Presque Isle Downs - Nice Purses

[Riot]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

But it's a lousy model for any business.

Why do you think that?

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Riot

Why do you think that?

I don't think that any business that cannot support itself is a good model. Other people may believe that slot revenue is a part of horse racing. I don't. I think it props up second and third tier racetracks that would not exist otherwise. I would expect horse owners and trainers to say it's all good but I just think there are too many bad racetracks running too many bad horses. Slot machines have proven not to bring new horse race wagerers. In fact, they cannibalize handle. I'm not a fan.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

I don't think that any business that cannot support itself is a good model. Other people may believe that slot revenue is a part of horse racing. I don't. I think it props up second and third tier racetracks that would not exist otherwise. I would expect horse owners and trainers to say it's all good but I just think there are too many bad racetracks running too many bad horses. Slot machines have proven not to bring new horse race wagerers. In fact, they cannibalize handle. I'm not a fan.

So it would be better if there was just a casino and the money that goes to purses could just go to the politicians pet pork projects?

[mes5107]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So it would be better if there was just a casino and the money that goes to purses could just go to the politicians pet pork projects?

I don't think he said that. I think StS is saying that supplementing purses with slot machine revenue is not a long term solution to draw in new horse racing fans.

Perhaps lowering takeout is more of a solution.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by mes5107

I don't think he said that. I think StS is saying that supplementing purses with slot machine revenue is not a long term solution to draw in new horse racing fans.

Perhaps lowering takeout is more of a solution.

Why would wouldn't this just be considered another revenue stream as opposed to a marketing platform? If you make horseownership more affordable you will attract more new owners who will help grow the game from within.

[ARyan]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Why would wouldn't this just be considered another revenue stream as opposed to a marketing platform? If you make horseownership more affordable you will attract more new owners who will help grow the game from within.

Great point!

[mes5107]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Why would wouldn't this just be considered another revenue stream as opposed to a marketing platform? If you make horseownership more affordable you will attract more new owners who will help grow the game from within.

Yes, it certainly is a new revenue stream for horseowners, and as purses go up, it does open the game up to lower income fans who would like to become owners. That is a good thing.

However, I think that most aspiring/current owners are/were horseplayers first. I'm a DeeTee stables member, and most of my non-horseplaying fans think that it is very cool that I'm a part of it. With that said, none of them ever take me up on the offer to come down to the simulcast to watch SWLY run (only 15 min away). It is hard to try to grow the industry from within, though I will still try.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by mes5107

Yes, it certainly is a new revenue stream for horseowners, and as purses go up, it does open the game up to lower income fans who would like to become owners. That is a good thing.

However, I think that most aspiring/current owners are/were horseplayers first. I'm a DeeTee stables member, and most of my non-horseplaying fans think that it is very cool that I'm a part of it. With that said, none of them ever take me up on the offer to come down to the simulcast to watch SWLY run (only 15 min away). It is hard to try to grow the industry from within, though I will still try.

Lure them with place bets...

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So it would be better if there was just a casino and the money that goes to purses could just go to the politicians pet pork projects?

If there were "just" casinos, there would be no Presque. There would also be no new racetracks in New Mexico and no new harness tracks in Ontario. It's a joke what the purses are at these places compared to handle. Other than supporting bad horse racing, what single good thing does racing there or at the other slots tracks do for the sport or the bettors? Did racing improve at Woodbine? At Mountaineer? At Gulf? No. Did takeout go down at any of those racetracks? No. It does zero for the bettors, who are the reason why racetracks exist. If you want to cast stones at people who benefit from what I think is a bad concept, don't leave out the horsemen. They are certainly also responsible for creating these artificially high purses for what I consider bad horse racing. As to your question, my answer is I disagree with your premise that these slot macine places would exist without the approval of horsemen. They wouldn't. They shouldn't exist, period. That said, if you are in the business, you can only take what they give you and I certainly have no problem with people getting paid as much as they can. I just think they're bad for racing.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

