Stupid is as Stupid does: California takeout bill goes to governor

[andymays]

http://www.drf.com/news/california-takeout-bill-goes-governor

Excerpt:

Tuesday evening, SB 1072 was described by Sen. Tom Harman of Huntington Beach as important for the viability for California horse racing. “This industry employs 50,000 people,” he said before the vote. “We need to do what we can to encourage the industry to try new things and new avenues.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How about that statement? This guy is like most politicians. They eff things up in the name of doing the right thing. This bill will have the opposite effect that Senator Tom Harman thinks it will.

[The_Knight_Sky]

This bill will have the opposite effect that Senator Tom Harman thinks it will.




Who here will shift most (if not all) of their action because of this?

And which tracks will benefit from California's gaffe ?

[DeanT]

“We need to do what we can to encourage the industry to try new things and new avenues.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How about that statement? This guy is like most politicians. They eff things up in the name of doing the right thing. This bill will have the opposite effect that Senator Tom Harman thinks it will.

Trying new things..... hmmm.

In 1908 the takeout was 5%. Now it is 22% blended.

That seems like "trying old things that have failed"

The way it was in 1908:

http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2009/12/when-takeout-was-5.html

from Racing historian Colin:

"As wagering evolves in places where peer-to-peer wagering and bookmaking is permissible, the U.S. remains tied to a system that is conceptually brilliant but has become rigid and stultifying by the political forces that insist on sucking it dry."

[turfnsport]

The blind leading the blind. It's a disgrace.

Don't bend over Andy without first looking behind you.

I have not been much on the "boycott bandwagon" but this screams of HANA dropping the huge F bomb on California racing.

[andymays]

The blind leading the blind. It's a disgrace.

Don't bend over Andy without first looking behind you.

I have not been much on the "boycott bandwagon" but this screams of HANA dropping the huge F bomb on California racing.

Agree! :ThmbUp:

[thaskalos]

I have not been much on the "boycott bandwagon" but this screams of HANA dropping the huge F bomb on California racing. California is only the beginning...other states are sure to follow.

All the states without slots are facing the same problems...dwindling mutuel pools - which means less revenue for the tracks - and no alternative way of maintaining their current purse structures.

Of course the tracks - true to their nature - will all choose to raise the takeout for some short term relief...instead of addressing the cause of the problem. And as the mutuel pools continue their decline...the takeouts will continue their ascent.

And all this will happen because of one reason, and one reason only.

The horseplayers' inherent inability to take a stand, and show the racing industry that they are a force to be reckoned with. The industry treats us like "addicts", and so far...we have done nothing to change their minds.

Do we need HANA to declare a boycott? Can't each one of us make that determination for ourselves...and carry it out for once?

Calling for "unity" before we take a stand, is just one more reason not to do it at all.

The player has always maintained that he has no voice in this game...but he does.

He voices his opinions at the betting windows...where he is heard loud and clear.

I posted this once, a while ago...in a thread that asked whether or not the takeouts will be reduced. I said that, not only will the takeouts not be reduced...they would be increased, unless the player does what customers all the world do, when they are dissatisfied with the prices and products of a business. THEY CEASE TO PATRONIZE THAT BUSINESS!

They don't just endlessly complain to the owner. Nor do they need to "organize", before they walk out!

[DeanT]

California is only the beginning...other states are sure to follow.

All the states without slots are facing the same problems...dwindling mutuel pools - which means less revenue for the tracks - and no alternative way of maintaining their current purse structures.

Of course the tracks - true to their nature - will all choose to raise the takeout for some short term relief...instead of addressing the cause of the problem. And as the mutuel pools continue their decline...the takeouts will continue their ascent.

And all this will happen because of one reason, and one reason only.

The horseplayers' inherent inability to take a stand, and show the racing industry that they are a force to be reckoned with. The industry treats us like "addicts", and so far...we have done nothing to change their minds.

Do we need HANA to declare a boycott? Can't each one of us make that determination for ourselves...and carry it out for once?

Calling for "unity" before we take a stand, is just one more reason not to do it at all.

The player has always maintained that he has no voice in this game...but he does.

He voices his opinions at the betting windows...where he is heard loud and clear.

I posted this once, a while ago...in a thread that asked whether or not the takeouts will be reduced. I said that, not only will the takeouts not be reduced...they would be increased, unless the player does what customers all the world do, when they are dissatisfied with the prices and products of a business. THEY CEASE TO PATRONIZE THAT BUSINESS!

