Crist responds in regards to "Takeout-Gate"

[bigmack]

Clearly, cj needs to recuse himself from the discussion as his deep affection for all things Serling/Crist/Hayward jades his judgement.

[Greyfox]

The NYRA Interim Report by the Audits and Investigations unit and the Board states:

"While it is clear NYRA knew they were collecting an inappropriate rate based on an August 2011 email, they decided to continue to collect the excess takeout in violation of the Racing Law without notifying any parties including the Board, the FOB, its tote company or its auditors."

So who carries the can here? The CEO I say.

[chickenhead]

Originally Posted by cj

Again, I think it has always been NYRAs job to do what they are told with regards to rates. In this case, nobody told them anything. If they want a change, they request one. Suddenly putting making them the prime responsibility in this case seems more than a bit disingenuous.

Well, thats an interesting question. When the rates changed to 26%, did NYRA ask for approval via the same process they would have used here? Obviously they knew they were supposed to, due to all the press and rancor at the time, but was the mechanism in fact the same?

9. THE NEW YORK RACING ASSOCIATION, INC. – TAKEOUT RATES
Pursuant to Section 238.1(a) of the Racing, Pari-Mutual Wagering and Breeding Law, the New York State Racing and Wagering Board approved the following takeout rates established by The New York Racing Association, Inc. on races conducted by The New York Racing Association, Inc.

This is all the Sept. 12 meeting notes have to say. It sounds as if NYRA established the rates in a request that the NYSRWB approved. But maybe not. Quite possibly not, I'll give you that. But until I dig up further evidence, the text says they weren't told their rates, their rates ("established by NYRA") were approved.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by bigmack

Clearly, cj needs to recuse himself from the discussion as his deep affection for all things Serling/Crist/Hayward jades his judgement.

Not anymore than those who refuse to see another, perfectly understandable side to all of this.

CJ makes some very valid points as to what was in that email between Hayward and Crist. There is no "smoking gun" as some are trying to portray. But there does seem to be plenty of poor interpretation of what was required by NYRA.

[Grits]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Not anymore than those who refuse to see another, perfectly understandable side to all of this.

CJ makes some very valid points as to what was in that email between Hayward and Crist. There is no "smoking gun" as some are trying to portray. But there does seem to be plenty of poor interpretation of what was required by NYRA.

I have a question. All points aside in the threads pertaining to this matter, how can you ignore the post that is clearly above what you've just written?

I'm sorry, but what Chickie has found here doesn't exactly smack of mustache twisting. Or, do you find this to be simply more poor interpretation?

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Grits

I have a question. All points aside in the threads pertaining to this matter, how can you ignore the post that is clearly above what you've just written?

I'm sorry, but what Chickie has found here doesn't exactly smack of mustache twisting. Or, do you find this to be simply more poor interpretation?

By mustache twisting, I mean two evil men plotting their evil deeds, as is being portrayed here by some.

As for what chick posted, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away from that.

It has been long known that NYRA is allowed to request changes in takeout rates within an established range...that range being established by the NYSRWB.

[chickenhead]

It has been long known that NYRA is allowed to request changes in takeout rates within an established range...that range being established by the NYSRWB.

Because there seems to be some argument that someone else should have changed the rates and just told NYRA what they would be, that NYRA only requests a change if NYRA wants it. That does not appear to be how things work.


from the relevant NY law:
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/PML/2/238

The retention rate
to be established is subject to the prior approval of the racing and
wagering board. Such rate may not be changed more than once per calendar
quarter to be effective on the first day of the calendar quarter.

New rates subject to approval, that is it. I cannot find any mechanism in the law for the NYSRWB to tell NYRA what the rates should be, or to change their rates. I don't think it exists. Obviously, as the legal allowable rates change, NYRA would be the responsible party for requesting rates that comply with the law. NYRA is the one that initiates changes in takeout, and they are also the entity required to comply with the law.

NYRA establishes it's rates, the NYSRWB can grant approval or not.

When they changed to 26%:

9. THE NEW YORK RACING ASSOCIATION, INC. – TAKEOUT RATES
Pursuant to Section 238.1(a) of the Racing, Pari-Mutual Wagering and Breeding Law, the New York State Racing and Wagering Board approved the following takeout rates established by The New York Racing Association, Inc. on races conducted by The New York Racing Association, Inc.

