Ellerslie gets biggest crowd in 15 years

[catemar 1]

Sorry, you've lost me Catemar. Return % on industry funding? Return to what, the industry? I don't think so. What owners are 4k better off than what?

Well let me put it this way Leggy...your ratio's are a complete waste of time when judging performance. Just more misleading stats. If clubs were to put back into stakes exactly what they recieved then it may be relevant, however they don't.

[The Apprentice 1]

thanks for the intro. I've been at Flemington for 24 Melb Cups. More Derby Days than MC's, but still. I am also a member of the VRC - which u are not. Flemington is not my favourite Melb course, I like Caulfield and Sandown. I would venture to say that I've been to more race courses and meetings in Victoria, South Australia and Tassie that you could only dream of. But that's ok. I've sponsored races at Geelong, Bendigo, Hamilton, Mildura, Caulfield, Moonee Valley - do I have to go on? I do know a little bit about the administration of the game and do currently serve on a Racing Board.

The problem we have in racing is that sectional interests, small club thinking and self-serving agenda taints the process of moving forward.

Ellerslie is a success, not due to it's favoured status but by it's non-race revenue agenda that provides $$ for it's stakes. If it operated like many NZ Clubs, that rely solely on miserly gate takings and the % it gets from on/offcourse turnover, then it would be F%$ked like many. Fortunately, the revenue from it's oncourse promotions, betting % and convention centre profits, enable it to be what Wellington couldn't achieve. ie, the backbone of Premier Racing in NZ.

You obviously have a thing about success and try to drag it down to another level. Tall Poppy? You win the prize. But you keep going to Buchan Races old son - maybe you should keep going to the Lakes Entrance Picnic races?

[Leggy 4,093]

Well let me put it this way Leggy...your ratio's are a complete waste of time when judging performance. Just more misleading stats. If clubs were to put back into stakes exactly what they recieved then it may be relevant, however they don't.

Wrong again Catemar. They have to now. At least what they receive as minimum stakes funding.

They also get the oncourse commission of 16%, a meeting feee of 12-15k and for the likes of ARC Carnival funding of apparently 160k. They can do what they like with those components.

If you don't think what the product earned from wagering is relevant to club performance then we are on different planets. Until a few years ago that was what they were paid on.

[d.burrow - Joan 224]

To the best of my knowledge all clubs [now days] have their stakes FULLY funded to the minimum level depending on whether it is a Industry day [most week days], Feature [every Sat somewhere] or a Premier Day [ most Sat and some Public Holidays].

As an example Group One's are at 200k, Group Two's 85k, Group Three's 70k and Listed 45k or something very close to these figures.

The other races, Rating 85, 75, 65 and Maidens at FULLY funded depending on the day - Industry, Feature or Premier.

From time to time you will see a race with a stake level well above its Grading i.e. the Wellington Cup at 200k where they have had to add an additional 115k to make up the stake.

Other Group two's around the Country are normally run for 85k however over Christmas I did notice Ellerslie running theirs for 100k [Eight Caret and Royal etc] so they had to top those up by 15k ea.

On the odd ocasion, a Club will UP the stakes of normal races as Cromwell did a few weeks ago but those races are few and between. The Club then has to fund the extra in that instance too.

I stand to be corrected of the absolute detail above but I am pretty close to the mark.

[Leggy 4,093]

Dead on Insider.

[emmdee 0]

thanks for the intro. I've been at Flemington for 24 Melb Cups. More Derby Days than MC's, but still. I am also a member of the VRC - which u are not. Flemington is not my favourite Melb course, I like Caulfield and Sandown. I would venture to say that I've been to more race courses and meetings in Victoria, South Australia and Tassie that you could only dream of. But that's ok. I've sponsored races at Geelong, Bendigo, Hamilton, Mildura, Caulfield, Moonee Valley - do I have to go on? I do know a little bit about the administration of the game and do currently serve on a Racing Board.

The problem we have in racing is that sectional interests, small club thinking and self-serving agenda taints the process of moving forward.

Ellerslie is a success, not due to it's favoured status but by it's non-race revenue agenda that provides $$ for it's stakes. If it operated like many NZ Clubs, that rely solely on miserly gate takings and the % it gets from on/offcourse turnover, then it would be F%$ked like many. Fortunately, the revenue from it's oncourse promotions, betting % and convention centre profits, enable it to be what Wellington couldn't achieve. ie, the backbone of Premier Racing in NZ.

You obviously have a thing about success and try to drag it down to another level. Tall Poppy? You win the prize. But you keep going to Buchan Races old son - maybe you should keep going to the Lakes Entrance Picnic races?

Thanks.

