Comments on: BLUM: TIME TO SPEAK UP

By: Alison Thompson Murphy

Alison Thompson Murphy — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 13:51:58 +0000

Funny, in reading Mr. Blum’s letter, I thoughtof two things:
1. That Garrett Redmond has been chanting these thoughts since I’ve known him (a few years); and
2. What’s wrong with getting personal with the managers of Breeders Cup?

Thanks for the space, Ray.

By: Garrett Redmond

Garrett Redmond — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 05:51:09 +0000

What a melancholy state of affairs !

Peter Blum’s effort to open up Breeders’ Cup, which should have brought forth many opinions by “Names” in the business, has produced just a few exchanges about witch hunts.

I fear Mr. Blum will find himself standing almost alone. Few will step forward to help bring about the reforms all know are necessary. They will call and encourage him, but they will not join with him or help him.

Note to Mr. Blum. I’ve been trying to call attention to the Breeders’ Cup racket for several years. I have plenty of material. If you wish to get in touch, call 953 0204.

By: Paulick Report » Blog Archive » BREEDERS’ CUP: TRANSPARENCY AND DEMOCRACY?

Tue, 03 Feb 2009 17:44:54 +0000

[...] « BLUM: TIME TO SPEAK UP [...]

By: Barbara

Barbara — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:19:18 +0000

If the investment of a portion of the reserve fund in the stock market produced a good return for 20 years prior to 2008 - a year when all lost money in the markets unless your name is Bernie Madoff - then I suppose the loss of value now is just the great return over the years and not the principle amount.

By: California Breeder

California Breeder — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:53:13 +0000

Well I’ve always known that a few Kentucky breeders control the Breeder’s Cup, and maybe that’s the way it should be, since the put up so much of the money.

I had no idea the people who work at the pleasure of the board of directors (the four officers mentioned by Mr. Blum) get a chance to vote on who sits on that board. Gee, I wonder who they’ll vote for?

That smells.

Thanks Peter Blum for enlightening us.

By: Slimpickens

Slimpickens — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:58:34 +0000

Whether he means well or not, Blum starts with a faulty premise. Since when is the sole purpose of nominating to run for the money later? Did I miss something?

Certainly, one of the reasons to nominate is for the foal to be eligible for Breeders’ Cup purses later and, to its credit, the Breeders’ Cup pays much more in purses every year then it takes in in nominations — a fact that seems to have been lost in all the dialogue over the stakes program.

By: Thorofan

Thorofan — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:14:22 +0000

“….We need a cross-section of industry participants with an effective mix of fresh ideas and high-level business expertise to develop new strategies that serve the breeder, while preserving our championship events in the best way possible…” [Peter Blum]

Well put Mr. Blum. Does your concept of a “cross-section of industry participants” include fans? Without fans, where would we be? Perhaps it is time to begin to include the “voice of the fan’ at the table. Because of pari-mutual wagering, fans are more than spectators as in other sports. Fan wagering contributes to purses at every track in the country. Fans are participants and stakeholders, not unlike owners, breeders, trainers, albeit with different levels of involvement. Fans come from all professions with all levels of experience. Members of ThoroFan work in the Thoroughbred racing and breeding industry, as well as are elected officials, tradesman, clergy, hospital administrators, businesspersons, corporate executives, Presidential appointees, etc. Treating fans like retail customers is flawed thinking. Lets invite the fan into the process, so they are part of the solution.

By: Sid Fernando

Sid Fernando — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 14:23:14 +0000

Mr. Blum has once again — eloquently — put the focus back on the issues.