Garrick Wrote:
>
>
> Some of the comments in this thread display an
> almost frightening ignorance of reality. I am
> going to use Louis Goosen's post ( no disrespect
> intended to you, Louis ) to respond and speculate
> on some of the points raised :
>
> > 1)The Rand has weakened and there is a definite
> swing towards Sports Betting which is hurting
> Horseracing turnover.
>
> As far fetched as this may sound the rand has
> weakened before. And also strengthened. In the
> early 2000's it hit R19 to the pound. It has also
> traded at close to half that level subsequently.
> Ask any so-called 'expert' in economics and one of
> the first things he/she will tell you is : Never
> try and predict currency movements unless you want
> to get seriously hurt. You simply live with the
> consequences but need to ask the question: What
> happens if the rand strengthens? Does the model
> change again or do shareholders simply pocket the
> profits?
>
> The swing to Sports Betting is well documented and
> GLOBAL. Ask the players and many will cite
> disenchantment with the racing product (and I'm
> putting it politely - they will tell you that they
> think it is s**t ). Local horseracing is a FAILING
> business. I take no pleasure in telling you this -
> read the operator's annual reports over the last
> couple of years and take your heads out from your
> own backsides.
>
> Many of the reasons are also well documented : The
> public perceives the sport to be corrupt, very
> poor PR, poor communication ( this very issue
> being a case in point ), take-it-or-leave-it
> attitude, potential conflict due to
> shareholder/participant interests. Etc.
>
> > 2)So, the moneys paid to the overseas partners
> who supply the International feed is now down by
> some 42%.
>
> We know that but it is not necessarily going to be
> permanent.
>
> > 3)The International partners have been putting
> pressure for a few years now in terms of the
> Bookies receiving their product for next to
> nothing. Now, with the Rand weakening, they have
> had enough and PGL had to find a solution.
>
> Truth at last. The corporates WANT MORE MONEY and
> SUSTAINED PROFITS. So who can they put the squeeze
> on?
>
> > 4)The truth is that Racing in SA costs some
> R720M to run annually and in spite of the Bookies
> having almost the same turnover as the tote,
> Bookies only contribute R114M of the R720M.
>
> Actually that's incorrect - it probably costs a
> lot more if you consider that owners have almost
> NO CHANCE of breaking even on the present stakes
> model. So there is an additional free 'subsidy'
> that the operator happily accepts and does not
> report on other than to make the occasional
> sympathetic clucking sound.
>
> How on earth does any half intelligent person
> compare the bookmaker model with the Tote? The
> tote takes no risk, gouges from 15% upwards out of
> betting stakes and FEELS ABSOLUTELY NO PAIN in
> returning you 0% profit on a winning bet! And
> that's supposed to be attractive to a thinking
> punter?
>
> Bookmakers do not flourish because of sheer good
> luck. They offer a product which a large number of
> people clearly find attractive and generally run
> more customer friendly businesses. Surely nobody
> can conceivably believe that bookmaker turnover
> would magically default to the tote in the absence
> of the former. I doubt it.
>
> I personally number a mere 1 amongst a portion of
> the market that does not bet on the tote AT ALL;
> simply because I 'construct a book' on most races
> and need to know what my returns will be in
> advance.
>
> Put bookmakers out of business and I will simply
> stop punting on horses altogether. Then the
> operator can kiss goodbye to the 3% I have been
> paying off winning bets and which has been
> subsidizing this sorry mess for 40 years. No skin
> off my nose - I too now prefer sports betting and
> can manage without the game - a decision which
> THOUSANDS have already made.
>
> > 5)Overseas partners put their foot down, as they
> believe that Bookies in SA have had it "for next
> to nothing" for too long.
>
> What utter spin! At least they used the word
> 'believe'. Clearly these are not UK partners as
> their bookmaker model may well be even more
> bookmaker friendly than ours!
