Toblerone

Well there you go. If this is true, and it isn't another Gary Williams from Nelson and his ATC synd friends, then visitors to the GoHarness site are being, at least partially, misled under the title "What other people are saying about GoHarness Syndication." Gary, can you please follow up with any of the others on that page and ask if they provided those quotes to Go Harness after entering syndicates with them? Lorna Hogan is a member of Racecafe isn't she? "HogieHorse" .. maybe she could shed some light.

Yes, 100%. The price was 4 digits.

Horse was virtually a give away owing to an ugly leg.

Ashoka, stop calling it a hypothetical number! $500,000 is the declared value of the syndicate regardless of how many shares are sold. This fact can not be escaped. It just means if a few less shares are sold, they will be going to Kennard for free. If I halve the figure, Mr Kennard now owns 50% of each horse without any outlay, with all costs covered including generous training rates and insurance accounted for. On top of this he gets a bonus $25,000 for this troubles. THE SUBSCRIBERS ARE STILL GETTING SHAFTED ON EXACTLY THE SAME SCALE!!! Did you do Maths in school?? "Do you know the then stud fee for Muscles Yankee when the "bone chip" horse was bred? In fact, do you know anything about this sire? Given this horses performances, please tell us what you would value this horse at...I can always use a laugh. I am sure that you do know the answers to the questions I have asked but since the right answers do not suit your argument, I'm looking forward to seeing how you smudge the facts." I can't believe I just read this. This horse was purchased for $63,000 at the end of it's two-year-old season, not long after having serious surgery to remove bone-chips in his hocks. What the fudge does Muscles Yankee's service fee have to do with anything? Any person in the industry will tell you a horse that has just had serious surgery is not a sellable proposition. That the Syndicate manager opted to purchase this horse, and at such a serious price, given the large risk factors, shows a great level of recklessness. I feel sorry for the syndicate members that the horse, effected by ongoing soundness issues after they purchased it, had four starts in four months before further surgery was required. If you continue you to defend this, much less using Muscles Yankee as the determining factor, you are sillier than I though. The true value of the horse? $15,000-$20,000 IF someone was prepared to take a large risk. Pretty sure this syndicate didn't sign up for LARGE risk though did they? How do you know they haven't made complaints? Where would they complain? To the media? to Racecafe? No, to each other or to the Syndicate manager. And that would never get made public. Please don't reply if you are going to bring up the same pathetic lines which are nothing more than a 'default' setting. You and your mate can't justify any of the financial questions listed here. Good day

My apologies, I realise now your name is Ivan, not Ian.

