Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
is the British Horseracing Authority run for the good of the,
a) owner
b) trainer/jockey
c) punter
d) bookmakers
I will forward the result of this official survey to Paul Bitter.
a) owner
b) trainer/jockey
c) punter
d) bookmakers
I will forward the result of this official survey to Paul Bitter.
Show More
The answer has been D since the day Peter Savill pitched his tent in Portman Square.
According to Hughie Morrison on ATR the answer is most definitely D
I make that a triple D..
Always happy with a triple D..
Always happy with a triple D..
Hughie was not a happy chappie with the 48hr decs,
and rightly questioned who was it supposed to be helping,
they have been a shambles ever since they were introduced but the BHA don't have the balls to change things !
and rightly questioned who was it supposed to be helping,
they have been a shambles ever since they were introduced but the BHA don't have the balls to change things !
D, followed by B with A a distant third and C treated with contempt.
Why do you think they changed the result of stewards enquiry to decimate the number of times the bookies paid out on first past the post? That rule alone must have saved the leading bookies millions.
D
BHA work for bookmakers, it's where they get there money .
should be the other way around , but like everything in racing , it is all messed up , everyone profiteering except the people who should be
BHA work for bookmakers, it's where they get there money .
should be the other way around , but like everything in racing , it is all messed up , everyone profiteering except the people who should be
D A B ........................... C ( Left poor 4th from start ... Tailed Off )
The appalling chain of events engineered by certain members of the good old BHA pre Betfair flotation should have resulted in jail time for at least one of them.
D btw!
D btw!
Tbh I do not think the BHA is in bed with the bookmakers. It is even worse than that.
High Street Books - The Devil incarnate.
BHA - Goldilocks...
BHA - Goldilocks...
C) Never had any place in the BHA's priorities.
The trainers have a representative on the BHA board.
The Jockeys have a representative on the BHA board.
The Owner has a representative on the BHA board.
and of course the Bookmakers are the puppet master using their financial clout to dictate how British racing is run.
Yet the Punter who keeps the Bookmaker, the Trainer and the Jockey in a job, has no voice whatsoever to champion their many grievances, and the owner only owns horses because Punters back on it, and breeders only breed horses because Punters back on it.
Strange state of affairs indeed, the paymaster is the black sheep?.
The trainers have a representative on the BHA board.
The Jockeys have a representative on the BHA board.
The Owner has a representative on the BHA board.
and of course the Bookmakers are the puppet master using their financial clout to dictate how British racing is run.
Yet the Punter who keeps the Bookmaker, the Trainer and the Jockey in a job, has no voice whatsoever to champion their many grievances, and the owner only owns horses because Punters back on it, and breeders only breed horses because Punters back on it.
Strange state of affairs indeed, the paymaster is the black sheep?.
totally agree with you silvergreaser, the punter is treated like dirt, the bha allow the stopping of horses on a daily basis without serious investigation, the stewards , bookmakers , bha , jockeys , trainers and owners are in total cahoots with each other and the punter who keeps game going is treated like dirt and this will continue when you have the likes of paul bittar and his ilk in charge
Don't get me started on 48hr decs....
Killed the game stone dead.Stopped the bread and butter multiple punters placing bets years ago.
Killed the game stone dead.Stopped the bread and butter multiple punters placing bets years ago.
The BHA and the bookmakers are in bed together.
The problem is, the bookmakers are the one getting all the pleasure out of it, whilst the BHA get whatever the bookmakers decide is worth giving in return.
The problem is, the bookmakers are the one getting all the pleasure out of it, whilst the BHA get whatever the bookmakers decide is worth giving in return.
Bit like my sex life.Only my wife earns over £100k per year....
The Jockey Club aka the BHA, contain some of the richest people in the country. They had every chance to buy the Tote and create a pure platform for punters and undercut the exchanges and the bookies and make betting on british racing available to the whole world via the Internet. Instead they spewed it and we are now left with the farce of wall to wall handicap racing dross as demanded by the bookies in order to maximise their profits and hence by the gross profits tax vehicle, the levy, at the expense of the punter and a once great industry. They are deadbeats - the whole lot of them.
Absolutely correct, Myrddin..
GPT was the biggest phuck up of all. And satans army love it..
GPT was the biggest phuck up of all. And satans army love it..
