Early Numbers at Santa Anita Promising

[Dahoss9698]

I figured Jelly would post about this, but he hasn't yet, so I will.

http://www.drf.com/news/santa-anita-business-ahead-projection-meeting

Only a weeks worth of data which obviously isn't enough to make any definitive conclusions. But, with the constant stream of negative news, this is a positive. So other than field size being up, what do you guys think is attributing to the increase?

[Robert Goren]

a dead cat bounce?

[Dahoss9698]

It's too bad no one seems interested in discussing anything positive.

When they call us bitter gamblers, I guess we can't really dispute it.

[woodtoo]

Good news indeed,one of my favorite tracks.:ThmbUp:

[chickenhead]

So other than field size being up, what do you guys think is attributing to the increase?

The pick 5 has been a nice new pool for them this Jan relative to last.

Their press is a lot better this year as they haven't been saying a lot of completely insane nonsense.

And their comparables from last year are as soft as the stay-puft man.

I'm glad their field size is up, I hope it stays up. And for the Pick-5. Both are very good for Cali bettors.

[Robert Goren]

It's too bad no one seems interested in discussing anything positive.

When they call us bitter gamblers, I guess we can't really dispute it.How is this positive? Have rolled backed their takeout rate hikes? To me this a set back for all the people like me who want lower take out rates. I sure it be interpreted by the powers that be that they screw over the betting public and if they can weather the first year the bettors will back. More proof in their minds that we are nothing more than degenerate gamblers.

[Striker]

They did some intelligent marketing locally with having HRTV secure a local TV deal to broadcast live racing on a local tv station Fridays thru Sundays, and they took up advertisements on 20-30 billboards along the highways out there. Some might not think this does anything, but IMO this is the sort of things to bring in the people who don't go to the track all the time or at all.

[jelly]

How is this positive? Have rolled backed their takeout rate hikes? To me this a set back for all the people like me who want lower take out rates. I sure it be interpreted by the powers that be that they screw over the betting public and if they can weather the first year the bettors will back. More proof in their minds that we are nothing more than degenerate gamblers.




Before the takeout increase a pk 3 or a tri that paid $159 now pays you $153.So basically,every time(yes-every time) you cash a ticket at this price you have to buy the TOC a beer.Daho thinks this is positive news.Incredible :bang:

[PaceAdvantage]

Before the takeout increase a pk 3 or a tri that paid $159 now pays you $153.So basically,every time(yes-every time) you cash a ticket at this price you have to buy the TOC a beer.Daho thinks this is positive news.Incredible :bang:Once again, someone is bringing in something that really isn't relevant to the thread topic.

The early numbers at SA are promising. To some this would be positive news (well, to most really...don't see how it could be negative).

The takeout rate is a totally different discussion, and it's frustrating to see this maneuver repeated in all these threads.

It's like being in off-topic and no matter the subject (even non-political ones), somebody always has to inject Obama into things...and before him, Bush... :bang:

[dinque]

Once again, someone is bringing in something that really isn't relevant to the thread topic.

The early numbers at SA are promising. To some this would be positive news (well, to most really...don't see how it could be negative).

The takeout rate is a totally different discussion, and it's frustrating to see this maneuver repeated in all these threads.

It's like being in off-topic and no matter the subject (even non-political ones), somebody always has to inject Obama into things...and before him, Bush... :bang:


when we decided to boycott the last thing i wanted to see was this...i think it is not really off topic at all....are we ending the boycott because the field sizes are up and there is a players pic 5???

[takeout]

when we decided to boycott the last thing i wanted to see was this...i think it is not really off topic at all....are we ending the boycott because the field sizes are up and there is a players pic 5???I’m sure as hell not ending mine. Any place that doesn’t have any more regard for its customers than to set a 22.68% rake on two-horse bets doesn’t deserve ANYONE’S business in ANY of their pools. Why people continue to support this kind of abuse (and ignorance by those in charge) is beyond me. I don’t get it. Must be something akin to Stockholm Syndrome.

[PaceAdvantage]

In my opinion, every single racetrack in the nation is charging too high a takeout. It's obscene all over...

[lamboguy]

In my opinion, every single racetrack in the nation is charging too high a takeout. It's obscene all over...
in your opinion, what do you think the fair takeout rate should be?