Now I see yhour point. You go on about irrelevant stuff again, because you are clearly up yourself. All that stuff is irrelevant when it comes to what is wrong with Ellerslie.

You could have gone to 100 Melbourne Cups, yet that wouldn't mean anything to what is wrong with Ellerslie. But thanks for clearing up that you fancy yourself, and that you have an ability to relate irrelevant things to a topic, as if they are important. Well done.

And Premier Racing. It doesn't exist in NZ. It is merely higher stakes for the same horses that raced for $5-$10K the week before. But that again shows, just how little you know about these things.

[Guest 2Admin2]

Thanks.

Now I see yhour point. You go on about irrelevant stuff again, because you are clearly up yourself. All that stuff is irrelevant when it comes to what is wrong with Ellerslie.

You could have gone to 100 Melbourne Cups, yet that wouldn't mean anything to what is wrong with Ellerslie. But thanks for clearing up that you fancy yourself, and that you have an ability to relate irrelevant things to a topic, as if they are important. Well done.

And Premier Racing. It doesn't exist in NZ. It is merely higher stakes for the same horses that raced for $5-$10K the week before. But that again shows, just how little you know about these things.

What IS wrong with Ellerslie?

I disagree with your point about premier fields - anyone who has raced a horse knows they are a damn sight harder to win even if some of the competitors are the same.

[Leggy 4,093]

What IS wrong with Ellerslie?

I disagree with your point about premier fields - anyone who has raced a horse knows they are a damn sight harder to win even if some of the competitors are the same.

Still the same horses admin. Just they're mostly all trying when the dough's up.

[emmdee 0]

What IS wrong with Ellerslie?

I disagree with your point about premier fields - anyone who has raced a horse knows they are a damn sight harder to win even if some of the competitors are the same.

To your second statement, that, and the answer by Leggy, is one of the major issues with 'Premium Racing', apart from the fact that NZ does not suit such a model.

To your first point, as a club, there is not so much to complain about, athough, in my view, they should be doing better. And in doing well, that is mostly because they get the best races, the best dates, and are in the largest population area.

As to what is wrong with Ellerslie from an industry perspective.

They simply do not attract sufficient punters/turnover given the group racing, premium dates, largest population that they should. They are damaging the NZ industry, when they should be the leading light.

And anyone that suggests that the club shouldn't be concerned with turnover, and that is the domain of the TAB, clearly is not focussed on the industry, and is only focussed on what the club can do for itself.

[The Apprentice 1]

How can Ellerslie attract the big or best punters, when clearly they don't control the betting? Your logic ( or lack of it ) is insane. The TAB is the only betting medium in NZ and it has little to offer punters. No incentives etc. so why do you blame Ellerslie? Their job is to stage the event and they do that successfully. They don't control the betting. As for your comments about being up myself? That shows I've landed a harpoon on you! Go back to Buchan - I've finished with you.

[Varro 244]

How can Ellerslie attract the big or best punters, when clearly they don't control the betting? Your logic ( or lack of it ) is insane. The TAB is the only betting medium in NZ and it has little to offer punters. No incentives etc. so why do you blame Ellerslie? Their job is to stage the event and they do that successfully. They don't control the betting. As for your comments about being up myself? That shows I've landed a harpoon on you! Go back to Buchan - I've finished with you.

agreed, it doesnt make sense the TAB are an independent agency. go back to the bush elbee

[hedley 1,900]

returning to the core activity, that of racing thoroughbreds at venues run by clubs, naturally ARC @Elle ..will be the talisman and masthead.

the sustained reticulation of funding gleaned from clientel 'punting' and wagering..is essential.

the need is for the extent and gravity of those clientel [abused in a myriad of ways..all Felt and sensed/picked Up upon By those clientel] to be betting more than they have dropped off to.

because the world's on such a steep climb of technological breakthough of further miniaturisations and synthesis Of them,..then that greatly affects 'your' industry.

Ellerslie had a Chinese New Year meeting, and we well remember the pledges Elle made to receive these visitors as repeat clientel.

Also, they were in a position to colaborate [on behalf of the greater Good of the industry]..with the TAB, with a view to accomodating the large new clientel...as well as those whom are the Biggest longevious clients.

Elle infered or conveyed that, but little or 'nothing' became of it.

I.T. 'experts' should've also been included by Elle and the TAB, and had that been done [or still can be and therefore Needs to be/SHOULD be happening..now]...an ambience would now exist On course [having been comissioned and pioneered by Elle]..to at least be the equivolence of Ozzie's 'best' efforts or arenas...or for that matter, those other jurisdictions we 'admire' etc.

i don't need to be any more 'pointed' than the outlining i've given as my current opinion and offering to the thread..or the solution.

