Albert Einstein’s famous observation regarding the true meaning of insanity provides remarkable relevance to the current TVN predicament and what, if anything, is going to replace the racing industry’s visual broadcaster.
Let’s have a quick overview at TVN’s decade journey – looking at the emergence of TVN.
I took a look at what TVN achieved and what still must be accomplished in part one of a three part series.
TVN was given birth from a business dispute involving the metropolitan race-clubs of NSW and Victoria and SkyRacing.
Not being an insider to the full story, the cause of this very public dispute was that the race-clubs wanted a bigger slice of the payTV pie. So they dressed up this notion with a more ethical view that horse-racing required a dedicated TV channel for the benefit of racing. Noble.
Just as an aside and call me sentimental if you will, but doesn’t the current squabble between racing’s two main players, Racing NSW and Racing Victoria, have a familiar ring to that squabble from so long, long ago?
What can I say Albert … they didn’t call you Einstein for nothing!
TVN’s hurried development caused much excitement in the industry that was devastated by NSW and Victoria’s decision to remove their metro racing-vision from SkyRacing.
It is really scary when you have people in control of such a huge industry willing to shipwreck it, and for what?
So, before anyone knew it, TVN was on the air. Racing’s flagship was broadcasting to those who could pay for it.
TVN’s business model in its first incarnation was as a Foxtel payTV subscription channel for $5/month. That’s right charging $5 on top of the Foxtel general monthly subscription. Yes, they were expecting the horse-racing enthusiast to pay twice to bet. There’s a plan.
This TVN money earner didn’t even last the length of the free trial. It became a Foxtel freebie within a couple of months.
The next major TVN venture was the establishment (with Bigpond/Foxtel) of an online presence called ‘Racing Network’. And once again they figured the punt crazy public would flood to it paying a subscription fee ($20/month). Although, if potential viewers were lucky enough to be a Bigpond subscriber, no subscription fee.
Can these racing management people pick a winner from a historical form-guide or what?
Speaking of form-guides, the next go-to strategy for TVN was to buy two of the three major form-guides; Winning Post and Best Bets.
This seemed like a great idea, making sure that at least in the short-term, while the world transitioned to the digital-age, a core requirement of the industry was always available for newsprint oldies. Then they basically did nothing with them.
To make their online presence more attractive, they value-added to Racing Network, by including archived replays on-demand – and for the poor unfortunates that wanted to check a horse’s past run but weren’t a subscriber: ‘tough’!
After all, casinos don’t need form-guides.
Call me feeble-minded but it seems to me people who are interested in all sorts of live-race betting would watch SkyRacing and Foxtel. People who enjoy horse-racing only would probably watch TVN, if they could.
Did anybody bother to ring the British Racing Authority and ask what happened to turnover when BBC4 lost the public race-broadcasting to UK Racing, a subscription service? You might be able to guess.
But before we enter our brave new world of horse-racing, something more essential needs to take place. Something that is at the core of every successful enterprise. An identity. Yes, I could hear the audible gasps of amazement.
Why haven’t they established an entrenched racing-industry identity? Simply, answering the question – what is ‘horse-racing’?
You would think that horse-racing supporters are ashamed of something. Before ‘any-Body’ can plan the future they need to know who they are; something the racing industry has been very confused about over the last 20 years.
Here are just a few clarifying ‘identity’ ideas about the racing industy:
This is just a handful of factors. I’m sure many others will spring to mind.
If there is an industry truth, it is that racing’s industry income is primarily derived from betting turnover.
So what should the industry do?
The first thing I would have thought was to make a huge banner of Albert Einstein’s observation:‘Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results’, and hang it on the boardroom walls of these monolith racing bodies.
Next, they should make everybody concerned with the well-being of the racing industry recite the Einstein mantra every morning on arriving at work. You know, like the rah-rah Amway sellers subject themselves to at sales meetings.
Who knows maybe after a decade or two, the importance of this universal understanding might register. I agree, two decades is a little quick for the way our industry usually changes but an effort should be made.
