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

John Allen address to 2016 Harness Conference

Recommended Posts

Guest 2Admin2

What does Trackside's cameras and machinery have to do with the NZRB?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest 2Admin2
Just now, MisterEd said:

What!  Helloooooooo! Do you realize the NZ racing board has a broadcasting arm!

Helloooooooooooo what?!  Didn't the NZRB sell out to a private organisation which they funded to set up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 2Admin2 said:

Helloooooooooooo what?!  Didn't the NZRB sell out to a private organisation which they funded to set up?

Good point Admin. Although "selling out" may not be entirely correct.

However the whole deal and believe me I have studied it and also talked to board members just never seemed logical.

I recall Bayliss or was it the Board Chairman coming out and saying they had aligned themselves with NZLive Ltd "leaders in the field" yet they hadn't yet started trading.

 

 

So maybe John Allen rather than entertaining IWMC come out and update the racing public on the Stanley St deal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I note from the speech in the head post that JA is also becoming an expert in mental health. The causes of depression now evidently include:

  • Changes in brain chemistry,
  • Genetics,
  • Changes in hormone levels,
  • Certain medical conditions,
  • Stress, grief or difficult life circumstances,
  • Reading Racecafe

I'm looking forward to seeing the new edition of the DSM, maybe DSM V - Revised.

I understand some other scientists are proposing that a further addition be made to that list.

  • Examining the performance and competence of the NZTR and NZRB leadership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting quote from JA's speech.   Agency business has gone up 12%

That is mind boggling considering there has been wholesale closure of retail agencies or does it mean profitability contribution from agencies?

Also if the margin on fixed odds bets has increased does that take into account the actual costs of producing that margin bearing in mind the more you take away from punters with fixed odds the less turnover on tote bets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SD, I suspect that "agency business" means turnover, NOT revenue. I don't think margins can have gone up based on what he reported. FOB margins for domestic harness may have gone up by 3m, but the facts as he reported are that net profit has gone up by $2m (as estimated, from 144.2m to 146.2m). If the gain in net revenue from pokies reported in the 6 month accounts has persisted in the second six months, then probably $5m of that has come from gaming and net profit from wagering is flat or slightly declined.  There sounds like a lot of spruiking going on in that speech that may not be very transparent. I hope I'm wrong but that's the perception I get. I wish they would just be specific and transparent about the state of play and give up this bs nonsense.

He also said that they would double account holders, apparently by making account verification easier and online because most new accounts don't follow up by going to a TAB and verifying. At the same time he dismisses the claims made here and elsewhere in social media that people aren't betting because the racing product is flawed by inconsistent tracks, noncompetitive handicapping systems etc. That is all brilliant apparently and we just need to simplify the verification process and all will be well. We'll double account holders and that will translate to vastly increased bottom line profits in somewhere between 6 months and 4 years, depending on which speech you listen to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Statistics can be made to make one look great. If 500 Agencies produced income of $500m it would average $1m per Agency right? If they close 100 Agencies and still do $500m, one could say income per Agency has been increased right? A wonderful 25% increase in income per Agency right? Don't believe all the Spin - it's easy to do. That's how bonuses are paid even in bad times !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Trump said:

Statistics can be made to make one look great. If 500 Agencies produced income of $500m it would average $1m per Agency right? If they close 100 Agencies and still do $500m, one could say income per Agency has been increased right? A wonderful 25% increase in income per Agency right? Don't believe all the Spin - it's easy to do. That's how bonuses are paid even in bad times !!

Exactly Trump. What they don't seem to get is that punter spend is not increasing. It doesn't matter if they have more or less agencies, more or less betting options. Nothing will change unless the racing product attracts more new punters, or existing punters to lose more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Leggy said:

Exactly Trump. What they don't seem to get is that punter spend is not increasing. It doesn't matter if they have more or less agencies, more or less betting options. Nothing will change unless the racing product attracts more new punters, or existing punters to lose more.

And nothing will improve if John Allen keeps running the TAB along 1950's lines.

There has to be a total rethink something John Allen because of his lack of confidence in his own knowledge of the industry can't do.

The NZRB has to be split up into.

1. Media/Marketing/Information 

2. Front End ...that visible to the public.

3. Backend ... the nitty gritty of processing bets and delivering raw info to media division. and front end.

The front end under control of a reinvented NZTR for gallops so that galloping people have control how that particular betting is displayed to the public which includes presentation of retailers if any required.

