90: The number of stakes races that will be run between today and November 21, most during the “Elite Summer Meet” session that concludes September 6.
16: The number of graded stakes, including the centerpiece 43rd running of the Grade 1 Haskell Stakes, August 1, expected to attract both the Kentucky Derby and Preakness Stakes winners, Super Saver and Lookin At Lucky. The 57th United Nations Stakes on turf is the other Grade 1, scheduled for July 3.
13: The number of races on today’s opening-day program, including the Elkwood (turf) Stakes and the Decathlon for three-year-old sprinters.
148: The number of entrants on today’s card.
3: The number of racing days per week, weekends beginning on Friday with the exception of Monday cards on Memorial Day, July4th and Labor Day weekends.
1500: The number of dollars earned by every horse starting at Monmouth Park, essentially an appearance fee, with money paid back to last. To accommodate the math, winner receive 55 percent of the purse, as opposed to the standard 60.
15: The number of percentage points management hopes opening-day attendance will increase over last year. The 2009 opener drew just over 7,000 fans.
4: The number of horsemen from Southern California given stalls for the entire meet; Mike Machowsky, Mike Mitchell, Bob Hess Jr. and Peter Miller.
7: The number of races per day that will be simulcast to California betting venues. Never before has California taken the Monmouth Park signal.
5: A pick wager, the Pick 5, the only one of its kind at a major venue. It reduces the degree of Pick 6 difficulty, by one, of course, while still offering the same potential for a life changing win.
50: The number of cents it costs to play the Pick 5. A 50-Cent Pick Five gives the average player a chance to leverage his investment via a greater number of combinations.
15: The parimutuel takeout on the 50-Cent Pick 5, the smallest hold on any super-exotic in the country. I never encourage bettors to get involved with multi-race wagers given the degree of difficulty and cost, but this bet is somewhat manageable and extremely tempting.
8: The number of states (7), and foreign countries (1), whose horsemen were allotted stalls for the entire meeting.
75,000: The number of dollars available to open class three-year-old maidens going two turns.
2: The approximate number of times daily handle from all sources will need to increase to justify million-dollar-a-day purse levels. And that’s the biggest number of all.
This model has to make sense from a business perspective. If it works, it will be the best thing that’s happened to New Jersey racing since the construction of The Meadowlands.
New Jersey owes horse racing. Giants Stadium was built with the cash flow generated by The Meadowlands. That handle also helped erect Byrne Arena. And, of course, the jobs that racing creates, the green space, etc., etc.
The industry also needs this grand experiment to succeed. Fewer races with quality horses racing for big bucks is the kind of product horseplayers not only want but need.
Obviously, the sport needs to grow its base to survive. The key is an improved, attractive product. The highest levels of the game still work. On paper, the Monmouth model makes sense. Ultimately, the proof that it does will be found at the bottom line.
22 May 2010 at 02:39 am | #
Good for Monmouth. They’re taking a shot here and racing fans everwhere should appreciate it.
I think the average daily handle is gonna increase drastically. With California in “intensive care” and New York on “life support” Monmouth will pick up the pieces.
Good Luck
22 May 2010 at 05:03 am | #
Andrew, that’s what put Tampa on the map, when FG was out of action post-Katrina, we’ll see. The handle will have to explode for this thing to work in the long term. Horseplayers need it to work if they want to get the kind of product they enjoy betting on.
Thanks,
JP
22 May 2010 at 05:23 am | #
And I will be the antipodean to Andrew A’s comment above.
Most of the handle will be off-track, meaning that the NJSEA will receive a mere 3% to 5% as payment for Monmouth’s signal fee on every dollar wagered off-track.
If less becomes more, or shrinking a company’s market share while increasing costs, becomes the knew business model then economic books will have to be re-written.
What has me believing that the NJSEA’s management has lost it is their willingness to pay $1,500 to every entrant in a race - sheer stupidity! When management of a racetrack offers races with purses then pays the owners of horses to enter their horses in the same races, one must conclude that it is April Fool’s day, ya gotta be kidding! If anything, it should be exactly the opposite, all owners of horses should be required to pay a fee to enter their horses in a race, and only the first three positions should share in the purse.
Enjoy this meet, where supposedly by increasing the purses the races just got better, meaning they are now going to be more exciting, more entertaining, more easily to handicap, and bettors will cash more tickets.
If NJSEA reports that the Monmouth meet was profitable later this year, then they are cooking the books.
22 May 2010 at 06:06 am | #
JRP,
A question: Do you recognize the the not so indirect role of the Tea Party in bringing this experiment to fruition in New Jersey? Do you think without Chris Christie this thing gets done in two months?