We might see progress. The eternal optimist I am.
Stay tuned for a part three.
Jason Cave
Guest
I came across on YouTube footage of the very first race meetings that was shown on TVN's debut telecast. And, here's a question for trivia buffs-what race meetings was on that day? The answer: Warnambool (VIC) and Warwick Farm (NSW).
kv joef
Roar Guru
Thx Glenn, and you are right about many of the issues you have identified and will find no real argument from ... on some minor issues, more a clarification than anything from my view. On that other matter of 'blooding', i absolutely confirm your observation and is one of the reasons i left greyhound racing behind as a youth. i admit that a shiver ran up my spine the first time i heard the phrase 'EASY KILL' enter the thoroughbred lexicon. Then it became a 'cool' expression and seemed to gain a life of its own. For me i heard it in the media about a decade ago and i remember thinking ... 'do these people know what they are saying?' ... as you pointed out an 'easy kill' described greyhounds being blooded in the bush. Set free to chase down basically anything that moved and kill it. if you think any creature can get away from a couple of greyhounds (except into a hole) think again. I'm not sensitive mate, i just think this 'easy kill' phrase doesn't belong to horse-racing. We both know heaps of terms that could be used instead that. I hope the distasteful phrase slinks away to where-ever it came. Anyway off a tasteless subject to another reminiscence from your youth and that should put a smile on the dial. I'm sure the 'kiddies' may never heard of the No.9s (race meetings). These were an illegal race meeting like a self-organizing organism. Sort of like an illegal two-up game with the same reaction if the authorities showed up. They were called No.9s because they contravened that article of the AJC's rules of racing. It was serious stuff for a 'licensed' person to be caught at one of these meets as you could lose your accreditation and be 'warned off' for a time. Anyway, people would show up on a property somewhere (up the valley) with horses, riders, a start peg and a finish peg, one or two bookies and a trustworthy type gets to be a steward and the judge. Actually some even has starting gates, where ever they came from and they were a lot of fun. I believe they were still held up unto the late 80's. Not that i ever attended one or two but i often thought ... this must be the way racing started. While the game started with the official royal recognition by Charles2 in the mid-1600s there are plenty of records of Anglo-pony meets before that.
Glenn Innes
Guest
You raise some interesting points so I will deal with them.The other sports you mention are NOT dependant on betting turnover for their survival. If the government banned football betting football would continue to prosper just like it did for the vast majority of existence when betting on It was illegal.Other sports earn the bulk of their income via media rights, sponsorship and gate takings they can live without gambling.Without gambling racing would be where show jumping or polo are, a sport for a tiny niche of equine enthusiasts. Racing will live or die on it's ability to attract betting turnover, because that is where it's revenue comes from.A few days as a day time nightclub with manure over the Flemington carnival every year ain't gonna save it...and that fashion could die out pretty quickly. The issue of ethics is far too complex to cover other than to note that peoples attitudes to animals (at least the ones they don't eat ) have changed.Forty years ago no one but a few hairy hippies would have cared less about a dog trainer blooding his dogs with a feral rabbit a feral pig or a possum , times change. If racing is going to survive it is going to have to become far more innovative as a wagering product,a national tote with pools big enough for exotics that offer the possibility of lotto type payouts, shorter gaps between races (forty minutes is crazy in this day and age)it also needs to do far more to educate punters as to how the sport works (ie the class system. principles of handicapping etc..most punters find it all too hard on the brain because no one explains it to them) I know people who bet on racing nearly every day and have for years and years who not have the foggiest clue as to how the sport actually works and just think it's all boat races because they don't even understand class and weight but they are old so they keep backing up, younger punters just give up and start betting on sports they understand.. That is just the start, I could go on forever but everyone will get bored because no doubt everyone has their own ideas, and I look forward to reading them t .