They don't just endlessly complain to the owner. Nor do they need to "organize", before they walk out!

I would agree with that if handle was what it was. I just have trouble thinking this business will ever do anything right.

If handle held the rate of inflation the last dozen years, handle would be about $20B. Instead it will do about 10.7B. That is close to a 50% drop. There is a boycott of racing right now, to the tune of half their business.

If you owned a flower shop in town and offered bad service and high prices and you had a 50% drop in your business, would you say "everything is fine. My buyers are addicts, so I can keep doing what I have been doing" That would be clueless; and your customers would not organize a further 10% boycott to drill it through your clueless head, they will just keep leaving.

We have lost virtually half the customers in racing the last decade. They have done nothing up til last year but raise signal fees and raise takeout. I have no confidence that another 10% takeout drop will make them feel any differently in places like CA.

Other places, yes, surely it is making a difference. NYRA is on TV talking that we are priced too high. Nick Eaves at Woodbine (who raised takeout this past decade because we were all degenerates supposedly) is now talking about lopping off 4% off tris, supers and other exotics. Two other thoroughbred tracks are doing it, and four harness tracks have lowered it. People are realizing that with a 50% real handle drop, people are actually speaking with their dollars.

In CA we are not dealing with normal execs, in my opinion. Handle could drop 50% next year and they will blame it on offshore poker, the economy, or the Olympics. We saw it with the Los Al experiment. They will listen to horse owners, and not even entertain any thought for the customers.

All MO.

[Charli125]

Do we need HANA to declare a boycott? Can't each one of us make that determination for ourselves...and carry it out for once?


I agree completely, and I've already made that decision for my personal wagering. No more CA. I think every horseplayer out there should be responding the same way.

[andymays]

I agree completely, and I've already made that decision for my personal wagering. No more CA. I think every horseplayer out there should be responding the same way.

It helps if it's organized. It helps if people go on radio shows and do articles about it. You have to create some buzz about a "suspension of play" in California.

[turfnsport]

It helps if it's organized. It helps if people go on radio shows and do articles about it. You have to create some buzz about a "suspension of play" in California.

That is correct, otherwise they will just blame any handle decrease on the weather.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

That is correct, otherwise they will just blame any handle decrease on the weather.

Or not being able to offer the Quadruple Quadzublar Quadactor In N Out 4 by 4 Quadtabulous Quadrafecta

[The_Knight_Sky]

It helps if it's organized.




A formal declaration should be in order. A vast majority of individual bettors tend to be fickle and approach wagering without defined goals. They will continue to wager without knowing what hit them.

Those that do know why their edge has been reduced (or eliminated outright), because of the takeout increase will automatically find less value plays. They may eventually leave the circuit for good since the time, effort and energy of focusing on California is not worth it.

Odds are 1/9 that all-sources handle will continue to plummet at all major Southland racing venues. So why not make it an official boycott and get the media's attention to spread the word of continued ineptitude out west?

PS: Good luck to the Breeders Cup Ltd if they're planning on
handle increases at a singular SoCal venue after the passage of this bill.
It simply won't be happening.

[andymays]

It's about taking a stand.

If not now then when?

It doesn't have to be for a long time. Maybe just a few days to let them know we're serious. Everyone should be able to stay away for a few days to get an idea of what the impact will be.

I like "suspension of play". Boycott makes it seem permanent which is unlikely. A 3 day shot over the bow should make a statement for starters.

[Charli125]

I like "suspension of play". Boycott makes it seem permanent which is unlikely. A 3 day shot over the bow should make a statement for starters.

My problem with the "suspension of play" is that it's too easy to lie about the results. As ITP and everyone else has mentioned, it's too easy to make up an excuse for low handle during such a short period of time.(what am I talking about, it's easy to lie about low handle season over season as proven by the Los Al debacle) I could be wrong as I wasn't there during the initial inception of the "buycott"/"procott", but I think that was why it was decided to go that route rather than the boycott route.

The biggest hurdle in creating a boycott that actually works is that there are some very big players that won't stop because that's how they make their living. While I would love to get them on-board, it's hard to convince someone that is making money, that they need to stop making money in the short-term in order to keep making money in the long-term.

We all know that handle is going to go down after this increase is approved, and that the estimated 25-30 million in additional purses is a pipe dream, and that is the most frustrating part for me. I refuse to believe that the folks in CA are not intelligent enough to know this, and I refuse to believe that they're intentionally trying to sabotage racing. So I'm at a loss as to why they would continue to make decisions which are detrimental to the sport.

