Hollywood - the gloves are off

A few comments on the posts i have read.
LouisG-Tellytrack was formed as a partnership between Phum/GC and the bookmakers as IGN had gone bust,Whilst the bookmakers had no share they funded it from the biginning on an agreed cost onlyb basis.To receive the tax brake from Prov Govt they had to provide the local picture to all outlets at no additional cost to bookmakers
All money generated for racing is Punters money.The punter pays for the show.the trainers earnings,jockey earnings,breeders,vets,bookmakers,Operator salaries etc so dont only point fingers at bookmakers everyone in racing even the NHRA lives off the punter.

Of the signed up members 60 are Betting World 62 KZNBS natal bookmakers.The balance are the smaller bookmakers who turn over a min. on horseracing or are office bookmakers with no cash turnover.So those numbers from Phumelela are not a correct picture.
Garrick
The operators would have plenty of money to fund racing if they had not declared the proceeds of the sales of racecourses as dividends to the Broederbond that runs racing.They want more for greedy shareholders,kantor,jooste,v niekerk and duplessis.
Why do think kantor bought another 69069 share on the market for R1,380,000 on the 30 th July 2014.
The increase is for shareholders!!

Stuff these shareholders stories. It really bugs some forumites, the wealthy shareholders. The biggest shareholder funds stakes. A percentage of all turnover goes to stakes. Turnover would increase if the open bet were outlawed.
I do my best for punters always, with absolute respect for them.They create the turnovers , without which we would have no stakes.
Ultimately, though, my Owners are my prime concern. Without them, there would be no racing to bet on. Costs are rising rapidly. What belongs to racing must belong to racing. You want to bet on racing, then do so, but leave the open bet alone. How difficult is that ?

And Tellytrack deserves to be an autonomous, self funding enterprise. You want it ? PAY FOR IT ! You can't go out and steal something, just because you dont like the price, because that is THEFT!
I realise that this is a betting site. However, I am amazed at the apparent blindness of Owners who post here and wear their betting caps rather than their Owners caps. We need turnover and profits to sustain racing. To me, it's that simple.

Louis where to now then?

Because punters don't give a flying you know what about your owners

Yes Bob.... And my Owners don't give a u know what about Punters. It's their horses. They bought them and paid for them and any info on their chances and wellbeing belongs to the Owners.

So where to now ?

The fundamental principle remains that Owners AND Punters fund the industry. That's why the concerns of and wellbeing of BOTH is of primary concern.

That's why we CANNOT look at racing just from a Punters side or just from an Owners side. We must see BOTH sides.

Which is why racing turnover belongs to racing..... And why Telly track is not a charity organisation. When we look at the interests of BOTH of the groups that fund racing, we must fight the open bet and the theft of Telly track.

louisg wrote: Stuff these shareholders stories. It really bugs some forumites, the wealthy shareholders. The biggest shareholder funds stakes. A percentage of all turnover goes to stakes. Turnover would increase if the open bet were outlawed.
I do my best for punters always, with absolute respect for them.They create the turnovers , without which we would have no stakes.
Ultimately, though, my Owners are my prime concern. Without them, there would be no racing to bet on. Costs are rising rapidly. What belongs to racing must belong to racing. You want to bet on racing, then do so, but leave the open bet alone. How difficult is that ?

And Tellytrack deserves to be an autonomous, self funding enterprise. You want it ? PAY FOR IT ! You can't go out and steal something, just because you dont like the price, because that is THEFT!
I realise that this is a betting site. However, I am amazed at the apparent blindness of Owners who post here and wear their betting caps rather than their Owners caps. We need turnover and profits to sustain racing. To me, it's that simple.

We home punters do pay for it Louis through our DSTV subs and the takeout on our bets - Now why on earth did Teletrack decide to punish US(actually themselves) by cutting the UK link? Why did they not just cut the commercial link? We did not steal a thing and help to grow the international brand yet it was us that were left in the dark while Phum(Teletrack is Phumelela) took the fight to the Bookmakers and then tried to FORCE us to use their TABS if we wanted to see UK Racing

Mr H ,reading Louis' comment .........."shareholders fund stakes" says it all really........the fact that the fund portion is a legislated portion of tote take-out and does not ever become part of "P" turnover seems to escape him.
He obviously sees the stake contribution as some sort of donation or direct expense..............in his mind it's "how business works".........lol

And Louis,insofar as stealing Tellytrack, some business's might see providing the picture as a fair price for receiving the resultant turnover............a clue.........Cell Phone providers will give you a free phone to support their core business.............it is often how "Big business works" !

louisg wrote: Turnover would increase if the open bet were outlawed.
...

