-
Available Subscriptions
Trotting Chat
2,988 topics in this forum
-
- 7 replies
- 917 views
-
- 3 replies
- 765 views
-
- 9 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 7 replies
- 945 views
-
- 7 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 8 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 12 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 6 replies
- 850 views
-
- 5 replies
- 889 views
-
- 27 replies
- 3.9k views
-
- 23 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 3 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 53 replies
- 4.1k views
-
- 21 replies
- 2.2k views
-
- 28 replies
- 2.6k views
-
- 1 reply
- 3.9k views
-
- 26 replies
- 2.9k views
-
- 39 replies
- 2.7k views
-
- 2 replies
- 585 views
-
- Guest
-
- 12 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 5 replies
- 655 views
-
- 1 reply
- 3.4k views
-
- 8 replies
- 2.3k views
-
- 27 replies
- 2.8k views
-
- 17 replies
- 2k views
Announcements
-
Posts
-
Never had a rebate as it is only on tote betting if I understand correctly. I would prefer that as the TAB has a monopoly on gambling on racing that they actually take the wagering that punters want. They put up the odds and yet are not prepared to allow some punters to bet reasonable amounts. Not sure how much the Entain owned Ozzie Bookies restrict punters to over there, but are the Ozzie’s restricted as much as we are here in NZ? -
By Chief Stipe · Posted
If you just want a site to post your opinions on without any response the start a blog and ban comments. Thats the best way to post crap and not get crap for it. At least on BOAY you have free rein to offend the site owner or even disagree with him without being banned. -
By Chief Stipe · Posted
Sorry I can't see the collary of Budweiser hiring a loud mouth transvestite to promote their light beer in a woke fashion with 3 racing clubs in the Waikato building a new track. Kenny Browne isn't with us anymore so it wont worry him that the members of three clubs each voted inidividually to build the new track. -
stopping the rebates must significantly impact turnover. Its just simple logic that it will be costing the tab/entain significantly in turnovers. the reasoning is simple. take every win and place bet that a person who got rebates makes.The tab take out of every $ spent is 15% on those bets and the rebated punter was getting back something like 1-2% at the end of each month,depending on what level the rebated punter fell into. so every $ a rebated punter spent,the tab was still receiving a minimum of 13% profit. then you look at the exotic bets like trifectas. i think the tab takeout % on those bets is 25%. They pay the rebated punters up to 3 or 4%. So the tab was still making at least 21% on every $ the reabted punter spent on exotic bets. So for every $1000 a punter spends on tritectas the tab is making at least $210,aving paid the rebated punter $40. so if you extrapolate that out,say the punter was a break even punter,which not many are,but say they were. Then that means every $100,000 they spent the tab got $21,000 and the punter $4000. But now you start to get real,and find that punter who was spending $100,000 was losing 4%,but was getting that 4% they were losing back in rebates,so were therefore breaking even. so now ,with no rebates,that punter is losing $4000 a month,or $48,000 a year. so very ,very quickly that punter will just stop betting or just cut right back on there spend.Its inevitbale.its just common sense. There can be no way the tab or entain could possibly have calculated the negative impact of taking away the rebates before they made the decsion to do so. The only indicator they could have used would be to compare the spend of punters who recieved the rebates before they got them ,against there spends after they got them. -
By Murray Fish · Posted
And rather $adly the local rate payers have to foot the build and then pay for maintenance of said 'vanity projects!' All of those projects are won through Politics not rational economics!
-
-
Topics
-
