Texas Thoroughbred Forum

[jrgators]

I'm in a hurry right now Roger, but Common sense, good advice, and money are part of planning. Perseverance is ambition within itself I think. I'm a Christian man with a deep relationship with, and belief in God. I think mixing God and business can get a bit dicey. I'm almost ashamed to say that.

[JimP]

Hi Guys,

Is anyone going to the yearling sale at Lone Star on Tuesday?
I think I might go shopping.

[Horsecrazy]

Key, please show me where Retama Park is reporting a profit this year. As a matter of fact, please show me where they reported a profit since the year they opened, 1995.

[keyranch]

The comment came from a Retama Rep to our Rep, the problems with Ret are not over the racing!

[Horsecrazy]

SOS

[Gate2Wire]

Rog & JR, after reading that JC report, you have to realize now that I know what I'm talking about. I'm just giving you guys facts.

Key, after reading the financial article on Retama, do you still stand behind your post on the 23rd that all 3 tracks made money? It must really be hard being you.

[Roger]

[quote="Gate2Wire"]Rog & JR, after reading that JC report, you have to realize now that I know what I'm talking about. I'm just giving you guys facts.

Gate, I would think after you reading it that you would see that we know what we are talking about. Take that report and make it relevant to Texas Racing. LS is costing us money running in the summer and there are several good bits of information that apply to Texas Racing. If we take what applies to Texas, we can move forward without slots, we need to looking at GROWING FANS and Bettors. ADW is one tool mentioned to do that.

[tinners way]

Gate, several relevant points, but also anomalies. If real handle is down 37%, G1's handle has grown by 23% and the decline of claiming handle is 4%. How does that scream for boutique meets?

I think we can all agree that not all tracks will make it, but it also says that to support the overall product you have to have a consistent base of handle. So possibly it is not all about boutique meets.

600k races were analyzed, less than .53% are Grade 1's. They can support themselves. Not so sure about any other level of racing except the claiming ranks Claiming races and the handle derived from them has to support every other level of racing, unless your boutique meet is eventually 1 race on the first saturday of May. (Law of Diminishing Returns)

And while the study mentions decline in foal crops, it does not address the need for a large pool of foals to produce those Grade 1 winners.

Yes, we have to grow our fan base, make the product easier to play and understand, and we have to have opportunity to prove the product- which will require a cross section of racing opportunity. Average number of starts for Kentucky Derby runners in 2010 was 8. Twenty five years ago it was 25. Unfortunately for your assessment the Sport of Kings requires the blue collar workers.

But if you want to continue the argument for slots or nothing as the long term solution, then you clearly have not read the report, just taken excerpts.

[dlove]

Well I am sorry to say the motion that I made to change the way members had to vote did not carry. Unfortunately I was only able to attend the first part by call as I had a family member getting married. I hate it as it was the first meeting that I did not to get to attend personally.
I want to say there were only 3 or 4 votes for it and few abstains and everyone else against it. I want to thank everyone who posted, emailed or called me on this prior. It shows members do want to get involved. I was contacted by 12 people total (call, email or FB page) and 11 of the 12 wanted the rules changed. I shared this with the board prior to the vote, but to no avail. No one else offered any comments from members, but just comments of what they thought. As someone said it has been this way over 20 years so why change it. I do want to thank the president for bringing the vote up first to allow me to take part. I really think he is doing a GREAT job to bring things forward and throwing things on the table for us to look at, but the old regime on this board is still running it and will not let change happen. Maybe they are right and I am wrong, but with the amount of members we are loosing (174 so far this year) maybe it is time for them to listen to the members.

I hope everyone will take part and bring people forward to run for the board. Please let me know if you have a candidate and again thanks to ALL the members for being a part of the TTA.

[keyranch]

I think the survey idea will help alot for change on the board. We need to know what and why these folks supported the reduction in race dates, supported no change in the failed incentive program, no change in the slots or nothing agend, and now no change in the voting system. It is very apparent, that no change is the course of the association and until there is change then the membership numbers will continue to drop.

The old guard will certainly be asked a few questions before the next election!!

[Jazette]

Thank you Dlove for trying. It's ashame that we can go to the polls and vote for only the candidates that we want to vote for and the vote still counts. But with the TTA if you don't follow their rules the members vote doesn't count. Sounds rigged to me. Thanks again!! Jazette

[tinners way]

Jazette, most of the rule changes were accomplished based on a "consensus". The vote last night was based on the full board voting. If you felt you were not represented, be sure you vote this fall, or better yet throw your name into the ring.

The 179 drop in membership represents over another 10% attrition. Prior to the rule changes we had over 4,000 members, today there are less than 1500. (I am sure it all has to do with lack of slots.)

I was hopeful we would be able to mount a challenge to the voting procedure, which as others have pointed out is much different with other organizations. 10 years ago we had term limits, a verifiable breed back rule, and balanced ATB awards program. "Consensus" changed all that.

[Jazette]

Jazette, most of the rule changes were accomplished based on a "consensus". The vote last night was based on the full board voting. If you felt you were not represented, be sure you vote this fall, or better yet throw your name into the ring.

The 179 drop in membership represents over another 10% attrition. Prior to the rule changes we had over 4,000 members, today there are less than 1500. (I am sure it all has to do with lack of slots.)

I was hopeful we would be able to mount a challenge to the voting procedure, which as others have pointed out is much different with other organizations. 10 years ago we had term limits, a verifiable breed back rule, and balanced ATB awards program. "Consensus" changed all that.

[Jazette]

Sorry Tinner, I don't know how to "quote" something on here ... or use the "quote" to respond. To be honest I don't know or understand all the ins and outs of the horse racing "inner circle" industry, however, I have learned a lot in the last year plus .. especially really big words! lol I am a common sense person and it doesn't make sense to me that if I go to the polls and I don't know anything about the candidates that are running for the railroad commission and I didn't vote on the rr commission position, the rest of my votes count. Would love to throw my hat in, however, name recognition is basically the only thing that counts in this game and my name wouldn't be recognized. Jazette

[tinners way]

Jazette, and I too will be corrected for not writing "hat into the ring".