 |
|
03-23-2012, 01:24 PM
|
#1
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 325
|
NYRA Takeout adjustments being made to accounts.
Logged in to my NYRA Rewards account today and found a large chunk of change in there.
Thought it was an error, looked around the net a bit first thought thinking it was the takeout reinbursement and sure enough after a tweet to TLG, he was quick to respond that it was the adjustment.
I didn't want to call NYRA right away, not that I would have kept the money, they know who I am and where to find me.
I also recieved a letter earlier in the week with their privacy policy etc. but no mention of reimbursment of funds. I guess they were just covering their hinds because outsiders were looking at our accounts.
Anyway It was a nice present, but I hope there are no tax ramifications as ther has been no official statement. I know I had a few close ones that probably would push me over the limit.
GL to all getting your $$$$
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 02:03 PM
|
#2
|
|
gelding
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,883
|
Refunded a total of $437,715.
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 03:10 PM
|
#3
|
|
gelding
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,883
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 04:12 PM
|
#4
|
|
C'est Tout
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cajunland
Posts: 13,269
|
Is this only for folks who are in state NY bettors?
__________________
How do I work this?
-David Byrne
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 04:39 PM
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mukwonago, WI
Posts: 3,203
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PhantomOnTour
Is this only for folks who are in state NY bettors?
|
According to the article, only NY account holders.
From the article:
"The vast majority of the takeout overcharges, which were on wagers on NYRA races by non-rewards account members at other racetracks or through advance deposit wagering operators, will never get refunded."
__________________
"I don't always frequent message boards, but when I do, I prefer PaceAdvantage."
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 04:45 PM
|
#6
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 325
|
In all, about $8 million was overcharged. The vast majority of the takeout overcharges, which were on wagers on NYRA races by non-rewards account members at other racetracks or through advance deposit wagering operators, will never get refunded. To try to make amends, NYRA reduced the takeout rate on exotic wagers to 24% from the legally permitted 25%
Thats BS. ADW's can identify their customers.
Let me tell you that added up to alot of money. I was very shocked at the amount in my added to my account. 1% isn't so small after all.
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 05:06 PM
|
#7
|
|
C'est Tout
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cajunland
Posts: 13,269
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wisconsin
According to the article, only NY account holders.
From the article:
"The vast majority of the takeout overcharges, which were on wagers on NYRA races by non-rewards account members at other racetracks or through advance deposit wagering operators, will never get refunded."
|
Sent an email to TwinSpires (my ADW) and asked them what they plan to do...not getting my hopes up but i will pass along whatever they reply to me.
__________________
How do I work this?
-David Byrne
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 05:59 PM
|
#8
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 1,028
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SansuiSC
Thats BS. ADW's can identify their customers.
|
The issue is that it's up to the ADW's to refund the money. NYRA didn't raise signal fees, so they don't have the 8 million. The extra takeout was either taken as profit by the ADW's, or was given back in rebates to the players. Rebated players probably got it all back already, and ADW's aren't going to go digging in their pockets to refund players. NYRA won't, and shouldn't in my opinion, be the one to pay them back, so I doubt anything else will come of it.
I think it's great that they refunded their customers and it was the right thing to do because they benefited from the higher takeout.
__________________
"Support Tracks That Support Players" Some Random Horseplayer-2011
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 08:13 PM
|
#10
|
|
intus habes, quem poscis
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brooklyn NY
Posts: 9,776
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Charli125
I think it's great that they refunded their customers and it was the right thing to do because they benefited from the higher takeout.
|
How? Only way this is possible is if the takeout was too low at the orginal levels.
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 09:09 PM
|
#11
|
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,828
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OTM Al
How? Only way this is possible is if the takeout was too low at the orginal levels.
|
NYRA took an extra one percent. Whether takeout was too low or too high doesn't matter in the short term. They collected more money than they should have.
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 09:22 PM
|
#12
|
|
intus habes, quem poscis
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Brooklyn NY
Posts: 9,776
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cj
NYRA took an extra one percent. Whether takeout was too low or too high doesn't matter in the short term. They collected more money than they should have.
|
No, players faced a takeout higher and received back, on average, less than they should have. However, if takeout was too high, the 1% increase would have resulted in a more than 1% decrease in betting. Thus they collected LESS money than they should have. There was more than a year when the rates were "legal" so you can't use the short term adjustment argument on this either.
The only possible way they collected more than they should have is if the takeout was too low to start with. If we are accepting the "takeout is too high and lowering it helps everyone" argument, then there is no logical way you can say they collected more money than they should have. Otherwise you are saying revenues go up both with increased and decreased takeout, which clearly makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 09:35 PM
|
#13
|
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,828
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OTM Al
No, players faced a takeout higher and received back, on average, less than they should have. However, if takeout was too high, the 1% increase would have resulted in a more than 1% decrease in betting. Thus they collected LESS money than they should have. There was more than a year when the rates were "legal" so you can't use the short term adjustment argument on this either.
The only possible way they collected more than they should have is if the takeout was too low to start with. If we are accepting the "takeout is too high and lowering it helps everyone" argument, then there is no logical way you can say they collected more money than they should have. Otherwise you are saying revenues go up both with increased and decreased takeout, which clearly makes no sense.
|
You lost me here. If Walmart gives back a dollar less change to every customer, the customer gets less and they get more, period. Maybe long term it would hurt Walmart because customers have less to spend, but we don't really know. You are really reaching here. NYRA did the right thing.
|
|
|
|
|
03-23-2012, 09:39 PM
|
#14
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,604
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by FantasticDan
Refunded a total of $437,715.
|
When I first read that, I thought that was just to you. 
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
|
|
|
|
|
03-24-2012, 12:51 AM
|
#15
|
|
gelding
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,883
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
When I first read that, I thought that was just to you. |
Yeah, I thought the same thing after I posted it. I actually went to edit, but then decided to leave it alone since it made me feel good 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
