Pricci Does It Again

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Great article:
http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog...cing/#comments

Interestingly, he put some blame on Richard Shapiro who corrects Pricci on a few issues. For example, it was the TOC who lobbied to get the takeout increase legislation to move forward.

A couple of quotes from the article:

...a price reduction and additional low-cost wagering products are the only things that can save the racing as a wagering option in the long term.

“It seems like just yesterday when maybe 5% of Horseplayers complained about the surface. Now it’s about 70%. I’m no David Axelrod or Carl Rove, but a 30% approval rating for synthetic surfaces in areas with good weather is pretty low.

“But then again maybe horseplayers are just stupid. Who cares about what they think anyway? They’re only customers, right? Stick with Pro Ride and raise the take 5% California. That’s a parlay for the ages!

[andymays]

Where does it claim Shapiro had anything to do with the potential raise in take?

[andymays]

Originally Posted by andymays

Where does it claim Shapiro had anything to do with the potential raise in take?

This was my response to Richard Shapiro along with more comments underneath the Pricci article.

I can’t see where John said Mr. Shapiro had anything to do with the increase in takeout.

Since I’m the one he is citing from an email I will take responsibility for not knowing Mr. Shapiro is no longer with the Alliance.

Mr. Shapiro in my book you are the poster child for the bad leadership in California. And as to the point whether or not you still have influence I would point to the CHRB allowing you to still attend live racing in California. It is a “no brainer” suspension in lite of your vandalism of a car in the Hollywood Park parking lot earlier in the year. If a Horseplayer did that what would have happened? Do you think the Horseplayer would have been banned from the Track? No kidding. The truth is you have buddies in high places in California racing looking out for you. It would be nice if Horseplayers had someone looking out for them.

In early 2008 Santa Anita was having trouble with the surface and in the middle of the card the Jockeys refused to ride. After a delay Santa Anita management decided to dig up the track and continue racing. The track that day was a speed favoring track to say the least and after they dug it up it was a dead closers track. Those of us that had bets in action that day like the P’3’s feel cheated to this day. The proper thing to do was to cancel the card or refund the bets and protect the bettors with bets in action. Did the CHRB do anything? Hell no. The remedy should have been to fine Santa Anita 100k and put it in a P-4 pool the next week. If you wonder why I’m on a mission that’s one example.

The example above in one example in a long list where the CHRB and the Racing Executives and Racing Officials threw the Horsplayers under the bus. It is one example and one reason why I am one pissed off Horesplayer. The Leadership of California Racing led us here but they reserve the right to go to the Horseplayers and raise the take to help them get out of the mess. No Thanks!

[andymays]

The title of the Pricci article is: Higher Takeout Can Terminate California Racing

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog...fornia-racing/


Now I know the article just went up and I could care less about anyone defending me in this dust up. From where I see it this is a signature issue for HANA and there should be hundreds of comments from members screaming at the top of their lungs about takeout in California and everywhere else.

Talking about it over and over again but doing nothing is weak.

Have at it guys and step up! On this one I can guarantee you some big wigs are looking at the comments underneath the article.

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog...fornia-racing/

[andymays]

There are some awesome comments underneath the article. Here is an excerpt from one of them. It’s worth reading the whole thing.

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog...fornia-racing/

Excerpt:

1. Jerry Jam says:
21 Nov 2009 at 04:03 pm | #

Richard (The Key Man) Shapiro’s statement that there was NO OPPOSITION to polycrap tracks coming to CA is true because HE NEVER LISTENED TO ANYONE OTHER THAN CRAIG FRAVEL AND RON CHARLES!!!


Shapiro, as a favor to the DEATH MAR TURF CLUB (FRAVEL AND JOE HARPER), pushed HARD for the CHRB mandate so that ALL CA TAXPAYERS would be forced to provide a FREE POLYCRAP TRACK TO DEATH MAR, since the state owns to racetrack property and DEATH MAR’S LEASE WAS SOON EXPIRING. Who knows how much “HAY” Shapiro and others might have received thanks to their CHRB Mandate from the parties involved????


Now, add in Florez and the State’s $144,000,000 YEARLY GIFT TO CA HORSERACING IN THE WAY OF A LICENSE FEE WAIVER. Why didn’t SHAPIRO and the CHRB seek to require that this money (BILLIONS OF $$) be used to promote CA horseracing and make much needed capital improvements at the racetracks? The answer to this question is that former CHRB Chairman Shapiro was too busy eating free food in the various director’s rooms and trying to get a job working for the racetracks, which he eventually did!!


