What does yesterday’s joint announcement between PGR and SIS actually amount to?
For some it is simply a ‘shifting of a few race times’.
So was it an overreaction to describe it as ‘a landmark’?
Well that depends on whether you view ‘landmark’ as ‘ground breaking’ or ‘game changing’ which it clearly isn’t.
Without drowning in cliches, I see this as a clear change in the direction of travel and assess it within the context of an article written a couple of months ago.
At no point in the past, have ARC/PGR and SIS shown any sign of being able to work together. Nothing. Nada. Niet.
In fact, the approach coming from ARC going back six years – relating to everything from closed tracks to trainers contracts – seems to have been one of killing off their rival.
PGR and SIS being involved in a struggle until only one survives has become an axiom.
Now, for the first time, the two sides have sent their emissaries to see if common ground can be found – and they found some. Albeit – only token.
Anybody who thinks that they have suddenly become ‘good buddies’ is delusional. The Greyhound Derby is not about to appear on SKY Sports. (At least not yet!).
But anybody who can’t see the need for compromise is, quite frankly, an idiot or an anti.
Word on the streets is that greyhound turnover is significantly down and that is going to lead to a massive hole in the welfare budget.
And that will affect everyone!
My take is that PGR now feel that they have established their position as the major provider of ‘greyhound product’ with SIS simply needing some dog racing content as more comprehensive suppliers of a wider range of ‘betting product’, rather than their once dominant role.
I have always believed that PGR actually need SIS to survive to keep the competition authorities at bay.
I also believe that this is a deal that the betting industry wants and needs to make their greyhound commitment more profitable.
They are the ones banging heads together.
At the same time – a decent section of that industry (Bet365, William Hill, Betfred etc) would not want to see a single player (PGR – jointly owned by their biggest commercial rival, Entain) able to dictate market terms.
So who knows, maybe there is some scope for greater cooperation and perhaps more initiatives of mutual benefit?
That is ‘landmark’.
