PDA

View Full Version : What's the deal with ADW Fee Caps? ADW Fee Cap Impacting Illinois Racing


andymays
08-05-2010, 12:31 PM
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/58237/adw-fee-cap-impacting-illinois-racing

Excerpt:

5% cap imposed by the Illinois Racing Board on advance deposit wagering fees charged by out-of-state racetracks to send their signals to customers in Illinois has led to a significant downturn in wagering from those sources.The fee cap, approved by the state legislature, went into effect July 12. Since that time, Illinois ADW customers have seen a significant drop in the number of tracks on which they can wager through XpressBet.com and TwinSpires.com, the two platforms approved by the IRB.

According to the TwinSpires.com website, among the signals that have been cut off from Illinois ADW customers are Calder, Del Mar, and Saratoga, consistently among the most popular tracks on which to wager this time of the year. The signals are not being provided because the tracks are among those that charge higher rates, usually 8%-9% for their signals.
IRB figures through Aug. 3 indicate average daily ADW wagering has plunged 35.7% from $316,532 a day to $203,394 since the fee cap took effect.

Excerpt:

Arnold said the fact California has a cap on ADW fees is insufficient reason to impose one in Illinois or any other state. He noted California was the first to authorize ADW providers, and in doing so the state established the same rate that is charged for simulcast signals. If anything, California should lift or raise its cap rather than other states following its lead, he said.

"California does need to take action," Arnold said. "We should not follow California’s bad policy and impose it here."

Arnold said there is a common misperception among many within the racing industry that higher signal fees benefit mainly the ADW providers. In fact, according to Arnold, the converse is true, and that when caps are imposed, the lower fees result in the ADW providers getting a higher rate, and that the brunt of the decreases are felt by the tracks and horsemen.

"Any time a state imposes an ADW cap, the only winner is the ADW company," Arnold said. Both Arlington and ADW provider TwinSpires.com are owned by Churchill Downs Inc.

Illinois THA president Mike Campbell said the "single issue that is fueling the war of the signal prices" is the 3.5% California fee cap . "It is causing this reaction throughout the industry," Campbell said. "Our problem here in Illinois is that this is the shot across the bow. It could potentially be a lethal blow."

FenceBored
08-05-2010, 01:45 PM
Andy, you left out the best part."The exact same cap has existed in Illinois for almost 30 years on interstate fees paid by Illinois offtrack wagering facilities to out-of-state tracks for their simulcasts," according to the IRB website. "These interstate fees come largely from revenue that would otherwise be paid to Illinois horsemen in the form of purses on Illinois races. The purpose of the cap on interstate fees is to preserve and promote the interests of Illinois horsemen and Illinois racing relative to other states."
-- http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/58237/adw-fee-cap-impacting-illinois-racing
Translation: "All your handle are belong to us."

horseking
08-05-2010, 01:55 PM
All it does is lock out Illinois players from utilizing the vast majority of ADW's....I wish the industry would start realizing that distribution is their friend....every track should be looking to get their signal in front of as many eye balls as possible....by limiting their signal/wagering all they do is drive more people offshore where the track gets ZERO percent.

This industry needs a wake up call.

Hoofless_Wonder
08-06-2010, 11:39 PM
In this case, the cap %'s and interstate issues with signals is a smokescreen for the dying handle at Arlington and the Illinois OTBs. I received a letter today from Twinspires Club reminding me that Saratoga, Calder and Del Mar can still be wagered upon at the OTBs here in Illinois. The letter goes on to state that an Illinois OTB account can be linked to my Twinspires account. How convenient.:mad:

So, now that I can't play the top tracks online I can:

- drive 12 miles/20 minutes to the OTB to bet them
- pay the additional OTB takeout on winning bets
- deal with the crowd, the noise, the crappy service, and the general idiots at the OTB

No thanks.:ThmbDown:

Now I have to expand my boycott of the Illinois tracks and OTBs to include Twinspires. TVG here I come.....

chickenhead
08-07-2010, 02:28 AM
so basically Tracknet peeps, who like to charge some of the highest signal fees in the industry, worried about signal fee limits spreading? Sucks to be a gambler either way I guess...either high prices or no signal, take your pick.