The obscene gross profits deal, means that the BHA are inextricably in bed with the bookmaking industry - and as the more profits the bookmakers make the more money comes into racing, you could argue that everyone working in the sport now has a vested financial interest in punters getting turned over whenever possible.
But it's much worse than that, imo.
The media in this industry, either have major bookmaker share holders or are in direct commercial partnership with the bookmaking industry. None of them can even be relied upon to report the truth when it comes to the bookmakers, imo.
The individuals who work for these media platforms are also commercially tied to the bookmaking industry. Luck, Cunningham, Hoiles, Hunt, Ramsden, Duval, Yates, Stevenson, Dixon are all sending their invoices to major bookmakers currently (and they are just the ones I am aware of).
The racecourses have been involved in a scheme instituted by BAGS where they get a payment for every race in which there is 8 or more runners (guess what this results in happening more often), while safety limits have been reduced by some tracks to ensure there are no 16 runner races.
Finally, as someone has already alluded to, there can be little doubt that Stewards have been told in no uncertain terms that disqualification of horses costs the bookmaking industry money, and so inhibits the returns to racing.
The attitude to punters from every sector of this industry is now entirely exploitative, imo. Our role is simply to have our money removed, and there is now absolutely no one that is ever going to fight our corner...
But it's much worse than that, imo.
The media in this industry, either have major bookmaker share holders or are in direct commercial partnership with the bookmaking industry. None of them can even be relied upon to report the truth when it comes to the bookmakers, imo.
The individuals who work for these media platforms are also commercially tied to the bookmaking industry. Luck, Cunningham, Hoiles, Hunt, Ramsden, Duval, Yates, Stevenson, Dixon are all sending their invoices to major bookmakers currently (and they are just the ones I am aware of).
The racecourses have been involved in a scheme instituted by BAGS where they get a payment for every race in which there is 8 or more runners (guess what this results in happening more often), while safety limits have been reduced by some tracks to ensure there are no 16 runner races.
Finally, as someone has already alluded to, there can be little doubt that Stewards have been told in no uncertain terms that disqualification of horses costs the bookmaking industry money, and so inhibits the returns to racing.
The attitude to punters from every sector of this industry is now entirely exploitative, imo. Our role is simply to have our money removed, and there is now absolutely no one that is ever going to fight our corner...
@millhouse is wrong on the headline even if he is right about everything else. The BHA is not in bed with the bookies, and indeed recently p'd off Ladbrokes by moving meetings around and messing up its sponsorships.
As I said, it's *worse* than that because the BHA -- like the bookmakers -- think the road to salvation is based on robbing the punter, so the BHA leaps on whatever the bookies say will increase turnover. So the BHA *acts* as if it were in bed with the bookies when it comes to ripping off the punter. The bookies, on the other hand, are using racing to get people through the door before shifting them on to numbers games and FOBTs.
On disqualifications -- remember the Racing Post and Timeform campaigned for years to let FPP keep the race (one can only assume Phil Bull once did his nuts when one was turned over).
As I said, it's *worse* than that because the BHA -- like the bookmakers -- think the road to salvation is based on robbing the punter, so the BHA leaps on whatever the bookies say will increase turnover. So the BHA *acts* as if it were in bed with the bookies when it comes to ripping off the punter. The bookies, on the other hand, are using racing to get people through the door before shifting them on to numbers games and FOBTs.
On disqualifications -- remember the Racing Post and Timeform campaigned for years to let FPP keep the race (one can only assume Phil Bull once did his nuts when one was turned over).
You wont be surprised to learn my vote is D......
I have explained why on my facebook page, because we always get coated for being anonymous on here.........
I have explained why on my facebook page, because we always get coated for being anonymous on here.........
Ramruma, the deal is that the more punters lose to the bookmakers the more the BHA and the racing industry get - how's that not being in bed with them..?
This issue obviously, was totally ignored by establishment poster boy and son of Jockey Club member Nick Luck in his recent three part interview with Bittar...
This issue obviously, was totally ignored by establishment poster boy and son of Jockey Club member Nick Luck in his recent three part interview with Bittar...
@millhouse -- being in bed together implies they plot (or at least plan) together. They do not: ask Ladbrokes!
That is why I say it is worse than that. The BHA behaves as if it has a shared interest in ripping off the punter.
That is why I say it is worse than that. The BHA behaves as if it has a shared interest in ripping off the punter.
High St Bookmakers = givers
Stupid BHA = Takers
(though they THINK they are in cahoots)
Someone pass em the anusol & pull their pants up......
