Posts Tagged ‘steve byk’

By Ray Paulick
I was all set to name Satish Sanan the winner of the first annual John Mayer Foot in Mouth Award for comments he made on Steve Byk’s “At the Races” Sirius/XM satellite radio show last Tuesday from which he was quoted in a Bloodhorse.com article as saying Churchill Downs was the “worst” racing organization and each of the Breeders’ Cups at Lone Star Park and Monmouth Park was a “disaster.”

Then I thought I’d better listen to the show before throwing Sanan under the bus with Mayer, the pop star who made some outrageous remarks in a just-published Playboy magazine interview about former girlfriends Jessica Simpson and Jennifer Aniston, among other subjects. Since the interview was published, Mayer, a profilic Twitterer, said he has “been trying to prove to people I’m not a douche bag.”

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Sanan has to take that drastic of a measure.

He did, however, agree to send out a statement admitting that he “mischaracterized” the relationship between the Breeders’ Cup and Churchill Downs during the course of the interview, which mostly consisted of him responding to criticism from several callers who disagreed with the concept of a permanent site for horse racing’s championship event. The callers especially disagreed with Santa Anita Park being named the permanent site, a rumor that has been making the rounds after numerous trial balloons were sent out by Breeders’ Cup officials but as Sanan pointed out on more than one occasion during the show is a decision that has not been ratified by the board. His personal preference, he said, was for Santa Anita Park to be the permanent site. (Archives for Sanan’s weekly segment on the show, entitled “Our Industry,” can be heard here.)

The full board of members and trustees of the Breeders’ Cup met in Florida on March 3, the day after Sanan’s radio appearance, and the Bloodhorse.com article published that morning apparently caused Breeders’ Cup board chairman Bill Farish’s blood to boil.

Farish issued a testy statement by mid-afternoon:  “The Breeders’ Cup board is extremely disappointed with recent statements from board member Satish Sanan with regard to host sites and those views in no way reflect the official position of Breeders’ Cup, LTD. The Breeders’ Cup has longstanding and valued partnerships with Churchill Downs and the New York Racing Association. No final decisions have been made on host sites beyond 2010 and as we indicated in December the board is looking at a permanent host location as a potential option as part of our ongoing strategic planning initiative. We extend our sincere apology to Churchill Downs and the State of Kentucky. We look forward to our return to Louisville and Churchill Downs for the 2010 Breeders’ Cup World Championships.”

Only Tiger Woods has apologized to more people.

Sanan sent an email to all of the members and trustees on March 4, a copy of which was leaked (not by Sanan) to the Paulick Report.

It reads: “I want to take this opportunity to address and clarify a number of issues raised in Bill Farish’s memo and mischaracterization of my comments during my regular show on Tuesdays on ‘At the Races’ radio network. The facts are as follows:

Regards,
Satish Sanan”

Sanan said things on his radio appearance about Churchill Downs that almost certainly have been said privately by other Breeders’ Cup board members, but the horse industry is not used to someone who serves on some of these exclusive boards being as candid publicly as Sanan has been. Perhaps Farish is somewhat sensitive because his father, William Farish, is the former chairman of the Churchill Downs board, but he knows the attitude about the Breeders’ Cup represented by CEO Bob Evans and his top executives  in negotiations to be host site can be summed up as follows: “We don’t really care if we host your event or not.”

Was there anything to be gained by trashing Churchill Downs, Lone Star Park, and Monmouth Park? No, there wasn’t, and I’m sure Sanan has said other things he’s regretted during the many hours he has spent communicating with racing fans and horsemen on the “At the Races” show. In the heat of the moment, I think Breeders’ Cup chairman Farish was just as much out of line, overreacting publicly to what Sanan was quoted in a news article as saying.

This industry needs people with the candor, the fresh perspective and the creative business acumen that Sanan has brought to Breeders’ Cup and other industry organizations, including the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders’ Cup, where he is member of a committee addressing issues related to structural changes and horse racing’s broken business model.

The candor sometimes gets him in trouble. “There is a group of people particularly pissed off at me,” he said on the radio show, “not as to what I’m trying to achieve or what the group is trying to achieve, (but about) what I had said about the alphabet soup organizations…People are taking it personally, some of the officers of some of these organizations. Candidly, the old saying in business is if you are trying to solve a business problem, generally speaking people who are part of the problem are people who are going to object to it.”

It’s that kind of candor and blunt talk that doesn’t endear Sanan to some people, but I get the feeling he doesn’t really care about that. We haven’t gotten very far in this business by having boards who rubber stamp cautious executive decisions, discourage open dialogue, and keep electing the same people year after year after year.

Copyright © 2010, 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

According to Tom LaMarra at the Blood-Horse, Satish Sanan discussed the possibility of a permanent host site for the Breeders’ Cup on the satellite radio show ‘At the Races with Steve Byk’.