BrisburghPhil
Roar Guru
Just one thing re Big Pond subscribers and access to free replays on Racing Network. That was the case intitially but as a Big Pond user I can assure you that didn't last. When I phoned Big Pond to complain they said they had nothing whatsoever to do with the Racing Network. Yet Telstra still billed me $20 a month off me for subscribing. Work that out!
kv joef
Roar Guru
Yes Stephen, everything seemed so positive in the spring. Look i haven't got a prob with TABcorp, they are a public shareholding and by law have to protect the value of their shareholding. Also believe that horse-racing vision should go into every pub / club / venue that wants it but by the same token these racing admin bodies have a similar responsibility of care to the racing industry. One of the things that has disappointed me is the lack of support for TVN by the high-profile industry-trade bodies like the Trainers Assoc, Jockeys Assoc, Owners Groups, Breeders Assoc, Barrier-Attendants Union ? etc. I'm sure they have been told by the authorities not to worry because a huge supply of air-freshener is on the way. The personal trade-support for the TVN is strong and vocal. But because it has been aired only on TVN, they are preaching to the converted. Again we don't know whats happening! Above in Glenn's quality post he mentioned the 'TAB' distribution deal but I'm pretty sure that deal went by the way a few years back. Racing-Roarers have long gotten use to mimicking a chihuahua barking at the gates of hell. So thx for your comments Stephen, and keep barking.
kv joef
Roar Guru
Thx Will, let's hope part 3 is not a Shaun Micallef 'zinger'. on a lighter note. An associate told me that TABcorp sent out a survey or something testing the water for potential names for their NEW racing channel. Apparently he sent back "TVN" :) . Sometimes it makes you proud to be an Australian.
Stephen
Guest
This is and always has been about protecting TAB Ltd and its business. They own SKY and are desperate to get/keep a monopoly on the vision to the exclusion of it wagering competitors. For years they ensured that the contracts they have with the various states had staggered expiry dates so that anyone waling away might have to spend a long time in the wilderness. I noted that things were going along just fine with negotiations last year until TVN made the suggestion they they would likely be able to broadcast in one of Channel 7's other channels during the daytime. This terrified TAB Ltd as it meant that many of their SKY outlets would also be able to abandon their hefty SKY subscriptions. This was NEVER about protecting racing and ALWAYS about TAB Ltd and its revenue streams.
Will Sinclair
Roar Guru
Some more nice thoughts, KV. Looking forward to seeing you bringing it home in Part 3. But the one thing that always stands out to me is this simple fact: "If there is an industry truth, it is that racing’s industry income is primarily derived from betting turnover." To me, this is the key. Increase turnover and you will increase revenue. And so, it should follow, that the people running racing should be doing everything in their power to make betting on horse racing MORE accessible. That should mea, among other things: - Easy and FREE access to live racing (on FTA TV and online would seem obvious); - Easy and FREE access to race results, form and race replays; - Easy and FREE access to experts / personalities who understand the sport and can communicate its intricacies to newcomers. If you make it easier for people to have a punt, you will increase turnover and increase revenue. This idea of hiding the product away and charging people to access it is a nonsense. It essentially ensures that only your absolute die-hard supporters will stay involved. Craziness!
Will Sinclair
Roar Guru
I still love the Best Bets for one single reason... it fits into my pocket. That tiny fact alone is enough to get me to buy it every week!
kv joef
Roar Guru
Solid posts as usual Glenn. But i will take you to task on a few points that actually underpin the mess the game now finds itself. "Horseracing is and always has been a gambling product" --- NO It HASN'T ... its never being a gambling product. Gamblers will gamble on anything where they THINK an edge exists (real or not) - mathematical or divine ... like card-counters; rigged-dice; biased roulette wheels; knowing the true probability of an event; have superior knowledge or notions like, 'i'm feeling lucky today', 'god please help me' and so on. By that common definition you describe ... all sporting contests (AFL, NRL, Soccer) are gambling products. Because as long as i can remember you could always bet on a footy game so try and convince a team supporter of that idea. BUT I know what you are getting at when you say horse-racing is a gambling product ONLY ... if that were true why do people go to Melb. Cup week in droves, why does that race stop a nation :), why did Black Caviar fill racecourses? ... champion horses always do. Horse-racing is a sport. You were involved in the gambling industry that happen to specialise on horse-racing. There is a difference. "how hard their (participants) attitude to horses really was, they were just livestock" --- again. the racing industry is a tough game. when asked to describe horse-racing, i often referred to it as ... like a team coach convincing mute athletic youngsters to compete against each other. And like any professional coach, most times you have to dash some young persons dreams by telling them they aren't good enough. You do have to steel yourself against the bruises, there are plenty of them but if you asked those same hard-nosed participants who their favourite horse/s were they probably would have an answer. The professional side of the game takes very few prisoners, that's just a reality ... like any sport.