Mike Campbell said the "single issue that is fueling the war of the signal prices" is the 3.5% California fee cap. "It is causing this reaction throughout the industry," Campbell said

"If we get slots in Illinois, with the purse money generated they could have a signal that (harness tracks) could charge 8% for in a very short period of time," Campbell said. .

Translation: Cali should raise their 3.5% signal fee cap, so we can charge their residents 8%.

I had no idea Cali had a hard limit of 3.5% signal fees for Cali players at ADWs tho. Too bad they suck up what must be around ~10%-ish then as a source market fee -- they could significantly lower prices on the back of that cap.

Hoofless_Wonder
08-07-2010, 05:39 PM
Another fine quote:

"Meanwhile, as the controversy continues to swirl, the IRB said it "will continue to monitor and adjust the cap as the interests of Illinois racing warrants."

If this were REALLY true, the IRB would be allow wagering to resume on all tracks for the Illinois ADW accounts, since they're losing $100K in handle every day. Or, they would at least OFFER the ADW account holders a chance to pay the OTB premium on those tracks which exceed the cap.

The Illinois horsemen supported the wagering restriction, and hence won't see another dime bet on their product from me - forever. I've got a long memory - I'm still PO'ed at the major league baseball players from the strike of 1994 - and have only paid admission one time to a game since then...

Jeff P
08-07-2010, 08:12 PM
There's another (almost completely overlooked) facet to this.

By posting a sentence or two on the Twinspires website asking players to blame the State of Illinois, management at CDI/Twinspires has (cleverly) diverted attention away from what (in my opinion) is really the core issue here:

For the past several years, behind the scenes, each time a track signal contract comes up for renewal...

Tracks keep driving up the wholesale cost of a bet by demanding ever higher signal fees.

If you ask me, in addition to asking the industry to make a genuine effort to more widely distribute track signals - and thus make racing more widely available to the general public...

Players (and the press) should also be asking the following question of tracks and horsemen:

Why is your signal fee so high?



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



-jp

.

rrbauer
08-08-2010, 12:03 PM
There's another (almost completely overlooked) facet to this.

By posting a sentence or two on the Twinspires website asking players to blame the State of Illinois, management at CDI/Twinspires has (cleverly) diverted attention away from what (in my opinion) is really the core issue here:

For the past several years, behind the scenes, each time a track signal contract comes up for renewal...

Tracks keep driving up the wholesale cost of a bet by demanding ever higher signal fees.

If you ask me, in addition to asking the industry to make a genuine effort to more widely distribute track signals - and thus make racing more widely available to the general public...

Players (and the press) should also be asking the following question of tracks and horsemen:

Why is your signal fee so high?


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



-jp

.

Simple question with a simple answer: Because they can get it.

Hoofless_Wonder
08-08-2010, 03:01 PM
Does anyone have a breakdown of where each percentage of an ADW-sourced wagers ends up vs. an on-track wager of the same amount? If the negotiating of fees escalates, I wouldn't be surprised to see a surchage model (like TVG) become the norm, and not even a higher volume of betting being able to discount that.

The more I think about this, this move is a win-win for the Illinois horsemen (and even the ADWs) if they can demonstrate the lower handle and corresponding revenue drop makes it ESSENTIAL for them to get slots to survive. I'm just not up on how close they are to getting slots. Hmmm. Slots at the OTBs?

Oh - and I forgot they closed the OTB in Peoria, so now it's a 35 mile/45 minute drive for me to get a bet down on Saratoga......

Striker
08-31-2010, 05:08 PM
I believe they have established the new cap and all Illinois residents can now wager thru the ADWs and catch the last week at the Spa. New cap is 9%.

Hoofless_Wonder
09-02-2010, 08:58 AM
I'm surprised - thought the restriction would be in place until the end of the Arlington meet. But I guess the 47% reduction in handle from the ADW sites caused a little heartache.

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/national-news/2010/August/31/Illinois-adjusts-account-wagering-cap.ASPX

I suppose some of that wagering handle will return now, but they (Illinois horsemen) won't see any of that from me.

Valuist
09-11-2010, 06:09 PM
Message to all Illinois players:

Bookmaker.com