PDA

View Full Version : 2011 NJ racing dates to be awarded today. And....


The_Knight_Sky
12-22-2010, 12:46 PM
http://i51.tinypic.com/5jsbrb.gif ...expecting fireworks regarding the possibility of Off-Track Wagering closures.
________________________________________

NJ Racing Commission looks to next year

Originally published: December 22, 2010 12:09 PM
By The Associated Press (http://www.newsday.com/news/region-state/nj-racing-commission-looks-to-next-year-1.2559918)

TRENTON, N.J. - (AP) — The New Jersey Racing Commission is meeting for the first time since Gov. Chris Christie announced a deal that throws a lifeline to standardbred racing.

The commission is scheduled to award racing dates for 2011 to the Meadowlands, Monmouth Park and Freehold racetracks on Wednesday.

But Standardbred Breeders and Owners Association of New Jersey president Tom Luchento says whatever racing schedule is approved will likely be amended next month.

The standardbred horsemen are trying to put together a deal to lease the Meadowlands and survive on about 85 racing days, down from last year's 141 days.

onefast99
12-22-2010, 02:01 PM
Jan. 6: The Assembly is expected to vote on several bills, including one to legalize online poker that could provide a racing purse supplement of as much as $30 million a year.


That is very good news!

The_Knight_Sky
12-22-2010, 02:46 PM
One of the first verdicts are in....

N.J. Racing Commission licenses Vineland off-track betting center, three others, despite Sports Authority call to deny license in Vineland

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/news/breaking/article_1cb988ce-0e01-11e0-b5c8-001cc4c002e0.html

The_Knight_Sky
12-22-2010, 04:11 PM
http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20101222/STATE/101222041/NJ-Racing-Commission-OKs-2011-racing-dates

The commission on Wednesday awarded thoroughbred and standardbred owners 141 days of racing. That's the same number Gov. Chris Christie vetoed this month after failing to strike a deal with horse breeders that would restructure the industry.

_____________________________

After waiting for this soap opera week after week and month after month.
All I can say is... Well dah ! ;)

What exactly was the point of discussing this matter in this particular meeting
if both breeds have designs on a drastically reduced racing schedule.
Still the NJ racing calendar is not crystal clear. Pathetic.

Fat Syd
12-22-2010, 04:51 PM
Not sure about standardbred meets but 70ish days of racing at MP is plenty.. Let them race April thru July 3 days a week.. Stop for the SPA meet and then start up again Sept 15 thru Nov 15 3 days a week.. no reason to go head to head with SPA. Less is more!

The_Knight_Sky
12-22-2010, 05:30 PM
....no reason to go head to head with SPA. Less is more!



A three day weekend sked "complements" the Spa season.
Monmouth Park summer racing will forever be a racing tradition.

If anything needs to be changed is the bleak November racing.
October 31st should be the latest for racing in Oceanport.

__________________________________

In other news (http://sboanj.com/index.asp?Key=1902)...

CHRISTIE OPPOSES HORSE RACING SUBSIDY, BUT MAY SIGN BILL ANYWAY

“Listen, there are things that we amend all the time,” Christie said, referring to a bill that creates an Atlantic City Tourism District, but also provides the horsemen a total of $30 million in purse subsidies for three years. “And negotiations have a way of ironing things out.”

I wonder what Robert Goren thinks about that. :D

Robert Goren
12-22-2010, 06:11 PM
A three day weekend sked "complements" the Spa season.
Monmouth Park summer racing will forever be a racing tradition.

If anything needs to be changed is the bleak November racing.
October 31st should be the latest for racing in Oceanport.

__________________________________

In other news (http://sboanj.com/index.asp?Key=1902)...

CHRISTIE OPPOSES HORSE RACING SUBSIDY, BUT MAY SIGN BILL ANYWAY

“Listen, there are things that we amend all the time,” Christie said, referring to a bill that creates an Atlantic City Tourism District, but also provides the horsemen a total of $30 million in purse subsidies for three years. “And negotiations have a way of ironing things out.”

I wonder what Robert Goren thinks about that. :DI would be greatly disappointed in him if he actually does it.

Fat Syd
12-22-2010, 06:29 PM
Ok sue me for 15 days of Nov racing lol.. I think going head to head with SPA hurts racing.. SPA needs to shed ten NYBred races a week and MP being dark could help.. NY BRED maiden Claiming need to be at FL NOT SPA.. We need a strong national product.. No MP during SPA works for all!!

alhattab
12-22-2010, 10:09 PM
http://www.app.com/article/20101222/NEWS03/12220367/Monmouth-Park-has-lease-appeal

Article discusses strong investor interest in Monmouth Park including several prominent owners (Hall, Brunetti, Santulli). Ultimately I think this is the direction this issue will go- back to the old days as far as ownership is concerned.

