Fiscal Restraint? - Yeah Right

[Mark Daly 0]

New Zealand Racing Board

The New Zealand Racing Board will make a special funding distribution of $6 million to the thoroughbred, harness racing and greyhound codes in March 2010.

Racing Board Chairman Michael Stiassny said on Wednesday he was pleased the Board was able to make the unscheduled pay-out which would benefit the grassroots industry.

[Don Frampton 1]

New Zealand Racing Board

The New Zealand Racing Board will make a special funding distribution of $6 million to the thoroughbred, harness racing and greyhound codes in March 2010.

Racing Board Chairman Michael Stiassny said on Wednesday he was pleased the Board was able to make the unscheduled pay-out which would benefit the grassroots industry.

[Eclipse 0]

Over the past 3 years

2007 Net returns of $122m with operating expenses of $130m

2008 Net returns of $131m with operating expenses of $140m

2009 Net returns of $119m with operating expenses of $145m

In a Press Release issued August 2007 Chairman Michael Stiassny trumpeted record profits for the 2007 year of over $120m. A time lapse of 24 days after the books were closed.

In a Press Release issued January 2010 Chairman Michael Stiassny goes public on the result after a "difficult" year. A time lapse of 173 days after the books were closed.

[Don Frampton 1]

Over the past 3 years

2007 Net returns of $122m with operating expenses of $130m

2008 Net returns of $131m with operating expenses of $140m

2009 Net returns of $119m with operating expenses of $145m

In a Press Release issued August 2007 Chairman Michael Stiassny trumpeted record profits for the 2007 year of over $120m. A time lapse of 24 days after the books were closed.

In a Press Release issued January 2010 Chairman Michael Stiassny goes public on the result after a "difficult" year. A time lapse of 173 days after the books were closed.

So on that basis, all the leadership efforts spanning a number of years have seen us 3 million per annum worse off.

Perhaps they should be focussing on lobbying for the necessary changes to the Racing Act rather than bowing to Parliament and ridiculously trying to work within it.

[Don Frampton 1]

The other thing is, who is the TAB really accountable to and for what level of performance?

Is it just there to collect taxes for the Government and by default is our NZRB really just a government extension focussed only on turnover no matter the cost?

An example of my concern is that I understand hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of money that could have been used to hold up stakes levels were thrown into various quaddie pools and the like as seed money (rather than a far lesser sum be set aside as only a contingency in the event guaranteed pool sizes were not reached).

Now who makes these decisions to use monies in this way (monies that existing owners have helped create for the purpose of stakes)?

The drastically reduced stakes we are currently witnessing is particularly disheartening for owners who invested in bloodstock at high prices a few years ago and are now seeing their investment decisions unnecessarily turned to dust (as their horses hit the tracks about now) by decision-makers not seemingly accountable to owners or TB Code specific controlling body representing owner's best interests.

Now I have not studied in detail the full rationale for "one racing" but, if it further reduces the TB code's ability to control its own destiny using its own income streams, I would be dead set against it for sure.

Let the TB code make its own savings from its own revenue streams taking into account its own overhead structures and needs (which are so different to other codes who know little of our code needs as neither do we of theirs).

By all means, let the codes voluntarily agree to share overhead costs wherever they can agree it is fair and appropriate, but under no circumstance should each code be dipping into another code's cookie by formula or any other basis.

[John Clydesdale 229]

The Mr Stiassny PR machine is very timely to help support the flawed One Racing proposal. The vote is today...now.

$6 million to buy some votes......Mr S might say "we only took that out of reserves because but we haven't made it yet....the same as we took out $22 million last season to help the industry survive....and we didn't replace that, sorry"

Mr Stiassny has to address the issues confronting him, not reducing the Reserves to create a false impression that he and his Board are doing a good job....

Timing is everything in politics, but our industry is a good deal bigger than that. Leave the politics to the Beehive and the other majority of government employees, just address the issues confronting the industry, but maybe you want to indentify them first.....that would be a good start.

How good is a Chairman that agrees to replace a CEO, in times of financial constraint and shrinking turnover, with another CEO that is rumoured to cost an additional 80% more than the previous. That sounds like a good decision from the Chairman and his Board.....doesn't it?

Mr Stiassny needs to go to the industry particpants, talk to them, go to the track, talk to trainers where they work, let them explain the issues that confront them. Then he might start to understand what is going on in the industry.

[Mark Daly 0]

Cynical use of other people's money to further their cause.

[classicbay 0]

Cynical use of other people's money to further their cause.

And their cause Mark?

As I see it they are only there to feather their own nest.

At graass roots level the pubTabs are closing earlier to save staff costs, posting the minimum of fields to save printing costs and servinng customers buying booze because that is where they makle their money.

all so that administration can pay themselves extravagent and unearned salaries.

Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.

[Mark Daly 0]

And their cause Mark?

As I see it they are only there to feather their own nest.

At graass roots level the pubTabs are closing earlier to save staff costs, posting the minimum of fields to save printing costs and servinng customers buying booze because that is where they makle their money.

all so that administration can pay themselves extravagent and unearned salaries.

Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.

Yip that too (feathering their own nest) but my comment was in support of John's comment about the timing in relation to the One racing proposal.

[Eclipse 0]

the post wasn't to make a thread about outside betting opportunities lost from NZ.

It was moreso about this whole One Racing thrust and how little financial impact it has.

Some background.

Nahkies produces an outstanding report on the efficiency of the NZRB - a statutory 5 year requirement.

Nahkies then does a further piece of work for NZTR and sees both poor internal governance and a racing industry riddled with duplicated cost.

But then the next bit gets scarey, from my perspective, and I don't know nor have met the people involved, so it's a hypothesis only.

On the NZRB board sits NZTR's representative - A Sutherland, who in reality is holding the trump card for the main game in town.

NZRB's chairman, more than aware that there's a "cost" lever to be pulled, finds a new best friend.

A quick piece of analysis is carried out - ballpark estimates pull a figure of over $10m in savings to make it sound significant. In all reality if $5m was saved they'd be smugly satisfied.

NZTR AGM - if this remit, in whatever format, isn't approved then you have a badly split Code body - gets passed, but maybe a sacrificial lamb in M Acklin who has made his point and can continue to hover closely?

And the next step is.....?

Perhaps count the votes at NZRB's table.

For mine I'm not sure what this is all trying top prove.

In all corners it reeks of egos and all that brings is divisiveness.

[Mark Daly 0]

Good point Eclipse re the solidarity thing even though most people can see through that facade.

And yes as to the actual report it reminds me of something put together after a late night drinking session with figures jotted down on the back of an envelope.

[Eclipse 0]

zzz,

in the past decade my small time involvement in racing ownership extends to 3 thoroughbreds,4 standardbreds and 0 greyhounds - yep clearly a bias there!