I'm well aware of the drudge of hcaps, but for a group 1 I'm sure it was rather disappointing for outsiders to our sport. There is a problem when the top echelon of showcase races does not deliver the competition to match the prize. Sure, I can find an angle, but what was the pleasure for others?

In today's RP Howard Wright complains that the pessimists are crowding out the optimists and judging by the crowds attending at the weekend and comparing with other sports, things are not as bad as they might seem.

I'm all for looking on the bright side, but increased attendances do not correlate with the amount bet on horseracing and this is in gradual decline as the Horsemen's Group own figures show. The decline is explained by the growing attraction of other sports as a betting medium which in turn is driven by bookmakers who recognise that it is their interests to push other non-levy attracting sports and to low cost, low risk machines.

Also, in the RP, Victor Chandler is quoted as saying that he would pay the levy if only betting exchanges paid levy on all bets laid including bets laid by customers. VC is not a fool and he knows that would kill exchanges so it is not likely to happen and therefore bookmakers can, in the meantime, seemingly occupy the moral high ground.

Racing has to get control over the betting pound spent on horses. This is THE strategic imperative , apparent for 50 years, and only ineptitude on the part of the racing industry has prevented this from happening. There is the slight possibility that the EU will look on the levy as an industry subsidy and therefore against EU law. The BHB/BHA seems to think this is unlikely but in my eyes it would force the issue if the EU took that view.

The future of the racing industry depends on well the individual elements with racing understand the key issue which is that their future depends on them at minimum retaining and at best improving their share of the gambling pound. They are competing against other sports and other gambling products in a fight to the death.

The racing product may have to undergo some modernisation but this is as nothing compared to the need for the people involved to understand what business they are actually in, to establish direct communication with the public and to control the channel by which revenue is raised through gambling.

The racing industry is dominated by the vested interests of those represented by the Horsemens Group (trainers, breeders, owners) and the courses.They are brainwashed into believing that the furtherance of the breed is the over-riding aim. This may have been vital 100 years ago but it is no longer necessary to have this as the dominant objective.

They are all blinkered as far as what needs to be done is concerned. Raise prize-money levels, they are too low. How to do that? Raise more money from those ****** bookmakers and the problem will be solved. That's it. That;'s as far their strategic vision stretches. I've had contact with these groups in another life. They are intelligent individuals but the racing world for most of them is as all they see. They have no understanding whatsoever of the real business that they are in and the simplistic marketing advice that they get doesn't help them to see things differently.

A leader of vision is required. They say that cometh the hour cometh the man. Well, where is he?

Thanks askari1 for the thought, but whilst I may be able to read the tea-leaves as well as anyone, I think it will take someone else to make the cuppa!

Decent thread this......though I m not a fan of the nags myself

Sandown, just out of interest, do you post on the interactive investor site? I have shares in what is now Timeweave, who are one half of the JV that owns Turftv, i used to work for them. The BB tagged to Timeweave makes very interesting reading, a lot of it echoes what you are saying....

Or even betting on a football game or a tennis match. The timescale on a race is just right to enjoy the thrill of the event and the bet

Really found your posts thought provoking on this thread Sandown, so the fact I've chosen one line to disagree with shouldn't be taken as me deliberately being an arse!

It had already occured to me earlier, that possibly the timescale of a race is just WRONG for a bet.

If you're an adreneline addict who needs it over with then you have FOBTs etc where you can spin a ball every few seconds, then another and so on.

If however you want to have a tenner on something you can sit back and enjoy with your favourite drink in the bar then soccer/tennis/etc mean you get a "run for your money"

With racing falling between the two, I did wonder if it might be a small part (Certainly don't think it's a major issue, which is why I didnt mention it) of the cumulative effect of why younger people bet less on horses.


Just a genuine uninformed query to go with your previous post too.. When they have the pop gig type days, do they change the racing accordingly?

For instance, there seems no need to have a group one race on a day where the target is just to get newer punters at the course. It would be a real shame if those who stay away due to such things are missing the cream of the racing that would be wasted on the newer punters who wouldn't really be able to spot the difference.

As to watching real flesh and blood as opposed to virtual, even as someone who's left the game I have to agree with you there. However I can see why we're in the minority a lot of the time.

Finally, just as another point that will depress you, but it's only intended as an observation not a put-down, when I used to go to racing of both kinds, I prefered the dogs.
Watching horses race is definitely more magnificent, I'm entirely in agreement with that, however you can sit and have a meal at the dogs and see the whole race. You know which dog is which as the colours never change, that kind of stuff, while still getting the hustle and bustle of the betting ring. (Remember I'm many years out of date here)

A trip to the horses (and I was lucky enough to have a finishing line box at one of the guineas events a few years ago. Despite my natural skepticism, I made sure to appreciate it) still seems like a quite a lot of a hassle trying to spot what's going on for just a moment of brilliance as they flash past you.

joshua tree
No, its not me but pleased to hear someone else has similar views!

aussieinUK
You know what Cheltenham in March and Royal Ascot is like. I should think that those meetings compare well with anywhere in the world. Mind you I was at a Sandown eveing meeting a few weeks back, the weather was glorious, the course looked perfect, it was comfortable without being overcrowed and it was delightful.Magic.

