Huey
-
Posts
1,983 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Huey
-
-
2 hours ago, Trump said:
You only have to see the success of the Magic Millions, Everest, Kosciusko, All Stars Mile, etc and get a lesson. They are lauded by the entire Aust Racing Industry. Support for these types of races (Qld govt sunk about $35m into MM on the Gold Coast for stakes) is massive, the public interest is massive, course attendance is massive. At this years Gold Coast MM, the Skyline Lounge dining lounge was $750 per person ( normal Sat about $150) and it sold out within a couple of hours bookings opened.
I'm not sure why you are quoting these very successful Australian initiatives that have in some form been copied over here ? Everyone knows they are successful in Australia , because guess what they can afford them and have got their house in such an order that their industry is economically able to make them viable without disturbing or at a cost to the rest of industry. In NZ we have been far from being in a position to that , but we try to replicate these initiatives as a fabricated shop window for the industry at the expense of the rest of the industry and they way we are doing it cannot go on forever.
-
2 hours ago, Nerula said:
Leo's old mate GeeP you know the bloke before Bernard S told me that if Ellerslie folded that would be the end of racing in NZ.
I don't believe that for a second. Racing would more than likely readjust its outputs to meet its inputs which is what should be happening in this country in the first place.
There a lot of people in NZ who just enjoy the sport and don't need fabricated races , swollen PR , hyped up marketing and overpriced shenanigans to enjoy it .
-
8 hours ago, Trump said:
You talk crap and fail to recognise they are the best managed Club by far in NZ. Their retention of land for long term benefit should be applauded. Unlike many other Clubs who have not had the same long term vision. They have made mistakes sure - but that’s what people in action do, in business or sport, because they are doing things with that long term vision.
you need to see that for your own good. They have tried to join up with Avondale, they supported Counties financially and what have they got from them? Nothing because they have got little to offer and paddle their own selfish canoe. ARC will be operating long after you and I are gone because they have a vision, and going by Tasman Man’s post and his reference to The Oaks and the miserable $40k the Club put in, I think you need to fact check. Anyway, it’s obvious the ARC have their detractors but that’s part and parcel of the TPS. Not sure why you can’t see that?You talk crap because you are naïve and assume that it is a level playing field across club land in NZ , when it is anything but. You make assumptions that the likes of Avondale have been afforded the same opportunities that the ARC have , when they clearly have not. Have you ever sat back and wondered why Avondale appear selfish?
-
12 minutes ago, Trump said:
I can’t answer that question for you as I’m not privy to the arrangements of that funding. I’m not commenting so much on the funding. All I’m saying is that ARC shouldn’t be condemned or penalised for being so fiscally responsible. Sure they have made mistakes. Some would say that their $2m gift to Counties to upgrade their training track was a mistake. But if NZTR are prepared to fund successful Clubs then why should they be looked down on? Question NZTR’s use of funds by all means, but don’t blame ARC.
The fiscal responsibility you speak of , has been gifted to them by the rest of the industry and in some cases to the detriment of the rest of the industry. Not sure why you can't see that.
- Pam Robson and d.burrow - Joan
-
1
-
1
-
3 hours ago, Trump said:
Ellerslie would have more money and investments than all the other NZ Clubs. That’s what having a diligent Board with a 15 year Plan does to a Club!
and being gifted dates, races and what ever else they have wanted by the industry.
- Pam Robson, d.burrow - Joan, THE TORCH and 1 other
-
3
-
1
-
On 3/21/2021 at 9:43 PM, berzerk said:
So saving now equals robbery?
Where do you think the funding for extra/split races comes from? When the races moved to Saturday (when Derby was moved) and stakes were raised, where did that money come from? And how about when an extra meeting is added?
And don't forget 12 months ago the TAB was virtually insolvent. Having a reserve (savings) for a rainy day might not be that stupid?
I don't get saving money should the TAB fold, are they looking to put a $100m kitty together or something? and establish their own betting agency if this occurs?