Stupid BHA = Takers
(though they THINK they are in cahoots)
Someone pass em the anusol & pull their pants up......
Obviously its D. Mainly because of the gross profits deal.
Its a juggling act.
I heard some idiot on ruk say the most important group in racing are the owners, for me its always the punter and then the bookie.
Without the punter its all a non starter.
I heard some idiot on ruk say the most important group in racing are the owners, for me its always the punter and then the bookie.
Without the punter its all a non starter.
The surprising thing here is that people seem astounded that the answer is D.
The vast majority of income for the BHA and racing in general comes directly or indirectly from punters. They are the principle revenue stream therefore I struggle to see what else the BHA could do.
Without bookmaker funding the sport collapses therefore the BHA are bound to focus their attentions on keeping them happy.
Thinking more widely you can't get away from the fact that if punters don't lose then there is an impossible to fill gaping hole in racing's finances. Winning is what we all try and do however if we were all successful there would be no racing. Punters have to pay for racing one way or another.
The vast majority of income for the BHA and racing in general comes directly or indirectly from punters. They are the principle revenue stream therefore I struggle to see what else the BHA could do.
Without bookmaker funding the sport collapses therefore the BHA are bound to focus their attentions on keeping them happy.
Thinking more widely you can't get away from the fact that if punters don't lose then there is an impossible to fill gaping hole in racing's finances. Winning is what we all try and do however if we were all successful there would be no racing. Punters have to pay for racing one way or another.
A complicated subject,and the interconnectedness between all branches of the industry,Courses ,TV ,Bookmakers is obvious.Punters have their own interests,we would like to have cheaper entrance on midweek non quality meetings(£2-£5 entrance may increase course attendance?)but TV ratings may drop? On course bookmakers probably deserve cheaper costs,they would like too see bigger crowds?. So the answers not easy,but we must be careful that the Bookmakers + TV do not become like the Banks in society and governing the industry?
Putters-in: owners, sponsors, punters, racegoers.
Takers-out: trainers, jockeys, racecourses, bookies, Betfair, the BHA, the Racing Post.
Racing is financed by the first group to pay for the second group.
Takers-out: trainers, jockeys, racecourses, bookies, Betfair, the BHA, the Racing Post.
Racing is financed by the first group to pay for the second group.
A fair point Banned Banks, but why does racing need to keep the bookmakers happy, rather than taking a strong stance & charging them a fair price for the product that they make zillionz betting on?
Bookmakers need to keep their shareholders happy & being unable to bet on this sport (despite their incessant moaning about turnover losing pace against other sports) would not keep their shareholders happy.......racing needed a backbone when this deal was done, but they sent in jellyfish to negotiate, imo
Bookmakers need to keep their shareholders happy & being unable to bet on this sport (despite their incessant moaning about turnover losing pace against other sports) would not keep their shareholders happy.......racing needed a backbone when this deal was done, but they sent in jellyfish to negotiate, imo
TV channels would not exist without sponsorship and advertising paid for by Bookmakers?
If ATR was too stop broadcasting,how many of those viewing public would pay for subscriptions too RUK,and how many would make way too the track at current entrance fees? (Not that many from the lower paid?)
A fair point Banned Banks, but why does racing need to keep the bookmakers happy, rather than taking a strong stance & charging them a fair price for the product that they make zillionz betting on?
It is clear that racing and the bookmakers have a symbiotic relationship however what has changed in recent years is the balance of this relationship.
If you go back 15/20 years before the advent of gaming machines and internet betting then horse racing was of course dominant and it could be argued that the upper hand for negotiations lay with the racing industry. Fast forward to the current day where horse racing acounts for about 25% of profits from shops and the whole dynamic has changed completely.
Racing is now the most expensive product for betting shops to provide. In addition to GPT they also have to pay levy. If they can get 75% of their income from other products they are inevitably going to offer to pay less for horse racing.
I can only see the situation getting worse as young people on the whole don't follow racing. You only have to look at the racecourses to see how they are reacting to the situation. To increase crowds they focus on everything bar the racing. Concerts, ladies days, family fun days etc are heavily marketed with barely any mention of a horse.
It is clear that racing and the bookmakers have a symbiotic relationship however what has changed in recent years is the balance of this relationship.
