Gural on Meadowlands future

[point given]

A 2 part video interview by Sam Mckee with Jeff Gural on whats next. Maybe slots in the future

http://www.standardbredcanada.ca/news/1-22-11/gural-im-giving-it-all-ive-got.html

[The_Knight_Sky]

Mr. Gural a smart man.

Hope to make a trip to Tioga to see what he's done up there,
and hopefully get an idea of what can be done at The Big M.

[onefast99]

Mr. Gural a smart man.

Hope to make a trip to Tioga to see what he's done up there,
and hopefully get an idea of what can be done at The Big M.
He wont have to deal with the high salaries the NJSEA was commanding. He will deal with the unions and most likely involve them in the overall success of the harness meet. He will also clean house and cut down on the waste. I am sure he will also find a more suitable food vendor. I wouldn't be surprised if a deal for Monmouth park isn't in the works at this time!

[The_Knight_Sky]

I am sure he will also find a more suitable food vendor.




The new grandstand should feature the Food Court offerings at the Menlo Park Mall. :ThmbUp:




I wouldn't be surprised if a deal for Monmouth park isn't in the works at this time!




Is that a hint?

No info at WikiLeaks just yet. ;)

[sonnyp]

you heard the part about the 30-35 year lease. he knows slots and/or casino table games, eventually, are inevitable at the meadowlands.

if he is to get involved, he wants a piece of that action. a lease of that length will put him in that position.

[The_Knight_Sky]

you heard the part about the 30-35 year lease.
he knows slots and/or casino table games,
eventually, are inevitable at the meadowlands.

if he is to get involved, he wants a piece of that action. a lease of that length will put him in that position.




30-35 years is like 3 centuries in the horse racing industry.
We're hard pressed to find people in management to last a mere 3 years
in horse racing let alone 30 years.

What will be interesting to watch will be how new and separate
owners at The Meadowlands and Monmouth Park work with each other.

If you had slots revenue at The Meadowlands would you share it
with the thoroughbred horsemen who do not race in East Rutherford any more? Could be some bad blood between the two breeds on the horizon. :ThmbDown:

[sonnyp]

staggering figures for atlantic city. how can they survive ?


http://viewfromthegrandstand.blogspot.com/2011/01/is-whats-bad-for-atlantic-city-bad-for.html

[The_Knight_Sky]

staggering figures for atlantic city. how can they survive ?


http://viewfromthegrandstand.blogspot.com/2011/01/is-whats-bad-for-atlantic-city-bad-for.html

PacingGuy wrote at his blog:

Of course, if an expansion of casino gaming in the state of New Jersey does occur, there is no assurance it will end up at the Meadowlands. The City of Newark has had a lot of power within the state legislature in recent years and Democratic Mayor Booker has formed an alliance of convenience with Republican Governor Christie, so don't rule out the possibility of a casino showing up in Newark (and possibly Jersey City) instead of the Meadowlands.

I'm not sure Newark or Jersey City is the ideal location for a North Jersey Casino. It'll probably take years to cut through the red tape.

I think horse racing has enough friends in the NJ legislature to keep the thorougbred racing calendar going in some form. The standardbreds future hinges entirely on the potential lease with Mr. Gural and friends.

The thought that the guv would nix the plan for a lease come April 1st
and throw the harness meet into disarray bothers me. That's the point of know return for the Meadowlands Racetrack as we know it.

[onefast99]

PacingGuy wrote at his blog:

Of course, if an expansion of casino gaming in the state of New Jersey does occur, there is no assurance it will end up at the Meadowlands. The City of Newark has had a lot of power within the state legislature in recent years and Democratic Mayor Booker has formed an alliance of convenience with Republican Governor Christie, so don't rule out the possibility of a casino showing up in Newark (and possibly Jersey City) instead of the Meadowlands.

I'm not sure Newark or Jersey City is the ideal location for a North Jersey Casino. It'll probably take years to cut through the red tape.

I think horse racing has enough friends in the NJ legislature to keep the thorougbred racing calendar going in some form. The standardbreds future hinges entirely on the potential lease with Mr. Gural and friends.