Track Collector
12-22-2010, 11:00 PM
Any word on what the schedule might look like for Atlantic City Race Course?

More race dates than last year? Return to some dirt racing?

Brogan
12-23-2010, 06:45 AM
Any word on what the schedule might look like for Atlantic City Race Course?

More race dates than last year? Return to some dirt racing?
I believe they were previously ok'd for their typical 6 day / grass only meet again.

onefast99
12-23-2010, 07:21 AM
http://www.app.com/article/20101222/NEWS03/12220367/Monmouth-Park-has-lease-appeal

Article discusses strong investor interest in Monmouth Park including several prominent owners (Hall, Brunetti, Santulli). Ultimately I think this is the direction this issue will go- back to the old days as far as ownership is concerned.
You have a better shot of hitting powerball than any of these individuals buying MP!

onefast99
12-23-2010, 08:38 AM
Not sure about standardbred meets but 70ish days of racing at MP is plenty.. Let them race April thru July 3 days a week.. Stop for the SPA meet and then start up again Sept 15 thru Nov 15 3 days a week.. no reason to go head to head with SPA. Less is more!
Why would they stop for the spa meet? Both tracks offer some very good racing during those months, and in case you forgot the Haskell is run at MP the first weekend of August(earlier in 2011). The fall meet needs to be re-worked at MP.

andtheyreoff
12-23-2010, 01:06 PM
I would be greatly disappointed in him if he actually does it.

Why? Because it would blow your whole anti-NJ agenda to bits?

alhattab
12-23-2010, 05:04 PM
You have a better shot of hitting powerball than any of these individuals buying MP!

I don't think a buy is in the cards- I shouldn't have used the word "ownership", but probably a lease. This piece was the lead in the Press on 12/23.

Robert Goren
12-23-2010, 05:53 PM
Why? Because it would blow your whole anti-NJ agenda to bits?He has said he believes in limited government. How is a government backed race track limited government? Nobody outside of horse racing believes the government should involved in it in anyway except for regulation.

onefast99
12-23-2010, 06:14 PM
I don't think a buy is in the cards- I shouldn't have used the word "ownership", but probably a lease. This piece was the lead in the Press on 12/23.
And Hall inquired about buying MP 4 years ago. It will never happen. As far as Brunetti goes he wants his casino at Hialeah, he will eventually sell a portion of it and live happily ever after. Santulli I can't see owning a track, if you threw Repoles name in there I would believe it.

onefast99
12-23-2010, 06:16 PM
I would be greatly disappointed in him if he actually does it.
So you are ok with Atlantic City getting government aid?

Robert Goren
12-24-2010, 06:42 AM
So you are ok with Atlantic City getting government aid?No.

Robert Goren
12-24-2010, 06:51 AM
In a slightly different off topic question. Is New Jersey the only place where most of the casinos consistently lose money?

DSB
12-24-2010, 08:18 AM
In a slightly different off topic question. Is New Jersey the only place where most of the casinos consistently lose money?

The casinos in NJ don't lose money. Their profits have eroded over the past few years, but they still make money. The truth is, those interests have nobody to blame but themselves for their current state of affairs.

First, the reason racinos and casinos have sprung up on NJ's borders are a result of the effect atlantic city has had on the racetracks in the region. Since the proliferation of aycee casinos beginning in the 1970's, horse racing's share of the gambling dollar has shrunk steadily. Rather than face extinction, the tracks in the region fought back. They convinced their legislators and citizens that NJ should not have a monopoly on casino gambling and that slots (and now table games) should be allowed at the racetracks. Delaware, Penn Natl, Philly, Charlestown, Pocono, etc. have casino gambling in one form or another and many more soon will have.

Second, Atlantic City's stubborn attempt to put NJ horse racing out of business has blinded them to billions of dollars of profits that could have been made by installing slots and table games at NJ racetracks. Any study on the subject has shown that enormous profits could be made by placing racinos at the existing racetracks (or those that once existed, such as Garden St. Park), which are located near population centers of millions of people. Instead, they let a great opportunity lapse. The NJ racetracks would have accepted pennies on the dollar of this profit with billions going to Aycee interests. This short sighted policy has (until now, anyway) backfired, as neighboring states have taken advantage of the opportunity. It is apparent that interests in Atlantic City still feel they can place casinos at the Meadowlands and Monmouth Park, but after there is no more racing to share profits with. This appears to be their aim and the current Governor seems to be on board with it.

Another thing that has to be acknowledged is that many of the nearby casinos are owned wholly or in part by companies who do business in Aycee. Doesn't it skew the figures a wee bit if a company like Harrah's cries that they are losing business in Aycee when they own the Chester racino just 40 miles away across the Pa. border? Yes, their profits may be down in Atlantic city, but they are way up in Pa.....

