|| Thoroughbred Takeout Increase in California?
|HANA has learned that California's thoroughbred tracks and horsemen are spearheading an effort calling for a takeout increase on exotic wagers at California's thoroughbred tracks. |
Read more at the HANA Blog:
|Horseplayer Group Battles Calif. Takeout Hike:|
|I really think now is time for s boycott.|
In advance. To show the weight we have when united
|AB 2414 being amended on the CA Senate floor this afternoon:|
First the bad news...
1. Takeout increase for exotic wagers:
2% increase DD and EXA.
3% increase all other exotics.
2. Thoroughbred signal fees: Set by statute at 8% plus up to 3% for "I'm not really clear what."
Now some good news:
3. A provision is being added as I type this to allow Betfair to operate a betting exchange.
The full text of the amended bill will be available on the ca.gov website sometime on Monday.
Now you know what I know...
|Havent bet one dollar into Cali all year and this just makes it permanent.|
Will burn my money before betting into their pools
|I thought there was a federal law restricting betting with betfair or any foreign book? How can Calif pass a law to make this legal? |
It's ridiculous to call internet betting immoral or illegal when the only difference is what country takes your action. I'm just curious how California plans to get around this? If TVG handles it then IRS gets a piece of the pie and maybe that will make it moral again.
A betting exchange might be a good thing even with IRS peaking at us. What will matter is what tax they place on the bets.
|You presented a good arguement on TVG against a tax increase, Jeff. I don't think think the head of TVG understands the consequences of the tax increase that he defends. TVG claims that 85% of the betting public are 50 years old and older. An increase in taxes will only cause many of the 50+ types to stop betting in CA.|
If we want to block a tax increase then it seems that it's a matter of generating a lot of mail to the Calif Reps who will be voting on this issue.
|HANA members have generated several hundred letters, phone calls, and emails to Assembly Members, State Senators, the Governor's Office, and the CHRB... with virtually ALL of them strongly opposed to a takeout increase.|
Despite that, amendments providing for a takeout and signal fee increase were tacked onto an otherwise innocent bill designed to promote the Breeder's Cup.
One of the things I voiced to my State Senator was the fact that alomst all of racing's ills are self inflicted.
Successful businesses GROW because they figure out the needs and wants of their target customer and make it their mission to satisfy those needs and wants.
Every failed business that you can name failed to do that at some point along the way.
Racing fails miserably when it comes to satisfying racing customer needs and wants.
I did everything I could to voice the following to my state senator:
Instead of a takeout increase, the Legislature should be directing racing's decision makers to identify the needs and wants of the customer and then ACT to satisfy those needs and wants.
In other words, GROW your business!
I think having the Betfair provision added onto the same bill that many in racing wanted to use as a vehicle for a takeout increase is the Legislature's way of telling racing decision makers:
Sorry. No free lunch. Grow your business.
It will be very interesting to see how this plays out this week with Golden Gate, Santa Anita, and CDI/Twinspires lining up to kill the very bill they were trying to use as a vehicle to force a takeout increase down our throats.
|From what I've read and heard, the BetFair prop is a non starter and a red herring to take focus off handle increase. Under the bill the horsemen would have veto power over exchange betting and they seem to be the ones pushing handle increase. They will stamp their little feet about exchange betting but then smile all the way to the bank with the handle robbery loot!|
~Edited by: Platinum2010Jul on: 8/24/2010 at: 11:09:17 PM~
California bill would raise takeout on exotics:
|I don't think we'll ever get a straight answer from the California racing industry. I read about SAX going back to a dirt surface. It was my understanding that a state law was passed that required synthetic surface on all major tracks by a certain date. I don't remember the date but it was around the time that BMX shut down because they didn't want to invest in the poly surface. Now SAX simply decides to go back to dirt on their own. There's something wrong with this picture. I like the return to dirt but not the BS.|
The tax increase might be more difficult to identify who did what for the people that will vote on the issue. It bothers me that I haven't recieved even one response from emails that I sent to two Senators and two Congressmen.
|Mike, It's my understanding that the thoroughbred racing association tracks SA, HOL, DMR, and GG were required by CHRB mandate to switch over to synthetic surfaces. Fair meets like SR, PLN, FPX, etc. were exempt from the mandate because their meets are so short. Los Al was exempt because they are a QH association not thoroughbred. BM was exempt because the property had been sold and was slated for the bulldozers. |
Last year, the CHRB lifted its mandate against synthetic surfaces - allowing the thoroughbred racing association tracks SA, HOL, DMR, and GG to petition the CHRB to return to a natural dirt surface on an individual track basis.
