up for grabs: Monmouth Park and 4 OTW's

[Canarsie]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

I don't know how wise it to bank on something that has had mixed bag of success(to say the least) in other states. NJ has one successful OTW and it is assumed that they will all be as successful.

Favorites in Toms River does quite well just not as much as the Fords operation. For your reading pleasure so you think twice before saying it's only one. The fact that's it's in southern central NJ means it doesn't get the press that the one up north does.

http://blogs.app.com/capitolquickies...e-remain-open/

[Robert Goren]

The NJ OTWs may or may not make money. I think it is folly to count on them to cover the losses of a race track. Their profits (if they have any) should provide a supplement to an already profitable racing operation. That the point I was trying to make. There seems to be an idea that OTWs can more than make up the losses of a race track. I am not sure that there is place where that is happening. The goal should be to make race tracks profitable even if there was no OTWs. I don't see a whole lot people involved in NJ racing wanting to do that. It just seems like they just keep looking for one outside source of revenue after another instead of addressing the problems of NJ race tracks that keep them from being profitable. In fairness to NJ, they are not the only place that is taking that approach.

[The Hawk]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

It just seems like they just keep looking for one outside source of revenue after another instead of addressing the problems of NJ race tracks that keep them from being profitable. In fairness to NJ, they are not the only place that is taking that approach.

They ARE addressing the problem. The problem is that what's keeping them from being profitable is that the five surrounding states all have slots and they don't.

In your world, you think they should be able to overcome that, but it's absolutely impossible for them -- or for any business, for that matter -- to survive long-term in the current situation they're in.

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

The NJ OTWs may or may not make money. I think it is folly to count on them to cover the losses of a race track. Their profits (if they have any) should provide a supplement to an already profitable racing operation. That the point I was trying to make. There seems to be an idea that OTWs can more than make up the losses of a race track. I am not sure that there is place where that is happening. The goal should be to make race tracks profitable even if there was no OTWs. I don't see a whole lot people involved in NJ racing wanting to do that. It just seems like they just keep looking for one outside source of revenue after another instead of addressing the problems of NJ race tracks that keep them from being profitable. In fairness to NJ, they are not the only place that is taking that approach.

According to the numbers I saw the Favorites in Woodbridge made $7m last year. No one knows if any other OTW in NJ can duplicate those numbers, but having no other ones built doesn't help the situation at all either.

[Kelso]

Originally Posted by David-LV

Kelso,

You must be pulling everybody leg, because these posts of yours can't be real.

Only a jokester or the most gullible could believe any of the junk that you are spieling out of your brain.

________
David-LV

Surely you're not sufficiently foolish to think that I should give two damns about your assessment of my opinions. But, just to be sure ... I don't.

[Kelso]

Originally Posted by onefast99

those same people who have had little or no say in the benefits and huge tax breaks Atlantic City Casinos are getting that is hurting NJ taxpayers more than the racing industry ever could .

Your turn, big shot. Cite the proof of your absurd claim.

Show us how many dollars the taxpayers have spent VERSUS HOW MANY TAX DOLLARS THE CASINOS HAVE PAID that has netted out to "hurting NJ taxpayers."

Just because the casinos have turned off the welfare-for-horsemen spigot (and $175+ million still isn't enough to satisfy your greed, is it) doesn't give you the right to lie about them "hurting NJ taxpayers."

If you think they should pay more, write your Assemblyman. But that doesn't mean that what they actually have paid/received to date has been a loss to the taxpayers.

(BTW, what's your preference: The casinos pay a heavier tax ... or they keep the same tax rate they have and continue paying hush money to you and your cronies?)

So prove how they've "HURT" taxpayers ... or stop with the desperate lies already.

Originally Posted by onefast99

To deny that is pure stupidity on your part.

Whether or not I deny it ... and whether or not it is, indeed, "stupid" to do so ... is completely irrelevant.

Of course, that's just what you intended, isn't it? You are simply desperate to change the subject because you know you cannot present a cogent rationale for the state to allow you to get your greedy hooves on other peoples' ... and ultimately taxpayers' ... money.

I'm going to continue returning the discussion to it's root premise, and the reason for all your whining; which is to say ... you can't make enough money (or any at all?) to satisfy you in your own business, so you expect welfare from those businesses and taxpayers who are making enough to take care of themselves. Stop envying other peoples' success and do something profitable ON YOUR OWN. If you can't, then I suggest you get out of racing; learn to live without the owners' box and start paying for track parking and clubhouse admission.

Originally Posted by onefast99

The only way they will not have a large part in the decision is if both tracks are leased out to private individuals and with time slots will make their way into the Meadowlands and Monmouth Park.