Kelso
12-24-2010, 12:48 PM
Atlantic City's stubborn attempt to put NJ horse racing out of business has blinded them to billions of dollars of profits that could have been made by installing slots and table games at NJ racetracks. Any study on the subject has shown that enormous profits could be made by placing racinos at the existing racetracks (or those that once existed, such as Garden St. Park), which are located near population centers of millions of people. Instead, they let a great opportunity lapse. The NJ racetracks would have accepted pennies on the dollar of this profit

<snip>

It is apparent that interests in Atlantic City still feel they can place casinos at the Meadowlands and Monmouth Park, but after there is no more racing to share profits with.


Your contradicted yourself. It's absurd to assert that the casinos ... whose executives are one hell of a lot more savvy than those running racing into the ground ... have been "blind" to the profits to be made from North Jersey. They have, rather, taken the smarter approach of waiting until the tracks are finished killing themselves off.

Casinos are fully aware (and apparantly so is the Gov) that RACETRACKS ARE NOT A PREREQUISITE TO THE AVAILABILITY OR CONDUCT OF OTHER FORMS OF GAMBLING ... such as slot machines, table games and sports betting. All that's needed are those "millions of people" you cite.

The profits ... even at "pennies on the dollar" ... from such NON-RACING FORMS OF GAMBLING are not a birthright of either selfish horsemen or dopey track execs.

DSB
12-24-2010, 04:37 PM
there's no contradiction in my statements, except maybe in your mind.

the opinion that casino executives are "a hell of a lot more savvy" than their racing counterparts remains to be seen. there's a good chance they are at least equally incompetent, although casino execs are almost surely more treacherous.

NJ racetracks were interested in a partnership with Aycee casinos as far back as 20 years ago when there was no competition from racinos in neighboring states. Garden State Park, the Meadowlands, and Monmouth could have brought the casinos to where the people are instead of the casinos being 1-2.5 hours away from the huge population centers in Pa, Northern NJ and NY.

A good argument could be made that "savvy" executives could have seen the wisdom of capitalizing on this situation in a proactive manner which would have been far more profitable than the scorched earth, wait 'til they die approach, which the casinos have taken. A good argument could also be made that such a proactive move could have either delayed or derailed the neighboring states from even implementing casino gambling. At any rate, it would have given Atlantic City several years head start in which they could have made billions of additional profits and contributed to the state's coffers.

Nobody ever said that non-racing forms of gambling are the birthright of the racing industry. However, a monopoly on such forms of gambling are not the birthright of the casinos, either, as various nearby states have decided. Free standing casinos exist along with racinos in Pa, and will eventually in NY and Md, also.

What has never been addressed in any of this is the benefit to the people of the state of NJ. Both the casinos and the racetracks exist and operate by the graces of the people of the state who license and regulate them.

A great many people in the state believe that the jobs of thousands of people who are employed by the racing industry and the billions of dollars of the state's economy they contribute, should be preserved. Where is it written that the state should rally around big casino corporations in Atlantic City to the detriment of any other?

Perhaps the Governor siding with the greedy, disingenuous, and inflexible casino interests have contributed to his recent decline in favorability in the polls.

How about we put it to a vote, and let the people decide and not have it decided by a coalition of greedy casino operators and dishonest politicians?

Kelso
12-24-2010, 10:39 PM
there's no contradiction in my statements, except maybe in your mind.

You said the casinos were "blind" to the profits they could have made with expanded gambling. Then you said they're planning to go after all that loot once they don't have to provide welfare money to the horse interests. THAT is a contradiction. (Not blind, just smarter than their wanna-be "partners.")

(I'm not at all surprised, however, that YOUR mind can't grasp the contradiction ... "blinded" as it is by lust for the profits of a business that you had no part in bringing to NJ in the first place.


NJ racetracks were interested in a partnership with Aycee casinos as far back as 20 years ago

Of course the tracks and horsemen wanted to "partner" with the casinos. Big surprise there, huh? They wanted to jump, snout-first, into the profit pool of an industry that had fought its own way into New Jersey and with which they desperately wanted (and still want) NOT TO COMPETE.

Much better to just play the "poor horse employees" card and try to shame the casinos and politicians into an undeserved subsidy. (Hell, it even worked for you guys for a while. A well-executed hustle.)


Garden State Park, the Meadowlands, and Monmouth could have brought the casinos to where the people are

THE CASINOS DIDN'T NEED THE TRACKS (or their horseman leeches) to open north Jersey facilities. NEVER HAVE, NEVER WILL. All they needed, and continue to need, was/is for the law (read, state Constitution) to allow them to build their own new facilities ... and even you guys haven't owned enough NJ politicians to make that happen.

Wake up and admit that the casinos are COMPETITORS (I know, dirty word to horsemen) of horse racing in the GAMBLING INDUSTRY. The tracks (and their horseman leeches) didn't need casinos when they had a monopoly on all forms of gambling in NJ. Now, however, the tracks and horsemen are whining because they they don't want to compete against a better gambling product.

