RaceCafe..#1...Tipsters Thread.... Share Your Fancies For Fun...Lets See Who The Best Tipsters Here Are.
scooby3051

Lets Hope They Unite.

Recommended Posts

TRAINERS BECOME RESTLESS AS RACING AWAITS OVERDUE CHANGES

29 March 2018

Roger-James-392x540.jpg

Respected horseman Roger James is just one of many thoroughbred trainers disillusioned with the state of the racing industry.

 

(By Brian De Lore, The Informant)

If 2018 goes down as the most pivotal year in history for racing and breeding, then all the action has yet to occur because the absence of change has so far brought with it a deafening silence, as the first three months of the year roll over.

April is now upon us as we wait for significant, anticipated changes that will revitalise this racing game and put it back to where we all believe it should be – in a position of sustainability and encouragement for owners, trainers, jockeys, stable staff and every other participant that makes this business tick over.

A former industry leader expressed this view last week: “It’s not that the NZRB aren’t trying, it’s just that the business model they are pursuing is 10 years out of date and they don’t recognise it, and the culture they have developed has isolated them from the three codes and made them defensive against an ever-increasing barrage of criticism from industry stakeholders.”

And if all the racing codes don’t share that view then we can only be sure the thoroughbred sector does.

If you could make the analogy of NZRB being a racehorse, then without stipendiary approval they have adopted numerous gear changes – fully blinkered, ear muffs and a tongue tie. Blinkered in the manner they have focused only on their predetermined priorities against NZTR advice, earmuffed to drown out the howls of industry condemnations, and tongue-tied in their refusal to enter into a full discussion about the needs of the thoroughbred code at all levels.

While on the subject of industry dissatisfaction, especially since the release of the Deloitte Report, unhappy rumblings are reverberating from the ranks of trainers in an ever-increasing volume. In August last year after receiving mandates from Trainers’ Association branches, a proposed vote of no confidence did not proceed when NZTR advised it would be untimely.

Now the trainers are looking to once again reignite the NZRB vote of no confidence with talk of subsequent action in the absence of change for the better. What that action might be is undecided at this point but it may involve the withdrawal of the product.

If you are a trainer reading this and the vote and potential strike action is news to you, that wouldn’t be a surprise. Ardmore trainer Stephen McKee confirmed to The Informant this week that the Trainers’ Association had not canvassed its members.

“I had heard Chinese whispers about certain trainers wanting to take strike action but I’ve had no contact from anyone,” he said. “No-one has been in touch with me; I haven’t heard a dickie-bird.”

The Deloitte Report has further highlighted the plight of the industry and particularly that of trainers. They are seeing and experiencing the corrosion first-hand. They are the ones able to fully gauge the depletion of the ranks of owners, and they are also the ones who know through their own experiences, rather than reading it in an academic report from Deloitte – albeit agreeing with the findings – that under the current regime racing is not sustainable.

The anecdotal evidence suggests trainers now have an increased ownership interest in the horses they train. “Yes, we do race a lot more horses now ourselves than we used to,” continued McKee. “Dad has always been an owner but there have been times when he’s had to be as well. But we’d prefer to be in a position where we just train them for owners, to be honest.

“We train about 35 at the moment. Out of that we would be racing 10 of them. It’s definitely because of a lack of owners and most of the stable is divided amongst only three owners –they would have 20 between them.

“There’s been quite a lot of decline; I don’t get the same support from the breeders now. There are a lot more syndicates today and your single owners have dropped away appreciably – even the small syndicates have dropped off and now you see groups of 10 or even more – the overall interest has waned along the way.

“The problem I see with racing industry people is that they keep saying they need government help but they don’t go to government organised in any way, so they’re not taken seriously. Government then say racing can’t run their own ship properly, so why would give them money.”

Former top jockey and now Pukekohe trainer Nigel Tiley is another stakeholder dissatisfied with the NZRB and is ready to take action.

“After reading the Glenda Hughes response to the Deloitte Report, if ever I’d been a little reluctant in the past to take action, that has now passed and now is the time to do it,” he said.

“I’m over it. We have a lot of young trainers licensed and we have a duty to make sure they stay in the game. Glenda Hughes’ reply was the biggest load of rubbish I’ve read. We all voted for Winston so he owes it to us to do something.

“I have 38 horses in work but only 25 will race in New Zealand. From those 25 Lee and I own or part-own 11 of them. That’s nearly half – the others are all going elsewhere and won’t race here.

“Before the past five years and compared right back to when I started training, I would have owned about five per cent of my horses as opposed to now when we are getting up towards half the stable. It’s hard to keep owners in the game now.

