Yes. And so what if Randall's honesty is negative.
And, unless you are in England, it is "privAtization," in England, it is "privAtiSation." Thank you for your support.

No, it's you who are missing the point. If government didn't have its hands so deep into racing's pockets, tracks probably wouldn't need VLTs to survive. The "current model" is broken because of the heavy "taxes" that government imposes on racing, unlike other gambling enterprises such as casinos. (That's why the "takeout" at those venues can be so much lower than at race tracks.) The reason NYRA has the highest handle in the country yet purses that are not commensurate with that handle is the huge "skim" going to government. Alex Waldrop spelled this out very well in testimony earlier this year to the NYS Senate Racing Committee.

That skim is specific to issues within NY state, that is not the same issue in NJ. OTB issues, that have nothing to do with NJ issues which is what this thread started out as. You are trying to paint with a broad brush. The government is part of the problem, to say it is the whole problem in racing is untrue.

Aren't VLT's a form of gambling? Why should tracks be prevented from exploring other avenues of gambling when the current landscape already allows that in competiting states? Isn't the gov't restricting the types of gambling allowed at track in NJ? So if they want to play favorites with private gambling businesses, why shouldn't the racetrack get paid if they arent allowed to expand their menu? The state shouldnt be in the racetrack business because most states cant run any business profitably. But that doesn't mean that the racetracks aren't still hamstrung by the states decisions.

Honesty isn't in question here. Randall has totally oversimplified the entire situation and used quotes by politicians in doing so. I dont know which is worse. Or if you are a product of the NY education system, worser.

They arent made out to be a problem because they are quite profitable and the state doesnt want to give them up.

........i need a $2 tri box and a blumpkin

Once again Chuck it is tiring to say the same thing over again. I was against the bailouts. I am against the state helping casinos, I am against the state helping the autos, I am against the state helping horse racing if it means losing millions of taxpayer dollars in the process. Why you continually change the subject is beyond me...

Explore away on VLTs. I'm at a loss for seeing how pulling a handle is helping boost the sport in any kind of long term way. I don't expect someone who works in the industry to turn down a handout.

Not in NJ I didn't....I can't speak for every jurisdiction. NJ racing is losing money and has been for many many years.

You simply refuse to understand the issue. Companies and industry doesnt operate in a vacuum, they pay taxes and employ people as well. The "subsidies" that you refer to in NJ are directly related to VLT's. That is pretty obvious to us 'insiders'.

What is "New Jersey racing"?

You aren't an insider. Your bread is buttered by the industry which in effect calls everything you would say on this into question.

Is this a real question? Monmouth and the Meadowlands. And yes our budget shortfall and is in the billions per year currently. Would you like to reduce the school lunch program or close Harness racing as a starting point.

Seriously? Are you really this ignorant?

Another excellent answer Chuck and yet another insult rather than a response. The thread is about NJ racing and our budgetary issues as a state.

If VLTs are so successful, why have horse racing at all? It is about where your gambling dollars are going to go. If you want to funnel VLT money into horse racing forever, I'm wondering where that business model ends. When VLTs are around every corner? When does the horse racing product on its own make money.

Are you really this ignorant? Part 2

Again, as a horse trainer what would one expect you to say? Much easier to call someone ignorant or negative than come up with a cogent response. That is par for the course on a message board.

Saying that because I am involved in an industry anything I say on said industry should be called in question isn't ignorant? As if my opinion or better yet, your view on the issue matter.

Quite a few people in the thread have attempted to relay to you that your take on the issue is mindnumbingly wrong. Your simplistic view on the issue just doesnt take into consideration pesky little items like facts.

And the idea that any business should be unable to expand its offerings to compete in a changing market is myopic.

Why doesn't McDonalds just sell hamburgers? They are in the hamburger business right?

Ah the veiled insult. As a horse trainer I seem far more able to read and comprehend this particular topic than you can, regardless of whatever profession that you are a member of.

This is a terrible post, it basically proves my point. Does McDonalds have VLT's?...Apples to apples I can talk about. And yes, the fact that it is likely that half the trainers out there will have less income or no job 10 years from now probably does cloud your ability to discuss the subject.

Not really. I don't teach math. I understand it though.

Lets try to move slow here for you.
1. You said in this thread that tracks are in the gambling business. This is correct.
2. VLT's are a gambling product. We can agree on this.
3. Tracks in surrounding states all have VLT's. Correct?

But NJ tracks and racing in general shouldnt be allowed to have VLT's? Why again? Because of the potential long term hazzards? You realize that the long term is only pertinent if the patient survives the short term?

McDonalds isn't in the gambling business therefore has no claim to expand its gambling menu.

Obviously Political Science isn't a strong suit

So again you answered no question? Your fix is to have VLTs everywhere at every track....Notice I've yet to see how that creates racing fans who bet on racing product....Keep that patient alive alright. I'm sure it will come out of that coma good as new.

just curious....are any of the california racetracks subsidized by the state?

Actually it's more like should McDonalds be allowed to sell Burger King hamburgers.

Returning to the topic, enough about the state "subsidy". It's not a goddamn subsidy and I'm sick of hearing it be called that. It's a phuckin BRIBE by the ratty AC casinos who (mostly) deserve to be shuttered if their product is substandard to what the tracks are proposing.

Oh. THAT'S what I meant to say. How did you do in that 10K contest?