[PaceAdvantage]

in your opinion, what do you think the fair takeout rate should be?I am not smart enough to answer that question.

But judging by what I see out there now across the land, much lower than we have now.

The idea of tracks taking more than a quarter of the pool on some type of bets is really mind boggling when you think about it.

[lamboguy]

I am not smart enough to answer that question.

But judging by what I see out there now across the land, much lower than we have now.

The idea of tracks taking more than a quarter of the pool on some type of bets is really mind boggling when you think about it.
then let me ask you this way. do you think that 12% for wps for nyra and california racing is exorbitant? that would be 23% less than what it is today.

[Cardus]

It's too bad no one seems interested in discussing anything positive.

When they call us bitter gamblers, I guess we can't really dispute it.

Wait, I thought that you were one of the bitter people?

How perverse: the bitter gamblers are those who wanted desperately to see another Santa Anita downturn.

[chickenhead]

Wait, I thought that you were one of the bitter people?

How perverse: the bitter gamblers are those who wanted desperately to see another Santa Anita downturn.

Sharp post.

[Tom]

The idea of tracks taking more than a quarter of the pool on some type of bets is really mind boggling when you think about it.

If you were to tip over a poker table and grab what you could on your way out the door, you might not get that much! :D

[fast4522]

It is a real nice track, they got rid of the garbage some called a surface, maybe get rid of Hollywood and possibly replace their two Senators.

[Indulto]

I figured Jelly would post about this, but he hasn't yet, so I will.

http://www.drf.com/news/santa-anita-business-ahead-projection-meeting

Only a weeks worth of data which obviously isn't enough to make any definitive conclusions. But, with the constant stream of negative news, this is a positive. So other than field size being up, what do you guys think is attributing to the increase?It's too bad no one seems interested in discussing anything positive.

When they call us bitter gamblers, I guess we can't really dispute it.Since you're the one claiming the news is positive, why don't you explain how it is positive and from whose standpoint?

If handle is up, is revenue also up? Or is revenue actually down because the handle increase is being generated from the new rebate program which would appear to return less to the track?

Maybe we need to start tracking average payoff per race type, per field size, and per level of handle to see if the news really is positive for the average player.

[PaceAdvantage]

then let me ask you this way. do you think that 12% for wps for nyra and california racing is exorbitant? that would be 23% less than what it is today.Like I said, all takeout rates everywhere are too high.

And like I also said, I'm not smart enough to pinpoint exactly where optimal levels are...I'm sure it wouldn't be that difficult to figure out if you have the right people working on the problem.

Nobody seems interested in doing such a study though...I don't see the NTRA funding such a study...shouldn't they be in the business of trying to figure out how the tracks can make the most money through increased handle?

[Caroline]

Like I said, all takeout rates everywhere are too high.

And like I also said, I'm not smart enough to pinpoint exactly where optimal levels are...I'm sure it wouldn't be that difficult to figure out if you have the right people working on the problem.

Nobody seems interested in doing such a study though...I don't see the NTRA funding such a study...shouldn't they be in the business of trying to figure out how the tracks can make the most money through increased handle?

Yes NTRA should. So should the Jockey Club, which just spent 2 million dollars on an external study to provide solutions to providing sustainable growth for horse racing - which never addressed pricing of wagers. Would the NTRA ever do such a thing? Horse players provided them with recommendations some years ago - how many of those have been implemented?

[andymays]

Yes NTRA should. So should the Jockey Club, which just spent 2 million dollars on an external study to provide solutions to providing sustainable growth for horse racing - which never addressed pricing of wagers. Would the NTRA ever do such a thing? Horse players provided them with recommendations some years ago - how many of those have been implemented?

Hi Caroline, I've talked to you about this before but theres something else I'd like to add.

1. How would a study take into account rebating? Lowering takeout often lowers the size of the rebate. In the case of the 14% takeout P5 in California there is no rebate.

2. The marketing/word of mouth value of lowering takeout.

Thanks,

A

[Tom]

Just what does NTRA do anyways?
Seems they have a whole lot of nothing to contribute.

[Al Gobbi]

The NTRA is still in business? :eek:

[FenceBored]

The NTRA is still in business? :eek:

Heck, the TRA (http://www.tra-online.com/about.html) is still in business.

