- This topic has 101 replies, 40 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
I think that a very real danger is that the marketing types, with their obsession for makeovers and Simon Cowell-like personalities, will miss the point that racing has appeal on a number of levels and that one slogan will not fit all.
Yes, racing needs to be made more accessible. Yes, there is a place for non-racing entertainment before, after and even during racing. Yes, racing needs a unified marketing campaign, with, for instance, racecourses acting collectively to promote "A Day At The Races".
But it also, for instance, needs to cater for the information-hungry participant much better than it is doing at present, and that will never be achieved by "dumbing down" across the board.
I would like to see the re-birth / re-branding of the traditional silver rings at racecourses as alcohol consumption areas. All other areas to be alcohol free or heavily restricted.
In a nutshell
a) clamp down on anti-social behaviour at the courses. It is the most off putting aspect of racing at the moment.
b) a contentious one but move to an off-course Tote monopoly with profits being fed back into racing. "Traditional" bookmakers allowed on-course only with the proviso that all betting is carried out via a central computerised system and their "admission" charge is a fixed percentage of their turnover.
c) Retention of the split enclosure system, with one of the main enclosures being completely alcohol free. This will give racegoers a choice. Single enclosures are all well and good but no fun if you want to avoid the drunks.
d) Engage racegoers more. There is a PA system at the course – use it. Have paddock commentaries. Have the commentators comment as the horses are going down –
most
are excellent readers of horses condition. Publish the weight of the horses. Have two racecards at each meeting – one "traditional" one aimed at the beginner with plenty of information for beginners and a second, more "technical" one with form lines and form data.
e) Big screens and plenty of TV’s in the stands at all meetings.
f) Have plenty of racing related displays at the course, again engaging racegoers.
g) Have more seating in the stands. My father-in-law is in his 80’s and still loves his racing, however he is limited to the courses he can attend as most do not have anywhere where he can sit and watch the racing.
h) adoption of point b) will allow for entrace costs to be subsidised and therefore reduced to a more affordable level. Admission costs should also reflect the quality of the racing on offer. However by retaining split enclosures again alls pockets can be suited.
i) Stop wasting money on consultants – the money can be better spent elsewhere.
j) Stewards enquiries should be "open", ideally cameras should be allowed, at the very least the press should be allowed in – the PA or RP could provide pooled coverage to prevent a media scrum.
and finally:-
Stop pussyfooting about and tinkering with the fixture list – just slash it.
All Monday’s, apart from Bank Holidays, should be blank days.
We sometimes have bad weather in the winter – if this results in blank days accept it – don’t bother putting on low grade betting fodder as a late replacement.
There should be more than three concurrent meetings in the afternoon and no more than two concurrent meetings in the evening.
There should also be a reintroduction of a proper geographical split of meetings.
Have to agree with much of Paul’s points, except probably b), but especially e, f and g.
For a casual racegoer, the thing most courses are missing is a pleasant place to sit down and have a reasonable cup of tea and something to eat without missing the action. Posh restaurants and burger vans are in good supply – it’s the middle ground that tends to be grotty/over-crowded/hideously expensive/without enough screens.
Cost needs to be addressed directly. There should be centrally directed tiers of pricing. Set maximum prices for the main enclosure for all courses, related to the quality of racing on offer. Courses with lower quality facilities should also not be allowed to charge the maximum. Mid-week, low quality meetings should not be able to charge more than £5 for main enclosure entrance; better quality meetings should not charge more than £15. Festivals would have to be exempt from this, but even their prices should be capped to some degree.
Use racecards more as a tool to encourage customer loyalty. All racecards should include a free £2 Tote voucher, plus a free or discount course return entry voucher. Discount vouchers for food and non-alcoholic drink should also be included to encourage racegoers to use the facilities. Prize draws and competitions are all very well, but I don’t know many people who bother entering – it’s a faff to fill it in and you know you’ll get bombarded with junk mail. Straightforward vouchers create more of a feeling of value and satisfaction.
