CALIFORNIA THOROUGHBRED TRAINERS
ALAN F. BALCH
A
Why is it?
BOUT 45 years ago, when I was first professionally involved in racing, among the first meetings I participated in was about the advertising budget for the upcoming year at Santa Anita. As a very young “Director of Public Relations,” I had just learned that my duties included supervising the advertising agency. I had no education at all in advertising, but I soon understood that everyone thinks he’s an expert in the field. It’s somewhat similar to horse training in that respect. Does advertising work? How can you tell? What makes it good? How much should we spend? Why should we spend anything at all? Whatever we budget, how should we spend it? I confess to have been skeptical about advertising going in . . . . about how much it “works,” if at all. But I stumbled across this old saw somehow, light-years before Google. A man wakes up after sleeping under an advertised blanket, on an advertised mattress, pulls off advertised pajamas, bathes in an advertised shower, shaves with an advertised razor, brushes his teeth with advertised toothpaste, washes with advertised soap, puts on advertised clothes, drinks a cup of advertised coffee, drives to work in an advertised car, and then, refuses to advertise, believing it doesn’t pay. Later when business is poor, he advertises it for sale. Why is it? Well, I was far from a decision-maker in those days, and Santa Anita’s advertising budget for the 1971-72 season was cut back from the previous season. A lot. What happened? Attendance and handle rose. Slightly. As an academic sort, I wanted to learn more. So I found everything I could on the subject to read and think about, from subscriptions to books to courses. Assaulted as we all are, every day, by every conceivable form of advertising, I began to think about it in ways I never had before. What works, what doesn’t, and why, and how is advertising a race track different 6
TRAINERMAGAZINE.COM ISSUE 35
from advertising a bar of soap or brand of beer, if it is? The advertising agencies of the time were “experts,” of course, although I quickly learned that most of their expertise involved competing with other agencies for new accounts. When a prospective client inquired too much about what impact their advertising had actually had on sales of their clients, conversations quickly took different twists and turns. The focus invariably turned to product quality and competitive environment. (Yet another similarity with horse training, come to think of it.) Santa Anita was in those days a “prestige” or “showcase” brand and account. Our ad business was sought after. Later, it became much less so, once the advertising community understood how demanding we were . . . if we were going to advertise, we wanted results. We wanted to see a clear connection between advertising expenses and our attendance and handle. We suffered through a few years of wet weather and lackluster business, as well as a couple of idiotic advertising decisions we made because they were recommended by these “experts.” One was the production of an exceptionally expensive and strikingly beautiful television commercial – it won a CLIO Award – few potential customers ever saw it. Why? Because it was two minutes long! We produced the spot but couldn’t afford to buy the time to run it very often. Trial and error is the best teacher, however. As a marketer and advertiser, I had an exceptionally expensive education, courtesy of Santa Anita. I learned that advertising does work; it is a necessity to employ effectively in any
“
Marketing, promoting,
and advertising are rightfully seen as required investments in the future of our sport
”
competitive market. When done properly – in conjunction with the other important components of modern marketing – it works so well that after about 10 years, even a colossal venue like Santa Anita began to have trouble handling the business, an eventuality that in my early years I never dreamed I would see. Sadly, on-track and overall business at most California tracks have now regressed to the point that little thought is apparently given to advertising. Or, perhaps, those who don’t believe in it are making the decisions. The “advertising doesn’t work” and “we can’t afford it” executives seem to be in charge everywhere. Except at Del Mar. The “nobody will go to Del Mar in November” skeptics worried me, I have to admit, in the aftermath of Hollywood Park’s long, slow decline and closing. But getting to Del Mar just before the new meeting opened, I immediately was reminded of the power of intelligent advertising integrated with sophisticated marketing. San Diego and its seaside track were buzzing. The results were powerful, despite a far smaller market than Los Angeles: daily average attendance on-track skyrocketed 187% over Hollywood’s numbers, and handle overall rose 15% to $10.4 million per day, when compared with Hollywood’s. To refuse to advertise, or to advertise weakly, in mega-markets like Los Angeles and San Francisco, is to refuse to compete. To stay in the starting gate. The word “advertise” means literally to turn attention to – when every other significant attraction is advertising, competing for attention, and racing is not, is inviting disaster. Where racing is healthy, anywhere in the world, its leaders are competing and competing successfully with every other leisure-time and gaming activity. Marketing, promoting, and advertising are rightfully seen as required investments in the future of our sport, and essential tools to compete. The rewards are not just or even mainly financial, but also in seeing the love for horses and the excitement that large crowds of enthusiastic fans generate. Where racing is not investing in advertising – or, worse, not even informing or exciting the public about their investments in redevelopment and innovations where those do exist – that message and the result are the opposite. Why is it happening? n