Governor names Bo Derek to horse board

[fooler]

I have very few problems with Bo Derek being named to the board. As a complete outsider to racing, I am not overly impressed with what I am seeing overall. Don’t see her appointment as a major improvement or damage to the board. Unless they are so blinded by her beauty that they let her have complete control!

Regarding Reagan - I voted in 1980 & 1984 not so much for him as against the other candidate. I first voted in 1972 and am still awaiting the presidential candidate I am excited to vote 'FOR".
As far as the economy - Let’s go back to our civic classes. Congress maintains the government pocket-book. The Pres can only approve (sign) or dis-approve (veto) their bills/laws. So boys and girls look at who is representing you in Congress - many of them have been in office longer than you have been alive.

Finally - I have lived and voted in 6 states (East & West, North & South) since 1972. In small towns and large cities - never have I had to wait for hours on end to vote. Maximum wait has been 1 hour, usually when I voted after work. Keep in mind I have been a registered R in communities that were and are predominatley D.

[cloudyandcallie]

hope

I hope Bo shows up for every meeting they have with a low cut dress! those guys will vote anyway she wants, and she’ll get better rules on drugs and injuries and benefit the horses. I assume she has common sense, and is intelligent enough to learn about racing and what her responsibilities are. Is she getting flamed here cause she wasn’t born on the backstretch, or cause she’s a sexy woman? if this were some guy like, darn, who’s a goodlooking guy who ride who is an actor? would you then flame his appointment? And maybe her animal rights position doesn’t sit well with some people. well just read the results of the break downs during races again. maybe she’ll make a difference in horse welfare and also promote safe racing, which I hope everyone would be in favor of.

[I_m_EBO]

Driving past the Rez with the glittering casino on our way home from town this afternoon, I mentioned to my dh this discussion as regards slots at the tracks, and he agreed it wouldn’t happen here because the tribes didn’t want it to happen here. I then mentioned that the tribes should build racetracks on their generally poor land, and he thought that would be spending more money than they’d like on an iffy investment, BUT they could buy some of the tracks that are in trouble, have them declared tribal lands and, Tah Dum, racing in CA is on its feet again. There is precedent for locating casinos off traditional tribal lands, so there you have it.

I think I’ll write to Bo.

[Drvmb1ggl3]

@I'm EBO;3374180

Driving past the Rez with the glittering casino on our way home from town this afternoon, I mentioned to my dh this discussion as regards slots at the tracks, and he agreed it wouldn’t happen here because the tribes didn’t want it to happen here. I then mentioned that the tribes should build racetracks on their generally poor land, and he thought that would be spending more money than they’d like on an iffy investment, BUT they could buy some of the tracks that are in trouble, have them declared tribal lands and, Tah Dum, racing in CA is on its feet again. There is precedent for locating casinos off traditional tribal lands, so there you have it.

I think I’ll write to BO.

So basically you are proposing they waste some of their Casino profits on welfare for racing? Good luck trying to convince the tribes, or any racing-free casino, of that.

I don’t think you understand the economics/politics of Racinos. Most would love to dump the racing end of things, it’s a drain on their profits. If it weren’t for state laws they’d already have done so.

[rcloisonne]

[QUOTE=Drvmb1ggl3;3374187]
I don’t think you understand the economics/politics of Racinos. Most would love to dump the racing end of things, it’s a drain on their profits. If it weren’t for state laws they’d already have done so.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately, this is very true. We have the slot palace, Twin Rivers, here. While there is no horse racing they do have the greyhounds. Live Greyhound racing has lost money for years and there have been numerous proposals to shut it down (which somehow never happens).

Greyhound racing suffers from the same appalling overall lack of concern for the animals’ welfare as horse racing. A similar rate of catastrophic injury to the legs occurs with the additional bonus of what happens when a dog hits the inner high voltage fence after a bump or stumble. Can you say crispy critter?

As long as money, greed and human egos are involved this will always be the case, IMO. You can’t legislate kindness or compassion.

[VirginiaBred]

@JER

You mean, like, bankrupt it? Or do you mean increasing the wealth of corporations and the rich? Or a ballooning budget and a huge deficit? Voodoo economics? Or maybe you just mean a lack of accountability.

Those are your words. I meant he is known as a great President that was elected by a HUGE majority to a 2nd term. That’s what I meant.

[I_m_EBO]

I don’t think you understand the economics/politics of Racinos. Most would love to dump the racing end of things, it’s a drain on their profits. If it weren’t for state laws they’d already have done so.

It’s a good probability that I don’t understand the economics, but I think I understand the politics.

