Poll - Is Takeout too high?

[Jeff P]

I'm asking for feedback... not just from HANA members, but from everyone here at PA. It doesn't matter if you a professional horseplayer, recreational player, occasional fan, owner, breeder, trainer, groom, track operator, track employee, ADW operator, ADW employee, tote company employee, NTRA Committee Member, past performance data company operator or employee, software developer, editor for a turf publication, turf writer, author, TV producer, on air talent, etc. HOW you are connected to the industry isn't the point. If you are reading this thread at PA you are connected to the industry in some way shape or form. I'm asking you an honest opinion if you have one.

[CBedo]

I would really like to hear explanations for those that vote they disagree!

[kenwoodallpromos]

Should be 10% at most for WPS, 15% for exotics, no breakage.

[Murph]

Just a 2% or 3% reduction could help many of us to make a little bit playing the game.

[Rocklane]

Just a 2% or 3% reduction could help many of us to make a little bit playing the game.


Murph,

I needed 3% to keep churning in 2008. In 2009, my handle is $0. I'll go to Hoosier Park for a couple days the next few months, but I won't be playing anything close to what I was previously was playing.

Actually, finding this board and reading Hajck's five part series on the HANA site aided in making the decision to stop playing.

I see a couple executives from tracks come on this board to solicit business and soon leave once 80% of responders tell them to lower their track's take. They dissappear soon after.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

32-3-3-0-0 so far.

Obviously The Pied Poper and his followers have not voted yet.

[Dave Schwartz]

I am all for lowering takeouts. Period.

However, this is kind of like asking, "Would you like to see the price of automobiles drop by 40%?" or "Would you like to get a 50% raise at work?"

I'd bet that even the tracks would like to see takeouts drop provided that their needs are still going to be met.


Seriously, Jeff, considering your audience, why would anyone not want something that benefits them?


The problem isn't what WE think is right or a good thing, the issue is "How do we get the industry to change?" As you have seen thus far the industry is not paying you more than lip service. Frankly, having them begin to notice you is a step in the right direction but it is a single step on a very long journey.


So, the question is, "Do you have a plan to MAKE the industry invite you to a real negotiating table for change?" (I am not asking what that plan is, just if you have a plan.)


Dave

[DeanT]

I am all for lowering takeouts. Period.

However, this is kind of like asking, "Would you like to see the price of automobiles drop by 40%?" or "Would you like to get a 50% raise at work?"



Dave,

I respectfully disagree with that. I think we should give horseplayers a little more credit.

If someone asks me if I think McDonald's prices are too high, I would have to say no. I get a burger at a decent price in 45 seconds for what I think is a fair price. Sure I would like to buy a meal for $1 but I think their prices are fine.

The same goes with betfair. If you poll 1000 people there if they think takeout is too high on racing, you would probably see a good mix. I dont think takeout is too high there. It seems about right to me - they give back to racing and offer a good service.

In racing here? I think a vast majority of players would think prices are too high - we'll see with this and other polls. But I think they think this, not because they are greedy or unrealistic, or want something for free, just because they think that it is.

Anyhow, just my opinion. But asking these questions can tell us quite a bit about the industry as a whole, and how horseplayers fit in that. I think a horseplayer can honestly say if he/she thinks that prices are fair or too high or too low.

[Jeff P]

I am all for lowering takeouts. Period.

However, this is kind of like asking, "Would you like to see the price of automobiles drop by 40%?" or "Would you like to get a 50% raise at work?"

I'd bet that even the tracks would like to see takeouts drop provided that their needs are still going to be met.


Seriously, Jeff, considering your audience, why would anyone not want something that benefits them?


The problem isn't what WE think is right or a good thing, the issue is "How do we get the industry to change?" As you have seen thus far the industry is not paying you more than lip service. Frankly, having them begin to notice you is a step in the right direction but it is a single step on a very long journey.


