Hollywood - the gloves are off

Louis -

of the 156 bookies that have signed up 60 are owned the operator that leaves 96 or 37%

Then you must remember that close to half of the 96 left are now paying less than they used to because 3% of their turnover is less than they used to pay.

I`m also hearing some bookies in Natal are included in the numbers but are not part of the deal..

A lot of the tote outlets in Natal are agencies run by bookies in their tattersalls so that must be quite complicated ......all TV's just become tote TV's and bookie clients just get the picture anyway.
Marshalls ,for instance used to offer fixed price odds ,open bet or TAB bets all under one roof(not sure what the current position is)
Hollywood have never had TAB machines as far as I know!

The one important issue arising out of this entire saga (and which tends to get lost in the 'noise') is this :

The operator wants more money to fund the sport.

The 'running' of the sport also involves paying external service providers (eg international racing 'pictures') and suchlike.

Based on the historical model the operator believes that bookmakers contribute less than their fair share to this exercise.

Side bar to revisit certain realities :

Bookmakers contribute NO FUNDING to the sport outside of the historical monthly fee for the picture (an anciliary service) and voluntary sponsorship of the odd race. They merely collect a 6% betting tax FROM THE PUNTER and pass it on. So the endless statements about 'contributions' are disingenuous to say the least.

But........the operator wants more money to fund the sport.

The only way in which this can be achieved is to INCREASE the takeout so that, once again, the punter will contribute more.

Given that the punter is not represented in any association or forum it's quite amusing to watch a battle raging over an issue where the ultimate funding source is not consulted or even mentioned!

The only leverage the punter has is the 'Thanks but no thanks. I'm out of here' option which, judging by the inflation adjusted decline in horse betting turnovers in the last 2 decades, he/she is exercising to the full.

The operator wants more money.........and that's all there is to it. You have to decide whether you are happy to give away an even bigger slice of your winning bet because that's the ONLY WAY IN WHICH IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

Garrick,100%,and it is probably surprising that racing is holding it's own as well as it is against the betting on sports that require no takeout to fund the actual fixtures.
I have not got enough facts and figures to offer it as a fact, but I would think that if all betting was under one tote (including fixed-odds,which is eventually inevitable IMO) then I would suspect that a reduced take-out, but on ALL markets,would improve the overall funding.

(A little birdie tells me that it has started to dawn on them and there are preliminary investigations taking place!)

* 1. EXTRACTS from 2013 PHUMELELA Annual Financial Statements:



2. EXTRACTS from 2013 GOLD CIRCLE Annual Financial
Statements:


* 3. Kenilworth Racing figures for 2013:
These figures are not available but are estimated to be at least R 18 million based on the fact that they were R 17.8 million in 2012. Kenilworth Racing figures were included in Gold Circle figures above and based on the difference between the 2012 restated figures and original figures i.e. R 54 461 363 – R 36 635 443 = R 17 825 920 which would have been the Kenilworth portion.

** 4. Tellytrack fees for Year ending 31 July 2013:
Bookmakers also paid a total of R 14 660 000 (R 14,66 Million Rand) for the Tellytrack service by way of a monthly fee per outlet. 30% (ratio of International revenue) of this would make another R 4 398 000 available to International Operators.

Garrick i`m reading your post again,brilliantly written as usual

you say

"The operator wants more money to fund the sport."

this may be partly true, but if they destroyed the bookies ,profits would get bigger and share dividends would get bigger

The one thing I cannot understand as regards this allowing TT to be broadcast in their rooms is, I would assume that the majority of the bigger bets and maybe a large % of bookmaker turnover is now online surely, so those that play big are either at the racecourse where you get TT free or at home where you get TT free...so why should bookmakers have to pay a % of their turnover for bets taken outside of their rooms?

or am I missing the point totally?

My question is, if the bookmakers are paying the punters % tax over to the government for their winnings (this money is not coming out of their pockets) , what are the bookmakers paying out of their profits (losing bets on horses) to the SA horseracing industry ?
Surely the bookmakers have to return something back to the industry for the "rights " to make a profit out of the punter. Who (the punter) is there because of there being horse races. or Am I missing the point ?

Neigh, the tote also only returns the punters money back into the game.

neigh wrote: My question is, if the bookmakers are paying the punters % tax over to the government for their winnings (this money is not coming out of their pockets) , what are the bookmakers paying out of their profits (losing bets on horses) to the SA horseracing industry ?
Surely the bookmakers have to return something back to the industry for the "rights " to make a profit out of the punter. Who (the punter) is there because of there being horse races. or Am I missing the point ?

Neigh the profits are minescule compaired with turnover

Well I mean petrol is there which makes money outa cars, pharmaceuticals are there to make money outa patients having operations it goes on, so I mean Im not sure if thats such a good argument..again I maybe wrong

Racing is in a tight financial spot because it has been the easier of two options for years to squeeze the player pool rather than to expand it.

Everyone in this game, from operators to players and everyone in between will benefit from customer growth, as right now we have everyone fighting for a slice of a shrinking pie which is causing margin squeeze as they all chase the fading bone called market share.

It boggles the mind that highly educated and experienced people can have so much knowledge yet have so little wisdom.

Arrogance can be a very destructive force that will cause much pain before it gets rooted out.

The above spat proves yet again that good old common sense is regrettably a rare commodity.

If everyone worked together for the greater good of racing we will see huge long term gains for every participant.