this piece suggests that there are tracks that want it, but can’t make as much money for the organisers (no mention of losses):
"…….Breeders’ Cup officials have to choose their words carefully whenever they keep picking Santa Anita and Churchill so as not to offend any other racing jurisdictions, but it’s still crystal clear what is going on here. They believe they make more money hosting the event at Santa Anita and Churchill as opposed to any place else.
There’s nothing wrong with that. In earlier times, the Breeders’ Cup was swimming in money, the bulk of it coming from nomination fees for foals and stallions. Over the last several years the number of foals born each year has declined significantly and stud fees aren’t what they used to be.
That’s forced the Breeders’ Cup to rely more on other sources of revenue, like handle and admission and seat charges. If running a Breeders’ Cup at Churchill means making a lot more money than a Breeders’ Cup at Arlington that’s a good reason to pick Louisville over Arlington Heights………"
Unlikely to be Belmont following the announcement that the BC is back with NBC and the Classic will be shown in prime time (appx 8.30pm east coast).
Santa Anita (because it’s west coast) and Louisville (floodlights) now look like the only credible venues. Also makes it more likely that one or other will become the permanent, or semi-permanent – ie. 4/5yrs – location at some point.