Consultant in '07 Predicted Windfall with Meadowlands Slots

[The Hawk]

So, why is it that NJ isn't putting slots in at the Meadowlands again, when this report, which costs $100,000 and is only three years old, says they wouldn't hurt the Atlantic City casinos? And what again is the downside of putting slots in at the Meadowlands and letting the state, the horsemen, and AC share in the profits?

Does anyone NOT realize that AC is simply waiting (hoping) that the racetracks die off, allowing them to grab a bigger share when they do install slots? Instead, revenue goes out of state, our taxes go up (highest property taxes in the US), and cops are laid off. It's absolutely mind-boggling that this is what they're trying to do, and they may get away with it.

[snip]The reports stated that 5,000 machines at the Meadowlands would produce $750 million annually and that 10,000 [m]achines would produce $1.5 billion annually,” said Irace, who noted the forecast at the time called for only a tiny reduction of Atlantic City gross gaming revenue if slots went to the racetracks.

[snip]

http://blogs.app.com/capitolquickies/2010/12/08/consultant-predicted-windfall-with-slots-at-racetracks/

[David-LV]

So, why is it that NJ isn't putting slots in at the Meadowlands again, when this report, which costs $100,000 and is only three years old, says they wouldn't hurt the Atlantic City casinos? And what again is the downside of putting slots in at the Meadowlands and letting the state, the horsemen, and AC share in the profits?

Does anyone NOT realize that AC is simply waiting (hoping) that the racetracks die off, allowing them to grab a bigger share when they do install slots? Instead, revenue goes out of state, our taxes go up (highest property taxes in the US), and cops are laid off. It's absolutely mind-boggling that this is what they're trying to do, and they may get away with it.

[snip]The reports stated that 5,000 machines at the Meadowlands would produce $750 million annually and that 10,000 [m]achines would produce $1.5 billion annually,” said Irace, who noted the forecast at the time called for only a tiny reduction of Atlantic City gross gaming revenue if slots went to the racetracks.

[snip]

http://blogs.app.com/capitolquickies/2010/12/08/consultant-predicted-windfall-with-slots-at-racetracks/

The greedy pigs from AC want the whole pie.

_________
David-LV

[Stillriledup]

So, why is it that NJ isn't putting slots in at the Meadowlands again, when this report, which costs $100,000 and is only three years old, says they wouldn't hurt the Atlantic City casinos? And what again is the downside of putting slots in at the Meadowlands and letting the state, the horsemen, and AC share in the profits?

Does anyone NOT realize that AC is simply waiting (hoping) that the racetracks die off, allowing them to grab a bigger share when they do install slots? Instead, revenue goes out of state, our taxes go up (highest property taxes in the US), and cops are laid off. It's absolutely mind-boggling that this is what they're trying to do, and they may get away with it.

[snip]The reports stated that 5,000 machines at the Meadowlands would produce $750 million annually and that 10,000 [m]achines would produce $1.5 billion annually,” said Irace, who noted the forecast at the time called for only a tiny reduction of Atlantic City gross gaming revenue if slots went to the racetracks.

[snip]

http://blogs.app.com/capitolquickies/2010/12/08/consultant-predicted-windfall-with-slots-at-racetracks/


Logic goes out the window when Politics are concerned. Politicians arent concerned with average joe citizen, they're only concerned with special interest groups who pay them off.

[DeanT]

Reports that are paid big cash for, like the ones which told racing ten years ago they better innovate and lower takeout, only get used when the conclusion fits with the person paying for the report's world view.

You mean a casino at the M, less than a half hour from the most densely populated borough in the western world, with billions flowing through it annually, would do well? They paid a hundred large for that?

:)

[Stillriledup]

Reports that are paid big cash for, like the ones which told racing ten years ago they better innovate and lower takeout, only get used when the conclusion fits with the person paying for the report's world view.

You mean a casino at the M, less than a half hour from the most densely populated borough in the western world, with billions flowing through it annually, would do well? They paid a hundred large for that?

:)

That's like paying someone 100k to say that legally selling pot at a Grateful Dead concert would be well received.

[The_Knight_Sky]

In other news....
(some) Democrats diverting casino funds to horse racing:

The amendments, drafted by Democrats and provided to The Press of Atlantic City by Whelan, D-Atlantic, require initial savings obtained through potential casino regulatory reforms to be redirected to fund the state’s horse racing industry. Originally, the first $30 million in savings due to planned deregulation was to be committed to a new tourism district, which will encompass the city’s busiest areas and include new management to improve safety, cleanliness and marketing.

Under the new proposal, the district would still receive $30 million. However, this money will be funded from the expiration of a current horse racing subsidy by the casinos. Under the new proposal, the New Jersey Racing Commission will get the first $15 million of deregulation savings — estimated at between $15 million and $20 million annually — and receive a total of $30 million over three years after the bill’s enactment.

“I wish that wasn’t in there,” said state Sen. Jeff Van Drew, D-Cape May,
Cumberland, Atlantic, who co-authored the amendments with Democratic state Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Cumberland, Gloucester, Salem.

Horse racing “is an industry that, if it wasn’t there, would not, in my opinion, put a knife in the heart of our state’s economy.”