“Let’s get rid of all the top-heavy administration costs,” concluded Tiley.

Over the years Cambridge trainer Roger James has prepared a lot of very good horses for major owners, but the normally reticent horseman now believes it’s time to speak out and take action before it’s too late.

“I came out of a recent meeting with some local trainers with the view that if nothing came out of the next NZRB meeting then we should go ahead and ask our members for a vote of no confidence in the NZRB,” confided James “That can only take place after an executive meeting of the Trainers’ Association.

“I lost three horses recently from an owner with eight or nine horses who says it’s no longer viable to race his horses in New Zealand. When that owner read the Deloitte Report he could see no future in racing horses in New Zealand. He’d been waiting for changes but wasn’t prepared to wait any longer.

“The situation now compared to 10 years ago is tenuous and becoming increasingly unviable. Without a doubt the decline has been a continuous one. The ability to earn a living from training has become markedly more difficult.

“That’s why there’s been a drift away from training here and an increase in numbers going to Australia. People underestimate the weight of the history of racing and the experience our old heads have – we are foolish if we don’t draw on some of that,” lamented James.

James’s reference to the ‘old heads’ is simply to bring back an administration that values the history and understands the grassroots of the business so that decision making at the highest level is made with a full understanding of the mechanics and people at the coal-face of racing.

For too long we have put up with a succession of lawyers, accountants and professional directors who have added very little over a long period of time and in fact have cost the racing industry dearly. The succession of financial failures includes the Typhoon betting system which resulted in a $14 million-plus write-off in 2012, although the real cost was thought to be more like $20 million.

The NZRB does as it pleases because the Racing Act of 2003 gives it that right – it virtually says do what you like with very little accountability or transparency back to the codes. The National Party showed little obvious interest for racing over nine years in Government and five years ago the then Minister for Racing Nathan Guy appointed National Party board member Glenda Hughes as the Chair of the NZRB.

In turn, John Allen was shoulder-tapped for the CEO job and that started a succession of shoulder-tapping appointments that today, in this writer’s opinion, has not only provided the NZRB with sub-standard governance and management but given us an organisation that’s little more than an over-blown National Party gravy-train riddled with nepotism, cost over-runs and wastage.

I won’t be the only one that’s noticed a lot of NZRB appointments have come from such places as the Post Office, Kiwi Bank, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and other government departments. There’s a club happening and a lot of shuffling around.

The NZRB has developed its own culture and it’s not that nice – one of alleged intimidation towards some of its employees and a workplace environment that’s been described by one former employee as toxic.

By May our Racing Minister Winston Peters should have a short-list of possible replacements for the NZRB board that will undergo some vacuum cleaning work when six of the seven positions come up for re-election in July. We can only hope the fresh appointees are the right people – vested with racing interests, impartial and doing the job for the right reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had it on very good authority! from someone that really knows what is going on! The Trainers Assoc (Post the brillants of the late great genius that  recently stode through that organisation) that they will now become a super Radical Militant as Assoc!  From now on until 'it rains pennie$ from heaven'!!! they will be turning up to all future meeting Not! I repeat Not wearing ties!!!! this is should to scare the almighty shit out of the likes of Winnie and Johnny Allan! meanwhile Pigs were seen flying in the skies over NZ tonight!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, scooby3051 said:

TRAINERS BECOME RESTLESS AS RACING AWAITS OVERDUE CHANGES

29 March 2018

Roger-James-392x540.jpg

Respected horseman Roger James is just one of many thoroughbred trainers disillusioned with the state of the racing industry.

 

(By Brian De Lore, The Informant)

If 2018 goes down as the most pivotal year in history for racing and breeding, then all the action has yet to occur because the absence of change has so far brought with it a deafening silence, as the first three months of the year roll over.

April is now upon us as we wait for significant, anticipated changes that will revitalise this racing game and put it back to where we all believe it should be – in a position of sustainability and encouragement for owners, trainers, jockeys, stable staff and every other participant that makes this business tick over.

A former industry leader expressed this view last week: “It’s not that the NZRB aren’t trying, it’s just that the business model they are pursuing is 10 years out of date and they don’t recognise it, and the culture they have developed has isolated them from the three codes and made them defensive against an ever-increasing barrage of criticism from industry stakeholders.”

And if all the racing codes don’t share that view then we can only be sure the thoroughbred sector does.