-
23 minutes ago, We're Doomed said:
Thank you for the reply. Do you mean I am 100% correct that a maiden would have attracted a big field, or correct that there is no demand and trainers don't mind three week gaps between opportunities? Do trainers have any input to programmes in Canterbury? They often appear to be very unimaginative: the programmes that is, not the trainers. I am still waiting to see the first maiden 2yo race in the SI, they appear every week in the north.
I'd be astounded if there wasn't demand for a mdn 1200,1400,1600 at the very least , surely the programming is to blame?
-
1 hour ago, Nerula said:
Sorry guys you haven't thought this through. Most of the payouts after weigh ins go 200, 200 ,200 and on to 14th place. but say the average field size is 11 then there is $600 not paid out say in a day of 9 races that $5400.
So NZTR have plenty of money for an extra race if they have to split a field of noms. But the real reason is they are wanting to build reserves.
Desperately wanting to see TAB get its act together. But its at the cost of Owners and licencees
So surely a simple formula for distribution should apply to each race? Can't be that hard surely? Still not convinced the payments for running 6th-14th on a Saturday should be any different to a midweek race though.
-
1 hour ago, Tauhei Notts said:
Distribute the stake money 65% the winner, 20% second, 10% third and 5% fourth.
Horses placed fifth through to tenth get their entry fees and riding fee refunded.
The savings in Goods and Services Tax would be huge.
Consider the split to be 62.5% first and 2.5% for fifth for races of $50,000 or more, in which case it would be 6th to tenth get their expenses refunded.
The above system is too simple for the powers that be to comprehend, and guess what the trainer's percentage would be if that trainer was good enough to train a horse to come 9th when the tenth horse was scratched. Sweet F.A., and F.A. is not the Football Association.
That makes sense to me, I think its important to keep the entry fees and jock fees covered no matter how many in the race.
-
Possibly one of the only good initiatives they have come up with imo. I have said before I think the distribution maybe needs to be looked (particularly on Saturday i.e. why is running 14th worth more on a Saturday than a Thursday) at but the free racing for jockey payments is a very good initiative. Participation is also a very key factor in the sport that is considerably overlooked, particularly by those who like everything their own way!
Let me guess those who want it changed are the same ones who wanted free racing gone, geniuses that lot.
-
-
51 minutes ago, Insider said:
None of that group will make it as a stallion, except possible Ole Kirk and I am only giving him the benefit of the doubt simply because of his breeding and his Caulfield Guineas win.
Having said that he is probably the best of a bloody ordinary lot given what's gone on since.
Maybe another colt [or gelding] will prove all dominate in the weeks ahead.
My prediction is that he will have the prefix of [NZ] after his name.
Liz
I'd be surprised if Ole Kirk didn't make it , something about him and the pedigree.
-
Wouldn't hesitate to use him for a second, but given his Sire has been moved into the Bread and Butter category , I'm picking he will be a harder sell than the likes of Ole Kirk,King's Legacy (not sure whats going on with him) etc.
-
1 hour ago, Peter R S said:
Well said, I’m with you on that one. The NZTROF of which I’m a member tells me they are pushing for change but it has so far fallen on deaf ears it would seem.
Perhaps the distribution needs to be sorted , but I see nothing wrong with the last horse getting some form of compensation in this case what appears to be a starters fee that pays for the jockey, what however does need looking at is why on a Saturday that amount needs to be be twice or even 3 x that amount for what is effectively a starters fee.
-
4 minutes ago, tasman man said:
This is a separate issue.....
1. Should there be an 'appearance' stake for all runners ......this reduces stake to winner and placed horses.
2. Should monies not paid out because of less starters be held back or paid out to starters.
I actually favour the current system of most starters getting a stake......Australia and Singapore do it so must have some merit. Possibly keeps field size higher which helps betting figures . Betting pays for stakes.Singapore dont pay to horse finishing last !
