Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Fischer
What we see here is a failure to show both the industry, and the players, that takeout significantly affects churn, and that churn significantly affects their bottom lines.
Without clear, convincing evidence, the industry is going to be fine with their current strategy, and the players will be largely indifferent (aside from 'outbursts' such as this thread).
|
It doesn't matter if the players realize that the takeout adversely affects their bottom line. The ever-shortening fields magnify the effects of the takeouts, even when they remain stable...and the players are sure to notice it when their wagering accounts are depleted...if they aren't already.
If you've been paying attention to the goings-on here, Robert...then you've probably noticed that the vast majority of the members here have recently admitted that they are betting a lot less money on the horses now than they have in the past. Some have even said that they've stopped betting ALTOGETHER...after betting the horses for many years. Do you suppose that they've done this because they have found "other gambling interests" for their money? Are they frequenting the CASINOS now, since they've stopped betting as much as they did on the horses? Of course not. Without exception...they've stopped because they've been LOSING. And, if they were smart...then they stopped before they did serious damage to their financial well-being.
When you lose enough, then you notice it...and you stop betting, or you slow down significantly. It matters not if you realize that the "takeout" beat you...or if you think that you lost your money for some other reason. The outcome is the same either way...and it doesn't bode well for the game, going forward.