If you could make the analogy of NZRB being a racehorse, then without stipendiary approval they have adopted numerous gear changes – fully blinkered, ear muffs and a tongue tie. Blinkered in the manner they have focused only on their predetermined priorities against NZTR advice, earmuffed to drown out the howls of industry condemnations, and tongue-tied in their refusal to enter into a full discussion about the needs of the thoroughbred code at all levels.

While on the subject of industry dissatisfaction, especially since the release of the Deloitte Report, unhappy rumblings are reverberating from the ranks of trainers in an ever-increasing volume. In August last year after receiving mandates from Trainers’ Association branches, a proposed vote of no confidence did not proceed when NZTR advised it would be untimely.

Now the trainers are looking to once again reignite the NZRB vote of no confidence with talk of subsequent action in the absence of change for the better. What that action might be is undecided at this point but it may involve the withdrawal of the product.

If you are a trainer reading this and the vote and potential strike action is news to you, that wouldn’t be a surprise. Ardmore trainer Stephen McKee confirmed to The Informant this week that the Trainers’ Association had not canvassed its members.

“I had heard Chinese whispers about certain trainers wanting to take strike action but I’ve had no contact from anyone,” he said. “No-one has been in touch with me; I haven’t heard a dickie-bird.”

The Deloitte Report has further highlighted the plight of the industry and particularly that of trainers. They are seeing and experiencing the corrosion first-hand. They are the ones able to fully gauge the depletion of the ranks of owners, and they are also the ones who know through their own experiences, rather than reading it in an academic report from Deloitte – albeit agreeing with the findings – that under the current regime racing is not sustainable.

The anecdotal evidence suggests trainers now have an increased ownership interest in the horses they train. “Yes, we do race a lot more horses now ourselves than we used to,” continued McKee. “Dad has always been an owner but there have been times when he’s had to be as well. But we’d prefer to be in a position where we just train them for owners, to be honest.

“We train about 35 at the moment. Out of that we would be racing 10 of them. It’s definitely because of a lack of owners and most of the stable is divided amongst only three owners –they would have 20 between them.

“There’s been quite a lot of decline; I don’t get the same support from the breeders now. There are a lot more syndicates today and your single owners have dropped away appreciably – even the small syndicates have dropped off and now you see groups of 10 or even more – the overall interest has waned along the way.

“The problem I see with racing industry people is that they keep saying they need government help but they don’t go to government organised in any way, so they’re not taken seriously. Government then say racing can’t run their own ship properly, so why would give them money.”

Former top jockey and now Pukekohe trainer Nigel Tiley is another stakeholder dissatisfied with the NZRB and is ready to take action.

“After reading the Glenda Hughes response to the Deloitte Report, if ever I’d been a little reluctant in the past to take action, that has now passed and now is the time to do it,” he said.

“I’m over it. We have a lot of young trainers licensed and we have a duty to make sure they stay in the game. Glenda Hughes’ reply was the biggest load of rubbish I’ve read. We all voted for Winston so he owes it to us to do something.

“I have 38 horses in work but only 25 will race in New Zealand. From those 25 Lee and I own or part-own 11 of them. That’s nearly half – the others are all going elsewhere and won’t race here.

“Before the past five years and compared right back to when I started training, I would have owned about five per cent of my horses as opposed to now when we are getting up towards half the stable. It’s hard to keep owners in the game now.

“Let’s get rid of all the top-heavy administration costs,” concluded Tiley.

Over the years Cambridge trainer Roger James has prepared a lot of very good horses for major owners, but the normally reticent horseman now believes it’s time to speak out and take action before it’s too late.

“I came out of a recent meeting with some local trainers with the view that if nothing came out of the next NZRB meeting then we should go ahead and ask our members for a vote of no confidence in the NZRB,” confided James “That can only take place after an executive meeting of the Trainers’ Association.

“I lost three horses recently from an owner with eight or nine horses who says it’s no longer viable to race his horses in New Zealand. When that owner read the Deloitte Report he could see no future in racing horses in New Zealand. He’d been waiting for changes but wasn’t prepared to wait any longer.

“The situation now compared to 10 years ago is tenuous and becoming increasingly unviable. Without a doubt the decline has been a continuous one. The ability to earn a living from training has become markedly more difficult.

“That’s why there’s been a drift away from training here and an increase in numbers going to Australia. People underestimate the weight of the history of racing and the experience our old heads have – we are foolish if we don’t draw on some of that,” lamented James.

James’s reference to the ‘old heads’ is simply to bring back an administration that values the history and understands the grassroots of the business so that decision making at the highest level is made with a full understanding of the mechanics and people at the coal-face of racing.