I did a quick check of Avondale Cup payout last weekend compared to 2011 and 2008.Stake gone nowhere !....$100k
Last week Robusto got $54k for first , $ 17.5k for second etc.5th to 14th got $1500...4 missed out
2011 winner got $60k ,then $19.5 .......5th got $2.5k then 6th to 13th got $1k.....7 missed out
2008 winner got $62 k , then $20k....5th got $2.5k then rest missed out
As to NZTR loving the savings from small fields ....surely it is these funds that enable them to put on extra races when the nominations demand it !
There one week ,gone the next.
If my horse wins a race with a $7k winning purse , I dont expect it to become $7.3k cos it was a small field !
JMO
Well there is one thing you and I can agree on.
But shouldn't the extra races that are put on be self funding , after all they are mostly only $10k races , surely there is something wrong if we can't fund the $10k through betting on the race or as part of the meeting?
- tasman man and We're Doomed
-
1
-
1
-
I'm picking already swept under the carpet that one.
-
46 minutes ago, stodge said:
I don't know the ins and outs of this but if the Trotting races are continuing at the same venue, I struggle to see why the gallops cards should be moved.
If the whole site was being closed and redeveloped, I could understand it.
As for all-weather racing (which isn't as we've seen over here), there's nothing wrong with it and I don't quite understand the bias against it. Most jurisdictions use some form of artificial surface for no other reasons than consistency and cost.
We'd have had no racing at all this week without artificial surfaces and by harrowing them deeper it's provided opportunities for jump horses to have a run.
Thoroughbred racing has a plan to significantly suck the life out of certain venues and pump up other venues (mostly in a fabricated manner) the plan is called the venue plan or something like that.
It has very little if any justification behind it, as has been pointed out here on many occasions the rationale behind it is flawed (as you've also rightly pointed out with regard to the trots ) , its probably going to assist in really giving the sport a knock out blow from which it will never recover . some say its so NZTR can get their hands on clubs assets as the enthusiasm at certain venues adversely affected by this plan wanes all in all any real business looking to perform wouldn't have a bar of it, however this is thoroughbred racing in NZ for ya!
-
-
5 hours ago, Red Rum said:
For the Thornden , IMHO a Group 1 should be WFA , but if it's a handicap make it a handicap if not WFA. Why have a bob each way with SWP . Kind of something and nothing .
Agree , these SWP races are really just gifting the races to the superior horse in the weirdest way possible i.e. getting weight off inferior animals. At least WFA makes sense.
- Baz (NZ), Pam Robson and Red Rum
-
3
-
5 hours ago, Trump said:
I doubt that many of the 12,000 in attendance would have been there because of the track. It was Wellington Cup day, party time. It “should” be busy. Very few would have mentioned the track all day!
The racing was good though. Quality may have been a bit thin but it was good racing and the Cup was won by the fave. That makes it an even better day!No , I'm well aware of that, but for those of us that do enjoy watching the racing its an excellent track imho.
-
1 hour ago, elvis said:
Is his fee likely to go down in third year.? Would like to go to him but third year might be better!
Nearly twice the price of OP ,cant see SS coming down much.
-
In other news water is wet.
Best track in the country why wouldn't it be popular?
-
Great spot, these SWP races are increasingly becoming a massive embarrassment to the sport in this country.
- shaneMcAlister, Gruff, Tauhei Notts and 1 other
-
3
-
1
-
5 hours ago, fermoy said:
I agree.After no local meetings on both Wellington and Auckland anniversary days it appears NZTR dont know what they are doing.Maybe a local should be running it?
Couldnt agree more.
The Oaks
in Thoroughbred Cafe
Posted
Perhaps they wanted to keep their club, perhaps they wanted their races back , perhaps they wanted an opportunity and a fair suck of the sav from the industry , I can't answer that.
But what I do find amusing is people like yourself and the industry is full of them that just assume a club or racetrack should fold because they believe its the right thing to do for the industry. No empirical analysis, empathy for the club in question nothing just an opinion that everyone should sell up because its big ol' Ellerslie. If that doesn't give you an indication of how bad things are then nothing will.