If 5 years ago someone had wanted to bet me:
1. BM would be reduced to a pile of rubble -
2. With HOL slated to be next -
3. SA and GG would end up in bankruptcy court seeking protection from their creditors -
4. The chairman of the CHRB would be caught on video in the parking lot at HOL keying Jerry Jamgotchian's car -
5. Bo Derek would be appointed one of the Commissioners on the CHRB and insist that racing takeout at Los Al (22%) would actually be lower than slot machine takeout (8%) while I was testifying about takeout before the CHRB -
6. The TOC would author a bill calling for a thoroughbred takeout increase after seeing brick and mortar handle at Los Al plunge 27% for the first 6 months after their takeout increase -
7. And the same TOC would be ok with a provision on that same bill legalizing exchange wagering --
I'd have bet everything I own that NONE of the above could possibly happen in a million years.
|Quick update on the status of the bill...|
No action was taken by the Senate again today.
It appears the Senate may be (purposely) dragging their collective feet on this given the amt of industry pushback.
No guarantees.... But there is a small ray of hope the Senate might not get to this bill (3 work days left) before the session ends on 8/31/2010.
~Edited by: jeff on: 8/26/2010 at: 9:14:14 PM~
|Dirty Rotten Scoundrels...|
George Wiley is a staff consultant who works for The Speaker of The California Assembly John A. Perez
I received the following email this morning:
Subject: change of plans...
From : "Wiley, George"
To : "'firstname.lastname@example.org'"
Received : 08-30-2010 11:04 AM
Hi Jeff...because the Senate refused to grant us a hearing on the Speaker's AB 2414, a decision was made over the weekend to instead utilize a Senate bill (SB 1072) that is in the Assembly to incorporate the current contents on AB 2414. That bill will be heard today in the Assembly GO and Appropriations Committee. Additionally, the exchange wagering authorization is going to be delayed until May 2012. That, and some other minor changes appears to have prompted Magna going neutral on the bill (still trying to confirm this). Please give me a call if you have any other questions...George Wiley
If they enact a takeout increase without a mitigating offset such as exchange wagering, I say the California product does not deserve one single penny of player business.
~Edited by: jeff on: 8/30/2010 at: 12:58:24 PM~
|I'm not sure what this is but it looks to me like SB 1072 was passed on 8/23 or at least an agreement was made earlier? This might be outdated and just not cleaned up. I'm curious if TVG will talk about this.|
The link that I got this from is:
CURRENT BILL STATUS
MEASURE : S.B. No. 1072
AUTHOR(S) : Calderon.
TOPIC : Horse racing: statewide marketing organization.
HOUSE LOCATION : ASM
+LAST AMENDED DATE : 08/20/2010
TYPE OF BILL :
Majority Vote Required
Non-State-Mandated Local Program
LAST HIST. ACT. DATE: 08/23/2010
LAST HIST. ACTION : Assembly Rule 69(d) suspended. Re-referred to Com. On
G.O. pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2.
COMM. LOCATION : ASM APPROPRIATIONS
COMM. ACTION DATE : 08/12/2010
COMM. ACTION : Do pass as amended.
COMM. VOTE SUMMARY : Ayes: 17 Noes: 00 PASS
TITLE : An act to amend Section 19605.73 of, and to add Section
19642.1 to, the Business and Professions Code, relating
to horse racing.
|Link to the text of SB 1072 as amended yesterday:|
|California takeout bill goes to governor|
|"The measure could raise $25 million to $30 million annually"|
So do they have a betting exchange set up yet where I can lay some action against this projection coming true?