22 May 2010 at 06:43 am | #
Dennis Robinson of the NJSEA did a TV interview this morning during which he said the process started 2 years ago.
The NJSEA and NJ horsemen came together first, then went to individual legislators, particularly those who ended up sponsoring the bill.
I can’t speak to Gov. Christie’s involvement, but this result traveled a path a lot longer than 2 months.
Wendell, instead of whining you should be thrilled. Great racing, with full fields, new betting options, the perfect storm for those who profess to love betting on Thoroughbreds. What’s not to like?
If you were a single man and Jennifer Lopez (or fill in your own name) called YOU for a date, would you go—or complain because she might only take you out once?
22 May 2010 at 08:26 am | #
Nick: I saw the interview. Yeah, the idea originated 2 years ago. But, the fact is it didn’t get done until Christie got into office and it was his sports and expo division that pushed this through. You think Corzine would have gotten this done?
22 May 2010 at 10:59 am | #
Mr. Kling: I am not whining, as you imply. I am very excited about Monmouth presenting full fields and many gambling options, especially the 50 cent pick five.
All my adult life I have spent reviewing company balance sheets and profit and loss statements, cash flow, and ability to payoff long-term debt; my position was to advise investors on a company’s ability to be profitable. In doing my job, I had a lot of time to spare, thus it was spent gambling on the nags, thus my interest in horse racing.
IMO NJSEA’s decision to go with a shorter meet and increasing purses is tantamount to committing suicide, that is financial suicide.
The math simply does not add up, meaning that the intake from takeout and from on-track handle and the small percentage to be received from off-track wagering will be far short of even covering the purses.
BTY, if Jennifer Lopez called me, I wouldn’t even have to take Viagra, I would have an erection that would last far longer than four hours.
22 May 2010 at 02:03 pm | #
i see this nothing more than a one year gimmick and like wmcorrow said it looks to be a financial loser....people are NOT going to be hanging around Monmouth park for 7 hours a day on the weekend and bet enough on 13 races to make up the handle difference ON TRACK that is needed
22 May 2010 at 02:16 pm | #
I’m hoping it works and will make the 100-mile drive several times to support Monmouth Park this summer. Even though I was raised on NY racing, Monmouth has always been my favorite track and I want to see it flourish. Whoever was responsible, at least the NJ decision makers were willing to try something new, unlike the pathetic NY state legislature.
Good luck. See you at the Shore.
22 May 2010 at 03:16 pm | #
Monmouth Park saw 17,903 in attendance Opening Day with $9.3 Million in total handle. A record for wagering in New Jersey outside of Haskell. That is approximately a 100% increase in handle over last year’s opening day. 50-cent Pick 5 Carryover going into Sunday’s card of $123,029. 15% Takeout starts in the 6th race.
22 May 2010 at 05:41 pm | #
Incredible 1st day. The Pick 5 conso paid $2,734. for a .50 bet. This is a good thing going on. I’m going to enjoy it while it lasts.
22 May 2010 at 11:34 pm | #
Kyle,
I don’t follow NJ politics. Observing NY is enough to make me sick to my stomach.
Wendell,
I’m speechless, and that doesn’t happen often.
23 May 2010 at 01:45 am | #
Today Daily Racing Form lauds opening day at Monmouth, commenting that attendance soared as did the on-track crowd. Very good, now lets pick up the pencil and work some figures. Here’s to you SophiaM:
1. The on-track crowd was 17,903 and the per capita wager was $75, far less than what New Yorkers wager virtually daily at NYRA’s tracks, which is between $180 and $220.
2. On-track handle was $1,325,737 and using a takeout mix of 20%, the takeout from the handle was approximately $265,000.
3. Off-track handle was $8,031,707 and the earning from their signal was about $402,000 (generously using 5%).
4. The purses totaled $812,000, thus earning from takeout and signal fees totaled $667,000, thus a shortfall occurred of $145,000.
Now, did parking fees, admission fees, the sale of food/beverages cover the salaries of the employees, utility costs, food/beverage costs, et cetera, plus those ole’ fixed costs like insurance, pension, health, security, and debt; or, did the day end with further debt added to the Balance Sheet?
And, this was opening day, which always draws a larger crowd; also, remember that NJSEA has touted that purses will average $1-million per day, while Saturday’s was only $812,000.
Like I said in a previous comment, the math simply does not support what NJSEA is attempting to accomplish.
BTW, over the years I have never been convinced that Monmouth Park’s Haskel Day was ever profitable, as the crowd on that day wagered, again, per capita around that $75 amount, and the takeout from handle and signal fee income seemed to always fall short of the purses offered that day.