If you go back 15/20 years before the advent of gaming machines and internet betting then horse racing was of course dominant and it could be argued that the upper hand for negotiations lay with the racing industry. Fast forward to the current day where horse racing acounts for about 25% of profits from shops and the whole dynamic has changed completely.
Racing is now the most expensive product for betting shops to provide. In addition to GPT they also have to pay levy. If they can get 75% of their income from other products they are inevitably going to offer to pay less for horse racing.
I can only see the situation getting worse as young people on the whole don't follow racing. You only have to look at the racecourses to see how they are reacting to the situation. To increase crowds they focus on everything bar the racing. Concerts, ladies days, family fun days etc are heavily marketed with barely any mention of a horse.
Banned_Banks has a point that racing itself is not marketed (or its marketing is left in the hands of bloody fools like Racing For Change).
Perhaps things have changed in the USA but I have from around ten years ago some free glossy leaflets provided by American racecourses on things like: how to read the form; what to look for in the paddock; and so on. Over here there is nothing similar on course or in the betting shop.
If you want people to enjoy racing, you have to help them understand it enough to form an opinion, because without an opinion, racing is simply a nice day out in the open air watching brown animals run round a field.
(And yes, Racing For Change will argue some of this stuff can be found on its lovetheraces web site but FFS who will find it there? It needs to be properly edited, then printed and handed out for free.)
Perhaps things have changed in the USA but I have from around ten years ago some free glossy leaflets provided by American racecourses on things like: how to read the form; what to look for in the paddock; and so on. Over here there is nothing similar on course or in the betting shop.
If you want people to enjoy racing, you have to help them understand it enough to form an opinion, because without an opinion, racing is simply a nice day out in the open air watching brown animals run round a field.
(And yes, Racing For Change will argue some of this stuff can be found on its lovetheraces web site but FFS who will find it there? It needs to be properly edited, then printed and handed out for free.)
pretty much agree with most of that Ramruna, I do feel the BHA - BHB should start too look closer at course attendance(especially the youth side of that?)Kids and parents cannot afford such expensive pastime.The courses need to respond with more offers to attract(midweeks etc)
being in bed together implies they plot (or at least plan) together. They do not: ask Ladbrokes
Ramruma, I think it would be hugely naïve for any of us to think that the bookmakers have not, at the very least, illustrated very clearly to the BHA how the returns to racing might be increased if they gave the bookmaking industry the product they want.
It's more likely, imho, that working groups have been set up between the BHA and the bookmaking industry to explore how to maximise revenue to the BHA from the bookmakers (in other words remove more of punters' money)...
Ramruma, I think it would be hugely naïve for any of us to think that the bookmakers have not, at the very least, illustrated very clearly to the BHA how the returns to racing might be increased if they gave the bookmaking industry the product they want.
It's more likely, imho, that working groups have been set up between the BHA and the bookmaking industry to explore how to maximise revenue to the BHA from the bookmakers (in other words remove more of punters' money)...
Millhouse I would be amazed if that wasn't the case.
In fact I think I would question the commercial suitability of the BHA if it wasn't.
I'm more surprised that you seem to think there is anything wrong with this. If an industry needs to make a certain amount of money to function then surely it would be remiss of them not to take steps to achieve this.
You appear to suggest that any attempt to make more money from punters is an underhand tactic. Punters money is what keeps the sport functioning. In your nirvana you appear to want a vibrant self funded sport with all punters being winners. I'm afraid the 2 things are mutually exclusive.
In fact I think I would question the commercial suitability of the BHA if it wasn't.
I'm more surprised that you seem to think there is anything wrong with this. If an industry needs to make a certain amount of money to function then surely it would be remiss of them not to take steps to achieve this.
You appear to suggest that any attempt to make more money from punters is an underhand tactic. Punters money is what keeps the sport functioning. In your nirvana you appear to want a vibrant self funded sport with all punters being winners. I'm afraid the 2 things are mutually exclusive.
That's a total misrepresentation of what millhouse , and others, are saying Banks. It is self evident that not everyone can win long term. Even in an ultra low take out pari mutuel system most would lose.
