- This topic has 66 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’ve just had a good look at the RFC feedback from the recent free week (26 Apr- 1st May). In addition to attendance stats, etc, they also surveyed a number of people (866) across all 9 racecourses that participated.
[b:1gfwkwoj]<u>Highlights from the survey</u>[/b:1gfwkwoj]
<b>Frequency of Racegoing</b> – 68% were new or infrequent (less than 4 visits). Looks quite encouraging on the face of it but to be meaningful you’d need control data from surveys conducted on non-free entry days (these figures might be typical of the attendance make-up of any meeting)
<b>Most enjoyable parts of the experience </b>- Interesting one this. 5% said ‘It’s free’. Only 6% said ‘The horses’. Top 3 answers were ‘Fun day out’ (21%), ‘Atmosphere’ (18%) and ‘Winning’ (17%). ‘The Weather’ figured highly too, at 12% so it’s a good job they didn’t run the survey in January. In the blurb the RFC suggests that because ‘The horses’ and ‘Watching the races’ scored relatively lowly it means that aspect has to be worked on. <i>Fundamental mistake IMO.</i> Instead of focusing on working hard on the things the visitors don’t seem to value, concentrate on the things that <i>they do</i>. Make a day at the racing MORE FUN, enhance the atmosphere even further. I think that I know what they are getting at, racing is about horses and races, yes? Wrong. ‘Going racing’, for the majority, is about having a great day out.
<b>Areas for improvement </b>-
Most people (57%) said ‘Nothing’ but, as the blurb points out, the fact that it was a freebie kind of invalidates the question. Ignoring that, the top answer was ‘cheaper drinks’, then more seating (9%) and then catering (9%).
I’d agree with all that. There are limited seating areas on a lot of courses. It can be tiring trudging about from paddock to bar to grandstand and many people do enjoy a sit-down. On the catering front, I think many on here have complained over the years about the price/standard of racecourse catering. Plenty to learn on that front I’d suggest. However, in my experience, racing is similar to most events of its type in that the catering is over-priced and, generally, rubbish.They also published some thoughts on the decimal odds trial. They say that the majority preferred the decimal odds but also that betting needed to be simpler to understand. The average Tote uplift at the courses ruinning the free days was 60% which the RFC say indicates that newcomers are more comfortable with the Tote. Some suggested that each way terms were confusing and minimum bet details were a barrier. I’d concur with all that too.
So –
Keep entry fees down, concentrate on providing a fun-filled atmosphere, get some more seats dotted about the place, sort out the caterers charges and quality and work to simplify/clarify betting (my experience is that betting is the singlemost ‘alienating’ part of the racecourse experience for newcomers, and, conversely, one of the things that adds most to the sense of fun – big opportunity there I’d say – how about ALL racecourse bookies operate to the same min bet and each way terms).
Not a bad list for starters.
It’s good to see that these issues are being formally highlighted/measured, let’s hope the findings are used wisely.
Pretty counter-intuitive findings which suggest that Kempton, for one, have taken the wrong path.
Fun Day Out – aside from the perenial game of hide and seek with the fifteenth and sixteenth stalls that the managemnt put on, the entertainment’s pretty thin on the ground. "I spy with my little eye something beginning with t". Fast foward three hours and if the matchsticks haven’t snapped yet, your firstborn will pipe up ‘trier’
Atmosphere – empty stands look upon a betting ring that resembles the stage set of
Waiting For Godot
Winning – erm, don’t think so
The Weather – freezing
I attended the free week at Doncaster, it was farcical planning, and full to bursting. Got caned too and the last 3 races. Not good..
The important thing to remember about research is that it is merely validation for what you wanted to do anyway.
A) "95% of people surveyed like lollipops so we’re right to focus on promoting lollipops."
B) "Only 5% of people like lollipops so we need to work harder on promoting what’s good about lollipops."Source: Lollipops For Change.
Be suspicious of anyone who quotes market research data as a justification for doing anything.
I would have thought it more important to establish whether the free entry model actually can be made to work financially. We all know Towcester has been run on these lines for several years and they are still open for business, but the evidence from the latest prize money stats suggests that it wouldn’t work for most tracks.
