Cost of entry is too high - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

Versajoe · 07-30-2008, 06:09 PM

As I'm sure is obvious, I'm new to horse racing. I live about two hours from the nearest harness track - and even farther from a thoroughbred track. Needless to say, it only makes sense for me to use ADW.

The biggest problem I've noticed with horse racing is the cost of entry. The industry is really shooting itself in the foot when it comes to enticing new players.

Nobody wants to start big. With an online poker site, you can play for free or for extremely low stakes. Other than your gambling capital, it costs nothing to start playing. If you don't want to learn by playing low stakes games, you can learn by observing other players. There is no fee for this.

Now let's look at horse racing...

No beginner should be betting every race at a track. But the programs... they're going to cost you. If I want to bet $5 for a horse to win in just one or two races, is it really worth $2-$4 for a program. Nope. I suppose I could get an unlimited subscription, but I'd have to make several hundred dollars worth of bets each month for that to make financial sense.

I want to learn. I want to see how my picks worked out. I want to see the race, rather than just infer from a chart. Live video? It's spotty at best, and if you're a low level bettor, it's going to cost you. Hello subscription fees!

Do you want past performance charts? Pay up!

I have no problem with companies making money. The DRF deserves to turn a profit. However, there should be some sort service given to people who are just starting out. EVERY track should offer free video. EVERY track should offer free programs - maybe not with as much content as a full program, but at least enough content to make a somewhat informed bet.

As it stands now, if you want the tools you need, you have to go in full bore. This discourages a lot of casual players that would someday become something more than casual.

The tracks are using a 1970s business model in an internet world.

Compare that to internet poker/casino sites, and you can see why the tracks are struggling.

BW~! · 07-30-2008, 06:30 PM

At twinspires.com you get free PP's if you make a $2 wager. They allow small deposits via Debit/Credit Card. I am a small bettor and I enjoy it. Free video as well.

http://whobet.blogspot.com/ has links to free PP's on the calender at the bottom of the site. You can also use the links on this page http://www.pacefigures.com/freePPs.html. You can almost get the full card for some tracks. But there are plenty of freebies for practice.

Good Luck.

Versajoe · 07-30-2008, 06:49 PM

Unfortunately, Twinspires requires you to bet $50 in the last 5 days (somewhat simplified) to get access to video. I know they are not vigilant about it, but I'm nervous they will start enforcing this.

When tracks started, they were competing at best with state lotteries that took at least 50%.

Now the competition is fierce, with casinos, online poker, etc. I just don't see how tracks have changed their model to reflect this. It seems like the only response is to get slots. If the slots can pay for the races, why can't they pay for video and PPs?

cj's dad · 08-06-2008, 06:47 PM

The program info at the trax has been compiled and printed out, ergo there is a cost involved and the subsequent profit margin is a foregone conclusion.

Now, lets look at Casinos-what type of program would youl like- one that touts the roulette wheel and shows the numbers arrangement and what #'s hit last thursday? or would you like to know what has been the ROI on the $1 slot machine #1605 in the same time frame that you are about to play in?

Respectfully, what you are saying makes no sense. The tracks publish info for your use-take it or leave it. The casinos have no info to publish; they will get their $$ no matter what the circumstances. casinos are mindless gambling to a degree- betting the horses based on available info is not.

Marlin · 08-06-2008, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cj's dad

The program info at the trax has been compiled and printed out, ergo there is a cost involved and the subsequent profit margin is a foregone conclusion.

Now, lets look at Casinos-what type of program would youl like- one that touts the roulette wheel and shows the numbers arrangement and what #'s hit last thursday? or would you like to know what has been the ROI on the $1 slot machine #1605 in the same time frame that you are about to play in?

Respectfully, what you are saying makes no sense. The tracks publish info for your use-take it or leave it. The casinos have no info to publish; they will get their $$ no matter what the circumstances. casinos are mindless gambling to a degree- betting the horses based on available info is not.

Exactly. Who says you have to buy a program to bet a horse? Even the dumbest of the dumb can realize horses have numbers. If you want to get cute and handicap it it will cost you more. Don't forget if you want to play poker online you have to buy a computer and pay for internet service.

alhattab · 08-06-2008, 07:53 PM

I think Versajoe is right. First if distributed electronically cost is much lower. Second if you're playing small the live game is cost prohibitive. You're out $5-$10 for the benefit of playing a stake of say $30-$50? Back in the day you could pick up the paper and it would have selections but even that is moving towards extinction.

If I ran the tracks I would include a "basic" program in the admission cost. Maybe a few lines of pps and career information but that's it. Maybe only career info- sort of a juiced up verson of the old pocket programs. I also would offer free admissions/programs for every $x bet. Of course you'd need tracking devices which are already prevalent but not really with the lower-scale bettors.

We all started playing small and I think ideas to get small players involved so they hopefully turn into big ones are good.

chickenhead · 08-06-2008, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cj's dad

The program info at the trax has been compiled and printed out, ergo there is a cost involved and the subsequent profit margin is a foregone conclusion.

Considering the data is a prerequisite to bet the horses, and considering the tracks make their money from people betting the horses, does it really make any sense at all to charge people for the data? Why not give away the prerequisite, the data and the video, and get it as broadly distributed as possible, so you can make more money on the business generated by it?

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-03/ff_free

Quote:

In its first year, 1903, Gillette sold a total of 51 razors and 168 blades. Over the next two decades, he tried every marketing gimmick he could think of. He put his own face on the package, making him both legendary and, some people believed, fictional.