[Charlie D]

I don't play Cal, but I'll "suspend play" at my chosen location in support if required.

[andymays]

My problem with the "suspension of play" is that it's too easy to lie about the results. As ITP and everyone else has mentioned, it's too easy to make up an excuse for low handle during such a short period of time.(what am I talking about, it's easy to lie about low handle season over season as proven by the Los Al debacle) I could be wrong as I wasn't there during the initial inception of the "buycott"/"procott", but I think that was why it was decided to go that route rather than the boycott route.

The biggest hurdle in creating a boycott that actually works is that there are some very big players that won't stop because that's how they make their living. While I would love to get them on-board, it's hard to convince someone that is making money, that they need to stop making money in the short-term in order to keep making money in the long-term.

We all know that handle is going to go down after this increase is approved, and that the estimated 25-30 million in additional purses is a pipe dream, and that is the most frustrating part for me. I refuse to believe that the folks in CA are not intelligent enough to know this, and I refuse to believe that they're intentionally trying to sabotage racing. So I'm at a loss as to why they would continue to make decisions which are detrimental to the sport.

The impact for a short suspension of play has to be at least 15%. It can be done. In fact more can be done if it is done the right way.

As far as why they do this stuff, I think the leaders are sucking as much money out of the game as possible before it crashes. Even though the handle is down at Del Mar they are kicking butt with the concerts and concessions. Horsemen don't share in that stuff.

The guys leading everyone off a cliff are still making big money for themeselves.

[jelly]

A formal declaration should be in order. A vast majority of individual bettors tend to be fickle and approach wagering without defined goals. They will continue to wager without knowing what hit them.

Those that do know why their edge has been reduced (or eliminated outright), because of the takeout increase will automatically find less value plays. They may eventually leave the circuit for good since the time, effort and energy of focusing on California is not worth it.

Odds are 1/9 that all-sources handle will continue to plummet at all major Southland racing venues. So why not make it an official boycott and get the media's attention to spread the word of continued ineptitude out west?

PS: Good luck to the Breeders Cup Ltd if they're planning on
handle increases at a singular SoCal venue after the passage of this bill.
It simply won't be happening.



I like It.


We need to advertise.Does anyone know how much to advertise on the Paulick report.
I don't think the DRF will take it,but we could try.

[rwwupl]

From:
Scott Lay (scott@aroundthecapitol.com) To Roger Way..

The governor now has until September 30 to act on bills that are on his desk. As he is planning to go on a six-day Asian trade mission beginning September 9, most Capitol insiders believe that most bills won't be acted on until close to September 30. Unlike 2008, he has not threatened to veto bills unless a budget is adopted.

[The_Knight_Sky]

I like It.


We need to advertise.
Does anyone know how much to advertise on the Paulick report.
I don't think the DRF will take it,but we could try.




Why wouldn't the DRF host an advertised gif?
Their folks understand the business. Here's Matt Hegarty:

Increases to the takeout have the potential to drive bettors to out-of-state or off-shore rebate sites, operations that reward bettors with cash back based on volume of handle.

The rebate programs are typically designed so that the largest bettors play against a fixed takeout, and increases to the takeout are typically refunded to the bettor.

http://www.drf.com/news/horseplayers-disagree-californias-plan-raise-takeout-exotic-bets

Make no mistake, this is a national issue where roughly four
out of five dollars wagered on California racing come from outside of state lines.

I can't help but think that after a few years of driving down this bumpy road
the tracks will ask for some "extra help" to boost purses, etc.
Could the Indian Casinos be the next target ? Just wondering :confused:

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Why wouldn't the DRF host an advertised gif?:confused:

From conversations in the past.....they won't do it.

Maybe they've changed but I doubt it.

[jelly]

Question for HANA.

Can you tell us what kind of limitations the DRF has on advertising?

Also,how about Paulick Report?

Thanks

[rwwupl]

Question for HANA.

Can you tell us what kind of limitations the DRF has on advertising?

Also,how about Paulick Report?

