There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
It's been a long time since I posted due to falling out of love for the game and having stood back and seeing racing going into self destruct mode, I thought I'd post my thoughts on the real underlying factors imo.....
In these hard commercial times it all comes back to generating more revenue and profit. The "old model" so to speak where essentially racing was a minority sport despite it being the second most watched sport (through sheer volume of races/meetings) it attracted the purist who understood the game. With betting turnover going south, thus the levy going further south, the bookmakers/exchanges have diversified and no longer rely on horse racing as their main source of revenue, so they become immune to the problem.
Therefore, there is not so much money sloshing about so the courses primarily have to look at different ways of generating revenue. Their number one target is the general public - who would be their ideal customer? The racing purist who spends the majority of his daily dispensable income when he/she goes to the races with the bookmakers and has the odd pint/coffee/pie or the person who is there on a social and is willing to knock back 8 pints and eat well. Obviously it's the latter and then add to the mix the corporate parties and they smell the turnover! You've only got to go racing at the weekend or a big midweek meeting and play "dodge the hen/stag party" and listen to the corporate suits who know nothing about the game (as a general rule) Add in themed meetings, Shergar Cup etc and it's obvious who the courses want to attract.
So what is the main thing that puts off Joe Public - does the whip spring to mind ?? Yes we purists understand it, but as we are told it puts a large percentage of people off. So.....if the perception can be changed, the courses find it easier to market the product and attract more of the type of people they are targeting.
Remember the days of snooker and darts where the players swilled lager - not a good public image so it went, along with tobacco advertising and other sports were "cleaned up" to attract a bigger audience - do you see the comparison?
The people that are suffering in this debacle are the purists who understand it, the owners who fund a lot of the sport - but it's the good old ££££ that is driving this imo.
My views on the rules - the penalties don't fit the crime, maybe the rules needed looking at but at the end of the day there is no such thing as bad publicity - if those who were thinking of going racing but were put off due to the whip, seeing things happen - job done!
In these hard commercial times it all comes back to generating more revenue and profit. The "old model" so to speak where essentially racing was a minority sport despite it being the second most watched sport (through sheer volume of races/meetings) it attracted the purist who understood the game. With betting turnover going south, thus the levy going further south, the bookmakers/exchanges have diversified and no longer rely on horse racing as their main source of revenue, so they become immune to the problem.
Therefore, there is not so much money sloshing about so the courses primarily have to look at different ways of generating revenue. Their number one target is the general public - who would be their ideal customer? The racing purist who spends the majority of his daily dispensable income when he/she goes to the races with the bookmakers and has the odd pint/coffee/pie or the person who is there on a social and is willing to knock back 8 pints and eat well. Obviously it's the latter and then add to the mix the corporate parties and they smell the turnover! You've only got to go racing at the weekend or a big midweek meeting and play "dodge the hen/stag party" and listen to the corporate suits who know nothing about the game (as a general rule) Add in themed meetings, Shergar Cup etc and it's obvious who the courses want to attract.
So what is the main thing that puts off Joe Public - does the whip spring to mind ?? Yes we purists understand it, but as we are told it puts a large percentage of people off. So.....if the perception can be changed, the courses find it easier to market the product and attract more of the type of people they are targeting.
Remember the days of snooker and darts where the players swilled lager - not a good public image so it went, along with tobacco advertising and other sports were "cleaned up" to attract a bigger audience - do you see the comparison?
The people that are suffering in this debacle are the purists who understand it, the owners who fund a lot of the sport - but it's the good old ££££ that is driving this imo.
My views on the rules - the penalties don't fit the crime, maybe the rules needed looking at but at the end of the day there is no such thing as bad publicity - if those who were thinking of going racing but were put off due to the whip, seeing things happen - job done!
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 14
|
By:
Not disagreeing with you Balders but can anyone explain that bookings for next years Grand National are supposedly way up on this years considering the race got quite a lot of bad publicity.
|
|
By:
Tend to agree with Balders.
Why else would you have a Head of Communications/Public Relations person in the form of Paul Struthers as part of your Whip Review Commission? Unless of course he brought a wealth of scientific or equine expertise to the debate. |
|
By:
Good marketing imo - people are not going for the racing, they are going for the "social occasion". Maybe there isn't a problem with perception, more likely the courses/BHA think there is and are using it to try and attract a bigger audience ;-)
|
|
By:
Though I tend to think his contribution was limited to "Well, how do you think these changes will sit with the general public, Paul?"
|
|
By:
A cynical but rather true post from the OP.
I would go further though, i think they know there isn't a problem with the perception... |
|
By:
If all the energy and effort which has been wasted on the whip issue had been put into explaining the need for the whip and its effect on horses racing would be in a much better light today.
|
|
By:
Exactement Arklearkle. I think though that the BHA has bowed down,for whatever reason,to the demands of the R.S.P.C.A.
and has fabricated this 'public perception'(dogmatic),nonsense as a way of justifying the rules to those involved in the game. |
|
By:
arkle, most festival meetings attract 10 times attendance of normal off day fixtures, royal ascot ladies day 60,000, 50,000 of them never watch a live race.
most festival days are for once a year social racegoers. |
|
By:
roggrain - don't think it's just the RSPCA, I believe they are just accessories/scapegoats to the real drivers involved here
|
|
By:
barry - if they can get the "social racegoers" to go six times a year rather then once a year, think of the revenue ;-)
|
|
By:
barry - if they can get the "social racegoers" to go six times a year rather then once a year, think of the revenue ;-)
|
|
By:
Which just goes to show that the social racegoer does not give a hoot about whips. In fact most of them hardly know that whips exist. The big problem with racing is the number of non-triers and if anything puts people off racing it is that FULL STOP.
|
|
By:
arkle, lots of owners/trainers are only in the game to have'A TOUCH' which means their horses dont always run on merit.
wrong distance, going, riding instructions, not fit. impossible to monitor. |
|
By:
Disagree with the OP. The racecourses have for some while aimed for the business of the pissheads. These people couldnt give a damn about how many times a horse is whipped. These new rules are no more likely or unlikely to get the courses repeat business.
The lowering of entrance fees to say a fiver, and the reduction of food costs would imo be a bigger lure than whip bans. |