- This topic has 28 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by
.
- Posts
..and here’s a request for Karl Oliver, Rod Street and all at Racing For Change, its’s Lostprohets with "Fake Sound Of Progress"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myxZjKWAOtE
Looking forward to their next announcements where the British Champion Series continues with the…
QIPCO Newmarket 3YO Colts Milers Grand Prix
QIPCO Newmarket 3YO Fillies Milers Grand Prix
Jardine Newbury Milers Grand Prix
Investec Epsom 3Y0 Fillies Grand Prix
Investec Epsom 3Y0 Colts Grand Prix
Investec Epsom Older Horses Grand Prix
….etc…etc…Hey, we might even convince the Beeb to cover it. (Just tell them it’s Grand Prixs and Horse Power).
Bula, Fred Darling, Diadem, Jockey Club Cup – RIP
Don’t give them any ideas CarryOnKatie, they’re probably in the office now punching the air. I mean how many "kids" who knows what a Guinea is nowadays.
I don’t see why they can’t have the sponsor name and Diadem in the race name. Why throw out tradition like that?
When the Kentucky Derby became The Kentucky Derby presented by Yum Brands people raised hell about it. Of course nobody except the TV presenters actually say the full race name.
I don’t see why they can’t have the sponsor name and Diadem in the race name. Why throw out tradition like that?
When the Kentucky Derby became The Kentucky Derby presented by Yum Brands people raised hell about it. Of course nobody except the TV presenters actually say the full race name.
Excellent point Miss Woodford. It is one thing having a race foreever associated with a brand – Mackeson, Massey-Ferguson and Hennessy all immediately spring to mind. Indeed, how long did De Beers ask for no more than the word “diamond” to be inserted into the title of Europe’s pre-eminent high summer middle distance all aged championship?
The problem with letting marketing trained professionals run amok is that you end up with a load of poorly thought out “brainstorm” “strategies” which serve nobody other than the people who devise them, who are extremely adept at always finding a positive spin to put on the predictable failure they have hatched.
Trust me, I worked very closely with a marketing department led by a CEO “visionary” who convinced himself that all he had to do was to “re-brand” a very old mutual society, carry out loads of research amongst highly impressionable “focus groups” who would say whatever you wanted them to provided the questions were cleverly arranged, and bingo, you got exactly what you wanted – 6 figure bonuses and an eject button which once pressed got you well out of the way before the sh*t really hit the fan and the whole sorry mess came tumbling down.
I have a lot of respect for Jim McGrath’s stand against them, but surely with all his influence he should have remained within and spoke out whilst still part of RFC?
how long did De Beers ask for no more than the word "diamond" to be inserted into the title of Europe’s pre-eminent high summer middle distance all aged championship?
It may have been their altruistic decision, but there does seem to be a ‘rule’ that races whose names have a royal connection do not have the sponsors’ names added as a prefix
e.g The Queen Elizabeth II Stakes (sponsored by Vodafone)
The Royal Lodge William Hill Stakesand I’m sure there’s others
In my opinion – and it was discussed at some length on the voluminous ‘Rod Street’ thread in response to the loss of the Bunbury Cup – all historic racenames, if sponsored, should follow the example of the QE II above, or at the very least have the original name retained after the sponsor’s name
TV and Course commentators here in the UK are always careful to include the sponsor’s name when introducing a race, presumably because they’re under orders to do so
Don’t give them any ideas CarryOnKatie, they’re probably in the office now punching the air. I mean how many "kids" who knows what a Guinea is nowadays.
I remember being in Mr Dew’s class 2I at Rainsford Comp, was only 11, and we did currency. I was the only kid in the class that knew a guinea was £1.05 lol
Nice showing up the smart ass posh kids, my hand went up sharpish when he asked the question
Fond memories.
- Total Posts 17716
It seems that RfC sent on my email on this matter to James Oldring, of British Champions Series Ltd. (so there’s some news for a start.) I hope Mr Oldring will not mind me reposting his reply here, with his address and email attached for anyone who wishes to contact him also.
I will reply to him personally in due course. The
emboldening
of certain phrases is mine, not his.