Ian, I think, first and foremost, you should declare your vested interest is that you own the three now two-year-old fillies that are leased by this syndicate. Can I ask you - did you command any fees to lease these horses, do you hold any of the 125 shares in the syndicate and if so, did you pay the required $1000 for them? What are the percentage terms on these leases? Unfortunately the Disclosure statement refers to these as 'any other deductions'. One issue, when reading the disclosure statement for this syndicate, that is concerning, is that two agents, one of which has proven business ties to the syndicator organiser/manager, the other of which, while no doubt professional and of the highest integrity, does NOT sell going racehorses with any regularity, if at all, valued a horse that has just had an operation to remove bone chips at $60,000-$70,000. Imagine my surprise when I noted the horse had just four starts this season, across four months, before having a further operation recently to remove more bone-chips. What do you make of this? Was this a good example of the "stringent selection policy" the website harps on about? I have reviewed the fund allocations of this syndicate. I do consider them high, but not excessively high. I note that $20,000 p/a is being charged as management remuneration. I make no judgement as to whether this is too high or note. But it certainly does not strike me as a charge someone who is doing it for the love and good of racing would do. Unless of course there is a second person that is being paid to do the work, which would be a different, and more understandable situation, all together. Thankfully for the syndicate, the horse won a tick over $10,000 before deductions, in those four starts so the cost of the operation will have come at no further outlay to them or the manager. On to your comments re: the Double the fun syndicate. You allege I (well I assume it is aimed at me as I am the only one providing figure estimates) am a "home bake accountant whose sums are not correct". I defy you to prove any of my declared expenditures wrong. Hopefully you can help us out and 'erode' some of the $279,000 I can't account for. I'm sure you can given your "first hand and inside experience". You also call me and others "narrow-minded & blinkered". I think this discussion has been played out, for the most part, using fair and reasonable facts and observations. I whole-heartedly dispute that. This is not a personal witch-hunt against Mr Kennard. In fact, I have never met him and anyone I have talked to has said he is the salt of the earth, a lovely chap, genuine, passionate, etc etc. HOWEVER, the fact remains, and I will repeat it again, there is a massive discrepency with the costs involved in the Double The Fun Syndicate. Of that there is no escaping. It is a moot point who is involved in any syndicate, or what age they are. And there are no 'owner priviliges' that you speak of except perhaps a free beer before the race and after if you win. But good luck getting 1000 drinks out of the Met in half an hour. there is the notable exception of entry to the stand on Cup Day if either of the horses are racing. there isn;t much room there though and I'd love to see the members and old boys club give up 1000+ free tickets/seats As for the "satisfied members having the time of their life", I see six testimonials. One of which from a Racecafe regular who I am fairly certain owned Xcellent and Changeover. I note also that Franco Harrison's disclosure statement is no longer available on the website. For the record that horse has won $11,000 in 16 months in NZ's second-best stable. He was valued at by the syndicate manager's mate, and purchased for, $60,000. Total Syndicate value - $180,000. Not my cuppa joe. By if some oldies want to kiss goodbye to $500 to buy some friends, then so be it.

Glad to see you guys fully endorse the chicanery and trickery that is rife in this industry. Don't you worry... everyone will be getting a slice of the pie and the good old grass roots mum and dad owners are getting a pittance for what they outlay. The reality is at 500$ a share, people should be getting a lot more than they are. They are getting a corn kernel in the most recent shit. And don't dress this up for anything other than what it is....Kennard has bought two horses himself (which he can well and truly afford), has inflated the costs to a ridiculous level so that he can get a free ride on whatever he is left with (be it 10%, 20%, 30%) and be seen to be working for the good of the industry. If he wanted to help the industry, he should be using his $136,000 to buy 100 mares destined for the works and putting them in foal to the stallions he owns then putting them in an unreserved auction as weanlings. What we need is 100 more horses not 100 bit-part owners being ripped off to the point they don't see any return and are disillusioned and never come back.

riiiight.

If he is helpful and passionate and doesn't need to be doing this, then why is he doing it with such huge margins? What do you propose we/I do? Buy a horse at the sales for $20,000 then syndicate in 100 shares at $800 for 1% for two years? THat's the same ridiculous cost structure. And before you talk about risk, let's not forget one horse has won three trials and both were personally trialled by Nigel McGrath. Seems very low 'risk' to me.

What is unsubstantiated? Everything I list there is accurate according to their website... and my estimations for training /agistment are VERY generous towards them.

Anyone defending this scheme needs their head read. There is no way there will be 1000 shares sold... but I am guessing the plan is to sell a portion of that and then the money man gets a free ride for his efforts. I don't begrudge an earn for the risk and management but why would anyone want to pay $500 for a .01% in 2 horses? And once you've set up an email database for each share holder, one email a week probably takes half an hour to write depending on how computer literate you are. I notice also in the declaration that two agents have valued an unqualified horse at between 50,000 and 70,000 each. I would like to know how they come to that finding. You are better off paying $2000 for 2% of three horses with the Auckland Trotting Club.. which do this every year and at the moment are struggling to fill their latest syndicate. Having a stack of people in one horse is not the answer to this industry. How many people who can afford a $500 share in a horse are going to breed a horse? Less than 1% I'd say. It may well increase on course turnover - yes - and that's a good thing for any club involved. And no doubt some of these people will get the bug and join other syndicates - especially if the horses involved do well. I am not knocking the syndicate, or the idea. It is in no way 'detrimental' HOWEVER - the organisers are clearly running a scheme designed to line their own pockets. And that is what irks me and I'm sure, most other people.

