PDA

View Full Version : It's just impossible the racing nitwits can be this moronic!


InsideThePylons-MW
12-19-2008, 03:55 PM
On the Paulick Report today, he talks up a plan by a guy that obviously has no clue about anything concerning the gambling/revenue side of racing. Cot Campbell gives this guy and his plan the double thumbs-up in the comment section. The survey on the PR is 70%+ for his plan.

How can all these people be this ignorant?

Basically the plan says that the purse pool/host track should get 15% of every wagering dollar. He cites a bunch of other stuff which is either wrong or factually incorrect.

None of these morons understand that nationwide handle would immediately drop appx. 30% with a snow ball effect of up to 50% once the pools are decimated and access is cut off in some areas.

If the host track charged 15% for it’s signal, 95% of rebate handle would be gone…..every ADW would shut their doors so there would be no internet betting period…….many tracks that live off of simulcasting dollars would shut their doors….many other tracks would make huge reductions in their simulcasting menus hoping to keep the 5% offtrack dollars as 20% on-track dollars…etc.

These guys are so stupid I hope it hurts because it's making me sick.

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/priority-1-racings-business-model/

Tom Barrister
12-19-2008, 04:28 PM
The man has a point, but the numbers are skewed in the other direction. The track/horsemen should get a bigger share than 3%. Pushing it entirely the other way (15% to the track and 5% to the ADW/Offtrack) isn't going to work, either. Both sides have to make enough on the agreement to make it fair.

If the heavy hitters (major rebate players) have to take a hit on their rebates, then so be it. The industry should be above letting a few people dictate what happens. There should still be some room left for the rebate players, and racing would improve.

DeanT
12-19-2008, 04:31 PM
It is Like We Live in the 1800's (http://pullthepocket.blogspot.com/2008/12/it-is-like-we-live-in-1800s.html)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vo3QAghRcKQ/SUv_ItpqtuI/AAAAAAAAAkI/ziBNm6CdlxI/s200/a_000202_detail.jpg (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vo3QAghRcKQ/SUv_ItpqtuI/AAAAAAAAAkI/ziBNm6CdlxI/s1600-h/a_000202_detail.jpg)Old time racing should love this article (http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/priority-1-racings-business-model/) to change the Interstate Horse Racing Act. In essence, it states the mantra that the producers of the product should get upwards of 90% of the revenue. The resellers should get a few scraps. In effect they want two things: 1) Reverse the rules of 500 years of capitalism and 2) Do the opposite of what successful gambling businesses do.

But I guarantee racing will love this. It gives them more money, in a pot they think is static, like we are an electrical utility.

This of course will not result in more money. Handles would more than likely be off 40% or so if we took money away from the sellers. When these folks learn that handle is not constant it will be a fine, fine day.

There are virtually dozens of things in this article that make little sense in the gambling economy, or frankly in any economy. A few parallels?

* A songwriter gets about 10% and has to pay a packaging fee for a song. They get about 7% of sales.

* An author writes a book and gets about 7% of revenue from it.

* If I am selling a bookshelf at Wal-Mart, I sell it to them for $10, they sell it for $100.

Now do what racing wants to do. Try selling a song to a reseller for 90% of the revenue. Try going into Jeff Bezos' office at Amazon and sell a book retailing for $20, for $19 to them. Try going into a retailer and selling your product for 90% of the shelf price.

Your sales of songs, books and bookshelves would be off by probably 95%. But somehow, like this writer says, we are supposed to believe that handle would stay the same. In fact he even says so.

At a time when everything in racing and breeding is heading south, correcting the IHA would see $1 Billion going to the host tracks in the first year. Half, $500 million, would go into racehorse owners’ purses at the host tracks. For breeders it should be noted, that $500 million in racehorse owners’ purses is more than all yearling sales in 2008, and it is reasonable to expect racehorse owners would reinvest that purse money into new racing prospects.

Yep, completely change the model, taking money away from customers and resellers and everything stays the same - we still have that (like magic) $1.5 billion dollars!

Articles like this tell us that we have a long way to go to change the face of the game in North America, and get people to lose the monopoly mindset that has been an albatross around our necks for so long. (http://pullthepocket.blogspot.com/2008/12/it-is-like-we-live-in-1800s.html)

chickenhead
12-19-2008, 04:41 PM
Goodnight, sweetheart
Well,it's time to go
Goodnight, sweetheart
Well, it's time to go
I hate to leave you, but I really must say
Goodnight, sweetheart, goodnight

JustRalph
12-19-2008, 05:47 PM
Cot Cambell sure knows how to pick a Jacket!!!

I think he was willed haywood hale broun's wardrobe when Broun died...............

Cangamble
12-19-2008, 06:06 PM
Pope made a comment over there. Tracks can decide if their best customers can get a rebate?????
He just doesn't get it. Everyone should get a rebate or they should reduce takeout drastically. Those are the only two ways to grow the game.
He lives in the typical fantasy world that execs and horsemen live in. Bigger purses and more grade 1 stake races will grow the game......that is just total BS.
The Breeders Cup was expanded to two days. When push comes to shove, who really gives a crap.