We'll agree to disagree about how much viewership Goldikova will garner if she is marketed in the same manner as Zenyatta was. People like to think they are seeing something special. That is why 60 Minutes went with the "greatest horse ever" nonsense. That is why the interviewer asked Mike Smith if Zenyatta is better than Secretariat. That's why the talking heads on ESPN's PTI were calling her the best ever before the Classic because she had never lost. Market Goldikova as the best miler ever and throw in the story about her trainer being a former jock, maybe something about what she drinks....ratings gold.
Again, the races she entered were more heavily attended because people wanted to be a part of the experience. How many of those people came again? Considering the state of California racing, I'm not really sure her impact has been anything other than inflated attendance 5 times a year.
I'm not going to assume these new "fans" were educated. I'm not sure why you would. Was there any education in the 60 Minutes piece? How about the ESPN coverage? I didn't see any. I would say your experience with Arazi is more the exception than the rule. Especially when you consider who the focus of the marketing blitz around Zenyatta was targeting.
IMO horse racing needs to try and draw in gamblers and people that follow other sports like football, basketball etc. Football fans pay big money to attend games, buy tons of merchandise and many of them gamble on games. Sports betting is a billion dollar industry by many accounts. I'm glad there was a lot of exposure for the sport, but I just don't know how effective it will be.
|