NYRA increases purses

[blackthroatedwind]

For those of you that think 30 years is too long....

The land claim is worth in excess of $1 Billion. If anything, NYRA may have sold their equity in that claim short by getting " only " 30 years. Being that they are better than 50% to win the claim they are forgoing over a half a billion dollars in value. Those of you that think they should have settled for less than 30 years should be careful next time you are in any kind of bargaining position.

Those of you that think NYRA should not get a franchise extension need to tell us which bidder should get the franchise and why. Otherwise your arguments hold no water. It is a CHOICE by the Governor. Please tell us why he chose the wrong candidate and why.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

For those of you that think 30 years is too long....

The land claim is worth in excess of $1 Billion. If anything, NYRA may have sold their equity in that claim short by getting " only " 30 years. Being that they are better than 50% to win the claim they are forgoing over a half a billion dollars in value. Those of you that think they should have settled for less than 30 years should be careful next time you are in any kind of bargaining position.

Those of you that think NYRA should not get a franchise extension need to tell us which bidder should get the franchise and why. Otherwise your arguments hold no water. It is a CHOICE by the Governor. Please tell us why he chose the wrong candidate and why.

Andy, while I agree with you, I don't think the time period is relevant. The 30 year extension can be viewed as a shield and a sword. First, I think it could be too short vis a vis the claim to the land. Second, I think it could be too long, unless there is clear cut measures in place to hold NYRA accountable to certain standards. My question has always been -- what if the standards are not met? There must be not only checks and balances, and accountability in place, but possible repercussions. There has to be "bite" behind the bark, and you know I've been saying that for many, many years.

As far as the land, I don't understand why this is still subject to debate. Sure, you never know how a case might turn out, and I've learned that lesson well -- however, counsel for both sides, during discovery seemed to arrive at the same conclusion, that being, it was significantly more probable than possible that NYRA would end up winning the land dispute. I think more importantly, the creditors committee and their legal counsel arrived at that conclusion. While I am sure few even know who those firms and players are, they are far more qualified to voice an opinion on such matters.

Eric

[blackthroatedwind]

I understand what you're saying, Eric, but I'm simply explaining why the State granted NYRA such a seemingly long extension.

[ELA]

I got that. I guess it just depends on how you look at it.

Eric

[ARyan]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

For those of you that think 30 years is too long....

The land claim is worth in excess of $1 Billion. If anything, NYRA may have sold their equity in that claim short by getting " only " 30 years. Being that they are better than 50% to win the claim they are forgoing over a half a billion dollars in value. Those of you that think they should have settled for less than 30 years should be careful next time you are in any kind of bargaining position.

Those of you that think NYRA should not get a franchise extension need to tell us which bidder should get the franchise and why. Otherwise your arguments hold no water. It is a CHOICE by the Governor. Please tell us why he chose the wrong candidate and why.

I am not saying NYRA is the wrong canidate, I am saying is this Governor has become very inconsistent in his views on NY Racing in 4 years. As I pointed out in another thread on this subject, this report is an interesting read;
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/rep...yra_report.pdf

Seeing how this report was founded by the now Governor and NYRA supporter, he may want to give us some truthful insight into how he came to the conclusion that NYRA now is better then the NYRA he wanted thrown under the bus a few years ago.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by ARyan

I am not saying NYRA is the wrong canidate, I am saying is this Governor has become very inconsistent in his views on NY Racing in 4 years. As I pointed out in another thread on this subject, this report is an interesting read;
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/rep...yra_report.pdf

Seeing how this report was founded by the now Governor and NYRA supporter, he may want to give us some truthful insight into how he came to the conclusion that NYRA now is better then the NYRA he wanted thrown under the bus a few years ago.

He threw NYRA under the bus so he could "rescue" them and claim credit for "cleaning up the sport in NY" like he did with Wall Street. Far easier to fix a problem of your own creation especially a sitting duck like NYRA instead of fixing a real problem. He is a politician's politician who campaigned on the premise that he was above politicians dirty games yet has been exposed as a complete hypocrite in that regard.

[ARyan]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

He threw NYRA under the bus so he could "rescue" them and claim credit for "cleaning up the sport in NY" like he did with Wall Street. Far easier to fix a problem of your own creation especially a sitting duck like NYRA instead of fixing a real problem. He is a politician's politician who campaigned on the premise that he was above politicians dirty games yet has been exposed as a complete hypocrite in that regard.

Agreed, and glad you see it.

That said, to say NYRA is free and clear of any problems is fatuous.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by ARyan

Agreed, and glad you see it.

That said, to say NYRA is free and clear of any problems is fatuous.

No one said NYRA was free of any problems but those problems are relatively minor until they become part of a political campaign then a political war.