23 May 2010 at 03:32 am | #
Complaining about Monmouth is absolutely insane.
What Monmouth did yesterday forces other tracks to step up their game a little and that can only be a good thing. The words some of the executives are using when talking about the customer can only be a good thing. There is a pick 5 carryover today and I believe the takeout is only 15% on that bet and that can only be a good thing.
My point in pushing the meet was to create a little buzz. A few days ago I sent emails to both the radio shows I listened to about going over Monmouth and they did so that’s good too.
I guess the the main point is that I am so sick of California and their problems and New York and their problems that I appreciate the enthusiasm of the Monmouth Executives. Will the buzz last? Only time will tell. I do think the biggest daily average handle increases will come on Fridays and Sundays. We’ll see.
Not only that but a one mile oval with a dirt surface and decent racing is where it’s at for me.
23 May 2010 at 04:54 am | #
Andrew A: I assume that you are referring to my comments above as complaining about Monmouth. Nowhere have I said a detrimental thing about Monmouth’s racing. I am questioning how Monmouth expects to be profitable. The objective of any company should be to be profitable; if not, they go out of business. What the NJSEA is attempting is beyond financial reason and will bankrupt racing in New Jersey.
I presented facts above, and I wish someone would step forward and prove me wrong; I would be overjoyed; such would mean that Monmouth’s meet this year will be successful and good for all of racing.
What ticks me off are turf writers at various newspapers, today’s example at Daily Racing Form, who talk about how attendance increased and how handle rose substantially and fail to note just why it happened: excessive purses that are not affordable.
New York tracks are bankrupt because of their management who failed to make decisions that would improve the bottom line until both shoes had dropped.
Anyway, I am hopefully I will win the pick five at Monmouth today.
23 May 2010 at 05:35 am | #
Andrew A is on the mark here. I am from California and I too am tired of excuses of why the game can not get its fair market share.
I wish Monmouth success, but I do not think the current plan is sustainable without further modification… and the next step is to lower the take across the board. Other tracks will notice and follow, and when we reach the optimum take numbers...all involved will say ,what took so long to do the right thing?
The people love our game,if we give them a chance.
23 May 2010 at 07:23 am | #
Andrew A loves a one mile oval with a dirt surface. I do too - IF they have a chute to accommodate 6 1/2 and 7 furlong races. After an overhead observation of the track layout - via Google Earth - I e-mailed Monmouth Park (maybe 6 weeks ago) and suggested that they could construct such a chute if they removed one barn and turned 2 others 90 degrees. Never got a response, but now I’m tossing this idea out to the general public. Variety is the spice of this punter’s life.
23 May 2010 at 10:03 am | #
Richard,
They might consider your chute idea next year, providing the current model proves sustainable. It will be interesting to see what day 2 brings.
Andrew, RWW,
I’m with you guys, enjoy what’s available at Monmouth this year; you guys have had precious little to cheer about in recent years.
To everyone else wishing Mth well: Good for you, your hearts your sentiments are in the right place.
Wendell, Re your last line in comment #7. IMO, TMI.
Thanks all for your time and passion.
JP
23 May 2010 at 12:41 pm | #
Richard, a six and one half would be great. I don’t need the 7.
I heard that Monmouth was up 125% today and I hope it’s true. Good for them.
23 May 2010 at 01:40 pm | #
Mr. Corrow,
Don’t lump all journalists in the same basket. If you read Crist’s article in the DRF on Friday, he opined that the Monmouth model would be fun for one year, but was not sustainable.
eric s.
24 May 2010 at 04:22 am | #
wmcorrow says:
23 May 2010 at 05:25 am | #
Today Daily Racing Form lauds opening day at Monmouth, commenting that attendance soared as did the on-track crowd. Very good, now lets pick up the pencil and work some figures. Here’s to you SophiaM:
1. The on-track crowd was 17,903 and the per capita wager was $75, far less than what New Yorkers wager virtually daily at NYRA’s tracks, which is between $180 and $220.
2. On-track handle was $1,325,737 and using a takeout mix of 20%, the takeout from the handle was approximately $265,000.
3. Off-track handle was $8,031,707 and the earning from their signal was about $402,000 (generously using 5%).
4. The purses totaled $812,000, thus earning from takeout and signal fees totaled $667,000, thus a shortfall occurred of $145,000.
Now, did parking fees, admission fees, the sale of food/beverages cover the salaries of the employees, utility costs, food/beverage costs, et cetera, plus those ole’ fixed costs like insurance, pension, health, security, and debt; or, did the day end with further debt added to the Balance Sheet?
