Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 08-09-2017, 01:38 PM   #136
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
In gambling...only the HOUSE is guaranteed a profit. In horse racing...the "house" is the TRACK. All the other entities involved in this game...whether they be called "owners", "trainers", jockeys", "jockey-agents", "gamblers", etc...are in the SPECULATING business...and they are taking a big financial RISK by participating in this game. And...there should be no "whining" appeased...for any rise in our respective "costs of doing business". If we don't like it...then, THERE is the door.

Justice for ALL.
__________________
Live to play another day.

Last edited by thaskalos; 08-09-2017 at 01:43 PM.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 01:49 PM   #137
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
The horseplayers aren't guaranteed a profit -- much less a "living" -- in this game...so, why should the HORSEMEN? If the horseman's operating costs are "skyrocketing", then why isn't he looking for something else to do with his time...just as he advises the whining HORSEPLAYER to do? Who assured the horseman that horse racing is an "entertainment venue" for US...but a "living" for HIM?
I am sure that there are many horsemen who have found something else to do. Really? on your last question. So a person who has millions invested in a breeding/racing operation should view a horse bettor as an equal?
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 01:55 PM   #138
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
In gambling...only the HOUSE is guaranteed a profit. In horse racing...the "house" is the TRACK. All the other entities involved in this game...whether they be called "owners", "trainers", jockeys", "jockey-agents", "gamblers", etc...are in the SPECULATING business...and they are taking a big financial RISK by participating in this game. And...there should be no "whining" appeased...for any rise in our respective "costs of doing business". If we don't like it...then, THERE is the door.

Justice for ALL.
If the house, in fact, was guaranteed a profit there wouldn't be tracks closing their doors each year. Everybody assumes risk.

Whining seems to work in many businesses.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 01:56 PM   #139
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
I am sure that there are many horsemen who have found something else to do. Really? on your last question. So a person who has millions invested in a breeding/racing operation should view a horse bettor as an equal?
Let me answer your question with a question of my OWN:

I have a $25,000 stock account...and you are a "big-shot"...with a stock account of $25,000,000. What "profit quarantees" should be available to YOU...that aren't available to ME? Isn't this a "gambling game" for the BOTH of us? Are you "more entitled" to a profit than I AM?
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:01 PM   #140
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
If the house, in fact, was guaranteed a profit there wouldn't be tracks closing their doors each year. Everybody assumes risk.

Whining seems to work in many businesses.
The track is guaranteed a profit as long as the game is going on properly. That's why it's vital that the right decisions be made...in order for the game to continue into the future. When outright NEGLIGENCE causes the game to flounder...then, not even the HOUSE should whine.
__________________
Live to play another day.

Last edited by thaskalos; 08-09-2017 at 02:10 PM.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:03 PM   #141
Andy Asaro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
Therein lies the problem. If people are so stupid that they have to be told that there is a problem and that they must act, then there is no hope for success.
Most people are uninformed and don't know better. It's reality
Andy Asaro is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:09 PM   #142
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Asaro View Post
Most people are uninformed and don't know better. It's reality
And that's why the battle may already be lost, before it even starts. Because, in this game, the "uninformed" don't even know that they are "uninformed". They think that they know-it-all already.
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:19 PM   #143
Robert Fischer
clean money
 
Robert Fischer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 23,512
failure, thus far

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).
__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.
Robert Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:33 PM   #144
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
Let me answer your question with a question of my OWN:

I have a $25,000 stock account...and you are a "big-shot"...with a stock account of $25,000,000. What "profit quarantees" should be available to YOU...that aren't available to ME? Isn't this a "gambling game" for the BOTH of us? Are you "more entitled" to a profit than I AM?
First of all the stock market is not a zero sum game. Gambling (horse betting) is a negative sum game. I am not aware that anyone is asking for a profit guarantee. Just about any business will try to minimize their costs in pursuit of making a profit.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:34 PM   #145
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Asaro View Post
Most people are uninformed and don't know better. It's reality
For these people racing is pure entertainment. If not, they would be informed.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:36 PM   #146
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Fischer View Post
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.
__________________
Live to play another day.

Last edited by thaskalos; 08-09-2017 at 02:46 PM.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:41 PM   #147
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
For these people racing is pure entertainment. If not, they would be informed.
Funny. I've been watching these people for years, as they file out of the OTB facilities after the day's "entertainment". They sure don't appear "entertained".
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:42 PM   #148
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Fischer View Post
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).
The Canterbury experiment sure didn't help convincing anybody.

AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 02:51 PM   #149
GMB@BP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
The minnows can boycot all they want unless the sharks boycott then this is wasted breath.
GMB@BP is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 08-09-2017, 03:00 PM   #150
Robert Fischer
clean money
 
Robert Fischer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Maryland
Posts: 23,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
It doesn't matter if the players realize that the takeout adversely affects their bottom line.
Maybe the players are mostly losing entertainment/gamblers who aren't that sensitive to the concept of churn.

However, TRACKS and ADWs, and SHAREHOLDERS are extremely sensitive to their bottom line.
If someone can show them clear proof that takeout-sensitive 'churn' improves their bottom line, some will be willing to accept that competitive advantage.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
The Canterbury experiment sure didn't help convincing anybody.
That was such an ill-conceived 'reach' to begin with. They could give me zero takeout, free cadbury chocolate eggs, and have the cadburry bunny at the track for the kids, and I would still not have much desire to figure out who the hell they are.




Seems like we're more focused on 'organizing' for the sake of the power dynamic than to present an irrefutable case to the Tracks, ADWs, and Shareholders.
__________________
Preparation. Discipline. Patience. Decisiveness.
Robert Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.