However what the big bookmakers are intent on doing is preventing anyone from winning. That is very different
However what the big bookmakers are intent on doing is preventing anyone from winning. That is very different
in a level playing field,
there would be no closed/limited accounts !
there would be no closed/limited accounts !
racing as a leisure pursuit in this country is nearing the end of it's life.
youngsters don't want to be ripped off paying extortionate amounts to get in to the course and then once inside, being mugged by programme sellers, food sellers and drink sellers.
the generation that put up with all of that has been chased away by concerts being given precedence over racing, so with families no longer attending, there are generations growing up with no interest at all in racing.
once the bookmakers start saying they're no longer going to pay as their racing take is now so small, then racing will simply sink into oblivion taking the BHA with it.
racecourses will probably be turned into concert courses (I'm pretty sure that CoCs will still want to water the stages) and the bookies will survive on their high street casinos.
youngsters don't want to be ripped off paying extortionate amounts to get in to the course and then once inside, being mugged by programme sellers, food sellers and drink sellers.
the generation that put up with all of that has been chased away by concerts being given precedence over racing, so with families no longer attending, there are generations growing up with no interest at all in racing.
once the bookmakers start saying they're no longer going to pay as their racing take is now so small, then racing will simply sink into oblivion taking the BHA with it.
racecourses will probably be turned into concert courses (I'm pretty sure that CoCs will still want to water the stages) and the bookies will survive on their high street casinos.
that's a good story Outpost,
how is racing in Dubai doing without bookmaking funding ?!
how is racing in Dubai doing without bookmaking funding ?!
youngsters don't want to be ripped off paying extortionate amounts to get in to the course and then once inside, being mugged by programme sellers, food sellers and drink sellers.
Can't argue with this either. I went to a midweek fixture at Santa Anita last year and got clubhouse admission, and a seat right by the winning post for the equivalent of what it costs to get in the silver ring at most British courses with no access to the paddocks and very little in the way of facilities. $5 got you standard entry with a seat in the grandstand.
Can't argue with this either. I went to a midweek fixture at Santa Anita last year and got clubhouse admission, and a seat right by the winning post for the equivalent of what it costs to get in the silver ring at most British courses with no access to the paddocks and very little in the way of facilities. $5 got you standard entry with a seat in the grandstand.
how is racing in Dubai doing without bookmaking funding ?!
Come on, Dubai is a complete anomaly where the funding situation is incomparable with anywhere else.
Come on, Dubai is a complete anomaly where the funding situation is incomparable with anywhere else.
Banks, I'm not surprised at all, as is evident in my post above. I was seeking to debate with Ramruma as to the agendas of the BHA in its relationship with the bookmaking industry.
No one with any business experience would be surprised at a high degree of cooperation between the BHA and the bookmakers in their shared commercial objective of removing punters of their money.
My objection, as usual, is the complicity and two faced hypocrisy of the rest of this industry, especially the media, in actively seeking to conceal this fact, while all the time pretending that they are somehow punters' best friends - as seen with Luck's frankly disgraceful refusal to ask Bittar how the BHA can possibly have the confidence of punters on this steroid affair if it is in a commercial joint venture with the bookmaking industry that relies on punters continuing to bet as if it never happened....
No one with any business experience would be surprised at a high degree of cooperation between the BHA and the bookmakers in their shared commercial objective of removing punters of their money.
My objection, as usual, is the complicity and two faced hypocrisy of the rest of this industry, especially the media, in actively seeking to conceal this fact, while all the time pretending that they are somehow punters' best friends - as seen with Luck's frankly disgraceful refusal to ask Bittar how the BHA can possibly have the confidence of punters on this steroid affair if it is in a commercial joint venture with the bookmaking industry that relies on punters continuing to bet as if it never happened....
I'm pretty sure that racing in dubai is receiving plenty of funding from other quarters.
as is racing in france and USA.
the difference is that racing is a social event in france and is paid for by their tote and there is no need for rip off entrance prices etc.
USA racecourses are also reasonably cheap to get in to even at major meetings and the UK alone is the only racing country which seems to think it's ok to chase customers away by constantly overcharging them.
as is racing in france and USA.
the difference is that racing is a social event in france and is paid for by their tote and there is no need for rip off entrance prices etc.
USA racecourses are also reasonably cheap to get in to even at major meetings and the UK alone is the only racing country which seems to think it's ok to chase customers away by constantly overcharging them.
Overstating our importance in the world is a british way of life, as is overcharging but the smell of coffee is just around the corner.
@millhouse -- I have no doubt the BHA acts whenever the bookmakers say that doing X will mean increased income for racing. My only quibble is that I do not see having a perceived shared interest is the same as being in bed together. The example I gave of the BHA screwing up Ladbroke's sponsorship suggests they are not in bed together. It just looks like they are because both want to rip off the punter.
