Good point. Attendance at NYRA is sort of a flawed stat because of spinners. NYRA's attendance figures are greatly impacted by potential Triple Crown on Belmont day and weekend spinners at Saratoga.

If Honor Code is undefeated and going for the Triple Crown and 135000 people show up for Belmont day the increase will be labeled a good idea. If we have another spotty TC season and a weak giveaway or two at Saratoga the idea will be labeled a failure.

I know I'm only one person, but this is what keeps me betting from my recliner. The dregs of society and stench of losing at OTB's keeps me far away, and I'll only visit a top tier track once in a blue moon and that almost always seems to be on vacation.

My gambling friends who know little to nothing about horse racing sometimes ask me (crazy i know) for a play or two. Rest assured, they always have a snarky comment to me about the people that visit these betting outlets and joke about how I'll one day be one of these guys lol. Needless to say, there's a stigma that goes along with horse players. Right or wrong, it's there, and I think it prevents some of the newbie generation from jumping in feet first.

I've also wondered what racetracks would look like if they followed the NFL's footsteps in making home viewership so much more enjoyable than year's past. Apples and oranges in comparison to product, just something that crosses my mind from time to time.

That hasn't been my experience.

Isnt this all about dressing up NYRA so it is more attractive to a potential buyer?

This really hits home for me. I love this game more than almost anything, but I'm often embarrassed to tell people I'm a horseplayer because I'll get dirty looks or jokes about ticket pickers/bums in smelly OTB's and a general lack of respect for a craft I work really hard at. No one would bat an eye if I said I was a poker player, in fact most would probably think it's cool. I don't know how to fix it, but betting on horses has a major image problem and is just about the least sexy game in the world in the eyes of most people my age and younger. It's incredibly far from the truth, but perception is reality in many respects.

It is all about Cuomo trying to find a way to cast NYRA off on its own after his coup of seizing NYRA properties to build his casinos while taking away the slots money so he and his criminal cronies can frivolously spend more money all while claiming that the horse racing industry can stand on its own feet to try to avoid the negative backlash of stripping the casino money.

Cuomo does not care what happens to the industry as long as he can get rid of it without egg on his face. He is an embarrassment to this State.

While I agree with the spirit of the post I think this is less nefarious. If you are looking to sell something you dress it up. To me this has nothing to do with it being a Premier product like some think and being worth more. I think its fair to charge whatever the market will bare and I think its fine to earn. I think neither is at work here.. To me this is window dressing pure and simple

You dont live in NY.

It costs $280 for a decent seat at a Knicks game. They kinda suck. Prices havent gone down here, ever.

What about when NFL teams make you buy preseason games at full cost if you are a season ticket holder? Do they give you a break if the team stinks?

What about "premium pricing", making you pay more for games against better teams?

What about when the Knicks forced season ticket holders to also buy season tickets to the WNBA team as well?

In theory.

Don't forget about seat license fees. Even the Jets had the noggins to force that crap on their fans.

I can see an overseas bookmaking company buying NYRA. They can stand losing money while they hope America becomes more open to sports betting. Didn't Betfair do this with TVG? The real estate (not literally) is worth a lot, considering just how much money is wagered at 11/10 illegally.

NYRA isnt going to be sold. They are looking to put management back into private hands but the land is now the states and who in their right mind would pay to manage NYRA with no slot revenues, no land ownership, political instability, an unknown decision concerning OTB's in NYC, properties in need of repair, massive pension liabilities, etc.

I dont believe that the land is for sale.

Why would you believe that if sports betting comes to pass that the state will just hand it over to NYRA?

I didn't realize you were specifying New York. I love visiting, but I would NEVER live there.

I thought we were discussing the NY market. Teams here seem to raise prices every year regardless and there havent been many parades.

Not talking about the physical land.. Talking about the gambling landscape and the potential to be the the first ones to operate a book in NYC

I doubt that being associated with NYRA will give them a leg up. Sports betting isnt close right now either. NJ keeps losing in court and that is with a sponsor for the bill and support from the state.

I have less problem increasing it for Saratoga than for Belmont....It should be tiered. Admission for AQ should be free.

New York City has a population 28 times larger than Pittsburgh.

Even though Pittsburgh has better sports teams in every major sport that doesn't involve large black men running over hardwood, it would stand to reason that ticket prices should be much higher in NYC than Pittsburgh.

There's only so much good seating at a major sporting event. I've been to Belmont Park on a major racing day before, it was the opposite of crowded. It was extremely comfortable.

How many racino's charge admission?

