Pa gets bad news for racing

[Fatboy]

May will turn into June which will turn into July which will turn into August and then September and in that time a second wave will hit because there is no vaccine so suck it up no racing until Jan 1st at the earliest. Believe me racing is not on the front burner, it hasn't even made it to the kitchen.

IT'S NOT EVEN IN THE HALLWAY WAITING FOR A SEAT AT THE TABLE EITHER

[PurpleSheetPicks]

May will turn into June which will turn into July which will turn into August and then September and in that time a second wave will hit because there is no vaccine so suck it up no racing until Jan 1st at the earliest. Believe me racing is not on the front burner, it hasn't even made it to the kitchen.

somehow i feel like this is true

its a shame we dont have the governance fighting for us
maybe they are, but i sure dont hear about it...
I know if i was on the board id be in harrisburg getting answers

[HornbyDuke]

I'm a bettor so that where this viewpoint derives from. But doesn't some of this problem with the seeming unwillingness of harness tracks to return just relate to profitability.

I've read on here from some posters for awhile that betting handle doesn't matter because casino $ siphoned off guarantee harness purse levels.

I don't enjoy saying this as a lifelong fan of harness racing who has been regally entertained  by the sport for all my lifetime, but  to me that seems idiotic. If a business isn't profitable it's based on a house of cards just looking for a reason to collapse.

Isn't the reason some of these flat tracks are going to run because of profitability. Track owners want them to reopen. No so true with the harness. Yonkers bleeds money so badly it's obscene.

I'm not sure what the business dies to resolve this but ignoring handle is egregious error IMHO.

[The Exporter]

It would only make sense, Horny. Just as in 2008. Business was severely interrupted by the financial collapse, world wide. What emerged was either a smarter more efficiently run business or a bankrupt business. The more heavily leveraged a company was, the less likely it was to return. 
 Markets for your product also either shift or dry-up. So, in order to move forward, a company must invest in customer retention/acquisition or, pack it in.
 There may not be many tracks that have the will or the funds to make the investment to move on.   

[Dingus]

It would only make sense, Horny. Just as in 2008. Business was severely interrupted by the financial collapse, world wide. What emerged was either a smarter more efficiently run business or a bankrupt business. The more heavily leveraged a company was, the less likely it was to return. 
 Markets for your product also either shift or dry-up. So, in order to move forward, a company must invest in customer retention/acquisition or, pack it in.
 There may not be many tracks that have the will or the funds to make the investment to move on.

You have to realize, that when the tracks allowed the casinos in as partners , the track was giving up some of it’s handle to the casinos in exchange for a % of the casinos handle.  Or, at least they should have figured that could happen.
The mistake was allowing the casinos to run the show.
It would have been like a store paying a % of its sales to a landlord.

The other problem, as I stated before, is the deals with the ADWs.
Purse money % is much higher for on track wagers than off track.
That needs to change as most bets are now made off track, even before the Coronavirus.

[The Exporter]

I don't know what track employed a model that "gave up handle in exchange for a % of casino handle ". I recall the lobbyist for the tracks pitching how harness racing would be exposed to new fans and handle. Having a casino would grow their base and market. In fact it had the opposite effect. Once the public was given a chance to choose, it did not choose racing.
 The off ADW's split has been a well documented house advantage and not paying fair rates for another's entity, for some time. NY demanded 5% more and collects that, as well as distributes it to their tracks.
 Bottom line is most race tracks, the entity with the power to make the change, couldn't care less.
 The result is purse accounts are funded about 80% from sources other than host handle.
I agree, this needs changing as you can almost give odds the states will change the casino's funding.

[Dingus]

I don't know what track employed a model that "gave up handle in exchange for a % of casino handle ". I recall the lobbyist for the tracks pitching how harness racing would be exposed to new fans and handle. Having a casino would grow their base and market. In fact it had the opposite effect. Once the public was given a chance to choose, it did not choose racing.
 The off ADW's split has been a well documented house advantage and not paying fair rates for another's entity, for some time. NY demanded 5% more and collects that, as well as distributes it to their tracks.
 Bottom line is most race tracks, the entity with the power to make the change, couldn't care less.
 The result is purse accounts are funded about 80% from sources other than host handle.
I agree, this needs changing as you can almost give odds the states will change the casino's funding.

Regarding the lobbyists-
Except the casinos stopped advertising that the track was there and only pitched the casino.

[LUCPARK]

every track cancelling or postponing many stakes and pa has postponed sires for 3 yr olds already

[jupiter]

I completely agree, iceman is right, racing is not on the front burner, not in the kitchen. I don´t think it is even in the house. State has a lot more to worry about than the horse community. The only hope they have is for the Hanover use what ever clout they have. This is killing their breeders awards.