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/breaking/article_d97d339e-023e-11e0-8c78-001cc4c002e0.html

[onefast99]

This is actually good news as the $15m will get the tracks the much needed money for 2011 and by 2012 there should be several other revenue streams including new OTW's. In 2014 the monies stop coming in and that gives the horse racing industry approximately three years to be self sufficient. That is also the needed time for the implementation of slots at the Meadowlands and it is just in time for the 2014 Superbowl!

[The_Knight_Sky]

This is actually good news as the $15m will get the tracks the much needed money for 2011 and by 2012 there should be several other revenue streams including new OTW's. In 2014 the monies stop coming in and that gives the horse racing industry approximately three years to be self sufficient. That is also the needed time for the implementation of slots at the Meadowlands and it is just in time for the 2014 Superbowl!

onefast99 -
I think it's great that these new bills in the Assembly help keep NJ racing afloat in the short term.

The real question is: Will everyone who benefits
keep accurate records of who is getting what, from which revenue source?

Something the NJSEA has failed to present to the media - up to this point.

[Mike_412]

Paying $100 grand for someone to forecast that a casino at the Meadowlands would make a lot of money is comedy gold at its finest.

[The Hawk]

Paying $100 grand for someone to forecast that a casino at the Meadowlands would make a lot of money is comedy gold at its finest.

The intent of the study was not to forecast if slots at the Meadowlands would make a lot of money. It was to determine the effect on Atlantic City casinos, in addition to the AMOUNT of money that it could expect to generate. The main obstacle to a casino at the Meadowlands is the protest from Atlantic City that it would cost them a lot of money, but this study suggests otherwise. As does common sense.

[onefast99]

The intent of the study was not to forecast if slots at the Meadowlands would make a lot of money. It was to determine the effect on Atlantic City casinos, in addition to the AMOUNT of money that it could expect to generate. The main obstacle to a casino at the Meadowlands is the protest from Atlantic City that it would cost them a lot of money, but this study suggests otherwise. As does common sense.
The study didn't take into account the table games now present at Parx and the Sands. A full casino at the Meadowlands is the only answer to keeping gamblers from crossing the border(s).

[The_Knight_Sky]

The main obstacle to a casino at the Meadowlands is the protest
from Atlantic City that it would cost them a lot of money,
but this study suggests otherwise.

Actually these same Atlantic City folks are more concerned
about their vested interests west of New Jersey.

A Meadowlands racino would afford the suburbans more convenience
and ultimately lower the gaming companies profit margins both
in Atlantic City and in Pennsylvania.

As a result horse racing and the state is missing out on revenue
every single day of waiting thanks to these unscrupulous thugs.

[Beachbabe]

In other news....
(some) Democrats diverting casino funds to horse racing:

The amendments, drafted by Democrats and provided to The Press of Atlantic City by Whelan, D-Atlantic, require initial savings obtained through potential casino regulatory reforms to be redirected to fund the state’s horse racing industry. Originally, the first $30 million in savings due to planned deregulation was to be committed to a new tourism district, which will encompass the city’s busiest areas and include new management to improve safety, cleanliness and marketing.

Under the new proposal, the district would still receive $30 million. However, this money will be funded from the expiration of a current horse racing subsidy by the casinos. Under the new proposal, the New Jersey Racing Commission will get the first $15 million of deregulation savings — estimated at between $15 million and $20 million annually — and receive a total of $30 million over three years after the bill’s enactment.

“I wish that wasn’t in there,” said state Sen. Jeff Van Drew, D-Cape May,
Cumberland, Atlantic, who co-authored the amendments with Democratic state Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Cumberland, Gloucester, Salem.

Horse racing “is an industry that, if it wasn’t there, would not, in my opinion, put a knife in the heart of our state’s economy.”

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/breaking/article_d97d339e-023e-11e0-8c78-001cc4c002e0.html


Thats a joke in of itself. I was in AC about a year ago. The casinos have been there...what?.....30 some years? You still can't venture more than a 1/2 a block from the casino without risking a mugging or something hazardous to your physical health.After all these years the town is still mostly a pit.
Another "tourism district" to keep the animals away from the visitors. It may work at the zoo, but the human predators can always find a way to get to the "fresh meat".

[onefast99]

Thats a joke in of itself. I was in AC about a year ago. The casinos have been there...what?.....30 some years? You still can't venture more than a 1/2 a block from the casino without risking a mugging or something hazardous to your physical health.After all these years the town is still mostly a pit.
Another "tourism district" to keep the animals away from the visitors. It may work at the zoo, but the human predators can always find a way to get to the "fresh meat".
Actually you are wrong, the boardwalk has been cleaned up a lot. There are more police officers on both bike and foot patrol as well as on ATV's from the Hilton down to the Showboat. As far as going out onto the streets, the only reason to do that would probably be to go to the outlet stores, they are only a short cab ride away from most hotels. Most hotel doorman will tell you to take a cab instead of the jitney if you are traveling from hotel to hotel.

[Zman179]

Paying $100 grand for someone to forecast that a casino at the Meadowlands would make a lot of money is comedy gold at its finest.

I could have told them that for $20 and a six pack.