I could go on but thats the general gist.... its worth noting that the costs of the front end can be negligible. Its horrifying to think Allen is going to spend $19 million. On what???

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, hesi said:

1.  Straight talker, no jargon like the previous CEO's, learn't his topic well and finger on the pulse, professional.  Acknowledges that what is being done is not enough.

2.  Interesting that he is using the RB resources to address the BYO issue

3.  The fact he mentions Race Cafe twice, is damming of Racing journalism.  RC has taken over as the only platform for the airing of criticism of the racing industry

4.  Interesting also that he did get duped by the Lisa Allpress article being misleading in saying she rode 5 winners and only cleared $200, when the riding fees of about $1000 had not been added in.

Racing journalism ? They have got rid of anyone who writes critical stories....only the poodles are left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Trump said:

Statistics can be made to make one look great. If 500 Agencies produced income of $500m it would average $1m per Agency right? If they close 100 Agencies and still do $500m, one could say income per Agency has been increased right? A wonderful 25% increase in income per Agency right? Don't believe all the Spin - it's easy to do. That's how bonuses are paid even in bad times !!

What's that old line.."There's lies, damned lies and statistics...." :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, hesi said:

It appears Race Cafe has become preferred reading for those leading the industry, so instead of being so negative about things(probably justifiable), it's the perfect opportunity to re-emphasise all those suggestions about what is needed for a sustainable industry.

 

this would be a good start -

ian-paisley-quote-the-day-for-deception-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hesi said:

It appears Race Cafe has become preferred reading for those leading the industry, so instead of being so negative about things(probably justifiable), it's the perfect opportunity to re-emphasise all those suggestions about what is needed for a sustainable industry.

 

I doubt if it's the "preferred" reading option, but it does give those described as industry leaders a small window through which they can look to determine the pulse of the grass roots participants.

I take your point thought, so I'll lead off with what bothers me, or where I consider they're negligent.

1. Accountability and transparency. If they spend our money on junkets then they should advise where they're going, what they're doing, and most importantly, publish a report or summary after the event giving us some indication of what they achieved.

2. Incentivise horses to run raceday. All expenses should be paid for by the authorities, nom's, acceptances, riding fees, transport, and modest appearance money for trainers and their staff. Every runner earns $14,000 for the industry, the net profit from every runner is just under $2,000, it follows that every field should have 14 runners not the current 10. It's so bloody simple, everyone wins when you have more runners.

3. Invest in infrastructure. The TB code has been raped and abused as NZTR has pursued a ludicrous preoccupation with stakes. No one wins when you plough everything into stakes, just like any healthy business you must invest in R&D, health and safety, and infrastructure. NZTR has proved it has no idea or ability to do what's right with regard to tracks or presenting an international quality product so cut them out of the loop, get rid of the liability that is NZTR, but you, the NZRB, should invest in half a dozen key clubs John and treat their upgrade as an above the line S16 expense so that we can have international quality product produced on an international quality stage, to sell to a discerning international audience.

4. Read the Racing Act John. In particular this.

Functions of Board

(1)

The functions of the Board are—

(a)

to develop policies that are conducive to the overall economic development of the racing industry, and the economic well-being of people who, and organisations which, derive their livelihoods from racing:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I applaud the initiative to improve tax concessions in respect of the industry. But what I haven't seen is an inclusive initiative that really gets to the core of improving the stock numbers, in particular top class stock. We all know that the best form of marketing for the thoroughbred industry is the realisation of a good horse. Those horses attract interest, entertainment and betting. Therefore the whole issue of taxation should draw the attention of those that wish to invest there hard earnt on superior stock. So there should be a scaled tax incentive in respect of investment in the right type of horse. Not a difficult proposition....if you buy a young mare that is a group one winner, you should get a full right off in the first year with incentives for the resultant progeny. Like wise there should be subsidiary benefits for producing mares, types of pedigree etc etc. The same could be said for stallions. But this proposition needs to be inclusive of industry participants and not the whim of any person who has little experience. That way we can get the best deal which makes the most amount of sense.

In respect of the rest, dear old John has a daunting task but he's got to stop seeking the advice of those who have already failed to stimulate the industry. Every member of every board who has been there for longer than 4 years have not been a help. They have been treading water.

We have major issues in respect of technology, media, data amortisation, racetracks, the structure of the racing calendar, our betting platforms and people (just to name a few). There are a number of interested parties within the industry that have the experience and knowledge to address a number of these. The problem is that these people are never asked for their help, and when advice is sought, the failure model participants seem to continue to be included.