The thought that the guv would nix the plan for a lease come April 1st
and throw the harness meet into disarray bothers me. That's the point of know return for the Meadowlands Racetrack as we know it.
Newark got the Prudential Center the most logical place to put a casino would be in an area where the state just spent a lot of money setting up the transportation center and built a rather expensive stadium. The Meadowlands can be changed over to house vlt's very quickly. The physical plant is already in place, this is a win-win situation.

[The_Knight_Sky]

Newark got the Prudential Center the most logical place to put a casino would be in an area where the state just spent a lot of money setting up the transportation center and built a rather expensive stadium. The Meadowlands can be changed over to house vlt's very quickly. The physical plant is already in place, this is a win-win situation.


Well who "built" that Prudential Center?
Did the NJSEA have any part of that?

If they did, why would they want a venue that competes
with the Izod Center?

As for The Meadowlands, I would definitely press for a fresh approach.
Build the brand new smaller grandstand along Paterson Plank Road.
If the slot machines become a reality they can be housed in a separate building or part of what is now the current grandstand.

I am very concerned with who would get what from the slot machine revenues at the Meadowlands racetrack. It has to be a fair deal all around.
If one of the Atlantic City casino operators wind up running it, they
would be looked upon as "Benedict Arnold" of the NJ Gaming Business. Atlantic City as a tourist destination could raise a white flag at that point.

And what would be the splits be between harness racing/thoroughbred racing/state/ casino operator? A casino in Jersey City or Newark doesn't involve horse racing but sure isn't "prime real estate".

[Canarsie]

Newark got the Prudential Center the most logical place to put a casino would be in an area where the state just spent a lot of money setting up the transportation center and built a rather expensive stadium. The Meadowlands can be changed over to house vlt's very quickly. The physical plant is already in place, this is a win-win situation.

The Meadowlands would need lots of electrical work for VLT's. I once wrote them a letter about 4 screens showing Australian racing and Balmoral only on the side. Say what you want about the NJSEA an executive responded and stated it's hard wired and very hard to change. The guy actually said he would go up to take a look. Of course nothing changed the next time I was there. :rolleyes:

It's the perfect spot people will never take mass transit with gambling money to Newark or Jersey City.

[The_Knight_Sky]

If the state wants to get out the horse racing business - well get out!

No leases. Just sell the track the way they're doing at Monmouth Park !!

Then we'll never have to worry about crooked politicians in the future. :ThmbUp:

[onefast99]

The Meadowlands would need lots of electrical work for VLT's. I once wrote them a letter about 4 screens showing Australian racing and Balmoral only on the side. Say what you want about the NJSEA an executive responded and stated it's hard wired and very hard to change. The guy actually said he would go up to take a look. Of course nothing changed the next time I was there. :rolleyes:

It's the perfect spot people will never take mass transit with gambling money to Newark or Jersey City.
I have a close friend who runs the IT dept at the NJSEA I was told they could change over the system to accommodate the older type vlt's by use of a wiring system similar to todays WIFI. I was also told that the newer machines that run off a "linked" system would need the newer type wiring and that these newer machines include the very popular Virtual Blackjack also know as Royal Match 21. Ex Governor Codey is a big advocate on putting a casino at the Meadowlands and recently stated that several current Atlantic City casinos have ownership in the 3 new Pocono casinos who have all recently added table games.

[The_Knight_Sky]

Ex Governor Codey is a big advocate on putting a casino at the Meadowlands and recently stated that several current Atlantic City casinos have ownership in the 3 new Pocono casinos who have all recently added table games.




That's another reason why A.C. stubbornly fights against a Meadowlands Racino.

In the end what is best for New Jersey?

That should be the question to answer.

[The Hawk]

A $50 million tax break for ONE casino, but Monmouth supposedly lost $6 million and horse racing is costing the state money?

http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2011110129007

[Robert Goren]

A $50 million tax break for ONE casino, but Monmouth supposedly lost $6 million and horse racing is costing the state money?

http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2011110129007 My conservatives friends are always telling that tax breaks aren't spending. I disagree, but they do have some sort point. I don't think the casino should get the tax break and Monmouth Park should not use tax payer money to stay open. As a side note, Monmouth Park lost closer to $10 million even after the casino subsidy. I really hope someone steps to the plate and runs Monmouth Park as stand alone horse racing facility. I do believe with right management and a gambler friendly attitude, it could make it.