[Mike_412]

The intent of the study was not to forecast if slots at the Meadowlands would make a lot of money. It was to determine the effect on Atlantic City casinos, in addition to the AMOUNT of money that it could expect to generate. The main obstacle to a casino at the Meadowlands is the protest from Atlantic City that it would cost them a lot of money, but this study suggests otherwise. As does common sense.

That'a my mistake for not clicking on the link you provided. I was going off your thread title in addition to a random sentence or two I read. Regardless, one day everything will work out here. A casino at the Meadowlands just makes sense that goes beyond the benefit that it would provide to the racing industry. Eventually, there will be one there. Whether racing gets a piece of it, time will only tell.

[Beachbabe]

Actually you are wrong, the boardwalk has been cleaned up a lot. There are more police officers on both bike and foot patrol as well as on ATV's from the Hilton down to the Showboat. As far as going out onto the streets, the only reason to do that would probably be to go to the outlet stores, they are only a short cab ride away from most hotels. Most hotel doorman will tell you to take a cab instead of the jitney if you are traveling from hotel to hotel.

Personally, I think the town hasn't been the same since Nucky died.

[slewis]

Why is it that racing fans/owners/horsemen and racetrack management feel there is some sort of "entitlement" to place slots on Government owned racetrack land, just to save the racing industry?
Even with Govt's facing HUGE budget gaps it's incredible to hear horsemen demand tracks not only put the slots in, but slice up a good chunk of the pie so they could race for outrageous money. Money that wouldn't be "earned" by the interest generated by the product they offer the citizens of the state.

It's flat out W-E-L-F-A-R-E.

It's amazing, especially on this forum, where so many preach "free market" capitalism and let the "free market" dictate and stop the redistribution of wealth.

The hypocracy is astounding.:bang:

[PaceAdvantage]

Why is it that racing fans/owners/horsemen and racetrack management feel there is some sort of "entitlement" to place slots on Government owned racetrack land, just to save the racing industry?
Even with Govt's facing HUGE budget gaps it's incredible to hear horsemen demand tracks not only put the slots in, but slice up a good chunk of the pie so they could race for outrageous money. Money that wouldn't be "earned" by the interest generated by the product they offer the citizens of the state.

It's flat out W-E-L-F-A-R-E.

It's amazing, especially on this forum, where so many preach "free market" capitalism and let the "free market" dictate and stop the redistribution of wealth.

The hypocracy is astounding.:bang:What hypocrisy? Look at the names of the people participating in this thread. Hardly a "who's who" of those who supposedly "preach free market capitalism" in off topic. In fact, I would venture to say that the vast majority of participants in this thread are not active political posters in off topic.

[depalma113]

Why is it that racing fans/owners/horsemen and racetrack management feel there is some sort of "entitlement" to place slots on Government owned racetrack land, just to save the racing industry?
Even with Govt's facing HUGE budget gaps it's incredible to hear horsemen demand tracks not only put the slots in, but slice up a good chunk of the pie so they could race for outrageous money. Money that wouldn't be "earned" by the interest generated by the product they offer the citizens of the state.

It's flat out W-E-L-F-A-R-E.

It's amazing, especially on this forum, where so many preach "free market" capitalism and let the "free market" dictate and stop the redistribution of wealth.

The hypocracy is astounding.:bang:

The premis of your argument is flawed. A government owning a racetrack is the antithesis of the free market. Until the government divests the assets and goes back to what a government should be doing, not owning anything related to business, they are going to have to support that ownership. By not supporting it, the government is selecting which industry should suceed and which should fail. A government having the power to pick winners and losers is a very scary, unfortunate reality of our time.

Let any company, without government regulation, own the Meadowlands Racetrack do with it as they please. If the company decides slots are more important than horse racing, than horse racing will go away. If the horse racing industry decides it is important to keep horse racing, someone in the industry will buy the track and run it themselves. Than they can take 100% of the profits and put it into purses if they so choose.

[slewis]

What hypocrisy? Look at the names of the people participating in this thread. Hardly a "who's who" of those who supposedly "preach free market capitalism" in off topic. In fact, I would venture to say that the vast majority of participants in this thread are not active political posters in off topic.


I used the term "forum" not "thread".

[slewis]

The premis of your argument is flawed. A government owning a racetrack is the antithesis of the free market. Until the government divests the assets and goes back to what a government should be doing, not owning anything related to business, they are going to have to support that ownership. By not supporting it, the government is selecting which industry should suceed and which should fail. A government having the power to pick winners and losers is a very scary, unfortunate reality of our time.

Let any company, without government regulation, own the Meadowlands Racetrack do with it as they please. If the company decides slots are more important than horse racing, than horse racing will go away. If the horse racing industry decides it is important to keep horse racing, someone in the industry will buy the track and run it themselves. Than they can take 100% of the profits and put it into purses if they so choose.

Really? Well I guess in your world you'd be all for a totally "free, unregulated" market. Which includes me being able to buy land next to the Meadowlands, open a full fledged casino, have the dealers and cocktail waitresses work topless, and have a full scale brothel as part of my complex.
Oh, and at the end of the bar I'd have a pharmisist despencing heroin, cocaine and any other drug you'd like.

