Philly.com

[freddymo]

This high handle nonsense just doesn't fly in the modern world. Go to a rebate shop and tell them you want to 1000 a day on Parx tri's and you will get 21% kick. Talk net takeout not advertised. Handle will be positively effected by lower takeout but remember you are looking for the sweet spot that maximizes play and still leaves enough for operators and the State. If it was truly in the states interest to lower rake on all products they would make the daily pik 3 lottery pay 850 to 1 instead of 500.

Steve and others seem to be of the opinion that because in 1956 horse racing kicked money to state governments exclusively that they hold a legacy to rake from other forms of gambling. That really is extremely parochial IMO (not saying I am right). Racing needs to reinvent itself so that it can stand alone on its own two feet without the help of slots.

[Calzone Lord]

Freddy, just because some of us have the will to get deals from rebate shops or off shore entities, doesn't mean excessive takeout isn't the biggest problem in the sport. This sport can't hold serve with its avg customers. It simply can't grow like it should. All growth is thanks to technology advances that make it way easier to bet than ever before. A lot of avg customers have to be like masochistic Cleveland Browns fans and put up with constant sustained losing. It's tough to subject your customers to those conditions, when they have so many other forms of gambling available to them. The biggest obstacle to growing is the reality of what the rake does, not the rake itself.

[PatCummings]

This article was so ridiculously bad, I literally stopped noting it's generalizations, inaccuracies, lack of context, the legislative history, etc. Everything that may have shown slots at tracks were good was literally marginalized at every turn.

Probably the most egregious example was the number of licenses (jobs, essentially) increasing 241% in seven years was identified as "a gain, though not a big one."

[Calzone Lord]

It was obviously a horrible article.

However, Parx and Penn National should be condemned.

Trifecta Takeout for the three PA tracks:

Presque Isle Downs: 25%
Parx: 30%
Penn National: 31%


Superfecta Takeout for the three PA tracks:

PID: 25%
Parx: 30%
Penn National: 30%


Pick 3 and Pick 4 takeouts:

PID: 23%
Penn National: 25%
Parx: 26%


Penn National and Parx both don't have PID beat in a single wagering category, from win-place-show through Pick 4's.

PID has 50-cent trifectas, 50-cent Pick 3's, 50-cent Pick 4's, and 10-cent supers.

Don't get me wrong...it's not that PID really cares about horse racing. They usually complain about "the state" when it comes to takeout, but they have at least made a small effort to work with "the state" and make their racing product the most attractive option in this pathetic state.

Handle in the second season was laughable here at PID. Now you get some Monday and Tuesday cards with over $40,000 just in the exacta pool, and similar fat pools in the other exotics, all offering low minimums.

No one detests PID's management more than I do...but at least they've made a very small effort in some important areas.

Parx was firmly established as Philly Park and the city of Philadelphia owns one of the five largest populations in the entire United States.

If any track in the world deserves to have such a terrible hack article written about it...it's probably Parx. They've done zero for the racing fan or the good of the sport.

[cmorioles]

Regardless of how bad the article is, slots money will go away, and it will probably be sooner than people think. Imagine if tracks actually have to try to generate handle.

[PatCummings]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Regardless of how bad the article is, slots money will go away, and it will probably be sooner than people think. Imagine if tracks actually have to try to generate handle.

I see it the same way, CJ. Obviously, it seems as though it will take a good long while to get there, and the likelihood of any jurisdiction going from current slots revenue to NO slots revenue support is also highly unlikely. But a slow burn? Probably.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Regardless of how bad the article is, slots money will go away, and it will probably be sooner than people think. Imagine if tracks actually have to try to generate handle.

No ****.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Freddy, just because some of us have the will to get deals from rebate shops or off shore entities, doesn't mean excessive takeout isn't the biggest problem in the sport. This sport can't hold serve with its avg customers. It simply can't grow like it should. All growth is thanks to technology advances that make it way easier to bet than ever before. A lot of avg customers have to be like masochistic Cleveland Browns fans and put up with constant sustained losing. It's tough to subject your customers to those conditions, when they have so many other forms of gambling available to them. The biggest obstacle to growing is the reality of what the rake does, not the rake itself.

Well said

[Cannon Shell]

The obvious points missed that scream for attention is that Greenwood, the owner operator of Parx is a foreign based company and their cut of the slots revenue is far greater than the horse racing industry's share. Of course the only reason that parx/greenwood has slots is because of horseracing however that point always goes unnoticed. As for the conspiracy theory that the state is behind the article I would say that considering the buffoonery who make up the state politicians in PA it would be highly unlikely. However IMO conspiracy filled mind the most likely source of this and other anti-racing articles is upper level management at Parx. They stand to gain the most with an elimination of racing.

[Cannon Shell]

And lets be serious about the ridiculous notion that anyone at any gambling establishment should care where the money they loses goes to. Slots players don't support racing, they play slots. Like people that play powerball aren't playing it to make a life changing score but to actually support the social programs that supposedly are funded by the lottery? The racetrack and horseman have a contractual agreement to split the revenue. It is a business agreement not much different than when state provide certain businesses and industries sweetheart tax and other deals to lure them into setting up in their state. Are those deals fair to the other established businesses that are not getting incentives or tax breaks? Of course not. While it pretty much universally agreed that racing has squandered much of the money in an inefficient manner (probably nowhere moreso that PA) the idea that somehow these deals are immoral or unfair is ludicrous.

[pointman]

One thing I never hear mentioned which Chuck touched on is that State governments, in particular to NY, have used horse racing as a way to get other forms of gambling legalized, specifically Casino gambling.

Certainly in NY, there would be no slots at Yonkers, Aqueduct, Saratoga Harness, Monticello, etc., from which the State has made a ton of money, without tying it to the horse racing industry.

Typical government BS with the horse racing industry is to use the horse racing industry to achieve goals and then dump them when they don't need them.

Without any doubt, if New Yorkers approve gambling statewide as Cuomo wants in a vote to Amend the State Constitution, the money flowing to horse racing here will be immediately cut off.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by pointman

One thing I never hear mentioned which Chuck touched on is that State governments, in particular to NY, have used horse racing as a way to get other forms of gambling legalized, specifically Casino gambling.

Certainly in NY, there would be no slots at Yonkers, Aqueduct, Saratoga Harness, Monticello, etc., from which the State has made a ton of money, without tying it to the horse racing industry.

Typical government BS with the horse racing industry is to use the horse racing industry to achieve goals and then dump them when they don't need them.

Without any doubt, if New Yorkers approve gambling statewide as Cuomo wants in a vote to Amend the State Constitution, the money flowing to horse racing here will be immediately cut off.

But it should be. Horse racing shouldn't be subsidized and I love racing. Sink or swim.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

But it should be. Horse racing shouldn't be subsidized and I love racing. Sink or swim.

I disagree. When the choice is between subsidizing an industry that the State has soaked for over 100 years while being able to raise significant tax revenue or having no casinos and having your residents subsidize the citizens of other states they are forced to go to gamble, the former is an easy choice.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

But it should be. Horse racing shouldn't be subsidized and I love racing. Sink or swim.

When the gov't institutes competition with any existing business the existing business is almost always compensated in some way. Plus it isn't a subsidy when the existing business (the racetrack) becomes the casino, it is a business deal. If the casino has no relationship with the track whatsoever it would be considered a subsidy.