For too long we have put up with a succession of lawyers, accountants and professional directors who have added very little over a long period of time and in fact have cost the racing industry dearly. The succession of financial failures includes the Typhoon betting system which resulted in a $14 million-plus write-off in 2012, although the real cost was thought to be more like $20 million.

The NZRB does as it pleases because the Racing Act of 2003 gives it that right – it virtually says do what you like with very little accountability or transparency back to the codes. The National Party showed little obvious interest for racing over nine years in Government and five years ago the then Minister for Racing Nathan Guy appointed National Party board member Glenda Hughes as the Chair of the NZRB.

In turn, John Allen was shoulder-tapped for the CEO job and that started a succession of shoulder-tapping appointments that today, in this writer’s opinion, has not only provided the NZRB with sub-standard governance and management but given us an organisation that’s little more than an over-blown National Party gravy-train riddled with nepotism, cost over-runs and wastage.

I won’t be the only one that’s noticed a lot of NZRB appointments have come from such places as the Post Office, Kiwi Bank, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and other government departments. There’s a club happening and a lot of shuffling around.

The NZRB has developed its own culture and it’s not that nice – one of alleged intimidation towards some of its employees and a workplace environment that’s been described by one former employee as toxic.

By May our Racing Minister Winston Peters should have a short-list of possible replacements for the NZRB board that will undergo some vacuum cleaning work when six of the seven positions come up for re-election in July. We can only hope the fresh appointees are the right people – vested with racing interests, impartial and doing the job for the right reasons.

Absolutely spot on. And those NZRB appointments all have the same thing in common - little or no experience in Racing. Or wagering.

Peters needs to front up bigtime to prove to the Industry all his pre-election talk wasn't just bullshit and bluster......

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Trainers Association is weak, we get no information and the members are treated like Mushrooms.

Strike action has long been talked about, and I would say that it was mooted many years ago, but to get us to act on a United front is like herding cats.

Sad but true, the Association is at its lowest eb of all time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the appointments are made by codes how did we get John Allen and the earlier turkeys that ran RB. How did Glenda get there?

I agree with p4p the model is rooted in parochialism. And the higher governance as I had told you before is a communist one. Communism kills human endeavour and Venuzuela here we come!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Nerula said:

If the appointments are made by codes how did we get John Allen and the earlier turkeys that ran RB. How did Glenda get there?

I agree with p4p the model is rooted in parochialism. And the higher governance as I had told you before is a communist one. Communism kills human endeavour and Venuzuela here we come!

The Board appoints the CEO hence that’s who appointed John Allen, with probable persuasion from the National Minister at the time, Nathan Guy.

The same Minister appointed the Chair, Glenda Hughes, who is a high up National person. 

The three independent members also get appointed by the Minister!!! (That’s the Racing Act that Gary Chittick presided over, and that at the time, I told him was flawed. He told me that I didn’t know what I was talking about! Who is right now Gary? - Sorry to digress guys.)

The three codes get to put forward ONE Board Member each. 

So as you see the Codes have very little say, especially when trying to push their own interests, and are effectively kneecapped by Clause 16 anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that is my understanding, from time to time sector groups are asked for suggestions of lesser roles but the minister appoints. Glenda is a Nat party hack and it wouldnt surprise to see her dumped. JA is a fence sitter and would know where Winston bodies are buried and would survive but he may not want to.

Really the whole thing needs a complete demolition from the top down, then with a defining mission statement, a complete rebuild. I would be ambivilent if the Govt stayed in as a minority shareholder, but the handbrake of the last century racing act has to go for racing to survive.

Will that happen under Peters? I would say no as he is too busy and too old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is apart from registration and licencing service providers TR have little power. Essentially they dont have econonic power in the generation of income.

They have little power over clubs.  Leo I remember your mate GeeP saying when it came to Ellerslie that club did as they pleased. in the next breath he said if ARC folded that would the end of the game in NZ.

The whole system is archaic. Dozens of clubs doing there best to keep themselves alive and racing in their community viable. Its a curious fact that some of the smallest are more viable by the dint they have very few meetings and less opportunity to lose money..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must take issue with Poundforpound.  Apart from the idiotic handicapping system (Patrick Erin and too many others) I have some respect for NZTR.  Okay, they should have recruited a CEO from inside rather than an Aussie dole bludger.

