LightsOut

Members
  • Content count

    167
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

LightsOut last won the day on September 30

LightsOut had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About LightsOut

  • Rank
    Maiden - R50

Recent Profile Visitors

937 profile views
  1. LightsOut

    DEAN MCKENZIE RITA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    Yes Leggy a totally insane situation. Some serious questions need to and asked and on this occasion I have no doubt they will be. The DIA apparently also knows more than Australia who based on the same requirements requiring their anti money laundering laws and racing wagering concerning it have a $10,000 and above amount to investigate. Imagine Aussie punters and the outcry if they had to contend with a pathetic 1k capping. You think they would have looked at Aussies requirements and straight away one with half a brain would realise dropping 900% less than them wouldn't work. All you would be doing is pissing off TAB customers and causing tons load more work to enforce it. And the rest they say is now history.
  2. LightsOut

    DEAN MCKENZIE RITA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    De Minimis Threshold (DMT) DIA guidance proposes to deal with the forming of a business relationship for retail and on course settings using a de minimis threshold (DMT), meaning that until a threshold is reached, there are no AML/CFT obligations attached to that transaction14. These transactions can be via cash, voucher or electronic payment methods. DIA has assessed a DMT amount of $1,000 to be appropriate in these circumstances. This means any transaction at or above $1,000 will attract full AML/ CFT obligations. The transaction will include any money deposited by a customer to make a bet as well as any prize money or voucher that is returned to a customer that is over the DMT. The DMT does not have a cumulative effect, meaning the threshold is applied to a single transaction that is at, or above $1,000, and is not as a result of cumulative or linked transactions that add up to the DMT. Regardless of the DMT if the NZRB notices anything suspicious about particular transactions or activities you must submit an SAR to the FIU. We 100% agree with your comments. This “rule” resulted from government Anti-Money Laundering (AML) changes that came into effect on 1 August and not from TAB policy or the like. We lobbied hard for the limit to be higher - ideally more closely aligned with Australia however we weren’t successful at the time. We can assure you that we are actively working with the Ministers Office and also the Department of Internal Affairs, who oversee these matters, to encourage change. \ https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/AML-CFT-Guidance-for-NZRB/$file/AML-CFT-NZ-Racing-Board.pdf #$%^ me so the DIA on their own accord assessed the figure to be $1,000 rather than the 10k legislated figure. So RITA lobbied hard for the limit to be higher, no you would lobby for the figure to be the 10k allowed for under the Act. just lobby for the figure to be the $10,000. How the $#^% could you not be successful when RITA was set-up by the Racing Minister whose role as Minister is to ensure that the regulatory settings support the racing industry to flourish. The Department of Internal Affairs supports the Racing Minister by providing policy advice and support through the legislative process. Great to see two areas that are overseen by Mr Peters working against each other. The Racing Minister should have told the DIA the figure is $10,000 and the purpose of your sole existence is to ensure that legislated Acts concerning the Racing Industry are adhaerd to your purpose is not to change them. The DIA have zero knowledge of racing Industry and its gambling customers and come up with a rediculous figure set at 10% of the stipulated Act amount. So they know more than RITA and consider themselves above a legislated Act and will determine themselves what the threshold will be. I can't help but repeat myself but $#^&* me this is the Organisation assisting RITA to get the Racing Industry back on track.
  3. LightsOut

    DEAN MCKENZIE RITA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    What does the Board have to do to comply with the AML/CFT Act? Initially, you’ll have to: designate someone in your business as an AML/CFT compliance officer assess and document the money laundering and terrorism financing risks your business may face establish an AML/CFT compliance programme setting out how you’ll detect and manage these risks. On an ongoing basis, you’ll have to: verify the identity of customers before providing any service covered by the AML/CFT Act. In some circumstances (such as if they represent a company or trust), you may also need to ask for information about where money came from and the other people involved. For more information about verifying customers’ identities, see: Information for customers about anti-money laundering laws submit a Prescribed Transaction Report to the Police Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) if a client wants to conduct a transaction in cash that is $10,000 or more, or an international wire transfer of $1000 or more monitor customers’ accounts to identify potential warning signs of money laundering and terrorism financing. You must report any suspicious transactions or activity to the FIU. For more information, see: Reporting suspicious activities
  4. LightsOut

    DEAN MCKENZIE RITA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    so even when given the actual answer you still can't accept it... The actual answer doesn't exactly clarify in any form why the 10k allowed for in the Act was subsequently reduced to 1k and by who so no I can't accept it. It would have been obvious to most with half a clue that the 1k figure was crazy we are talking just 10% of the amount stipulated in the Act. It can't exactly be that hard a task for either RITA or the DIA to determine by who and the reasoning behind it. Just another financial burden on the Industry by having to increase staffing levels to accommodate a 90% decrease in what was a realistic financial reporting figure in line with overseas racing organsations.. Something definitely doesn't add up when comparing the Acts requirements to what the NZRB requirements are. Why the hell wouldn't someone have questioned the huge decrease when you have a legislated Act to back up your claim that 10k is the figure for the NZRB to be held accountable with any financial transactions. Bizarre but bizarre situations have a habit of occurring more often than not in the NZ Racing Industry. Casinos have a 6k threshold which again shows a huge distortion when compared to Racings 1k level. If I wanted to wash money the casino is a far better outlet than the Racing Industry.
  5. LightsOut