The published figures report on total prize money offered by each track over the twelve month period to March 31st, and breaks that total down into the amounts provided by the Levy, the racecourse and the owners.
Towcester paid out £550k in prize money during the year, but only £10k of that came from the racecourse itself. The Levy provided £490k and the owners (in entry fees) the remaining £50k.
To put those numbers into context, other NH only courses of a similar size to Towcester came up with more money of their own – Newton Abbot £27.5k, Taunton £40k, Perth £79.5k, Kelso £111k, Ludlow £109k. The only tracks with a lower input than Towcester were Worcester and Hexham, names that I suspect won’t surprise anyone as being the bottom of the league.
It’s also pretty clear that the free entry model is never likely to be viable for the bigger tracks – Ascot for example put in £4M to prize money, Cheltenham and Newmarket almost £3M.
If the Levy payment to Towcester is cut, I wonder if they would be able to sustain the business on the basis of free admission.
AP
great post AP, and valid points , however there is an argument that racing is too expensive in any event and something should be done to fix that
Personally I never miss a meeting there now and it has rekindled my interest in Nh
Some tracks though like Leicester, Nottingham and perhaps Bath could well mirror Towcester , and still do very nicely
Cheers
Ricky
- Total Posts 17716
however there is an argument that racing is too expensive in any event and something should be done to fix that
Is there not rather a "received wisdom", rather than an argument? We hear this repeated a great deal, but compared against Premiere League football, or one-day county cricket, it can hardly be said to be so – with the exception of a handful of prestige dates at certain venues.
I’m not sure I’ve seen any evidence that it’s too expensive to go to the great majority of meetings: although of course if asked, everyone would want it to be cheaper. How many turkeys would vote for Christmas?
Shock news – British public finds free day out in nice weather enjoyable, not keen on expensive drinks and food, has little interest in the purpose of the event and doesn’t understand the difficult stuff.
It would have been interesting to see responses to the question "would you come back again and pay £15-20 per person entry?"
- Total Posts 17716
Too often I hear people in racing say things like
"compared against Premiere League football, or one-day county cricket, it can hardly be said to be so"
Racing cannot and should not be compared to other spectator sports. At those events you spend a great deal of time watching the game which is continuous to a great extent bar the obvious scheduled breaks.
The entertainment with racing is vastly different. Many who attend will hardly see a live piece of horseflesh. That large section of the crowd go to socialise, gamble and enjoy a day out in the countryside. You can be on a racecourse for four hours and the live action contributes no more than fifteen minutes ( flat racing ) of that time. How can you make a value comparison with a football match that has ninety minutes plus time on or an eight hour cricket game? For many the price racing charges at the gate is comparitive to paying to get into a pub. Who would do that?
It’s time the comparison line was binned for good. Then we can get some real discussion going for the improvement of racing and its "saleable products".
Well said that man , the comparisons to football are at least puerile ….
truth is this , how many of those guys will come back and pay 16/ 18 quid to go racing after having a free taste
How many will pay 40 to 70 quid for members access for premier meetings
I am excluding pop bands after racing from this as loads of folks love this as a night out and fair play , I am convinced the racing has little or nothing to do with that experience , just look at the bars !!!!
My guess is not many at all will return for a racing day
cheers
Ricky
Good post AP
But with more horses in training than ever (or seemingly) and an avalanche of races, the economic model is clear
Prize money needs to be cut. Result may be a loss of owners and trainers, but so what? Does the sport need them?
cut prize money with a view to cutting racecourse input and admissions can come down.
- Total Posts 17716
Clive I expect a posse of zero to jump abord the "let’s cut prizemoney" bandwagon. Payout levels are already lamentable enough in this country.
Attracting a new audience to the racecourse is relatively easy. The respective individuals desire to maintain an interest in the sport is something that Racing For Change, or anyone else, can not influence.
If you offered me a free ticket to a major sporting final – a sport that I have no passion for – I would almost certainly take you up on the offer, but the chances of me subsequently following the sport are slim.
Racing certainly sttracts a wider variety of people than most sports because the event itself is not necessarily the focal point of the excursion.