So, the question is, "Do you have a plan to MAKE the industry invite you to a real negotiating table for change?" (I am not asking what that plan is, just if you have a plan.)


Dave

Actually Dave, I DO have a plan. And yes, it's a long term plan. And yes, I realize I'm fighting a very uphill battle. But I'm ok with that. Anyone who really knows me knows that I'm actually good at fighting uphill battles. <G>

The first step is awareness and education. At the simplest most basic level - shine a spotlight on takeout in the following areas:

1. Make players aware that takeout matters - that better pricing (lower effective takeout) can be a real difference maker to their bottom lines.

2. Make track operators aware that an ever increasing percentage of racing customers are becoming more and more aware about takeout with the passing of each and every new day.

3. Educate track operators how their current 20 percent blended takeout structure is so high that it sends gambling dollars elsewhere... offshore, away to other forms of gambling that racing has to compete with, etc.

4. Educate track operators, horsemen, as well as members of state legislatures that real world case histories EXIST in the State Lottery Market Space where prize payouts have been increased (reduced takeout) to produce massive increases in revenue flowing back to state coffers.

5. Remind track operators, horsemen, as well as members of state legislatures that over the years the industry has paid out several hundred thousand dollars to consulting firms for economic studies and recommendations. The gist of these studies and recommendations was summed up by the NTRA Players Panel as follows:

Virtually all known studies of the dynamics of pari-mutuel wagering indicate an inverse relationship between takeout rates and handle, such that a reduction in takeout inevitably results in significantly greater handle.

6. Educate horsemen that the current 20 percent blended takeout is costing them purse money because of the depressed handle that it causes.

Dave, you were involved very early on in those War Room meetings that led to HANA being formed. Yet a search of the HANA memeber database doesn't show your name. Would I be asking too much if I asked you to click the link below and sign up as a HANA Member? <G>

HANA Sign Up Link
http://www.jcapper.com/HANA/SignUp/HANASignUpForm.asp?source=0

-jp

.

[Dave Schwartz]

I signed up long ago. In fact, I was one of the earliest.

I am more than willing to sign up again but if you have lost my registration, how many others have you lost?

Dave

[InsideThePylons-MW]

I signed up long ago. In fact, I was one of the earliest.

I am more than willing to sign up again but if you have lost my registration, how many others have you lost?

Dave

Uh oh!

You have lost your seniority.

Back of the line! :)

[DeanT]

You are there Dave. Way back last August. Wow, time flies. I had to resubmit your email addy tho to keep things up to date.

ITP: Love the new sig.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

As you have seen thus far the industry is not paying you more than lip service.

Actually that's one thing the industry does some of the time which is smart. They've obviously watched The Godfather (Sun Tzu too complicated).

"Keep your friends close but your enemies closer"

[Jeff P]

Dave, I owe you an apology. I spelled your name wrong during my db search. Must be going a wee bit daft in me advanced age. :bang:

But I stand by my statement that I do have a long term plan, that this is an uphill battle, and that the first step is awareness and education.

ITP, I'm admittedly newer at dealing with them than you are. But yes. I'm discovering they are very adept at paying lip service.


-jp

.

[Dave Schwartz]

Boy, that was close.


Jeff,

I am thrilled to see that you have a plan. If the key to a good local business is location, location, location, the key to success in what you are trying to accomplish is membership, membership, membership.

May I suggest that every HANA email you send out should have current membership on the bottom?

Also, does HANA have a Facebook Fan page? How about Twitter?


Dave

[DeanT]

Also, does HANA have a Facebook Fan page? How about Twitter?