So if you read this John, please make an initiative to gather a group of concerned, intelligent and knowledgeable people who do not have conflicts of interest and have the desire to fix the industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note to Berri Chittick.

It's called The Racing Act for a reason.

If it was about breeding it'd be called The Breeding Act.

Breeders, and those who represent them, have had every opportunity to make constructive change in this industry but they've done nothing useful, except get disproportionate resources and policies directed toward bloody females. I don't need to remind you of specifics but have a think about the abusive handicapping model ( and all the male horses that've been forced out of the racing game ) and the 200+ race that are female only, always with excessive stakes, and seldom if ever capacity fields.

Breeders in NZ are quite competent Berri/Garry, so competent that if you lend them your ear for five minutes they'll usually tell you how good they are. The racing folk are not quite so well off Berri/Garry, they're struggling to a man/woman, so let's agree that the breeders should keep their noses out of racing, and the racing community should keep their noses out of breeding, unless of course you need a hand selecting your next stallion ( wouldn't that be hilarious !! how would you be if NZTR told you which stallion to buy !!  ).

Anyway let's agree John that breeders have bigger houses than most of us, bigger boats, bigger helicopters, bigger egos, bigger beach houses, but smaller ideas with zero lateral vision, so tell them to XXXX XXX please.

Anyway, I've had the Petone xxxxxx pick you a nice new horse  !!

 

image.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest 2Admin2
1 hour ago, Berri said:

I applaud the initiative to improve tax concessions in respect of the industry. But what I haven't seen is an inclusive initiative that really gets to the core of improving the stock numbers, in particular top class stock. We all know that the best form of marketing for the thoroughbred industry is the realisation of a good horse. Those horses attract interest, entertainment and betting. Therefore the whole issue of taxation should draw the attention of those that wish to invest there hard earnt on superior stock. So there should be a scaled tax incentive in respect of investment in the right type of horse. Not a difficult proposition....if you buy a young mare that is a group one winner, you should get a full right off in the first year with incentives for the resultant progeny. Like wise there should be subsidiary benefits for producing mares, types of pedigree etc etc. The same could be said for stallions. But this proposition needs to be inclusive of industry participants and not the whim of any person who has little experience. That way we can get the best deal which makes the most amount of sense.

Berri - how will this assist the New Zealand RACING industry?  The BEST horses no longer race here.  The rewards and stakes are better across the ditch.  What you are proposing will make it better for the big breeders who predominantly sell the BEST to overseas clients.  If the breeders do get even more tax breaks can we count on them putting some money into stakes or track upgrades or technical innovation?  I guess with the latter they already have a hand in that by leasing buildings to Trackside.

horse.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Admin...surely you know the answer to this? The more better horses NZ produces, the more better ones go to Aussie which markets our industry no matter what. At the same time, the more better horses bred here, the more stay here as well, thereby improving the spectacle here. The more better horses here, the better the betting because the better the interest. Instead of only having half a dozen good horses racing in NZ, we need a couple of dozen good one (and when I mean good I mean up to group one class). It all adds up...

So IF we have a genius with good connections who feels he can change the taxation for the better, lets make sure he's got the right ammo

And don't think that I'm not aware of the many far more important assets that we need to develop, customise or improve in order to provide the platform for growth. It just seemed in IMWC labelled this as John's main cause in life at the mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎08‎/‎2016 at 10:12 AM, Midget said:

Note to Berri Chittick.

It's called The Racing Act for a reason.

If it was about breeding it'd be called The Breeding Act.

Breeders, and those who represent them, have had every opportunity to make constructive change in this industry but they've done nothing useful, except get disproportionate resources and policies directed toward bloody females. I don't need to remind you of specifics but have a think about the abusive handicapping model ( and all the male horses that've been forced out of the racing game ) and the 200+ race that are female only, always with excessive stakes, and seldom if ever capacity fields.

Breeders in NZ are quite competent Berri/Garry, so competent that if you lend them your ear for five minutes they'll usually tell you how good they are. The racing folk are not quite so well off Berri/Garry, they're struggling to a man/woman, so let's agree that the breeders should keep their noses out of racing, and the racing community should keep their noses out of breeding, unless of course you need a hand selecting your next stallion ( wouldn't that be hilarious !! how would you be if NZTR told you which stallion to buy !!  ).

Anyway let's agree John that breeders have bigger houses than most of us, bigger boats, bigger helicopters, bigger egos, bigger beach houses, but smaller ideas with zero lateral vision, so tell them to XXXX XXX please.