Most of what you say about racing, bookies and the media is right. It is the grand, overarching conspiracy theory that spoils it.
Most of what you say about racing, bookies and the media is right. It is the grand, overarching conspiracy theory that spoils it.
Come on, Dubai is a complete anomaly where the funding situation is incomparable with anywhere else.
Outpost was painting a bleak picture and my point was,
as long as there are rich people, horse racing will carry on,
remember how it all started, it was just rich people running their horses against each other for personal wagers !
Outpost was painting a bleak picture and my point was,
as long as there are rich people, horse racing will carry on,
remember how it all started, it was just rich people running their horses against each other for personal wagers !
Does anyone remember an article in the Racing Post in the mid 1990's about a large Ladbrokes in the centre of Munich.The reporter was talking to locals and was amazed how they were talking knowledgeably about Cheltenham, which was a few weeks away.
Well, there was no sign of this shop when I was there last Winter though there was an LBO called 'The Soccer Shop', with punters betting on in running in all sorts of leagues in all sorts of locations. These shops are all over Germany now - the only LBO's that I know of that show UK racing are one in Cologne and two in Dusseldorf. Even in Berlin they all seem to be footy shops, supported by the likes of the machines, Tennis, Handball,Ice Hockey ect, a few will have trotting and German racing as further support.
This scenario is relevant to the UK because as the grey haired brigade pass on and are not replaced by like,LBO's here will soon be in a position to operate without the horses. I don't think racing's profile has ever been lower in this country than it is now but the authorities spin us the yarn that the Summer Saturday boozing crowds that pack the cult venues are the gauge that should measure the sport's popularity.
Well, there was no sign of this shop when I was there last Winter though there was an LBO called 'The Soccer Shop', with punters betting on in running in all sorts of leagues in all sorts of locations. These shops are all over Germany now - the only LBO's that I know of that show UK racing are one in Cologne and two in Dusseldorf. Even in Berlin they all seem to be footy shops, supported by the likes of the machines, Tennis, Handball,Ice Hockey ect, a few will have trotting and German racing as further support.
This scenario is relevant to the UK because as the grey haired brigade pass on and are not replaced by like,LBO's here will soon be in a position to operate without the horses. I don't think racing's profile has ever been lower in this country than it is now but the authorities spin us the yarn that the Summer Saturday boozing crowds that pack the cult venues are the gauge that should measure the sport's popularity.
moondan
moondan
25 Aug 13 12:47
Joined:
18 Nov 10
| Topic/replies: 1,299 | Blogger: moondan's blog
Overstating our importance in the world is a british way of life, as is overcharging but the smell of coffee is just around the corner.
An excellent post ... totally agree.Overcharging prevalent in MANY different areas of our lives ,sport being just one .
moondan
25 Aug 13 12:47
Joined:
18 Nov 10
| Topic/replies: 1,299 | Blogger: moondan's blog
Overstating our importance in the world is a british way of life, as is overcharging but the smell of coffee is just around the corner.
An excellent post ... totally agree.Overcharging prevalent in MANY different areas of our lives ,sport being just one .
With the gloomy possibility of the economy in general for the foreseeable future,things may well take a downturn,Gambling does and can do well in those conditions,but the industry is in no position(like in previous depressions) there may be too much product,and it is most certainly overpriced,the damage when and if it takes place ,will be interesting too spectate.
@verbotene liebe is probably right. It used to be that if you wanted to bet, your choices were horses and dogs. Now there is football, FOBTs and random number games, so there is no need for the younger punter to learn about racing.
Ramruma, I would respectfully suggest that one man's 'conspiracy theory' is another's commercial realism.
Where one stands on that spectrum probably depends on your own experience of the bookmaking industry or how hard nosed you want to be about business in general, I would guess - but make no mistake, the agenda here is to rig up the card deck in any way possible to facilitate the removal of our money...
Where one stands on that spectrum probably depends on your own experience of the bookmaking industry or how hard nosed you want to be about business in general, I would guess - but make no mistake, the agenda here is to rig up the card deck in any way possible to facilitate the removal of our money...
StevieB
Thanks for that.
Its about to get even worse, with the wellfare bill being trimmed by many billions which has cheered some but the reality is those billions will not swilling around the economy and will not be ending up in hard working small businesses who's workers support racing etc,etc.