From my pov, I think horse racing would be a draw to get more people into the casinos’ venues. Not everybody, as one would presume by reading this racing forum, gets his/her kicks from pulling the handle on a slot machine. The casinos in CA are constantly adding different games and constantly booking big name entertainers (as well as cage fighting bouts) to attract new customers and keep their regulars. In addition, our local casino has recently built a 200 room hotel, is planning a golf course, hosts high school proms in the ballroom, operates a high end restaurant, etc.
http://www.thepalace.net/

Allowing the tribes to operate casinos on their own lands was, and is, not a slam/dunk operation; there is still much entrenched opposition to legal gambling within the state–not all of it coming from Nevada interests. There are people who want to protect the public from the siren call of gambling, there are people who think it’s opening a door to organized crime (like it’s not already here), there are religious people who oppose it just because, and there are people who can’t stand the idea of a Rich Injun. The tribes make great efforts to present the casinos and surrounds as “entertainment”. They make great efforts to improve the nearby communities.

If actually building a new racetrack is cost prohibitive, why not sell a portion of the existing racetracks to a single tribe, or consortium of tribes? Everybody wins. The tribes get new players and grow even richer; horse racing gets more money.

But tell me this: If horse racing is such a losing proposition, why are upwards of 20,000 foals born every year? How do owners manage to pay the trainers? How do the trainers manage to pay their assistants and periferial people? How do the tracks manage to pay their electricity bills?

Inquiring minds. . . . .

[Glimmerglass]

[QUOTE=I’m EBO;3374710]
From my pov, I think horse racing would be a draw to get more people into the casinos’ venues. Not everybody, as one would presume by reading this racing forum, gets his/her kicks from pulling the handle on a slot machine.[/QUOTE]

Good in theory but in reality - as proven by many, many racinos - the live racing is not the draw whatsoever. Sadly the notion of sitting among thousands of banks of slot machines with that constant and annoying ringing and flashing is like a moth to a flame for the vast majority.

You’ll never find hoards of people on the trackside of the house and the slot machines barely used. I don’t care if they announced that Secretariat was going to do one final parade lap. It wouldn’t get them to leave from pulling the lever like a monkey in a science experiment.

I don’t think its a marketing thing either. You could try to make every day of racing a ‘derby day’ with promotions and celebration yet the majority of visitors to these racinos are the one-armed bandit crowd and they simply gravitate towards the slots.

Business wise, as said, the folks running these racinos despite having gotten their approval by having living racing and only continue because of it too do loathe the obligatory horse racing side. Why? Because in most cases (although not all) the casino side of the house is making all the money and subsidizing the live racing portion. Drop the racing then that money can be either plowed back into gaming operations or paid out to the owners.

One nice win in Illinois was this summer although yet to be worked out is the long battle between the tracks and the riverboat casinos. The casinos were approved years ago only if the money they were going to be taking away from racing (at the time the sole legal form of gambling in the state) was kicked back 3% of their revenue. The riverboats all said “ok” and as soon as they were up and running they sued saying the obligation to subsidize Illinois race tracks was illegal. So payments have never been made. The state supreme court ruled in favor of the race tracks this summer and that could bring a windfall of new money to racing in the state.

Of course the casinos have appealed so we’ll see what happens

[Glimmerglass]

[QUOTE=I’m EBO;3374710]
But tell me this: If horse racing is such a losing proposition, why are upwards of 20,000 foals born every year? How do owners manage to pay the trainers? How do the trainers manage to pay their assistants and periferial people? How do the tracks manage to pay their electricity bills?

Inquiring minds. . . . .[/QUOTE]

The million dollar question to be sure. I for one wonder why we haven’t seen a more sharp drop in the quantity of registered TB horses being born in the US. I think the output has been in the mid 30k range in recent years in general.

Although lets be clear about how many actually start in a race, using some older but consistant numbers: from Not By A Long Shot, T.D. Thornton

1997: 35,139 registered TB foaled in NA, of that, 23,014 would make it to the races; 15,886 would eventually graduate to the winners circle. Just 1,140 would win in a stakes race. A mere 223 would win any graded stakes race.

[I_m_EBO]

GG, I’m almost afraid to ask, but what happens to the 12,000+ tbs who don’t go to the race world?

You wrote:

Good in theory but in reality - as proven by many, many racinos - the live racing is not the draw whatsoever. Sadly the notion of sitting among thousands of banks of slot machines with that constant and annoying ringing and flashing is like a moth to a flame for the vast majority.

You’ll never find hoards of people on the trackside of the house and the slot machines barely used. I don’t care if they announced that Secretariat was going to do one final parade lap. It wouldn’t get them to leave from pulling the lever like a monkey in a science experiment.

I must have an surprisingly optimistic view of my fellow man. Of course, I can’t believe people think that drilling off shore and in the Alaskan reserve will knock a dollar off the gasoline prices by tomorrow, either. :no: