Posts Tagged ‘betfair’
Monday, November 9th, 2009
By Ray Paulick
Horse of the Year won’t be the only racing subject being debated in the coming weeks in the wake of the 26th Breeders’ Cup championships from Santa Anita Park Nov. 6-7. For what it’s worth, if I had a vote in the Eclipse Awards (and I don’t), it would go to Zenyatta as Horse of the Year. I can’t blame anyone for supporting Rachel Alexandra, but I am a believer in the Breeders’ Cup being a key factor in determining year-end championships, including Horse of the Year. Zenyatta showed up and turned in a performance for the ages. Rachel Alexandra remained in her stall, resting on her own historic achievements from earlier in the year.
Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra make up the greatest unfulfilled rivalry since…well…Curlin and Big Brown in 2008. If you’re like me, I’ll bet you’re getting tired of these rivalries, the ones that only play out in the mind. I prefer the type settled on the racetrack: Affirmed and Alydar…Sunday Silence and Easy Goer.
The other subject worthy of discussion and debate is the Breeders’ Cup itself. This is year three of the two-day version of this event, one that began in 1984 as an audacious seven-race, $10-million day of racing. It’s now a 14-race smorgasbord that includes more “championship” races than we have championships (as measured by the Eclipse Awards).
The expansion in large part was based, not surprisingly, on money. In 2005, then-Breeders’ Cup president D.G. Van Clief Jr., who was serving in the dual role as commissioner of the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, set a goal of $200 million in handle for the event by 2010. Total handle that year (when the event was at Belmont Park) was $124.0 million, and it rose to $140.3 million in 2006 (Churchill Downs was the host site), the last time the Breeders’ Cup was conducted on one day.
The expansion to two days and more races was also designed in part to be more attractive to an international audience of horseplayers. The downside is the dilution effect it has on the entire event. Has victory in a Breeders’ Cup race lost some significance?
The first two-day Breeders’ Cup, held at a very wet Monmouth Park in 2007, yielded a total of $147.2 million in handle, and $155.7 million was bet at the 2008 Breeders’ Cup at Santa Anita’s Oak Tree Racing Association meeting. Handle dropped in 2009 to $150.2 million, despite the availability of common-pool wagering for the first time to Betfair’s two-million-plus customers.
Barring some sort of a miracle, the 2010 Breeders’ Cup will fall well short of Van Clief’s stated goal. In fact, it could be argued the event is less successful today from a wagering standpoint than it was 10 years ago in 1999, when it hit $100 million in handle for the first time and was still conducted on a single day.
But should handle (or television ratings, which also are lower today than they were 10 years ago) be the yardstick for success? The expansion from eight to 14 Breeders’ Cup races has broadened participation in the event from a horse owner’s standpoint, and it’s given the breeders who support the program through nominations more chances to recoup the fees they’ve paid over the years.
I wouldn’t pretend to compare the Breeders’ Cup Marathon or Juvenile Fillies Turf or some of the other new races with the Turf or Classic in terms of importance or prestige. Those races aren’t going to produce as much betting turnover, either. But they are races that should attract the best of their division from around the world, and they are interesting betting races for fans (compared to the standard fare of five- or six-horse fields that plague so many top races nowadays). In addition, though the new races have increased the total prize money to $25.5 million, roughly one-third of those new purses are paid for by pre-entry and entry fees. So in my mind these new races do serve some purpose.
Have Breeders’ Cup officials hit on the perfect formula on how to present the two days? Probably not. There are many who feel stacking all the filly and mare races on Friday (along with the Marathon) is insulting and sexist. There are other options, including putting the newest and least compelling races on Friday and keeping Saturday with the traditional Cup races. They could also consider making Friday all turf racing and Saturday the main track races.
But the real problem with the Breeders’ Cup is not the event itself, or the order in which the races are run. It’s the absence of an understandable, easy-to-follow ranking or eligibility system in the weeks and months leading up to the Cup.
The Win and You’re In qualifying races are a start, but not the end game solution. It also doesn’t help that so many other tracks are hosting live races on the same day as the Breeders’ Cup and, in effect, competing with the championships for wagering dollars. Our industry should take a look at another racing sport that has its biggest event early in the season and has still managed to create an exciting and engaging championship Cup. NASCAR has the Daytona 500, as big an event for NASCAR as the Kentucky Derby is for horse racing, and has managed to create a build up after its early climax with its Chase For The Sprint Cup. In order for horse racing to build itself back to national prominence outside of the first Saturday in May, a similar invention must be instituted with the Breeders’ Cup as the final act.