I guess you dont agree with my analogy between children's shoes and a gambling enterprise.
Fortunately, 98% of society does.

Next, how would you like to put the fate of racetrack welfare into the hands of the voting citizens. Let's have a vote in NJ (and NY too for that matter)and see if the citizens of the state have no problem with forking over 100's of millions of what should be tax revenue, so it could be directed for racing to sustain a "hobby" for the well to do who spend ridiculous sums of money on horses, the majority of which will be worth less than 10% that amount within 5 years. Would you like to base the future of the business on that vote?

Now after reading this you might think I'm so anti horseracing. That couldn't be further from the truth. I am in this business. But I have a pretty good idea of the money the participants are earning (and in the case of owners, spending).
Racing needs to be preserved as an historic and traditional industry and Government must be there to keep it thriving. 80 thousand dollar maiden sp wt races are not the way to do that, regardless of how many owners name their horses "WE NEED V L T'S.

[The_Knight_Sky]

A casino at the Meadowlands just makes sense that goes beyond
the benefit that it would provide to the racing industry.
Eventually, there will be one there.

Whether racing gets a piece of it, time will only tell.




What will be interesting to see what happens if Monmouth Park is sold
by the NJSEA. I don't think any buyer in the right mind would want to
sign on the dotted line without knowing how the purses will be funded
in the future.

I am (in most cases) anti-slots at the racetrack. But this is a unique situation in New Jersey. Not many state governments in the nation
have a "gaming district" to protect within their states.
And not many states own half the racetracks within their borders. Jersey does.

With slots revenue, NJ racing is bolstered and that helps the national scene.
This is not Delta Downs or Evangeline Downs being propped up.

[The Hawk]

Why is it that racing fans/owners/horsemen and racetrack management feel there is some sort of "entitlement" to place slots on Government owned racetrack land, just to save the racing industry?
Even with Govt's facing HUGE budget gaps it's incredible to hear horsemen demand tracks not only put the slots in, but slice up a good chunk of the pie so they could race for outrageous money. Money that wouldn't be "earned" by the interest generated by the product they offer the citizens of the state.

It's flat out W-E-L-F-A-R-E.

It's amazing, especially on this forum, where so many preach "free market" capitalism and let the "free market" dictate and stop the redistribution of wealth.

The hypocracy is astounding.:bang:

It's not "entitlement", and it's not just to save the racing industry. For one, thing, the state is broke, and NJ residents pay the highest property taxes in the country. Every homeowner I know in my area pays at least $12,000 per year in taxes, and we're sitting on a $1 billion a year revenue stream we can't utilize because the casinos are too powerful, and horse racing is too weak. But I digress...

Every surrounding state has slots, and those slots revenues go to purses. Telling NJ horsemen that they have to survive without them, or without some type of supplement, shows a lack of understanding of the situation. When every one of your competitors has the backing of their government, which helps provide a huge revenue stream, you're set up to fail.

Obviously, there isn't a business in the country, racing-related or otherwise, that could survive under these circumstances. Yet critics, like the Newark Star-Ledger, which makes a boatload of money from casino advertising, wants the public to believe it's because horse racing "is dying", not just in NJ but across the country. And another problem is it's NOT a free market -- politicians from the southern part of the state won't even let the people vote on a casino at the Meadowlands, when polls suggest it's overwhelmingly what the people want.

[Robert Goren]

:confused: How does having slots at race tracks in surrounding states keep gamblers from betting on a race run in NJ ?

[slewis]

It's not "entitlement", and it's not just to save the racing industry. For one, thing, the state is broke, and NJ residents pay the highest property taxes in the country. Every homeowner I know in my area pays at least $12,000 per year in taxes, and we're sitting on a $1 billion a year revenue stream we can't utilize because the casinos are too powerful, and horse racing is too weak. But I digress...

Every surrounding state has slots, and those slots revenues go to purses. Telling NJ horsemen that they have to survive without them, or without some type of supplement, shows a lack of understanding of the situation. When every one of your competitors has the backing of their government, which helps provide a huge revenue stream, you're set up to fail.

Obviously, there isn't a business in the country, racing-related or otherwise, that could survive under these circumstances. Yet critics, like the Newark Star-Ledger, which makes a boatload of money from casino advertising, wants the public to believe it's because horse racing "is dying", not just in NJ but across the country. And another problem is it's NOT a free market -- politicians from the southern part of the state won't even let the people vote on a casino at the Meadowlands, when polls suggest it's overwhelmingly what the people want.


Wait a second. There are two diferent issues you're digressing.

If the argument is to put slots in the meadows to help ease the tax burden, that now becomes a moral issue. That moral issue being does the state want to increase it's tax revenue though immoral means (i.e. gambling/lotteries etc) and do they want to do move that demography farther north to the Meadowlands.

Your "surrounding state" argument for racing is flawed. The purpose of propping up racing in smaller venues through slot revenue was to offset the lower populations (much lower) in those areas for which a track couldn't survive.
If you were a salesman working on commissions and I, as your supervisor, awarded territories for you to cover, are you going to choose Charlestown, WV or Manhattan? (and no, we're not selling tractors,lol).
As a sales manager I might offer a higher commission scale for the salesperson in WV.
That theory was the goal of the legislators in those (small) states that first added VLT's. It helped the racing industry in their state(s) and added tax revenue.

