a question to the bookmakers

All bets are recorded electronically.
I presume that the gambling board will have figures?

It would be interesting to know how many bookmakers lay open bets.

Adios,

why not name and shame then?

what does the term "open bet" mean?

Hibernia
An open bet is when a bookmakers lays a bet at tote odds, not at fixed odds.

cheers karel,i take it without contributing to the pool?

Hibernia,
Indeed, without contributing to the pool, but carrying risk the same as with their fixed odds bets

Cat,

close your eyes and take a deep breath.

This thread is trying to make some sense out of this issue.
Why, for instance, do punters bet with bookmakers when there is a Tote next door or in the same room?
How much do punters bet in open bets?
How many bookmakers lay open bets and how much is that turnover in terms of the overall market?
Do bookmakers make money out of the open bet, or is it a service to their customers?

Unless we have facts how can we judge?

Cat,

By all means let them be involved in the fixed odds business.
Competition is what makes the world go round.

How much does Betting World contribute to the Tote operators bottomline, anyway?
BW first needs to make a (taxable) profit after expenses before the operators get their share.
In the grand scheme of things I can't imagine this amounts to serious money.

Cat

People on this forum hate bookmakers but it isn't personal because they like their own bookmaker.

A big operator like Bettingworld employs say 300 people, and generates a profit of say 3 or 4 million working 7 days a week. The average bookie can't compete with that growth because they don't have the 'works dept' of a racing operator to fit out a roll of so many shops for free.

For the RA or P to label the bookmaking industry as the source of it's woes is just laughable. But if they say it on the propaganda channel often enough, even people like you begin to believe their twaddle.

In fact, imho, the bookmakers and the fixed odds industry provide the flavour of our horseracing and keep many people, including owners involved. I think many owners would lose interest without this spice so racing better be mindful to be careful what you wish for...

The tote turnover is in billions, just bank charges and the security of moving it around is enormous, there is no comparrison between the two industries.

Another problem is that owners, who already have all the income from the totalisator system for their stakes, still want more. What about giving the gambler the choice of how he wants to spend his money?

I am told there are 3500 horses in training in JHB now, the last thing anyone needs is more owners with more horses, just thank God the modern trainer seems only able to get 6.38 runs p.a. out of the average horse.

You may want more stakes, and I may want more stakes, but punters don't need more racing and I don't think the open bet is responsible at all that the average earnings per horse is about R38,000.

To get 38K up to say 50K, you need to find about 75 million. Again, we just worrying about prize money for owners, something that 'racing' has in oversupply. I would guess that owners are spending (just in training fees) between 300 and 350,000,000 pa, without the capital cost of buying the horse and compete for stakes of about 250 million.

If SA breeders want to keep going, they need an export market real soon. Even Jooste is about to switch from a nett buyer to a supplier. I would guess he has over 200 mares now with his eye on many more. Already these numbers are putting the strain of stakes to the maximum, how much more can racing absorb here? Happily, we don't have to make restrictions because supply and demand economics will fix all!

These are just the facts, I haven't had time to consider the implications other than perhaps to put a MR restriction of say MR55 after 12 starts (2x the 6 runs p.a.) and force the boring dead wood out and divert the savings to make other races or increase stakes of existing better races. A clean up may make the whole thing more entertaining for the customer and stop the absolute waste of feeding horses who make big losses for their owners.

It stands to reason that if good horses are profitable and average horses make small losses, that bad horses is where we are bleeding. They are not good for turnover either, and not good for the breeding industry. It must mean I blame the race programmers then My end.

TS good morning Sir.

I can't sleep, been awake for an hour here in wet wet wet london town.

I'm still not grasping all of the 'original corporisation' thing.

I know that the 'racing trust' are the holders of a bunch of shares/responsibilties, and I thought that the RA are apart of that 'deal' and therefore HAVE to be the owners voice.

Which therefore negates, any such possibility of an alternative 'power base'.

Or am I in fact, 'missing something'?!?

Intrigued, Jim

Im sure the turnover created betting on the "aways" is tiny and providing markets on these meetings is a service to their customers and not damaging the pools?

What a lott of Bull.
Open betting, fixed odds what does it really mean.
Who cares?

What do they contribute? (Bookmakers)
They already took other the tote. (If you can't see it dont even bother to contribute towards this discussion any more)

Can you get bookmakers out of horseracing....... no.
It will cost to much.