Racecourses should encourage local groups and societies to get involved. I found it very strange that Nottingham Racecourse didn’t want anything to do with Nottingham University, for instance. Colleges and universities often have sports societies – the racecourses should be proactive and offer discount admission and special offers (but probably not free booze!) to their local ones. Same goes for local sports clubs – the target audiences will often overlap.
Keep racing on terrestial telly.
Thinking about racecourse food has made me hungry, so I’m off to get some lunch now…
The problem with branding, or rebranding, is that it attempts to put a product into a box, packaging it as a certain type of experience appealing to a particular target group.
Racing as an product can appeal to a huge range of target groups, offering each a different experience. It can offer a champagne ‘n’ hats day out for a girly group; a nice lunch and corporate box experience for businesses; a day of sport and betting for serious fans; a family picnic with horses and bouncy castles on a Bank Holiday Monday….
All of these groups are equally important for the future of the racing industry. Branding to target one or other of these groups is likely to alienate at least some of the others – I imagine many Brians are the small corporate box type who sponsor races at their local courses, or the die-hard sports fans who provide betting revenue.
This diversity is also one of racing’s greatest strengths – it offers a variety of experiences that sports like football and rugby cannot. Trying to homogenise racing into a single experience is a mistake.
IMO, racing should have a centralised information service with a calendar and booking details, but much of the marketing needs to be done on a localised scale. Marketing racing as all Royal Ascot glamour and celebrity is all very well, but first-time Devon racegoers to Newton Abbot will be disappointed if that is what they are expecting! Different courses should target their own marketing to their specific target audiences – a family experience at Cartmel, a corporate opportunity at Newbury, a showbiz and fashion edge to Chester, etc.
The racing authorities’ role should be to ensure the general image of racing is good – clean, sporting, exciting, competitive, prestigious and with high animal welfare priority. Going racing can be a great event and day out for everyone. Branding to a target group is exclusive – racing can be inclusive and should be marketed as such.
- Total Posts 17716
I agree, Sal.
Far too much emphasis is being put on the BHA’s role in rebranding, marketing and promoting racing. Their function, first and foremost, is to govern (and police) the sport as effectively and efficiently as possible. If they’re not doing their job – which, at the moment, is questionable – and instead spending time and money on pointless PR exercises, there will be nothing on which to build any sort of advertising campaign.
It seems fairly obvious that it is the racecourses’ responsibility to promote themselves, as each is likely to appeal to a completely different demographic (those who prefer a quiet afternoon of wholesome National Hunt racing, for instance, aren’t likely to enjoy the hectic fashion show that is Royal Ascot, so different promotional strategies would be required). In this instance the BHA should only concern itself with ensuring that each course meets specific criteria in terms of value for money, hygiene and facilities, centralising the booking of tickets (as I have discussed previously) and ensuring the general public that racing is as clean and enjoyable as it can be.
Oh, and the word ‘committee’ should be removed from the vocabulary of every official in the industry.
In a nutshell
a) clamp down on anti-social behaviour at the courses. It is the most off putting aspect of racing at the moment.
b) a contentious one but move to an off-course Tote monopoly with profits being fed back into racing. "Traditional" bookmakers allowed on-course only with the proviso that all betting is carried out via a central computerised system and their "admission" charge is a fixed percentage of their turnover.
c) Retention of the split enclosure system, with one of the main enclosures being completely alcohol free. This will give racegoers a choice. Single enclosures are all well and good but no fun if you want to avoid the drunks.
d) Engage racegoers more. There is a PA system at the course – use it. Have paddock commentaries. Have the commentators comment as the horses are going down –
most
are excellent readers of horses condition. Publish the weight of the horses. Have two racecards at each meeting – one "traditional" one aimed at the beginner with plenty of information for beginners and a second, more "technical" one with form lines and form data.