(Say, why didn't all you brilliant track/horse guys open YOUR OWN ATLANTIC CITY casinos right from the start ... even though you didn't have a damned thing to do with the enormous and very costly effort of legalizing casinos, way back in the '70s? Why don't you do it now?

Nothing stopped you then. Nothing's stopping you now. Then ALL OF YOUR CASINO PROFITS could have gone, or could now go, into more lucrative purses and fatter track salaries. Then you wouldn't have to demand more welfare from your COMPETITORS ... or from New Jersey's taxpayers.

Or, what's your take on allowing both casinos and racinos up north ... provided that the casinos don't have to subsidize the racinos in any way? Ya know, try to stand on your own in the casino gambling business? Think ya can handle it?)


A good argument could also be made that such a proactive move could have either delayed or derailed the neighboring states from even implementing casino gambling.

Oh, you're really digging deep into Wonderland with that one! You have a better chance of proving that past-posting doesn't happen than you have of supporting this blast of thumb-up-your-ass logic.


Nobody ever said that non-racing forms of gambling are the birthright of the racing industry. However, a monopoly on such forms of gambling are not the birthright of the casinos, either

See "brilliant track/horse guys," above.


How about we put it to a vote, and let the people decide

DEAL ... PROVIDED that one clear option is to vote for the proposition that any welfare-tax that might otherwise go to tracks and selfish horsemen will,instead, go into the general treasury for the benefit of all NJ taxpayers.

I'll bet the farm THAT proposal would overwhelmingly and quickly result in lots of north-jersey casinos and NO SUBSIDIES FOR TRACKS AND HORSEMEN.

In other words, the voters of New Jersey will tell you guys to stand on your own; to compete on price and product or go down the tubes just like the businesses from which so many of them are now out of work.

(Horse employees ... just like selfish horsemen and incompetent track executives ... are no more deserving of special consideration than anyone else.)

onefast99
12-25-2010, 01:30 PM
THE CASINOS DIDN'T NEED THE TRACKS (or their horseman leeches) to open north Jersey facilities. NEVER HAVE, NEVER WILL. All they needed, and continue to need, was/is for the law (read, state Constitution) to allow them to build their own new facilities ... and even you guys haven't owned enough NJ politicians to make that happen.

Wake up and admit that the casinos are COMPETITORS (I know, dirty word to horsemen) of horse racing in the GAMBLING INDUSTRY. The tracks (and their horseman leeches) didn't need casinos when they had a monopoly on all forms of gambling in NJ. Now, however, the tracks and horsemen are whining because they they don't want to compete against a better gambling product.

The NJSEA owns and operates the Meadowlands facilities(except the new football stadium)the NJSEA owns and operates Monmouth Park. The casinos are going thru a difficult time with outside competition including three nearby racinos that have recently added table games. The Governor of NJ put together a commission to study the future of horse racing in the state on NJ. Several of the commission members are former NJSEA executives. In fact they were the same executives who agreed to the wild spending sprees that the NJSEA went on, including 266m in bonds for the old Giants Stadium, two convention centers(A/C and Wildwood)and a state aquarium. The old Giants stadium carries approximately $110m in debt which equates to $13 per each NJ taxpayer. The casinos in AC pay about 54% of the normal taxes paid by others in the casino industry, just look at the casino tax collections in the state of Connecticut. There is also a new senate bill that was put forth to aid the casinos, it is called S-12. You can google it and reach your own conclusions on this bill.
Your last comment has me confused, the horseman aren't whining about anything to do with competition by the AC casinos they are trying to show the Governor that there are inconsistentcies in the way the NJSEA has run the tracks and spent monies on unrelated projects that have actually benefited the casinos and the south Jersey politicians. Jon Hanson who heads the special commission released figures several months ago on how much MP lost for 2010, he said it was approximately $6.6m. This was done before the meet ended and some sources are saying it will be $1m or less. There is room for both forms of entertainment in NJ. But there is no more room for error by the NJSEA.

lamboguy
12-25-2010, 05:41 PM
there's no contradiction in my statements, except maybe in your mind.

the opinion that casino executives are "a hell of a lot more savvy" than their racing counterparts remains to be seen. there's a good chance they are at least equally incompetent, although casino execs are almost surely more treacherous.

NJ racetracks were interested in a partnership with Aycee casinos as far back as 20 years ago when there was no competition from racinos in neighboring states. Garden State Park, the Meadowlands, and Monmouth could have brought the casinos to where the people are instead of the casinos being 1-2.5 hours away from the huge population centers in Pa, Northern NJ and NY.

