CRIST: Changes dilute Cup's appeal

[Danzig]

i feel so stupid.

i didn't really think about why the BC officials added these new races. i didn't think about why they wanted to run on a friday-i figured that they wanted to give the fans more-and there's the difficulty of fitting races into a one-day schedule.
i just was doing some catching up on my reading, and am on page 965 in the feb 16 bloodhorse. it's the dan liebman (editor in chief) article that he does.....bear with my typing from this article, which discusses the bc going to cali two years in a row.


'churchill is not happy with the financial arrangements whereby Breeders Cup takes most of the handle and simulcasting revenue, leaving the host track with, basically, just another big Saturday. One thing tracks could count on was a nice spike in on-track business the day before the BC. But, with the BC races now also on Friday, much of that handle also flows to BC, not the host track.(my italics).'

also says in the article that monmouth lost money on the bc last year--weather didn't help of course, but they lost millions.


seems that liebman points the blame for churchill not getting the deal next year on the ky track. but with the current state of the bc race schedule--what's in it for churchill really?

so, all about money. BC wanted the friday money too, rather than just saturday. and the sponsorship dough. and now they want a sponsor for the whole event, not just for each race.

does everyone remember what happened to the golden goose at the end of the story?