Fortuntately, for the benefit of CA horseracing he made YET ANOTHER BAD DECISION AND KEYED MY CAR.


http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog...fornia-racing/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[DeanT]

A good comment here that is getting lost in the yelling and name calling:

TOC policies have resulted in horseplayers doing one thing: Betting Less.

They have been masters in that regard. Price sensitive horseplayers in most states have the option to sign up with an ADW that provides some form of rebate. Horseplayers in California do not have this option, thanks to the California ADW law that limits ADW compensation.

Now this is precisely what Pope and others (TOC) have long argued for, if only the tracks and horsemen got to keep more of the money, all would be well.

Is all well in Cali? Are the tracks providing rebates to California customers, since they’ve made it impossible for any of the ADWs to do so? They have exactly the law in Cali that has long been promised would fix everything. Is everything going great for them?

Of course not! Nothing is well in Cali racing.

They are now thinking maybe they need to raise takeout rates. Of course, because keeping rates high on the players has worked so well. Right?

The ONLY question, is how small does this game need to get before you guys figure out you need to start growing it?

In any business—you either give the customers what they want, or you go out of business. This ain’t a magical business, it works just like all the others.

[andymays]

Originally Posted by DeanT

A good comment here that is getting lost in the yelling and name calling:

That goes without saying. The comments are a voice of reason and appear to be written by someone who knows what they're talking about.

Any guesses?

[Indulto]

Originally Posted by andymays

That goes without saying. The comments are a voice of reason and appear to be written by someone who knows what they're talking about.

Any guesses?

Sure sounds like our own poster, rrbauer.

Congratulations, AM, on being recognized beyond this board for having something worthwhile to say. And by a HANA advisory board member, no less! Maybe respect is something that trickles down. The next step is an interview with Ms. Forney.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Ca college students know how to get heard- take over as building! I suggest it not be at a track on the last day of the meet- interest lost fast!

Originally Posted by andymays

The title of the Pricci article is: Higher Takeout Can Terminate California Racing

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog...fornia-racing/


Now I know the article just went up and I could care less about anyone defending me in this dust up. From where I see it this is a signature issue for HANA and there should be hundreds of comments from members screaming at the top of their lungs about takeout in California and everywhere else.

Talking about it over and over again but doing nothing is weak.

Have at it guys and step up! On this one I can guarantee you some big wigs are looking at the comments underneath the article.

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog...fornia-racing/

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Indulto

Sure sounds like our own poster, rrbauer.

Congratulations, AM, on being recognized beyond this board for having something worthwhile to say. And by a HANA advisory board member, no less! Maybe respect is something that trickles down. The next step is an interview with Ms. Forney.

My agent emailed me with a bunch of offers.

Larry King is a big Horseplayer and he's hounding me to come on the show!

[andymays]

This was sent to me yesterday and the only thing I changed was to delete the persons name and the first couple of words of the last sentence. It is another example of someone making a great point. Not sure why the person did't post it themeselves but it probably has to do with the uncivilized nature of the debate so far.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Takeout and handle are linked... an elastic relationship exists between the two.

Set takeout at 100% and handle very quickly becomes $0.00... producing $0.00 for tracks, purses, and state coffers.

Set takeout at 0% and handle will soar... again producing $0.00 for tracks, purses, and state coffers.

Somewhere between 100% and 0% is the optimal price point for takeout... the point at which takeout drives handle to produce max revenue for tracks, purses, and state coffers.

Every economic study produced over the past 15 years suggests that the true optimal price point for takeout is a lot closer to 10% than the 22% blended takeout that tracks and horsemen keep forcing upon us.

One of HANA's core beliefs is that racing takeout should be set as close to the optimal price point as possible... the goal being to produce max revenue for tracks, purses, and state coffers... which in turn results in a healthy prospering industry.

The real question becomes one of "Why would leadership of the TOC seek to do the exact opposite of that?"

HANA was formed because it's obvious that a lot of the problems in racing are self inflicted... falling handles and revenue from mismanagement of takeout being a prime example.

[andymays]

Originally Posted by DeanT

A good comment here that is getting lost in the yelling and name calling:

Dean, I thought about your comments regarding the uncivilized nature of the comments made by some (maybe me) in the article and under the article (maybe me). The words by Jerry Jam were pretty raw as well but in his case he's been screaming from the top of his lungs for over a decade about the problems in California. I have to tell you I laughed so hard my side still hurts after I read his comments because you have to know the history of his relationship with Shapiro and others in California. He has been treated unfairly by quite a few characters there including Richard Shapiro and has fought back with everything he had including filing and winning several lawsuits against the CHRB. All anyone would have had to do was listen in on a couple of CHRB meetings where Jerry spoke and people would see that it is some on the Board of the CHRB that are "out of touch" to say the least. Time has proven that Jerry has been right on a awful lot of issues including his opinion of Richard Shapiro.

