I've been saying this

super article LSU and very very valid points Mr Hawaii. I agree with all but would like to add the following for consideration.

Racing has key issues to sort out in SAF before the new virgin market will bite. In no particular order of priority, they all have priority:
1. integrity, and the perception thereof
2. service
3. engagement

without being boring, there is a limited budget so certain aspects are getting attention and others not. At the moment (see previous posts about the same topic), raceday service is getting some attention, and general public awareness.

The other points are on the agenda and some will roll out this year. Rome wasn't built in a day.

ps, racing-v-soccer/sports, surely racing has the propensity for better odds return than sports betting? but because the learning curve is steep and longer, participants at the starting point are not supported or encouraged to learn (or there is no access to learning).

Through awareness, and education, a culture can be borne and nurtured, given the product is clean and well delivered. This will ultimately convert to punting, and other revenue streams. Stay positive and do your bit, it all helps.

Please believe me Ive spoken personally to many youngsters of all races in SA, guys and girls earning good money. If they set aside R200 a weekend to have a bet its going to be on sport and definitely not on horse racing. All sports channels in SA discuss the upcoming sport all the time, horse racing is dying accept it, its tainted with the brush of being crooked (the first question anybody who does not bet on horse racing asked "but thats a crooked game hey?")..how do they know No 3 in Race 2 is just going for a run, or the distance is too short, or it will need the run?? even us long term owners get the same rubbish excuses.

Thanks everyone, some really insightful comments all around and lots of food for thought.

Thanks for the kind comment in the Sporting Post LG.

Oscar, the point you make about youngsters and their spending preferences should be the starting point for any racing marketing campaign. We got to get the future generations interested and convince operators of the feasibility of the exercise.

Social wagering is big and growing business and racing can tap into this easily with the format we have created. Convincing them is a mammoth task though as it will require spending more money on racing than set aside in already sparse budgets, with the pay off only coming down the line. This is a huge wall to break down or get over but when we do the results could be spectacular.

We don't actually need to work with tote operators to get this done as the format will not require a tote license to introduce. Bookmakers or a group of investors could get things up and running profitably on a fairly limited budget, but this is not the way I wish to go at this point.

Tote operators are in the best position to take racing forward should they want to and this will be my preferred option at all times. Possible personal benefits aside, I would like to see racing doing well and taking a more prominent place in the wagering market again.

LSU I must commend you on the latest article and those before it. You clearly have the interests of racing at heart and have given possible solutions much thought. You do however commit a Cardinal Sin in your thinking by assuming that the operators actually want local racing to succeed. It is patently obvious to see to even a blind man that local racing is seen as a necessary evil due to the high costs of staging the show and this is no conjecture on my part. Perusal of the last Phumelela results show just how they put local racing in the worst possible light when comparing it to the other arenas they generate profits from. From a numbers perspective they lament the slow growth of local racing even though it constitutes more than half of their turnover. Far more appetising are the side shows like soccer and sport betting where the margins are so much tastier. International racing is also feted as a far more profitable offering, clearly this is due to not being liable for "production" costs on the events being bet on. From a business model it is difficult to disagree with, however it is my opinion that Mr du Plessis and his bunch of asset stripping colleagues do not do local racing justice. I have my suspicions as to how the bottom line is projected.

Let's go back to the "good old days" when racing was the only show in town. Lets consider how business was done. You had off course totes and you had on track betting. You bet on horses and nothing else. Let us consider what the costs were. Tracks had to be maintained, facilities and staff for betting had to be supplied and paid for. Nothing much different to what we find today. The single biggest difference to the supply chain as such IS THAT THE PRODUCT OFFERING HAS CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY. To explain - in 1980 ( or any year prior to sports being offered ) Harry Casual, your typical tote punter had a choice of tote products on horse racing to spend his leisure Rand on when he visited his local tote. The current scenario is that Harry can spent his cash on fixed odds, lotto, soccer bets, sports bets, etc, etc that have nothing to do with the local racing product at all often at the same facility he was going to in 1980. So the operator has taken Harry's leisure Rand and diminished the possibilities of that Rand spend occurring on a local tote racing product. The amount of money that Harry is spending may not have changed, lets assume it has matched inflation, but the distribution of where he spends most certainly has. The operators now sit with an increased turnover and disingenuously make claims that the local racing product is not as viable as other offerings.

