Toys Out Of The Pram?

Shadow Leader

Shadow Leader

At the Start
Joined
Nov 9, 2003
Messages
9,884
Anyone else think that the reactions against TurfTV are a classic case of toys out of the pram by SIS/the major bookmakers? Why should SIS enjoy the monopoly on racecourses? I love it that Hills are getting stroppy & threatening to pull sponsorship everywhere & even funnier is that Sid James have threatened to do the same - I'd say Sid's circus in particular are simply making a song & dance & will cave in before long. Mind you it did make me grin to see Fred Done investing in SIS today whist saying "Amrac will not last" - au contraire, I believe they are in an ideal position & if the people running it are worth their salt they must have a very strong hand. Already they have exclusive rights to the major tracks like Newbury, Ascot, York, Goodwood & Chester & as of January 1st will have all the RacingUK tracks too, having already poached the jewel in ATR's crown in the shape of Ascot. The bods at SIS must be looking over their shoulders nervously!
 
I agree SL. I dont like this pulling sponsorship threat from bookmakers - its a bit like bullying the new kid. I find it odd anyway that several bookmakers have shares in SIS. I hope the Amrac venture is a success.

What I do not want is betting shops not showing the 'decent' racing from the Amrac tracks, having the same business as before ie their punters dont give a damm about the decent races, treating Wolverhampton same as Ascot.

It will be interesting to see how this battle develops...
 
Originally posted by Shadow Leader@Mar 30 2007, 08:23 PM
The bods at SIS must be looking over their shoulders nervously!
Click to expand...

I actually think the opposite. As far as I'm concerned, SIS/the big bookmakers hold the aces.

TutfTV simply won't get off the ground unless the major bookmakers subscride to it. With Ladbrokes, Hills, Coral and Betfred - responsible for around 2/3 of the nation's LBOs - standing shoulder to shoulder with SIS, it is only Totesport (the only other significant player - as yet, officially undecided) of the major players that might break rank.

If Totesport sign up, I reckon the rest will quickly follow (IMO, there is no way that non-TurfTV subscribers could compete on the High Street with Totesport). However, if they don't, TurfTV is dead in the water.

Without Totesport, the only firms that could break the SIS betting shop monopoly are the indies and - let's face it - not many of these are going to be willing (even if they are able) to shell-out another £6.5k pa are they? Surely they will be happy enough to fall in line with the big boys and hope that TurfTv just goes away.

So far, the only firm to commit to TurfTv is Better (yes, that firm that went Non Runner No Bet for Cheltenham around about last Easter). They have 13 shops in the London area are unlikely to pose any threat to the big firms on anything other than a very local basis.

Quite simply, the bookmakers have deeper pockets than Amrac and will be content enough to survive on a diet of All Weather shite, Irish racing, greyhounds, Portman Park and numbers games until TurfTv is no more.
 
The Nanny also have shares in SIS don't they?

I'm not so sure Relks tbh - as of January 1st SIS will be left with none of the big meetings, TurfTV having taken all of the premier RUK tracks as well as Ascot. True, the bookies might be happy to attempt to survive on BAGS & 49s but will it really work if they can't provide pictures for the Grand National meeting/Cheltenham/York/The Derby meeting/Royal Ascot/King George meeting/Guineas meeting/Glorious Goodwood et al? Oh well, at least they'll be able to cover the Winter Derby in depth!
 
Originally posted by Shadow Leader@Apr 1 2007, 02:09 PM
...as of January 1st SIS will be left with none of the big meetings
Click to expand...

My point is that, without any subscribers, TurfTV won't last that long.

It should also be remebered that races on terrestrial TV will still be seen in all LBOs, so the the meaty bits of the big meetings will still be visible (albeit not via SIS).
 
It's incredulous that sis will continue to charge the same 13K despite only covering 50% of the courses they previously covered and yet there seems to be little fuss from the independants. It's like the miners going on strike to get Thatcher a rise.
 
Precisely HT - they should be lowering their prices & yet no-one seems to have kicked up a fuss about it. Obviously the firms with a vested interest won't but there are plenty of other large enough firms out there without that vested interest.

Relks - time will tell but I reckon that if the venture is run properly they've got a fairly strong hand. Once a few firms start to cave in (which I'm sure they will) others will follow suit. For example I reckon Sid's circus will be one of the first to cave in - they won't want to only be providing courage of the gaff tracks, despite the FOBTs & all that rubbish.
 
Sid has about 20 shops ffs. They don't matter.

Between then, Ladbrokes, Hills, Coral and Done have the betting shop market by the short and curlies (except for Totesport) - and they are playing hard.
 
I know they've only got about 20 shops but once someone gives in & it's reported in the Post plenty of others are sure to follow suit.

I also love the scaremongering in the RP about there being 2 SPs - that's not likely to happen!
 
Originally posted by Honest Tom@Apr 1 2007, 04:21 PM
It's incredulous that sis will continue to charge the same 13K despite only covering 50% of the courses they previously covered and yet there seems to be little fuss from the independants. It's like the miners going on strike to get Thatcher a rise.
Click to expand...

I am sure the independents will be more than happy with the "product" with which SIS supplies them as replacement for action from the TurfTV tracks.
 