In my life time the picture has never been bleaker yet spin has never been more used.
We have always had spin but it was once rightly called bullshxt.
Thanks for that.
Its about to get even worse, with the wellfare bill being trimmed by many billions which has cheered some but the reality is those billions will not swilling around the economy and will not be ending up in hard working small businesses who's workers support racing etc,etc.
In my life time the picture has never been bleaker yet spin has never been more used.
We have always had spin but it was once rightly called bullshxt.
make no mistake, the agenda here is to rig up the card deck in any way possible to facilitate the removal of our money...
Yes. It is a shared agenda, not a conspiracy. They do not need to conspire because they want the same thing.
Or at least, they think they do. What the BHA seems not to have noticed is that bookies are using racing to get people through the door and then inducing them to bet on other things, preferably random number games and FOBTs, or to bet online so that less money is paid back to racing. The BHA is killing racing not because it is in bed with the bookies, but because it has not noticed their ultimate aims are very different.
Yes. It is a shared agenda, not a conspiracy. They do not need to conspire because they want the same thing.
Or at least, they think they do. What the BHA seems not to have noticed is that bookies are using racing to get people through the door and then inducing them to bet on other things, preferably random number games and FOBTs, or to bet online so that less money is paid back to racing. The BHA is killing racing not because it is in bed with the bookies, but because it has not noticed their ultimate aims are very different.
Ramruma, I wish I had your optimism. You are right though about the different objectives, the only difference is that while they are happily working in partnership now, the bookmaking industry will inevitably ruthlessly shaft the BHA as soon as it has them exactly where it wants them...
Right now it's in the Punters interest too stay at home watch ATR and bet on Betfair and other exchanges(keep costs minimal),is this good for the courses and trainers?
The vast majority of racing´s income is derived from racegoers/punters. In order to increase or even maintain revenue there are two things racing can do: make the product more attractive to grow the market; or maximise income per punter/racegoer.
The BHA would argue probably that concerts/sideshow attractions increase the number of people going racing and so increase course revenues, and in time racing´s long-term future. What they cannot see is that, at the same time, they are alienating real racing fans who have no interest in paying a premium to go racing to see some popstar of yesteryear or X-factor finalist. Why can´t they have two entry prices, one for racing alone, the other for racing plus entertainment?
On the other hand, real racing fans would probably argue that the BHA are doing nothing to improve the attractiveness of racing itself. Too much dross racing does nothing to excite punters and the Friday/Saturday overkill has become too much for many; the standard of stewarding is still appalling; the rules on interference have been skewed too far in the direction of the infringer (as Sky Lantern´s case showed); allowing the Tote to fall into private hands; overwatering leading to false ground and results.
What seems clear to me is the BHA have identified racing´s key stakeholders as courses, bookmakers and the media - but crucially NOT punters. Together the BHA and the media are working hard to stay on message: to put a positive spin on everything to do with racing, while ignoring anything negative - particularly when it comes to bookmakers. When bookmakers restrict and close more and more accounts they are effectively driving people away from the sport, yet nothing ever gets said. It is not difficult to see why anyone would think there is a conspiracy...
The BHA would argue probably that concerts/sideshow attractions increase the number of people going racing and so increase course revenues, and in time racing´s long-term future. What they cannot see is that, at the same time, they are alienating real racing fans who have no interest in paying a premium to go racing to see some popstar of yesteryear or X-factor finalist. Why can´t they have two entry prices, one for racing alone, the other for racing plus entertainment?
On the other hand, real racing fans would probably argue that the BHA are doing nothing to improve the attractiveness of racing itself. Too much dross racing does nothing to excite punters and the Friday/Saturday overkill has become too much for many; the standard of stewarding is still appalling; the rules on interference have been skewed too far in the direction of the infringer (as Sky Lantern´s case showed); allowing the Tote to fall into private hands; overwatering leading to false ground and results.
What seems clear to me is the BHA have identified racing´s key stakeholders as courses, bookmakers and the media - but crucially NOT punters. Together the BHA and the media are working hard to stay on message: to put a positive spin on everything to do with racing, while ignoring anything negative - particularly when it comes to bookmakers. When bookmakers restrict and close more and more accounts they are effectively driving people away from the sport, yet nothing ever gets said. It is not difficult to see why anyone would think there is a conspiracy...
Punters have choice,we can play, or we can stop.(simples)
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539