I can't help you if you don't want to help yourself.

Your taking it to a new level with this ****.

Please concern yourself with yourself.

Why dont you say something relevant?
Comment on his point, instead of making your own **** up.

Hmm.

And here I always thought I was bred because my parents were horny.

He has no point. He is wrong. Your buttboy Doug agrees with me. Get on board big boy.

So because Doug agrees its right?
Ill keep that in mind for future DT discussions.

Not at all, but since you can't think for yourself I figured you'd blindly follow whatever he has to say....That is my last response to you in this thread.

LOL. First time I have been told I cant think for myself.
Please dont respond again, it would be best for everyone.

I have no point? Have you read this thread? Your status as board douchebag is firmly in place but seriously, your "I'm smarter than you mantra" is old and tiresome.

You have done nothing but spout a tagline about takeout going up and starving the beast then tried to make a stupid comparison to taxation being a deterrent. Meanwhile, I've tried to tell you that from a business perspective the takeout increase is a viable last ditch effort for an entity that is failing slowly but surely.

So hey, if you have a second, break down where each wagering dollar in CA goes and let me know where you can trim from.

Last ditch effort, huh?

Sort of like in a 'sending pictures of your cock to a girl who isn't interested in going out with you' kind of way.

Proof is in the pudding. All I know is you don't raise taxes during a depression and you don't raise takeout during a depression. And I realize they didn't on WPS but it doesn't matter....Plus why anyone is supporting 4 and 5 horse fields is beyond me. The inner has never looked better.

Brett tried. Wrangler http://www.sportsgrid.com/nfl/snl-br...re-commercial/

So from a business perspective, you believe the takeout increase will be a detrimental move? I'll be more than happy to post the daily handle figures for SA each day compared to the same period in 2009-2010. That's basically what this boils down to, but feel free to insert any pertinent cock joke.

Nope. Nice try. There will be a bounce from going back to dirt that has nothing to do with the takeout point.

And supporting a takeout increase because you know your product is about to become more attractive to your customers is a bad business move how?

Huh, we are talking passed each other? They will get bigger fields as a result of returning to dirt. They would get bigger fields if they would cut down on the racing in general. And they wouldn't have to raise takeout to do it.

Wait, so which is it?

I would never argue that supporting a bad product is a good idea, especially when you think the price is too high. However, my point from the beginning has been that, dirt plus increased purses based on increased handle is going to lead to increased interest.

SA could have tried to run on a broken track, had a few cancellations, continued to watch their handle slide as it has at the last God knows how many synth meets. Or they could have switched to dirt, been able to bring back some barns that left or bring in some that are new and develop a better product. They chose the latter. I think they made the right call.

Why do you need both?

Yes synthetic has been a disaster from every perspective I can think of. So go back to dirt and see where you are handle wise. Maybe the boost you get in handle means you can offer bigger purses....Maybe. And then I look at California's budget conditions and I wonder what the future looks like out there. They are in store for more IOUs starting early next year. Kick the can. Racing doesn't get kicked by increasing the tax on the game IMO.

You're going from an already draconian level - to a little higher level.

Detrimental move? Maybe not in the extreme short-term - but in the long term, yes.