    DEAN MCKENZIE RITA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    Posted September 9 if i have a $50 bet and manage to win $1200 how is that money laundering ...if i placed a bet of $5,000 then sure ask the question...this stupid rule has nothing to do with someone who manages to jag a win ...why should have to prove to your organisation who i am...change this invasive rule to those placing bets in large amounts.. Voice of reason We 100% agree with your comments. This “rule” resulted from government Anti-Money Laundering (AML) changes that came into effect on 1 August and not from TAB policy or the like. We lobbied hard for the limit to be higher - ideally more closely aligned with Australia however we weren’t successful at the time. We can assure you that we are actively working with the Ministers Office and also the Department of Internal Affairs, who oversee these matters, to encourage change. In the interim, it’s really important we’re very clear with punters about what is required, particularly as we come up to the Spring Carnival, so we’ll be working hard to get the message out. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So who reduced it to the crazy amount of 1K? Doesn't sound by the reply it could be the DIA so that leaves one outfit which doesn't surprise me.
  6. LightsOut

    John Allen

    Leggy summed up John Allens term as CEO. He never really showed much improvement from day one his Racing and Gambling Industry knowledge , at least not enough to give those involved in the industry to have any confidence in him as a leader. As I have stated before I don't have a personal dislike of the man but I do dislike the fact that he was put into a position of a National Industry at a time when it was already in serious decline. You would think he would have looked at a couple of recent CEO's as in Bayliss and Brown and the reasons why they had their terms as CEO"s cut short.They also were the wrong people for the job as lacking in Racing and Gambling experience and knowledge and basically didn't perform as expected.. As far as proof goes I don't think I imagined the betting platform disaster. Millions over in budget to build and an exodus of customers to overseas competitors, it was sold to the Industry as a means of retaining customers. Maybe some more proof will come out in a few weeks when the turnover figures for the past season are released. I am picking you will see the biggest decline in turnover ever for a racing season while adding in the biggest one off cost in a season. In March John Allen must have known the budgeted figures were not going to happen so why didn't he look to make changes within the business to try and balance the obvious deficit. Rather than waiting for RITA to hold his hand he should have taken on board his own initiative's to try and rectify the situation which is what any Board or shareholders would expect of a CEO. Sadly I think its fairly obvious given the above why that didn't occur. Here's some more proof not imagination. The Betting Platform was heralded to the Industry that it was going to double customer numbers, increase turnover and make the TAB competitive with overseas competition. With Australian punters not able to bet into the NZ TAB the increase if any in customer numbers would have been minimal but in fact they have declined as has turnover. Unless a Company takes over another Company customer numbers won't double so it was a crazy claim to have made. With the NZ TAB paying Racing and Sports bodies far more than their Australian rivals they can never be competitive so once again a crazy claim made with no actual idea. Bottom line any Company or Organisation given the above would have demanded the CEO's resignation unfortunately even if your a nice guy it counts for nothing, the only thing that counts is the bottom line and I think we all know how far down that is. I don't know if the law had anything to do with it, he didn't have to listen to the law he needed to listen to the right people for guidance. Yes unfortunately the same limitations as his predecessors which was a lack of knowledge and experience. One would think that form would have stacked up well to know that he wasn't really the right person for the job. You are assuming that his successor will show the same form, hopefully we will see stronger and more potential form next time. The CEO role should be for 5 to 6 years max and an understudy should be appointed after 2 years to step up to the next level, at least then the person will hopefully have gained experience and knowledge if they don't already have it. If he is no good after 18 months dump him and replace him. I have no doubt he has a very keen mind but maybe it could have been keener with regard to Racing and Gambling and by listening to the right people who know what they are talking about rather than talking crap. Sad to hear on the link below Michael Dore who was the TAB Racing Manager for many years express his thoughts on the betting platform. Hard to believe the Industry could pay his salary for around 30 years to improve his knowledge and experience on the gambling and racing industry in NZ and yet when it was most needed he obviously wasn't listened to. Personal agendas for some at the NZRB obviously mean far more than the financial well being of the NZ Racing Industry. Mmmm is it any wonder why it is in its current predicament. https://soundcloud.com/trackside-radio/210-peter-earley-w-michael-dore-nzgra?fbclid=IwAR1aGY7wYndAQ_MG1Ew1mm_UN8_0NasNnrPWZxhcy2SHmAOaCfBWscHwxXU Lets face it if he had done his homework he would have known he was drinking from a poisoned cup. Ha I don't think when he took over you could compare it to taking over a struck Titanic, maybe the lifeboats were on standby to be lowered. That is one thing that the Titanic and the Racing Industry do have in common, at the end of the day there won't be enough lifeboats to save all.
  7. LightsOut