Louis - NO - the reason why the open bet exists is because the punter gets such appalling service from the off-course tote. It was first the punter who wanted the open bet not the open-bet bookies.

Fix the appalling service and then may be, just may be...

Thanks, Rob, for agreeing with me on this one. The "resultant turnover" is being stolen through the open bet. The core business is not being supported. That's why there are no free cell phones....
Also, Rob, revenue from Bookmakers is shown as turnover and forms part of the stakes breakdown.

Mr H - home users are not the focus of this thread.

Mac, check your facts and the logic of these. The Open bet was simply a decision by bookies to take on the tote by not putting the ticket through the tote and by standing the bet themselves. The punter never asked bookies to do that.
The open bet affords the opportunity to manipulate dividends, to decide whether to place the bet on the tote or not. Often, the Open bet is stood even whilst a tote machine is on the premises.
As for poor service, there are complaints on this site against bookies too. Ultimately, the limitations of dividends/payout ceilings of the open bet are a contradiction in themselves. Heaven forbid that you catch a one ticket P6 on the open bet....

louisg wrote: Mac, check your facts and the logic of these. The Open bet was simply a decision by bookies to take on the tote by not putting the ticket through the tote and by standing the bet themselves. The punter never asked bookies to do that.
The open bet affords the opportunity to manipulate dividends, to decide whether to place the bet on the tote or not. Often, the Open bet is stood even whilst a tote machine is on the premises.
As for poor service, there are complaints on this site against bookies too. Ultimately, the limitations of dividends/payout ceilings of the open bet are a contradiction in themselves. Heaven forbid that you catch a one ticket P6 on the open bet...
R
You see Louis , you believe all the crap you are fed-I had a bookmakers cubicle and I was certainly taking the open bet before it even had a name
We were next to a tote that closed at 11am on race days......all the punters who were late used to come in and looking for the bets they had planned-we provided those bets , but subject to limits as we did not enjoy a spread on these bets-so I can tell you first hand you are WRONG!
Can I ask you one question? Have you ever read the judgement on the case and read why the judge ruled that the open bet was " not unfair" ?

louisg wrote: Thanks, Rob, for agreeing with me on this one. The "resultant turnover" is being stolen through the open bet. The core business is not being supported. That's why there are no free cell phones....
Also, Rob, revenue from Bookmakers is shown as turnover and forms part of the stakes breakdown.

Mr H - home users are not the focus of this thread.

Louis you are correct but we were the ones to suffer and it is us who were inconvenienced by the operator, who we fund, without any concern - Hell they did not even bother to tell us that UK racing was coming back to our screens - And you expect us to go out of our way(going through the tote is a nightmare) to support the Tote when they do very little to accommodate the people that pay their salaries. I have no problem with them cutting of the Commercial feed - That is their right BUT what or who told them that it would be fair OR good for business to limit the home feed? The person that came up with that plan must be looking at the drop in turnover and wondering how they could have been so wrong (everyone told them this would happen). I have NEVER heard of a business that decides to stop production of a product that is in a growth cycle because they wish to get a better price for it.

Louis a few home truths as you dont seem to absorb much.
1.Bookmaking has been around from before the Tote days
2.Bookmakers are and have been owners for many many years.and are still owners.i dont think you will be getting any of their horses.
3.Bookmakers take bets at any level ,say R2.00,even Interbet does.Tote has been at R6.00 and no verbal bets for over 10 years even after being told they have lost the plot.Some bookmakers even inflate the dividend up whilst the Tote deflated the dividend down to steal the fractions.
4.Tote owns 55 licences they can lay the open bet and have been told to do so but wont because their staff are so badly trained they would not know how to take a verbal R2.00 bet. Meanwhile the slot machine business is growing daily at 20c a spin.
5.Maybe the broedebond dont want the black africans in their sport?
6.If the open bet disappeared totally bucket shops that are all but dead would florish as they do even in Hong Kong,layins sport and racing bets.Its common knowledge that some of the power failures at night soccer matches are caused by unlicenced bookmakers making sure the game is abondoned so as not to pay out.
7.You dont address the biggest problem that Phumelela nearly collapsed a industry that generates the second largest amount of tax to Provincial Govt without giving a stuff for the country.
The days of broedebond power in this country are over.!!!