October
OctoberCompare and contrast
I cannot help but compare the overwhelming case for reducing pool rake-offs to increase the popularity of racing as set forth in "Prescription for Racing" (Bruce Clark 10/10) with Gerry Harvey’s bitter appeal on The 7.30 Report on (8/10) to the courts and racing hierarchy in NSW to increase punter rake-offs so that prizemoney can be further raised for him and other wealthy owners.
I am not aware that he is a leviathan punter. However, apart from acceptance fees he has to pay, he is one of Australia’s biggest sponsors of racing. Sponsors, along with punters, provide the only income from which clubs can source prizemoney.
There are few owners as generous as Gerry Harvey when it comes to putting in via sponsorship. But I remain puzzled as to why he should prostrate himself on behalf of all the other greedy owners, who, along with many studs, are net takers from racing.
Until racing administrators accept punters, along with sponsors, as their customers (and revere them as retailers revere theirs), racing will continue to lose market share to its competitors.
These competitors are not just the other gambling forms but retailers and tourist facilities also.
On racetracks, tote rake-offs are excessive and food cannot be compared with that available at shopping centres, either in quality or value.
Finally, why do punters have to pay admission to gamble on racecourses when casinos and poker-machine venues offer more excitement than racecourses for free?
It is only for us serious punters that racecourses retain attraction.
"Prescription for Racing" has been the first serious self-search that I have seen from racing administrators.
Melbourne