We had them before they jumped the shark :D

Here is the goods Dave

Blog http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/
Web http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/
Resources http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/playerresources.html
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Horseplayers-Association-of-North-America/44663680571
Twitter
http://twitter.com/HplayersAssnNA

[chambedr]

Maryland used to have the lowest takeouts in the US - Now they are among the highest. Back in 1982 when industry insiders engineered an increase from 15 to 17% on straight wagers, a veteran horseplayer approached Chick Lang, the general manager of Pimlico and complained. When a radio commentator asked Lang about the encounter, his only comment was that the player was "gambling scum". This attitude sadly is still in place with management in many plants around the U.S. Enjoy the "great entertainment" but don't expect to "win" anything. Granted that racing has to have a mechanism to fund participation, many operators would prefer to run a second-rate operation, secure in the knowledge that they are ripping off their base of support.

[andymays]

Maryland used to have the lowest takeouts in the US - Now they are among the highest. Back in 1982 when industry insiders engineered an increase from 15 to 17% on straight wagers, a veteran horseplayer approached Chick Lang, the general manager of Pimlico and complained. When a radio commentator asked Lang about the encounter, his only comment was that the player was "gambling scum". This attitude sadly is still in place with management in many plants around the U.S. Enjoy the "great entertainment" but don't expect to "win" anything. Granted that racing has to have a mechanism to fund participation, many operators would prefer to run a second-rate operation, secure in the knowledge that they are ripping off their base of support.


Good first post chambedr! I think you're right about the attitude of most Racing Executives.

[CBedo]

I'm not sure about Twitter, but they do have a FB page.

http://www.facebook.com/CBedo?ref=profile#/pages/Horseplayers-Association-of-North-America/44663680571?ref=search

[Tape Reader]

This is a bit "tongue-in-cheek" but... I think takeout is too low.

I would like to see it raised to 50% or higher. Then, ADW's would be giving huge rebates not only to whales, but even to the two dollar bettor. Business would flock to the ADW's. Tracks would be going out of business left and right.

Then, some people with some business savvy would open a track with artificially low takeout. Bettors would then flock to that track. Handle would soar. Purses would increase. Quality of racing would dramatically improve. All this without free hot dogs.

Then, another track would open with even lower takeout. Add some fancy derivative betting. Scream about the insane tax code. Politicians, not wanting to be left out, would hop on the band wagon championing for the "little guy" (lots of votes). Capitulation? Hopefully.

[boomman]

Murph,

I needed 3% to keep churning in 2008. In 2009, my handle is $0. I'll go to Hoosier Park for a couple days the next few months, but I won't be playing anything close to what I was previously was playing.

Actually, finding this board and reading Hajck's five part series on the HANA site aided in making the decision to stop playing.

I see a couple executives from tracks come on this board to solicit business and soon leave once 80% of responders tell them to lower their track's take. They dissappear soon after.

In case you are speaking of me as one of the track executives that appear here and then "disappear", be assured that I for one have not done that in any way shape or form. In fact we are hosting H.A.N.A. this weekend at Yavapai Downs to hear all of their concerns and in conjunction with the AZ HBPA board see what can be done to make this state as friendly as possible to the wagering customer in the future. A lot of work lies ahead and it won't be easy, but we promise to listen and do everything we can to make our product as viable as possible for horseplayers in the future............

Boomer

[CBedo]

We had them before they jumped the shark :D

Here is the goods Dave

Blog http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/
Web http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/
Resources http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/playerresources.html
Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Horseplayers-Association-of-North-America/44663680571
Twitter
http://twitter.com/HplayersAssnNAI haven't heard someone use "jump the shark" in a long time! Happy Days are here again!

[BillW]

I haven't heard someone use "jump the shark" in a long time! Happy Days are here again!

Happy Days reruns are a big thing North of the border. :D

[DeanT]

Happy Days reruns are a big thing North of the border. :D

We only get one channel up here!

Boomer, good luck this weekend. We need to sway some opinion, so I hope you are up to it :)

I haven't heard someone use "jump the shark" in a long time!
Whenever I jump on something, it is called jumping the shark. If I was alive in 1958 I would have killed the hula hoop :)

[boomman]

We only get one channel up here!