A good argument could be made that "savvy" executives could have seen the wisdom of capitalizing on this situation in a proactive manner which would have been far more profitable than the scorched earth, wait 'til they die approach, which the casinos have taken. A good argument could also be made that such a proactive move could have either delayed or derailed the neighboring states from even implementing casino gambling. At any rate, it would have given Atlantic City several years head start in which they could have made billions of additional profits and contributed to the state's coffers.

Nobody ever said that non-racing forms of gambling are the birthright of the racing industry. However, a monopoly on such forms of gambling are not the birthright of the casinos, either, as various nearby states have decided. Free standing casinos exist along with racinos in Pa, and will eventually in NY and Md, also.

What has never been addressed in any of this is the benefit to the people of the state of NJ. Both the casinos and the racetracks exist and operate by the graces of the people of the state who license and regulate them.

A great many people in the state believe that the jobs of thousands of people who are employed by the racing industry and the billions of dollars of the state's economy they contribute, should be preserved. Where is it written that the state should rally around big casino corporations in Atlantic City to the detriment of any other?

Perhaps the Governor siding with the greedy, disingenuous, and inflexible casino interests have contributed to his recent decline in favorability in the polls.

How about we put it to a vote, and let the people decide and not have it decided by a coalition of greedy casino operators and dishonest politicians?good postand i want to go one step further. casino's are a non-productive business that suck out the blood of citizen's from the state of new jersey. horse racing leaders to breeding in the state of new jersey and agricultural jobs to go with it. horse racing is productive, horses are born and raised to run as racehorses. slots and blackjack just suck up money along with the lottery.

Stillriledup
12-25-2010, 06:56 PM
Its not rocket science, the Casino barons want racing OUT of North Jersey. That way, they can move in, install slots and not have to share the money with racing.

NJ Stinks
12-25-2010, 10:38 PM
DEAL ... PROVIDED that one clear option is to vote for the proposition that any welfare-tax that might otherwise go to tracks and selfish horsemen will,instead, go into the general treasury for the benefit of all NJ taxpayers.

I'll bet the farm THAT proposal would overwhelmingly and quickly result in lots of north-jersey casinos and NO SUBSIDIES FOR TRACKS AND HORSEMEN.

In other words, the voters of New Jersey will tell you guys to stand on your own; to compete on price and product or go down the tubes just like the businesses from which so many of them are now out of work.



I'd take my chances with a referendum. Horseracing and open space are two things that mean a lot to the people of NJ. The casinos will secure a lot of votes in the southeast counties. Elsewhere it will be viewed mainly as David vs. Goliath.

Kelso
12-26-2010, 12:36 AM
Your last comment has me confused, the horseman aren't whining about anything to do with competition by the AC casinos

Not true. The whole cycle of "give us a cut of your casino profits or let us eat into 'em with slot machines of our own" originated with tracks and horsemen complaining that their product wasn't selling nearly as well as when THEY had a monopoly on NJ gambling.

The casinos began taking business from the tracks ... and purse money from the horsemen ... by offering a better product at a better price. The ONLY response from tracks and horsemen was "we're special ... we live on beautiful farms and employ lots of cheap labor ... we deserve to be subsidized by casinos and/or taxpayers."

Tracks and horsemen have determinedly and consistantly REFUSED TO COMPETE with the businesses (casinos) that have been eating their lunches. They have steadfastly refused to make the game cheaper (TAKEOUT) or more honest (drugs, past-posting) or more accomodating (free admission, free admission, free parking, clean restrooms, reasonably-priced food) in a respectable effort to compete

The only response, by NJ horsemen and tracks, to casino competition for GAMBLING DOLLARS has been "we're in the entertainment business" and "gimme, gimme, gimme."

Kelso
12-26-2010, 12:48 AM
I'd take my chances with a referendum. Horseracing and open space are two things that mean a lot to the people of NJ.

You might be right. It's worth a referendum to find out.

I think the taxpayers will say they've already dedicated enough property tax money to preserving open-space (in the towns where that issue carries any weight at all). They'll also recognize that it makes no sense to try to preserve horse farms that they know will sell out to the first shopping center or housing developer who comes up with the right price. Subsidizing racing does not, in any way, preserve open space. It only delays its conversion.

As well, given the opportunity to dedicate any "extra" casino taxes (money that would otherwise go to subsidize tracks and horsemen) to their own state treasury ... I think the overwhelming response will be "NO MORE WELFARE FOR HORSEMEN!"

Again, it's worth a referendum to find out ... provided that the voters have a clear opportunity to vote for putting those "extra" taxes to work for themselves, rather than for a special interest that has already cost them many millions.

Zman179
12-26-2010, 07:59 AM
The horsemen would never want this to go to referendum because they believe that they have very little chance at getting the voters to go along with it. New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation (average $7.281 as of Feb. 2010) and the third-highest auto insurance rates; New Jersey residents are getting killed financially. If you post a referendum in which the extra monies would go for either property tax relief, or for supporting horsemen and open spaces, which one would you vote for? No way in hell would the horsemen get my vote.

onefast99
12-26-2010, 10:27 AM
The only response, by NJ horsemen and tracks, to casino competition for GAMBLING DOLLARS has been "we're in the entertainment business" and "gimme, gimme, gimme."