Thanks


http://www1.drf.com/about/about_advertising.html

For more information about placing an ad in Daily Racing Form or on DRF.com, please contact a member of our advertising staff based on your business location:

Jeffery Burch
Vice President/ Advertising, New York
212-366-7650

Don Gleeson
Northeast Advertising Representative, New York
212-366-7666

Fritz Widaman
Director of Sales and Business Development, Mid West
859-224-6868

Jon Lindo
Western Advertising Representative, Los Angeles
760-930-9750

Greg Dixon
Classified Advertising
National Toll-Free 1-800-364-8409 Ext. 6880

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

advertise@paulickreport.com

Publisher: Ray Paulick - ray@paulickreport.com
Associate Publisher: Bradford Cummings - brad@paulickreport.com

[chickenhead]

If DRF took a boycott ad I'd eat a pair of HANA boxers. Not gonna happen. Also not gonna get a TV spot on TVG or HRTV.

HANA could prolly get a boycott message into Paulick, Equidaily, and maybe one coverage mention of it in Bloodhorse. One day, one mention, then forgotten.

PaceAdvantage is probably just about the largest audience a boycott message could reach sans a coordinated plan to fly banners over tracks, every weekend. So....Pa Members -- Quit playing Cali already, will ya?

[andymays]

If DRF took a boycott ad I'd eat a pair of HANA boxers. Not gonna happen. Also not gonna get a TV spot on TVG or HRTV.

HANA could prolly get a boycott message into Paulick, Equidaily, and maybe one coverage mention of it in Bloodhorse. One day, one mention, then forgotten.

PaceAdvantage is probably just about the largest audience a boycott message could reach sans a coordinated plan to fly banners over tracks, every weekend. So....Pa Members -- Quit playing Cali already, will ya?

What do you tell people that say even with the raise in take California is still lower than other venues? Where are they supposed to play?

[chickenhead]

What do you tell people that say even with the raise in take California is still lower than other venues? Where are they supposed to play?

Nowhere is always an option....

[andymays]

Nowhere is always an option....

I'm asking because it's going to come up. You have to have a decent answer.

A suspension of play can work for a few days to start but anything more than that will be tough to pull of initially.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

No way they'd ever take a boycott ad....ever.

I was talking about an ad explaining how the takeout raise affects/robs a bettor.....they won't even take that I'm sure.

Was told no controversial ads like this allowed.....this at a time when their website was cluttered with ads for offshore bookmakers and touts with 900 numbers.......just fvcking incredible.

[jelly]

What do you tell people that say even with the raise in take California is still lower than other venues? Where are they supposed to play?



Monmouth 15% takeout pk4 and 5.


Churchill and Keenland come to mind.

[andymays]

Monmouth 15% takeout pk4 and 5.

Churchill and Keenland come to mind.

Other than the Monmouth pick 5 their take is high or am I mistaken.


Just for the record my answer would be to play offshore. Somewhere the money doesn't go into the pools.

I think that's a realistic solution.

[jelly]

Yea,just as high as anywhere else,but pick4 and Pk 5 are good bets at 15%.

[andymays]

You have to make the right call on the first one and you have to have all the answers before you take the shot.

Failure is not an option.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Even without a boycott, handle will fall, it has to.
Here is what is going to happen. Those who mainly play California tracks will get less back, some will go to the track less over time, and they will all churn less.
With an increase in takeout comes less overlays for exactors, etc. This will cause whales who use sophisticated software that keys in on overlays to bet a lot less.
I have to assume that the cost of the California signal will increase as well. This will turn off many price sensitive players who bet on the basis of net rebate. It will also affect whales in a big way because it also makes for less overlays to play as this cuts into their margins.
And then of course, there are many angry horseplayers, many of whom will follow through on their threats to not play California tracks again.
The fact that the takeout increase will go to purses, may give purses a short term rise (not nearly what they think it will be), but not significant enough to attract new owners to pay $100-125 in day rate. I don't see field size rising much.
We are in store for a shortage of horses in the next couple of years due to the state the industry is in right now. Less owners, less horses being bred, and non economical horses being retired much sooner than ever before.

This is going to be a disaster for California, boycott or no boycott.

[andymays]

Even without a boycott, handle will fall, it has to.
Here is what is going to happen. Those who mainly play California tracks will get less back, some will go to the track less over time, and they will all churn less.
With an increase in takeout comes less overlays for exactors, etc. This will cause whales who use sophisticated software that keys in on overlays to bet a lot less.
I have to assume that the cost of the California signal will increase as well. This will turn off many price sensitive players who bet on the basis of net rebate. It will also affect whales in a big way because it also makes for less overlays to play as this cuts into their margins.
And then of course, there are many angry horseplayers, many of whom will follow through on their threats to not play California tracks again.
The fact that the takeout increase will go to purses, may give purses a short term rise (not nearly what they think it will be), but not significant enough to attract new owners to pay $100-125 in day rate. I don't see field size rising much.
We are in store for a shortage of horses in the next couple of years due to the state the industry is in right now. Less owners, less horses being bred, and non economical horses being retired much sooner than ever before.