He sold millions of razors to the Army at a steep discount, hoping the habits soldiers developed at war would carry over to peacetime. He sold razors in bulk to banks so they could give them away with new deposits ("shave and save" campaigns). Razors were bundled with everything from Wrigley's gum to packets of coffee, tea, spices, and marshmallows.

The freebies helped to sell those products, but the tactic helped Gillette even more. By giving away the razors, which were useless by themselves, he was creating demand for disposable blades. A few billion blades later, this business model is now the foundation of entire industries: Give away the cell phone, sell the monthly plan; make the videogame console cheap and sell expensive games; install fancy coffeemakers in offices at no charge so you can sell managers expensive coffee sachets.

Quote:

From the consumer's perspective, though, there is a huge difference between cheap and free. Give a product away and it can go viral. Charge a single cent for it and you're in an entirely different business, one of clawing and scratching for every customer. The psychology of "free" is powerful indeed, as any marketer will tell you.

This difference between cheap and free is what venture capitalist Josh Kopelman calls the "penny gap." People think demand is elastic and that volume falls in a straight line as price rises, but the truth is that zero is one market and any other price is another. In many cases, that's the difference between a great market and none at all.

podonne · 08-07-2008, 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chickenhead

Considering the data is a prerequisite to bet the horses, and considering the tracks make their money from people betting the horses, does it really make any sense at all to charge people for the data? Why not give away the prerequisite, the data and the video, and get it as broadly distributed as possible, so you can make more money on the business generated by it?

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-03/ff_free

Gillette's an easy example whenever the argument it to give away half of a product to get people to buy the other half, and there are countless more examples. But, that's doesn't prove that this would be true at the racetrack.

My guess is, if you went to the track to gamble, you would be willing to spend some small percentage of your expected handle to get some additional information. If this information were free, your handle would increase by only that small percentage, and the track would lose money in the tradeoff. If you go to the track, but don't want to gamble, you aren't going to suddenly want to do so because the information is free.

In other words, there is a certain level of supply and a certain level of demand for the information in a program, and for the average person who goes to the track to gamble, those levels even out at about $5. And to hijack your point, if you aren't there to gamble, you wouldn't pay even a penny for that info.

podonne · 08-07-2008, 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Versajoe

The tracks are using a 1970s business model in an internet world.

Compare that to internet poker/casino sites, and you can see why the tracks are struggling.

Hi Versajoe. I shared your frustration when I started. Best I found was tsn where you can get unlimited current programs for $60 a month.

The thing you have the remember when comparing tracks to casinos is that casinos don't have to distribute "information" to get you to play. Tracks do, and what you may not realize is that in order for the track to get that info to include it in a program, they have to pay... Equibase. I'd be suprised to hear that they make a lot of money on programs, if any at all.

The gathering and processing of information is what makes this game different from the casinos, and information isn't cheap.

chickenhead · 08-07-2008, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by podonne

My guess is, if you went to the track to gamble, you would be willing to spend some small percentage of your expected handle to get some additional information. If this information were free, your handle would increase by only that small percentage, and the track would lose money in the tradeoff. If you go to the track, but don't want to gamble, you aren't going to suddenly want to do so because the information is free.

In other words, there is a certain level of supply and a certain level of demand for the information in a program, and for the average person who goes to the track to gamble, those levels even out at about $5. And to hijack your point, if you aren't there to gamble, you wouldn't pay even a penny for that info.

People who are interested in making money at the races, and playing on paper and trying out different strategies before they wager, are not necessarily going to trip over themselves to pay $1K+ (up to several times that) to get a year or mores worth of data to look at.

I can get all the basic data I want for free when it comes to sports betting, the stock market, etc. At some basic level, when you combine the relatively steep data costs, just for the extremely basic info, with the high takeout, at some level it just becomes completely non-competetive with other things one might be doing. So why even start, there are better, easier, cheaper options.

It's not about increasing my handle, it's about getting the guy who's handle just might go somewhere else instead. There is actually competition out there for that guy.

Free is guaranteed not to be too high a barrier to entry. $1 per track might well be too high. Lack of being able to easily find free video and replays, a barrier to entry. The need for multiple ADW accounts, a barrier to entry. The tax regs, a barrier to entry.

Lots of barriers they've built up around this game.

Gillette is probably an outdated model, Google is much better. They give you just about anything they can think of for free, if they think it will cause people to use Google more, and therefore cause them to make more money, because it drives customers into their wheelhouse, serving ads.

The tracks make their money with their cut of the pools. They should be doing everything they can think of to drive money into the pools. The simple fact is, they don't really know what free data would do for business, because they've never had free data. I don't know to what degree it would help, but it would guarantee it would never be a barrier to entry. Considering all the barriers we know exist, removing a few might seem a pretty good idea, even if you're unsure of the return.

Pace Cap'n · 08-07-2008, 06:50 AM

The tracks have an ownership stake in Equibase.

Robert Fischer · 08-07-2008, 08:30 AM

racing needs to recruit the Virgin, reward the Simulcaster, and assualt the Trackgoer with coupons.

David-LV · 08-07-2008, 11:31 AM

How about that 10 or 12 dollars to park, 6 dollars for a hot dog, 8 dollars for a beer at Del Mar.

Why don't somebody tell them at Del Mar it is not the economy stupid, people are sick and tired getting robbed day in and day out.

________
David

46zilzal · 08-07-2008, 11:33 AM

Woodbine has the right idea: NO admission, Free parking

The old Las Veags move: get hem INSIDE to spend their money

cj · 08-07-2008, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 46zilzal

Woodbine has the right idea: NO admission, Free parking

The old Las Veags move: get hem INSIDE to spend their money

Yes, Woodbine gets you inside then rapes you with their obscene takeouts.