- This topic has 39 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
If anybody was in any doubt about the decline in the status of the Derby as a major sporting event, then they know now.
Peak TV audience declined from 2.8 million to 1.9 million, and betting turnover was down by 10 to 25%, depending on who you listen to. One bookmaker was saying that, in turnover terms, the weekday Cheltenham Gold Cup outperformed the Derby by a factor of three.
Granted, the generally fine weather around the country didn’t help the TV numbers, but this is a disaster.
Just about the only glimmer of light I can see in this debacle is that any notion of running the Gold Cup on a Saturday is dead.
Several articles in the press about this, here’s the Guardian’s take: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/ju … by-betting
As you suggest the weather would have impacted the viewing figures …. interestingly the numbers attending Epsom held up well.
Also bear in mind this year press coverage has been overshadowed by the bl**dy World Cup (roll on 12th July when it is all over) and the so called "news" of Ferdinand’s injury.
Regarding the betting turnover being down. Two factors I suggest.
Firstly it wasn’t exactly a classic (no pun intended) renewal of the race on paper so less interest.
Secondly we are in recession and people, especially once or twice a year punters, are rightly not going to fritter money away money on betting when they should have other fiscal priorities.
Racing is in decline, it is a minority sport, interest is waning and will continue to wane until there are fundamental changes to the sport. Changes far beyond the tinkering of Racing For Change.
Back in the days when all we had was the 4 terrestrial TV channels and radio, racing was quite popular. Falling viewing figures could also be something to do with numerous satelite channels and the internet all being increasingly popular allowing a greater diversity of other sports to dilute the interest in racing.
Good to see the decline in viewers had nothing to do with the quality of coverage and the personnel producing it.
Philip Bernie, BBC head of TV sport is quoted as saying "Coverage of the Derby was outstanding, reflecting this great sporting event extremely well. Though viewing figures are down from last year, we’re pleased with the programme".
Think he may be a touch blinkered and biased myself.
As racing receives no payment for any coverage of the sport I would like to see any broadcaster who wishes to show the Derby, Grand National, Cheltenham etc be allowed to do so, a bit like Dubai do with their racing. It’s not so long ago the Derby was shown on both the BBC & the commercial channel and as we see with the Racing Post,competition is good and lack of competition is bad.
Notice how ATR speed their pictures up when showing the same racing as RUK (France & Dubai)I don’t believe interest in racing is in terminal decline in this country, courses are packed out throughout the summer, the problem is racing doesn’t get enough back from betting on the sport.
How much interest and betting is there on the sport in France but look at the prize money there compared to here.don’t believe interest in racing is in terminal decline in this country, courses are packed out throughout the summer, the problem is racing doesn’t get enough back from betting on the sport.
How much interest and betting is there on the sport in France but look at the prize money there compared to here.Eddie spot on
Nice to see someone who sees it as things stand
Ricky
I would suggest the large crowds at some summer meetings proves nothing with regards the state of the sport. How may of those at the meetings are there to watch the racing? Many are there to pour as much booze down their throats and socialise with friends. Many will never see a horse in the flesh the entire meeting and their £5 e/w bets will have little impact on the Levy.
Prize money is plummeting – if that is not decline I don’t know what is? (BTW I did not say it was in terminal decline – decline does not have to be terminal.
With regards the levy – why should racing be the only sport to claim a levy from the bookmakers? Bookmakers should pay a levy to all sports they take bets on or none. There should be no special cases.
Comparisons with France are not fair comparisons at all. The French / USA et al took a sensible course in terms of funding by going for a PMU monopoly. We should have had a Tote monopoly in this country and then racing would be on a much sounder commercial footing.
The funding of racing is a farce, no other industry would (or would deserve to survive) using such a model. If it doesn’t join the real world and live within its means it will then be in terminal decline.
It’s easy to say a tote monopoly is the answer. But I think Matt Chapman raised an interesting if practically impossible point a while back – why has racing, or the people that run it, not set up its own betting exchange? They could have got a huge head-start if things were played right not far off a decade ago now.
- Total Posts 17716
I would suggest the large crowds at some summer meetings proves nothing with regards the state of the sport. How may of those at the meetings are there to watch the racing? Many are there to pour as much booze down their throats and socialise with friends.
When was this ever different? You’ll be familiar I know with Frith’s epic canvas
Derby Day
(and Howard Brenton’s play of the same name), which make it clear that only a tiny minority of race day crowds were ever there for the racing.
The great thing is the upward trend in attendances at the major meetings (though we all know the jam is spread far too thin elsewhere, thanks to the Bookie Lobby.)
Prize money is plummeting – if that is not decline I don’t know what is?
Now let’s face the facts: there is no sign of the important owners (Coolmore, the Arabs, the Aga Khan…) reducing their commitment to British and/or Irish racing: quite the reverse. Many of the Plutocrat Americans and British Aristocrats have drawn in their horns, but our Racing will remain healthy whilst there are beautifully bred horses to run here. In that respect, there is not one vestige of support for the Doomsayers.
We can perfectly well do without the Marketing Morons, and RFC carpetbaggers, but that is another argument. As Jim McGrath wisely said on the ATR Forum yesterday, their salary cheques depend on saying everything needs changing, so they are hardly likely to admit publicly that everything is rosy in the garden, are they?
- Total Posts 17716
If anybody was in any doubt about the decline in the status of the Derby as a major sporting event, then they know now.
