JeffP wrote:
Quote:
|
Looking back I couldn't have been more wrong. Not only were they aware of racing's paid for economic studies and case history from other forms of gambling - but they were purposely choosing to ignore it.
|
The CHRB has a history of domination by licensed horsemen,they have been in the majority for as long as I can remember. They do what they see as best for the horsemen and the racetracks and customers (gamblers)are the outsiders. I have experienced this attitude for a long time. In other words "it is their game" Their lopsided actions have caught up to them and it is time for them reap what they sow. The financial model was unsustainable before this latest ill advised takeout increase. The CHRB has not honored their mission statement to protect the betting public. They have caused most of their own problems. No other State allows a majority of horsemen on the Board for this very reason. They can not be removed by the Governor,except for certain cause.
It starts at the top, with the CHRB, we need some "Sportsmen" who do not have ties to the industry in the majority on the Board.
Jeff... You did the right thing and you did a fine job of it, but you got what many customer advocates received before you in California.. not much so far.
The trend lines will continue to go down with the latest grab for more purse money by legislative means,instead of growth by customer popularity. Racing will survive, but the racing managers will not and they will be joined by ex-CHRB members.
rwwupl