And, this was opening day, which always draws a larger crowd; also, remember that NJSEA has touted that purses will average $1-million per day, while Saturday’s was only $812,000.
Like I said in a previous comment, the math simply does not support what NJSEA is attempting to accomplish.
BTW, over the years I have never been convinced that Monmouth Park’s Haskel Day was ever profitable, as the crowd on that day wagered, again, per capita around that $75 amount, and the takeout from handle and signal fee income seemed to always fall short of the purses offered that day.
-----------------------------------------------
Perhaps in your “robust” financial analysis, you missed the most important line item of them all? The fact that the casinos paid a purse subsidy of $30 million each of the last 3 years and this is the last year of the contract?
One word to describe this kind of mistake from someone who purports to be so smart: Oops.
24 May 2010 at 11:21 pm | #
BloodHorse.com Breaking News
New York State lawmakers on May 24 approved a $25 million loan for the New York Racing Association, keeping the racetrack operator solvent for at least the rest of the year and avoiding a shutdown of its operations.
For more information go to
http://
http://www.bloodhorse.com/
horse-racing/breaking-news/57171
24 May 2010 at 11:35 pm | #
News via http://www.bloodhorse.com
Hollywood Park Cancels Live Racing May 26…
Pointing to an insufficient number of entries, Hollywood Park announced that it has canceled its May 26 program. Live racing will resume at the Inglewood, Calif., track on May 27.
======================
Handle Still Strong at Monmouth; Ibboyee Wins
Monmouth Park followed its record-breaking opening day with another strong showing May 23. A total of $7,046,389 was wagered on the 11-race program, an increase of 126% over the corresponding day last year.
======================
Attendance, Handle Way Up at Monmouth Park
Attendance and betting soared for opening day at Monmouth Park May 22, the first day of a 50-day meet offering $50 million in purses. On-track attendance increased 74% over last year’s opening day.
25 May 2010 at 12:07 am | #
The simple truth is:
As these stories & others illustrate, the cancer running through racing is wide spread. Monmouth, hopefully, will be a bright spot for at least this meet. Cali racing is hurting bad. NY racing struggles on. And the blight is not limited to just these states. One is hard pressed to find positive indications of long term survival. Government regulation; rigid management/business models & a stagnant user base are the factors one finds. Each passing losing season/meet increases the odds against the changes the industry must make. For many decades including now, they simply refused. That has & is morphing into a case of no longer having the options/money to change.
Entire article at:
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_15154196
Santa Anita owners defend voiding Oak Tree contract
Brenda Gazzar, Staff Writer
Posted: 05/24/2010 07:12:51 PM PDT
Santa Anita Park’s new owners defended cancelling its lease earlier this month with the Oak Tree Racing Association, which runs the traditional fall meet there, saying the contract did not account for the true economic cost to run the track.
MI Developments, which has come under fire for the move from the horseracing industry, is scheduled to meet with the charitable association’s director on June 4 to discuss another lease proposal. However, Oak Tree’s traditional fall meet at Santa Anita could be held at Del Mar or Hollywood Park if the two parties are unable to renegotiate an agreement.
“The deal they got was the best deal in America,” said Dennis Mills, vice chairman and chief executive officer of the Canada-based MI Developments, which recently acquired the track from Magna Entertainment Corp. through bankruptcy proceedings.
“It’s a phenomenal deal and everybody’s turning the tables on us, but they don’t understand what we’ve brought to the table,” Mills said. “We brought the team that executed, we brought the facility, we brought all the capital expenditures. We brought the race track. Did they make a contribution? Yes, but it was an absolute fraction of what was invested in that facility.”
Echoing former Santa Anita President Cliff Goodrich’s remarks to the California Horse Racing Board last week, Sherwood Chillingworth, the director and executive vice president of Oak Tree, said Monday it was the racetrack that had a very good deal.
“They get 75 percent of our profits,” Chillingworth said. “We pay them $2.5 million a year in lease rental, which was designed to cover capital costs...and we gave them $3 million to redo the track three years ago and we didn’t have to give them anything...Where can you get a better deal?”
Goodrich, who negotiated the deal, told the CHRB that the Oak Tree lease “greatly favors the landlord.”
Chillingworth said Oak Tree renovated the park’s backstretch recreation hall for $875,000, built an equine hospital and paid $80,000 to put in air conditioning into the director’s room, Chillingworth said.
MI Developments, which is chaired by Canadian mogul Frank Stronach, voided the Oak Tree contract after acquiring Santa Anita .
Read entire article at: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_15154196#ixzz0ovsQynhU