e) Big screens and plenty of TV’s in the stands at all meetings.
f) Have plenty of racing related displays at the course, again engaging racegoers.
g) Have more seating in the stands. My father-in-law is in his 80’s and still loves his racing, however he is limited to the courses he can attend as most do not have anywhere where he can sit and watch the racing.
h) adoption of point b) will allow for entrace costs to be subsidised and therefore reduced to a more affordable level. Admission costs should also reflect the quality of the racing on offer. However by retaining split enclosures again alls pockets can be suited.
i) Stop wasting money on consultants – the money can be better spent elsewhere.
j) Stewards enquiries should be "open", ideally cameras should be allowed, at the very least the press should be allowed in – the PA or RP could provide pooled coverage to prevent a media scrum.
and finally:-
Stop pussyfooting about and tinkering with the fixture list – just slash it.
All Monday’s, apart from Bank Holidays, should be blank days.
We sometimes have bad weather in the winter – if this results in blank days accept it – don’t bother putting on low grade betting fodder as a late replacement.
There should be more than three concurrent meetings in the afternoon and no more than two concurrent meetings in the evening.
There should also be a reintroduction of a proper geographical split of meetings.
Agree with this post.
Reports are that security were called to deal with an anti social element at Newbury on Saturday who were ruining the day for others.
There is far too much racing,just to provide low grade betting office fodder. Most people don’t have time to keep up with the form and certain newspapers don’t even carry the cards.
In a recession, racecourse admission is well over-priced. Who wants to pay £15-£18 to stand and watch low grade mid-week fare?. Catering is appalling in quality and well over-priced. Potential racegoers are being fleeced.
Agree with the point about Tote/bookies,especially with the advent of the exchanges.
As regards another poster’s suggestion about raising the low public profile of top jockeys,you would have to handle this carefully and change cultures as most seem wary and suspicious that if they speak to someone they will be tapped up for information. In any event Ryan Moore is hardly Mr Personality and probably wouldn’t see it as his job to help promote the sportGet some of Alan Sugars Apprentices to have a go at rebranding two racetracks.
Cant be any worse than paying £250000 to a load of ejits who tell us stuff that we already know.
Get some of Alan Sugars Apprentices to have a go at rebranding two racetracks.
Cant be any worse than paying £250000 to a load of ejits who tell us stuff that we already know.
- Total Posts 17716
Yes, Neil, pretentious tits outrank expensive pretentious tits every time
"Agree with this post.
Reports are that security were called to deal with an anti social element at Newbury on Saturday who were ruining the day for others.
"That sadly strikes a chord with me.
I used to take my daughters to Lingfield evening meetings and they absolutely loved the whole thing. "When are we going racing again Dad?"Youngest daughter moved away and persuaded her friends to attend Newbury as she imagined they would all love it too. The train up was filled with drunks, the course was filled with rowdy drunks, the train back was standing room only with even more drunks, urinating in the carriages and one being sick all over her. She’s was devastated and embarrassed to ever recommended racing as something being a great day out and sadly it’s never, ever again.
Silvoir – Take a look at the link below.
http://www.belmont-stakes.info/belmont-tickets.php
Puts our courses to shame. Newbury charged £18 for the Lockinge and wanted £10 for a Lockinge ‘Lock-Inn’ after races (which was cancelled in the end due to what I presume was lack of demand) !! You can watch the Belmont for £3.
Add this to the ridiculous prices that contract caterers are allowed to charge for refreshments, and I think you start to see where the problem lies. Is it racing that needs to market itself better or just the individual courses themselves ? Can the BHA dictate pricing policy to the racecourses ?
Slash prices. It’s worked at Towcester and the two days they do charge are both very well attended.
There are also many good suggestions on here of how to engage the racegoer. Once you work out how to do that the marketing will take care of itself.
You need to remind people this is a sport first and a betting medium second. The sport is what really draws people in.
- Total Posts 17716
And yet you’ve offered less than **** all, happy.