It’s a challenge to organize a sport that lacks structure and organization, but that’s the challenge the Breeders’ Cup was given through a long-term strategic plan presented to the board of directors earlier this year. For this plan to be fully developed and implemented, it will require the cooperation of not just horsemen, but of racetracks that in years past have been reluctant to work with the Breeders’ Cup. Those tracks have to understand that a healthy and prosperous Breeders’ Cup is in their best interest, just as the Breeders’ Cup has to realize that tracks must be viewed as partners in developing the strategic plan.
Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report
Savvy businesses recognize value. Advertise in the Paulick Report.
Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick
Tags: belmont park, betfair, Big Brown, Breeders' Cup, Chase for the Sprint Cup, churchill downs, Curlin, D. G. Van Clief Jr., Daytona 500, juvenile fillies turf, kentucky derby, Monmouth, nascar, Paulick Report, Rachel Alexandra, Ray Paulick, santa anita park, zenyatta Posted in Breeders' Cup | 54 Comments »
Thursday, October 22nd, 2009
By Ray Paulick
Betfair, which revolutionized betting nearly a decade ago through the creation of exchanges pitting one person against another, has reached a breakthrough agreement with the Breeders’ Cup, providing Betfair’s two million-plus worldwide customers access to commingled pari-mutuel pools and allowing the company to offer live video streaming of the Nov. 6-7 world championships to its exchange betting players. The deal was announced in London Thursday by Breeders’ Cup president and CEO Greg Avioli and Betfair director of horseracing Stephen Burn.
The Breeders’ Cup will receive an undisclosed fee from Betfair as a result of the agreement, and the deal promises to bring international wagering on the event to a new level. Betfair, along with other exchange betting companies and overseas bookmakers, has previously offered wagering on Breeders’ Cup and other American races of interest (though supposedly not to residents of the U.S.), but the wagering or live video streaming has never been officially sanctioned by the host racetrack or association, and no revenue has ever flowed back to America.
This agreement also permits Betfair to use Breeders’ Cup logos and marks and to advertise and promote the championships to its customers.
Betfair already had a relationship with Breeders’ Cup through TVG, the American-based racing network and wagering company itbought for $50 million in January 2009, but that agreement did not permit live video streaming to Betfair’s customers, sanction exchange wagering or allow Betfair’s international customers access to commingled Breeders’ Cup pools.
Betfair recently signed a deal with many American tracks, permitting the company to offer commingled pari-mutuel wagering to its exchange betting customers and paying a fee to tracks from Betfair revenue on exchange betting.
“Our agreement with Betfair is an important milestone in our ongoing effort to grow the international simulcast wagering market for the Breeders’ Cup World Championships,” Avioli said in a statement. “As more and more international horses participate in our championships, interest levels and wagering handle from around the world continue to increase, allowing us to maintain the highest possible purse levels for the event.”
“Our partnership with the Breeders’ Cup is the beginning of what we intend to be a mutually beneficial partnership with U.S. racing,” said Betfair’s Burn.
According to a press release, international handle bet directly into the Breeders’ Cup pools on the 2008 Breeders’ Cup World Championships was $17.6 million, up 16% from 2007 and 34% from 2006 (the last year the event was held on one day). The Breeders’ Cup has targeted international wagering as an important revenue stream for future growth.
Betfair has revolutionized wagering through cutting-edge technology that enables players to choose their own odds and even make a bet after a race has started (those bets would not go into the commingled pari-mutuel pools). A press release said the company processes over six million transactions per day on a variety of sports and other events and games.
Typically, deals between horse racing associations and Betfair pay 10% to the racing industry from the company’s profits on horse racing bets. That’s a far cry from the percentage of betting horsemen and tracks get from the traditional pari-mutuel division of revenue, but Betfair offers the hope of dramatically increasing the amount of money wagered, thereby significantly lowering the effective takeout. It’s a balancing act, and only time will tell if a deal with betting exchanges like Betfair are a net win for the racing industry.
The Paulick Report took an in-depth at Betfair in January when the company acquired TVG. Click here for that article.