This is going to be a disaster for California, boycott or no boycott.


This from the San Diego Union this morning. I guess they'll need to raise the take again next year to subsidize the people who put on the show. How about 30% so they can put on the show? :rolleyes:


http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/sep/01/talks-continue-del-mar-hosting-oak-tree-11/

Excerpt:

"I hope it happens,” O’Neill said. “But my main apprehension is all the people who put this great show on. What we have to figure out, as a sport, is how to subsidize the people who put the show on. I know how difficult it is going to be for them to find housing and things for an additional six weeks.

“That’s the one scary thing for me, but from a selfish standpoint, it would be a great thing for business and the sport. It’s a fun place, a great atmosphere and great location."

Harper said no date had been set for future meetings. The CHRB did not respond to a request for comment.

[The_Knight_Sky]

Other than the Monmouth pick 5 their take is high or am I mistaken.




Monmouth Park
WPS 17%
DD Ex 19%
Tri Sup 25%
P3 25%
P4 P5 15%
P6 20% (not offered this meet)

Del Mar Fairgrounds: Horse Racing
Last Updated by Horseplayersbet.com on Feb 18
WPS 15.43%
All Other Bets 20.68%

Philadelphia Park Race Track
Last Updated by Horseplayersbet.com on Feb 18
WPS 17%
DD Ex 20%
P3 P4 26%
Tri Sup 30%

Saratoga Race Course
WPS 16%
DD Ex 18.5%
Tri Sup 26%
P3 P4 26%
P6 26% on carryover days 16% on non c/o days

The new California exactas at 22.68% would make even Philly Park's takeout look good. But that's not the whole enchilada of course. Field size, pool size racing surface and the familiarity of the product are strong selling points.

Only the individual knows where to shift the action.
In this instance he must shift to survive over the long haul.

numbers courtesy of: Horseplayersbet.com
http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?hl=en&gl=ca&ptab=2&ie=UTF8&view=map&msa=0&msid=105431952953964702152.00047fd83f45cb6beac52&ll=34.741612,-93.867187&spn=66.947093,112.5&t=p&z=3&source=embed

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Retama starts up their short meet this weekend. The author here gives the impression that takeouts have been reduced, but they have not, they are the same as last year.
12% on Doubles and Pick 3's.

http://www.drf.com/news/retama-lowers-prices-takeout-short-family-oriented-meet

[rwwupl]

If California players(loyalists) would convert to W-P-S(15.43%) wagering only, and forget the exotics, it would make a statement that could be seen in black and white, without any "Boycott" ,Adds or arguments and the least amount of inconvenience. They do not think we have the will or courage to do that...Do we?

Racetrack "Beancounters" understand that logic and would get the message soon enough... if enough of us took a stand to be noticed.

rwwupl

By the way, DRF,Jay Hovdey has a good article on point that you might enjoy..


http://www.drf.com/news/exchange-concept-seems-foreign
excerpt:

For the most part, those committee meetings were undercovered by media and therefore not part of the mainstream conversation in California racing circles. The concept of legalizing betting exchanges was broached only a couple of times at the regular monthly meetings of the state racing board held this year, and then never as an agenda item for formal discussion.

And now it is law. Is this a great country or what?

Do not think for a moment the California legislature sat around, sipping espressos, just waiting for the horse racing bill to hit the floor. As is their barely functional lawmaking custom, assembly members and state senators engaged in a flurry of votes on a bottlenecked pile of bills into the wee hours Tuesday night as the clock ticked down on the legislative session.

Along with the passage of the takeout/betting exchange bill, California’s finest passed a bill raising the minimum age for admission to kindergarten to five, by Sept. 1 (I started the Big K at four years, 10 months, which certainly explains a lot). They defeated one bill that would have banned plastic bags in retail stores (some 19 billion are used by Californians each year — got a problem with that?), and another that would have banned the open toting of unloaded firearms. But at least they passed a bill that would increase penalties on paparazzi who break the rules of the road while chasing targets like Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, or any child accompanying Angelina Jolie.