But I'm DEAD SET against it in HIGHLY POPULATED areas, like the Meadowlands and NY. It's downright WELFARE. If you cant cut it with a population of some 10 million plus, your business and marketing ability sucks, in plain english.

These are two very different issues Hawk.

[onefast99]

"Now after reading this you might think I'm so anti horseracing. That couldn't be further from the truth. I am in this business. But I have a pretty good idea of the money the participants are earning (and in the case of owners, spending).
Racing needs to be preserved as an historic and traditional industry and Government must be there to keep it thriving. 80 thousand dollar maiden sp wt races are not the way to do that, regardless of how many owners name their horses "WE NEED V L T'S."
NYRA will have slots at Aqueduct in the very near future, purses will be inflated based on the revenue generated by those slots. The NY bred program will get a huge boost as well as huge purses within the next few years. MP gave away huge purses to entice both the owner and bettor. The average daily handle both on and off track increased significantly by over 35%, the new numbers that will come out after January 1st will show MP lost about $1m for the entire season. This year saw another increase, one which I am shocked you missed, new owners. Yes the $800,000.00 a day purse structure was a big time contributing factor, but adding new owners in a "dying" game is something that MP can and will build on for the future. The state of NJ is very different than any others, the NJSEA is the controlling entity behind its survival, the NJSEA also built the old Giants stadium, the new convention hall in Atlantic City(which benefits only the AC casinos)the state Aquarium in Camden and the Wildwood Convention Center. The NJSEA is also strapped with $26m a year in debt service due to the bonds that were floated to build the now torn down old Giants Stadium. They own the Meadowlands racetrack facility which entitles them to use it in the best interests of all those involved. And based on what the general public have expressed in several recent polls including the Hall Institute, NJ wants a casino at the Meadowlands with horse racing involved.

[The Hawk]

:confused: How does having slots at race tracks in surrounding states keep gamblers from betting on a race run in NJ ?

It doesn't. It keeps good horses from running in NJ, since they'd of course rather run for more money an hour away, and we're left with short fields lacking quality. That's not something that will attract any revenue, and soon thereafter the politicians will say "racing is just not popular in NJ". And, shortly after that, we'll have more malls and condos in place of racetracks.

Of course, you know all of this. Glad you're feeling better! :ThmbUp:

[The Hawk]

Wait a second. There are two diferent issues you're digressing.

If the argument is to put slots in the meadows to help ease the tax burden, that now becomes a moral issue. That moral issue being does the state want to increase it's tax revenue though immoral means (i.e. gambling/lotteries etc) and do they want to do move that demography farther north to the Meadowlands.

Of course. The lottery is state-wide.

So it's okay for Atlantic County to raise it's tax revenue through slots but not for the northern part of the state?

Your "surrounding state" argument for racing is flawed. The purpose of propping up racing in smaller venues through slot revenue was to offset the lower populations (much lower) in those areas for which a track couldn't survive.
If you were a salesman working on commissions and I, as your supervisor, awarded territories for you to cover, are you going to choose Charlestown, WV or Manhattan? (and no, we're not selling tractors,lol).
As a sales manager I might offer a higher commission scale for the salesperson in WV.
That theory was the goal of the legislators in those (small) states that first added VLT's. It helped the racing industry in their state(s) and added tax revenue.

But I'm DEAD SET against it in HIGHLY POPULATED areas, like the Meadowlands and NY. It's downright WELFARE. If you cant cut it with a population of some 10 million plus, your business and marketing ability sucks, in plain english.

These are two very different issues Hawk.

I understand that they're two different issue, and I understand your point. But does your stance change in terms of NJ now that NY has slots? Should they still stand pat when NY has slots? I get that you feel NY shouldn't have them, either, but now that they do should NJ stand by and watch this industry die?

[onefast99]

I understand that they're two different issue, and I understand your point. But does your stance change in terms of NJ now that NY has slots? Should they still stand pat when NY has slots? I get that you feel NY shouldn't have them, either, but now that they do should NJ stand by and watch this industry die?

Just read the latest comments by Jon Hanson, he knows that the Meadowlands is a gold mine and based on his commissions report he is looking at every angel to get a shot at developing that property and eventually turning it into a full casino by 2014. But first he must make the Governor happy and work out how they can lure Steven Ross in to take over Xanadu and show the people of NJ that they are acting in their best interests. The Meadowlands has become a huge political football and there is a lot to lose for the Christi administration if any wrong doings are uncovered by those whose lives are most affected by the outcome which is the horseman.

[slewis]

[QUOTE=onefast99NYRA will have slots at Aqueduct in the very near future, purses will be inflated based on the revenue generated by those slots. The NY bred program will get a huge boost as well as huge purses within the next few years. MP gave away huge purses to entice both the owner and bettor. The average daily handle both on and off track increased significantly by over 35%, the new numbers that will come out after January 1st will show MP lost about $1m for the entire season. This year saw another increase, one which I am shocked you missed, new owners. Yes the $800,000.00 a day purse structure was a big time contributing factor, but adding new owners in a "dying" game is something that MP can and will build on for the future.to build the now torn down old Giants Stadium. They own the Meadowlands racetrack facility which entitles them to use it in the best interests of all those involved. And based on what the general public have expressed in several recent polls including the Hall Institute, NJ wants a casino at the Meadowlands with horse racing involved.[/QUOTE]

First of all, what takes place in surrounding states is the problem of the racing industry, in your case New Jersey. But what you're looking to do is life support NJ racing. I applaude. At the tax payers expense. I stop applauding.

