10 % across the board, would the little tracks survive?

[Igeteven]

10 % across the board, would the little tracks survive?


OK people, I wave my magic wand and over night the take out is drop at all major tracks in the United States.


Just think all tracks in California, Kentucky, New York and Florida went to
10 %

Big question, there are a lot of smaller tracks as we all know in the U.S.

Can they survive if the betting dollar goes to these State.


Any CPA's out there, anyone from HANA can answer that, anyone working in at a small track can answer this. Anyone working at a big track can answer this.

We all would like to know.

[castaway01]

No offense, but the scenario is way too simplistic. You leave out vital information that would determine what tracks, if any, survived:

1) How much does handle rise if the takeout drops? I know there are papers written on this and the like, but how much would it actually go up and at which tracks?
2) How about signal fees? When Keeneland tried to drop their takeout in some pools to 15%, they got dropped by tracks who wouldn't take bets on their races. How does simulcasting continue as is with 10% takeout? Not saying it couldn't, but that would have to be explained first.

[johnhannibalsmith]

No offense, but the scenario is way too simplistic. You leave out vital information that would determine what tracks, if any, survived:
...

The magic wand will solve these issues. I'm surprised the magic wand's first order of business wasn't to transmoglify that surface back to dirt.

Sorry Lester, but Castaway's right here - it's quite tough to give you an honest answer because there are some assumptions that just don't translate to reality.

[Igeteven]

No offense, but the scenario is way too simplistic. You leave out vital information that would determine what tracks, if any, survived:

1) How much does handle rise if the takeout drops? I know there are papers written on this and the like, but how much would it actually go up and at which tracks?
2) How about signal fees? When Keeneland tried to drop their takeout in some pools to 15%, they got dropped by tracks who wouldn't take bets on their races. How does simulcasting continue as is with 10% takeout? Not saying it couldn't, but that would have to be explained first.

I don't have any solutions to this problem, that's why I need a brain surgeon to explain it. Believe me what I say, we have a lot of intelligent people who write on this forum a hell of lot smarter than I am. I will admit to this, others will not, they think they are the smart one.

Everyone is screaming lower the take out, NOW WOULD THE LITTLE TRACKS SURVIVE IF WE DID THIS.

[BillW]

I don't have any solutions to this problem, that's why I need a brain surgeon to explain it.

Everyone is screaming lower the take out, NOW WOULD THE LITTLE TRACKS SURVIVE IF WE DID THIS.

Would little tracks survive if we continue to do what we are doing now?

We always have these discussions as if the present model is successful and change is such a big risk. The reality is that small tracks will not survive by continuing with the present model.

[Igeteven]

Would little tracks survive if we continue to do what we are doing now?

We always have these discussions as if the present model is successful and change is such a big risk. The reality is that small tracks will not survive by continuing with the present model.

A lot of people would be unemployed and a lot of horses go to the killers

[proximity]

could they survive?

uhh, they'd thrive.

smaller tracks would take more bets on these tracks and give more money back to their patrons who would subsequently have even more money to wager on their live races......

betting more money on one track, doesn't mean betting less on another.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

10 % across the board, would the little tracks survive?


OK people, I wave my magic wand and over night the take out is drop at all major tracks in the United States.


Just think all tracks in California, Kentucky, New York and Florida went to
10 %

Big question, there are a lot of smaller tracks as we all know in the U.S.

Can they survive if the betting dollar goes to these State.


Any CPA's out there, anyone from HANA can answer that, anyone working in at a small track can answer this. Anyone working at a big track can answer this.

We all would like to know.
First off, I think it more likely that smaller tracks drop their takeouts anywhere close to those levels before the larger ones do. California is considering hiking takeout. Kentucky is in the process of putting in a 1.5% ADW fee (it was originally tabled at .5%), which means that Kentucky ADW customers will not be able to get the same type of rebates available to those in most other states. Still not as bad as California, Virginia, and of course Arizona (that has no legal internet betting).

Secondly, smaller tracks usually have lower host track fees. Bigger bettors are starting to gravitate towards these tracks while betting less at larger tracks.

As for local crowds. If the bigger tracks lower, all tracks will lower. This will be good for growth, as horseplayers at B and C tracks will cash more, leave the track with more, and most importantly, come back more.

[Igeteven]

First off, I think it more likely that smaller tracks drop their takeouts anywhere close to those levels before the larger ones do. California is considering hiking takeout. Kentucky is in the process of putting in a 1.5% ADW fee (it was originally tabled at .5%), which means that Kentucky ADW customers will not be able to get the same type of rebates available to those in most other states. Still not as bad as California, Virginia, and of course Arizona (that has no legal internet betting).

Secondly, smaller tracks usually have lower host track fees. Bigger bettors are starting to gravitate towards these tracks while betting less at larger tracks.

As for local crowds. If the bigger tracks lower, all tracks will lower. This will be good for growth, as horseplayers at B and C tracks will cash more, leave the track with more, and most importantly, come back more.

Excellent Post my man :) :)

[Charlie D]

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/racing-for-change/why.asp

Paul Roy: British Horseracing Authority Chairman

"As someone passionate about racing - an owner, breeder, racegoer, viewer and punter - I knew when I was appointed chairman of the authority that part of what we had to do was to steer racing towards change.

Markets change, society changes, consumers change, and so should we, to make sure we are as important in the future as in the past. The most successful businesses continually innovate and reinvent themselves. Racing should be no different.




US racing industry also has to reinvent itself.

[DeanT]

Should there be a change in the laws for this:

Ed De Rosa:

http://blog-beb.thoroughbredtimes.com/2010/03/pennsylvania-tracks-committment-to.html

Philadelphia Park has a current average purse distribution of $262,887, so you probably won't find many local horsemen who are disappointed with the expanded gaming model, but I sure am.

The rule in states with expanded gaming should be that takeout on horse racing wagers cannot exceed the takeout on slot machines, which is typically in the 10% range.

Jeff Gural, owner of two racetracks in the Bloodhorse:

“If you’ve got slots,” he said, “the pari-mutuel revenues are a drop in the bucket. Why offer slots with an 8% takeout and then charge people 20% to bet on racing?”

Gural's VP of racing, while speaking of their lowering of takeout in New York yesterday.

http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2010/03/tioga-lowers-takeout-to-new-york-state.html

"“We would even consider going lower on the takeout rates to between eight and nine per cent like the typical hold in the casino world if the state would allow us."

Is it time for a new state law: "If your track gets more than 50% of its revenue for purses and profits from slot machines, the takeout must be lowered to what you charge for slot machines."

The horseplayer would get something back from the slots, and the business through higher handle at places like PHA Park et al would grow.

Does anyone disagree with those folks?

[rwwupl]

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/racing-for-change/why.asp

Paul Roy: British Horseracing Authority Chairman




US racing industry also has to reinvent itself.



I think so too. :ThmbUp: