Racing Association Slams Bookmakers

@LSU...no party, other than the punter, funds the industry...where do the operators or bookies get the funds for the take-out to fund racing ?? If punters don't contribute, how do owners get stakes, how do operators and bookies fund their operations, how do trainers earn fees and pay their expenses, how do shareholders get their dividends, how do execs enjoy their perks, how does anything happen in the industry ??

As a punter, it does not matter to me how much is contributed by each party as it still comes from the punter...neither the operator or bookie funds any shortfall from their pockets...if they had to do so, their business model needs a re-look and it is unlikely that they will continue with that stream of business...

So, I hold no water for either party...it is my choice, as one who makes a contribution to the funding of the industry, as to where I spend / waste my money and my choice is the bookie mainly due to certainty of payouts with respect to the bets I take unlike the operators who continue to blame a mystery overseas punter for strange dividends...

T, I agree with most of what you are saying as we as punters are indeed funding most of the show. Not all, as there are sponsors that make direct contributions to certain races or race days.

All I am saying is that anybody that understands business will realise that successful businesses makes profits, regardless of which industry we are discussing.

Profit making is not to be attacked, how the money is spent is a different matter.

Phumelela does most things right which is why we have a punting opportunity daily but there are quite a few areas where they can improve.

My gripe is mostly about our concerns and complaints receiving no attention and there is really no excuse for ignoring your paying customers.

The reality is that racing is not making enough money to address even some basic issues that we have raised in this forum.

If you had a business with different divisions and a few are money spinners and one big one is not, where would you be allocating resources to?

Obviously they need to make a profit. I'm just talking about SOME of that profit going back into the game.

Ruffian, apologies if it sounds like I am attacking you in my response, not the case.

The operator is putting a disproportionate amount into racing where most other businesses would have pulled the plug on a loss making operation, they are subsidising it, which is why they are fighting so hard for extra revenue.

They have a choice going forward:

1. Continue to subsidise and have an ever growing obligation and the least profitable option. Under this scenario racing will continue to be sucking the hind tit.

2. Find ways to grow the game so that it becomes financially self sustaining again and ultimately bottom line positive. Under this scenario they will see much better financial performance and us as punters a few benefits as well.

This poses the question, why are they opting for option 1?

One of the points that have concerned me for sometime is the principle that a product must make a profit!
I fully agree with that sentiment, but would go one step further ,and say that no business will continue to subsidise a loss area, forever.
If we accept that ,we have to be concerned that "P" has made statements that the profitability of the local product is beyond their control and needs the assistance of the taxman and the judiciary!!!!!
The danger has to be that, after the asset stripping and the cupboard is bare, they just hand back a destroyed industry!
It needs to be put into the hands of competent management right now, before it's too late, so that the focus can be on producing, at the very least,a break even local product!

A very scary possibility indeed Rob.

These totalisator bets contributed R10 million and R5 million respectively to Gold Circle and Kenilworth Racing's profits in 2013, all of which were re-invested into funding the sport of horse-racing.

Somebody once posted the various take-outs of the tote and if those were true , I have to ask why the totes take-out of the soccer bets exceeds those of horseracing?.....no cost of product and no tax!!!

.....while every one is running around doing sums of who gets what and why.....should we not be asking the question WTF is the RA doing by siding with the operators in having a go at the bookies....it is not their business they are there to look after members owners(some may hold bookie licenses)trainers etc....now that the bookies are a target of the operator is it really necessary for the RA to put the boot in..... :blink:

hooray muhtiman their main job is to look after owners and try to attract new owners.yet statements made by prominent owners like if don't like what going on sell your horses and get out the game,and if you are a small owner and can't afford the facilities on big race days to go find another hobby,there's deafing silence.there are to many dermos (a dermo is a person who when he come s out the arse of another person needs to go to a dermatologist to get a prescription sunblock,because the over counter products are not strong enough)in this game

The answer has been on the forum for years.................there are a couple of puppet masters(all shareholders of "P" ) and all the rest are puppets................no matter how much they protest their independence.

rob faux wrote: The answer has been on the forum for years.................there are a couple of puppet masters(all shareholders of "P" ) and all the rest are puppets................no matter how much they protest their independence.

.......

......and hence this thread should be linked to the thread.....Is racing in South Africa Doomed.....to much in fighting and siding with the real power behind racing....the lack of independence of both the RA and the NHRA IS NOT THE RIGHT RECIPE TO STOP THE ROT..
....nor is picking a fight with the bookies and blacking out racing coverage and aggrieving the most important customer ......THE PUNTER....Its a Rush...to drive racing into the DIRT