Arnold signs bill to "help" horse-racing industry

[Indulto]

Originally Posted by chickenhead

... Unfortunately, as I don't think anyone knew about this...there was no argument "against" submitted to the Senate. Whether HANA says concerned or outraged here at PA doesn't really matter, getting HANA to a point where they are aware of these things as they are happening, and able to submit formal "Arguments against" when this stuff is in process is where we need to get to.

HANA can now take a position against an incease (and for a decrease), but should they be more proactive considering the national stage the upcoming BC provides?

I'd like, at least once, to get on the record before something happens, rather than always in the position of us hearing about it after the fact.

A frustrating, but familiar situation. Do these circumstances finally warrant formal feedback from the HANA membership?

[chickenhead]

HANA can now take a position against an incease (and for a decrease), but should they be more proactive considering the national stage the upcoming BC provides?

HANA kind of has a longstanding position against any takeout increases, and for takeout decreases, its not a question of taking a position. It's where, and how well they make the case that matters. Submitting formal input to be read in the Senate would have been exactly the type of situation where HANA could put horseplayer concerns on the record in a way that individuals cannot.

Do these circumstances finally warrant formal feedback from the HANA membership?

Are you talking about polling? HANA has wanted polling for a long time, as has been mentioned previously. It doesn't take any external circumstances to warrant them, it takes time and effort to get it done, which I believe have been ongoing for some time. That said, this doesn't have anything to do with polling -- HANA has an email address, anyone, anywhere can and should alert HANA to stuff like this. Our legislative watch program is all of us as members.

[Indulto]

Originally Posted by chickenhead

HANA kind of has a longstanding position against any takeout increases, and for takeout decreases, its not a question of taking a position. It's where, and how well they make the case that matters.

Yes, I'm sorry I wasn't clearer. Does this situation merit taking ACTION of any sort ranging from a petition and/or email campaign, to advertising in the DRF (and requesting donations to finance it), to demonstrating at Santa Anita, to boycotting the BC there. Perhaps a DRF ad could publicize a petition and help recruit members for it. A press release should help that effort as well.

Submitting formal input to be read in the Senate would have been exactly the type of situation where HANA could put horseplayer concerns on the record in a way that individuals cannot.

Whatever happened to NoCalBoy? Wasn't he privy to stuff like this?

Are you talking about polling? HANA has wanted polling for a long time, as has been mentioned previously. It doesn't take any external circumstances to warrant them, it takes time and effort to get it done, which I believe have been ongoing for some time. That said, this doesn't have anything to do with polling -- HANA has an email address, anyone, anywhere can and should alert HANA to stuff like this. Our legislative watch program is all of us as members.

A self-reporting poll like here at PA, but only for HANA members, might be the ideal. But why not send an email to each HANA member requesting a reply stating their preferences in prioritizing a set of actions contemplated by the leadership? A reply containing the original e-mail with the member's target and source e-mail address should enable validation of their ballot agaimst the data base. Perhaps that can be done automatically by some utility. The tally could be reported back by e-mail, at least initially, to make the membership aware of the results.

[chickenhead]

for the first part, my thoughts, yes something should be done. It's meaningful as it's something we don't want, Cali is a high profile arena, and it's probably the easiest arena, for a variety of reasons, for us to make a high profile stink.

Not directly as a response to this tho (at least to me. This appears to be a procedural thing that apparently makes something in some way easier to do, its not an actual doing of it, I'm no lawyer and its hard for me to tell what this actually changed), but as a response when (I'm assuming when) one of the tracks request permission to raise takeouts from the CHRB.

I can't see any reason for the tracks to request this law change unless they intend on requesting a takeout increase -- and yes, as soon as it pops up on the CHRB agenda, I'd like to see the CHRB and the tracks hit with a barrage of form emails. I think that is something we should organize in advance. And I'd certainly like to see some high profile public advocacy going on at that meeting, in person.

I like the idea of a DRF ad, I've always like the idea of DRF ads. I like the idea of TVG commericals too. Not just for this, for all sorts of things. Everyone, send in money. Now. And maybe HANA can begin to think about doing some of these things! They are miles away from being able to do them now, and they don't like to seem like they are begging for money, I think. You want to send HANA money earmarked for ads, send it earmarked for ads, and HANA can run some ads.

[chickenhead]

As to possibly instigate others, I've just donated $200 to HANA, earmarked for ads. If anyone else would care to contribute, with or without earmark, please do so. Money is required for HANA to do the things we want them to do.

http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/donations.html

[NoDayJob]

Originally Posted by Tom

Arnold, in an exclusive interview last night, told horse players, "I'll be baaack!"