[Berri 2,131]

Well here is the real truth.

Ellerslie, Avondale, Ruakaka, and Counties should actually go it alone and do their own thing.

The Auckland region has the valuable assets, the prime locations, and the black sand that is required for the all weather tracks that are surely our future.

The development of an adjacent AW track would fill the only hole in our local portfolio and will of course allow re-location of problem meetings and scheduling of unlimited industry based reveue generator meetings for overseas consumption.

All we need is a good business model to develop collateral revenue streams and then we should cut NZTR and the provinces loose, forever.

Goodbye monkey, get off my back, and take your breeders with you.

If we rely on all weather to get us out of the bind, then we are well and truely buggered. They definately can fill some gaps in the calendar (wet shite weather) but concrete evidence suggests that unless you build an all weather that can take 20 horses or more racing at the same time, the betting can be in trouble. It's quite boring racing as the pattern is a little more predictable. I have looked closely at betting trends in the US, UK and Ireland and there are some limitations. But if you then make more than 20 horses race against each other...things change. Therefore having a track on the inside of the grass limits the amount of runners in each race.

I also agree that the NZTR are currently toothless. They haven't been proactive in encouraging betting because no-one knows what's really needed. It was Acklin and Chittick that allowed the new Act to take away the right for a Club to operate it's own tote. We argued at the time that as long as it was not acting anti competitively, then the club could seek a license from the NZRB to run its own tote under terms and conditions that didn't breach the Racing Act. This arguement also lassooed the NZRB because they also couldn't act anti competitively and withhold that right from the racing club.

Now start thinking about what a bet is and you just might get the potential windfalls for the racing clubs IF they became a bit innovative.

In the meantime, the NZTR have been aware of this right for the last 8 years and have chosen not to do anything about it.

[d.burrow - Joan 224]

Dead on Insider.

Given that everyone has their Stakes fully funded why don't some of you now come on and tell us which 'Clubs' are out performing the rest with what they are putting up as 'additional' monies.

Now that is very different to comparing turnovers to stakes money as under the current structure it is somewhat irrelevant except for on-course turnovers where they get the EXTRA.

Having said the above, the 'clubs' that get the greater numbers on-course have the opportunity from food, booze gate takings and sponsorship to prop up their infrastructure [ and Stakes ] etc otherwise if you take it to the other extreme it is mostly 'voluntary labour' that props up the Waipukurau's, Waverley's and Omakau's and most other Clubs that don't have carnivals etc etc.

P.S. I have always wondered about Wairarapa with their massive on-course turnover and gate takings. I will admit that they are unlikely to make much out of catering as the majority of people bring their own.

[The Apprentice 1]

your comment re AWT's is interesting. Hong Kong has an all weather track (strathayr?) has it not. It doesn't seem to affect their racing so why would it be a prob in NZ - which has inclement weather? I def would be against the type of "synthetic' tracks that Toowoomba (QLD) and Sunshine Coast have put in - at the urge of Racing Qld. The trainers don't support it because it's hard on the horses. They break down on it. But Strathayr seems to be a great racing surface for all horses and sports, and going by HK, the punters don't mind betting on it.

[jd 0]

Ellerslie is not doing that well for the industry (betting turnover). However they are doing very well for themselves (pies, drink, gate takings and their general business).

The Aucklanders on here seem content with the above, while others think that is a rather selfish stance - considering the Industry provides Ellerslie with the prime dates, good stake money and therefore good horses.

So how to make everyone happy? Not sure that can be done - as The Apprentice (Don Trump?) says betting is the TAB's problem and not Ellerslie's.

Weaver and co must be tempted to lure these 20,000 once a year race-goers into having a bet, but if I worked for Ellerslie I would have to consider that every $10 bet that Olivia loses, means one less stella she can afford. The commision on the stella will be a lot more than 16%.

What is the solution, as Ellerslie deserve these dates and big races because of their facilities, population etc

[Berri 2,131]

the betting trends are interesting. Favourites win more of the time and the general form is far more predictable. This is probably due to the consistant track surface and that the pace is slightly predictable as well. Even with the new surfaces there is still a fair amount of kick back and many horses don't like it. Makes the jockey ride slightly differently. Therefore the only way to change this predestrian presentation is to make a track that can have more than 20 runners and have a big long roomy straight. Obviously this means that all tracks in NZ (maybe not Riccarton) cannot provide this. Once again the reason why I say this is that if you make a new track, create it for the future, Make it so that you get the international betting and viewing market by creating a differential....get creative

[Leggy 4,093]

A very astute and succinct summary IMO jd. You have named the problem with precision. I have been thinking about this problem on and off over the last few days and the word 'AND' keeps coming to mind. How can we allow clubs to do well what Ellerslie does with their premier venue, AND do so without it costing and preferably with it benefiting the industry as a whole?