Dear
[Pinza]
,
Many thanks for taking the time to email Racing for Change, who have passed your message over to me – as to be fair to them,
the renaming of these races was not a decision in which they had involvement
, so it’s not for them to take any criticism.
I know that you will not be alone in your views that to change what are historic (and in many cases, hugely meaningful to the racing enthusiast) names for these races that now form part of QIPCO Champions Day is the wrong one. The decision to make these changes was not taken lightly –
there were lengthy, and occasionally heated, discussions involving the ‘owners’ of the race names
– in this instance, Ascot and Newmarket, as well as the BHA’s Racing Committee and also the Executive and Board of British Champions Series (made up of representatives from Ascot, The Jockey Club, York, Racing Enterprises Limited, Newbury, Arena Leisure and Racecourse Media Group).
This was not a suggestion put forward by an external ‘PR agency’, it was entirely internal, and therefore cost nothing.
Whilst I appreciate that the exploits of Pride winning the Champion Stakes at Newmarket are rightfully remembered in the naming of a race in her honour, Newmarket have had discussions with Pride’s owner, and his preference is that an alternative race at Newmarket is renamed the Pride Stakes, rather than the title remaining with the race at Ascot.
I have also attached the Press Release issued today giving a little more explanation behind the decision to rename the races. As I said earlier, I fully appreciate that this decision will disappoint and anger some racing fans – and many of them will be of the opinion that part of the joy of racing is understanding who/what Diadem was, or why the Jockey Club Cup is so named.
However we as racing have to face facts:
our core TV audience is ageing and of limited interest to sponsors
; our attendance figures remain relatively static; our market share of betting is diminishing at an alarming rate; our prizemoney levels lagging woefully behind other developed racing countries…
doing nothing is not an option
.
We have to find ways to make horse racing more relevant to today’s sporting and leisure society
.
I love the sport, and am passionate about seeing it succeed. I’m also a traditionalist at heart, and remember Pride’s gallant performance to be runner up in the Arc before coming on to win the Champion Stakes at Newmarket. I remember Persian Punch’s titanic efforts in the Jockey Club Cup…
but I’m in the minority. To most sports fans, these are not events that are on the radar, and we have to change that
.
The sport is a phenomenal spectacle of symmetry between the thoroughbred and man; but it’s art is lost on the masses at the moment. If, by promoting our best races in a Series leading to a Championship finale day at the end, with simple to follow categories, means that more people come to appreciate the sport, then I think that it’s worth sacrificing the title of a race to help achieve that goal.
Whilst you criticise the decision to mimic the Breeder’s Cup race names model, just consider for a moment what a phenomenal commercial success that event has become
.
It attracts major blue-chip and mainstream companies to sponsor
. It is viewed in racing countries all over the world. It offers astonishing levels of prize money.
It attracts the very best horses from all over the world to go and compete. This is what British Champions Day must become
.
I don’t seek – nor necessarily expect – to elicit a change of heart in your views, which will be shared by some; but
I do want to try and get across the message that everything that has been done with respect to the British Champions Series has been done in consultation with the courses and connections involved, and with the very best intentions and aspirations
.
Thanks once again for taking the time to email.
Kind regards
James
James Oldring
Operations & Events Director
British Champions Series Ltd
75 High Holborn
London WC1V 6LS
t: 020 7152 0188
m: 07584 392 171
e: joldring@britishchampionsseries.comThanks for the posting the reply, Pinza. Certain elements of the reply were certainly worth reading.
Many thanks for taking the time to email Racing for Change, who have passed your message over to me – as to be fair to them, the renaming of these races was not a decision in which they had involvement, so it’s not for them to take any criticism.
Karl Oliver, who apparently runs BCS LTD, sits on the RfC board.
- Total Posts 17716
FWIW, my reply:
Dear James
Thank you for your reply to my email, which is appreciated.
You articulate many points with which I – and doubtless many other members of the racing community – would wish to take issue, but as the renaming is a fait accompli which no amount of argument or negative feedback is going to change, I will confine myself to just a couple of observations.
However we as racing have to face facts: our core TV audience is ageing and of limited interest to sponsors; our attendance figures remain relatively static; our market share of betting is diminishing at an alarming rate; our prizemoney levels lagging woefully behind other developed racing countries…doing nothing is not an option. We have to find ways to make horse racing more relevant to today’s sporting and leisure society.
