This has always been a problem with this proposal, IMO.ita wrote: Wed Jan 24, 2024 10:42 am Commission's reaction to report could be a good sign for communities looking to build horse tracks and casinos
There is an apparent disconnect between what the report is allegedly saying and what critics of the report are saying. The report apparently concludes that Nebraska doesn't need more racetracks with 4 operational tracks currently. Critics are saying that Nebraska doesn't have enough casinos. Legislation only allows casinos at ractracks and cities wanting caisnos are now trying to force racinos in an additional 7 locations. Can the state support 7 more casinos? Probably. Can it support 7 more tracks? Probably not. In my mind, more tracks just do not make sense. I think Horseman's Park was doing like 1 live race a year under the schedule released for 2021. Fonner's was scheduled for 30+, Columbus track has 12, and Lincoln's also had 1. If we had 7 more tracks doing 1 day of racing a year, it seems like a monumental waste of land, money, etc.In the last year Nebraska's racing and gaming industry has taken off.
New casino's opened their doors, sports fans were able to start placing bets on games and several communities have started exploring the benefits of opening their own track and casino.
But in December a report, ordered by Nebraska's Racing and Gaming Commission, created some doubts on whether the state could handle more racetracks…
...
That study, authored by The Innovation Group, determined that Nebraska already had sufficient capacity at existing horse tracks and did not need to build anymore to keep up with demand.
But the Racing and Gaming Commission has taken issue with the lack of hard data in the report, particularly around casino gaming, and doubt the author's conclusions.
They finally get approval but only contingent upon opening at a race track. Before the casino(s) they have a handful of races a year, max. Now everyone wants the casino revenue as it does make sense to be able to share with more than one entity. However by limiting it to race tracks only they've created barriers to try and prevent competition. They'd argue it's to prevent casinos on every corner, but the problem is people with the financial resources that would like to open a real casino (with a hotel, etc) doesn't want a race track. So you build a race track just because you have to.
Same thing goes along with sports betting - they approved it onsite at a casino, which the casino loves because they get a cut of the bet that way. If you're betting offsite through an app then that casino won't see a direct benefit. Therefore they don't want you to bet through the convenience of an app.
We don't want slot machines inside Casey's... but at the same time do we want one casino in the Omaha metro that everyone has to go to and it has to have a horse track attached?
Ultimately I think the horse track requirement will be dropped at some point. And hopefully the sports betting won't have to be onsite forever, either.