A second view I have on how the local product performance is ambushed, is by how costs associated with the running of the operation are allocated. Fixed costs are a reality of any operation. Rentals of buildings, Staff costs, utilities etc, etc. Let us get back to Harry and illustrate my point. In 1980 Harry went and bet his R100 a meeting at his local tote and still bets there to this day. In 1980 100% of costs were allocated to local racing as this was the only show in town. HOW ARE THESE COSTS ALLOCATED TODAY AND HOW IS THE SPLIT DONE BETWEEN THE VARIOUS PRODUCTS? I have no doubt that local racing bears the brunt of costs to portray it in the unfavourable light that the operator does. Let me break it down further to illustrate my point, and take it to a tote teller level. Some poetic licence needed here! Harry has been punting for 35 years ( 1980 ) always at the same branch and always with the same tote teller, lets call her Mavis - ( Harry is smitten with her ). Mavis has evolved with the business and has gone from offering just horse racing bets to a variety of bets, she spends a disproportionate amount of time catering to soccer punters these days. These soccer punters are served from the exact same tote machine that previously only catered for local horse racing bets. She has also evolved from just offering SA racing to offering the spectrum that she does today with the international product. Mavis gets paid a salary, she gets allocated a tote machine to generate punters tickets, has a pension, medical aid and the like. In 1980 all these costs were borne by the local racing division. HOW ARE THEY SPLIT TODAY? Mavis most certainly does not generate 100% of her turnover to local racing coffers so why should local racing carry her costs?

Perhaps therein lies the reluctance to listen to people who want to uplift local racing. Perhaps it is not in the operator interests to build local racing spend. Perhaps this is all about the bottom line and the reality is that local racing spend is at the detriment of operator profit. Perhaps this is why guys like Leon will never be entertained seriously regardless of what ideas are put on the table.

As a footnote and to strengthen my argument that local racing is not seen as a priority, one only needs to look at the deterioration of local tracks in terms of maintenance. The Vaal sand is a disgrace because the operator continually looks to avoid spending money to ensure the track returns to its "glory" days when it was feted as an "all weather" and meetings would not be lost.

Spot on, Mr H. I agree with the principles of no choice and protectionism. I remember what a big deal Comrades was because we had little other live sport. We used to have early morning get togethers etc and all fairly, friends etc crowd around the tv. Can't remember when last I got up to watch the coverage.
And it wasn't called July Fever for nothing... I have a few old scrap books from my high school era when I lived and dreamt racing - packed with cut-outs leading up to the July from newspapers and all the stories, dreams, interviews... Front page news!! And now?
If I had a lighty who wanted to try and collect the same type of articles he would be struggling for variety.

Thanks OTA, you have summed up the reality of the situation superbly.

I have got to the same conclusion that you have the more I am dealing with operators and it frustrates me as marginalising racing is a strategic mistake no matter what provides the strongest bottom line contribution at this time.

Every word you have said rings true and it is so easy to drive a self fulfilling prophecy if you desire a certain outcome, especially a negative one.

My theory is that betting operators will have a gigantic about turn in their thinking the moment that long term growth potential in racing could be proven as a reality again. It will take just one powerful concept, backed up by results to discredit the predictable thinking and actions that we have become accustomed too.

OTA has explained it perfectly,and if anybody doubts the basic allegation that local racing is not a priority,I can confirm having had a lengthy discussion with a person employed in a senior position at "P" and when I queried why certain milestone were not being achieved,he responded that there was no desire, at director or senior management level,to prioritise the local product!
That was from the horses mouth ..............excuse the pun.........lol

rob faux wrote: OTA has explained it perfectly,and if anybody doubts the basic allegation that local racing is not a priority,I can confirm having had a lengthy discussion with a person employed in a senior position at "P" and when I queried why certain milestone were not being achieved,he responded that there was no desire, at director or senior management level,to prioritise the local product!
That was from the horses mouth ..............excuse the pun.........lol

Very interesting perspective from P's senior circle Rob.

I pride myself in understanding economics fairly well and I have never seen any business where an annual divisional shortfall and a growing one at that is not something that ends up having to be addressed.

If local racing is not a priority it should at least be enough of a concern to continue the search for a proper racing solution and most definitely not one that requires constant cross subsidisation.

If acceptance of defeat is the official stance you have to question the suitability of the suitor to look after the product over the longer term.

Racing needs someone willing to champion it's cause, not an entity who has no interest in it's wellbeing.

Curious to know what the figures are for online Bookies,

What with Technology improving, surely those who use to go out to the course are now retired and casually sitting in their favourite Arm chair, with a drink in their hands watching / Listening to the racing online taking their bets online.

You guys ever listen to the William Hill racing Radio. my word i wish SA had something like that. great listening to them chat and tip.

Jimmy online bookies are handier for the big players

But remember bookie used to take nearly 100% of their slippage on horse racing

They now say horse racing makes up about 20% of their slippage and 30% of stakes wagered ... Doubt it will go backwards ?

I've tried getting some friends to join me on course or get interested in a Football bet or two. but they all say the same thing. Its not worth it, they want to win big, when they see that the team they wanna bet is 4/10 or the when they hear the Favourite in the July or Met is odds on they dont want to take the bet. Because to them R400/R1000 isnt a bet, they want to win R40000/R1000 on the favourite. or they just shrug shoulders and say they are too unlucky to be gambling and would rather spedn the money on something more vailable like Booze and taking the kids out.