There is little point in attempting to rebrand the sport and market it to a new audience if the product is ruined by the selfish actions of the minority. It may not ultimately be the BHA’s responsibility, but it’s a problem nonetheless and one that needs to be addressed sooner rather than later.
I’d love to see how you’d promote the Rome derby, happy.
‘There’ll be drinking, there’ll be shouting and there’ll almost certainly be violence, but the football will be good…’
Sounds like great fun
Differences in HK:
1. There are 2 tracks serving 7 million people, rather than 60-odd tracks serving 70-odd million people.
2. The tracks are owned and operated by the HKJC, as are all off-course betting outlets.
3. Usually two meetings per week – Wednesday night (8 races at HV) and Sunday afternoon (10 races at ST) – from September to June.
4. No person under the age of 18 is allowed into the racetrack (unless – like Matthew Chadwick – required to ride horse).
5. No shortage of racegoers of all ages upwards from 18 at the tracks.
6. Racegoer profile, using Kate Fox’s “The Racing Tribe” categories:
ENTHUSIASTS:
– Fans: regular but not obsessive racegoers: many
– Addicts: compulsive racegoers (at least once a month): many
– Horseys: passion for horses rather than racing: few
– Anoraks: recite six-generation pedigree off top of head: fewSOCIALS:
– Suits: corporate hospitality: lot of space given to boxes, quite a few– Pair-bonders: dating couples: quite a few, but do study the form
– Family Day-outers: quite a few, but only where all over 18
– Lads’ and Girls’ Day-Outers : quite a few of all ages, but restrained and no boozed-up herds, and again do study the form.
– Be-seens: dressers-up, fashionistas: very few: only those in the middle of parade ring or the permatan Western tourists on international racedays.
7 Most travel to both courses by cheap public transport.
8. Cheap entry: Public Enclosure HKD 10 (about GBP 87 pence). Members: HKD 100 (tourist price).
9. Cheap food and drink, both service-station food-court and Little Chef restaurant variety. But alcohol costly.
10. Many TV screens everywhere with parade ring / racing pictures, and constant betting pool info.
11. Much colour coverage for cards in local press. 60 mins dedicated TV program going through card, trials, etc each night before racing.
12. Large and effective presence of police (who carry guns and do not socialise but are helpful if approached) and HKJC ushers who are pro-active and friendly and not jobsworths.
Thoughts for GB:
A There is a large societal difference. HKers by mental and physical nature are more passive than GBers, so inherently less friction in interaction. No “pint and a fight = good time” or “my right to do what i want” attitudes.. No knives carried.
B Also a large commercial difference. The HKJC is a betting and racetrack-owning monopoly. It is government-regulated and has to ask permission to stage extra racedays. But it is also the largest taxpayer in HK, accounting for 10 per cent odd of all taxes received by government (and it is taxed on receipts, not profits – no expenses are deducted first). On top of that it is still the largest charitable donor in HK, funding schools, hospitals, etc.
Still, I do wonder about the “one size fits all” approach for GB.
Has anyone actually tried the “forbidden fruit” approach to build up a young racing audience, by strictly excluding anyone under 18 from all betting / racing areas ?
As a commercial proposition “sweating the asset” of a racecourse that maybe has 20 racing days a year, inherently is not necessarily in sync with maximising an “only here for the racing” audience.
To reconcile the two, maybe put the “non-racing” elements into discrete separately-focused enclosures, with entry (and where appropriate exit) policed as strictly as for Members?
Then rebrand and re-price each enclosure ?
best regards
wit
- Total Posts 17716
It just astounds me that a plethora of sound, reasoned and potentially (highly) successful suggestions have been put forward on this thread, yet such sources of knowledge and experience weren’t considered six months ago.
I have to ask – if next to nothing (or the bleedin’ obvious, whichever you prefer) was worth £250,000, what tag do we attach to the previous four pages?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.