I have introduced a fair few people to the sport by taking them racing. They all enjoyed the experience, but none of them have taken a subsequent interest in the sport on a regular basis.
Racing is very much a ‘revolving door’ sport. Many people will venture through that door, but just as many will leave and return when they require its custom again – a relaxed, enjoyable day out.
Rod Street, already at the helm at Racing Enterprises Ltd (and, hence, Racing For Change which sits under that umbrella) is now going to head up the Champions Series as the new Chief Executive, taking over from Karl Oliver, who is taking a sabbatical before intending to announce his ‘latest challenge’ later in the year.
Given that Rod was closely involved in the creation of the existing QIPCO Champions Series we should possibly put on hold any dreams of a radical transformation but, just in case Rod is looking to put his own wee stamp on things, here’s your chance to send Rod (a keen TRF follower) <b>a heads-up from the coal-face on what is and what isn’t working in the current series.</b>
Quick straw poll to gauge whether Racing Forum regulars believe that racing is getting its bang for its buck from the Racing For Change initiative.
Here are the stated aims of the RFC project –
To broaden the appeal of racing, reaching a wider consumer audience and maximising participation through betting, racegoing, ownership and all forms of engagement with the sport—in order to increase betting turnover on horseracing, other commercial revenues and general media coverage.
The measures (looking at the aims) which you might want to think about when selecting which poll option to select are –
Has ‘betting’ participation increased?
Has ‘racegoing’ participation increased?
Has ‘ownership’ participation increased?
Has ‘all forms of engagement’ increased?
Has betting turnover on horseracing increased?
Have other commercial revenues increased?
Has general media coverage increased/improved?- Total Posts 17716
Interesting.
I wish we were doing the same.
The basic task is to make the public gain appreciation of horse racing, as there is a distinct lack of it.
The objectives are fine yet it’s not straightforward to fulfill them because the environment is now too competitive.
There is also a conflict:
One has to play it to the rich cats and to the public at the same time. If this is done in the right proportions it can work, otherwise it won’t.The Greek experience is a must to avoid and it’s as follows:
Betting participation:
Dwindled to near zero. Argument there as to why the caravans leave house every September and not uniformly throughout the year.Racegoing’ participation
The Greek race course was advertised as "the best in Europe". However it looks like the Gobi desert, because it’s too far and nobody goes there.Ownership’ participation
Not enough betting and half the ownership was dismissed.All forms of engagement
No.Betting turnover increased?
No.Other commercial revenues?
Not even the proverbial toothpaste.Has general media coverage increased/improved?
The racecourse pays for the broadcasts. Former race course director said to the media "you pay" and was laughed out of court.In 1997-2001 racegoers tried to warn about the new race course.
No internet those days and we could not make our opinions heard by the widest possible audience.In 2004 we proposed something like the RFC project described here and we were called jokers. We were told "Fergusson is moving his stables here tomorrow and you are jokers", but they see the predicament now.
The moral of the tale is that undemocratic methods don’t work.
I can see a few champing at the bit on this one, cormack…
Betting? The only thing that has increased my betting participation over the last few years has been the advent of the betting exchanges. I dont see what RFC have achieved in this area. Granted sorting that mess out is not their remit either.
Racegoing? The free week last year was a great idea and I wish them well with it again in April. This is easy though, the public like a day at the races, RFC or not.
Ownership? Nothing RFC or anyone else could say or do would see me parting with 17 large for the privilege of running a horse in the UK for peanuts. Better ways to spend your money imo. Having said that, if I was a well connected "City" guesser with more money than sense I’d probably be tempted.
General Media Coverage? Considering 90% of it is contested by Racings equivalent of the Rymans League, I think overall media coverage in the UK is good, certainly in quantity if not quality. We’re spoilt really. I haven’t noticed a perceptible increase in media coverage since the RFC project started though.
Betting turnover? I’d say its down. Cards like Monday and Tuesday of this week dont help.
Other commercial revenues? Probably job well done, if RFC were connected with the Qatari sponsorship of the Champions Series. Job very well done in fact.
Overall there’s not a lot RFC can do imo. The big issues are gambling revenue and the racing fraternity’s attitude to the commercial realities of modern day sport. Sort those and the rest takes care of itself.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.