Quote:
Originally Posted by clicknow
How do I even KNOW that SA isn't in some kinda plan with a real estate company to have high rise high density condos rising on the very spot?
|
The problem with conspiracy theories re: Stronach is that if he wanted to close tracks and redevelop them, he's had about 20 years of opportunities to close tracks and redevelop them, and hasn't done it. He definitely wants to close Pimlico, but that's the thing- when he actually wants to close a track, he tells you.
The theory behind "closing tracks and redeveloping" is that operating the racetrack loses money and therefore you need to get yourself into a position as soon as possible where you can close a real estate transaction and then close the track. That's what Churchill did with Hollywood Park. If you keep operating for decades, it sort of defeats the purpose (plus, real estate crashes do happen, even in nice neighborhoods, and you don't want to get into a position where you are trying to time the market).
No, Stronach is actually trying to stay open. He realizes that if Santa Anita (and to a much lesser extent Golden Gate, but he owns that track too) is going to survive any sustained attack by the critics of racing in California, it needs to get out in front of problems and be perceived as progressive and willing to take on the sacred cows of racing, whether it is trainers like Hollendorfer or the Lasix issue.
Now he may, indeed, fail and then have to close the track. I'd say that there's a significant likelihood that 10 years from now, there is no racing at Santa Anita, either because an initiative banning the sport passes, Stronach's tough anti-doping policies result in a severe horse shortage that prevents the track from running, or the powers that be realize what has actually been true for 25 years- that California racing would work better with one circuit, not two.
But it's not due to any conspiracy. What you are seeing is an attempt by a very savvy racetrack owner to keep the sport going against long odds.