[Hanover1]

With Jimmy Simpsons money in the fold, rest assure that the moves will be calculated, and in the interest of horsemen and bettors alike. Jimmy does not jump in, he does his homework.........

[The_Knight_Sky]

Monmouth Park should not use tax payer money to stay open.



Monmouth Park uses casino subsidies given to NJ racing
to not lobby for slots at the track.




As a side note, Monmouth Park lost closer to $10 million
even after the casino subsidy.



You sure about that in 2010?

I mean...really, really sure :confused:

[onefast99]

My conservatives friends are always telling that tax breaks aren't spending. I disagree, but they do have some sort point. I don't think the casino should get the tax break and Monmouth Park should not use tax payer money to stay open. As a side note, Monmouth Park lost closer to $10 million even after the casino subsidy. I really hope someone steps to the plate and runs Monmouth Park as stand alone horse racing facility. I do believe with right management and a gambler friendly attitude, it could make it.
The numbers have not been released yet. The NJSEA is still working on them and once they are officially released the loss will be in the 1m range for MP. There will be a 15m infusion by the state this year (2011)that money will come from the casino re-development fund.

[Robert Goren]

Let get something straight here, in 2010 Monmouth Park was run an agency of the state of New Jersey. If it were to lobby the state legislature for slots, it would need to use state funds to do it. That would perhaps the greatest abuse of state money in the history of the country. I doubt that even the liberal minded people of New Jersey would stand for that. It would have been the horse people who would have had to do the lobbying. But none of this matters because the horse people do not want a stand alone self sufficient race track in NJ.

[onefast99]

Let get something straight here, in 2010 Monmouth Park was run an agency of the state of New Jersey. If it were to lobby the state legislature for slots, it would need to use state funds to do it. That would perhaps the greatest abuse of state money in the history of the country. I doubt that even the liberal minded people of New Jersey would stand for that. It would have been the horse people who would have had to do the lobbying. But none of this matters because the horse people do not want a stand alone self sufficient race track in NJ.
This is one debate that you are clueless about. The NJSEA is the controlling entity of the Meadowlands and MP facilities. The NJSEA has a huge payroll combined with many ongoing issues of spending monies on projects that have caused many politicians to point fingers at this agency and ask what is going on. The Governor is looking at all aspects of the racing industry and based upon biased commission reports he is trying to appease those who are heavily trenched in Atlantic City but has met opposition along the way. He now realizes through the efforts of former Governor Codey that NJ may indeed need to expand their AC casino licenses only to other parts of the state. How does this affect racing, simple, the NJSEA owns and runs the Meadowlands Sports complex, it is some of the most coveted real estate in the world. Jon Hanson sees dollar signs when he envisions what the Meadowlands can bring to the state as far as revenue goes, but primarily his pocket first. The Meadowlands was paid for by the racing industry(exact percentages unknown). Why would the NJSEA give up the Meadowlands? It would if it was dismantled by the Governor thus leaving open a casino development headed by, yes you guessed it, Jon Hanson. The state has given the thoroughbred racing industry 15m from the casino re-development fund for 2011, this will continue in 2012 with 10m and 2013 with 5m. By late next year the state will have the internet poker gaming online and that will add another 11-23m per year to the horse racing industry. Also there will be 5 more OTW's set up in NJ thus adding another 13-27m to the industry, and creating jobs along the way. The Xanadu project has a new owner, the people who are associated with the Mall of America, eventually once they are up and running they will also push for a casino at the Meadowlands. Last but not least is the Atlantic City airport project which is years away but would need to use some of the land the current racetrack sits on. Thus giving hope that a third thoroughbred track will once again be operative in NJ and generating much needed revenue that this industry needs. In the near future there will be slots at the AC racecourse, bet on it!

[Phantombridgejumpe]

have to be the solution.