Horse racing should be so lucky, that paparazzi would care. Instead, as a response to downward purse trends, the takeout on exotic wagers will increase by either 2 or 3 percent, depending upon the type of wager. Horseplayers should be rightly peeved – charging more for a bet when customer cash is tight is as nuts as cutting taxes in wartime – but at least the money goes right to purses, which might keep an owner or two in the game for a little while longer. Still, the dike will need more thumbs.

[The_Knight_Sky]

Retama starts up their short meet this weekend. The author here gives the impression that takeouts have been reduced, but they have not, they are the same as last year. 12% on Doubles and Pick 3's.




Nonetheless Retama is doing what Delaware Park is not doing with their "exacta gimmick", starting from the very beginning of the meet.

Futhermore, TVG patrons will get the same reduced prices as those players on track (unlike DelPark).

I feel like a fish out of water tackling Texas and Louisiana racing but I think Retama will do well with this "less is more" concept. Good luck to them. :ThmbUp:

[DeanT]

"I hope it happens,” O’Neill said. “But my main apprehension is all the people who put this great show on. What we have to figure out, as a sport, is how to subsidize the people who put the show on. I know how difficult it is going to be for them to find housing and things for an additional six weeks.



This has been the problem for 50 years, in my opinion Andy.

Whenever the business has a problem with costs from the supply side, the horseplayers are asked to pay for it.

Not to inject too much politics here, it is like your health care thing down there. Costs have gone up sky high, so instead of looking at costs, people are asked to pay for it, with no change to the culprit.

Costs have gone up huge everywhere for horse owners, because (mostly because of slots) they can charge more, because people are willing to pay more. Instead of an $8000 purse twice a month for your 5 claimer, costs dictate that you need a $10000 purse twice a month. The increase in purses do not help people make more money, because the new money just goes to the vets etc.

Here is a post from a a couple of horseman on a board (here in Ontario):

The cost of vet work is insane. It got so out of hand that vets in the U.K. now have to have there prices listed when you walk into there clinic. All the most commonly Rx'd meds are up on a black board type of set up. I have a up to date list of the wholesale prices of vet. meds. Included is a suggested retail price. One med. commonly used on horses wholesales for $45. The suggested retail is $175!! That is simply insane. Go to a vet seminar/workshop. Hearing the Pharma company rep talk about getting every penny they can get out of there clients is sickening! Then they tell you how to sell that product. What to say to sell the product, where to place the brochures, etc..

I can't begrudge someone making a good living. But these vets have more income than a good casino does!! Youtube some of these workshops/seminars. CBC and W5 did a show on vets and what they charge. It made for some very unhappy vets, pharma. companies. But it sure let the public know what was going on.

And:

The mark up on products and vet work is hard to believe. This winter when we were in vegas we got into the the vets trade show. alot of the vets we use were in attendence. if you had seen the prices that they buy the products for you would be sick. 150 % markup on most products like acid adiquin anything else you want to mention. I was sick when we walk'd out.


Some of my favorite fees you see on a vet bill now

:examanation fee
:injection fee
:x ray set up fee
:$10 for a shot of bute, after they put in $480 worth of acid in your horses Knees

So, once again players are asked to pay for something for suppliers, instead of the suppliers trying to control their costs. It's insane. And a vicious cycle, in my opinion. You could double a purse, costs will go up by about the same amount. It's how it is done, and it hurts racing.

[thespaah]

http://www.drf.com/news/california-takeout-bill-goes-governor

Excerpt:

Tuesday evening, SB 1072 was described by Sen. Tom Harman of Huntington Beach as important for the viability for California horse racing. “This industry employs 50,000 people,” he said before the vote. “We need to do what we can to encourage the industry to try new things and new avenues.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How about that statement? This guy is like most politicians. They eff things up in the name of doing the right thing. This bill will have the opposite effect that Senator Tom Harman thinks it will.
Morons.....Politicians still don't get it.
Historical info shows a consistent pattern in that when taxes ( the takeout is a TAX) are increased, revenues fall. It's that simple.
Politicians are quite possibly the stupidest people on the planet becuase they continually repeat the same actions that in the past yielded negative results, thinking there will be a different outcome this time.
It's very simple. If you stab yourself in the hand with a pencil, it is going to hurt. The same action will bring the same result with each successive attempt.
Politicians truly believe they can continue to gouge the producers with the hope we will buy into their nonsense.
It is my prediciton that this increase in the cost to wager in California will result in lower handle and at the end of the day, less revenue.
Morons.

