I was reading more about the McKinsey Report commissioned by the Jockey Club this evening. I came across what I think is something that is a little bit disconnecting.
Keep in mind I am just a dumb horseplayer, so I expect I am probably missing something.
The report calls for an increase in spend for TV coverage, to try and drive eyeballs to our sport. That's cool. Revenue can come from eyeballs over time by cultivating them - even with interruption marketing. It's a mass market strategy, and that's fine.
However, on takeout, it appears that strategy is completely turned on its head.
"I think we heard a lot from our most important customers that the
pricing of the product is a little bit too high. But, in general, we
thought a better way to deal with it - because of the regulatory
environment - was to give targeted rebates to our best customers as
opposed to a general reduction in takeout."
Instead of mass marketing to bettors - who supplies us with about nine out of every ten dollars of non-slot revenue - they have decided to target market.
So, if you want to watch on television, turn it on. If you want to fund the sport and get what your everyday slot machine gives you in value, you have to find an ADW that might or might not be legal in your state, learn the game, bet over $10,000 a month, call the owner of the ADW, and negotiate a rebate.
Like I said, I'm just a dumb bettor, but can anyone tell me why we'd want to spend millions mass marketing to people who will not give us revenue, but spend nothing target marketing to those who might?