Lori
Well, I have to disagree. You get 6 runs for your money in a meeting. If its not too crowded there is just the right time in between races to visit the paddock, get your bet on, watch the race  and then get a drink or something to eat before the next race. A perfect formula which has worked well for 200 years. Go on Lori, get yourself to the races again and see what you are missing

Zola's Back Heel
You are right about the learning curve and there is no amount of history to get nostalgic about. I tenr to remember years according to who won that years Derby, Arc or Champion Hurdle. Pleasure builds. You get to read horse's body language and conformation which is rewarding. You can make comparisons with the greats that you have seen in the past. Trips to the Arc for the weekend (I have been enough times to forget how many) with my family and friends have been near perfect (most of the time). The Glorious Goodwood week was a must for many, many years whilst the children were gowing up. Beach holiday, good seafood and Goodwood. Memories.This is why I believe that age is a virtue when it comes to racing and why enjoyment (despite the niggling complaints about price, food etc sometimes)increases with age. Some things definately get better with age!

Lori

You know I've long thought that racing is missing a trick and not taking advantage of its many enthusiasts who know a lot about the game and who could enhance the experience for other racegoers. How much would it cost to recruit a number of people for each course who could take  as mall group and show them the ropes, what to look for with the horses, how to bet, what to bet, where the best advantage points are etc. Very little I should think. A lot of "oldies" would do it for nothing if say they got in for nothing as well.It seems to me that you haven't been given a good enough introduction yourself and you have just missed out on the best bits. You can never know enough you know

In reply to your earler questions, no they don't put on the bands with top class racing unless you can call the bandstand singsong at R.Ascot that. More like improvised "Last Night of the Proms!"

Lori
Is boosting attendance at meetings the most important thing? That might sound a really dumb question, but it's not immediately obvious to someone out of touch such as myself.

As I've said, increasing attendances doen't necessarily correlate with increased betting on horses (and increased levy)but if you start with triallists/newbies who have higher proepsects of becoming horseracing enthusiasts then it can help in the longrun. Bare attendance figures hide the profile of where the increase is coming from. I just can't believe that youngsters who go for the bands will throw up (although literally they will!) longterm enthusiasts in great numbers i.e become converts.

The Tote has to be acquired, the pool takeout has to be reduced by at least half to say 15% in order to compete, a lottery type bet needs to be developed,and it needs to be aggressively marketed and managed. Racing could then play hardball and refuse to allow bookmakers/exchanges to bet on horses! Impossible to legislate? Don't know - if the case is made hard enough the Govt might buy it. That would give racing a fighting chance alright.

Simon Bazalgette, top man at the Jockey Club (and boss of Peter Fisher, the undercover reporter head of racecourses) was quoted in today's Times as saying that the levy system "was not fit for purpose" (the to-go-to phrase currently) and that levy income for 2011 is set for another drastic fall.This follows Wednesday's meeting by independent bookmakers who are looking for a rise in the levy threshold for small shops which would cut the levy by an estimated £8m. Goodness knows what the current estimate for 2011 is now- its falling like a stone through water.

According to the Balzalgette interview, the cuts will not be felt so harshly at the top end "the worst place to cut prize money". So, just as we have to wait until October to see where the Governmnets axe will fall, so we have to wait until the autumn for the detail on where the cuts will fall in racing.

Not so much the Sport of Kings, more the Sport of Paupers!

The firm was unable to confirm what impact if any the move to Dublin would have on its levy payments.

Betfair drill another screw into the coffin that is racing's finaces.

Probably this:

http://www.thoroughbrednews.com.au/international/default.aspx?id=48098

Late to this and I may well be missing something.

But I can't see where the crisis is, except in the eyes of the ROA or whatever they call themselves now.

Total races have gone up nearly 50% in the last 10 years, 2100 in 2001 to 3100 in 2009.

Racehorse population is difficult to gauge but given that the average number of runners per race has only recently dropped, it is holding up quite well.

Courses are seeing very high attendances. OK, many of the people coming are as interested in the pop acts as the racing, but their money is still flowing in to the racecourse tills.

So where's the problem?

The ROA rambles on about the return to owners, which is indeed very low in this country. But if the population of horses in training is not declining, it is clear that the likely return is not an issue for most owners.

If the numbers of horses does decline, the number of races can be reduced.

So what is the crisis?