The people who are saying "the admission prices were the same over 100 years ago at NY tracks" are technically correct ... but that was an entirely different game. You had a bunch of on-site bookmakers working on razor thin margins, and you could pick and choose the best deals. Adjusted for inflation, "Plungers" bet today's equivalent of hundreds of thousands of dollars on a single race, sometimes.

You can gauge on admission when the takeout is about 1% and sometimes flirting with positive expectation, instead of 16%

But tickets keep selling, totally different thing. Obviously the prices are market driven. We'll see if that works at the track. The times I've been to Belmont on non-Belmont Stakes days, I was nearly run over by a few tumbleweeds.

There is a pretty good secondary market for sports tickets in New York. That means tickets could very well be under priced. That isn't remotely close to true for horse racing.

Completely right. I find it hard to believe that people will become die hard race fans if they don't come to the track. It's not a fortune but there are a lot of people who come to Saratoga who live upstate and have very little. They aren't going to the clubhouse. Ever.

It isn't just New York. I live in Pittsburgh and tickets for the Steelers, Penguins, and Pirates have all gone up substantially while I think attendance in all three leagues has gone down.

Like Doug said, there is a finite number of seats for pro sports. There is an actual demand in most cities. Those that aren't winning and have lots of empty seats don't raise prices that I have seen as a general rule. Even when a local team stinks, people often want to see the stars on the other teams.

There is no demand for clubhouse admission to Belmont, or any admission to Belmont. I could see if this were for days with G1 races, or something like that. But a Wednesday or Thursday afternoon to see five maiden races, a couple claiming races, and some bad statebreds? Come on. You probably won't find two people in the crowd those days that are there for the sporting aspect.

Between tolls and gas they should be paying you to come to Belmont on the weekdays.

The ticket price increase at Saratoga pales in comparison to the increase in the hotel rooms. This year during Travers week it was $285/nt, next year $360/nt.

ticket prices also depend on the opponent. we're pricing hockey games, and caps vs boston is significantly higher priced then caps vs kings.

The uninformed bettor make up the majority of the dead money in the pools. You want these people to fatten up the pools for you to take it away. Would you rather have ONLY saavy handicappers at the track so you can chase 4/5 shots all day? The uninformed bettor is exactly what you want coming to the track. Free admissions will invite more of these people in. I would rather see increases in prices in racing forms, clocker reports, and other sheets because this gives you an edge over your fellow degenerate.

People still go to the track? And they pay? I can see why NYRA would think that they'd then be willing to pay even more.

:D:tro:

I see you changed your post. The undesirables and uninformed are not the same. Part of the reason I used the word "undesirables" is because I was describing people who do not add to the pools but take away from the atmosphere and distract the actual bettors.

will a lousy fiver really make the difference between going to the track or not? hell, people pay hundreds every couple months to upgrade to the latest iphone, if they want to go to the track five bucks won't make the difference.

Its best to reward people coming to the track than to punish them. If you say an extra 2 dollars wont decrease attendance then the counter argument shall be....does it increase it? If so, how? Is there something new and spectacular offered at the track that the new increase is worth me coming? A fiver multiplied by 50 days times 1000 people is money that could be used in the pools. Would you not welcome that or are the hobos that much of a nuissance to you?

Fair enough but I think you can keep out the undesirables either way. Do casinos have undesirables when the admission is zero? They get booted out. Bad for business

ok, make it free for a week-let me know the difference in attendance.

It is free at Remington, and I don't see a bunch of vagrants hanging out.

In any case, wouldn't it actually be easier to remove them when they haven't paid to get in.

Just for my own curiosity how often do you go to the track?
I get the feeling the folks advocating price hikes don't have a lot of skin in the game.

ding ding ding

it's not so much advocating price hikes as saying a two dollar increase is no big deal. how long has it been at $3? prices go up on stuff all the time.

do i go as often as others? no. but whether i went every day or once every third blue moon, $5 is no big deal-especially when one considers it costs twice that, or more, just to park at other venues. or a cab ride to get to a game. the cold pizza i choked down at a football game costs more than that.


like i said earlier, last time i made the jaunt to arlington it was $7 to get in, now it's $8. anyone in that area know if it had an attendance drop due to the increase? you think people went to arlington, got to the ticket booth and said $8?! i'm out of here? and if it's $8 there, $5 starts to sound like a bargain.

Except that this isn't a football game. You go too bet on the races. That is where tracks make their money. And last I looked there are options all over the place for the gambling dollar.

I guess I should just take your advice and suck it up, but from someone who actually attends the races the costs add up, $10 admission $5 program $32 for two seats in the Clubhouse and a couple of bucks for the person who wipes your seat with a dirty rag.
Multiply that by 4 or 5 days per week. So will $6 more dollars be a deal breaker, maybe.