Clubs and stakes used to be funded primarily on total turnover. However, as has been pointed out, while they can influence that by attractiveness to punters of the racing product, they have no control over the wagering product. So, a return to that funding model makes little sense as it leaves clubs vulnerable to too much that they cannot control.

On the other hand, an industrious (one might say equally industrious relatively speaking) smaller club like Wairoa has to work extremely hard to attract what the industry blesses ARC with yet generates excess funding from wagering for the industry. To do so however, they plough back prospective commissions and other earnings in RTO, stakes, and travel subsidies, utiliseing volunteer labour, a personal touch with owners and trainers, and have to find their own marketing budget instead of being gifted it by the industry.

What's more, they have to generate loyalty and support from owners and trainers who along with the club, provide a racing product for the industry that will generate the very revenue that funds the cost to the industry of days like Boxing Day at Ellerslie.

So, it seems to me the pendulum has swung too far when clubs have little incentive to encourage wagering, even oncourse. NZTR may be on the right track by linking a set of club KPIs to funding but to get that right in a balanced way to incentivise clubs to generate revenue for the industry at large as well as themselves will be challenging.

I should point out jd that your Olivia / Stella example is somewhat inaccurate. Allowing for churn, the $10 hospo spend, equates to $60-70 of turnover and is therefore the better result for the club as they get the entire $10.

[hedley 1,900]

Today, 09:06pm

kopia

Member

I understand there was a heavy rain early on Saturday morning around Ellerslie. that track was never going to be what it was reported to be. No wonder people are turning off punting and racing horses in NZ. I am livid that we accepted the track report and didn't scratch our horse. Ellerslie-we know you monitor this site, how about an explanation or are you going to keep your head in the sand? Here's 2 questions: who determined the track reading prior to 7.30 this morning? And is that person going to be disciplined for bullshitting the public?

..the opinions that count, say that betting's the TAB's concern...and not particularly, the club's.

[very convenient., no oncourse punting initiatives needed to boost industry turnovers...and no chance of having to be accountable]

[emmdee 0]

..the opinions that count, say that betting's the TAB's concern...and not particularly, the club's.

[very convenient., no oncourse punting initiatives needed to boost industry turnovers...and no chance of having to be accountable]

Yes Hedley, so many seem to think that. And I look at the state of the industry, and I wonder why?

Obviously in thinking that, and then suggesting that Ellerslie are putting on such a great show, they think Ellerslie is doing all it should.

Seems that the show Ellerslie puts on, isn't considered a heck of a lot 'better' show, than many other meetings, certainly by the punters anyway.

[Daveski 13]

Seems that the show Ellerslie puts on, isn't considered a heck of a lot 'better' show, than many other meetings, certainly by the punters anyway.

That's an interesting comment which I note doesn't have an supporting facts.

There were three racing meetings on Xmas day at AK, PN, and Dunedin. ARC's on course (excluding FO) was $1.2M while the other 2 meetings combined only just did $420K - in other words, AK almost did 3x the total of the other meetings combined.

Off course was similar with AK alone doing in excess of $3M offcourse and the other two combined not making $2.5M.

I'm not lauding AK's performance - we should expect those figures from a premier club on a premier day. However, I struggle to see how these figures can be used to damn the club as a number have chosen to do.

[Leggy 4,093]

They were on Boxing Day Dodgy and if you read the thread you'll see we've already discussed those figures and the merits or otherwise of ARC's performance in the circumstances.

[Daveski 13]

They were on Boxing Day Dodgy and if you read the thread you'll see we've already discussed those figures and the merits or otherwise of ARC's performance in the circumstances.

My bad. It just shows that my thinking is consistently 24 hours ahead of you

[emmdee 0]

That's an interesting comment which I note doesn't have an supporting facts.

It seems you think that Ellerslie doing 2-3 times the turnover of the other clubs on the same day, is a good result.

I would call it close to pathetic.

So many that support this tiered model, refer to Australian stakes at metro level etc.

What ratio do you think is done on a metropolitan meeting compared to a country/provincial meeting in general, on the same day? I'll give you a hint. It is not anywhere near as low as 3.

Yet, in your example, the absolute top club supposedly, could manage about 2.5 times the turnover of Manawatu.

That is clear evidence, that the punters don't really like the Ellerslie product (to the level they should), since on that very day, Ellerslie had been provided with the premium races on the day.

[Leggy 4,093]

since on that very day, Ellerslie had been provided with the premium races on the day.

Yes, and 6 times the industry funding