
|
By:
if the tracks stopped taking punters to the fookin cleaners with excessive mid week entry fees maybe there would be more of them.
|
|
By:
agree with yorkie ..have they never heard of concessions or two for one offers !!! by the way tim your not there are ya lol xx
|
|
By:
NO DAVE SAW THE WEATHER FORECAST.
|
|
By:
a good judge ....mr thompson arrive back yesterday ? |
|
By:
NOT SURE!
|
|
By:
Racecourse bookies cant make it pay mid week , only 2 books at wolves yesterday it will be tote only soon.
Time has come to reduce entry fee for punters and bookies before its too late. |
|
By:
plenty punters in the hospitality boxes
![]() |
|
By:
how many books in tatts plz
|
|
By:
primo....about 25 books in tatts
i stood in pitch no 16 race 1 take £177 race 2 take £ 99 race 3 take £ 48 packed up and went home winning £36.88 less £378.00 expenses which included £100.00 MARKETING Fee TOTALLY USELESS |
|
By:
TOTALLY DEPRESSING,PLUS MORE BAD WEATHER ON THE WAY
![]() |
|
By:
roy
how many books would there have been without link ups today ? |
|
By:
possibly only BK linked up today
|
|
By:
cheers roy never went so i didnt know the answer,only one linked up is a step in the right direction at these midweek meetings.
|
|
By:
a bigger step in the right direction is to keep the 378 in your pocket and stay in the warm, pretty much time to more or less forget working tll spring, i go to a couple of tracks in the winter(picking and choosing when the weathers dry)freezing your b0000lllooox of trying to get the exes is not he way forward
it sonds to me that the northern jumps meeting mid week arer even worse than down south.its only 4 months, forget nov dec jan feb, then its point to point season(wages tme again.)i reckon ill do a few meetings at plumpton just a few at ling a/w and stay indoors bar tht.i think we all know the jumps season is just a total wasste of time. (flats hard enough) o those who go 2 or 3 times a week during thec winter, wrap up well and bloody good luck to you. |
|
By:
what has happened to oncorse bookmakers [on horseracing] is a carbon copy of what happened at the dogs only 5yrs ago i was paying £165 a night rent [ at the dogs ] it got so bad not only did it become rent free in 2009 they started paying me , and my pencil to attend the bags . the decline set in at least 18mnths ago with horseracing most every bookmaker i know has dramatically cut the number of days they work ,cut staff numbers [basically try to cut their exes] and look what happened post negotiations the exes have gone up [in my case 20%] this new regime with marketing fee + 5 times + 6times +8times etc was the biggest own goal in the history of bookmaking . i truly believe in these dreadful economic times "our negotiators " should have been looking for us all to pay less not more ! with current oncourse business the way it is and no reason for it to improve in the forseeable future there will be a lot of casualtys i am afraid.now more than ever is the time for the bookmakers to unite and stand together . we still hold most of the aces i'e they still need sp;s they still need us there [at the moment]
|
|
By:
flash bookie what aces do you hold?
|
|
By:
jimnast, didn't I spot you, on tv, having two out of the three pitches in the silver at Ludlow last week ?
|
|
By:
roy
these figures are worse than u posted for catterick, why dont u just stay at home on these days? anyway you have a treat 2morrow wetherby are charging u 6 times for the badge they class this as a premier day.lol |
|
By:
all a gloomy assessment to cheer me as i set off on my 240 mile round trip to stratford on avon
the negotiators could have maybe got no increases at most courses but the racecourses wanted books to pay for all days , attend or not and an annual cheque in advance. some with better picks would like that but poorer picks would not but they are the ones sreaming. no win situation. keep your aces to yourself , flash , or is that your bluff stategy |
|
By:
SPOT ON FLASH,ADGE ARE THE BOOKMAKERS WITH "BETTER PICKS" THAT "WOULD LIKE"TO PAY "AN ANUAL CHEQUE IN ADVANCE"THE VERY SAME ONES THAT DONT ATTEND OR RENT OUT THEIR PITCHES MIDWEEK BECAUSE THEY CANT MAKE IT PAY
![]() |
|
By:
jimnast,cant help but notice all the double picks you have,banngor,fontwell,chester,goodwood,leicester,ludlow,lingfield,newmarket,salisbury,sandown,stratford,thirsk,windsor,(ive probably missed some)not bad to say that you are against it,or are you just moving with the times?
|
|
By:
240 mile round trip for what adge ? Am I misssing something ? Or is it 'cos you haven't paid your marketing fee ?
