Interesting BC stats

[Slewbopper]

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/bre...istory-bc.aspx

Attendance has been pretty much a constant. Total handle and TV ratings, however present a sharp contrast. BC 1 garnered a 5.1 rating (still the highest) with a $16.5 mil handle. BC 26 was 0.6 and $150 mil (9 times as much wagered with 1/8 of the audience) The biggest drop in ratings took place in '06 after NBC dropped the BC. But the fact is, the ratings had been steadily dropping for 22 years with little spikes here and there.

To put the ratings into perspective, the women's college basketball championship game last year had a 2.7 rating.

[Songofthesword]

that actually is interesting.

[Slewbopper]

that actually is interesting.

Sots, after reading your tome about eBay and California takeout which made a lot of sense, even though very verbose as is your wont, this BC thing makes little sense to me. How can 1/8 of the original audience generate 9 times more revenue? Okay, I will take into consideration inflation, but still.......

Obviously the internet and additional races is the major reason for the continued upward spike in handle. But anyone that is sitting at home and wagering on the BC on their computer also has his TV tuned to ESPN all day. So it makes little sense to me why the ratings are so low.

[Worksoplad]

Because the vast majority of money wagered is wagered inter track or at off Off-track wagering places, so the Nielson TV ratings are totally irrelevant to the equation.

[the Ol'Line Rebel]

Sots, after reading your tome about eBay and California takeout which made a lot of sense, even though very verbose as is your wont, this BC thing makes little sense to me. How can 1/8 of the original audience generate 9 times more revenue? Okay, I will take into consideration inflation, but still.......

Obviously the internet and additional races is the major reason for the continued upward spike in handle. But anyone that is sitting at home and wagering on the BC on their computer also has his TV tuned to ESPN all day. So it makes little sense to me why the ratings are so low.

I think alot of that handle has to do with the explosion of "exotic" wagers to play with. Just a guess. Never mind the other variables.

[arkle]

Sots, after reading your tome about eBay and California takeout which made a lot of sense, even though very verbose as is your wont, this BC thing makes little sense to me. How can 1/8 of the original audience generate 9 times more revenue? Okay, I will take into consideration inflation, but still.......

Obviously the internet and additional races is the major reason for the continued upward spike in handle. But anyone that is sitting at home and wagering on the BC on their computer also has his TV tuned to ESPN all day. So it makes little sense to me why the ratings are so low.

Accessibility to wagering.
Simulcasting/Intertrack wagering didn't become widespread until into the 90's. Hell in some places, like most parts of Texas, you couldn't gamble on a horse well into the mid 90's, as there was no tracks close by.
Then you have online ADWs in the last decade.

[Songofthesword]

When did it become commonplace to be able to simulcast?

[arkle]

When did it become commonplace to be able to simulcast?

It varies from state to state and track to track, but generally in the 90's

Here's some info for Kentucky..

In September 1988, Kentucky began intertrack wagering, allowing patrons to bet on races at any Kentucky track from any other Kentucky wagering location. Beginning in July 1994, full-card simulcasting allowed patrons at any location to bet on races from tracks across the country.
Advance deposit wagering has increased players’ options even more. Today, nearly
90 percent of money wagered on races in North America is bet at off-track sites, by
phone, or online.

From Hollywood Park's home page....

North-South Simulcasting
The introduction of full card simulcasting from Northern California at the 1994 Spring/Summer Meet and the success of Friday nights contributed to a record average handle of $8.1 million. The trend continued at the 1994 Autumn Meet and into 1995.''

For the first time, Hollywood Park imported and exported races to Canada. The continuing simulcasts from Northern California and Hong Kong throughout their season, plus the introduction of inter-track wagering from New York State contributed to a record daily average handle of $10.3 million during the 1995 Hollywood Park Spring/Summer Meet.