Look at Dover Downs and Parx for example. Are they surviving? Yes. Do they have good purses? Yes. Do they attract more than 500 racing fans a day to the track? Not even close.

I like horse racing T-Bred and Harness, I really do. I appreciate it puts a lot of people to work, I appreciate it is a nice thing to have in my home state. I really try to see that side of it. But I was at the Meadowlands in the 80's when you needed a reserved seat on a Friday or Saturday night, when there were lines 8-9 deep at a floor full of betting windows. I saw crowds of 20,000 all the time, and for huge events they went over 30,000 often.

I think I'd rather die they be on life support in this case.

[onefast99]

have to be the solution.

Look at Dover Downs and Parx for example. Are they surviving? Yes. Do they have good purses? Yes. Do they attract more than 500 racing fans a day to the track? Not even close.

I like horse racing T-Bred and Harness, I really do. I appreciate it puts a lot of people to work, I appreciate it is a nice thing to have in my home state. I really try to see that side of it. But I was at the Meadowlands in the 80's when you needed a reserved seat on a Friday or Saturday night, when there were lines 8-9 deep at a floor full of betting windows. I saw crowds of 20,000 all the time, and for huge events they went over 30,000 often.

I think I'd rather die they be on life support in this case.
What if the casinos and race-tracks were on an even playing field? Did you ever consider that? The Meadowlands was at one time the place to be. Imagine if they built casinos in that area of the state instead of AC. Imagine if the NJSEA marketed their product to the general public and stopped living in the 80's. The entire state of racing in NJ needs a new marketing approach, and if that means bringing slots in like Parx did then do it.

[Phantombridgejumpe]

Honestly, I haven't thought about the level playing field and really don't care to.

I'm all for a new marketing approach. I'm all for getting younger players, I'm all for new ideas and new technology and new marketing.

But I don't see the point of having 3,000 people in a building when 2,750 of them are playing slots/vlt's and 250 people are betting $80 each a day on the racing.

There were many people at Dover Downs who had no idea a harness race was taking place 200 feet from them.

You seem to be all for anything that will help the track survive and thrive and I understand that view. My view is if it can't survive on its own it should go away - - as much as I would really, really hate to see that happen.

[Robert Goren]

Is or is NJSEA a government agency? Who appoints the people who run it? Is it a private company with stock holders? Who is responsible for the shortfalls when they spend more than they take in? You can fancy it up with all the fancy names you want, but when push comes to shove it is the taxpayers who cover any losses that it incurs. Like I said before the horse people do not want a stand alone self sufficient race track. Places like Parx are great places for horse people, but are lousy places for the horse race better. I am a better and I never claimed to want anything other than a better deal for better. I haven't seen that happen at most racinos. In fact, most of the time when race tracks are converted into racinos things get worse for the better. Also like I said before I want what the horse people don't , that stand alone race track were things like the purses are dependent on the amount of money the horse race betters wager, not something like slot machine money. When a horse person can make money on a horse without it winning races, it is not good for the betters.

[onefast99]

Is or is NJSEA a government agency? Who appoints the people who run it? Is it a private company with stock holders? Who is responsible for the shortfalls when they spend more than they take in? You can fancy it up with all the fancy names you want, but when push comes to shove it is the taxpayers who cover any losses that it incurs. Like I said before the horse people do not want a stand alone self sufficient race track. Places like Parx are great places for horse people, but are lousy places for the horse race better. I am a better and I never claimed to want anything other than a better deal for better. I haven't seen that happen at most racinos. In fact, most of the time when race tracks are converted into racinos things get worse for the better. Also like I said before I want what the horse people don't , that stand alone race track were things like the purses are dependent on the amount of money the horse race betters wager, not something like slot machine money. When a horse person can make money on a horse without it winning races, it is not good for the betters.
The world-class, multi-billion dollar industry that the NJSEA created for the State brings the three "e's" to New Jersey -- economic development, entertainment, and ego -- from East Rutherford to Oceanport, from Camden to Piscataway, from Atlantic City to Wildwood. The NJSEA is proud of its continuing investment in its facilities and their positive impact on job creation and tourism. A continuing source of pride to the people of New Jersey, the NJSEA and its facilities are led by a Board of Commissioners and an outstanding management team, including some of the most respected executives in their field, who are prepared to meet the challenges of the 21st Century. This board consists of 16 members appointed by the Governor. There are also several "ex officio" members.