Under current provisions of the New Jersey Constitution, and regardless of track ownership, there is absolutely NO way the voters will not have the final say on satisfying your greed. Absent those circumstances in which New Jersey Democrats manage to trade in political favors with the imitation justices on the State Supreme Court, constitutional referenda are unavoidable.

I suggest you have somebody read ... and explain ... the state constitution to you. (And, once again, YOU typed "The NJSEA did have the power to get slots into the racetracks..." That is entirely untrue; so you either lied or ... yet again ... illuminated your colossal ignorance.)

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by The Hawk

They ARE addressing the problem. The problem is that what's keeping them from being profitable is that the five surrounding states all have slots and they don't.

In your world, you think they should be able to overcome that, but it's absolutely impossible for them -- or for any business, for that matter -- to survive long-term in the current situation they're in.

Money from slots only effect the purses and somewhat the abilty to get horses. It does not attract handicappers. Race tracks need to atract handicappers, not slot players. There is one thing I have learned from the NJ racing posts. Horsemen have no idea what will make me(the handicapper) want to bet on a horse race. They haven't even shown any interest to trying to learn that. I and others try to tell you what we want, but all we hear about is slots. All that brings is higher purses for basically the same horses. We are not stupid. We know cheap horses when we see them no matter what kind of purse they run for. I get the feeling that the horsemen would like to get rid of the handicappers entirely and run their races for the money they get from the slot players.

[Kelso]

Originally Posted by Relwob Owner

Based on your posts, I would say that your definition of "dislike" and most others' definition of "hate" is probably about the same.

If true, then I consider that to be "others'" problem. (I'll speculate that they probably deflate the meanings of other weighty words ... such as "hero" ... as well.)

Originally Posted by Relwob Owner

Your "dislike" of horsemen hurts all of your arguments and your general credibility as well IMO. It shows a huge bias coming into any discussion on and colors each one of your arguments, which given your "dislike" of horsemen, will always be weighted against them, will it not?

Please re-read what I wrote. I did not say I dislike horsemen, per se. I said I dislike people who try to put their hands in my pocket. Horsemen who demand higher takeout rates and assorted subsidies (slots/OTBs/etc) do precisely that. But do understand that I dislike them as pick-pockets, not as owners/trainers of race horses. Big difference, no?

Originally Posted by Relwob Owner

The other issue with your blanket "dislike" of horsemen is that you are using an incredibly broad stroke to describe who horsemen are and how they behave.....I know and am familiar with a many of them and your negative view of them is way off in many cases.

Again, see above. I am not painting horsemen with a broad stroke. I am painting welfare mavens, actual and aspiring, with that brush.

I, too, know and like some horsemen. Their hands are all visibly outside of my pockets.

[onefast99]

I suggest you have somebody read ... and explain ... the state constitution to you. (And, once again, YOU typed "The NJSEA did have the power to get slots into the racetracks..." That is entirely untrue; so you either lied or ... yet again ... illuminated your colossal ignorance.)

They have the wherewithall to put the slots at the tracks once the NJ voters have their say. Nothing special about that the NJSEA has taken on many projects. You just like twisting everything to fit your agenda.

[onefast99]

Surely you're not sufficiently foolish to think that I should give two damns about your assessment of my opinions. But, just to be sure ... I don't.

As I said earlier and all on this forum would agree, you are all bark and no bite. Will I see you at Monmouth this summer picketing the track because the horseman are taking "money out of your pocket" that is a good one. Once again all you do is resort to personal attacks on anyone that disagrees with you in every post or thread you are involved in.

[alhattab]

Robert- you wrote: "The NJ OTWs may or may not make money. I think it is folly to count on them to cover the losses of a race track. Their profits (if they have any) should provide a supplement to an already profitable racing operation. That the point I was trying to make. There seems to be an idea that OTWs can more than make up the losses of a race track. I am not sure that there is place where that is happening. The goal should be to make race tracks profitable even if there was no OTWs. I don't see a whole lot people involved in NJ racing wanting to do that. It just seems like they just keep looking for one outside source of revenue after another instead of addressing the problems of NJ race tracks that keep them from being profitable. In fairness to NJ, they are not the only place that is taking that approach."

The first to NJ OTWs built were in Woodbridge (about 25 miles north of Monmouth Park) and Tom's River (about 30 miles south of Monmouth Park). While these OTWs, particularly Woodbridge, drew new handle into the state, they also picked off customers that would have driven to Monmouth Park. In these cases, the revenue shifted to the OTWs top line, but the expenses, most significantly purses, do not shift away from the racetrack. To me, it doesn't make sense to look at the OTWs and racetracks independent of one another. If done right, they are integrated entities. Now, whether Monmouth Park itself needs to react to the new reality by cutting expenses in certain places is a different debate. One could reasonably argue that they must. If the NFL made all of its money purely from TV, would they play in 80,000 seat stadiums?