Tags: betfair, betting, betting exchange, Breeders' Cup, Greg Avioli, Horse Racing, Paulick Report, Ray Paulick, stephen burn, tvg Posted in Betting Exchanges, Bookmaking, Breeders' Cup, Wagering | 36 Comments »
Friday, August 21st, 2009
Jess Jackson issued the following statement in the wake of TVG and BetFair’s agreement to add $400,000 to the purse of the Grade 1 Beldame at Belmont Park Oct. 3 if unbeaten champion Zenyatta and 3-year-old filly sensation Rachel Alexandra both are in the starting line-up for the 1 1/8-mile dirt race at the New York Racing Association track:“Our strategy has not changed in scheduling Rachel Alexandra’s campaign this year. We will always take it one race at a time.
“Right now, we are focused on her next start. I hope to have a decision on that early next week. After that race, we will need to see how she recovers and then determine her next start.Â
“I understand the growing excitement around a race that involves these two magnificent athletes competing but both camps need to do what is in the best interest of the horse. And for us, that means waiting until she completes and soundly recovers from her next race before any decisions are made about the Beldame Stakes or any other venue.†– Jess Jackson
Â
Tags: Beldame, belmont park, betfair, jess jackson, New York Racing Association, Paulick Report, Rachel Alexandra, Ray Paulick, tvg, zenyatta Posted in New York Racing Association, Rachel Alexandra, zenyatta | 8 Comments »
Saturday, May 23rd, 2009
By Ray Paulick
Is Betfair developing a conscience? The world’s leading betting exchange, which recently dipped its toes into U.S. gambling waters with its purchase of the horse racing network and account wagering company TVG, has reportedly made a voluntary contribution to the Levy Board, the statutory group that disburses betting revenue from bookmakers, exchanges and the tote in the form of prize money for British racing.
The Guardian reported on Friday that Betfair recently made a voluntary payment of almost $2 million to the Levy Board in recognition of profits made by the exchange from clients outside of the UnIted Kingdom betting on British horse racing. The amount represents 10% of Betfair’s profits on such wagers.
Betfair has contractual obligations to the Levy Board on profits made from British punters, but this is apparently the first time the exchange made voluntary payments on gains from overseas clients betting on British racing. Betfair is based on Malta.
“We have sent a check,” Betfair spokesman Mark Davies told the Guardian, “as there is no statutory mechanism by which we can pay the levy in respect of our international business. We are doing this because we support British racing.”
That begs the question of when Betfair will begin to share its wealth with U.S. racetrack and horsemen (or , more simply,“Where’s ours?” as Australian-based pedigree consultant Byron Rogers asked when alerting me to Betfair’s voluntary payment to the Levy Board.) Though the betting exchange says it does not accept any wagers from the United States, it does offer betting on American horse racing to its international clientele. Currently, to my knowledge, Betfair does not share any profits from those bets with American racetracks or horsemen’s organizations. Negotiations have taken place between Betfair and Breeders’ Cup officials, as well as with the Thoroughbred Owners of California, but no revenue sharing deals have yet been struck.
It seems only a matter of time before American racetrack and horsemen’s organization officials link overseas wagering on American racing via Betfair to domestic contracts involving TVG.
Those who want to learn more about the relatively brief and exceedingly successful history of Betfair, a company founded in 2000 by Andrew Black and Ed Wray, might be interested in Colin Cameron’s new book: “You Bet— The Betfair Story: How Two Men Changed the World of Gambling.” Click here for details.
Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report
Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.
Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world.
Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick
Tags: Andrew Black, betfair, betting exchange, Breeders' Cup, byron rogers, colin cameron, Ed Wray, Horse Racing, levy board, mark davies, Paulick Report, Ray Paulick, thoroughbred owners of california, You Bet the betfair Story Posted in Betting Exchanges, International Racing, Wagering | 6 Comments »
Wednesday, January 7th, 2009
By Ray Paulick
Are betting exchanges a possible solution to the problems facing the U.S. Thoroughbred industry, which in 2008 saw its annual pari-mutuel handle fall for the fourth time in six years, dropping over 7% to a 10-year low? The Thoroughbred Owners of California thinks they may be, having recently signed a letter of agreement with betting exchange giant Betfair to have the UK-based company promote California racing abroad while TOC helps BetFair obtain statutory and regulatory approval to operate a betting exchange in California.
