RaceCafe..#1...Tipsters Thread.... Share Your Fancies For Fun...Lets See Who The Best Tipsters Here Are.
Guest 2Admin2

NZTR and Intellectual Property.....Do they have any?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Midget said:

The article isn't too promising, bit obtuse and vague for me, dependent on race fields legislation and that's a long shot for mine but I suppose you can live in hope, and surely this lot are going to get something right at some stage....even a blind squirrel gets the odd acorn......

Can someone post that old speech by Andrew Brown.

You are talking about Racing Ahead which was put by by him in 2010: From the Otago Daily Times 25 May 2010.

Racing: Move afoot to make the TAB the world's best

 

Racing is in the doldrums, but the New Zealand Racing Board is embarking on a transformation with a strategy that says it plans to be the best wagering organisation in the world, with the highest population rate of participation, by 2015.

Its critics will inevitably call its aims pie in the sky, particularly with the state of the New Zealand racing industry at the moment.

News broke yesterday that Avondale Racing Club had suspended racing at its course from July 4 because of financial problems and that comes on the back of a series of race meeting abandonments because of unsafe tracks and an industry that has had to reduce prizemoney for owners -- not only because of the recession but also through a government clampdown on sponsorship of race meetings by charitable trusts funded by pokie machine money.

But the board, which runs the TAB, says it has developed its 2010-2015 strategic plan called Racing Ahead based on its vision to lead New Zealand racing and its wagering services to become the best in the world.

In a summary, chief executive Andrew Brown admits the vision is audacious.

"I sincerely believe the New Zealand racing industry can be the envy of the world and that Racing Ahead is the way to achieve this ambitious goal."

The strategy sets out five goals to achieve by 2015:-

* A modern retail network offering the very best betting services;

* a world class betting website meaning the TAB will be New Zealanders' preferred wagering provider over offshore competitors;

* a customer base of one fifth of all New Zealand adults;

* greater funding for the three racing codes;

* more owners of quality horses and greyhounds, with ownership to become more accessible and affordable.

"In 2015 racing and wagering will enjoy wide public acceptance," the board says its strategy. "The TAB will have a 10 percent increase in customer satisfaction and 50 percent fewer complaints. On-course attendance will be an entertainment choice for families."

Brown says there will be change to achieve the aims. "We will not maintain a sustainable industry, let alone be the world's best, by doing the same things we have always done."

The board acknowledges it has increasing pressures on it from all directions, including increasing domestic competition from the likes of Lotto and casinos -- the racing and sport wagering share of the gambling market has dropped from around 20 percent to 13 percent over the past 10 years.

 

There is also increasing competition from offshore operators, with research showing the TAB misses out on $50m of betting a year. Other factors are declining sponsorship for clubs, tax pressures with rises in GST and ACC levies, higher costs of training and staging events, and declining quality in tracks and grandstands.

Initiatives to attract more punters include improving TAB outlets, increasing the product offering -- including new tote options such as exactas and quinella place, and more fixed odds options.

The board also has initiatives to have the highest level of integrity in racing and wagering, and the best quality racing.

The board has presented its strategy to clubs around the country over the past six weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Admin, having read the article in question I'm of the opinion that it's just a "shot across the bows" of the NZRB given that there's a licencing agreement up for renewal.

Read it again, there's no detail, no succinct facts, just lots of waffle about meetings and strategy, with big clubs, most of whom can't pay their bills or grow their own business.

I've been to many meetings with NZTR, they're typically about as productive and useful as masturbating, but you always get well fed and watered.

If there is a silver bullet anywhere in that article it's well hidden, so I'm gong to say this is a classic "all hat and no cattle" bluff.

That said there will be dialogue going on with international agencies who might or might not be interested in what NZ has to offer by way of product.....but any new arrangements would be horrifically tangled and may be detrimental.

This is the NZ racing very of Brexit, and my choice of moniker ( Lewinsky ? ) would be Rexit, because that's about all they've done to racing in these last few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ted.