[onefast99]

When a horse person can make money on a horse without it winning races, it is not good for the betters.

If you mean the $1500 per horse that was given last year, that was to induce large fields and make it a win-win for the horseman and betters.

[Robert Goren]

When a horse person can make money on a horse without it winning races, it is not good for the betters.

If you mean the $1500 per horse that was given last year, that was to induce large fields and make it a win-win for the horseman and betters. I know a lot betters who think giving $1500 to a horse for running out the money is a bad idea. I want every horse in a race trying to win, not just running for feed money. I think most betters feel the same way. Anybody who thinks a 12 horse field with 7 or 8 horses not trying to win, but running for feed money is a win-win situation for horse racing has been smoking some funny smelling hay.

[The Bit]

WEG is doing the same pay to start routine soon, perhaps tonight. I know the initial reports from the first card drawn with this implemented were good. Big, full fields. But, like you said, how many are now just in it for the ride around? Now, you don't even have to finish 5th to get paid, just sit on the cones and make it a workout and come back next week.

[Phantombridgejumpe]

I think we get frustrated when we can't have what we want at the track. It seems like it SHOULD work, but the reality seems to be that there is not enough support there to make it work.

If you and I were to open a track with nice purses, the lowest takeout in the country, great TV feeds, free programs, great betting options etc.... but no slots or VLT's I think 9 times out of 10 we would be out of business within a year or two. And the 1/10 of the time it worked I think we would have our knees broken by somebody.

There just seem to be too many hands in the cookie jar for any track to do a trial run at what you are suggesting.

[Robert Goren]

I am not optimistic about horse racing in general. The one thing I am pretty sure of is that in 10 years there will be no racinos only casinos where race tracks used to be. Anyone who thinks slots are good in the long run for racing hasn't run a business. No business can survive on cannibalizing one part of business to keep another part running. The load will always become too heavy. Only massive amount of taxpayer money will keep the tracks open the way they are being run today. I don't think the taxpayers will stand for their money being used to keep a gambling joint open very long. I don't the taxpayers will buy the argument that a dollar of tax money spent here will bring 2 over there for more than a couple of years when it comes to gambling. It is a hard enough sell with manufacturing plants.

[Canarsie]

The exchange and single pool bill was signed today.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/61067/bills-to-help-jersey-racing-signed-into-law

[onefast99]

I know a lot betters who think giving $1500 to a horse for running out the money is a bad idea. I want every horse in a race trying to win, not just running for feed money. I think most betters feel the same way. Anybody who thinks a 12 horse field with 7 or 8 horses not trying to win, but running for feed money is a win-win situation for horse racing has been smoking some funny smelling hay.
That's a great response from a better. I know you don't represent the majority. Isn't that what a better does, eliminates the horses who don't belong in the race? How do you know the one who is running for the "feed money" all of a sudden fires and wins at a big price like several did last year at MP.

[Phantombridgejumpe]

For every oddball horse that came out of nowhere and won the worry is that there were 5 just jogging around the track for the $1,500 in 'free' money.

Those horses that were not running with good intentions took money in bets and those wagers were almost a robbery.

Now, is it part of the game to try to figure out if a horse is well placed and coming up to a good effort - - I suppose so. However, without starting money the fairly safe assumption was that all the connections were really trying to place as high as possible; when a good fraction of that incentive is taken away I think the questions can be raised.

I know Monmouth claimed they were going to monitor any owners/trainers who had non-competitive horses in races, but I must say on the surface the practice of paying all starters is not a policy I'd support. Put that money into the total purse and let it be earned by the horses that deserve it. If that lowers field size slightly I am willing to make that trade.

[onefast99]

For every oddball horse that came out of nowhere and won the worry is that there were 5 just jogging around the track for the $1,500 in 'free' money.