When they changed to 24%:

NYRA – REQUEST TO ESTABLISH TAKEOUT RATES
On December 21, 2011, the New York State Racing and Wagering Board (Board)
approved the New York Racing Association, Inc. (NYRA) request to reduce the takeout
rates on NYRA races for all exotic wagers from 26% to 24%, super exotic wagers from
16% to 15% and super exotic bets with a carryover from 26% to 24%.

If anyone can find any other mechanism for rates to change...

[bigmack]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

CJ makes some very valid points as to what was in that email between Hayward and Crist. There is no "smoking gun" as some are trying to portray. But there does seem to be plenty of poor interpretation of what was required by NYRA.

"Deciding to wait" is not a smoking gun to you two?

Whoops, there I go again with another question. Get cj to tell me to f u ck off.

[DeanT]

Yes, that's right in the emails, Mack. This thread is like a Twilight Zone episode

BTW, Chick asked for the IG right on Pacead about five months ago. Today the IG arrives.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...pector-general

Chick has some serious power.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

The NYRA Interim Report by the Audits and Investigations unit and the Board states:

"While it is clear NYRA knew they were collecting an inappropriate rate based on an August 2011 email, they decided to continue to collect the excess takeout in violation of the Racing Law without notifying any parties including the Board, the FOB, its tote company or its auditors."

So who carries the can here? The CEO I say.

The idiot state officials who let down the state by not knowing what the hell they were supposed to be collecting. They used the word LAW......who makes and enforces the LAWS?

The idiot NYS officials.
Case closed - NYS screwed up and is looking to point fingers now.
When I place an order and the trucker drops it off, I make sure I get what I am supposed to to get - even though it is my supplier's duty to ship the right stuff. The take out money is a lawful amount the STATE is in charge with collecting and distributing. Is it oo much to expect them to get that one thing right? Even in NY?

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by DeanT

Yes, that's right in the emails, Mack.

To be fair, what was posted omits a pretty significant part of the email. Not sure why this was done other than to deceive, but I think it is fair to post what the ... omitted.

From http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/a...n-overcharges/

Since we are showing substantial losses in 2010 and 2011 and we have been smacked around by Cuomo (and he could check the SRWB from approving), we decided to wait. Also, the regional OTBs who collectively lost money in 2010 will scream like stuck pigs and that would provoke Skelos who is very tight with the guys who run Nassau OTB to introduce anti-NYRA legislation for the benefit of the OTBs. Finally, we are quietly working on a plan to open 10 or so restaurant/bars in the city and we did not want the politicos to block this effort. We have some internal debates on how much to lower each pool and how we would present this to our simo customers, the consumers and the politicos.


The situation is a bit different than is being presented in the post you responded to.

[riskman]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

How can we believe that Hayward didn't know he was breaking the law, when another email has surfaced, in which, association vice president Elizabeth Bracken writes to another executive:

"Takeout legislation sunsets middle of September, but I haven't heard that we intend to lower takeouts"...?

Bracken knew more than Hayward about this?

The sunset law enacted in 2008 increasing the takeout expired and terminated sometime in Sept. 2010 reverting back to the lower take automatically unless it was extended by law.NYRA continued to charge the increased rate from Sept.2010 to Dec.21, 2011 in violation of the law in spite of receiving an E- mail on 9/28 2010 from an "unidentified individual"pointing out the problem. Haywood forwarded the E-mail to NYRA general counsel.It has become clear to me that several people in NYRA knew the sunset clause was expiring and decided knowingly to continue with expired takeout rate over a 15 month period resulting in 8.5 million withheld due to bettors. Nothing at this point can convince me otherwise.
Did the governing board of NYRA interview Haywood and Kehoe after receiving Sabini's report from the State Racing and Wagering board before they were suspended? If they did, that would be revealing.

[bigmack]

One wonders how it is Crist makes a statement like he did in his published piece - "and I believe that had he known the wrong rate was being applied, he would have gotten it changed immediately" when it's clear Hayward did indeed know players were being overcharged takeout and decided 'now is not the right time' and that he was waiting until it was a more comfortable climate to disclose.

Crist says immediately apparently to mean whenever Hayward feels it's a better time to tell people they're being hosed.

[PaceAdvantage]

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by bigmack

"Deciding to wait" is not a smoking gun to you two?

No, in fact, it backs what CJ is saying.

Why would he think he had the option to wait unless there was a serious misinterpretation of what was required by NYRA...likely by General Counsel Kehoe.

Makes a lot of sense when you think about it...