a few ideas, no doubt naive, that might help.

​The future is a concern to me, especially as I have so little of it left before me. I would like the future of British horse racing to be at least sustainable after I have taken my final breath, though it would be a comfort in my transition from here to there if British racing were to be on-the-up or preferably thriving once more.
I have little faith in premierisation and whether it succeeds or fails, I fear the consequences for the racecourses outside of the ‘premier league’ will be on the short road to dire. I do believe there is a grain of a good idea in the premierization (the dictionary dislikes the word in any form it is spelt) concept but at its core there is an ‘only the strong will survive’ attitude that sticks in my craw. Unless the whole of the racing industry is part of the plan, I can foresee the sport losing more followers than gaining. When Cartmel, for instance, regularly draws a larger attendance than Newbury or Newmarket, when should it be considered outside the ‘premier league’? I doubt if Cartmel will suffer to any significant degree but why should excellently run racecourses that provide elevated amounts of prize-money be deemed second-class? If, God Forbid! we were to lose Cartmel, or Hamilton, Thirsk, Beverley and so on, will the people who regularly attend their local racecourses turn their favours to any other racecourse? After long deliberation, I have formed the conclusion that there is the prospect of throwing out the baby with the bathwater in a desperate attempt to raise finance from greater betting turnover and access to the World Pool.
Outside of its fan-base, horse racing is little understood by either the public or by the media. It is thought to be elitist at best and an abuse of an animal at worst, throwing a huge amount of money into races, which will fall into the coffers of multi-millionaires the majority of times, will not change one iota the perception people have of the sport. A pleasant day at Cartmel or Brighton is more likely to encourage new patronage, I would suggest.
Changes to the structure of British racecourses should exceed a racing programme based on the finger-crossing of premier league Saturdays. Journalists, jockeys, trainers, owners, racecourse executives, the racing man in the street and grandstand, must have ideas to improve the sport. Why not organise brainstorming sessions with all of the above? But not the B.H.A.. They can be involved in a later stage of the process. Like Government, the B.H.A. should become servant to the sport, not the master of the sport.
It is oft cited that the frequency of good-class flat horses being sold abroad to countries with prize-money levels that to Britain and Ireland, racing nations that cling to the out-dated concept of bookmaking companies like sailors to an upturned rowboat, that is the equal to treasure at the end of a rainbow, is because of poor returns for owners from prize-money.
I would argue otherwise. Yearlings are sold for inflated prices that give the majority of purchasers only a slim chance of breaking even, let alone coming out in front. It is a sad reflection on the state of racing in this country when trainers are openly admitting to buying yearlings with an eye to selling them on at a later date to Hong Kong, Bahrain or Australia. If there cannot be a cap on the price a horse can be sold for at auction, at least bring in a scheme where a percentage of the price paid at auction is recycled back to the sport to boost prize-money. I would argue that stallion fees should be capped, which might bring down the eye-watering, at times, amounts horses are bought for. 
I believe horse racing’s biggest problem is a breeding side of the industry that over-produces and that allows breeders to become rich and influential without giving any additional financial assistance to the sport it feeds on.
For a couple of years, with exception given to the major meetings, racecourses should only stage six-races per meeting. This single measure would increase prize-money per meeting and increase competitiveness throughout the season. At the lowest level, if the seventh race at a present-day fixture were to be dropped, at least £4,000 would become available to increase one of the other races to a value close to £10,000, plus if the dropped races averaged close to 10-runners, nearly 70-horses per week would be available to increase competitiveness throughout the week. If competitiveness truly boosts betting turnover, surely this suggestion is worth trialling. 
Race conditions need to be more imaginative, with emphasis, as in Ireland, of giving horses every opportunity of winning a race on behalf of their owners. So, I propose more maiden races and maiden handicaps, greater opportunity for horses to run-up a sequence, a boost in prize-money for races above 12-furlongs to incentivise breeders to support stallions with a staying pedigree, more maiden sprints but less sprint handicaps. The race programme given a slant to giving opportunity for the single-horse owner, the small syndicates and racing clubs to taste victory as winning is the best incentive for people to keep having horses in training.
I am sure there are brighter and better ideas to be found if only the B.H.A. would open-up the debate to all-comers. The future, sadly, is not golden but the colour of brass handles.