Boomer, good luck this weekend. We need to sway some opinion, so I hope you are up to it :)


Whenever I jump on something, it is called jumping the shark. If I was alive in 1958 I would have killed the hula hoop :)

Dean: Thanks! Looking forward to meeting everyone, and I'm sure we'll have a lot to talk about the next couple of days!;)

Boomer

[highnote]

In case you are speaking of me as one of the track executives that appear here and then "disappear", be assured that I for one have not done that in any way shape or form. In fact we are hosting H.A.N.A. this weekend at Yavapai Downs to hear all of their concerns and in conjunction with the AZ HBPA board see what can be done to make this state as friendly as possible to the wagering customer in the future. A lot of work lies ahead and it won't be easy, but we promise to listen and do everything we can to make our product as viable as possible for horseplayers in the future............

Boomer


Boomer,

Thanks for setting up the HANA meeting with Yavapai connections. It was great to finally meet the man behind the words!

It was very informative to understand the unique situation in which Yavapai finds itself because of it's non-profit status and it's relationships with the other racing jurisdictions in the state.

It was important that the triumvirate of Track Executive, Horseman and Horseplayer got a chance to meet face to face. All three parties want the same things -- a bigger bottom line (bigger handle helps tracks and horsemen and lower takeouts helps horseplayers become more profitable), wagering system integrity and elimination of illegal drugs. Whether we can all agree on the best way to achieve those ends remains to be seen.

One thing that would help bring the three parties closer together would be to educate Horsemen and Race Track executives and employees to stop referring to Horseplayers as gamblers. When I handicap a race and bet my hard earned money I don't consider it gambling any more than handicapping a publicly traded corporation and buying their stock. Pulling a lever on a slot machine is gambling -- in my opinion.

I had the opportunity to correct a person during our meeting when Horseplayers were referred to as gamblers, but I did not speak up because it didn't seem appropriate in that moment. Also, the person who called us gamblers did not do so maliciously. Changing Race Track executives' and Horsemen's perception of bettors from gamblers to Horseplayers may seem trivial, but it is actually very significant.

The HANA members who spoke during the meeting were very bright and articulate. It is a misconception to think of any of them as gamblers.

That said, there is a saying -- "We teach people how to treat us." Horseplayers have some responsibility to let others know that we are not gamblers.

I look forward to talking with you more about the future of Yavapai and it's relationship with Horseplayers.

Thanks again for your support of HANA and for your efforts to help improve Yavapai and the racing industry.

Regards,

John

[rrbauer]

FWIW

Referring to horseplayers as gamblers is very commonplace across venues in Arizona, New Mexico, West Texas and Olkahoma. It is simply a label and has no pejoriative connotation.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

FWIW

Referring to horseplayers as gamblers is very commonplace across venues in Arizona, New Mexico, West Texas and Olkahoma. It is simply a label and has no pejoriative connotation.

What about Barry Irwin?

[Indulto]

... One thing that would help bring the three parties closer together would be to educate Horsemen and Race Track executives and employees to stop referring to Horseplayers as gamblers. When I handicap a race and bet my hard earned money I don't consider it gambling any more than handicapping a publicly traded corporation and buying their stock. Pulling a lever on a slot machine is gambling -- in my opinion.

I had the opportunity to correct a person during our meeting when Horseplayers were referred to as gamblers, but I did not speak up because it didn't seem appropriate in that moment. Also, the person who called us gamblers did not do so maliciously. Changing Race Track executives' and Horsemen's perception of bettors from gamblers to Horseplayers may seem trivial, but it is actually very significant.

The HANA members who spoke during the meeting were very bright and articulate. It is a misconception to think of any of them as gamblers.

That said, there is a saying -- "We teach people how to treat us." Horseplayers have some responsibility to let others know that we are not gamblers. ...Quick. Somebody change the HANA Mission Statement to reflect the organization's new #1 priority -- educating the industry not to use the G-word. :lol:

Surely the most significant item addressed at the meeting would be the first reported.;)

Frankly, I don't care what terminology they use as long as they lower takeout.