This paragraph is, it seems to me, the heart of your rationale. Amongst many points, I find it specially revealing that, in an age of TV satellite diaspora, internet and twitter, BHA are still thinking in terms of marketing to a "core TV audience". Of course that is shrinking. But it is also an increasingly small component of the marketing picture.
I also find it telling that your attitude to an "ageing" audience takes no account of the fast- changing demographic in our society, whereby "grey power" wields increasing fiscal influence at the expense of the previously much sought-after teen and twenties group. Advanced marketing people understand this well, so it seems you have been paying the wrong people to give you some very short sighted and old-fashioned advice.
The sport is a phenomenal spectacle of symmetry between the thoroughbred and man; but it’s art is lost on the masses at the moment. If, by promoting our best races in a Series leading to a Championship finale day at the end, with simple to follow categories, means that more people come to appreciate the sport, then I think that it’s worth sacrificing the title of a race to help achieve that goal.
Beautiful words: so it is an irony that you have not been able to see that marketing a beautiful race name such as the "Diadem Stakes" would have offered you so much more chance of capturing the hearts and minds of your target audience than the prosaic and banal "QIPCO British Champions Sprint Stakes", a name worthy to have been cooked up by a committee of accountants rather than embryonic poets such as yourself.
These sorts of committee compromise never win out.
Last, the Breeders Cup Series has succeeded (to the questionable extent it has) because it runs races on the turf as well as the dirt or all-weather surfaces. Your Champions Day cannot emulate that mixture, and – run as it is the ‘wrong way round’ on undulating turf at Ascot – has no earthly chance of attracting runners from the USA in return.
So the decision to emulate the Breeders Cup rather than plough a more original and imaginative furrow, clearly spelt out in your letter, is a basic mistake showing too little awareness of the realities of international racing. Once again, it looks as if accountants rather than aficionados have won the day.
Yours
[Pinza]
Back in the days (20+ yrs ago) when I worked in an office, I used to organise four racing trips each year involving anything from 12 to 20 fellow slaves. Almost all of them were either occasional or first time racegoers when they first joined a trip.
None of them ever asked me what the races were called, what quality of horses we’d be watching, how much prize money was on offer, whether there’d be music during or after racing, or how this meeting compared with similar events worldwide.
They only asked how much would it cost, which pub would we be visiting and what time should they arrange to get collected when the coach returned to base.
BUT, none of them would ever have gone racing on his own initiative – it needed an existing keen follower of the sport to get them interested. And there were spin-offs – at least three became annual members at Newbury, two did the same at Cheltenham, others became regular racegoers with their own families. About ten years ago, I came across a couple of dozen of those old friends in a hospitality box next to the saddling ring at Stratford. One of our number had died tragically young and his colleagues had chosen to sponsor a race in his memory and reconstruct the sort of day out we’d enjoyed years before.
My point – getting new people into racing long term is far more likely to be achieved by inroductions from existing fans than it is by marketing campaigns that might get them out for one day. So annoying your existing customers is not the way to proceed, however much you buy into the jargon about appealing to a younger audience etc etc.
There’s an old business maxim that racing would do well to remember – "It costs ten times as much to develop a new customer as it does to keep an existing one".
AP
However we as racing have to face facts: our core TV audience is ageing and of limited interest to sponsors; our attendance figures remain relatively static; our market share of betting is diminishing at an alarming rate; our prizemoney levels lagging woefully behind other developed racing countries…doing nothing is not an option. We have to find ways to make horse racing more relevant to today’s sporting and leisure society.
So it is about ‘increasing turnover and feet in grandstands’.
Doesn’t matter where the turnover comes from or what class of clientèle are attending the meetings, it really is just as simple as making more money in a money mad world?
Thanks for finding that out for us Pinza. It’s also interesting to note that ageing followers of our once great game are not of interest to them any more, just pissheads and Essex girls. Nice to know.
We should hire some cheerleaders and put up a couple of nice marquees selling pink sequinned ‘fashion’ jockey silks and commemorative 5L kegs of Fosters.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.