You next make a statement regarding the NJSEA and how "the general public" supports a casino with horse racing involved.
Prove the part of the statement "with horse racing involved". Without even researching this I'm gonna open my yak and say NONSENSE.
Under what terms? If you're saying that "the general public" would agree to say, a 7% contribution of slot revenue, I'd say bring that up at a town meeting and they'll run your arse out the building. You wanna WHAT? Have $80,000 maiden races for wealthy owners while my property taxes are how much? You want charity for racing people so my kid has to sit in a classroom with 35 students instead of a new school being built and teachers hired?

Yeah, I want to see that one.

[onefast99]

First of all, what takes place in surrounding states is the problem of the racing industry, in your case New Jersey. But what you're looking to do is life support NJ racing. I applaude. At the tax payers expense. I stop applauding.

You next make a statement regarding the NJSEA and how "the general public" supports a casino with horse racing involved.
Prove the part of the statement "with horse racing involved". Without even researching this I'm gonna open my yak and say NONSENSE.
Under what terms? If you're saying that "the general public" would agree to say, a 7% contribution of slot revenue, I'd say bring that up at a town meeting and they'll run your arse out the building. You wanna WHAT? Have $80,000 maiden races for wealthy owners while my property taxes are how much? You want charity for racing people so my kid has to sit in a classroom with 35 students instead of a new school being built and teachers hired?

Yeah, I want to see that one.
Here is the Quinnipiac poll....and story. Enjoy!
http://media.nj.com/star-ledger/photo/-5caac41fadbeaa22_small.jpgTRENTON (http://www.nj.com/politics) — New Jersey voters want state government to stay involved in the horse racing industry and to keep out of Atlantic City, a poll released this morning found.
The Quinnipiac University survey shows voters disagreeing with key recommendations of last month’s report on the future of gambling in New Jersey by the Hanson Commission, which was appointed by Gov. Chris Christie. Christie has endorsed the recommendations.

Forty-six percent of registered voters say it’s a bad idea for the state to take over law enforcement and other functions in certain sections of Atlantic City, while 33 percent say it’s a good idea. Thirty-nine percent think the state should end its involvement in horse racing, while 44 percent say it should not.




A majority of voters – 69 percent – say the state should try to revive Atlantic City as a beach and boardwalk resort.

“Bring back romantic-enchantic Atlantic City, New Jerseyans say. They want the place to be revived as a beach and boardwalk mecca,” said poll director Maurice Carroll. “But they don’t like the proposed state takeover.”

The commission recommended taking over the gambling and entertainment districts of Atlantic City and ending an annual $30 million subsidy for horse racing, which casinos provide in exchange for keeping slot machines out of the racetracks.

Slightly more voters support allowing slots at tracks than oppose it, the poll found. The report recommends doubling down on reviving Atlantic Cityrather than allowing slots at other locations.

Quinnipiac surveyed 1,190 registered voters between August 9 and 17, producing a margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points.

[slewis]

Hawk,

Regarding my stance with NY/NJ. Yes it's a big problem.

Our politicians are supposed to work for us. What a joke. The taxpayers of the state of NY would NEVER approve of the deal NYRA got from the state, especially given the current state of the NY budget crisis.

NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER. I'd like to have someone do an investigation behind that deal. I GUARANTEE the payoffs were enormous. To roll over and play dead and cave to not only give NYRA 25yrs but a piece of a casino is criminal.

But this is the way America works now. What Kulina did was good. He proved a "what if" scenario. But the handle does not substantiate the purses, so New Jersey racing needs to come back to reality.

Onefast makes a point about "new owners". Yes, and good. But you cant just give gobbs of money away to get new owners into a sport that even the IRS wont recognize as a business investment unless you show profit over x number of years.

It's a "fun" hobby. An expensive fun hobby. So dont make horse ownership out to be anything but. Besides, there have been many new rules regarding tax incentives in the Thoroughbred industry in the last 5 years, like depreciation.
Now let me remind everyone that I, as much if not more than anyone, want racing to thrive. But not from welfare, no, no way.
Which is why, especially in NY where NYRA is (and has historically been) so anti fan friendly AND does NOTHING to cultivate new blood.

I'm there virtually EVERY DAY.... Everyone's 45yrs or older, same faces, no new marketing. If I were the state I would have MANDATED that 50% of slot money be invested in trying to cultivate young people, and would have capped purse raises to 15%. I would have explained that all tracks need to be self sufficient, especially with a fan base of 10 million people in NY and God knows how many throughout the country.
That being said, I have always believed racing to be an historic tradition that the States of NY and NJ need to preserve. Be there for the track when they truly need (like for capital improvements), but get it off the welfare line.