Funny man was Andrew Brown, and he left in a very murky cloud indeed !!

Not reported in your article but he also said we'd be the envy of the world within five years, and that the NZRB and TAB would distribute $185 million to the codes by 2015.

The Bonkin' Bayliss & Glenda Hugges presentation of 2013 was just as bad, just inflated puffery with zero substance or likelihood of actually materializing.

I think we can safely expect more of the same, with zero accountability, and a lot more overseas junkets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nerula said:

Call it whatever acronym you like. You just tell us who you think Own the racing product and whether they have any rights to commercialise that offshore. Never mind what ever the structure is here. Address the fundamental question.

I would have thought that those who put on the show have a much better claim than any bureaucrat sitting on his fat arse Nerula..

If that is true, then it follows that the Lions share of any benefits that accrue should also be distributed to them...?

Given that the NZR "brand" is worth bugger all in an International context, they are pushing it uphill anyway IMO.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Midget said:

Thanks Ted.

Funny man was Andrew Brown, and he left in a very murky cloud indeed !!

Not reported in your article but he also said we'd be the envy of the world within five years, and that the NZRB and TAB would distribute $185 million to the codes by 2015.

The full NZRB release (if that's a good word to describe it) is here: http://www.thoroughbrednews.com.au/nz/archive.aspx?id=46825&page=23&keyword=

 

Racing Ahead NZ Racing Board Strategic Plan 2010-2015

21 May 2010 | New Zealand Racing Industry Board 

Over the past three weeks we have launched our strategic plan to 2015 entitled Racing Ahead. To successfully meet the challenges the New Zealand racing industry faces we need to change the way we do things.

The NZ Racing Board has developed Racing Ahead based on the audacious vision to lead New Zealand racing and its wagering services to become the best in the world.

Racing Ahead sets out five goals – and supporting initiatives – to ensure we can meet the challenges we face now and in the future.

A vision for the New Zealand racing industry

By the year 2015, the New Zealand racing industry will be the envy of the world.
Among other things, our industry will have:
• A modern retail network offering the very best betting services.
• A world-class betting website meaning the TAB will be New Zealanders’
preferred wagering provider over offshore competitors.
• A customer base of one fifth of all New Zealand adults.
• Greater funding for the three racing Codes.
• More owners of quality horses and greyhounds, and ownership will be more
accessible, affordable and desirable.

In 2015 racing and wagering will enjoy wide public acceptance. The TAB will have a
10% increase in customer satisfaction and 50% fewer complaints. On-course
attendance will be an entertainment choice for families.

Finally, the NZ Racing Board will be an employer of choice and among the ten best
places to work in New Zealand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Midget said:

Thanks Ted.

Funny man was Andrew Brown, and he left in a very murky cloud indeed !!

Not reported in your article but he also said we'd be the envy of the world within five years, and that the NZRB and TAB would distribute $185 million to the codes by 2015.

The Bonkin' Bayliss & Glenda Hugges presentation of 2013 was just as bad, just inflated puffery with zero substance or likelihood of actually materializing.

I think we can safely expect more of the same, with zero accountability, and a lot more overseas junkets.

 

These poms certainly can be "creative" with their presentations, and "murk" seems to follow them around.

So the flies on that Hotel Suite wall tell me anyway.....;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 2Admin2 said:

IT'S NOT IP!!!!  It is the right to own and sell a product.  Joseph Parker owns his trademark - Duco own their's.  Duco has contracted to promote Parker and manage him.  Although with the latter I would imagine there is a different structure to do so.  Now draw some parallels with racing.  FFS they sold the racing broadcast jewels to a private company and helped fund them to do so.  They may think they own the copyright to the live broadcast however three minutes after a race the margin utility of that copyright is nil.  Except to the enthusiastic owner of the winner who forgot to record the race at home.  Arguably given what that owner paid to supply the product they should own Tge copyright.

There's fuck all unique creative endeavour in broadcasting x thousand races a year to call it IP.

