On the Greyhounds forum,

New Cross Anyone ever go there ?

A fabulous read!

These posts by oncourse books saying 'bigger than the machine' keep appearing

you're not doing yourselves any favours with such obviously contradictory statements as the above and ones about the prevalence of hedging bets on here

Is being unable to turn the caps lock off one of the traits required to be an on course bookmaker?

Perhaps shouting out nonsense all day on the track translates to shouting nonsense on here too?

the same clown who  stated that the sport had never been cleaner on channel 4 last week, go away banks your waste of space

Yeah - great idea - 135% over round

way too late - an attempt to reinvent yourselves 5 years ago still might not have worked - but now technology and undercutters have got you  -  your overrounds have found you out - you cant reinvent yourselves against technology that doesn't allow you a workable margin - even mug punters are seeing the the light - extinction (course books as we know them) seems not far away.

Biggest race of the year - grand national

What over round do most bookies  have it to - 105 % ????????

40 Runners and you bet to 118%!

No wonder i sold up!

FOXY I PHONED UP NEWMARKEY TODAY AND THEY SAID I HAVE TO PAY THE 20 QUID THIS IS AFTER THE AGT SAID TO ME PAT DONT PAY THE SCORE THEY DONT KNOW WHAT THERE DOING WHEN I TOLD NEWMARKET THIS THEY WASNT VERY HAPPY ABOUT THE REMARKS THEY TOOK MY PHONE NUMBER AND SAID THEYD GET BACK TO ME ...WHICH THEY DIDNT .........ILL PHONE THEM AGAIN TOMMORROW ,I JUST HOPE I DONT SWEAR

factmachine,I wonder if you asked yourself if Betfair shares were a good buy at £6.90,or just thought they would continue to fall.Then,when they surged back up to £8.40,showing a substantial profit for many investors,asked yourself why you didn't play.The comments about the profitability of the company are amazingly doom-ridden.
  There was talk about the layers drying up for the last 8 years!!!
   Re.racecourse negotiations,don't forget you guys trade on racecourse ground,so they do have the power to impose conditions,or change existing ones, if necessary.They are in charge,but you also have strength in numbers,IF all sing together.Fragmentation never wins the day.Good luck.

unfortunately I have reached thew conclusion Robin Grossmith will never bend on two fronts. He won't permit anyone to alter or influence his business and he's convinced no track should be able to dictate commercial terms to Bookmakers. He's been fair and honest in stating his position. It is not a view endorsed by many Bookmakers though and almost noone on his association.
He did a wonderful job on Board on Rails, with my Father. And he is a hard worker for Bookies. However my view he has shouldered too much of the work associated with pitch contracts, and with that has come an singularity. Perhaps that is inevitable when noone else wants to do the work. The battle I face is in not only convincing him that now is the time to seriously moderate his views on tracks aand get thoroughly behind his members clear wishes on each way terms
123 signed contracts delivered on the Hill at Epsom - without complaint out of 131. And he's seeking to challenge the contracts on each way imposition. Ridiculous really.
Robin has refused a questionaire to date to his association on imposition of terms. his response ' if it's unlawful, no point in asking members to vote on it.' But no judge has ruled it unlawful?
Nigel Spencer took a straw poll at Windsor recently and reported of the 30 or so attendees all but one (who abstained) was in favour of standard terms
I took a poll of 28 at Newbury-mostly ring- 28 questioned. 25 in favour - 3 against
I did the same at Ascot- and got around nearly 40 firms. 3 against 'imposition of standard terms by racetracks' that was my question.
Sunday - there is a meeting of the executive to discuss the way forward. Robin will or will not accept what these numbers are telling him. I will try to persuade him and the executive, that at this time most bookmakers want a more constructive dialogue- without a lawyer in the room, with tracks. And for the leaders to start acting for the members they represent
Those are the facts as I see it, and as Bookmakers tell me. I have stated my position here, and in the press, as honestly as I can. I will try very hard on Sunday to persuade my colleagues of the need for change now. Either way I ask for your support in attempting to deliver 'voluntary agreements' with racetracks - and the return of local pitch councils. Not Bookmakers charters or Lawyers fees.
One final point. Should i lose the debate on Sunday- the racetracks will win the war

SPORTS,ROBIN DID INDEED DO A "WONDERFUL JOB" FOR BOARDS ON RAILS,WHICH WAS ANOTHER NAIL IN THE COFFIN FOR MOST TATTS RINGS AFTER INVESTORS WERE ASSURED BY THE LEADER OF THE NJPC THAT "THERE WILL NEVER BE BOARDS ON RAILS"THE QUESTION THAT SHOULD BE ASKED IS HOW THE HELL WAS HE ALLOWED TO GET AWAY WITH IT,CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG BUT WERNT RAILS BOOKMAKERS ONLY EVER ALLOWED ON RACECOURSES WITH THE STRICT PROVISO THEY WOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO DISPLAY PRICES

Factmachine. It's a very old debate now. I assume you've owned your pitches from before the days of sales of pitches? Because then i could understand your view better. However, in business, it's rather inevitable that change sometimes hurts folk. Don't forget my Dad was main protagonist. So i'm biased :)

How was business today at Ascot ? seemed busy ........

Sedgefield tomorrow Mr Facts?

Thanks for the explanation. I think the racecourses are aware that personal preferences are superceding the wishes of the majority and as you say if mutual agreement/s can not be reached will act accordingly. The suggestion that such action is illegal is in my view something of a smokescreen.

good luck on sunday , geoff

Adge thanks. I don't expect to carry the day. The exec is far too cliquey. But you never know, might dawn on the boys that the Rails assoc has never had an issue with each way terms nor viewed tracks as the arch enemy of Bookies. it's a misnomer

Geoff, the directors of the Associations have both a duty of care to their members and are also legally responsible as directors for decisions that are made at board level.  It would be irresponsible of them not to take legal advice on something as big as this that they may be recommending to their membership (depending upon the results of the ballot of members.)

I know there is a lot of frustration amongst the decent bookmakers with the rogues who are getting the rest a bad name with the EW terms but you cannot ride roughshod over the law of the land.  It needs careful consideration to make sure its done right.

GEOFF as you know im somebody who generally beleives in the ring DOING THE RIGHT THING because in the long term i think it will help us.i do think though that you are making the same mistake that the negotiating team made.im not convinced you and the people who are talking to the racecourses have a mandate to do what you are doing.theres a big difference to walking round a ring and asking people than having a secret ballot.if a ballot was carried out and you knew for sure the figures for and against you would be in a stronger(hopefully)position.the thing that worries me is that all we do is give things up to the racecourses(entrance multiples,marketing fees,more books in tatts and the rails,tote booths and there own booths all over the place etc.)we should be going to the racecourses and saying the new law is costing them customers but (example after poll) 95% of books are prpared to bet to gold flag terms as a minimum if for example the marketing fee is scrapped or perhaps used to MARKET.perhaps every racecourse has page 3 in the programn explaining how to bet with a bookmaker etc. and a few large signs around the racecourse saying the same.finally geoff answer me ,honestly,if your after fairness etc. what do you think of the one for one system (tatts and the rails)because were never going to get books to agree on anything while a system that is so obviously wrong is allowed to stay in place.