Peak TV audience declined from 2.8 million to 1.9 million…
But that is meaningless unless you also factor in
(a)
Racing UK and
(b)
internet watchers, which those figures do not. Add those in, and we don’t have anything remotely catastrophic, do we? Perhaps a rise if anything, though that’s a personal hunch, rather than a (misleading) statistic.
It’s easy to say a tote monopoly is the answer. But I think Matt Chapman raised an interesting if practically impossible point a while back – why has racing, or the people that run it, not set up its own betting exchange? They could have got a huge head-start if things were played right not far off a decade ago now.
Savill was approached by some Eejit, over a decade ago, about setting up a racing run exchange.
Needless to say Savill passed up the idea. Maybe he was too busy lobbying Parliament to get FOBTs into the shops.
In any case, wouldn’t a racing-run betting body fill you with dread? Imagine what it would be like if it was run by the present shower.
If anybody was in any doubt about the decline in the status of the Derby as a major sporting event, then they know now.
Peak TV audience declined from 2.8 million to 1.9 million…
But that is meaningless unless you also factor in
(a)
Racing UK and
(b)
internet watchers, which those figures do not. Add those in, and we don’t have anything remotely catastrophic, do we? Perhaps a rise if anything, though that’s a personal hunch, rather than a (misleading) statistic.
Are you seriously suggesting that there were at least 900,000 more people than last year watching the Derby on RUK and the net?
It’s easy to say a tote monopoly is the answer. But I think Matt Chapman raised an interesting if practically impossible point a while back – why has racing, or the people that run it, not set up its own betting exchange? They could have got a huge head-start if things were played right not far off a decade ago now.
Savill was approached by some Eejit, over a decade ago, about setting up a racing run exchange.
Needless to say Savill passed up the idea. Maybe he was too busy lobbying Parliament to get FOBTs into the shops.
In any case, wouldn’t a racing-run betting body fill you with dread? Imagine what it would be like if it was run by the present shower.
Of course it would in that sense. It’s why letting them get hold of the Tote would be a disaster, more so than governmental control. And undoubtedly some would just avoid a racing run exchange for those type of reasons. When I said practically impossible, unless a racing run exchange offered multiple sport betting globally, realistically it wouldn’t be viable as punters want ease of access as much as anything. You never know, maybe they could have packaged a deal with governing bodies of sports worldwide if they created this exchange, or at least racing authorities globally. Then they could have the share of what British racing really generates…
I would suggest this was a one off. A combination of fantastic weather and a poor line up of horses with Sea The Stars a distant fond memory. Nothing to get excited about for the ordinary punter. I’m not the biggest flat racing fan in the World, but I usually make a point of catching the Derby. This time I didn’t bother because I didn’t care who won.
The actual viewing figures are meaningless, what’s important is the percentage audience share.
The reduced betting turnover is something of a worry but in my eyes, the race was such a minefield. If I hadn’t been doing so well backing Moore lately, I probably wouldn’t have had a bet at all.
I would suggest the large crowds at some summer meetings proves nothing with regards the state of the sport. How may of those at the meetings are there to watch the racing? Many are there to pour as much booze down their throats and socialise with friends. Many will never see a horse in the flesh the entire meeting and their £5 e/w bets will have little impact on the Levy.
Prize money is plummeting – if that is not decline I don’t know what is? (BTW I did not say it was in terminal decline – decline does not have to be terminal.
With regards the levy – why should racing be the only sport to claim a levy from the bookmakers? Bookmakers should pay a levy to all sports they take bets on or none. There should be no special cases.
Comparisons with France are not fair comparisons at all. The French / USA et al took a sensible course in terms of funding by going for a PMU monopoly. We should have had a Tote monopoly in this country and then racing would be on a much sounder commercial footing.
The funding of racing is a farce, no other industry would (or would deserve to survive) using such a model. If it doesn’t join the real world and live within its means it will then be in terminal decline.
Interestingly enough on the other thread Rob North stated that the only way to judge the success of a sport was "bums on seats".
No one said you said "terminal decline."
Comparisons with France are perfectly fair to point out there is far less interest in going racing and betting on it there than here but it is in a far healthier state.
I’m a bit puzzled why you think a Tote monopoly would be ideal but because we haven’t got one you consider racing should receive absolutely nothing from bookmakers betting on it.
What’s your suggestion for funding the support then?
- Total Posts 17716
Are you seriously suggesting that there were at least 900,000 more people than last year watching the Derby on RUK and the net?
I don’t know what the RUK / Internet figures were, and nor do you. I am suggesting that given the satellite-internet diaspora, these terrestrial viewing figures are increasingly meaningless.
Unless you can prove that there is an
overall downward trend
in
total
viewing figures, at home and abroad, sustained
over a decade or so
, then your doom-saying is firmly in the Cassandra camp – and I’m talking Frankie Howerd’s
Up Pompeii
lady rather than the rather more accurate Trojan original!
For me the Coolmore/Ballydoyle alliance & Godolphin has taken much of the interest in the classic races away. The huge Ballydoyle teams in the Derbies recently, that made up most of the field. I wonder whether others feel this? I actually (for the first time in years didn’t watch the Derby live. The fact that their pacemaker nearly won the race was quite astonishing.
The BBC coverage was not that good either, especially as we saw few of the runners before the race. We see shots of Carson in the paddock looking at them & a quick long shot of the runner.
As for course attendance, there were a lot of posts on here about the cost & we are in a recession, that has to be a factor.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.