Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff P
Therein lies a (chicken or the egg) paradox.
Where do (or did) owners (used to) come from?
A fair percentage came from fans who stuck around long enough to become horseplayers.
From there a select few went on to become owners.
I'll stick my neck out and make the argument that creation of new owners is a function of customer demand for the product.
I'll also stick my neck out and say yearly foal crop is also a function of customer demand for the product.
In turn, customer demand for the product is a function of the product being embraced by the general public as a compelling gambling game.
Because that's literally what it is.
Horseracing (in the eyes of the public for 360 days a year) is a (not so) compelling gambling game.
For purposes of this thread I'll define a compelling gambling game as one that is currently seeing growth in terms of total customer spend on the product after adjusting for inflation.
Imo, every compelling gambling game that you can name has two key elements:
1. Integrity - public perception is that the game is regulated in such a way that the game is on the up and up.
2. Optimal Pricing - the takeout, vig, or house edge isn't so high vs. other forms of gaming that it is driving business away.
-jp
.
|
IMO...every "compelling gambling game" must also have a 3rd key element. It must feature a bunch of players who have started at the relative bottom and, through skill and perseverance, have climbed up the ladder to the point where they have amassed real wealth by putting their knowledge to proper use. The betting public needs examples such as these as proof that the time and effort required to "master" this game comes with the possible prerequisite monetary reward.
Poker has players like that...and so does sports betting and the stock market. But horse racing's only "big winners" are a few mysterious computer guys who are playing an entirely different game than the rest of us are.