And because racetracks are in the GAMBLING business, they should NEVER be privately owned.

[slewis]

Here is the Quinnipiac poll....and story. Enjoy!
http://media.nj.com/star-ledger/photo/-5caac41fadbeaa22_small.jpg
.”

The commission recommended taking over the gambling and entertainment districts of Atlantic City and ending an annual $30 million subsidy for horse racing, which casinos provide in exchange for keeping slot machines out of the racetracks.

Slightly more voters support allowing slots at tracks than oppose it, the poll found. The report recommends doubling down on reviving Atlantic Cityrather than allowing slots at other locations.

Quinnipiac surveyed 1,190 registered voters between August 9 and 17, producing a margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points.

Onefast, Im not surprised by this. But did the pollsters vote knowing that a significant percentage of what would be State tax revenue would instead be GIVEN to the racetracks?

This is the part I KNOW wont go down, (and the point I was making to you).

An agreement of THAT issue is my contention.

[onefast99]

Onefast, Im not surprised by this. But did the pollsters vote knowing that a significant percentage of what be State tax money is being GIVEN to the racetracks?

This is the part I KNOW wont go down, (and the point I was making to you).

An agreement of THAT issue is my contention.
You bring up a very loaded question. The general public as well as many of those in the "know" have been given little data on how the revenue streams generated by the various NJSEA ventures are distributed or for that matter obtained. We all know that NJ wanted a football team, Giants Stadium opened in 1976 at the sametime the harness track opened. 1 year later the thoroughbreds were introduced to the Meadowlands. In 1981 the Arena opened its doors, all paid for by the people of NJ and run by the NJSEA. In 1992 the NJ Aquarium opened in camden NJ, in 1997 the all new Atlantic City Convention Center opened, in 2002 the Wildwood NJ convention center opened, all paid for by the people of NJ and run by the NJSEA. How many know that? Oh and to bring up a real sore subject here are the salaries for those running this organization...
NJSEA Salaries



Anybody see a problem with these numbers?



Not hard to see why the NJSEA is losing money!

Salaries - as of 2009 - of those NJSEA employees earning more than $ 75,000
David Attilio $ 76,100.00
Matthew Bell $ 75,588.00
Vernard Bennett $ 140,128.00
Joan Bottiglia $ 90,486.00
Rich Carlino $ 93,388.00
Angelo Chinicci $ 77,992.00
Joseph Consolazio $ 188,296.00
Jeffrey Cooper $ 95,004.00
Giuseppina Coppa $ 92,000.00
Alex Dadoyan $ 97,000.00
Michael Dempsey $ 118,032.00
Dennis Dowd $ 190,500.00
John Duffy $ 170,540.00
Marcello Esposito $ 121,468.00
Charles Evans $ 125,548.00
Thomas Ferreri $ 134,092.00
David Forti $ 96,504.00
John Gincley $ 75,000.00
Michael Graime $ 99,504.00
Frances Guthrie $ 91,044.00
Robert Halpin $ 103,060.00
Michael Hegewald $ 111,160.00
James Jemas $ 106,872.00
Robert Juliano $ 101,128.00
William Knauf $ 120,644.00
Peter Koch $ 114,996.00
Robert Kulina $ 191,064.00
Thomas Lindon $ 117,636.00
Joseph McCormick $ 92,144.00
Elisabeth McFadden $ 103,370.00
Samuel McKee $ 100,592.00
Gregory Miller $ 90,256.00
James Minish $ 197,276.00
Dorothy Nicholson $ 77,072.00
Maureen Peterson-Kenney $ 100,940.00
John Rasmus $ 94,720.00
Lennon Register $ 185,004.00
Anthony Repola $ 137,520.00
John Samerjan $ 144,504.00
Antonio Sanchez $ 100,192.00
Horace Smith $ 120,728.00
Mark Stefanacci $ 191,532.00
Tad Stockman $ 76,010.00
Helen Strus $ 131,776.00
Concetta Tamburri-Forst $ 111,240.00
Peter Verdee $ 117,136.00
Sergio Vlacich $ 80,100.00
Ken Warkentin $ 87,504.00
Lynn Weber $ 90,616.00
Gary Wolff $ 120,000.00
Kevin Woods $ 81,216.00
George Zahn $ 157,360.00

[The Hawk]

Those figures help to illustrate something that I realized at an early point in this whole fiasco: Christie is NOT anti-horse racing, he's anti-NJSEA. And he's probably not wrong.

[The Hawk]

Onefast makes a point about "new owners". Yes, and good. But you cant just give gobbs of money away to get new owners into a sport that even the IRS wont recognize as a business investment unless you show profit over x number of years.

But I don't think they're giving away "gobbs" of money, not when the game throws off revenue and jobs which can offset the money invested. I agree the purses were out of whack, but they should have a chance to tinker with it and get it to the point where it can survive. I'm not convinced Monmouth can't survive on it's on, without slots, but having slots at the Meadowlands can help in so many ways, beyond racing, as I've said.

