[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Withers

Sorry to exercise right of response so late, but really, there are LOADS of sports that operate without betting revenues. What exactly makes horseracing so different? Other sports manage to fund multimillion dollar stadiums. Why? Because of their massive fan base and appeal and the fact that people watch the sport and exert so much pressure on local governments that they put themselves in debt to keep local constituencies happy. Nothing wrong with betting revenues, and yes, they currently support the sport. I'm just suggesting that horseracing, by making betting king, is equating itself to slots...and there's no sport in slots, however much money it generates. People need heroes and human interest stories. When more than 100,000 show up in the pouring rain to watch Funny Cide as they did, it wasn't betting that brought them out, and their support does help the sport. If TV ratings are not important, why does DRF report on them after every single Derby/Preakness/Belmont? Why is Superbowl advertising so important? But don't worry, I'm sure you all are right that betting is all that matters to horseracing's future success. Big handles, big purses, and no TV audience and everything is great...the sport is in full freefall, but of course the current model is working...

The day i walk into the sports authority and see as many horsey jerseys as football jerseys will be the day blackthroatedwind sees spooky mulder in the HOF.

i can hear it now "Our top selling jersey this year is Stormello - not Carmello"