Lack Of Customer Growth In Racing – Are Operators Missing The Point?

Apologies for the ambiguity Rob.

It's not really about being right or wrong as it's purely about trying to do something for racing at a time when my favourite pastime's very existence is being threatened. In most jurisdictions globally racing is being treated as a subsidised entity with preference towards other forms of gaming.

As gamblers we are all spoilt for choice and we can choose to vote with our pocket and our feet. I have made my choice which is to support racing and never mind whether its pari-mutuel or fixed odds. My only interest is to see racing getting back to an economically viable industry that won't need handouts to survive. I fear no ridicule as it is to be expected and I actually enjoy criticism when it comes from people who understand the game.

Racing has failed to attract new customers for decades and it clearly shows that there are flaws in the model. The question is whether this should be accepted and racing should be allowed to die slowly or are there still untried solutions that could lead to a resurgence in future.

The racing industry has done many positive things with improvements in distribution being the biggest success story but in the critical area of customer growth all attempts have been unsuccessful. I have studied racing models and products all over the world and this is one area where very little has changed in over thirty years. Are the products good, yes they are for the market they serve.

For racing to thrive it needs to reach out to a much more diverse customer base which makes products aimed at a broader interest an absolute neccessity. All of us will benefit from sustainable customer growth as pool liquidity will improve and through the funding model increased stakes should bring new owners to the game.

There is nothing to be gained by purely accepting where racing is going to without any attempts to change its lot. It is probably easier to sit on the sideline and cast stones but all of us could make a positive difference if we were really committed to changing what is wrong.

LSU Wrote:

---

> Apologies for the ambiguity Rob.
>
> It's not really about being right or wrong as it's
> purely about trying to do something for racing at
> a time when my favourite pastime's very existence
> is being threatened. In most jurisdictions
> globally racing is being treated as a subsidised
> entity with preference towards other forms of
> gaming.
>
> As gamblers we are all spoilt for choice and we
> can choose to vote with our pocket and our feet. I
> have made my choice which is to support racing and
> never mind whether its pari-mutuel or fixed odds.
> My only interest is to see racing getting back to
> an economically viable industry that won't need
> handouts to survive. I fear no ridicule as it is
> to be expected and I actually enjoy criticism when
> it comes from people who understand the game.
>
> Racing has failed to attract new customers for
> decades and it clearly shows that there are flaws
> in the model. The question is whether this should
> be accepted and racing should be allowed to die
> slowly or are there still untried solutions that
> could lead to a resurgence in future.
>
> The racing industry has done many positive things
> with improvements in distribution being the
> biggest success story but in the critical area of
> customer growth all attempts have been
> unsuccessful. I have studied racing models and
> products all over the world and this is one area
> where very little has changed in over thirty
> years. Are the products good, yes they are for the
> market they serve.
>
> For racing to thrive it needs to reach out to a
> much more diverse customer base which makes
> products aimed at a broader interest an absolute
> neccessity. All of us will benefit from
> sustainable customer growth as pool liquidity will
> improve and through the funding model increased
> stakes should bring new owners to the game.
>
> There is nothing to be gained by purely accepting
> where racing is going to without any attempts to
> change its lot. It is probably easier to sit on
> the sideline and cast stones but all of us could
> make a positive difference if we were really
> committed to changing what is wrong.

LSU,if you follow the forums you will be well aware of my feelings about the operators so I couldn't agree with you more...........I just prefer more practical identification and action.............that lot wouldn't be able to interpret "consultant" talk.

Valid point, chat again soon

Some marketing guru coined the phrase the four P's of the marketing mix where one of the P's is Place (Distribution). What Phum did to Tellytrack was a strategy to constrain its own distribution.