On a related point maybe part of the problem is that the people who know the most on the subject like HANA leadership (And I'm not being facetious) take a path that may be too civilized when it comes to certain issues like takeout. As you pointed out the comments by RB underneath the Pricci article were outstanding but in today's world what gets attention is not only the truth but the truth in an interesting and edgy way and yes sometimes an uncivilized way. Scientific Journals are full of truthfull and important information but they never become best sellers. The point being that if you want to fire up a membership and attract new ones you have to get your message out in a more interesting and sometimes uncivilized way in my opinion.

Anyway, I took my shot and had some fun doing it yesterday although I know some were not thrilled with the piece and the comments. I kind of laughed when I saw Horseplayersbet had started a thread about it and put some of my words in the thread starter. He obviously didn't read it too carefully and he probably wouldn't have posted it if he knew those were my comments in the article. Maybe I'm wrong.

Live Long and Prosper Horseplayers. God knows you deserve it!

[rwwupl]

In the interest of “subject Drift”, Take out and Ca.Bill S/B 517 was referenced in the above article. The provisions are clear and allows for the Associations to set their own price for take out, higher or lower.

I want racing to return to dirt,clean up the drug policy and have a central authority,and make racing more fan friendly too . I want the leaders of this game to listen to its customers, which they have a tradition of ignoreing.

The subject of take out is now in the lap of the Association leaders(Santa Anita, Hollywood,Del Mar,Fairplex etc.) and the CHRB., not the State or its Government Organization Committee, currently headed by Dean Florez. The Associations can not blame the State for their business troubles from over pricing their product.

Business conditions demand that the price of the product be lowered.

They must lower the price to revive the game or possibly be replaced for poor management.

Here is a summary of the bill text:


The bill: S/B 517

1. Authorizes a thoroughbred association or fair to file a
written notice with CHRB to alter the amount deducted
(the takeout) from the total amount wagered (the handle)
on horse races.

2. Maintains the existing statutory requirement that any
adjustment to the takeout shall be approved by CHRB.

3. Maintains the existing statutory limit that the takeout
shall not be less than 10 percent or more than 25
percent of the handle.
4. Requires the written notice filed by a thoroughbred
association or fair to include the written agreement of
the thoroughbred association or fair and the
organization representing the horsemen. This
requirement replaces the provision in existing law which 4

specifies that a request to alter the takeout shall be
“a joint request” of the thoroughbred association or
fair and the horsemen’s organization.

5. Maintains the existing statutory requirement that any
adjustment to the takeout shall be approved by CHRB.

6. Provides a notice shall be filed with the CHRB to modify
or redirect a distribution and shall be accompanied by a
report detailing all receipts and expenditures over the
two prior fiscal years of the funds and accounts
proposed to be affected by the notice.

7. States if the proposed distribution modification or
reduction increases or would increase the financial
burden of any organization or entity, the consent of
that organization or entity shall also be obtained, as
described.

8. Provides that the initial approval of a distribution
modification or redirection shall be limited to a
one-year period. A prior approval may be extended upon
consent of each organization and entity that gave its
consent for the initial distribution modification or
redirection for the subsequent year contingent upon
receipt of a financial report and a determination by the
CHRB that the extension is in the economic interest of
Thoroughbred racing.

9. States that a Thoroughbred association or fair whose
written notice for a percentage deduction which was
approved by the CHRB shall provide subsequent quarterly
reports of receipts and expenditures of the affected
funds if requested by the CHRB.

10. Provides that fiscal reports must be provided to the
CHRB and the respective fiscal committees and Committees
on Governmental Organization of the Senate and the
Assembly, which accounts for all receipts and
expenditures in any of the affected funds, as specified.

rwwupl

[andymays]

Good Stuff RWWUPL!

[andymays]

On the subject of takeout Roger Stein reported on his radio show that of the 25 million Betfair added to the handle for the Breeders’ Cup, Santa Anita received only 100k. It did improve the handle a little though.

He also takes a little shot at the CHRB.

He also takes a big shot at TVG and an even bigger shot at Betfair and the biggest shot at Todd Schrupp. He's a little uncivilized and calls Todd Schrupp "Todd T. Shmuck"!

http://www.rogerstein.com/radio/archive2.asp


Archived shows come up about an hour after the show or about 10:00 am PST.