Keeneland apparently raising takeout

[highnote]

Originally Posted by AlsoEligible

Besides giving people the ability to wager on almost any track in the world, while sitting in front of the computer in their underwear? ADWs provide convenient access to a larger wagering menu than any track or OTB. What else do you think players are entitled to?

Lower takeouts

[Andy Asaro]

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

Excerpt from Pricci article.

Watchdogs are not supposed to sit at a round table with an industry it’s supposed to be monitoring.

Horseplayer advocates should be sitting across the table from industry stakeholders. If not, it’s inherently conflicted--not White House-sized conflict but nevertheless at cross purposes with the people it is chartered to represent.


http://www.horseraceinsider.com/Sara...o-for-players/
=========================================

The people on the panel are all top notch but as I’ve said before, going there and sticking to the same plan as before the Keeneland takeout hike was a mistake IMO.

Paul Matties responds to criticism of HANA at Equestricon in thread.

[Lono]

You don't have to worry about HANA doing anything as long as they get wined and dined, by the track. I had this discussion with Cary Fotias (god rest his soul) 15 years ago.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Lono

You don't have to worry about HANA doing anything as long as they get wined and dined, by the track. I had this discussion with Cary Fotias (god rest his soul) 15 years ago.

Who is getting wined and dined?

[ultracapper]

Good luck with a gambler owned race track. Getting any of the state racing commissions to grant dates would be a monumental undertaking in itself. The first thing you'd hear is that the fox is running the hen house. Gamblers running a pari mutuel operation, are you kidding? The first thing the gambling commission would worry about is pool manipulations by these very gambler/operators.

Zero chance.

The first thing that must be changed before anything can be accomplished is the industry's relationship with the state governments. Without that, there will be little change for the good of the industry. Could you imagine setting up a fast food stand, going to the state and asking them how many, and what dates, you could operate? McDonalds has those dates. Burger King gets these, KFC gets to sell food during these months. There is no real competition in the horse racing industry that promotes bettering your operation and then being rewarded with higher profits because you run a tighter ship than the next track over. The state grants you your racing calendar, and then you do with it what you will.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by Lono

You don't have to worry about HANA doing anything as long as they get wined and dined, by the track. I had this discussion with Cary Fotias (god rest his soul) 15 years ago.

Was there a hana 15 years ago?

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by ultracapper

Good luck with a gambler owned race track. Getting any of the state racing commissions to grant dates would be a monumental undertaking in itself. The first thing you'd hear is that the fox is running the hen house. Gamblers running a pari mutuel operation, are you kidding? The first thing the gambling commission would worry about is pool manipulations by these very gambler/operators.

Zero chance.

The first thing that must be changed before anything can be accomplished is the industry's relationship with the state governments. Without that, there will be little change for the good of the industry. Could you imagine setting up a fast food stand, going to the state and asking them how many, and what dates, you could operate? McDonalds has those dates. Burger King gets these, KFC gets to sell food during these months. There is no real competition in the horse racing industry that promotes bettering your operation and then being rewarded with higher profits because you run a tighter ship than the next track over. The state grants you your racing calendar, and then you do with it what you will.

And the fox is not running the hen house now?

[AlsoEligible]

Originally Posted by highnote

Lower takeouts

What do ADWs have to do with lowering takeouts?

Online outlets already get nickle-and-dimed to death by every god damn acronym in this industry. From tracks, to horsemen, to owner associations, to teller unions, to local and state governments.

It's gotten to the point where smaller ADWs literally can't operate in states like California without losing money. Even the big ones barely break even, in the most populated state in the country. It should never have gotten to that point, but here we are.

And now they all need to offer rebates on top of that? If they can afford to do it in certain states to maintain customer loyalty or to get a leg up on the other guys, that's one thing. But high takeout is certainly not the ADWs problem to fix. That's a ridiculous claim.

[highnote]

Originally Posted by AlsoEligible

What do ADWs have to do with lowering takeouts?

Online outlets already get nickle-and-dimed to death by every god damn acronym in this industry. From tracks, to horsemen, to owner associations, to teller unions, to local and state governments.

It's gotten to the point where smaller ADWs literally can't operate in states like California without losing money. Even the big ones barely break even, in the most populated state in the country. It should never have gotten to that point, but here we are.

And now they all need to offer rebates on top of that? If they can afford to do it in certain states to maintain customer loyalty or to get a leg up on the other guys, that's one thing. But high takeout is certainly not the ADWs problem to fix. That's a ridiculous claim.

You said xpressbet and cd were owned by racetrack conglomerates. So those two should be able to lower the takeout. They sell their signals at low enough prices that ADWs that take their signal can offer rebates, so why are they not willing to help the horseplayer by lowering the take?

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by highnote

You said xpressbet and cd were owned by racetrack conglomerates. So those two should be able to lower the takeout. They sell their signals at low enough prices that ADWs that take their signal can offer rebates, so why are they not willing to help the horseplayer by lowering the take?

It's much more complicated than that. Every state is different.

[cj]

Bill Nader on Keeneland and takeout in general:

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com...or-bill-nader/

[highnote]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

It's much more complicated than that. Every state is different.

No doubt. Everything is complicated. They were smart enough to figure out how to become a racetrack conglomerate. They must have some political clout.

If the management at those tracks sere serious about lowering takeouts they could.

The big players betting millions per year will continue getting rebates and the small player will play for fun, but not realizing or not caring how the deck is stacked against him.

But good for the tracks if they can get away with charging one class of customer a higher price than another class. They're smart.

[elhelmete]

Good interview with Ken Ramsey, past the 1/2 point he speaks his mind about Keeneland and the takeout issue. Good listen!

http://latalkradio.com/content/horse...hip-experience

Go to August 15 in the archive section

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by elhelmete

Good interview with Ken Ramsey, past the 1/2 point he speaks his mind about Keeneland and the takeout issue. Good listen!

http://latalkradio.com/content/horse...hip-experience

Go to August 15 in the archive section

Thanks for the link....Go to 35:45 of this link for Ramsey's heated and frank comments about the Keeneland takeout issue....Good stuff:

http://latalkradio.com/content/horse...%20#audio_play

[elhelmete]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

Thanks for the link....Go to 35:45 of this link for Ramsey's heated and frank comments about the Keeneland takeout issue....Good stuff:

http://latalkradio.com/content/horse...%20#audio_play

I knew little about Ken before I listened to this, and obviously I was somewhat mistaken in my assumptions about how he might view the Keeneland thing.

I'm glad to be set straight, now I like the guy, and not just for his stance here.