Suggesting that Santa Anita Park will change surfaces, Sanan explained the Southern California track has everything needed to become the permanent site. However, when a caller asked if a decision had been made, he responded by saying ‘It’s not ratified yet."

Read it at the Blood-Horse

Then come back to the Paulick Report and let us know what you think

- Bradford Cummings

By Ray Paulick
A Paulick Report reader commenting under the pseudonym of “another young owner” made the following observation in connection with yesterday’s article that surveyed top executive salaries at 18 industry non-profit associations: “Over $3.75 million a year and our industry has never been worse off… we have some great leaders!”

Actually, the aggregate of the 18 salaries was $3,911,096 and didn’t include bonuses, retirement plan contributions or other benefits.

But the point made by “another young owner” was not lost on me. When you consider that executive salary should only be a small fraction of an organization’s expenditures and that there are many more associations and businesses not included in our survey, it makes you wonder: What exactly are we getting for all that money?

Do we really benefit from and need a TRA and an NTRA, a TOBA, an HBPA and a THA, a TOC and a CTT, a Jockey Club and a Jockeys’ Guild? For the ultimate absurdity consider that we used to have two national organizations for racing regulatory bodies—neither of which really had the authority to do anything.

Perhaps when racing was healthy—a regional or local sport that didn’t participate in interstate commerce–there was little need to consolidate some of these redundant organizations. But today, as revenues are in serious decline among racetracks, horse owners, breeders and in virtually every other industry sector, the status quo will not work.

But don’t take it from me. Owner and breeder Satish Sanan, a no-nonsense businessman who has closely examined racing’s organizationally littered landscape, believes the industry will continue in a downward spiral unless it commits to changing its structure.

Sanan, a weekly guest on Steve Byk’s satellite radio show, “At the Races,” has been speaking out in his regular “Our Industry” segment about the need for a new structure. (Click here to listen.) Yesterday, in reaction to the Paulick Report’s salary survey, Sanan said: “If you look at the so-called alphabet soup organizations from TOBA to NTRA to horsemen’s associations, the THA, and the (Thoroughbred) Owners of California, you can add all that crap up, and collectively we are spending millions of dollars. Each one is doing one or two good functions, but not seriously impacting the growth of the industry. It goes back to, do we need this kind of structure and what the hell is it doing for our industry? We need a single structure and in that structure we have got to find a way to generate more revenue, put more money back into the business, hire the best talent.

“When the NFL and NBA created leagues, they brought people in, paid them millions of dollars, and put governance and structure in place and marketed the hell out of their sport and nobody complains about that because they bring in hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. Unfortunately, there is not an organization with the exception of maybe individual racetracks that are customer focused, customer centric, customer-service centric.”

Sanan said Breeders’ Cup–where he is on the board of directors and has led a strategic planning committee that is set to announce its final recommendations at a board meeting on Thursday—is the only association on the horsemen’s side of the industry that has focused on revenue growth. “I do not know of another organization that is tasked with growing the business,” he told Byk.

“The leadership of our industry should be thinking like a think tank and working together, talking about how do we transform this business, how do we go back to how this business used to be, how do we attract new owners, keep the existing owners, keep the existing horseplayers, have them bet more and make it more attractive to them and market the sport so we can attract new ones. I’m at a loss as to whose job it is and who thinks about these things on a daily, weekly, monthly basis. Can you name somebody? I (expletive deleted) can’t.”

Byk couldn’t either.

“We have got to streamline our industry,” Sanan continued. “There should be one horsemen’s organization, not 15. Period. There should be one panel that focuses on nothing but all the issues that are integrity-related: safety, medication, tote and wagering, and build confidence so we can attract new people. We need the best of minds with the most creative and innovative marketing programs to attract new horseplayers, new fans and market the hell out of the sport. Shoot, if this was my company I would be doing it.”

And that begs another question: Whose company is it? Who will take the lead here? Which organization will dissolve or be willing to merge with someone else. Which alphabet soup executive will focus more time on doing what’s right for the greater good of the industry instead of fighting to maintain whatever small chunk of turf he controls? Many of these executives are bright people, but the absence of a common-sense structure and industry-wide collaboration is a lethal combination.

There are too many chefs cooking our alphabet soup, and no one is buying it.

Copyright © 2010, 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

By Ray Paulick
On an afternoon when heavy rains forced Santa Anita Park management to cancel a special holiday program, track president Ron Charles said the all-weather surface currently in place will be removed at the end of the 2009-’10 and strongly hinted the Arcadia, Calif., racetrack would return to dirt for its main track surface.