If there were "just" casinos, there would be no Presque. There would also be no new racetracks in New Mexico and no new harness tracks in Ontario. It's a joke what the purses are at these places compared to handle. Other than supporting bad horse racing, what single good thing does racing there or at the other slots tracks do for the sport or the bettors? Did racing improve at Woodbine? At Mountaineer? At Gulf? No. Did takeout go down at any of those racetracks? No. It does zero for the bettors, who are the reason why racetracks exist. If you want to cast stones at people who benefit from what I think is a bad concept, don't leave out the horsemen. They are certainly also responsible for creating these artificially high purses for what I consider bad horse racing. As to your question, my answer is I disagree with your premise that these slot macine places would exist without the approval of horsemen. They wouldn't. They shouldn't exist, period. That said, if you are in the business, you can only take what they give you and I certainly have no problem with people getting paid as much as they can. I just think they're bad for racing.

You dont think that racing has improved at Mountaineer or Woodbine? You think it is better for competition to come in and get favorable treatment and just let the tracks die because they cant compete without it? I agree that the tracks are not thinking forwardly in terms of doing more for the paying/betting customer. I campaign on a regular basis to track management thoughout the country for this. But a lot of that has to do with state mandated regulation where the state actually controls the pricing (ie.takeout)in an industry. What other industry has to to overcome a regulator that is also a competitor? (Lottery, etc) To say that all slots are doing is proping up an industry is words. I prefer allowing an industry to compete on a more level playingfield with other gambling competitors. It would be like McDonalds not being allowed to sell salads and chicken sandwichs because it started off as a hamburger joint. By allowing the tracks to expand their gambling menus you are benefiting the tracks, the racing industry and all associated businesses.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You dont think that racing has improved at Mountaineer or Woodbine? You think it is better for competition to come in and get favorable treatment and just let the tracks die because they cant compete without it? I agree that the tracks are not thinking forwardly in terms of doing more for the paying/betting customer. I campaign on a regular basis to track management thoughout the country for this. But a lot of that has to do with state mandated regulation where the state actually controls the pricing (ie.takeout)in an industry. What other industry has to to overcome a regulator that is also a competitor? (Lottery, etc) To say that all slots are doing is proping up an industry is words. I prefer allowing an industry to compete on a more level playingfield with other gambling competitors. It would be like McDonalds not being allowed to sell salads and chicken sandwichs because it started off as a hamburger joint. By allowing the tracks to expand their gambling menus you are benefiting the tracks, the racing industry and all associated businesses.

I don't think racing has improved at slots tracks. You may get a horse or two for upper class races you wouldn't have got but no overall. And when a Thursday Philly Park race with an overinflated purse draws one or two runners out of NY, what good does that do? None, really. The Phil Park pools are too small and the takeout too usurious to wager seriously into so all you get in the end iis a watered down NY race.

I don't think slot machines compete for horse players. I doubt you can go to a slot room at a racino and see three people with a racing form. I do not believe they are the same people, no.

Should some tracks die because they cannot compete? Absolutely. I don't see anything wrong with people, businesses or industries who cannot compete failing. The favorable treatment you speak of I don't understand. It's not right to say that in one sentence without following it in the next by saying that the slot tracks are created, at least in great part, by the horse racing industry itself.

Your on your own with the McDonalds analogy. I don't get it. That's like saying US Steel should have gotten saved in the end despite the fact the economy changed and they couldn't compete. Who should have paid? Microsoft?

I'm not a takeout/regulations expert, so I concede there. But how can Ellis do what they did? It's possible, apparently.

It's not as if every single track that is succesful has slots. Tampa, Oaklawn, Arlington, Santa Anita, Keeneland all had or are having good meets this year. It's possible, apparently.

I understand that a new race track with high purses is a good thing for people who earn their money racing and like I said, people should certainly earn whatever they can.

If you try to explain to a non-racing fan what Presque is and why the purses there are as high as DelMAr and Saratoga but pools are going to be so low that a $100 wager will bang it up so much that you cannot bet the track, you'll get a confused response.

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think tracks should exist if wagering does not support them.

