PDA

View Full Version : TOC Restricts Rebates


DeanT
02-02-2009, 10:07 PM
Thanks to Turf n sport for pointing this out. For those who do not know, Betamerica was giving members of their ADW 3% on Santa Anita. But:

http://www.betamerica.com/betamerica/rewards.shtml
*** Special Notice about our Santa Anita January Rewards ***
Our right to carry racing on Santa Anita requires that we receive the consent of the race track and of the Thoroughbred Owners of California, the horseman’s group at Santa Anita. The Thoroughbred Owners of California notified us this week that it is their policy not to allow any marketing incentives on a California thoroughbred race track in excess of 2% of the amount wagered. As a result, we have reduced our January Santa Anita Rewards promotion from 3% to 2% for the balance of January.

InsideThePylons-MW
02-02-2009, 10:32 PM
I guess the Couto's and the Scherf's will care about the bettor next time.

As I said before, these guys are not the answer.

They need to be gone ASAP. I fear that they will only be gone once racing is no longer able to fund their salaries.

ddog
02-02-2009, 10:35 PM
i assume it's in the contract so they have to comply, but it's nuts.
once the adw buys the signal if they want to give part of their money away what concern is it of any bodies?

if the adw decided to give it to a charity would that violate the rules?

DeanT
02-02-2009, 10:44 PM
Andrew Beyer once said that 'racing thinks the rules of business do no apply to them'.

This is a prime example, imo. If I am selling you a piece of furniture at $40, and you want to offer it for $42 so you only make $2, I am happy because I will sell more. I want you to offer it at a low price. In this case, the TOC and any track/group has negotiated a percentage to them for the signal. Then Betamerica is offering a lower price to players from their own share, not the tracks/TOC's. Yet the TOC says "no, you can not offer a lower price to your customers, even though it does not cost us anything?"

Andy Beyer is right on, imo. TOC should be jumping for joy that Betamerica is offering more of a rebate to increase volume and increase interest in California racing.

miesque
02-02-2009, 10:54 PM
i assume it's in the contract so they have to comply, but it's nuts.
once the adw buys the signal if they want to give part of their money away what concern is it of any bodies?

if the adw decided to give it to a charity would that violate the rules?

You are correct, money rebated back to the customer is for all intensive purposes an expense by the ADW. The track gets their cut (aka commission) on the signal and a portion goes back to the ADW covers their expenses and how they spend that money is really their prerogative, and in theory an ADW could spend the money on private jets, booze and hookers instead of giving rebates to their customers and it has the same impact on the bottom line, its money out the door.

DeanT
02-02-2009, 11:11 PM
could spend the money on private jets, booze and hookers

This is what I have been lobbying that HANA spends its large bankroll on. It is falling on deaf ears.

But members: I will keep trying :ThmbUp:

BillW
02-02-2009, 11:25 PM
This is what I have been lobbying that HANA spends its large bankroll on. It is falling on deaf ears.

But members: I will keep trying :ThmbUp:

Why would we need private Jets :confused: :lol:

miesque
02-02-2009, 11:30 PM
Why would we need private Jets :confused: :lol:

We might be able to rent a hang glider based on our current budget. :lol:

turfnsport
02-02-2009, 11:42 PM
You are correct, money rebated back to the customer is for all intensive purposes an expense by the ADW. The track gets their cut (aka commission) on the signal and a portion goes back to the ADW covers their expenses and how they spend that money is really their prerogative, and in theory an ADW could spend the money on private jets, booze and hookers instead of giving rebates to their customers and it has the same impact on the bottom line, its money out the door.

I'm no longer wagering on SoCal races thanks to Couto, which does leave me with extra money for booze and hookers, although I will continue to fly commercial coach.

BillW
02-02-2009, 11:47 PM
We might be able to rent a hang glider based on our current budget. :lol:

:ThmbUp:

Charlie D
02-03-2009, 12:01 AM
Interesting developement


Have Betamerica's competitors been crying foul to TOC???

Indulto
02-03-2009, 12:09 AM
I'm no longer wagering on SoCal races thanks to Couto, which does leave me with extra money for booze and hookers, although I will continue to fly commercial coach.tns,
Maybe HANA should hold balloting for two Person-of-the-Year awards – one for the individual that did the most FOR horseplayers and one for he or she that did the most TO them.

For the former I nominate Ray Paulick whose enabling the horseplayer-horseman debates on his site probably generated greater awareness of player dissatisfaction from a positive standpoint than any other source.