Is it better to be represented by the one of the handicapping elite or a handicapping elitist? :bang:

[boomman]

Boomer,

Thanks for setting up the HANA meeting with Yavapai connections. It was great to finally meet the man behind the words!

It was very informative to understand the unique situation in which Yavapai finds itself because of it's non-profit status and it's relationships with the other racing jurisdictions in the state.

It was important that the triumvirate of Track Executive, Horseman and Horseplayer got a chance to meet face to face. All three parties want the same things -- a bigger bottom line (bigger handle helps tracks and horsemen and lower takeouts helps horseplayers become more profitable), wagering system integrity and elimination of illegal drugs. Whether we can all agree on the best way to achieve those ends remains to be seen.

One thing that would help bring the three parties closer together would be to educate Horsemen and Race Track executives and employees to stop referring to Horseplayers as gamblers. When I handicap a race and bet my hard earned money I don't consider it gambling any more than handicapping a publicly traded corporation and buying their stock. Pulling a lever on a slot machine is gambling -- in my opinion.

I had the opportunity to correct a person during our meeting when Horseplayers were referred to as gamblers, but I did not speak up because it didn't seem appropriate in that moment. Also, the person who called us gamblers did not do so maliciously. Changing Race Track executives' and Horsemen's perception of bettors from gamblers to Horseplayers may seem trivial, but it is actually very significant.

The HANA members who spoke during the meeting were very bright and articulate. It is a misconception to think of any of them as gamblers.

That said, there is a saying -- "We teach people how to treat us." Horseplayers have some responsibility to let others know that we are not gamblers.

I look forward to talking with you more about the future of Yavapai and it's relationship with Horseplayers.

Thanks again for your support of HANA and for your efforts to help improve Yavapai and the racing industry.

Regards,

John

John: It was great meeting you as well, and we appreciate you stopping by and visiting us on your cross country family vacation from Connecticut. I agree that we had a very good discussion involving Yavapai Downs track management (which for posters info was myself and General Manager Gary Spiker), members of the Az HBPA board representing the horsemen, and yourself, H.A.N.A president Jeff Platt, and some Az resident members of H.A.N.A. I think we got some great ideas out there and want the board to know that Jeff Platt and a couple of Az H.A.N.A members will be meeting with myself and the AZ HBPA at their next meeting the end of September to try and take our ideas for improvement to the next level. But as Rich Bauer accurately points out later in this thread, the "gambler" word was not used in any context to suggest that you are the same as a slot player or to put down horseplayers in any way. It was simply the word that is used here by many people to describe horseplayers and in no way shape or form was meant to be disrespectful or IMHO lead to a discussion about it specifically as we obviously have plenty of ground to cover already.........;)

Boomer

[Imriledup]

Takeout is only too high if you treat racing as something more than a recreational afternoon out. If you treat racing as an investment vehicle than yes, the takeout makes racing a bad investment. Sure, you can win, but the amount of money that you can win is not worth the time and effort that you have to put into your handicapping. There's probably a better way to invest your money and get a positive return without having to do any work at all.

If you put your money in a CD or a money market fund, you will have more money at the end of the day for doing absolutely nothing. With horse racing, a person who makes a 5% profit on his wagers is really 25% better than the crowd.

That horseplayer is paying the racing industry 20 percent in order to profit 5 percent. The 5 percent profit would be hard to attain even if there was 0 takeout, so the player has to basically spend 60 or 70 hours per week handicapping, doing speed figs, watching replays, ignoring his family and friends, etc in order to 'support' the industry. To keep it afloat. Out of the 25% 'profit' that player makes, the industry gets 4 pennies to the player's 1 penny.

Its just too much.

With 20 and 25 percent takeout rates the norm, its much better to play money on a football game at a 5% takeout rate.

[ezrabrooks]

"With 20 and 25 percent takeout rates the norm, its much better to play money on a football game at a 5% takeout rate".