My real concern is the NZRB.  And I was reminded of that when I attended a Fonterra interim results meeting on Thursday.  Just as Fonterra are busy building a monolithic structure, so much so that answers to my questions (curly, I know, but they should have had the answers), the NZRB are doing a similar job.  A monolithic structure to try to become a world leader in wagering, but with a CEO who thinks that five to two is 1.55 p.m.  I note that over the past five years the number of Fonterra employees receiving more than $100,000 has risen by one third.  I have not seen the NZRB figures, but would bet that something similar has happened.  And just as Fonterra's suppliers have been getting the same or less than they were five years ago, participants in the NZ racing game have similarly been downtrodden.  Fonterra should recruit a CEO from within, just as the NZRB should do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a huge anomaly with NZRB/TAB.

With the investment into Sports Betting infrastructure they are building their own empire whereas for racing profitabilty their structure should be as lean and mean as possible. Sports betting should have been seen as a separate business contracted to NZRB. By no means should racing resources been sacrificed for this separate business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, poundforpound said:

What about NZTR though.

This is what’s been reported and I’ve no reason to disbelieve it.

1. The last CEO appointed was an unemployed Australian.

2. The current CEO was an unemployed Australian

3. The handicapping model was written by an unemployed Australian

4. The current “chair” was the head of the now defunct and failed Australian racing channel TVN.

WTF is it about Australia’s unemployed ( and presumably failures ) that makes them so attractive to NZTR ?

 

 

 

 

 

I suppose just as Australia has been deporting their crims to NZ, they are now deporting their unemployed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, hesi said:

The Nats did nothing for 9 years, but then Peters has been missing in action also.

What has happened to the NZ First policies, in particular, an urgent review of the operations and costs of the NZRB

  • Return a greater proportion of industry taxation to the racing codes.
  • Introduce a new (below Premier Meeting) category of meeting where every race will be for $15,000 minimum, with relativity across the codes.
  • Enhance employment and export opportunities by working with the industry to improve the international status of New Zealand Group 1 races to attract greater international interest.
  • Restore marque racing plans and prize money initiatives in line with New Zealand First policy implementation 2005 –2008
  • Return New Zealand racing to what it was good at. Racing needs breeding programmes to re-establish New Zealand as a first tier country in racing. That means policies assisting importation of quality mares, and properly using the sire cost write down.
  • Urgently review the operations and costs of the New Zealand Racing Board
  • Continue to support projects and initiatives, e.g. the Racing Safety Development Fund (a contestable fund of $1.5 million per annum, matching dollar for dollar contributions from racing clubs) that enhances safety and improves the quality of facilities in the racing industry, including the safety of riders, handlers, spectators, officials and others involved in racing codes, as well as the health and safety of animals.
  • Direct IRD and Treasury to respect the spirit of the laws passed to assist racing so we do not have specious departmental interpretations of laws that are clear to the industry.
  • Further improve the appeal of the racing industry to a wider audience by encouraging the promotion of “family-friendly” activities in conjunction with race meetings in all codes.
  • Defend the historic, modest share of the racing industry, to lawful gambling proceeds, against unreasonable attacks.

Several of Winston's objectives are totally unrealistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I don't necessarily disagree with many of P4P's comments, I don't actually think money is wasted on stakes. I think the total stakes pool is badly allocated. I was not a fan of Winston's multi million dollar races, which I seem to recall P4P supported. And I do believe we do need some aspirational races, but within reason. The problem we have is that virtually the same pool of horses race for $10,000 and $22,500 races so that does nothing to create an obvious structure of racing. And why on earth rating 65's needed to be $22,500 rather than $20,000 is beyond me. Basically, the money is just not spent wisely and there are examples of that every day. 

The biggest problem with the gallops code is that there appears to be no one with any feel for racing or common-sense running things. The non racing types need to be cleaned out while the industry returns to getting the basics right.

I would be interested to hear where P4P thinks stakes money is being wasted. I presume he would prefer to see money taken out of stakes and spent building some super tracks. A bit chicken and egg really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, poundforpound said:

What about NZTR though.

This is what’s been reported and I’ve no reason to disbelieve it.

1. The last CEO appointed was an unemployed Australian.

2. The current CEO was an unemployed Australian

3. The handicapping model was written by an unemployed Australian

4. The current “chair” was the head of the now defunct and failed Australian racing channel TVN.

WTF is it about Australia’s unemployed ( and presumably failures ) that makes them so attractive to NZTR ?

 

 

 

 

 

I know you like terry b leo but he could be heading your way after the aquanita fiasco will you be suppling him with a reference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, We're Doomed said:

I suppose just as Australia has been deporting their crims to NZ, they are now deporting their unemployed.

your wrong were doomed there not aussie crims there kiwi crims and where are they now playing with your Russian spies 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.