For the latter I nominate Drew Couto whose efforts on behalf of the TOC and the THG have IMO done more to stifle participation in California racing by players within the State -- as well as outside it -- than any other racing industry figure. He should be encouraged to go fly a kite instead of a jet.

rrbauer
02-03-2009, 01:00 AM
Restricting rebates denies the market an opportunity to allow the most efficient operators to provide the product at the most competitive price. The entire thrust from TOC and THG and other horse owners' groups is driven by their monopoly mentality. By restricting rebates the TOC effectively allows inefficient operators to remain in business and masks the single fact that makes rebates possible: TAKEOUTS ARE TOO HIGH.

I stopped wagering on California racing after last summer's Hollywood Park meet except for few races at Del Mar and it was the first time in many years that Del Mar was not a mainstay on my gambling menu. I have not bet a penny on California racing since then and there is nothing on the horizon that will cause that to change. I expect a raise in takeout in California that will be fueled by the state's budgetary crisis. At the very least I expect the 1/2 point raise on exotics (for workers comp relief in '04) that is supposed to go away after this year to remain. Several attempts have already been floated to get a takeout raise in northern Calif to bankroll the expansion of racing at Pleasanton. They won't quit until they get it.

I moved from California in 2004. I miss the weather. I don't miss my 13-million neighbors in Orange Co and I sure as hell don't miss the industry-driven restrictions on where/when/how I can bet.

Cangamble
02-03-2009, 09:47 AM
These guys are morons. I haven't bet a California race other than the Breeders Cup for quite some time now. I don't do variants for the tracks either. They just don't get it.

turfnsport
02-03-2009, 12:51 PM
Thanks to Turf n sport for pointing this out. For those who do not know, Betamerica was giving members of their ADW 3% on Santa Anita. But:

The entire thread went AWOL on the Del Mar Forum...Dean Couto must be a Mod....lol..

DeanT
02-03-2009, 05:01 PM
What the heck happened to the thread?

Jeff P
02-03-2009, 06:04 PM
MaryS, the one of the moderators, told me she deleted the thread because it contained language (profanity) that wasn't appropriate for their forum. To be fair, some of the posters were calling Drew borderline profane names and telling him where he and his TOC cronies could stick this policy and their 5 horse fields.

It's a crying shame though. Because once you got past the profanity and the name calling there were some revealing posts about this particular TOC policy.


-jp


.

rrbauer
02-03-2009, 06:15 PM
It's a crying shame though. Because once you got past the profanity and the name calling there were some revealing posts about this particular TOC policy.


-jp


.

We're civilized on this board.....moderators that know when to look the other way! :) TOC's policies are anti-horseplayer. Horseplayers' policies need to be anti-TOC. Frankly, the California horseplayers are the "swing vote" where the TOC anti-everythingthat horseplayerswant issue is concerned. So long as they continue to support an inferior product (from every perspective imaginable) TOC will continue on its merry way.

turfnsport
02-03-2009, 06:23 PM
MaryS, the one of the moderators, told me she deleted the thread because it contained language (profanity) that wasn't appropriate for their forum. To be fair, some of the posters were calling Drew borderline profane names and telling him where he and his TOC cronies could stick this policy and their 5 horse fields.

It's a crying shame though. Because once you got past the profanity and the name calling there were some revealing posts about this particular TOC policy.


-jp


.

Jeff,

that is BS on Mary's part...Those comments were made in the FIRST post of the thread, but she waited until the thread was 3 pages long to delete the thread?

I'm guessing she was told to delete the thread by a higher up, mainly because they could not respond to your comments and questions, which made entirely too much sense.

Or the higher ups heard my post read verbatim on the Roger Stein show on Sunday and told her to delete it.

She could have deleted or edited the post and not the thread.

cj
02-03-2009, 06:33 PM
The Delmar forum is akin to Pravda.

DeanT
02-03-2009, 07:30 PM
Jeff,
Or the higher ups heard my post read verbatim on the Roger Stein show on Sunday and told her to delete it.

Holy smokes. On the radio? You are famous Turfy :)

turfnsport
02-03-2009, 07:49 PM
Holy smokes. On the radio? You are famous Turfy :)

LOL..no I used to call Stronach much worse on the radio.

I do have to give Roger Stein credit for using the "D" word. :lol:

Cangamble
02-04-2009, 05:47 PM
New Blood Horse article:
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/49077/questions-raised-on-california-rebating
Couto also indicated the TOC now allows entities with which the group has agreements to rebate 2% to its customers – hence, the incentive program of XpressBet (and the percentage reduction announced by BetAmerica).

But the TOC has also denied certain ADWs access to California signals because they rebate, though Couto said there were usually other integrity-related questions involved in making those decisions.
*****************************
Yeah, the questions have to do with Couto's integrity.:lol:

DeanT
02-04-2009, 06:15 PM
Only in the racing business would something as simple as lowering a price for a customer by a couple of points need to be explained by lawyers in a 1200 word article.