>
> > 6)So, whilst the SA product has to be continued
> in the current manner, PGL have no control over
> Overseas feeds and the costs as determined over
> there.
>
> Has the operator never heard of any of the
> multitude of financial products which one can
> employ to stabilize any business trading in
> foreign exchange priced products or services? That
> takes care of the currency fluctuations.
>
> With regard to 'control overseas feeds and costs'
> etc., - whatever happened to 'negotiation'?
> Clearly the operator is great at bullying SA
> customers but not so good with international
> businessmen!
>
> 7)In the meantime, PGL has obtained a Broadcasting
> license and will Broadcast the International feed
> on their own decoders, which is a lot more
> expensive for Bookies than at present.
>
> Simple solution - bookmakers stop betting on
> overseas racing or just do not offer a picture.
> They bet to percentages and NOT pictures. So the
> punter can source the picture ( if desired ) at
> home and call in the bet. What's changed?
>
> 8)Contrary to rumours, the new decoder costs about
> 80 US Dollars.
>
> Another charge. Another decision almost GUARANTEED
> to chase away more punters than bookmakers! And
> what happens when they suddenly decide to levy a
> regular charge? Don't forget - this operator has
> already reneged on a similar type scheme in the
> past so who's to say it won't happen again?
>
> 9)We will still have Tellytrack at home as per
> current, but will only see local Racing.
>
> Like much of the rest of the country I am not
> particularly enamoured ( not to be confused with
> 'interested' ) with local racing. So - well done.
> This should help to make a FAILING business fail
> faster. Imagine if rugby had the same attitude -
> no more internationals that do not feature the
> Springboks. And we focus on Vodacom Cup only. Buy
> another decoder if you want to watch Super 15.
> Because the rand has weakened and the price went
> up..........
>
> 10)This is very good for local Owners etc, as more
> time for Interviews and shows such as Winning Ways
> etc.
>
> This is where crass ignorance REALLY raises its
> ugly head. Whilst doing the rain dance understand
> the following - International racing - because
> there are no stakes to provide and infrastructure
> is a fraction of the cost of the local product -
> helps contribute towards the FAILING South African
> product.
>
> I fail to see how you can possibly regard putting
> income at risk as being 'very good for local
> Owners'. If you paid even the slightest attention
> to the customer base you would see that most
> people who appreciate the problems facing racing
> would accept a 'passive' broadcast in the interest
> of cost containment - ie no interviews, no Winning
> Ways, no presenters.
>
> > I love it !
>
> You may well have to learn to love an even more
> contracted sport as this forces more out or they
> continue leaving because they are disenchanted.
>
> In the meantime - let's ship another couple of
> dozen 'beautiful people' down to the Met at our
> expense. People whom we will never see again and
> who are totally unlikely to ever buy a horse. Now
> that's the type of sensible marketing I like to
> see the operator engaged in. Not.
Garrick, very well put.
I've been reading this for several days now, and it looks and sounds like a smoke and mirrors pantomime.
If anyone in the Forum is aware of the way ICASA work, they will realise, should the statement of point 7 be correct, that this has all been done without any participation by the role players.
Notifications need to be made in the Media. Objects lodged. Hearings need to be held, witnesses for and against called, facts and figures, benefits and disadvantages clearly laid out. Did any of this happen? if so, when?
Firstly, who's licence has been used for the last couple of decades to put out TT?
Secondly, why apply for a second licence?
Third. Licence applications is a vast capital expenditure, so where in PGL's ledger does it show?
Fourth. When was this licence granted, and being a broadcaster, what conditions were stipulated?
I am sure if this process was followed, parties that would be effected, ie bookmakers, would surely have wanted to attend, as well as Joe public.
I am not convinced by this.:S
I too agree, that the way PGL ride roughshod over everyone, is not on. It sounds a lot like "I don't want to play, so I'm taking my ball and going home"! They could not get their way with the bookies, asking extreme fees, so attack from another perspective, or simply put, use another excuse.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
<
