Blinkered, brutish and boring

Howard Hamilton's rant in last Friday's Gleaner was illogical and intemperate.

In it, he lamented that the leadership of horse racing's "stakeholders" had wimped out on a decision to refuse to nominate horses for Caymanas Park races. He pointed out that the decision to withhold nominations was taken at a combined general meeting of "stakeholders", but the almost immediate volte-face was instigated without recourse to the several memberships.

He seemed especially peeved at the owners' association president for suggesting more meetings with Government. Hamilton's opinion was that that would serve no purpose. The "unity" from which this latest threat of disruption was born impressed him, but he was disappointed at how quickly it evaporated at the finance minister's request without an inch of ground having been conceded.

What exactly were "stakeholders" seeking by this expression of "unity"? Hamilton listed two demands, namely:

1. Bookies be forced to pay a 10 per cent rights fee (up from 3.5 per cent) demanded by CTL for the dubious privilege of using CTL's odds (calculated for all by a computerised totalisator after deducting 30 per cent plus of punters' stakes) instead of calculating their own odds based on their own sales.

2. Sunday racing be introduced with all CTL OTBs permitted to fully participate.

To these ends, he considered what he called "the unanimous decision not to nominate horses ..." justified and an example of "a level of unity which gave us hope ... ."

seeking answers

I have some questions for Howard regarding this "unanimous decision", especially in light of his express concern about decisions taken in the absence of "constituents". How many registered owners attended the original meeting? How many registered owners are there in all? Who does this decision to withhold nominations most adversely affect? Will Howard's Breeders' Association suspend its yearling sale and forego commissions/profits therefrom? Will trainers stop sending monthly bills to owners? Will grooms sacrifice their salaries? Or is it, once again, only owners, the sport's major investors, who'll continue to pay for silly political games being played by some?

What do "stakeholders" expect to gain by shutting down the industry? Is it that every time an industry decision goes against you, the reaction must be to "lock it down"?

Let's examine the details of the wonderful advances that these "unified" demands were likely to achieve to see if delay, neglect or denial justifies such extremism. CTL's last published balance sheet disclosed that its liabilities exceeded its assets. No purse increase has been possible for more than two years. But, according to "stakeholders", the solution is to demand a fee from third parties' businesses for a service which is non-essential to those third parties. This is arrant nonsense from persons who seem not to have a clue about modern business or modern racetracks.

fooling who?

How does an increased rights fee from bookies address the fundamental fiscal incompetence that put CTL into de facto bankruptcy in the first place? Why is dependency on the viability of third-party businesses going to save CTL? What if these businesses fail, including because a crippling rights fee must be paid to CTL? What then?

I hear tote monopolists shrieking, "Great! If they close, we'll get their customers." Get them and put them where? The racetrack, whose facilities haven't been upgraded since Whoppi killed Phillop, accommodates about 6,000 customers. Maybe 9,000 bursting at the seams. CTL's 60 OTBs can accommodate about another 3,000. At best, CTL can't service 15,000 bettors per race day. Jamaica's adult population is more than two million. Who are we fooling?

Then, there's Sunday racing. Sunday racing is a nice gimmick that, on the most optimistic projections, can't solve the promoter's fiscal problems. What CTL needs is to be dragged, kicking and screaming into the technological age whereby customers don't have to leave their homes; drive miles over pothole-laden roads; park in unsafe parking areas; suffer personal harassment by pimps, touts and fashion police (would you believe that a bankrupt company turns away customers wearing sandals?); then stand in long lines to bet while others push, shove and peep. Customers should be able to bet from home and watch the races upon which they bet live by way of subscriber cable TV or a secure website.

That's how to significantly increase CTL's customer base and viability. No need to terrorise any other legitimate business. When will sanity prevail and these brutish, boring threats to "lock it down" from "stakeholders" holding no threatened stake stop? Never, if blinkered 'leaders' like Hamilton continue to exhibit the vision of a Ray Charles with cataracts.

Peace and love.

Gordon Robinson is an attorney-at-law. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.