DeanT
02-04-2009, 06:30 PM
Opines:

No Sales Allowed

For the bizarreness, bizarrability, or other word that probably is not a word, check out Ryan Conley's article at the Bloodhorse. (http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/49077/questions-raised-on-california-rebating)

In effect, Betamerica.com was giving out a 3% rebate as a promotion for Santa Anita races. But this was struck down to 2% by the horseman group in California (http://www.betamerica.com/betamerica/rewards.shtml) (so they say here):


BetAmerica Wager Rewards

*** Special Notice about our Santa Anita January Rewards ***
Our right to carry racing on Santa Anita requires that we receive the consent of the race track and of the Thoroughbred Owners of California, the horseman’s group at Santa Anita. The Thoroughbred Owners of California notified us this week that it is their policy not to allow any marketing incentives on a California thoroughbred race track in excess of 2% of the amount wagered. As a result, we have reduced our January Santa Anita Rewards promotion from 3% to 2% for the balance of January.

This is like a Wal Mart having a sale on wooden lawn chairs, and the logging company who cut down the tree telling them they can't.

Only in racing.

In Conley's article it seems in our bizarrily, bizzare business, we don't even know if we are allowed to have a sale; something that capitalist businesses have used since a 2 for 1 sale on a beaver pelt.

Here’s a fact: Some domestic advance deposit wagering outlets are openly offering cash rebates to customers that wager on California racing signals.

Now, here’s a question: Is this legal?

When the aforementioned sons and daughters of all of us start taking their MBA, all they will need is this article to answer what is wrong with racing. We can't even have a wagering sale without lawyers, horseman groups, and a 1500 words article explaining it all.

Cangamble
02-08-2009, 10:06 AM
I just left this message on the Del Mar board (I don't expect it will stay there long):
When tracks just lower the takeout on one or two types of bets, nothing can proven. They do this to lure players into handicapping their cards and then hopefully betting other things.
We don't know if the lower takeout helped or not. We might, when players like me now avoid Maryland tracks completely. They were hardly appealing to bet on in the first place.
As for Ellis Park, more people bet on the pick 4, however we don't know for sure what people did with the extra money they won. I doubt anyone bought a new suit. More likely, it was bet at other tracks through ADW's or other tracks on the Ellis intertrack menu.

As for those who doubt that lower takeouts are the way to go, just check out the growth of Betfair and sports betting, while horse racing continues to be stagnant (actually, it is dying if you take population increase and inflation into account).

I haven't bet a California track other than on Breeders Cup day since I discovered rebate shops. And there is no turning back now.

As for not allowing rebates to be over 2%. I still won't bet California tracks. Good luck California.

I just don't get it. Why does California care as long as the signal fee is paid. Who are the decision makers protecting? The offshore houses that rebate players 10% on California racing? I hope they are getting paid off at least for doing so, because they are costing California horsemen a lot of dough.

rrbauer
02-08-2009, 11:14 AM
I just don't get it. Why does California care as long as the signal fee is paid. Who are the decision makers protecting? The offshore houses that rebate players 10% on California racing? I hope they are getting paid off at least for doing so, because they are costing California horsemen a lot of dough.

California cares because their decision process is driven by the monopoly mentality. Their thinking is that if there are efficiencies in the operations of some ADW's which frees up money for customer rebates then those operations are making too much money and they need to either pay a higher rate to Calif tracks/horse owners or be shut out. It's basically an anti-trust issue but nobody has enough at stake to take them on. Except for some time that I was out of the country in the 80's, this will be the first year that I will not bet a penny on California racing since I walked into Santa Anita in 1960! And, so long as the power-mongers and misfits continue to ruin Calif racing, my money stays elsewhere.

NoCal Boy
02-10-2009, 10:56 PM
California cares because their decision process is driven by the monopoly mentality. Their thinking is that if there are efficiencies in the operations of some ADW's which frees up money for customer rebates then those operations are making too much money and they need to either pay a higher rate to Calif tracks/horse owners or be shut out. It's basically an anti-trust issue but nobody has enough at stake to take them on. Except for some time that I was out of the country in the 80's, this will be the first year that I will not bet a penny on California racing since I walked into Santa Anita in 1960! And, so long as the power-mongers and misfits continue to ruin Calif racing, my money stays elsewhere.