Mr  Harry  Findlay  was on ATR  this morning   and  what he  said  was  spot  on   Now if you clowns  at the BHB   and  the   Jockey  Club  Aint seen  it    you should  go out of your  way to get  a  copy  ..  in a nut shell  he said  dump the  bookies ..  and  listern to your  core  business    the  paying  public .

SOME 50 independent bookmakers, joined by representatives from SIS, TurfTV and Racing For Change, gathered on Wednesday at Wolverhampton racecourse for what was described by Joe Phillips, vice-chairman of the Independent Bookmakers' Association, as an "emergency meeting not to issue threats, but to try to find a way just to survive".

The meeting was billed as a discussion about whether independent bookmaking could survive and as a forum for the IBA's members to tell picture suppliers SIS and TurfTV, as well as representatives of racing, about the desperation among the smaller firms.

Phillips called on SIS to go back to its board and review a recent cost increase. He said: "This extra £500 charge contributes nothing, but adds to our losses. It is ‘give us £500 but nothing changes'. Both SIS and TurfTV need to give serious thought to working together; how do we all go forward?

"It's time the independent market said enough's enough, we're second-class citizens, but trying to compete with Hills and Ladbrokes is like chalkand cheese. What are SIS and Turf TV going to do about it, about us, their customers?"

This was a broad-based gathering of bookmakers with key figures from the Association of British Bookmakers - Will Roseff, chairman of the Bookmakers' Committee, and council member Howard Chisholm - also sitting at the head of the room.

Roseff said: "The Bookmakers' Committee, to assist this small end of the market, has recommended raising the levy payment threshold [levy-free income]. We estimate the levy would go down by £8.5 million, half of the extra that racing has earned [from the arrival of TurfTV] - although that is only a quarter of the imposition on bookmakers because of costs and dividends to Alphameric/Timeweave."

Chisholm, a leading north-east independent, said: "If British horseracing failed tomorrow and was no more, we'd make more money.

"The industry is moving on and it's good we're moving away from depending on horseracing. They [racing] don't know how to run their own business, but they can certainly screw up ours.

"Racing doesn't want small bookmakers operating with the levy threshold, they'd prefer those shops to close and the business to go to big companies paying a full ten per cent levy."

That was denied by Racing For Change's development director Nigel Roddis, who interrupted to say: "This is nonsense. Of course racing wants independent bookmaking to survive."

Standing laterto address the meeting, Roddis said he was not going to apologise for racing getting the best price for its product, but talked of the efforts being made to make racing more interesting and his belief that more lunchtime racing was worth considering.

Dominic Ford, MD of Roar, said: "In 2010 the idea of an above-inflation SIS increase is madness. Can SIS be more efficient? What about, for example, the costs of Fantastic League [virtual football] - I haven't taken a bet on it. I closed a shop last week - that is £18k less for SIS. I've seen research that there will be 6,000 shops compared to 8,500 - will that mean a 33 per cent increase in costs?"

SIS head of customer relations Brent Dolan and Adrian Ford, MD of TurfTV, also addressed the meeting.

Dolan said: "The majority of our costs involve media rights, there has been a staff pay freeze for two years and we're not recruiting."

He said SIS is introducing an integrated football service this season and the launch of sis.com will offer a fully integrated audio service.

"Five hundred bookmakers have signed up, it will be free, and will cost us three-quarters of a million, but we will take on board everything that has been said."

Ford explained that TurfTV arrived because of the bookmaker shareholding in SIS, and said firmly that "we're not going away". He said there had been no decision made on any price increase for 2011 and seemed to hint it would be avoided if possible.

Imv the people running horse racing do not consider seriously enough the poss. that the levy will come to seem untenable in the light of racing's declining share of the betting pound. Formula 1 is not part-funded out of bm' s winnings on taking bets on it; why shd racing be any diff.?

Alternatives to a levy in profits wd only tend to make the prices on racing uncompetitive in relation to other sports (largely through encouraging bf to take a greater cut in transaction fees or commission).

Racing needs to become more popular, and will only be able to do so through its showcase events like Royal Ascot and Cheltenham. The present set-up has the strong underwriting the weak, with less and less money to go round. So I am w/ Sandown on having some sort of correlation between turnover on specific events and funding contribution from bookmakers.

Incidentally, I agree w/ Lori that the balance of analysis time / time watching the event in horse racing is only good for punters that have made a commitment to winning. For recreational punters, something like football is far more diverting. For myself, ideally I wd want events to be over instantaneously (tho' obviously watching horse races on numerous occasions provides inputs for future selections....)

It is and remains an existential problem - and one that will only be solved when it is seen as such.

REM

Make sure you increase stakes, so that if you lose, you can smile and think what a worthy cause you have contributed to

And what about the Tote?  It's the fourth biggest? High Street presence yet it enjoys a competitive advantage over it's main rivals that it hopelessly fails to utilise.