What I don't get, is who would pay for streaming or other video rights to races other than wagering providers? And, if they are already paying Racefields fees, why would they pay for vision on top of that? Does that happen in any other jurisdiction? If not, wouldn't we just be pricing ourselves out of the global market altogether?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's not much less inspiring viewing as Virtual Racing streamed to Overseas Agencies in live racing down times. So there is some worth to fill gaps if only those caused by time zone differences.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Betting on NZ thoroughbred racing accounts for just 3.2% of TAB turnover in Australia and Australian punters appear to have a relatively poor understanding of our racing"

Yeah right Greg. I'd say that confirms that most of them have a bloody good understanding of it.

"The graph that accompanies this article illustrates how difficult it has become for the NZRB to grow the earnings from its domestic wagering operations"

Can someone please help me find the graph that shows that http://nzracing.co.nz/EditorialMonthly/699069/july/2016.aspx and is it possible that may be at least partly due to the quality of product that NZTR are dishing up for the NZRB to sell compared to what else is available to those punters?

"NZRB funding to the codes is yet to be finalised, with the codes seeking to collaborate with the Racing Board on the challenging business circumstances the board faces."

That sounds ominous to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest 2Admin2
1 hour ago, Leggy said:

"NZRB funding to the codes is yet to be finalised, with the codes seeking to collaborate with the Racing Board on the challenging business circumstances the board faces."

That sounds ominous to me.

Sounds like a pending dog fight to me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Leggy said:

What I don't get, is who would pay for streaming or other video rights to races other than wagering providers? And, if they are already paying Racefields fees, why would they pay for vision on top of that? Does that happen in any other jurisdiction? If not, wouldn't we just be pricing ourselves out of the global market altogether?

Legs. If you have a Sky subscription, even a basic one, you would see that a lot of the programs are crap and even regurgitated at that. Sky have bought that to fill in the day. The question of the value is secondary.

The primary question is WHO OWNS THE PRODUCT and thus who has the right to commercialize this.

Can you answer this simple question please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a sky subscription but none of us watch it apart from the odd rugby game at this time of year.

If it's a simple question, then I assume you know the answer. If I had to make an educated guess, I'd say it's the individual clubs that are putting on the show that own the product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to think of a similar situation whereby a primary producer effectively tendered their product out to multi agencies to sell on.

Domestically I suppose dairy farmers have a choice to whom they might supply, and Fonterra would be #1 but they've got issues.

I suppose the Telcos are similar in reverse whereby the fat cat aka Telecom, now known as Spark, had to provide the lines for a plethora of start ups to sell and supply data, that's been fabulously successful giving cheaper options to customers, not to mention better service.

Racing is very different, that's obvious, but I can see how this might be beneficial and invariably increased competition leads to cheaper prices and better service, but that said who's going to provide the essential services, like radio & Trackside ? and how would the individual clubs who're selling their product to say an Australian based agency pay the NZRB their share of media costs ?

Me thinks there's a long journey ahead, with many twists and turns, and based on their history I'd suggest we should have absolutely ZERO confidence in NZTR to steer us through the choppy seas ahead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Midget said:

I'm trying to think of a similar situation whereby a primary producer effectively tendered their product out to multi agencies to sell on.

Domestically I suppose dairy farmers have a choice to whom they might supply, and Fonterra would be #1 but they've got issues.

I suppose the Telcos are similar in reverse whereby the fat cat aka Telecom, now known as Spark, had to provide the lines for a plethora of start ups to sell and supply data, that's been fabulously successful giving cheaper options to customers, not to mention better service.

Racing is very different, that's obvious, but I can see how this might be beneficial and invariably increased competition leads to cheaper prices and better service, but that said who's going to provide the essential services, like radio & Trackside ? and how would the individual clubs who're selling their product to say an Australian based agency pay the NZRB their share of media costs ?

Me thinks there's a long journey ahead, with many twists and turns, and based on their history I'd suggest we should have absolutely ZERO confidence in NZTR to steer us through the choppy seas ahead. 