kv joef
Roar Guru
Yes, correct pjm. i thought it was a smart move by Racing Network / TVN or whoever is actually in control? This made sure the industry supporters had the two basic types of form-guides - Best Bets a 'comment' form-guide and Winning Post - a 'details' form-guide. Over my time, form-guides have come and gone and i'm sure the TVN / racing admin had decided they were not going to be blackmailed by publishers like the events of 10 years ago. if the race-form offering were reduced to newspapers and a couple of specialist publications own by one or two proprietors, who knows what would happen? Actually, i think we know.
kv joef
Roar Guru
Thx Brent. Not so sure about 'better alternatives'. I'm continually fascinated how much form-guides HAVEN'T developed but more on that when i 'rejoin' Scott Woodward's article from last spring on available public race-form. Many misconceptions are inherent in form-guides ... like when odds are described as representing a probability. No they don't. Probability is finite, it exists between 0 and 1 (100%). Odds have an infinite upper-bound, when at least two results have been defined. Odds are actually an estimate. Mind you Brent, for that notion to take root, you have to believe that probability exists at all :) .
Glenn Innes
Guest
At the end of the day the industry survives on betting turnover, no turnover, no industry.Horseracing is and always has been a gambling product the difference is it was once the only gambling product now it is just one of many. For the last three years turnover has fallen, so obviously the number one issue is how to reverse that trend, and to be honest I have no answer to that. It was interesting reading Rob Waterhouses brief comments on the recent greyhound scandal he made two interesting points.Firstly that any ban on greyhound racing would cost horse racing because under ancient distribution formulae horse racing has been benefiting from the increased turnover on greyhound racing at a time when it's own turnover has been shrinking. Then he mentioned that dog racing was really a nineteenth century sport trying to live in the 21st century...so is horse racing.In the eighteenth and nineteenth century horses were still the main form of transport (at least over land for short distances) people were familiar with horses and interested in them. Then came motor vehicles, urban and then suburban living and horses drifted out of most peoples lives, but racing remained popular because it had a gambling monopoly.That is gone now and racing is a 19th century sport fighting to survive in the 21st century. I mean it wasn't a love of horses that got me interested in Racing (I had never had any contact with them) it was the gambling, just like all my friends and relatives.When I started to work in the wagering industry and first had some limited contact with industry participants I was actually quite shocked as to how hard their attitude to horses really was, they were just livestock. entirely disposable if they couldn't earn. These days there is an increasing number of people who find this unethical and consequently can't stomach horse racing.Indeed I can see the next four corners doco coming like a freight train,"Racing,front end of the pet food industry" , So on one side you have gamblers who have found other things to bet on, and on the other an affluent suburban middle class isolated from how their food is harvested who simply do not approve. I still love racing, I don't bet on it anymore because more than enough years of my life have been spent comparing formlines calculating track variants watching video etc etc as well as the torturous data entry but I still watch the carnivals and follow the good horses, but sadly I see nothing but decline in the years ahead unless something really radical happens and I can't think of what that could be.Fifty years from now it will be where harness racing is today.if it's still legal.
pjm
Roar Rookie
He didn't actually say that.
Brent Ford
Roar Guru
Great analysis KV. I like the Best Bets but then I realised in a digital world there are so many better alternatives. Poor TVN I enjoyed the vision from the mounting yard pre-race.