This purported fuss over rebates in CA strikes me as odd. It is no secret that Twinspires, Xpressbet and Youbet each rebate players above a certain threshold based on various conditions. I have no idea about TVG, but presumably yes as well. It is also no secret that CA sends it signal to rebaters like Elite and RGS. Drew Couto has been well aware of all of this for quite some time with no issues and CA is a beneficiary of large players into their pools because of it. It does make one wonder who really is behind the fuss here. I do not think it is the CA tracks as most either own ADWs or are involved indirectly with ADWs that are licensed in the state. Tracknet controls the signals to GG and SA, while Jack Liebau of Hollywood Park is Chairman of the Board at Youbet. So who really is behind this fuss in CA? Who turned Ryan Conley on to this rebate issue, which is really a non-issue for the most part at the moment? If it is not the tracks in CA nor the TOC, nor the licensed ADWs in the state nor the rebate houses that do take the CA signal, then who? Who has an agenda to drive rebate handle out of CA, or, I guess, stir the pot in order to get something accomplished there? I guess the fair-operated simulcast facilities in CA are one possibility. Others?

lamboguy
02-11-2009, 01:07 AM
for sure RGS and ELITE give the big rebates on the tracknet tracks. they are paying over 6% for wps as long as you bet $1 million a month on their tracks or something to that effect.


i play at PREMIER TURF CLUB, they give nothing on tracknet because they don't have the tracknet. they are doing a bang up job with their handicappers report of the tampa races. that report is better than any rebate you can get at these offshore rebate shops. today i hit the late pick 3 with their numbers @ tampa. i played 6 combinations and the payoff was $200 for $1. i can't begin to tell you how many winners they have been on this whole meet. in one of the tampa races if you went deep into their numbers you would have had a $40 winner and a $280 exacta today.

the reason why i am bringing this place up is because they do the work to try to promote horseracing. they are not a one way street like offshore shops.

aside from the tampa report they also do a keeneland report. its just as good as the tampa one. they have plans to do others. the one thing they need are players into their system. another reason to play with PREMIER TURF CLUB is that their money is as solid as a rock. they are governed by NORTH DAKOTA where they have to be bonded unlike the state of NE HAMPSHIRE where guys lost their deposits in a bancrupcy. these are very stressfull times we are all going through these days, and to worry about your adw is insane.

rrbauer
02-11-2009, 10:23 AM
Who turned Ryan Conley on to this rebate issue, which is really a non-issue for the most part at the moment?

Why don't you ask Ryan Conley? From my perspective, until the power mongers at THG and TOC; and, the monopoly-minded at Magna and CDI stop engaging in restraint-of-trade practices that penalize both competing ADW companies and horseplayers; and, takeout levels remain too high thus fueling rebates, it will always be an issue.

highnote
02-27-2009, 03:18 AM
What a difference a few weeks makes.

Ian out at PTC.

Betting Exchange in at TVG.

CHRB comes out of the closet and admits they don't enforce their own anti-rebate rules.

Liebau said, "I don't think the California Horse Racing Board should take any action that will discourage people from betting on California races."

WOW! This recession must be making California racing executives crazy -- they're starting to act like they're listening to their customers.

What's next -- lowered takeouts? Elimination of breakage? Stiff penalties for drug positives? Free admission? :eek:

Indulto
02-27-2009, 05:11 AM
... WOW! This recession must be making California racing executives crazy -- they're starting to act like they're listening to their customers.

What's next -- lowered takeouts? Elimination of breakage? Stiff penalties for drug positives? Free admission? :eek:http://www.horseraceinsider.com/John-Pricci/
Have Lunch at the Track
By John Pricci February 27, 2009…Caught up with the Terry Finley show today on replay. …

… Finley didn’t sugar-coat current realities, acknowledging the rough sledding ahead and how the industry needs to stabilize and move forward …

… It was refreshing to hear from a horseman that of racing’s four major components: breeders, owners, tracks and bettors, it was the bettors who were least recognized until now, and how many of them have lost confidence in the industry.

On that players would agree: they have lost confidence, and they resent paying more in takeout, I.e., when they‘re not shut out by a wagering platform dispute.

… Finley is correct that the tracks, NTRA, and Breeders’ Cup take many unfair knocks, adding he’s tired of hearing it. Apparently he is unaware of the industry’s thin skin and penchant for shooting messengers.

And if it were not for an independent media, where would the impetus for change come from? What would be the incentive for eliminating the status quo? Which organizations would willingly jeopardize the bottom line in the interests of doing no harm?

… Finley wants bettors with a vested interest in the health of the game to take “fate” into their own hands. Bringing a few people to the track is certainly not an unreasonable request, although I suggest it should be a day that you don’t love the card. ...

ezrabrooks
02-27-2009, 12:36 PM
Free Admission? I went over to LS last week, and was shocked that they stopped charging for Parking (a personal gripe of mine).. but, got to the admission gate and found out they had up the price of admission a $1.

Ez

Cangamble
03-03-2009, 11:30 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/columns/story?columnist=finley_bill&id=3945951