Not to sound like Oracle but I called this years ago. Spitzers loves to ride in on a white horse. I also have been waiting for a politician to come up with a state agency to run the whole thing. The only surprising thing was it took Bruno so long to break out his idea which certainly wasn't cooked up recently. Strong politicians love state agencies because they control them, which leads to greater power for them. They will throw out the old "We run the state and its 100 billion dollar budget. How hard can a couple of racetracks and a casino be?" argument. Watch, it will happen.

I mean why let some outside companies or NYRA have any control when they can create a public agency that can "make" the state a bunch of money for the local pork projects and create more political patronage jobs?

[ARyan]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

No one said NYRA was free of any problems but those problems are relatively minor until they become part of a political campaign then a political war.

Not to sound like Oracle but I called this years ago. Spitzers loves to ride in on a white horse. I also have been waiting for a politician to come up with a state agency to run the whole thing. The only surprising thing was it took Bruno so long to break out his idea which certainly wasn't cooked up recently. Strong politicians love state agencies because they control them, which leads to greater power for them. They will throw out the old "We run the state and its 100 billion dollar budget. How hard can a couple of racetracks and a casino be?" argument. Watch, it will happen.

I mean why let some outside companies or NYRA have any control when they can create a public agency that can "make" the state a bunch of money for the local pork projects and create more political patronage jobs?

Very much agreed.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

He threw NYRA under the bus so he could "rescue" them and claim credit for "cleaning up the sport in NY" like he did with Wall Street. Far easier to fix a problem of your own creation especially a sitting duck like NYRA instead of fixing a real problem. He is a politician's politician who campaigned on the premise that he was above politicians dirty games yet has been exposed as a complete hypocrite in that regard.

Chuck, I am not on either side of the Spitzer aspect to this, and I am not so sure it's important as to whether or not he can lay claim to being the savior. From afar, I am more positive than negative about him as Govenor. Be that as it may, I see 3 NYRA's here -- first, the NYRA that was, the one "thrown under the bus" so to speak. I don't care whether it was Spitzer or anyone else that did the throwing -- it was absolutely, positively neccessary. I have been a critic of NYRA's for many years and I've never hidden that fact.

I also see the NYRA of today -- much improved, certainly not ideal and perfect, but far improved nevertheless.

I also see -- and very much hope to see -- the potential newly created, reconstituted, reformatted, whatever you want to call it NYRA -- the NYRA of the very near future. I want to see a transparent NYRA, one that is held accountable and one that works WITH the NYTHA, the state, the legislature, the owners, breeders, fans, bettors and everyone else. That is what I see the state pretty much demanding from a new NYRA. If NYRA can't meet these standards, then there must be repercussions. I never saw that possibilility from the "for profit" model, the "investors" or whatever you might want to call it. Like I've always said, I like the Woodbine model and what I've seen there, but I don't like what I see at Finger Lakes. That is the business model of the "franchise holder" and that is what the success or failure of NY racing will hinge upon.

Who gets the credit is not important to me. If Al Gore wants to say he invented the internet, then so be it. It's semantics. I more care that the internet is there.

Eric

[ARyan]

Originally Posted by ELA

Chuck, I am not on either side of the Spitzer aspect to this, and I am not so sure it's important as to whether or not he can lay claim to being the savior. From afar, I am more positive than negative about him as Govenor. Be that as it may, I see 3 NYRA's here -- first, the NYRA that was, the one "thrown under the bus" so to speak. I don't care whether it was Spitzer or anyone else that did the throwing -- it was absolutely, positively neccessary. I have been a critic of NYRA's for many years and I've never hidden that fact.

I also see the NYRA of today -- much improved, certainly not ideal and perfect, but far improved nevertheless.

I also see -- and very much hope to see -- the potential newly created, reconstituted, reformatted, whatever you want to call it NYRA -- the NYRA of the very near future. I want to see a transparent NYRA, one that is held accountable and one that works WITH the NYTHA, the state, the legislature, the owners, breeders, fans, bettors and everyone else. That is what I see the state pretty much demanding from a new NYRA. If NYRA can't meet these standards, then there must be repercussions. I never saw that possibilility from the "for profit" model, the "investors" or whatever you might want to call it. Like I've always said, I like the Woodbine model and what I've seen there, but I don't like what I see at Finger Lakes. That is the business model of the "franchise holder" and that is what the success or failure of NY racing will hinge upon.

Who gets the credit is not important to me. If Al Gore wants to say he invented the internet, then so be it. It's semantics. I more care that the internet is there.

Eric

Wow, I thought your posts were great untill this one Actually just that in bold the rest was still reasoned well and very much on point...

NYRA maybe improved, but it still needs much more reform (internally and with help from the State) to be a better not-for-profit.