Where have you seen any responses by the NJ horsemans groups that they are requesting anything that isn't fair and equitable for everyone involved? Here are the facts, the casino licenses in the state of NJ, when applied for, must be used in the designated casino zone which just happens to be in Atlantic City. The NJSEA owns and operates the Meadowlands sports complex, if the NJSEA wishes to have horse racing and slots at that facility they would need to have slots approved in the form of a vote by the people of NJ. Slot machines can produce revenue that would reduce the taxes in this state and it would also give the horse racing industry an immediate revenue stream. The NJSEA also has had the opportunity to have its own revenue stream by building out OTW's throughout the state but didn't do so. The state gave out two licenses to the Toms River and Vineland facilities that are operated by competitors such as Greenwood and Penn Gaming, who have kept the Cherry Hill NJ facility from being built. No one wants this stand off to continue as all involved will lose out while other states continue to grow their casino related buisnesses on NJ's borders. In early January there is a final hearing on the already passed internet gambling act(must be signed by Governor), which will give AC over $150m in marketing monies and the horse racing industry approximately $30m a year, it is a win-win for all involved.

Kelso
12-26-2010, 01:09 PM
Where have you seen any responses by the NJ horsemans groups that they are requesting anything that isn't fair and equitable for everyone involved?

<snip>

Slot machines can produce revenue that would reduce the taxes in this state and it would also give the horse racing industry an immediate revenue stream.

<snip>

give AC over $150m in marketing monies and the horse racing industry approximately $30m a year

You asked and and twice answered your own question.

"Giving" horsemen public money (from either taxes or casino profits at STATE-OWNED facilities) that could and should otherwise be RETAINED BY THE PUBLIC is not "fair and equitable for everyone involved." It is welfare for horsemen and it is at the direct expense of NJ taxpayers.


if the NJSEA wishes to have horse racing and slots at that facility they would need to have slots approved in the form of a vote by the people of NJ.

If the NJSEA "wishes to have horse racing and slots" at their STATE-OWNED facilities, then ALL OF THE PROFITS therefrom belong to the taxpayers of New Jersey. The money should stay with them ... and them only. Those tables and machines will be very busy and very profitable whether horses are running outside or not.

Just because the state has been generous enough to the horse industry to operate racetracks does not give selfish horsemen ANY legitimate claim to ANY "revenue streams" generated at those tracks (takeout, admission, concessions, gambling) ... or by the NJSEA in general (OTW wagering).

The tracks should offer purses that the horsemen are free to accept or reject. If they accept, the only money they should get is what they (honestly) win. If they reject, the state stops bleeding money with live horse racing. THAT is a genuine "win/win."


The NJSEA also has had the opportunity to have its own revenue stream by building out OTW's

Stop whining as if the NJSEA is owned by, or exists solely for the benefit of, selfish horsemen. It is neither.

If and when the NJSEA uses any or all of its licenses, THE LICENSES ARE OWNED BY THE TAXPAYERS OF NEW JERSEY. Any and all profits therefrom should be used to benefit ALL TAXPAYERS ... not just selfish horsemen, or any other special interest.

Horsemen have no inate right to the profits of OTWs. Their only right is to receive the purses for which they have freely chose to compete and have honestly won.


No one wants this stand off to continue as all involved will lose out

Self-serving tripe. Only selfish horsemen and incompetent track executives care about how much money they can squeeze out of taxpayers.

Atlantic City casinos, as a group, continue to be profitable ... albeit not as profitable as when they were the only game east of the Mississippi. They'll be even more profitable if and when they open North Jersey facilites and pay even more millions into the state's treasury than they already do.

If and when they open those facilities, horsemen have no legitimate claim to ANY of those profits or taxes.

And if NJSEA opens any gambling facilities of its own ... OTWs or casinos ... ALL OF THE PROFITS WILL BELONG TO NJ's TAXPAYERS. Horsemen will have no right to any of that loot. They're not the ones who will have made it happen.

DSB
12-26-2010, 03:24 PM
You said the casinos were "blind" to the profits they could have made with expanded gambling. Then you said they're planning to go after all that loot once they don't have to provide welfare money to the horse interests. THAT is a contradiction. (Not blind, just smarter than their wanna-be "partners.")

(I'm not at all surprised, however, that YOUR mind can't grasp the contradiction ... "blinded" as it is by lust for the profits of a business that you had no part in bringing to NJ in the first place.




Of course the tracks and horsemen wanted to "partner" with the casinos. Big surprise there, huh? They wanted to jump, snout-first, into the profit pool of an industry that had fought its own way into New Jersey and with which they desperately wanted (and still want) NOT TO COMPETE.