I can't get excited about a 11/10 wager on a 50/50 proposition...therefore, I would prefer to battle the WPS take out.

Ez

[Horseplayersbet.com]

"With 20 and 25 percent takeout rates the norm, its much better to play money on a football game at a 5% takeout rate".

I can't get excited about a 11/10 wager on a 50/50 proposition...therefore, I would prefer to battle the WPS take out.

Ez
It is more like a 21/20 wager on a 50/50 proposition. This has been explained a few times but one more time won't hurt.
The point spread is made so that there will be equal betting on either side in theory. So it is supposedly equal to a coin flip.
If you bet $100 on 10 games and win half, you have bet $1000, made $500 on won games, and lost $550 ($500 plus juice) on lost games. So you lost $50, but since you could technically have lost all the games, you risked $1100 (this is what you really bet). 50 divided by 1100 equals 4.55% takeout.
In theory, if you bet $1000 on win bets that average a 17% takeout, you will lose $170, or on $1100 worth of action, $187....plus breakage :)

[ryesteve]

Takeout is only too high if you treat racing as something more than a recreational afternoon out.Even if you treat it as recreation, you still want a fair shot. If I go to a carnival and try to win a stuffed panda by throwing softballs at milk bottles, it's all for fun and I really don't need the panda, but it would still piss me off if I found out one of the milk bottles was nailed down.

20-25% takeout isn't exactly nailing the bottle down, but it sure is a pretty strong glue.

[Imriledup]

Even if you treat it as recreation, you still want a fair shot. If I go to a carnival and try to win a stuffed panda by throwing softballs at milk bottles, it's all for fun and I really don't need the panda, but it would still piss me off if I found out one of the milk bottles was nailed down.

20-25% takeout isn't exactly nailing the bottle down, but it sure is a pretty strong glue.

But, here's the problem. Too many people treat it as recreation and don't force the racing industry to give them a fair shake. There are too many people who don't care about the fair shake and that's why the industry doesn't have to listen to the few people who DO want a fair shake. Too many people who don't care about takeout is why people who DO care are having a problem getting it reduced.

[ryesteve]

But, here's the problem. Too many people treat it as recreation and don't force the racing industry to give them a fair shake. There are too many people who don't care about the fair shake and that's why the industry doesn't have to listen to the few people who DO want a fair shake. Too many people who don't care about takeout is why people who DO care are having a problem getting it reduced.I don't think that's quite the problem. It makes sense, and has been confirmed by some who would know, that most heavy players would be in favor of either lower takeout or uniform rebate policies, because it would inflate the pools and they'd be able to churn more money into the pools and make even greater profits. So right now, most of the money being put into the pools is coming from people not happy with the status quo. So the problem isn't apathy. The problem is, how do they enforce their will? It's difficult to expect someone to engage in a boycott when they're making a lot of money as it is. The only hope is for things to get so bad that some (or most, if not all) of the heavy players can no longer compete because they're the only ones in the pool.

[Indulto]

I missed this comment which appeared about a month after the blog piece. I'm a little surprised that HANA (and CG in particular ;)) hasn't responded to it there in several weeks. There is a sharp poster here with the same handle, but I don't know if it is the same person. If HANA has already responded elsewhere, I apologize, and please point me to it.

http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2009/08/andy-beyer-had-it-right-in-1991.html (http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2009/08/andy-beyer-had-it-right-in-1991.html)
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Andy Beyer Had it Right, in 1991

comments:
Mike D said...
September 2, 2009 4:54 PMThere has been a lot of chatter recently about track takeout. The knee-jerk response is that the takeout is too high, and as a result, the two-dollar bettor is slowly going broke or leaving the game while the big bettors are wagering through rebate shops getting as much as 7% on every dollar wagered. But what many horseplayers fail to appreciate is that tracks get a relatively small portion of the takeout. For example, in California about 73% of the takeout pie is out of the track’s control.