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

Money from slots only effect the purses and somewhat the abilty to get horses. It does not attract handicappers. Race tracks need to atract handicappers, not slot players. There is one thing I have learned from the NJ racing posts. Horsemen have no idea what will make me(the handicapper) want to bet on a horse race. They haven't even shown any interest to trying to learn that. I and others try to tell you what we want, but all we hear about is slots. All that brings is higher purses for basically the same horses. We are not stupid. We know cheap horses when we see them no matter what kind of purse they run for. I get the feeling that the horsemen would like to get rid of the handicappers entirely and run their races for the money they get from the slot players.

The above was a reaction to a comment that the slots in surrounding states has hurt Monmouth's profitability. Doesn't the attractiveness of purses in PA and Delaware negatively affect the quality of racing and wagering opportunities at Monmouth Park, thus resulting in likely lower top lines? Before slots, Delaware was paying $80k/day and Philly was paying $120k/day, while Monmouth was around $180k/day. Now the whole picture has changed. Philly's purses may cause a horseman to run there during the winter rather than lay up to get ready for the summer, thus reducing the horse inventory for Monmouth's meet. Delaware and Philly both directly compete for horses with Monmouth during the summer, except in August when Philly closes. Before they weren't competing for the same horses. Philly shippers never ran well at Monmouth, and shippers between the tracks were rare. Delaware wasn't even considered. Both factors, among others, are how the slots in nearby states negatively affect Monmouth's ability to provide the type of betting product we want, and thus negatively affects revenue.

It is ironic for me to live near Monmouth Park, but to think the most attractive betting opportunities occur during the winter because there is less competition for horses. How else to explain the quality of racing at Tampa Bay Downs considering relatively paltry purses?

[Robert Goren]

On Tampa Bay which I bet quite a bit. The quality of horses running there is pretty poor. But they do a good job of getting fairly large fields of pretty well matched horses. They are attractive to people like me who bet over the internet. I don't know how much of a cut the track(and the horsemen) get from that, but I suspect it is pretty small. Yesterday at TB, a crowd of 3400 bet about 250k on track, but they got a handle of over 4 million from out of state wagering. The on track numbers stink. The off track numbers aren't to bad, but if they aren't getting much of a cut it doesn't matter. Trying find out those numbers is impossible. I do know that when places like CA or IL try to demand 5 or 6 % for their signal the ADWs get really upset. To me looking at it from a business point of view and not as a better, tracks have get people on site and betting there to be really successful. A on site dollar wagered is worth at least 5 or 6 wagered over the internet or from an out of state simulcast center.

[onefast99]

I've never heard someone suggest all the OTWs would be as successful as Woodbridge. In fact, the other two (Vineland and Tom's River, run by Greenwood/Penn National partnership) I'm sure are not. You cite what is widely considered to be one of the worst managed enterprises in all of racing as why OTWs cannot be successful. I don't know for sure, but I think they do reasoanbly well in Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Illinois and other states.




By not building out the OTW's in NJ it leaves many bettors looking for a place to go, some have ended up at the NY tracks and the few OTB's that remain open and others have headed to Parx and Delaware. The NJSEA had its chance to expand the OTW business model but once it was denied in several NJ towns it seemed as if they stopped trying.
The horse racing industry and related businesses generate over $780m a year in economic activity. There are over 13000 jobs associated with this industry based on this those few who think the horse racing industry will just fold up shop and leave are sadly mistaken. The last 10 years NJ was sleeping when it came to planning for the future of horse racing and gaming in the state, now it rests on the Governor and other elected officials to come up with solutions.

[The_Knight_Sky]

Originally Posted by onefast99

The last 10 years NJ was sleeping when it came to planning
for the future of horse racing and gaming in the state,
now it rests on the Governor and other elected officials to come up with solutions.

Let's just hope it's a series of long-term solutions for the racetracks.
A new business model that works even without the "benefits" of slots in the short-term.

If it isn't....
It will be a death sentence for live racing in New Jersey.

[The Hawk]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

Money from slots only effect the purses and somewhat the abilty to get horses. It does not attract handicappers. Race tracks need to atract handicappers, not slot players.

This is the point, though. Money from slots attracts better horses, which attracts handicappers. That's why they need slots, they're competing with five states for a finite number of decent horses.

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

There is one thing I have learned from the NJ racing posts. Horsemen have no idea what will make me(the handicapper) want to bet on a horse race. They haven't even shown any interest to trying to learn that. I and others try to tell you what we want, but all we hear about is slots. All that brings is higher purses for basically the same horses.

Last year's Monmouth meet featured high-quality racing. You may be talking about the statebred races when you say the same horses, and you'd be right about that. Otherwise, the races drew a lot of horses from the surrounding area, and that's what made for good quality racing.

This area is not like all others. I too like Tampa, but part of the reason they're successful is they don't have to compete for horses.