Much better to just play the "poor horse employees" card and try to shame the casinos and politicians into an undeserved subsidy. (Hell, it even worked for you guys for a while. A well-executed hustle.)




THE CASINOS DIDN'T NEED THE TRACKS (or their horseman leeches) to open north Jersey facilities. NEVER HAVE, NEVER WILL. All they needed, and continue to need, was/is for the law (read, state Constitution) to allow them to build their own new facilities ... and even you guys haven't owned enough NJ politicians to make that happen.

Wake up and admit that the casinos are COMPETITORS (I know, dirty word to horsemen) of horse racing in the GAMBLING INDUSTRY. The tracks (and their horseman leeches) didn't need casinos when they had a monopoly on all forms of gambling in NJ. Now, however, the tracks and horsemen are whining because they they don't want to compete against a better gambling product.

(Say, why didn't all you brilliant track/horse guys open YOUR OWN ATLANTIC CITY casinos right from the start ... even though you didn't have a damned thing to do with the enormous and very costly effort of legalizing casinos, way back in the '70s? Why don't you do it now?

Nothing stopped you then. Nothing's stopping you now. Then ALL OF YOUR CASINO PROFITS could have gone, or could now go, into more lucrative purses and fatter track salaries. Then you wouldn't have to demand more welfare from your COMPETITORS ... or from New Jersey's taxpayers.

Or, what's your take on allowing both casinos and racinos up north ... provided that the casinos don't have to subsidize the racinos in any way? Ya know, try to stand on your own in the casino gambling business? Think ya can handle it?)




Oh, you're really digging deep into Wonderland with that one! You have a better chance of proving that past-posting doesn't happen than you have of supporting this blast of thumb-up-your-ass logic.




See "brilliant track/horse guys," above.




DEAL ... PROVIDED that one clear option is to vote for the proposition that any welfare-tax that might otherwise go to tracks and selfish horsemen will,instead, go into the general treasury for the benefit of all NJ taxpayers.

I'll bet the farm THAT proposal would overwhelmingly and quickly result in lots of north-jersey casinos and NO SUBSIDIES FOR TRACKS AND HORSEMEN.

In other words, the voters of New Jersey will tell you guys to stand on your own; to compete on price and product or go down the tubes just like the businesses from which so many of them are now out of work.

(Horse employees ... just like selfish horsemen and incompetent track executives ... are no more deserving of special consideration than anyone else.)

I just couldn’t let this go without a response.

First of all, your arrogant diatribe – merely a collection of opinions – is unimpressive. I would submit that my opinions carry at least as much import as yours, considering I am a lifelong NJ resident and have been involved in nearly every facet of NJ racing over the past 35 years….

I must admit I’ve rarely seen such a degree of vitriol towards horse racing as I’ve seen in your posts. Aww, have we had a few too many bad days at the track?

At any rate, this being a free country, you are entitled to your opinion – and your hatred.

One thing you seem to be stuck on is the notion that the NJ racing industry should be most concerned about the Atlantic City casinos as their competitors. I don’t believe anything could be farther from the truth. NJ racing is in a life and death struggle against racinos on our borders (racinos are racetracks that have alternative forms of gambling). It is these entities that deprive NJ racetracks of both the volume and quality of horses which are essential to the success of any track, and they are doing it through purse increases from the alternative gaming, which NJ tracks have been denied.

Let’s try a little exercise in the hypothetical.

Say that NJ racetracks could wave a magic wand and they could eliminate either all of the Aycee casinos, or all of the racinos within 50 miles of our border. Which one do you think they would choose?

It’s a no-brainer. The NJ racing industry doesn’t fear Atlantic City, they fear that they won’t be given the ammunition to compete with racinos in the neighboring states.

When the time comes that Monmouth Park has to compete with the Borgata for horses, then you will have a point….

Oh and nice try with the “welfare” BS. The casinos willingly paid the NJ racing industry for forbearance from seeking slots at the racetracks. It was a small price to pay for the additional billions they reaped from maintaining their monopoly. I, for one, have come to question the wisdom of the tracks accepting such a deal in the first place.

Now if you want to know who is really getting welfare in this state, you have to look no farther than….what do you know? The Atlantic City casinos.

This on the Aycee casinos from an article in the Press of Atlantic City dated July 29, 2010:

“Companies now pay 8 percent of gross revenue to the state, an arrangement that is higher than the 6.75 percent maximum in Nevada but is dwarfed by the 34 percent rate in Pennsylvania.”

Why are the people of NJ accepting less than one-quarter of the going rate that is contributed to the citizens of Pa? Why are we subsidizing these casinos?

Oh, maybe it’s because the casino industy in Atlantic City has helped to revitalize that town, like we were led to believe when New Jerseyans voted for casino gambling way back in the 70’s.