Santa Anita and the other major California tracks were required by the California Horse Racing Board to install synthetic surfaces by Jan. 1, 2008, but horseplayers and many trainers have been critical of the various synthetic tracks ever since. Charles, during an interview on Steve Byk’s "At the Races" radio show Monday afternoon, said the synthetic tracks did not deliver as promised by their manufacturers. Santa Anita Park joined Hollywood Park in installing Cushion Track prior to the 2008 deadline and experienced almost immediate problems with the track’s ability to drain and lost several days of racing after rains hit Southern California. Santa Anita replaced the Cushion Track with material from another manufacturer, Pro-Ride, and sued the owners of Cushion Track.  When that new surface was installed in time for the 2008 Breeders’ Cup, Charles indicated it would be a short-term solution. Santa Anita began experiencing further drainage problems again last fall.

Del Mar has gone with Polytrack, which is part owned by Keeneland and in place at Keeneland, Turfway Park, Arlington Park and Woodbine.The Bay Area’s Golden Gate Fields, like Santa Anita owned by bankrupt Magna Entertainment, installed Tapeta Footings, which is also installed at Presque Isle Downs in Pennsylvania and at the new Meydan racetrack in Dubai, which is scheduled for its grand opening in the next couple of weeks.

Charles did not confirm the Pro-Ride surface would be replaced with dirt,, though said a decision will soon be announced and that it would be supported by a majority of the trainers and jockeys he has spoken with. Charles said the synthetic tracks were installed with good intentions–to reduce injuries and make racing safer, especially during wet weather–but became an extremely polarizing issue in racing. The synthetic tracks were cited by Rachel Alexandra’s principal owner, Jess Jackson, as the reason his star filly did not compete in ther 2009 Breeders’ Cup at Santa Anita.

Click here to read a Daily Racing Form article on the anticipated change.

Then come back to the Paulick Report and let us know what you think about synthetic tracks and the possibility of Santa Anita returning to dirt for its main surface.

By Ray Paulick
Last week I wrote that if I had a vote in the Eclipse Awards, I’d cast my Horse of the Year ballot for unbeaten Breeders’ Cup Classic winner Zenyatta. Well, I don’t have a vote, and I have no one to blame but myself.

A little more than seven years ago, I resigned from the National Turf Writers Association, one of the voting groups for the Eclipse Awards. The other eligible voters are selected staff members of the Daily Racing Form; chartcallers for Equibase; and racing secretaries at National Thoroughbred Racing Association member tracks. There may be a handful of others, including some Breeders’ Cup employees who have a vote.

I quit the National Turf Writers Association after the 2001 media Eclipse Awards were announced and then-NTWA president Jay Privman of the Daily Racing Form unfairly, in my opinion, questioned the eligibility of a piece written by one of the winners, Laura Hillenbrand. Hillenbrand, author of the best-selling book “Seabiscuit: An American Legend,” had previously won an Eclipse Award in 1998 for an article on Seabiscuit published in American Heritage magazine. Her 2001 award was for an original adaptation from the Seabiscuit book that appeared in Equus magazine.

As I recall, Privman, as NTWA president, sent an email to members criticizing the awarding of a second Eclipse to Hillenbrand and suggesting it was “unseemly” of her to even submit the piece for consideration. It was my understanding he was trying to have her stripped of the award.

I had never met Hillenbrand but admired her work, believing that her treatment of Seabiscuit (which was made into a wildly popular movie) was one of the biggest boosts in positive publicity Thoroughbred racing had received in many, many years. I even wrote that Hillenbrand be given an Eclipse Award of Merit, in part because of her personal circumstances: she was afflicted with chronic fatigue syndrome and often struggled to even sit upright and work on her computer while writing the book.

I was offended by the tone of Privman’s letter to NTWA members and asked several individuals on the board of directors to demand an apology or reprimand Privman for what I felt was an abuse of his office. When they did neither, I quit the organization.

Several years later, I asked an executive at the National Thoroughbred Racing Association if I could qualify to vote under the NTRA’s umbrella. I was told “no,” and remained on the sidelines when it comes to voting for Eclipse Awards, something I did for nearly 20 years.

If I really wanted to vote for the Eclipse Awards, I could put aside my strong disagreement with Privman and the NTWA board and reapply for membership in that organization. I’m just not ready to do that.

But enough about me.

There are many others who should have a vote for Eclipse Awards and do not. They include numerous individuals who cover racing regularly or on a full-time basis for television and radio, including ESPN, TVG and HRTV. They aren’t eligible because they aren’t “turf writers.” This group includes knowledgeable individuals such as Steve Byk of Sirius satellite radio’s “At the Races”; Carolyn Conley, Kurt Hoover and Jeff Siegel (among others) at HRTV; Bob Baedeker, Simon Bray and Todd Schrupp (among others) at TVG. It’s incomprehensible that individuals like these do not have an Eclipse Awards vote. In fact, I think it’s time to bring a public element to Eclipse Award voting in the same manner that Europe’s Cartier Awards have done.

As the ranks of full-time turf writers diminishes, racing should take advantage of the growing list of knowledgeable individuals who make their living covering the sport for non-print media outlets. To ignore this reality is just the latest confirmation that the people who run this sport have their heads buried in a place where the light doesn’t shine.

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