This article was posted
during a discussion of why free historical racing data (ie old form) was
removed from various sites
Consider horse racing as a
product (anathema to lovers of the sport, but necessary for purposes of
illustration):
Owners and by extension trainers,
jockeys and breeders are the suppliers.
The principal racing
authorities/race clubs are the wholesalers.
Betting agencies are the
retailers.
Punters are the consumers.
A number of issues now become evident:
1. the wholesalers bear a
responsibility to ensure that suppliers fully disclose the condition and
specifications of their goods and that this information is made available to
retailers and consumers, which clearly makes all data from barrier trials
(official and unofficial), trackwork and racemeetings conducted under the
auspices of the raceclubs subject to full disclosure.
2. levying a fee for the
provision of said data is akin to charging consumers to view advertising
material relating to product specifications. "come and buy my product, but
first you'll have to pay to inspect it!" wholesalers/retailers in the
wider world have little difficulty in understanding that recouping the expense
of promotion occurs at the point of sale.
3. wholesalers may well seek the
opinions of suppliers, but ultimately need to survey consumers to determine the
type of product end users wish to purchase. Therefore the type of racing
offered and the conditions under which it is conducted (ie race programming)
must be a function of consumer demand.
If consumers want energy
efficient goods, bleating suppliers with an unsuitable product will be ignored.
Likewise, if punters want open betting races comprising competitive
participants (3yos) with low retention rates (markups) then they presumably
would vote with their pocket and owners/trainers marshalled to supply the
desired product, with complaints about handicapping and programming relegated
to the lowly perspective of suppliers' concerns, whilst retailers prepared to
operate on low margins could be encouraged and certainly not stifled by
protectionism.
Commissions from Betting agencies
back to the industry need to be a function of retention rates.
4. form analysts (of which I am
one) and organisations who add value to racing data clearly fit the role of
product reviewer. Their analyses may be paid for by consumers or retailers, but
consumers are entitled to provision of raw data (product specs) to make their
own purchasing decisions at no cost to them.
I invite ausracers to expand
and/or contradict the analogy I have outlined.
Marc Lambourne