Yes, I'd agree with that synopsis. If we are going down the track of that kind of business model, I can't imagine that clubs would want NZTR, or for that matter Trackside, involved. I'd say a consortium of clubs might be a better option and I'd be pretty sure that alternative media production outfits would emerge pretty quickly to provide that side of the product creation much more efficiently. NZRB could then decide whether to buy the product or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly the product is owned by the producers which are the clubs who put on the events. The agency tasked by legislation to manage the treasury side of the business do not own the product unless there are some fishhooks in the Racing Act. And I have scant knowledge of that.

Unless the clubs and by extension NZTR establish that the codes are all in a cul de sac.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Leggy said:

I have a sky subscription but none of us watch it apart from the odd rugby game at this time of year.

If it's a simple question, then I assume you know the answer. If I had to make an educated guess, I'd say it's the individual clubs that are putting on the show that own the product.

Aha I have just woken up to your wee dig, Yes I am a "simple" person and you are far more "educated" than i. 

I am but a humble chippy. But long educated in the university of life I invariably know the most fundamental answer to "which way is up"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nerula said:

Aha I have just woken up to your wee dig, Yes I am a "simple" person and you are far more "educated" than i. 

I am but a humble chippy. But long educated in the university of life I invariably know the most fundamental answer to "which way is up"

It wasn't intended to be a dig and I think we agree. I see myself as more of a humble chippy than anything else. My first paid job was as an apprentice building roof trusses, and I spent yesterday building a deck and pricing up a front porch for a colleague. All for a Liquorland voucher, most of which I drank last night :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a topic dear to my heart because theoretically the owners own the raw data. They pay the bills and provide the data collection facility (horses) to enable the parasites to do their work. I know that there has been extensive discussions that the punter is the most important participant in respect of the financial stability of the industry under the current model.

BUT what we are experiencing is consecutive fumbling and tumbling by the bureaucrats that have somehow hijacked the data.

There is IP and it comes in two pieces. The first is the actual individual horse performance, whether in training or during the race. This data quite rightly is initially owned by the owner unless the owner has mandated or licensed another party to collect it, and as a result of collecting it, to amortise it. So the owner should rightfully claim right to this, and if they choose to license it to others, this should be done in an agreement under terms and conditions that are favourable to the owner. I will give you an example of this in the real World. Any actor has joined the Actor's Guild. This effectively protects the actor's name or face from being exploited by parasites. The same can be said for international sports people. So this could/ should be relocated in the thoroughbred world.

In respect of actual racing data, including the sectional times, should initially belong to the data collecting representative of the owners, the NZTR, who also enable to the race horses to race collectively. This is where the NZTR and the racing clubs come into play. They make a calendar. The calendar is subject to intellectual property ownership because it is a works. The rights to utilise or amortise those rights vest in the NZTR, so theoretically anyone who wishes to publish a race field is/ or should be subject to conditions under license applied for the use of those rights. This is where I see NZTR's rights to be pivotal in respect of the RIB, who DON'T HAVE these rights vested within their appointed mandate. So the NZTR are in a position to direct and agree with the NZRB the rights (including fixed odds and any betting using the race program data) of any forms of betting using racing content.

So I have been spewing about the proposed NZRB's proposition to out source the fixed odds betting. Everyone wake up. This is another fuck up which once again is a decision making process that our leaders have absolutely no understanding of what they should do. It is once again a proposed balls up about to be executed by people who don't understand the puzzle.

So the Owners Association should mobilise themselves and claim the data. They should renegotiate the right for the NZTR to use their data. The NZTR in turn (and I understand something is under foot) should protect that data in a proper data license agreement with the NZRB. They after all have completely destroyed this industry as most of you agree that Betting is a primary driver for the prosperity of our industry.