[thespaah]

What do you tell people that say even with the raise in take California is still lower than other venues? Where are they supposed to play?PA has high takeouts, does it not...Are there other states/tracks with higher takeouts than CA?

[andymays]

PA has high takeouts, does it not...Are there other states/tracks with higher takeouts than CA?

Most states have higher takeout than California.

[cj]

Most states have higher takeout than California.

Most other states aren't running a plethora of unbettable races.

[thaskalos]

The high takeout is most damaging to the player, when it is combined with the small fields.

[andymays]

The high takeout is most damaging to the player, when it is combined with the small fields.

Exactly. :ThmbUp:

When I proposed my Horseplayers Early pick 4 with the 10% take one guy said to me "why can't it be 15% like the Monmouth P5?". I said "because the early races in California have the shortest fields on the card and 15% isn't going to motivate anyone."

On top of all that California players aren't eligible for significant rebates because of some other shady deal. All things considered it's bullshit.

[thespaah]

Most states have higher takeout than California.tried to look for numbers. no luck couldn't find a link. can you post some examples....
BTW if CA has alower takeout than other states then this whole thing is moot..
Perhaps this is a bigger issue. Perhaps the players are pissed off even more than ever due to the short fields and now CA wants to up the ante by 10% or so.

[andymays]

tried to look for numbers. no luck couldn't find a link. can you post some examples....
BTW if CA has alower takeout than other states then this whole thing is moot..
Perhaps this is a bigger issue. Perhaps the players are pissed off even more than ever due to the short fields and now CA wants to up the ante by 10% or so.


HANA has them all listed somewhere. You can take my word for it.

A "suspension of play" would mostly be about drawing a line in the sand. The dirty dealing in California makes it much easier to do here because most everyone is motivated right now.

[DeanT]

tried to look for numbers. no luck couldn't find a link. can you post some examples....
BTW if CA has alower takeout than other states then this whole thing is moot..
Perhaps this is a bigger issue. Perhaps the players are pissed off even more than ever due to the short fields and now CA wants to up the ante by 10% or so.

It does not have much to do with it. The present rates are irrelevant. Players are dumbfounded that they are raising rates up to 15% while their business is off. Players (and economists) are also shaking their heads regarding the fact that not only are they doing it, they think that handle will stay the same. This shows a complete disregard for mountains of empirical and theoretical evidence.

I guess it comes down to this - My 6 year old nephew who has a lemonade stand is selling glasses for $2 and he is not selling any. If he comes to ask any sane person for advice, they might say that he should cut his price to a dollar and see how he does, because $2 is expensive when compared to others on the block. No one in their right mind would tell him to juice up the price to $3 a glass and expect success. But that is what CA industry execs are telling us. It is maddening for those who want the sport to grow, and they simply are not taking it any longer.

[The_Knight_Sky]

tried to look for numbers. no luck couldn't find a link.
can you post some examples....




I use CanGamble's map with a new 22.68% takeout on Exactas and Daily Double
as a reference point and compare that with other opportunities.

http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?hl=en&gl=ca&ptab=2&ie=UTF8&view=map&msa=0&msid=105431952953964702152.00047fd83f45cb6beac52&ll=34.741612,-93.867187&spn=66.947093,112.5&t=p&z=3&source=embed

[andymays]

It does not have much to do with it. The present rates are irrelevant. Players are dumbfounded that they are raising rates up to 15% while their business is off. Players (and economists) are also shaking their heads regarding the fact that not only are they doing it, they think that handle will stay the same. This shows a complete disregard for mountains of empirical and theoretical evidence.

I guess it comes down to this - My 6 year old nephew who has a lemonade stand is selling glasses for $2 and he is not selling any. If he comes to ask any sane person for advice, they might say that he should cut his price to a dollar and see how he does, because $2 is expensive when compared to others on the block. No one in their right mind would tell him to juice up the price to $3 a glass and expect success. But that is what CA industry execs are telling us. It is maddening for those who want the sport to grow, and they simply are not taking it any longer.


Lemonade, Hamburgers, Toilet Paper, underwear, you name it and we have a story for you. :)

[DeanT]

Lemonade, Hamburgers, Toilet Paper, underwear, you name it and we have a story for you. :)

Wait until I pull out my adult video analogy :)