What an idiot.

An idiot, ya say? He makes an idiot look like Albert Einstein.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

I have no idea how much these are or how these work but I'm sure this would be effective on BC days.

http://www.advertisingaerial.com/id12.html

Something like....Lower takeout or racing will die.....etc

[Horseplayersbet.com]

There isn't one positive comment made by readers:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano....html#comments

I especially like the one that states that bettors do not have bottomless pits of money.

[andymays]

Santa Anita needs to be turned into a museum with a petting zoo!

[GameTheory]

If what I've read is true, this takes the takeout rate out of the hands of the state lawmakers and back into the hands of the tracks and horsemen. Yes, it allows an increase (which is probably what they want), but isn't that transfer of power what WE want? In most places, takeout can't be lowered without the legislature doing it. Lowered takeout is now at least possible, correct?

So now we just need to make the case that they ought to lower it instead of raise it. Either way, we need to "call it" now -- tell them what's going to happen if they raise it, explain why they should lower it (again). We should be sending references to, or copies of those takeout studies to all the relevant parties -- not just make an announcement, but be stuffing envelopes to be sent by name to the individual people that matter showing them the evidence -- that they will be hurting THEMSELVES with a takeout raise. And if they do raise it, when things start to go badly we should be sending THAT evidence to the rest of the country. HANA should start keeping its own handle statistics.

This could actually be an opportunity, no?

[cj]

Originally Posted by GameTheory

If what I've read is true, this takes the takeout rate out of the hands of the state lawmakers and back into the hands of the tracks and horsemen. Yes, it allows an increase (which is probably what they want), but isn't that transfer of power what WE want? In most places, takeout can't be lowered without the legislature doing it. Lowered takeout is now at least possible, correct?

So now we just need to make the case that they ought to lower it instead of raise it. Either way, we need to "call it" now -- tell them what's going to happen if they raise it, explain why they should lower it (again). We should be sending references to, or copies of those takeout studies to all the relevant parties -- not just make an announcement, but be stuffing envelopes to be sent by name to the individual people that matter showing them the evidence -- that they will be hurting THEMSELVES with a takeout raise. And if they do raise it, when things start to go badly we should be sending THAT evidence to the rest of the country. HANA should start keeping its own handle statistics.

This could actually be an opportunity, no?

I agree, this is exactly what we not only want, but need. That is why I had the qualifier on my boycott statement. I've thought it was ok not to go crazy demanding takeout cuts for now, but any increase should be fought tooth and nail...no more Mr. Nice Guy.

Of course, like most, I expect an increase.

[andymays]

When Horace Greeley told everybody to "go west young man" he didn't know they were going to raise the take. Shove it California!


And if he didn't say that to hell with him too!

[Space Monkey]

If I bet SA today, what is the takeout? The same or has it been raised immediately?

[DJofSD]

Originally Posted by Space Monkey

If I bet SA today, what is the takeout? The same or has it been raised immediately?

Good question and good luck trying to get an answer.

You purchase equities via a broker, you know up-front what the commision will be. When you make a bet at a racetrack, do you know what the vig is? Do you know where to find it? Is is published anywhere at your local OTB palor, on the web site for your ADW company of choice?

[BMeadow]

Apparently these "legislative analysts" assumed a $4 billion annual handle on California racetracks, then multiplied it by 5% to come up with the $200 million figure. This sounded good to legislators, particularly those without any knowledge of mathematics or finance.

Handle in California has fallen precipitously in the past couple of years, and this new bill is only going to make it worse. This increase figures to send many players to other tracks, to offshore bookmakers who offer rebates, or out of the game altogether.

When you have a business that's in trouble, you don't raise prices. If General Motors charges $1 million for each new car it sells, and it sells the same number of cars as last year, I guess that would be great. But at that price, it wouldn't sell any cars.

And that's where horse racing is headed. By the logic of this bill, an increase to a takeout of 95% would raise an additional $3.8 billion for the industry. Except that no one would be betting at all.

But I guess it's to be expected when not a single horseplayer was called to testify about the bill, and the first time any of us were notified was when the thing was already signed. I suppose we're just a bunch of degenerate idiots, anyway. Geez, I wish I was as smart as a legislator.

Nice headline, by the way. Maybe the next time there's a murder the headline writer can write, "Overpopulation Problem Reduced."