|I think they stiffed the betting exchange, Steve. I should qualify my statement. The exchange isn't dead just put on hold for a year and then what??|
~Edited by: mikejlb on: 9/2/2010 at: 1:12:07 AM~
|The silliest argument I still continue to hear from players who should know better is that people who go to the track "don't know what the takeout rate is, so raising wont impact them". While sure there is no doubt some players who play on and off track have no idea what the takeout is. While I would argue that the majority of money in the pools knows the takeout but thats for another day thats beside the point. The point is someone doesnt have to "know" that the cost of something is increasing to be dramatically impacted. Means more trips to the ATM. An increase in losses for the losing player and a reduction in winnings (if there one single winning player really out there oblivious of takeout) for the winning player. But other than that no impact. Oh yeah possibly expedite the player giving up the game due to to increased losses. But yeah other than that no impact.|
|It might be worth the expense and effort to print out an information sheet that would show the tax rates at all the tracks, information about the bill in CA, and what HANA is about. Volunteers might distribute the info sheets on windshields of cars parked at various race tracks. I think just a few busy race days would cover most people that go to the track and then the project would be finished. Too much work? Yeah maybe... I'm carrying too many extra pounds so it might be a good thing for me.|
|If you walk into a store to buy a loaf of bread, and notice that the bread is stale and overpriced, you put it down and you walk out of the store.|
Thousands of racing customers have been doing just that for the better part of a decade now. If you take all sources handle as it existed in 2003 and adjust it for inflation, and you compare it to all sources handle today in 2010, you will discover that all sources handle today in 2010 is approximately one half of what it was just seven years ago in 2003.
Consider the real life case where instead of walking out of the store, a group of conscientious racing customers took the time to contact the owners of the store and explain to them in a reasonable and intelligent manner why thousands of racing customers have been buying their bread somewhere else.
Instead of listening to the customer group’s suggestions, the owners of the store decided to implement a takeout increase at one of their stores: Los Alamitos.
Oddly enough, this same group of racing customers presented data to the CHRB clearly showing that year over year on track handle at Los Alamitos was down more than 27 percent during the six month period immediately following that takeout increase.
Instead of rescinding the takeout increase (as had been promised at the time it was implemented if it caused handle to drop) the CHRB voted unanimously to keep it in force – effectively telling racing customers everywhere what they could do with their ideas about fresh bread at competitive prices.
Shortly afterwards, the owners of the store lobbied the California Legislature to amend an innocuous bill originally written to promote the Breeder’s Cup. They were able to convince John A. Perez (D) to tack on provisions mandating a takeout increase of up to 15% over previous levels for exotic wagers at California's thoroughbred tracks. Takeout on exactas and daily doubles was raised to 22.68%. Takeout on all other exotic wagers was raised to 23.68%.
The above events actually took place during 2010.
Who are the owners of the store?
Hollywood Park, Del Mar Thoroughbred Club, Santa Anita, Golden Gate Fields, Los Alamitos, the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC), and the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB).
Who is the customer group?
The state law?
At the September, 2010 CHRB meeting, when it was announced that Senate Bill 1072 had been signed into law by the Governor: The owners of the store stood up and cheered.
At some point, as a consumer, you have to consider the possibility that the owners of the store no longer deserve your business.
That’s exactly where horseplayers are at right now given the recent actions of the store owners in California.
You do not raise prices in the face of economic downturn. You lower them.
The store owners in other states are watching. It’s time for players everywhere to send a clear message back to the store owners. It’s time for players to start speaking with their wallets.
To me, the fact that other states still have takeout even higher than California’s new 23.68 percent takeout on trifectas is irrelevant. California is where the store owners decided to raise takeout over the objections of the players. California is where the CHRB ignored the facts related to the Los Al takeout increase. California is where the track owners, the TOC, and the head of the CHRB lobbied the Legislature for a takeout increase. California is where the Legislature ignored the voice of the player and passed that takeout increase. California is where the Governor ignored the voice of the player and signed Senate Bill 1072 into law. California is where the owners of the store made comments like the following after they enacted the takeout increase:
CHRB Commissioner David Israel:
“People often say we are competing with the casinos. I think that’s shortsighted and wrong. We’re not competing with casinos. We’re in the entertainment business. We’re competing with the Dodgers and the Giants and the Angels and the Lakers and we’re putting on a show..."
CHRB Commissioner Keith Brackpool:
"We offer in California the premier racing product on a year-round basis,” he said, “but we were offering our first-class product at a discount price. We’re changing the pricing model. We left win-place-show where it is. But we came up with a solution that will produce $30 million more a year. That’s a 25-to-30% increase in overnight purses."
I hate to use the word boycott, but in my opinion the owners of the store in California clearly no longer deserve even one penny of my business.
