Giving Away the Store


OK, we finally had a weekend with good weather both days, good crowds at the track, great racing, especially on Saturday, and the usual Sunday giveaway mob scene. But a closer look at the numbers suggests that perhaps those giveaways -- by now a Saratoga tradition -- really don't contribute much of anything to NYRA and its horsemen.

It's safe to assume that NYRA doesn't actually make any money on the giveaway items themselves. Even if made by near-slave labor in China, those long-sleeved t-shirts (today's giveaway item) probably cost NYRA a couple of dollars each. Add in the need to pay a few people to hand the shirts out to the oncoming hordes, and add in the over-ordering that's a necessary part of running the giveaway program, and it seems unreasonable that NYRA could realize a profit on the $3 general admission charge. I don't know how much of the giveaway items' cost is picked up by corporate sponsors (today's shirt was credited to the Adirondack Trust Co.), but it's hard to imagine that someone else is paying the whole cost of those items.

But, you (or NYRA) say, all those people coming in for the t-shirts will bet, right? And NYRA will get the takeout from all that additional handle. Not so fast.

Yesterday -- admittedly a great racing day, with the Alabama and the Sword Dancer -- attendance was 32,344, and on-track handle was $5,517,000. That's an average of about $170 per person, and, remember, the crowd on a day like yesterday includes a number of casual $2 bettors, not to mention lots of (presumably) non-betting children.

Today's crowd was announced as 65,598. Obviously it was nothing like that, since the announced crowd counts each "spin" of the turnstile by someone who goes through again and again for more t-shirt vouchers.Today's on-track handle was $4,486,660. If you use the announced attendance as the divisor, that's betting of only $68 per person. So, obviously, there were nowhere near that many people on the grounds.

Let's apply yesterday's per-person average to today's handle and see how many real live people there might have been at the track. Dividing the four and a half million dollar handle by per-person assumed betting of $170, and assuming roughly the same mix of racing fans, casual bettors and kids, we get an assumed actual attendance today of 26,392. Nice, and certainly enough to produce the feeling the the track was bustling, but nothing to really write home about.

Would many of those 26,392 have stayed home if there were no giveaway? Probably a few, but mostly they'd be the people you see LEAVING the track, carrying dozens of t-shirts, as you're walking in 20 minutes before the first race. In other words, they're almost complete non-bettors, and those are the folks that NYRA is losing money on with every t-shirt they take home.

So, if anyone at NYRA is listening, how about just trying the no-giveaway approach. Offer good racing, pray for sunshine, and see what happens.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Economics of Owning a Race Horse in New York

I've been wanting for some time to write about the economics of racing from the owners' and trainers' point of view. And the quarterly ritual of preparing financial statements for my Castle Village Farm partnerships has finally provided both the motivation and the data to get started. So, this post will look at racing from an owner's point of view. I'll follow up later with a look at the economics of being a trainer. In both cases, I'll be focusing on the New York racing scene, that is, as an owner or a trainer stabled at Aqueduct or Belmont, and making an annual pilgrimage to Saratoga. New York has the best purses around -- they'll average over $700,000 a day at the upcoming Saratoga meet -- but it also has very high expenses. So, even with the kind of horses that most of us are satisfied to have -- solid, hard-working thoroughbreds -- not a stakes horse, but not a $4,000 Finger Lakes claimer either -- it's not easy to come out ahead -- even when you...
Read more

NEWSPAPER RESTRUCTURING IS PAINFUL, BUT NECESSARY

Financial pages are full of developments and changes at newspaper companies and these are being commented upon anxiously by those in the industry. Unpleasant conditions certainly abound, but these development are not indications that the industry is dead or dying in the near future. What they signal is that things which worked in the past are not working now, that newspaper companies are badly in need of restructuring, refocusing, and renewal, and that the boards of the companies and the company managers are taking badly needed action. The techniques for restructuring are no mystery. First, you need some cash. This can be obtained by attracting new capital through investment or loans. New York Times Co. did this recently by borrowings $250 million from Carlos Slim. Other firms are looking for friendly investors with liquidity. Another way of raising cash is by turning assets into cash. A classic move made by many types of firms is the sell their building and lease back any space that i...
Read more

Is the future of digital journalism an outside job?

Making small digital news providers sustainable has become the holy grail of journalists and the search continues for workable business models and revenue streams. Advertising may produce some revenue, but it will never generate sufficient resources to support digital journalism because so little advertising money is available for sites with small audiences. About three-quarters of all online advertising goes to the top 10 sites and Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Yahoo account for about 60 percent of all online revenue. This leaves very little advertising expenditures to be contested among all other players--of which news providers are only a small fraction. At the same time, the prices paid for online advertising are falling because there are so many sites offering advertising, the advertising inventory is nearly infinite, and audiences continue fragmenting. This means the majority of funding for start-up digital journalism must come from elsewhere and online news sites—especially s...
Read more