They certainly have done a fine job of it. Before casino gambling, Atlantic City was a slum. Now it’s a slum with a struggling casino-laden boardwalk that nobody wants to go to…..

Here’s a good summation:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Editorial-Board-Blog/2010/0809/A-state-takeover-of-Atlantic-City-s-gambling-mess-is-not-the-answer

There are plenty of contradictions in what I say, but I am contradicting your characterizations, not my own words. When I say that casino operators were “blinded by greed”, that contradicts your opinion that they were just being brilliant businessmen. Now, if the casinos sacrificed hundreds of billions of dollars in profits over the years in order to accomplish a goal of putting racing in the state out of business, that brilliance is lost on me. In fact, some people might say it’s pretty stupid. Maybe, just maybe, the geniuses who operate the Aycee casinos are as incompetent as their racing counterparts.

You love to talk about “selfish horsemen.” If the casinos are trying to destroy racing in the state, that would be the very definition of selfishness (although I’m sure you’d characterize it as “sound business practices”)

As far as letting the people decide about racinos in NJ, I have a simple proposition. Why not ask the people to approve casinos at racetracks in return for 50% of the profits which will go directly to property tax relief?

The casinos in Atlantic City are failing. The biggest reason is that they are in, well, Atlantic City - a place where NOBODY WANTS TO GO. You made some reference to “racetracks opening a casino in Atlantic City”. Well, duh, why would they do that when they already have a perfect site that is within short driving distance of the biggest population center in the country?

I say let Atlantic City continue to falter on their own and have the racetracks, which would provide far more revenue to the state, take up the slack. Why prop up a dying industry, which has caused most of its own problems and is located in a place that nobody wants to go to?

I can see it now: billions pouring into the state’s coffers, NJ racetracks on even footing with those in neighboring states, farmland preserved, jobs saved, and maybe even a new racetrack in the shadow of the Ben Franklin Bridge.

If they can do it in Chester, we can do it in Camden…..

The casino interests don’t need the tracks to operate in North Jersey, but they do need the people. So, if you think that the casino interests are just going to move North or anywhere else in the state, remember they aren’t going anywhere without the approval of the people of the state of NJ (read, State Constitution)

Finally, horse racing employees aren’t entitled to any more consideration than anyone else – and of course nobody said that – but they are entitled to equal consideration.

More interesting reading on the subject: http://www.casinosno.org/info.php?info_id=40

onefast99
12-26-2010, 03:53 PM
Horsemen have no inate right to the profits of OTWs. Their only right is to receive the purses for which they have freely chose to compete and have honestly won.

Based on your post it is quite evident you have no idea what you are talking about. The OTW's are a revenue stream set up by the NJSEA for the sole purpose of funding the racing industry with a large part of that earned revenue, which, by the way is solely due to people wagering at those facilities. Here's another one for you, the casino industry has received more hand-outs than any other business, industry or group in the state of NJ.

Robert Goren
12-26-2010, 04:12 PM
The New Jersey fight is just first salvo in the war of casino style gambling attempting to rid itself of having use some of its profits to keeping horse racing alive. It won't be the last. It is a war that the horse racing interests can not win in the long run. If those of you who race horses want to be in business 10 or 20 years from now, you have got come up a way to make your business profitable again. The gravy train of racinos is not going to last forever.

onefast99
12-26-2010, 05:52 PM
The New Jersey fight is just first salvo in the war of casino style gambling attempting to rid itself of having use some of its profits to keeping horse racing alive. It won't be the last. It is a war that the horse racing interests can not win in the long run. If those of you who race horses want to be in business 10 or 20 years from now, you have got come up a way to make your business profitable again. The gravy train of racinos is not going to last forever.
Where was it ever written that the casinos want the horse racing industry out? It is Governor Christis commission that recommended the Meadowlands be leased to a private party for harness racing purposes and the possible sale of Monmouth Park to private interests. Where did it ever say the casinos want horse racing out?

Robert Goren
12-26-2010, 06:14 PM
Where was it ever written that the casinos want the horse racing industry out? It is Governor Christis commission that recommended the Meadowlands be leased to a private party for harness racing purposes and the possible sale of Monmouth Park to private interests. Where did it ever say the casinos want horse racing out?No one is objecting to a an unsubsidized stand alone(non racino) race track. But that is not what the horse people want.

onefast99
12-26-2010, 06:22 PM
No one is objecting to a an unsubsidized stand alone(non racino) race track. But that is not what the horse people want.
The horseman in NJ want the NJSEA to do what they had planned, build out more OTW's. The reason the Meadowlands came into the conversation was due to its location and the remote possibility that a racino could be added to the existing structure at a minimal cost. The state is also looking at adding sports betting and internet gambling that would add additional monies to both the casino industry in the form of marketing dollars and about $30m a year to the horse racing industry.