I have to put the question out there to other players:
Has the time come for an organized national players’ boycott of California racing?
|You are so right!! It's time...to "buy bread" some place else!!|
|Southern Cali is my circuit of first choice. It's the circuit I've specialized in and played mostly on track going back 20+ years. This afternoon I read the transcripts of the January 2010 and July 2010 CHRB meetings. The way Platt and Meadow were treated at the July 2010 CHRB meeting coupled with the passage of SB 1072 coupled with Brackpool's comments afterwards cinched it for me. |
They no longer deserve my money.
Please organize a boycott and yes count me in.
~Edited by: Charlie James on: 9/30/2010 at: 1:02:57 AM~
|The PlayersBoycott.org site is now live:|
Q. Who is behind the boycott effort?
A. Players who believe "enough is enough" who are willing to stand up for what they believe in.
Btw, that describes me and this effort has my full support. Not only that, I volunteered some of my free time to help get the site off the ground.
When I asked the JCapper user community what they thought an appropriate response to the TOC/CHRB takeout increase might be, their response was loud and clear. As players they told me (passionate 2/3rds majority) that an organized boycott of California Thoroughbred Racing was absolutely the right thing to do.
When I put the question to the HANA member database, roughly 2/3rds of our member players said exactly same thing.
Still, deciding to launch a boycott effort was not an easy decision. Over the past two years HANA has established more than a few solid working relationships with industry decision makers. By backing or sponsoring a boycott, no doubt some of those relationships will be put at risk.
That said, the actions of the TOC and CHRB towards players over the past year have been nothing short of appalling.
Your participation in The National Players' Boycott Of California Thoroughbred Racing effort will help shine a very public spotlight on the actions of the CHRB and TOC and bring about much needed change.
We ask you to consider carefully the idea that every handle dollar spent on California thoroughbred racing is a vote in support of higher takeout and a vote to support the mistaken belief expressed by the CHRB and the TOC that the customer is irrelevant.
You have a choice when it comes to where you spend your money.
Every handle dollar not bet on the California thoroughbred racing product is a vote for change and a vote to send a very clear message to the CHRB and the TOC:
The customer DOES in fact matter.
Feel free to pass the link on to every player you know.
|It appears a lot of players may already be boycotting...|
Paulick Report - Handle drops significantly in Santa Anita opener:
"Handle drops significantly in Santa Anita opener--end quote
While both attendance and handle dipped for the 2010 Santa Anita winter meet opener, the disparity in their respective declines was measurable. Attendance was 34,268 or a decline of 4 percent over 2009. However, all-sources handle was down 23.6 percent.
Was this due to the poor weather on the East Coast, the uncertainty of a newly installed dirt surface or did the horesplayers boycott have the desired effect?"
|I guess we'll see which way it trends, but I'd have assumed that the bad weather in the east would've helped; people stuck inside, and track closings leading to fewer alternative wagering opportunities seems like it would've funneled more money towards California. |
Also, Aqueduct is closed this entire week; last year, it was open when SA opened. I could be wrong, but I don't think all the NYRA bettors are taking the whole week off too. Some of that handle should be showing up elsewhere, but it sure didn't show up at SA. It would be interesting to compare the handle trends at Tampa and Calder to see if they showed similar declines.
|Looking at the numbers, this decrease isn't really a fair comparison, because last year opening day was a saturday and this year, it was a sunday. With attention and gambling dollars being diverted to football, I don't think you can compare these two sets of numbers. If you compare the first sunday vs. the first sunday, it's probably a better comparison, but it's still biased because this year's first sunday being "opening day", probably inflated the handle. That said, if you do compare the two first sundays, SA is up 17%; however, Tampa is up 53% over these same two days. Unfortunately, Calder and Fair Grounds don't tally up the handles in the charts at BRIS.|
My interpretation of the numbers is that the bad weather and the AQU hiatus did benefit the other tracks, but SA didn't benefit nearly as much as they should have. However, until more numbers come in that show otherwise, the SA execs will probably point to the +17% and claim success.
|With Aqueduct reopening yesterday, we've now got some good numbers to compare. Comparing yesterday's interstate handles with the interstate handles on 12/30/09 (also a wednesday), SA was down 36%... AQU was down 9% and TAM was UP 4%. I think takeout deniers might have a hard time rationalizing these numbers.|
|A tale of two tracks:|
|Great to see these handle trends continuing. At this point, do you think it would be a good idea to pepper the CHRB with emails asking for a reaction?|
|HANA Blog - How Do Sports Bettors & Poker Players Feel About Horse Racing?|
How Do Sports Bettors & Poker Players Feel About Horse Racing?