Betfair, which has been trying for several years to gain access to the U.S. market, is also believed to be a leading candidate to buy TVG, whose parent company, Macrovision, announced its intention to sell TVG last year. Though there are no confirmed suitors, others rumored to be potential buyers of the racing network and Advance Deposit Wagering platform include Churchill Downs Inc.; Marc Nathanson, a cable TV industry billionaire and father of TVG president David Nathanson; and an industry consortium that could include Keeneland, the New York Racing Association, former Hollywood Park chairman R.D. Hubbard, and Los Alamitos racetrack owner Edward Allred.
Betfair, a privately held company, was founded in June of 2000, using a technologically advanced platform permitting individuals to go online and bet against one another on a wide range of events, including horse racing, sports, politics and even reality television shows. By taking commissions of 2%-5% from winning bets, the company offers extremely low takeout and has built enormous volume: it claims to have over one million customers from 140 countries, with 100,000 or more active players in a given week. (UPDATE: Betfair said in October 2008 that it signed up its two millionth customer; see comments section, below) Its wagering platform handles over five million bets per day. In 2007, Betfair had 42 million English pounds in earnings before interest, depreciation, taxes and amortization on revenue of 240 million pounds. According to its annual report (which can be seen here), Betfair has 110 million pounds cash on hand.
CONCERNS ABOUT BETFAIR
The problem many see with Betfair is that the company pays a small percentage for the rights to races on which it handles wagers. In England, for example, it pays a bit over 10% of gross profits on racing wagers. In some cases, however, it pays no fees at all, as is currently the case with racing from the U.S. Betfair currently accepts bets on American racing, but only from customers outside of the U.S., and it does not have rights to any video signals. Betfair is acutely aware of concerns from racing interests in the U.S. who believe betting exchanges would cannibalize pari-mutuel betting and decrease revenue to tracks and purses. It addresses some of those fears in this pamphlet, which was designed to appease the racing industry in the United Kingdom.
Another concern raised about Betfair centers on wagers it accepts that a specific horse will lose, prompting worries about race-fixing. But Betfair has cooperated in several investigations involving horse racing and sports betting, giving authorities access to detailed betting information as part of its memorandum of understanding.
Drew Couto, the president of TOC, said the letter of agreement with BetFair was signed last month. He believes wagering will continue to suffer unless the industry distances itself from Albert Einstein’s definition of insanity: doing the same thing time after time and expecting a different result. “That really describes our industry’s approach to this sport and business over the last decade,” Couto said.
“Going forward,” he added, “we have to face two very important realities. “First, we have allowed the sport to basically disappear. It’s no longer a sport, but simply a justification to gamble and wager, and as a wagering proposition we know it’s not the most attractive. We have to go back and make it a sport. We have to give the sport some structure to have it make sense for the fans, make some very serious fundamental changes to focus on the sporting aspect of racing. We have left it largely to the tracks to be the stewards of the sport, and they only care about the financial side.
“Second,” Couto said, “we have to adopt new ways our fans can participate. New wagers, betting exchanges. We have to embrace these new ways of playing as ancillary to the way we currently operate, so it’s new and fresh. That includes tournament-style wagering that was approved by the RCI (Association of Racing Commissioners International) last summer. If we don’t begin to do things differently and find new ways to operate, we are bound to be the definitive example of what Einstein said.”
CAN RACING DEVELOP ITS OWN BETTING EXCHANGE?
Chris Scherf, executive vice president of the Thoroughbred Racing Associations of North America, a racetrack trade organization, for years has advocated that North American tracks consider developing their own betting exchange. He sees the trend in downward handle as a serious crisis.
“We’ve got to look into pricing (the takeout charge on pari-mutuel bets), the product that’s being provided and the convenience factor for wagering,” Scherf said. “We need to make the same kind of concerted effort on handle that is currently being made to improve the safety and welfare issues. Track by track, you can get swamped in a million problems, but this has to be at the top of the pile. We are losing bettors. What do we have to do to change that aspect of the business, the part that provides us revenue? Of course, the entire debacle of cutting off signals in the last year (due to contractual disagreements between tracks and horsemen over ADW splits) was extremely detrimental to any kind of sustained gambling business.
“The problem,” Scherf said, “is we’ve got tracks and horsemen both saying they need more money in this economy. But the first thing we need is an engaged gambling public, and they should be at the top of the list.”
Scherf said he is “somewhere in between fear and welcoming” Betfair into the industry. “We had no master plan for how ADW would fit in and now we are trying to retrofit it, which is causing a lot of angst and problems. We need to spend more time developing a strategy (for exchange betting), though it’s difficult to do that when you have a wide disparity throughout the industry in resources and markets.”
