I wonder if the Pegasus pricing reflects a trend. I have read a couple of posts on the Pull the Pocket blog discussing the efforts of California racetracks to get the CHRB to require ADW’s to use geolocation to identify bets made through the ADW by people at California tracks. The ultimate objective is to get the ADW’s to pay a higher signal fee for such bets. Those posts raised two questions in my mind.

The first question: why would a racetrack patron with an ADW as an option choose instead to bet through the windows/machines at the track? With an ADW, there is no waiting in line (and risk of getting shut out), and there are no vouchers and tickets to lose. And the second question, why should the track be entitled to a higher signal fee for ADW bets made by its patrons? The track is not doing anything more for that customer than it is for an offtrack customer, and the ADW is not doing anything less. In fact, the presence of the ADW option probably makes the track’s customer service task easier, because there are less people in lines and fewer tickets to get jammed in machines.

All of which leads me to the topic of this post: is there a trend towards racetracks looking at attendance, not as a means of increasing handle (which they could view as largely independent of attendance), but as a separate source of profit to be maximized? With that viewpoint, it may be best, particularly in trying to create big days, to sell a limited number tickets to wealthy patrons, rather than to allow the grounds to be overrun with lower-paying customers who bring with them customer service difficulties and expense. That could explain the Pegasus pricing. It is also consistent with the way Churchill Downs is running its racetrack business (increasing Derby and Oaks day admission prices and building new luxury seating) and with NYRA’s introduction of big-day attendance caps and Saratoga picnic table sales.