Slewis, I get what you're saying now. You're against tracks doing ZERO to cultivate interest, and generate new fans, and then sticking their hands out for money when their own industry dies off due to their own negligence. And I agree with you on that point, 100%. I guess where we disagree is that now that we're at this point, I'd like to at least see the playing field leveled for NJ, and have slots at the racetracks. It sounds like you're against that, maybe unless there are several provisions in place that mandate they do something to cultivate and grow the game, as opposed to simply dumping the money into purses. In that light, I couldn't argue with your position, you're right about that.

[onefast99]

Those figures help to illustrate something that I realized at an early point in this whole fiasco: Christie is NOT anti-horse racing, he's anti-NJSEA. And he's probably not wrong.
Hanson ran the NJSEA, he over spent and over promised. Mulcahy also was part of that regime, how these two got on the commission is beyond belief.

[slewis]

But I don't think they're giving away "gobbs" of money, not when the game throws off revenue and jobs which can offset the money invested. I agree the purses were out of whack, but they should have a chance to tinker with it and get it to the point where it can survive. I'm not convinced Monmouth can't survive on it's on, without slots, but having slots at the Meadowlands can help in so many ways, beyond racing, as I've said.

Slewis, I get what you're saying now. You're against tracks doing ZERO to cultivate interest, and generate new fans, and then sticking their hands out for money when their own industry dies off due to their own negligence. And I agree with you on that point, 100%. I guess where we disagree is that now that we're at this point, I'd like to at least see the playing field leveled for NJ, and have slots at the racetracks. It sounds like you're against that, maybe unless there are several provisions in place that mandate they do something to cultivate and grow the game, as opposed to simply dumping the money into purses. In that light, I couldn't argue with your position, you're right about that.

Hawk,

You know why this sport is doomed? Because those that run it just dont get it. For example: NYRA pushed the state racing and wagering board to approve uncoupled entries to help fill races and provide more betting opportunities.
What a bunch of fools. So now here is a race in which Todd Pletcher has 3, sometimes 4 runners.
Now for those that know anything about this sport, Todd knows which horse is fastest. But we also know that the fastest horse does not always win, and horses sometimes dont run the way trainers (and owners) expect them too.
But it's not only the public perception that gets skewered. There are MANY times trainers have multiple entries and I just wont bet because I'm not comfortable, whereas, I would bet if those same horses were trained by different trainers.
Now my point here is that, I have nothing against Todd, nor do I want to prevent anyone from making as much money as they can, but the NYRA board shoved this rule in and the state racing and wagering board, who are supposed to protect the betting public, play dead and allow it. Why? Because the members of the NYRA board RULE over the the Govt agency that's in place to prevent JUST THAT FROM HAPPENING.
It's kinda what's taking place throughout America as a whole. The politicians are supposed to legislate to keep commerce smooth and protect the citizens. But it's CORPORATE AMERICA that really rules and controls the politicians.
NYRA (and racing) is no different.
The correct thing to do is to LIMIT the number of stalls the top trainers have so that more trainers get horses and have a chance to succeed, but more importantly, THE BETTING PUBLIC WILL IN TURN BENEFIT.
So you'd think with all the problems in NY and NJ, these guys would get it.
But you know what? They dont, and they never will.
Example in point? California. Where some racing exec just gave a speech of how raising the takeout will help the sport because purse size will go up and the bettors will have more horses to eventually bet with those larger purses.
Can this clown say this with a straight face?
This is why horse racing is doomed.

Thanks to you and Onefast for a good discussion.

[Zman179]

Example in point? California. Where some racing exec just gave a speech of how raising the takeout will help the sport because purse size will go up and the bettors will have more horses to eventually bet with those larger purses.

Right now, Hollywood's purses are either on or below par to those offered by Philadelphia Park. When Aqueduct opens its slots parlor in May, the NYRA purses will blow up sky high ($100,000 allowance purses are very likely) and California racing will plummet even further down the food chain.

[depalma113]

"Really? Well I guess in your world you'd be all for a totally "free, unregulated" market. Which includes me being able to buy land next to the Meadowlands, open a full fledged casino, have the dealers and cocktail waitresses work topless, and have a full scale brothel as part of my complex.
Oh, and at the end of the bar I'd have a pharmisist despencing heroin, cocaine and any other drug you'd like."

Please explain how this would harm any individual from another individual? Oh that's right it would not. Government's job is to protect it's citizens from each other and outside threats, not themselves. Your morals or beliefs are of no concern to me.

So if someone wants to spend their money on drugs, gambling and getting laid, they should have every right to do it without fear of prosecution from a government. If someone wants to open a business that caters to that client, thay should also have no fear in do in so.

"Next, how would you like to put the fate of racetrack welfare into the hands of the voting citizens. Let's have a vote in NJ (and NY too for that matter)and see if the citizens of the state have no problem with forking over 100's of millions of what should be tax revenue, so it could be directed for racing to sustain a "hobby" for the well to do who spend ridiculous sums of money on horses, the majority of which will be worth less than 10% that amount within 5 years. Would you like to base the future of the business on that vote?"

Again, what does the general public have to do with it? That state should not be involved.

"Racing needs to be preserved as an historic and traditional industry and Government must be there to keep it thriving."

No government should get out of the way and force those that want racing to continue to make the necessary decisions needed to keep it. Of course it won't, because far too many people believe the government has some sort of reason to be involved, including those that participate.