PDA

View Full Version : Why Do California Players Pay More to Bet?


rwwupl
09-24-2010, 10:50 AM
This is being circulated in California...



Why do California Players Pay More to Bet?


Rebates to favored customers are something that works to the deficit of California players and the industry in general. Many ADW,s offer rebates, but under present California state law, sponsored by the TOC there is a 6.5% Retention Cap on ADW wagers generated within the state of California. There is no state law prohibiting rebates in California, but the retention cap leaves no wiggle room for California players to receive the rebate percentages that ADWs offer other out of state players. Yes, there are certain favored California individuals offered up to 3% in California, but it is very selective, and is not public knowledge. ADWs offer rebates to favor out of state players on California tracks around 8% rebate. Takeout, plus any rebate, is the cost of the bet to the player.

We are a customer driven participant sport, not a spectator sport. Customers compete against each other. The customer with a lower cost of bet will last longer, win more often and create more churn (handle) than the customer that has a higher takeout to overcome.

How can you or why would you as a customer want to compete with others who have been granted a head start by the house? The newcomer is asked to compete on an unlevel playing field. If you live in California, you are subsidizing California players who live out of state. California players must avoid the law and seek other places to bet if they want a lower cost and competitive dealÖmany of these other sources do not report to the mainstream and all Californians lose revenue.

HANA estimates through player interviews that billions of dollars each year of U.S and Canadian thoroughbred handle is wagered out of the pari-mutuel pools.

Legislating higher purses does not solve the problem. We have tried this before, with $40 million extra for purses via SB27 a few years ago. All it brought was higher prices for everything horses in California, and new cars for the owners. Because that did not work, we now are asked to throw in another $70 million via SB2414, for purses at the direct expense of the customers. The business model is unbalanced and broken.

Has it occurred to California racing managers that customer relief of the takeout is the surest and swift way to increase customer participation and handle?

Handle is everything in horse racing. To increase handle you must have more fans betting more money. We can not achieve this by charging more and more for the bet and creating the perception of bias and favoritism to certain customers.

The CHRB is there to protect the interests of California bettors. We can only look to them to free the California player from the unequal cost of the bet, and serve a measure of justice to the California customers.

roger@hanaweb.org

http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/

sign up here:

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

andymays
09-24-2010, 11:26 AM
Outstanding work Roger. Thanks. :ThmbUp:

Indulto
09-24-2010, 01:09 PM
This is being circulated in California...

Why do California Players Pay More to Bet?

Rebates to favored customers are something that works to the deficit of California players and the industry in general. Many ADW,s offer rebates, but under present California state law, sponsored by the TOC there is a 6.5% Retention Cap on ADW wagers generated within the state of California. There is no state law prohibiting rebates in California, but the retention cap leaves no wiggle room for California players to receive the rebate percentages that ADWs offer other out of state players. Yes, there are certain favored California individuals offered up to 3% in California, but it is very selective, and is not public knowledge. ADWs offer rebates to favor out of state players on California tracks around 8% rebate. Takeout, plus any rebate, is the cost of the bet to the player.

We are a customer driven participant sport, not a spectator sport. Customers compete against each other. The customer with a lower cost of bet will last longer, win more often and create more churn (handle) than the customer that has a higher takeout to overcome.

How can you or why would you as a customer want to compete with others who have been granted a head start by the house? The newcomer is asked to compete on an unlevel playing field. If you live in California, you are subsidizing California players who live out of state. California players must avoid the law and seek other places to bet if they want a lower cost and competitive dealÖmany of these other sources do not report to the mainstream and all Californians lose revenue.

HANA estimates through player interviews that billions of dollars each year of U.S and Canadian thoroughbred handle is wagered out of the pari-mutuel pools.

Legislating higher purses does not solve the problem. We have tried this before, with $40 million extra for purses via SB27 a few years ago. All it brought was higher prices for everything horses in California, and new cars for the owners. Because that did not work, we now are asked to throw in another $70 million via SB2414, for purses at the direct expense of the customers. The business model is unbalanced and broken.

Has it occurred to California racing managers that customer relief of the takeout is the surest and swift way to increase customer participation and handle?

Handle is everything in horse racing. To increase handle you must have more fans betting more money. We can not achieve this by charging more and more for the bet and creating the perception of bias and favoritism to certain customers.

The CHRB is there to protect the interests of California bettors. We can only look to them to free the California player from the unequal cost of the bet, and serve a measure of justice to the California customers.rw,
Am I correct in assuming this piece was penned after the takeout increase bill was signed, and in interpreting the action requested being for the CHRB to allow/enable California residents playing through on-shore ADWs to receive rebates equal to those of out of state players?

If thatís the intent, what about on-track bettors? Donít the bolded portions above apply to them as well? How likely are newcomers introduced to racing outside the racetrack to become regular participants either on or off-track?

Do customers of off-shore ADWs offering the largest bettors rebates in excess of 8% also bet into California pools. If so, isnít the bettor being addressed in your piece still at a disadvantage?

rwwupl
09-24-2010, 03:47 PM
rw,
Am I correct in assuming this piece was penned after the takeout increase bill was signed, and in interpreting the action requested being for the CHRB to allow/enable California residents playing through on-shore ADWs to receive rebates equal to those of out of state players?

If thatís the intent, what about on-track bettors? Donít the bolded portions above apply to them as well? How likely are newcomers introduced to racing outside the racetrack to become regular participants either on or off-track?

Do customers of off-shore ADWs offering the largest bettors rebates in excess of 8% also bet into California pools. If so, isnít the bettor being addressed in your piece still at a disadvantage?

Indulto...

Yes, and there are several approaches to start leveling the playing field.

What I have as a personal goal is what I think will serve the industry best for the long term..The bet should be one price for all, and it should be the optimum price point as proven by experience.Rebaters and non-rebaters would find benefits to all.

Until we achieve that dream, I will point out what I think can be done step by step. There are many ways to get there and in California we must have the approval of the CHRB...I have pointed out something that is obvious that they can do something about,and I can assure you that they have noticed, but it requires action by the CHRB. We need their good will and cooperation.

If you have ever been to a CHRB meeting,you would think you are in a foreign country, everyone is being fed by the takeout, and they want more. When Brackpool announced the Gov. had signed the bill,they all cheered on que.

rwwupl

InsideThePylons-MW
09-24-2010, 05:12 PM
it requires action by the CHRB. We need their good will and cooperation.

Getting a chunk of meat from a lion's mouth -800 vs Getting cooperation and good will from the CHRB +600

DeanT
09-24-2010, 06:00 PM
Getting cooperation and good will from the CHRB +600

I'd book that at +600