Those horses that were not running with good intentions took money in bets and those wagers were almost a robbery.

Now, is it part of the game to try to figure out if a horse is well placed and coming up to a good effort - - I suppose so. However, without starting money the fairly safe assumption was that all the connections were really trying to place as high as possible; when a good fraction of that incentive is taken away I think the questions can be raised.

I know Monmouth claimed they were going to monitor any owners/trainers who had non-competitive horses in races, but I must say on the surface the practice of paying all starters is not a policy I'd support. Put that money into the total purse and let it be earned by the horses that deserve it. If that lowers field size slightly I am willing to make that trade.
Heres one for you, what if you have a 9 horse field in a turf race, it is rained off the turf to the dirt, the field scratches down to 4 horses. The race is a first level allowance 80k. The winner gets 48k, second gets 16k and third gets 8k while fourth gets 4k. Should the rest of the purse be given to each of the participants?

[Robert Goren]

This game is tough enough without trying to read the minds of the trainers. I consider a horse being run for the feed only the same as stiffing a horse. If trainer is not running a horse to win then that should announced to the public.

[onefast99]

This game is tough enough without trying to read the minds of the trainers. I consider a horse being run for the feed only the same as stiffing a horse. If trainer is not running a horse to win then that should announced to the public.
That is probably something that should be added to the list, which includes horses that were recently gelded.

[Phantombridgejumpe]

Heres one for you, what if you have a 9 horse field in a turf race, it is rained off the turf to the dirt, the field scratches down to 4 horses. The race is a first level allowance 80k. The winner gets 48k, second gets 16k and third gets 8k while fourth gets 4k. Should the rest of the purse be given to each of the participants?

I would split the left over money ($4K in your example) proportionally...So the winner still gets 3 times the 2nd place finisher etc...

Instead of 48/76K the winner now gets just over $50,526 out of $80,000.

Hey, I like full fields, I'm not a fan of 4 horse races, but I don't want to see unfit or unwell horses out on the track. They simply don't belong there and in my opinion hurt the game. I'd rather a 4 horse field with 4 horses that are healthy and trying to win than a 7 horse field with at least 2 of the horses running mostly because they will get $1,500 just for starting.

But then again when the current generation grows up they may give every horse that starts the Kentucky Derby a bed of roses so none of them feel bad.

[onefast99]

Heres one for you, what if you have a 9 horse field in a turf race, it is rained off the turf to the dirt, the field scratches down to 4 horses. The race is a first level allowance 80k. The winner gets 48k, second gets 16k and third gets 8k while fourth gets 4k. Should the rest of the purse be given to each of the participants?

I would split the left over money ($4K in your example) proportionally...So the winner still gets 3 times the 2nd place finisher etc...

Instead of 48/76K the winner now gets just over $50,526 out of $80,000.

Hey, I like full fields, I'm not a fan of 4 horse races, but I don't want to see unfit or unwell horses out on the track. They simply don't belong there and in my opinion hurt the game. I'd rather a 4 horse field with 4 horses that are healthy and trying to win than a 7 horse field with at least 2 of the horses running mostly because they will get $1,500 just for starting.

But then again when the current generation grows up they may give every horse that starts the Kentucky Derby a bed of roses so none of them feel bad.
If you think you are going to get an unfit horse(visually)past the current state vet at MP you are sadly mistaken.

[Zman179]

Heres one for you, what if you have a 9 horse field in a turf race, it is rained off the turf to the dirt, the field scratches down to 4 horses. The race is a first level allowance 80k. The winner gets 48k, second gets 16k and third gets 8k while fourth gets 4k. Should the rest of the purse be given to each of the participants?

Either keep the current rule (monies revert to the purse account), or give all leftover money to the winner. No sharing.


Hey, I like full fields, I'm not a fan of 4 horse races, but I don't want to see unfit or unwell horses out on the track. They simply don't belong there and in my opinion hurt the game.

It's not that they're unfit or unwell, they're just hopelessly overmatched. You can't expect a horse which can place in a 4K claimer to all of a sudden run his/her guts out in a 15K claimer.