Horse Player Coalition

[wegoosewe]

http://www.ntra.com/hpc_index.aspx


came across. could be interesting along with hana

[highnote]

Thanks for pointing them out.

They started in April. Surprised no one saw them sooner.

Looks like HANA and HC have many of the same goals.

[BillW]

That is the group leading the effort to eliminate the $5000 withholding threshold in another thread.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49278

[highnote]

That is the group leading the effort to eliminate the $5000 withholding threshold in another thread.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49278

I was aware of NTRA getting a bill sponsored. But I didn't know NTRA had a subgroup called Horseplayers' Coalition that was behind the bill.

[rrbauer]

Being an arm of the NTRA immediately puts the "coalition" in bed with the racetracks. Ergo, no takeout reductions and no breakage reform; both of which weigh more heavily on horseplayers' pocketbooks than does withholding tax from large scores.

When the NTRA-tracks virtually ignored the recommendations of its own hand-picked "Players' Panel" they demonstrated their indifference to their "customers". And, what do you get for $25 besides supporting their agenda? 40% off on paint!!

Stay with HANA. It represents horseplayers. Period!

[highnote]

Being an arm of the NTRA immediately puts the "coalition" in bed with the racetracks. Ergo, no takeout reductions and no breakage reform; both of which weigh more heavily on horseplayers' pocketbooks than does withholding tax from large scores.

When the NTRA-tracks virtually ignored the recommendations of its own hand-picked "Players' Panel" they demonstrated their indifference to their "customers". And, what do you get for $25 besides supporting their agenda? 40% off on paint!!

Stay with HANA. It represents horseplayers. Period!


BREAKAGE:
I agree that HANA should work on eliminating breakage.

The breakage should only be applied to the final payoff, not to each $1 or $2 fraction of the total bet.

I can see if you make a $27 win bet and your true payoff is $44.01. Fine, if you're at the track, they can keep the penny and round the payoff down to $44.

For example, let's say you make a $27 win bet on the favorite. The actual payoff for a $1 bet is $1.63. The track would round down the payoff to $1.60 and pay you $27 times $1.60 which equals $43.20.

They should pay you $27 times $1.63 which equals $44.01. Then round it down to $44. I don't think many people would complain about that. Pennies at the track are a nuisance.

However, when betting online, the full payout should be made since no money is physically changing hands.

WITHHOLDING:

I heard that the withholding bill has little chance of success as its written. Don't know if this is the case.

Maybe HANA should get together and write up a document that can put forth another set of ideas on how to withholding can be reduced? Maybe it will be redundant in some areas, but maybe HANA can offer some ideas that haven't been covered.

Has anyone looked at the NTRA bill to see if everything has been covered?

[Cangamble]

BREAKAGE:
I agree that HANA should work on eliminating breakage.

The breakage should only be applied to the final payoff, not to each $1 or $2 fraction of the total bet.

I can see if you make a $27 win bet and your true payoff is $44.01. Fine, if you're at the track, they can keep the penny and round the payoff down to $44.

For example, let's say you make a $27 win bet on the favorite. The actual payoff for a $1 bet is $1.63. The track would round down the payoff to $1.60 and pay you $27 times $1.60 which equals $43.20.

They should pay you $27 times $1.63 which equals $44.01. Then round it down to $44. I don't think many people would complain about that. Pennies at the track are a nuisance.

However, when betting online, the full payout should be made since no money is physically changing hands.

WITHHOLDING:

I heard that the withholding bill has little chance of success as its written. Don't know if this is the case.

Maybe HANA should get together and write up a document that can put forth another set of ideas on how to withholding can be reduced? Maybe it will be redundant in some areas, but maybe HANA can offer some ideas that haven't been covered.

Has anyone looked at the NTRA bill to see if everything has been covered?
In today's world of technology, there is no reason that ADW's can't pay out exact amounts.
HPI for example on 20 cent supers will often pay out to the penny if the pay for $1 was $xxxx.x5
At the track, I can see rounding down to the nearest nickel.

I'm a proponent of getting rid of the penny btw. It makes "no cents" when the cost to make a penny is higher than amount a penny is worth.
I know that would mean a one time small bit of inflation..........except at the racetrack:)

[rrbauer]

In today's world of technology, there is no reason that ADW's can't pay out exact amounts.
HPI for example on 20 cent supers will often pay out to the penny if the pay for $1 was $xxxx.x5
At the track, I can see rounding down to the nearest nickel.

I'm a proponent of getting rid of the penny btw. It makes "no cents" when the cost to make a penny is higher than amount a penny is worth.
I know that would mean a one time small bit of inflation..........except at the racetrack:)

Precisely. The only "breakage" necessary is to remove the mils from the payoff calculation. Today, the majority of settlements are done electronically via account or voucher. When there is a cash settlement (say $89.44) and they want to get rid of the pennies and pay $89.40 I have no beef with that. But if the settlement is via voucher or account credit then it should be $89.44.

[highnote]

Precisely. The only "breakage" necessary is to remove the mils from the payoff calculation. Today, the majority of settlements are done electronically via account or voucher. When there is a cash settlement (say $89.44) and they want to get rid of the pennies and pay $89.40 I have no beef with that. But if the settlement is via voucher or account credit then it should be $89.44.


And to determine that $89.44 payoff there should be no breakage involved whatsoever -- even on track.

The only breakage that should occur on-track is the pennies on the final amount the track owes the winning ticket holders.

Breakage SHOULD NOT be applied to each $1 or $2 bet and then multiplied by the number of times a person holds the winning ticket.

[highnote]

Being an arm of the NTRA immediately puts the "coalition" in bed with the racetracks. Ergo, no takeout reductions and no breakage reform; both of which weigh more heavily on horseplayers' pocketbooks than does withholding tax from large scores.

When the NTRA-tracks virtually ignored the recommendations of its own hand-picked "Players' Panel" they demonstrated their indifference to their "customers". And, what do you get for $25 besides supporting their agenda? 40% off on paint!!

Stay with HANA. It represents horseplayers. Period!


Richard,
I was reading the description of the Horseplayers' Coalition on the NTRA website. It says:

The National Thoroughbred Racing Association (NTRA) announced today the formation of the Horseplayers' Coalition, a consortium of horseplayers whose common objective is to seek legislative and regulatory solutions to tax and business issues that impact racing fans and pari-mutuel racetracks.

The Horseplayers' Coalition will provide grass roots support for the NTRA's lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill.

I notice they throw the word "racetracks" in there. For a $25 membership fee, I would prefer to belong to a horseplayers' organization that focuses it's effort solely on the fans.

If they are going to include tracks and horseplayers in their coalition, why leave out horsemen?

The good thing about HANA is that membership is free and represents ONLY Horseplayers' interests.