Which brings up another interesting point. I have not seen anyone mention that NYRA is not, I believe, a "non-profit" but a "not-for-profit." While the differences are debatable, I believe they are very different. Its a different discussion, but one that I feel should be included when discussing the profitablity and bankruptcy's of NYRA and the State of NY.

[ELA]

Originally Posted by ARyan

Wow, I thought your posts were great untill this one Actually just that in bold the rest was still reasoned well and very much on point...

NYRA maybe improved, but it still needs much more reform (internally and with help from the State) to be a better not-for-profit.

Which brings up another interesting point. I have not seen anyone mention that NYRA is not, I believe, a "non-profit" but a "not-for-profit." While the differences are debatable, I believe they are very different. Its a different discussion, but one that I feel should be included when discussing the profitablity and bankruptcy's of NYRA and the State of NY.

To be honest, I thought I said that. I did mean that. I did not point blank say that they need much more reform, but I agree, along the lines of the things I was talking about -- transparency, accountability, and so on. However, one component that is absolutely needed for a better NYRA -- is not only internal, but external -- is a complete overhaul of the laws, legislation and operating environment.

As far as Spitzer, I expect many people to have different opinions and tastes. That's why Baskin-Robbins has all those flavors, LOL.

Regarding the not for profit and nonprofit aspect, I've heard too many people debate nonprofit, not for profit, quasi-nonprofit, quasi this, that, and so on. Professionally, and personally, I have much involvement in the (let's just call it) nonprofit world.

I wouldn't debate the issue, as in this forum it's a fallacious arguement. However, not for profit and nonprofit -- both are a tax status, they are not a management style.

Eric

[ARyan]

Originally Posted by ELA

To be honest, I thought I said that. I did mean that. I did not point blank say that they need much more reform, but I agree, along the lines of the things I was talking about -- transparency, accountability, and so on. However, one component that is absolutely needed for a better NYRA -- is not only internal, but external -- is a complete overhaul of the laws, legislation and operating environment.

As far as Spitzer, I expect many people to have different opinions and tastes. That's why Baskin-Robbins has all those flavors, LOL.

Regarding the not for profit and nonprofit aspect, I've heard too many people debate nonprofit, not for profit, quasi-nonprofit, quasi this, that, and so on. Professionally, and personally, I have much involvement in the (let's just call it) nonprofit world.

I wouldn't debate the issue, as in this forum it's a fallacious arguement. However, not for profit and nonprofit -- both are a tax status, they are not a management style.

Eric

Agreed. I also have much involvement in that not-for-profit/non-profit world. However we are an independent contractor that makes our profit on making these non-profits/not-for-profits capital gain. If we don't enable them to increase capital, we don't make our income. Many sides of the die in the non-profit/not-for-profit world. It truely is an issue that, I feel, should be debated in the case of NYRA and NYS, but perhaps not in this discussion in this thread, it seems complicated and agressive enough...

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by ELA

Chuck, I am not on either side of the Spitzer aspect to this, and I am not so sure it's important as to whether or not he can lay claim to being the savior. From afar, I am more positive than negative about him as Govenor. Be that as it may, I see 3 NYRA's here -- first, the NYRA that was, the one "thrown under the bus" so to speak. I don't care whether it was Spitzer or anyone else that did the throwing -- it was absolutely, positively neccessary. I have been a critic of NYRA's for many years and I've never hidden that fact.

I also see the NYRA of today -- much improved, certainly not ideal and perfect, but far improved nevertheless.

I also see -- and very much hope to see -- the potential newly created, reconstituted, reformatted, whatever you want to call it NYRA -- the NYRA of the very near future. I want to see a transparent NYRA, one that is held accountable and one that works WITH the NYTHA, the state, the legislature, the owners, breeders, fans, bettors and everyone else. That is what I see the state pretty much demanding from a new NYRA. If NYRA can't meet these standards, then there must be repercussions. I never saw that possibilility from the "for profit" model, the "investors" or whatever you might want to call it. Like I've always said, I like the Woodbine model and what I've seen there, but I don't like what I see at Finger Lakes. That is the business model of the "franchise holder" and that is what the success or failure of NY racing will hinge upon.

Who gets the credit is not important to me. If Al Gore wants to say he invented the internet, then so be it. It's semantics. I more care that the internet is there.

Eric

Eric you are correct in what you are saying. But who "saved" NYRA is important to Spitzer, or at least it was. If I thought that another outfit could do a better job I would be all for them. But I have seen how some of the other operators work and it is not so great. Allowing some casino company to come in and be in control you can pretty much say good bye to major racing in NY. The pols are already shrinking the slot money cuts and they are not that great to start with. At the very least NYRA is interested in horse racing and if they get a good deal that includes a cut of the slot money and possibly a better deal with the OTB's I believe they will do just fine. NY racing is important for the whole industry and to see it controlled by politicians or casino operators will no doubt weaken the sport in NY and as a consequence, everywhere else.