New England
The NEHBPA board met on Monday night for round two of a discussion on the latest offer from Suffolk Downs for the 2011 meet. There was no resolution to the dispute at the meeting’s conclusion. Via email, NEHBPA lawyer Frank Frisoli said this morning that the board “is continuing to discuss the matter and is seeking to discuss alternatives and modifications with Suffolk Downs.”
As Lynne Snierson reported for the Blood-Horse yesterday, and a Railbird source confirmed, the net simulcasting revenue split remains contentious, and days may be a matter of dissension within the board. The horsemen have sought 100 days of racing this year. Suffolk, which originally offered 67-76 days, has now proposed 75-85 days. What does not seem an issue at this point is the track’s total purse offer of $8.4 million. That’s about the total paid last year, and matches up with the horsemen’s last offer to the track.
Regarding the proposal, Frisoli noted, “we believe [it] remains open.” Contrary to a report yesterday that Suffolk has threatened to shut down in March if the blocked simulcasting signals were not restored by February 26, a source indicated that there is no deadline to the proposal, although it is based on revenue assumptions that may not hold if signals are not restored soon. The board will meet again to discuss the offer on February 23.
9:30 PM Addendum: Lynne Snierson has more on Monday night’s meeting. As mentioned above, days remain an issue. Snierson’s source says that that board is in agreement on 100 days; Frisoli’s response is a study in lawyerly parsing:
“Part of the problem is that the number of live racing days is more important to some of our members than it is to others. As a board, we are trying very hard to do a good job of representing the entire membership. I think the board is doing that.”
Also clarified is the possibility that the purses and days on offer will be cut if simulcasting signals are not restored quickly, as a racetrack source told Railbird yesterday. “[T]he offer Suffolk has on the table now is contingent upon all simulcast signals being turned back on no later than Feb. 27. After that, Suffolk will start cutting race days and total purses,” reports Snierson.
The NEHBPA board met on Sunday to discuss the latest offer from Suffolk Downs for the 2011 meet, but a consensus on the terms could not be reached, reports Lynne Snierson:
“There was a lot of talk but there is no agreement yet,†said one board member who asked not to be identified. “Our discussions were mostly about clarification, of both exactly what Suffolk is offering and of what we want and what we can accept. There is no consensus among us at this time, but one may be within reach.â€
Details of the proposal have not been confirmed. Both sides may have moved toward a compromise on purses and days, with Suffolk reportedly upping its offer for total purses to $8.4 million* from $7.5 million and the horsemen giving way on the 100-day meet minimum the group has sought. Snierson indicates that the simulcasting revenue split, which the horsemen have argued should be 50-50, may also still be in contention. The board will meet again tonight to discuss the proposal; updates here as available.
*The total of the new offer from Suffolk is in line with the counter-offer made by the NEHBPA to the track on February 10, which proposed purses based on available revenue and 100 days. A source confirms the track is proposing average daily purses of $103,000 to $110,000 for 75-85 days of racing.
1:15 PM Addendum: More from Snierson:
Suffolk Downs has threatened to shut down in March if the New England Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association and other chapters across the country do not restore simulcast signals by Feb. 26, according to a source close to the negotiations in the ongoing dispute …
A racetrack source said there was no deadline for the offer, but indicated that it was important for the blocked simulcasting signals to be restored quickly or purses and days on offer for the meet were in danger of being cut due to lost revenue. During the weekend of February 12-13, the first full weekend Suffolk was unable to simulcast such tracks as Aqueduct and Gulfstream, handle was down approximately 50% over the equivalent weekend the year before.
The NEHBPA and Suffolk Downs resumed negotiations this afternoon, one week after the horsemen offered the track a proposal for the 2011 meet, and almost four weeks after talks over purses, days, and the simulcasting revenue split initially broke down. No details of the discussion were divulged. Frank Frisoli, the horsemen’s lawyer, sent the following statement:
The NEHBPA conferenced with representatives of Suffolk Downs this afternoon. It anticipates receiving a proposal in the very near future from Suffolk Downs which will be presented to the Board of Directors of the NEHBPA.
The NEHBPA will have no further comments on this matter pending receipt of a proposal.
Track officials have not yet commented.
Hopefully, that the horsemen expect a proposal soon from Suffolk is a sign some progress was made today in finding a resolution to the bitter dispute.
2/18/11 Addendum: Lynne Snierson reports on the Thursday conversation:
“We had a good dialogue today and some of it is encouraging,†said Chip Tuttle, chief executive officer of the East Boston, Mass., track. “There are some places where we still have additional work to do to reach a consensus. We will keep the process moving forward.â€
In light of the past few weeks, that’s a promising statement.
9:00 PM Update: “Constructive” talks continued on Friday …
Suffolk Downs and the NEHBPA will resume talks, reports Lynne Snierson:
Frisoli said on Feb. 16 that a conference call among the negotiating teams for both sides has been scheduled for late afternoon on Thursday (Feb. 17)….
“We want to race this year and we want to have a good relationship with them,” said Frisoli. “We have been flexible and they have been rigid. But now they want to talk to us, and that is a good sign.”
Regarding revenue lost to simulcasting signals blocked as part of the dispute, NEHBPA lawyer Frank Frisoli told the Blood-Horse: “Although we believe that Suffolk caused this dispute and should therefore equitably be held accountable for the loss, we are still agreeing to share the loss.†That’s magnanimous.
Elsewhere: A Saturday Afternoon Horse praises the NEHBPA, chastises Suffolk:
Isn’t it the responsibility of the business owner to keep his customers happy? And with that in mind, didn’t management know that the simulcast signal would be pulled if they weren’t serious and sensitive to the horsemen’s interests and concerns? Of course the fans are unhappy, but that’s managements’ problem to resolve.
No, it’s not. We’ve heard several times during this dispute that the track should treat the horsemen as equal partners. If equal applies to revenue, then it applies to taking care of customers. Bettors fund purses — in slots-less Massachusetts, it’s as simple as that — and each time a simulcasting signal is cavalierly cut, or a bet is blocked on an ADW because of a squabble, revenue is lost not only at that moment, but later, because fans leave the game. The more customers alienated, the smaller purses paid — making unhappy horseplayers a problem for the horsemen as much as for the racetrack.
More on Tuttle’s Tuesday letter: “… little to endorse and much to dispute …“
Copyright © 2000-2023 by Jessica Chapel. All rights reserved.