I'm Absolutely Staggered By This Statement

I'm absolutely staggered by one of the statements made by Mr Wainstein in the recent 'interview' which was copied onto this site.

For quite some time I have been attempting to obtain accurate information regarding the PRECISE takeout on bets struck with Saftote.

Responses have largely been characterised by obfuscation; ranging from 'about 20%' to outright stonewalling.

Assuming Mr Wainstein knows what he was talking about and not reading from a carefully prepared script we are now advised that the takeout is 25% on ALL bets. (Reference: The Wainstein interview)

This is MASSIVELY larger than the figures I have been historically fed & suggests that the takeouts MAY have been hiked without the customer ever been advised. No surprises there!

Yes - I have always been aware that takeouts on bets such as the Pick 6 etc., was 25% but does this mean that they are skimming 25% off win & place bets as well?

This is a huge increase on the takeout of 15% - 18% on win & place pools that was the order of the day when last I was able to extract information from the 'operators' in the days when racing was managed by a club system.

As stated in a previous post - I regard Saftote as a 'financial services' type provider in that it simply provides the platform (a pool) for punters to bet on races & other sports. As someone who has worked for over 30 years in financial services I can tell you that 'takeouts' in this sector have been REDUCED dramatically by both competition & regulation whereas Saftote appears to have moved in the opposite direction. Silently!

This rapacious takeout has outcomes that are often nothing short of fraudulent. What 'mug' (apologies to uninformed punters) would back a horse for a place only to survive the risk of the wager & have the stake returned? Less, of course, the takeout!

Small wonder that punters are FINALLY getting the message & turnovers are in deserved decline.

Despite the continual cry to outlaw bookmakers they remain the complete example of my contention that punters ACT IN THEIR OWN INTERESTS. I do not bet on a horse on the basis of wanting to fund racing. I bet because I want to make money on my successful picks.

I have long argued that racing's funding model is broken & outmoded. According to Mr Hawkins' Tellytrack interview Gold Circle also seem to have come to this conclusion & are looking for methods to reduce their dependency on the tote as a funding vehicle.

It is a simple law of economics that if you charge your customer more than is reasonable for goods & services they will stop buying your product & go elsewhere. Getting them back then becomes a HUGE problem.

In the UK only 52% of stake money is provided by their Tote. Much of the remainder is provided by the 'levy' and the individual, privately owned racecourses staging the meeting. Despite this there is NIL tax ( ie takeout) on bets struck between bookmakers and punters. Furthermore - no self respecting punter in the UK uses the tote; which remains largely the preserve of the uninformed day tripper who has only a slight interest in wagering.

It is ironic that our local mandarins continually bleat on about modern technology, younger punters etc., yet studiously obstruct the introduction of betting exchanges! Surely an option such as Betfair is tailor made for a tech savvy youngster?

Yet the operator continues flogging the beasts dragging the ox wagon called Saftote whilst buying ever more bookmaking licenses. Go figure! This game is ONLY about the shareholders. Stakeholders can simply suck on it.

....a)must have either come out of the mouth incorrectly... :S
... b)Larry is just rounding off.... :blink:
....c)Larry does really not know.... :blush:
....d)Larry saw this on a internet site... :lol:
....e) Larry is correct.... :dry:

So, Garrick, are you saying that, compared to let's say a decade ago, a serious punter's return is a substantial % less now even though he applies the same successful mathematics?

Reduce the margins and revenue WILL increase.

Mac wrote: Reduce the margins and revenue WILL increase.

In the short term - The new numbers/soccer punters only play dream bets and horse racing can never compete (I see their tickets - three results in soccer Team a/b draw yet in racing to take a huge accumulator there are normally between 7-14 horses per race - These guys take up to 40 matches per bet)

Don wrote: So, Garrick, are you saying that, compared to let's say a decade ago, a serious punter's return is a substantial % less now even though he applies the same successful mathematics?

I am saying that out of every 4 bets struck 1 entire bet is forfeited to costs. This is an absolutely outrageous % for providing a service where no tangible article is delivered. A betting exchange, for example, which performs a very similar function to a tote in that it simply allows punters to put up money against other punters WITHOUT RISK TO THE OPERATOR, has a MAXIMUM charge of 5%.

It is abundantly clear that in the absence of customer growth revenue needs to come from somewhere and this happens to be us, the loyal customers. As most players don't up their daily spend and there are no more race days to add it leaves only one very contentious option.

Better, player friendly products is the only place where a solution will come from but I fear that limited thinking will put paid to that eventuality.

Racing operators are their own worst enemies as they do very little to show creativity and a passion for the sport, in fact mostly the exact opposite.

Given this scenario, add seeing the punter and their complaints as a nuisance in most instances and you have a perfect recipe for the deteriorating situation.

My apology, but the pain is mostly self inflicted and I have personally stopped feeling even remotely sad at the misery which is race administration.

The market is there to be accessed as racing has all the right elements for exciting competition between players and longer term growth but the continuous bungling and purely profit driven decisions away from racing is shaping the story for an epic tragedy.

I am not very far away from saying goodbye to supporting local racing as it reminds me of the saying that you can take a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

Much as I love the game and a firm belief that it has extremely profitable potential it is just too painful to see it becoming what it is today, a raped industry with a very bleak future.

At Garrick. I've never backed on real exchanges. Are the over-round's zero %?

Buy low sell high? ...I think Rooseveld coined that...
My firm belief is...
Buy bulk,sell cheap,sell more,and you get all the customers.
Thats called growth
Very simple,is'nt it?

Mac wrote: At Garrick. I've never backed on real exchanges. Are the over-round's zero %?

Mac - I can't answer that simply because its so long since I used an exchange (no kidding). I stopped when they were outlawed quite some years ago so I'm not sure whether they operate in precisely the same fashion as they did when I used them. Back then you only paid commission on your nett winning position per race. It worked on a sliding scale and reduced to a minimum of ( I think.....) 2% if your 'rolling volumes' reached certain levels.

It did not require a huge volume to get to 2% although playing regularly helped!

Mac


yes most markets on bet fair fluctuate between 100% and 102% the exception is SA racing because the volumes are so low the market is not properly formed.

USA racing is also higher as is Aussie racing I'm typing this at 08h21

the 08h22 in bus is currently 121%

the 1st race at lingfield is currently 103%

Garrick = your purported 25%. Why is this necessary? does it have something to do with the co-mingling pools