![]() |
|
By:
I've been back home from Stratford for about half an hour. Went to the bookmakers open meeting, saw how many books and how many people, got back in car and off home.
|
|
By:
the marketing fee for kempton boxing day in the silve ring will sure see a huge drop in numbers. its ner impossible meeting to win at as a rule, most books have somewhere else to go (ill be at fonterrs),noone goes any other meeting so whyy pa the fee.
|
|
By:
so if u not attend at any meeting over the year then u dont ave to pay the marketing fee
|
|
By:
'Open meeting' wassy ? Please tell !
|
|
By:
Sick
Newbury NH is the same as kempton. Thats why virtually every pitch above no 35 is for sale - they are unviable - when paying £300 for the badge. Only question is whether the race course will care in the long run that less books will attend the big days. |
|
By:
Reading all the threads concerning oncourse bookmakers,you can only reach the conclusion that their representatives didn't negotiate good deals with some of the courses.It appears to an onlooker that you got your security of tenure at a great cost.Perhaps your negotiators weren't very strong,considering courses HAVE to offer bookmakers prices,and an alternative,like pool betting.
|
|
By:
I don't think they will care - the marketing fee and the increased multiple from the better picks will cover the shortfall. Even 25% less books would give the same income over the year.
|
|
By:
Only time will tell. They would get increased multiple from those missing, if it were not for the way the "marketing fee" were charged.
I suspect you may be correct though. |
|
By:
You should have been able to negotiate a sliding scale for badge fees in relation to pick numbers,so that those in a "poor" pick don't pay the same as one of the big firms in a top pick.
According to a reply to my suggestion of this months ago,it wasn't negotiable.Surely everything is negotiable.Cpllectively you had a strong hand,divisively,not so. So it appears you now have great security on pitches that aren't worth operating,and are probably losing value too!!! |
|
By:
UNBIASED YOU HAVE HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD,YET SOME OF THE POSTERS ON HERE ARE CONVINCED THE NEGOTIATERS GOT US A "GREAT DEAL"WHEN THE FACT IS THE ONLY ONES THAT GOT "THE GREAT DEAL"WERE THE RACECOURSES.
|
|
By:
THETRUTHHURTS
Totally agree with you. yesterdays marketing fee (approx £3500) straight to the bank this morning |
|
By:
Open meeting at Stratford before racing today demo as per AGT website. Good bookmaker attendance, very positive meeting.
|
|
By:
Perhaps the disgruntled ones could get unbiased to lead them? seems to have most things sorted imo.
|
|
By:
AUCTION SITE SEEMS TO BE FREEZING PROBABLY STOPPED ME BUYING SOMETHING I MIGHT REGRET
|
|
By:
etratford report.....17 books [ 16 last year ]
weather far worse than the forecast i saw business abysmal for 4 races [ weather related ], decent for 1 an good for the other 2. the 2 good races a short price favourite won both but as places were good minor losses. best part of M1 snarled up getting home..took almost 3 hours marketing fee not charged until march 2013 at least the air was fresh.....onto wetherby tomorrow |
|
By:
Why not stay at home instead adge and watch Bargain Hunt - another trip likely to be Pointless !!! Any jocky report from today ? Were you vociferous at 'wassy's meeting' ?
|
|
By:
If more 'open' meetings a la today's at Stratford had taken place at other courses prior to negotiations reaching an advanced stage would racecources have become aware of the feelings of the rank and file of bookmakers with the possiblity of a different agreement ?
|