Some suggest that reducing this tax on the bettor not only keeps more players in the game through increasing the churn, but also attracts new players, which in turn increases wagering pools and as the saying goes: you’ll make it up in volume. Well, let’s suppose a track has a handle of $1M per day with a takeout of 20%. Then the takeout is $200K per day. Now suppose the takeout was reduced to 10%, then the track would have to handle $2M per day to maintain its takeout. If this is the only track with a 10% takeout, then it may attract enough bettors from other tracks, but if this move is successful, then more tracks will follow suit. And once enough tracks had done so, where will the extra revenue come from? Bettors are not going to start doubling down, and slot players in the racinos will not be racing to the windows. And don’t count on the big money players. The rebate shops are not going to give up their best customers without a fight. And also there’s the unintended consequence of limiting wagers from off-site locations. This is what happened in 2007 when Ellis Park had a 4% takeout for the Pick 4. Sportsbooks in Vegas weren’t accepting bets because the 3% fee they were required to pay to carry the signal left only a 1% margin to cover their cost.

The argument of lower takeout is a straw man; if takeout was such an overpowering factor in the mind of horseplayers, then why do exotic wagers account for roughly 70% of all monies wagered on horse racing. The takeout for WPS is normally 17% - 18%, while the takeout for exotic wagers are mostly 25% or higher. Smart players will tell you that’s because there’s more value to be found in these wagers. And why is there more value, because the overwhelming majority of players in these pools are just looking for a big score – to heck with takeout.

In the end, the great takeout debate is less about keeping the two-dollar player at the track and more about the big bettors getting just a little more edge on the game. If you’re a player pushing a half-million dollars through the windows per year, then just a 2% reduction in the takeout puts another $10,000.00 in your pocket. As tracks do a better job catering to their high-end customers with their own version of rebates and incentives, you will hear less about high takeout. After all, it’s cold hard cash that wins the hearts and minds of horseplayers.

[rwwupl]

Mike D,
If you really believe your own spin, why don,t you point to the enormous success of attracting new customers every time the rates are raised?

If you would take the time to read the many fine articles and books on the subject(Try the HANA website for starters) you would find your theories do not hold water. You are repeating the self serving line of the horsemen and the racing managers who benefit from the take.

The racing managers and the horsemen are deluding themselves if you think when you raise rates you will make more money. There is a tipping point and that has been passed.

The full story can not be defined here , so people like myself get tired of answering people like you. So just tell me when racing becomes more popular instead of losing ground as a result of high rates, tell me more about it. rwwupl

[Horseplayersbet.com]

This is the first time I've seen the comment. It was an early August post and the comment was from early September.
Again, most people don't care about or know about takeout. They bet exotics because in gambling the idea for many is to make a score, not because they think about takeouts.
The more a person bets exotics without rebates, the faster they go broke and get disillusioned. The disillusionment never has to be associated with high takeouts either. Players will blame bad rides, bad luck, dq's etc as reasons they need to take a break, but the bottom line is their bankrolls have shrunk to next to nothing thanks to track takeout.
A takeout reduction does not put more money in a players bank account. It is churned back, and in a whales case, a takeout reduction is met with a rebate reduction of the same amount.

[DeanT]

There is great value in the win pools with low takeout. The $6 winner in the first at MNR paid over $8 at Betfair.

[rwwupl]

Also Add to Mike,

The argument that customers are not aware of the take out has been de- bunked many times and means little except to the spin masters.

It is true that not many customers of racing can tell you the take out #`s,just like not many people can tell you the tax on cigarettes. When you tax more on cigarettes ,sales go down.

Customers of racing know when they win or lose. The lower the tax, the more winners are sent home. Winners tell their friends and return for more.

There are not enough winners being sent home to be sustainable. The games health rides on the back of the average fan, which the policy of the racing managers and their followers has been a disaster.

The results of these policies speak for themselves .