOC Achievements. After clicking on the title, and wading through the supposed accomplishments that the TOC does for horse owners in California, I thought there was a couple of interesting sections with these two titles:

SECTION 1.ADVANCE DEPOSIT WAGERING

SECTION 2.INCREASED INTERSTATE AND INTERNATIONAL
SIMULCAST PURSE REVENUES

--In SECTION 1, it talks about increased revenues from ADWS.
What I found interesting in SECTION 2 was not about the simulcast rates and the increase in purse revenues, but the part about the on and off track revenues declining...to which upon reading about this declining part, I have to say..."Well duh!".

-- It appears to me that the growth in revenues in the immediate future and long-term for California tracks and horse owners is through ADWS. So, in my view, with costs ever-increasing for California horse owners, that they should be welcoming an outstanding, competent, revenue-generating ADW like PREMIER TURF CLUB.


T2W