[sumitas]

The purses at Presque Isle have to be a plus, imo. All races on the card benefit. What's not to like ?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

I don't think racing has improved at slots tracks. You may get a horse or two for upper class races you wouldn't have got but no overall. And when a Thursday Philly Park race with an overinflated purse draws one or two runners out of NY, what good does that do? None, really. The Phil Park pools are too small and the takeout too usurious to wager seriously into so all you get in the end iis a watered down NY race.

I don't think slot machines compete for horse players. I doubt you can go to a slot room at a racino and see three people with a racing form. I do not believe they are the same people, no.

Should some tracks die because they cannot compete? Absolutely. I don't see anything wrong with people, businesses or industries who cannot compete failing. The favorable treatment you speak of I don't understand. It's not right to say that in one sentence without following it in the next by saying that the slot tracks are created, at least in great part, by the horse racing industry itself.

Your on your own with the McDonalds analogy. I don't get it. That's like saying US Steel should have gotten saved in the end despite the fact the economy changed and they couldn't compete. Who should have paid? Microsoft?

I'm not a takeout/regulations expert, so I concede there. But how can Ellis do what they did? It's possible, apparently.

It's not as if every single track that is succesful has slots. Tampa, Oaklawn, Arlington, Santa Anita, Keeneland all had or are having good meets this year. It's possible, apparently.

I understand that a new race track with high purses is a good thing for people who earn their money racing and like I said, people should certainly earn whatever they can.

If you try to explain to a non-racing fan what Presque is and why the purses there are as high as DelMAr and Saratoga but pools are going to be so low that a $100 wager will bang it up so much that you cannot bet the track, you'll get a confused response.

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think tracks should exist if wagering does not support them.

If you dont think that Praire Meadows, Charlestown, Mountaineer, and Woodbine dont have better racing than before slots you must have a short memory.

The McDonalds analogy was saying that a restaurant should be able to offer more items on its menu as the market changes just as the tracks should be able to offer more gambling options as the market changes. As partners with the track the horsemen should be able to share in the proceeds of the new menu.

Ellis had to petition the horseracing authority to get permission to drop the takeout in the pick 4. KY has one of the few racing commissions that allows the tracks to lower takeout rather easily

Why would there ever be a need to explain Presque Isles purses to a nonracing fan? Why would anyone care? Why do you care?

[scanman]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think tracks should exist if wagering does not support them.

That being the case, then surely, Presque Isle Downs would have never come into existence.

As most people know, Mountaineer Gaming is only using the track as a means to generate income from the slots in an area where no slot gambling is available. A smart investment move by Mountaineer.

Did racing need another track in northwestern PA? Absolutely not. With 7 tracks within a 5 hour drive (Penn National, Mountaineer, Thistledowns, Beulah Park, Finger Lakes, Woodbine and Fort Erie), why in the world would racing need another track in an area where tracks already struggle to fill their races? It doesn't. But since Presque Isle Downs will become a reality, let's look at the positive effects it will have on racing.

1) Excellent purses that will benefit everyone involved in racing (owners, trainers, jocks, stable staff)
2) Economic boost to the agricultural industry in the area, as well as a positive employment impact.

Will it generate great racing? Doubtful. Have to wait and see. Surely the large purses will/should attract better horses, but next year when they run their meeting (May-Sep) they will be competing against Bel/Sar, WO, AP and to a lesser degree Pen, Pha, Del and Mth. Just not enough good horses to go around, so yeah, racing will be diluted. But I don't see where that's a big deal, because a genuine fan should/will appreciate racing at all levels. Racing is racing. Within the last year I've witnessed great enthusiam for racing equally in the grandstands at the "great" Churchill Downs and the "lowly" Flagstaff.

As far as slots being a prop for racing, (it is), but I don't see a problem with that either. Anything that puts money into racing to keep it going or to stimulate growth is a good thing.

[Left Bank]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

So it would be better if there was just a casino and the money that goes to purses could just go to the politicians pet pork projects?

It will soon anyway.They always change their minds{Politicians}and when the money gets big,and their budgets are coming up in the red,they will come for your slots money.What they give,they will also take away.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Kimmeastar

It will soon anyway.They always change their minds{Politicians}and when the money gets big,and their budgets are coming up in the red,they will come for your slots money.What they give,they will also take away.

Unfortunate but true