Originally posted by Shadow Leader@Apr 1 2007, 03:51 PM
I also love the scaremongering in the RP about there being 2 SPs - that's not likely to happen!
Click to expand...
TurfTV wanted to do their coverage through the current BAGS service which , with a bit of bargaining, could've meant no possibility of two SP's, no new equipment required, no disruption. Tom Kelly said no to this and none of the cartel's obedient followers are asking why?
 
I can't see how Turf TV are in a strong position at all. Ladbrokes, Hills and Corals will all have 8 million + a year wiped off their balance sheets if they sign up to Turf TV - good luck selling that project to them.

The SIS tracks plus the televised terrestrial racing (in addition to foreign/virtual racing) perhaps wouldn't satisfy diehard racing fans, but it will be more than enough to keep betting shops going until Turf TV goes to the wall...
 
So why is no-one insisting SIS lower their prices? The only possible answer is that as they are controlled by the bookmakers it's the latter named that are refusing.

Also, will someone please enlighten me as to what divine right SIS have to enjoy the monopoly with no competition? Why the hell shouldn't someone else be allowed to compete with them?

HT - TurfTV will be providing the SPs [for their tracks] as per the contractual agreements (ergo in the same way that SIS currently provide the SPs for their tracks) so the only scenario in which two SPs will be produced are if SIS insist on doing their own SPs for trackes for which ghey have no right to be providing SPs.
 
Actually, Turf TV have a very strong hand. Whatever punters spend their money on in betting shops, horseracing is the primary driver in getting punters into shops. The loss of at least 31 tracks from Corwilbrokes shops will lose them money and a lot of it.
Think a fundamental point is that that at long last one section of the racing industry is at last standing up to the tri-opoly and challenging their control of UK racing. The scare stories planted in the RP etc about SPs and sponsorship might suggest that the major bookies are rather more worried about the outcome and in the case of Willhill and Ladbrokes the profits made from SIS at the expense of racing.

Sure, they will need nerves of steel and rasonably long pockets to win through, but it would be surprising if Turf TV hadn't planned for that.

richard
 
It will come down to who needs who more though, Richard. I would guess that TurfTV cannot not survive without the Big Three bookmakers buying their product.
On the other hand, Horse Racing is becoming less and less important to the bottom line of the big bookmakers - a fact that seems to have escaped most within the sport.
 
Another thing that I think people appear to be overlooking is that TurfTV/Amrac will have fairly decent funding being backed by two already established firms in Racing UK & Alphameric. Mind you as I said my biggest doubt is over whether the product [Amrac] is managed properly ~ I hope that their organisational skills are quite a bit better than Alphameric's!!!!
 
I wonder if RUK have factored in the liklihood that if bookies shops are not showing the racing, people like me who don't yet have the channel and go down the shops to watch racing from those tracks will be resigned to getting it! Mind you I wouldn't think many people who are that keen are still without it.

There are still quite a few independent bookmakers here in East Anglis - Jennings for example has quite a few shops, and they spread across at least to Bucks. Wonder what they will do?
 
While I don't agree with what's going on, I can understand it. If I ran one of the majors I'd be threatening to withdraw sponsorship too.

And Shadow Leader, don't be so sure about the strength of "two established firms" - racing UK is yet to get on to a firm financial footing and Alphameric interests in racing would becme almost zero if they were to lose their contracts with Hills, Ladbrokes, Coral, Stanley and Betfred, which threat must be on the cards.

This is going to be one of the real brinkmanship exercises. I'd love to be involved in the negotiations - on either side, for the sport.
 
Sport ? Sounds more like playing poker for a million pounds a hand to me........ Oh, sorry, that would be sport to you LordH.
 
If Alphameric's engineers are anything to go by they'll do a job for 10 mins and spend 1 1/2 hours sat around drinking tea.
 
Time will tell Brian - I happen to disagree with Baldyfred that Amrac won't be around for long.

As for Alphameric surviving - it would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if the likes of Hills, Laddies et al finish their contracts with them. It would cost them fortunes & they'd have to source another firm who had the resources to refit all their combined shops and quickly after the Alphameric software & equioment was removed. Not to mention retraining all their staff with a different slip capture system - it wouldn't be workable. Mind you I'm not so sure Corals or Laddies use Alpha - they certainly didn't in the older days when they first started using slip capture.

Martin - that's a worry, yes! Not that the engineers have a lot to do with the way the firm is run but having dealt with Alpha extensively for a few years now [and had several dozen run-ins with them!] you'd like to hope their staff are a lot more on the ball than a lot of the previous motley crew! Although to be fair they had improved over recent months.
 
Originally posted by Shadow Leader@Apr 3 2007, 06:01 PM
Mind you I'm not so sure Corals or Laddies use Alpha - they certainly didn't in the older days when they first started using slip capture.
Click to expand...
they do. And Alphameri made a great deal of the Ladbrokes contract in their last financial report. Don't underestimate how important it is to them.
 
Ladbrokes have used Alphameric for their screen systems but not for their slip capture. That is entirely an in-house development, which means that Ladbrokes would potentially be in line to be the sole supplier to the industry should Alphameric fall out of the picture. That's enormously unlikely but an interesting thought, nonetheless.
 
Don't Tote use Alpha for their slip capture too? I know when I've been in there shops it's been the exact same set up as Betfred, Hills and Corals.
 
Back
Top