Frustrating how reluctant media is to attribute any of Churchill's handle losses to idea that bettors might've responded to a price increase
— Brandon Valvo (@BValvsRacing) July 2, 2014
If, after a much publicized price increase, your local lemonade stand had their sales crater 25% this summer, we would not have to hire Columbo to figure out why. The business would not say it's been a little too humid for foot traffic, The World Cup was on, or demand was really, really high, but they ran out of lemons.Racing, an insular business, has been run with increasing rates of takeout for so long it's become a way of life. Insiders do not want to talk about it, nor do they want to have it publicized that a policy initiative was a mistake. This is why something as simple as a price going up and having people consume less of it seems like a foreign concept; something that happens to "other businesses".
Churchill Downs' handle went down this meet because the price of a wager was increased and as a result people bet less than they did last year. It's not that difficult to be honest about a fact that is so obvious.
3 comments:
"CDI" and "honest" are two terms I'd never expect to see in the same article, much less same sentence. A more vile, stupid, closed-minded bunch of morons running something they haven't a clue about I've never seen, except for republiklans in congress.
The media reports what tracks tell them ..... been this way forever.
The real way to gauge impact of the increased takeout would be to judge it against other tracks over the same period. If they're all down the same percentage, then it was systemic. If not, then it was just CDI.
Post a Comment