[Caroline]

Hi Caroline, I've talked to you about this before but theres something else I'd like to add.

1. How would a study take into account rebating? Lowering takeout often lowers the size of the rebate. In the case of the 14% takeout P5 in California there is no rebate.

2. The marketing/word of mouth value of lowering takeout.

Thanks,

A

I'm trying to find data on rebate rates to obtain better estimates of price responsiveness (anonymous but "player" specific). Tough Andy because, guess what? Nobody wants to supply that data - it's almost, but not quite?, impossible to obtain data at the level of individual players. Working on it though :-)

Quantitative "marketing" research can be done I think e.g. the value of (lower) price leadership on specific bets. It needs a long enough sample period to estimate the full benefits of that from existing data. But it's feasible...

Gimme ten years to publish something, folks. Or go start experimenting :)

[dinque]

saw your interview on hrtv....very impressive.....thanks for all your input on takeout awareness and especially your work with horse rescue....

[Caroline]

saw your interview on hrtv....very impressive.....thanks for all your input on takeout awareness and especially your work with horse rescue....

Thank you so much Dinque!

[iceknight]

I’m sure as hell not ending mine. Any place that doesn’t have any more regard for its customers than to set a 22.68% rake on two-horse bets doesn’t deserve ANYONE’S business in ANY of their pools. Why people continue to support this kind of abuse (and ignorance by those in charge) is beyond me. I don’t get it. Must be something akin to Stockholm Syndrome.

I am not sure why you make such sweeping statements.. Their WPS takeouts are slightly lower than nyra wps take outs. Their Super take outs are lower than Nyra take outs (at 26%) and keep in mind that the top 4 or 5 tracks in the country by mutuel pools are the ny and ca tracks..which is why I am comparing them. Now, I absolutely love the Florida and kentucky tracks as their takeouts are lower but the fact is.. by the sheer size and wealth wielded in these states (ny & ca) maybe they are able to take more from the players (us) because more people are going there for entertainment and filling their coffers?

After reviewing other comments, I have decided to add this. If we (horseplayers) TRULY WANT the takeout to be lower... then we need to start calling it RACING TAX and SURCHARGE.. because people *hate* taxes and the more people understand that it is truly a tax on our resources (betting pool) then more people will ask for a reduction in it. The "lower takeout" cause needs to be addressed the right way.. Do away with the "old" traditional jargon which somebody conveniently used long time ago to obscure a tax by some other name.

[andymays]

I'm trying to find data on rebate rates to obtain better estimates of price responsiveness (anonymous but "player" specific). Tough Andy because, guess what? Nobody wants to supply that data - it's almost, but not quite?, impossible to obtain data at the level of individual players. Working on it though :-)

Quantitative "marketing" research can be done I think e.g. the value of (lower) price leadership on specific bets. It needs a long enough sample period to estimate the full benefits of that from existing data. But it's feasible...

Gimme ten years to publish something, folks. Or go start experimenting :)

They need to start experimenting and supplying you with the numbers. I'm reasonably sure that if the CTHA gets enough seats on the TOC board they will work with you.

[rubicon55]

I am not sure why you make such sweeping statements.. Their WPS takeouts are slightly lower than nyra wps take outs. Their Super take outs are lower than Nyra take outs (at 26%) and keep in mind that the top 4 or 5 tracks in the country by mutuel pools are the ny and ca tracks..which is why I am comparing them. Now, I absolutely love the Florida and kentucky tracks as their takeouts are lower but the fact is.. by the sheer size and wealth wielded in these states (ny & ca) maybe they are able to take more from the players (us) because more people are going there for entertainment and filling their coffers?

After reviewing other comments, I have decided to add this. If we (horseplayers) TRULY WANT the takeout to be lower... then we need to start calling it RACING TAX and SURCHARGE.. because people *hate* taxes and the more people understand that it is truly a tax on our resources (betting pool) then more people will ask for a reduction in it. The "lower takeout" cause needs to be addressed the right way.. Do away with the "old" traditional jargon which somebody conveniently used long time ago to obscure a tax by some other name.

Agreed, governments have no problem calling it a tax on us tax payers. Using that term should certainly gain some attention.