    John Allen

    Bottom line is the buck starts at the top, when you clean a place out you start at the top. I don't think anyone would argue JA never knew jack $#%& about racing and during his term as CEO never attempted to improve that knowledge. If he had of he wouldn't have come out with so much rubbish while looking so confused.
  8. LightsOut

    John Allen

    Ha ha if you believe he went on his own accord you are thicker than I thought.
  9. LightsOut

    John Allen

    There you go again , read what I posted , at least quote me accurately. That seems pretty accurate to me. I was actually been kind to you by calculating your HE IS HERE TO STAY at only 12 months. Here to stay implies he isn't going anywhere. Just put your hand up and say you made a shocking and now proven to be a very bad and uneducated call.
  10. LightsOut

    John Allen

    No your correct PR but can you imagine the task they have going through non transparency over years of totally incompetent management. Then on top of that the red tape to go through to make things happen. Years of poor management won't take days to right but hopefully it will only be a few months. Hang in there PA hopefully soon you will feel more positive about the Industry.
  11. LightsOut

    John Allen

    Nothing you have ever quoted has ever been correct. Your best call was John Allen will still be there in 12 months so that actually makes your other early crows look laughable. Once again I think your horribly out of touch with reality when you say nothing of importance will happen before the next election. Something big is about to happen, watch this space.
  12. LightsOut

    John Allen

    The NZRB can easily absorb a reduced numbers of employees however the NZ Racing Industry can't afford stagnant or reduced stake money. Some where along the way unfortunately the NZRB got lost in what their actual purpose to exist is. Hopefully RITA will cut the place to the bone as that will be the first step to proving to the Industry they are on the right track.
  13. LightsOut

    John Allen

    Cutting the number of overpaid and under performing staff at the Racing Board by 2/3rd's might actually be more prudent financially for the Industry than reducing the number of races held by 2/3rd's.
  14. LightsOut

    John Allen

    I think it would be better referenced as a horror rather than a novel and maybe if you did take time to read a little more you might find yourself better educated in the real world as far as the NZ Racing Industry is concerned. Assumption is the mother of all failures which you fall into by thinking I have a hatred of John Allen. I have posted as a person I have no problem with him but as far as his leadership skills and knowledge of the NZ Racing Industry I have had a huge question mark over his ability. Don't forget even John Allen endorsed my concerns by stating himself that he has been a serial failure in his working life. His management efforts at the NZRB are just a continuation of his self confessed working life flaw. He certainly didn't make me redundant at NZ Post but his tenor there as the CEO did result in many becoming redundant so no surprise I guess for you to assume that I may have been collateral damage from JA fallout. You need to read between the lines and the balance sheets TA as if you had of you wouldn't have made such an uneducated claim that John Allen would still be there in 12 months. Thankfully John Allen saw the writing on the wall as I and many others have over recent months and knew better to depart under his own announcement than have it done for him. A major #!%# up was proposed by John Allen to the NZRB Board which was subsequently implemented. The investment has proven to not perform as it was told it would do to the NZ Racing Industry, it has become a liability when its cost to build and service is not returning the extra revenue to warrant the tens of millions in costs of it. No financial institution would consider it in any way to be a worthy investment based on current returns. Years ago $20 plus million was as you as you so loosely label was seen as an investment in a new betting platform called Typhoon, that so called investment returned zero dollars and ended up in the bin. This new betting platform at over twice that cost of Typhoon is in service although in what could only be described as doing so in an under performing capacity and is highly unlikely to ever return the revenue required to justify it's over budget inflated investment. If you do some homework rather than once again assuming you will find out exactly why the Racing Minister told the DIA to go back to the drawing board to create a viable working policy with regard to racefield fees. I think its very obvious to most even if its not to you time isn't needed to tell that the Betting Platform is not a success. NZRB Board members gone, the CEO gone, are you slowing getting the picture that is getting painted? It's called the domino effect and its starting to steamroll. The financial plight of many trainers will see the pension going towards reducing their ever increasing debt to stay in a business that continues to have inflation % of costs far exceeding income increased %. You really do live in cuckoo land thinking they will be thinking "life's never been better". Your one of those uneducated people who have become like that by not evaluating the NZ Racing Industry well enough to make a statement worthy of consideration. You continually think time will tell eg John Allen and the Betting Platform. Your probably best to keep your head buried in the sand with no clock to view. $#%* me the Industry is in its current strife because time has run out thanks to a poorly run Organisation set up to return the best possible income it can to ensure of its survival.
  15. LightsOut

    Jacinda Ardern

    That Tilford sounds like a recently resigning CEO re achievements are nil, at least he resigned before getting tossed out. Good to know Tripple Alliance that you acknowledge that when someones achievements are nil they have to go.