So Owners Association, you hold the baton to start the process for correctness. A demand from you (on behalf of the owners) to both the NZTR and NZRB CAN BE A GAME CHANGER. If you do nothing, then we have to get rid of you. You will not have been looking after the owner's interests, which is what you are mandated to do.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be rather keen to know the ratios of the following parties in domestic horse ownership.

1. Studs and commercial vendors

2. Breeders ( non commercial )

3. Trainers

4. Elective participants who do it for a hobby

Can anyone help ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the clubs didn't sign over their IP as I understand is being suggested, would that therefore exclude them from the racing calendar as such and mean they had the right to negotiate to sell their IP to other providers i.e. someone else with the means of holding or televising a race day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NZRB have made arbitrary decisions such as the loss of "free to view' and the reduction in Race Form in the metropolitan papers. They sit isolated under the protective wing of their unelected status. 

If ownership of the product was assumed by them, on past history the downstream dividend to the codes would see little benefit. 

There will be a high social cost if the industry goes tits up and the problem and the likely possible solution is political.

Guy needs to pull his finger out and its time for Winston to get going again. Forget the Left as they think racing is elitist and are uncaring of the little people who derive a humble living doing what they love. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Huey said:

If the clubs didn't sign over their IP as I understand is being suggested, would that therefore exclude them from the racing calendar as such and mean they had the right to negotiate to sell their IP to other providers i.e. someone else with the means of holding or televising a race day?

I would say so. Dates are set by the RB for the purpose of domestic wagering under the Racing Act. I don't think there is anything preventing a club or consortium of clubs from conducting race meetings whenever they want to with the IP sold to say a wagering provider in China. There would be no domestic wagering unless the RB also purchased the rights. I agree with Berri that owners probably own the IP with respect to individual horse data but they essentially sign that over to clubs when they contract to participate in events staged by those clubs. That is similar to the situation of an individual tennis player signing over their IP rights to a club such as Wimbledon which is staging the event. They do that in return for a crack at the prize money and/or any appearance fees. The individual athlete rights are pretty much worthless unless they are participating in an event which can be sold for the visual and/or wagering rights. In the TR scenario, those are staged by clubs.

I'd say clubs should think long and hard before signing those rights exclusively to NZTR or NZRB, given the track record during the time which they have essentially had them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've got to follow the trail. The owner gives the horse to the trainer after having the horse registered with the NZTR. It is at this initial NZTR stage the rights start to change for the owner.  It is at this point of the puzzle where the owners have the opportunity to renegotiate the rights, and as the owners now should get pro active, this needs to be looked at with urgency. 

There is enough noise to suggest that once again the NZRB is about to make another serious mistake.

When we're these original agreements designed? How long ago? Are they now a true reflection of our modern age? 

I know what I think so why don't you go and have a look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest 2Admin2
2 hours ago, Leggy said:

I would say so. Dates are set by the RB for the purpose of domestic wagering under the Racing Act. I don't think there is anything preventing a club or consortium of clubs from conducting race meetings whenever they want to with the IP sold to say a wagering provider in China. There would be no domestic wagering unless the RB also purchased the rights. I agree with Berri that owners probably own the IP with respect to individual horse data but they essentially sign that over to clubs when they contract to participate in events staged by those clubs. That is similar to the situation of an individual tennis player signing over their IP rights to a club such as Wimbledon which is staging the event. They do that in return for a crack at the prize money and/or any appearance fees. The individual athlete rights are pretty much worthless unless they are participating in an event which can be sold for the visual and/or wagering rights. In the TR scenario, those are staged by clubs.

I'd say clubs should think long and hard before signing those rights exclusively to NZTR or NZRB, given the track record during the time which they have essentially had them.

The data has no value unless it is published and the punter determines it is of value.  It isn't IP - the data is generated by the act of racing which involves a number of factors.  The Tennis Player at Wimbledon when accepted as an entrant plays for stake money funded presumably by oncourse ticket sales and largely broadcast rights.  They have no right to those total earnings other than that that for which they compete for.  As an individual they have stuff all IP other than perhaps their "brand."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.