I notice the "Go Racing" set-up, backed/run by Noel Kennard and John Robinson has announced a new 1000-share syndicate called the "Double The Fun Syndicate". Shares cost $500 making the total value of the syndicate $500,000. The disclosure statement says the horses have cost $136,600. The syndicate will last for two years, which is 24 months of training fees. It is fair and reasonable to assume $2000 a month for 20 months for each horse in training, farrier and veterinary fees... allowing for 4 months of spelling over the two years. This is $80,000 in trainer's fees. Lets allow $4000 total for agistment for 4 months each and insurance p/a of $4200 per year for both horses total. So, with costs of $136,600 (purchase/vet), $80,000 (training), $4000 (agistment) and $8400 (insurance) that totals $229,000. Might I ask, where is the other $271,000 going. Any ideas? What have I forgotten?

Idolmite, Kilcoyne - you are everything that is wrong with this industry. Jog on.

Shouldn't be too much of a commute from Kumeu to Kawakawa Bay in the morning.

Highlight of the year, far and away, is the emergence of Christen Me as our best horse and the next mega star of harness racing. Watching Themightyquinn win the Auckland Cup, Stig the Rowe Cup and Terror To Love the NZ Cup were also highlights. Also enjoyed watching Bit Of A Legend race in 2013. Could be anything next season and beyond.

Should say Ohoka Punter second

I think you've been inhaling those cleaning chemicals, Janitor. How can you have Bit Of A Legend third when racing brilliantly and Ohoka Punter third when beaten by Rocknroll Lass and Pass Them By. BOAL and Border Control will be the two to fight it out, just like in the NZ Derby. Royal Aspirations with Blitzthemcalder on his back is not a guaranteed winner. And I think Venus Serena should find the top and won again. As for the others you have it mostly right, except the 2yo trot.

Just the one, but if you speak to the right people you get a fair idea of what is happening.

Don't know where you got that idea, Kilcoyne. But it's not true. At least not with regards to the horses previously and currently being sent to China. Currently about 100 New Zealand standardbreds have gone to, or are about to go to China (there is a large amount of horses currently in quarantine) as well as twice as many thoroughbreds, with a view to competing in saddle paces. Gambling is illegal in China and as far as I am aware there is no current racing persay, but a race track is under construction. Those exported have been colts, fillies, mares and mares in foal and have come from the bottom end of our market. They do not appear on the export lists because they are not registered in any capacity in China. Effectively it is just the private sale of horses that HRNZ has little to no jurisdiction over. I am told that this market will just get bigger, and to an end it may replace the bottom end of the Australian market that has fallen away with the new import fee rise in Australia. Sadly, geldings are the losers here, and as we know, they make up the majority of our racing population.

Purdon's was as a result of Cribox usage. I can't confirm how the Australians have garnered positives to it, but the suspensions would suggest it was part of a drench or injection?

Blame lies fairly and squarely with Ricky at Menangle and Alexandra Park. He can fume all he wants about instructions (quote Guerin) but a fav does not hand up the lead to an outsider in the second biggest race on the calender. Five days after another shocker the time has come for him to fall on his sword.

And who are the best trainers to use Rocknroll? This all sounds very exciting

It's cute how you have hope. Any owners of decent horses that leave them in NZ are mad. No money, poor driving, weak odds, heinous stand starts and a handicapping system that limits racing life. A$22,000 vs NZ $8,000 hmmm

lol

You're an absolute numb skull. So you're saying Ricky May on NZ's best horse had to hand up to battler who is not up to the good ones but would have attacked for the lead regardless. Then when he got the lead he was always going to hand up. Coincidentally to his stablemate. But then pull out and take the lead again? You contradict yourself.