Lonny Powell, an industry consultant based in Lexington, Ky., who previously served in executive positions with racetracks (including head of Santa Anita Park), the ADW company Youbet.com and as president of the Association of Racing Commissioners International, said BetFair has done a good job of “mainstreaming themselves” in recent years by sharing more of its profits with the racing industry in Europe.
“It’s here to stay,” Powell said of Betfair and exchange betting. “When I was in the ADW world, I wished they would just go away, but I don’t feel that way anymore. We’re like an ice cream store that only sells vanilla, but you can go over to Baskin Robbins and get 33 flavors. We need variety.”
Powell, who said he is optimistic the industry will find a solution to its present challenges, believes racing interests should look at developing their own betting exchange. “If the industry could somehow take this wagering crisis a little more seriously and rather than find ways to kill something, find ways to make it work, we can grow the gambling dollar,” he said. “A Betfair type of platform can be operated by U.S. racing interests. The economic model that Betfair offers is flawed, but we all agree our current model is flawed, too. I’ve got to believe a Betfair type of platform would work. Our product is stale, and our wagering levels are stale.”
INTEGRITY ISSUES REMAIN A CONCERN
The reason for declines in handle go beyond a limited product line, said Mike Maloney, a professional gambler in Kentucky who has become an outspoken advocate for horseplayers at industry conferences and who served as an ad hoc member of a Kentucky Horse Racing Commission Task Force. “We are at a very significant crossroads in racing,” Maloney said, “probably the biggest one in my lifetime. The financial crisis is magnifying our problems, but the problems have to be dealt with before racing can recover. The economy may improve, but racing’s problems will still be there.
“Our customer base is aging, and they’ve lost a lot of their faith in the integrity of racing,” he said. “As they age, they aren’t being replaced. The second problem is the takeout is too high. We can’t attract new players and are having a hard time holding on to existing ones. It’s exacerbated because the takeout keeps going up. With competition from other gambling opportunities, you can’t get away with that any more. It’s roughly 5% in other forms of gambling – sports, table games, trading options – but it’s 20% for us. New York just raised takeouts; trifectas are 26% now, and I just refuse to play it. Kentucky wants to raise takeout. What other business in this economic climate would consider racing prices?
“Third,” Maloney said, “racing integrity problems are real, and they are not exaggerated. If anything, they probably are underplayed. Trainers who use drugs to cheat; unsecured wagering pools with outdated technology; unregulated participants allowed access into those pools. People are just beginning to learn about some of the problems in these areas. In the last couple of years the light is being shined on them. These are serious problems that need to be dealt with. Big players realize they can’t trust the pools they are playing money into.”
Finally, Maloney said, the corporate mentality of many racetracks has hurt the game. “There is a disconnect with customers with some of these racetrack holding companies. They don’t really understand their business, and there’s too much short-term bottom line thinking; cutting costs, worrying about the next quarterly report, and too little thought about long-term improvement of the product.”
Maloney, who called betting exchanges a “two-edged sword” because of how they would cannibalize pari-mutuel betting, said the industry has had a wake-up call after being “rocked by betting and drug scandals and threatened” by the federal government. “This crossroad we’re at, what we do from here, will determine the fate of racing.”
(Do you have an opinion on how the industry reverses the trend in declining handle? We’re interested in your comments below and in your thoughts about betting exchanges, the subject of the Daily Paulick Poll, which can be found on the left-hand column of the Paulick Report home page.)
Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report
Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world.
Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary.
Tags: advance deposit wagering, ADW, association of racing commissioners international, betfair, betting exchange, chris scherf, churchill downs, david nathanson, drew couto, edward allred, gambling, Hollywood Park, horse race gambling, Horse Racing, horseplayer, integrity in racing, Keeneland, lonny powell, los alamitos, marc nathanson, mike maloney, New York Racing Association, nyra, pari-mutuel wagering, Paulick Report, powell strategy & solutions, professional gambler, R.D. Hubbard, Ray Paulick, RCI, santa anita, Thoroughbred industry, thoroughbred owners of california, thoroughbred racing associations, toc, tra, tvg, youbet Posted in Account Wagering, Betting Exchanges, Industry Organizations, Industry Reform, Regulatory Issues, Wagering | 37 Comments »
|
|