Anyway, I've had the Petone xxxxxx pick you a nice new horse  !!

 

image.jpeg

Now now my desperate friend, luckily you remembered to take the bucket away before you took this portrait of the latest love of your life. Pretty average job of crutching so that you knew where the wet spot might be. Love the reverse Mohawk in front....I must get your hairdresser's name.

Don't disagree with you in respect of the fillies races. That was an ill conceived experiment that couldn't help. You still can't make money winning average fillies and mares races worth $10k a piece and you can't make a fine purse out of a pig's ear so you're not going to make fillies into good horses no matter what. The powers that be haven't quite realised that the international agents discount our black type race form because in the majority of occasions, it doesn't stack up. Joe the betting public also isn't really interested in betting on average filly races. We need good horses to bring them back but this isn't the only thing.

You may be aware that a white flag has been placed on the battlements with Mr Chittick. I thought, as the chairman of the RIB, that he had a chance to make real change but unfortunately there was much too much noise to entice him to make that happen. Life's too short.

We need a team to help. I'm slowly getting one together but its not easy as time is the killer of all.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's hopeless Berri, we're stuffed for so many reasons.

Costs are rising ever faster, returns are diminishing, the racing is of such poor quality you just can't embrace it, and arguably the worst aspect of our predicament is that the hard working battlers are being ignored, taken for granted, and meantime the salary earners at both the NZRB and NZTR seem oblivious or indifferent.

Not that I think the NZRB and NZTR are particularly negligent anyway, it's just that they don't seem to have any ideas to stem the tide of hopelessness.

Costs associated with breeding will increase by 20% this year, less horses will be bred, less foals next year, and the toxic vortex we're trapped in gathers strength and swallows us up.

If only we could wind the clock back ten years, and use the Fairtax money for investment to create better facilities and  a better product that we could sell on the international market....too late now....

Out of curiosity, is there anyone out there who still believes the Fairtax windfall was well spent ? and if there is could that same person help me understand how we're ever going to dig our way out of this hole as long as we waste all our money on stakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems blindingly obvious to anyone with more than a cursory interest in the industry, Midget. What will it take for the NZRB and NZTR to go into crisis mode and take some urgent drastic action to try (at least) to arrest the slide. Maybe the day they realise their own jobs are in jeopardy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But their jobs will never be in jeopardy because they just cream it off the top.

I can't think of a single person who's accountable on a performance basis in either organisation, not one, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

I'd go further and say you can't expect them to empathise with us or even to understand our plight, because they know that every week they get a handsome deposit in their bank account. They're insulated from the harsh reality of racing life.

Someone very close to me used to get $1,500 an hour for doing that Saturday morning Trackside show, and he used to think he was underpaid, but then he went training, and he didn't get $1,500 a week, in fact he didn't get $1,500 a month !!

Therein lies the problem, unless you've been at the bloody coalface, as an owner, trainer or jockey, you simply cannot understand the awful pile of shit those who spill their blood and their sweat, toiling without gratitude to put on the show, are in. It's depressing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest 2Admin2

Maybe Allen should spend a morning or three working in a small stable (the type that makes up most of our stables).  Not a breeder backed stable propped up by over priced yearling sales, with heaps of staff and nicely appointed boxes, walkers, swimming pools and rose gardens.  No your run of the mill stock standard NZ hard working stable.

By the time the real work is finished he will still have time to put in a full days work at the Board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1 August 2016 at 8:23 AM, Midget said:

I doubt if it's the "preferred" reading option, but it does give those described as industry leaders a small window through which they can look to determine the pulse of the grass roots participants.

I take your point thought, so I'll lead off with what bothers me, or where I consider they're negligent.

1. Accountability and transparency. If they spend our money on junkets then they should advise where they're going, what they're doing, and most importantly, publish a report or summary after the event giving us some indication of what they achieved.

2. Incentivise horses to run raceday. All expenses should be paid for by the authorities, nom's, acceptances, riding fees, transport, and modest appearance money for trainers and their staff. Every runner earns $14,000 for the industry, the net profit from every runner is just under $2,000, it follows that every field should have 14 runners not the current 10. It's so bloody simple, everyone wins when you have more runners.

3. Invest in infrastructure. The TB code has been raped and abused as NZTR has pursued a ludicrous preoccupation with stakes. No one wins when you plough everything into stakes, just like any healthy business you must invest in R&D, health and safety, and infrastructure. NZTR has proved it has no idea or ability to do what's right with regard to tracks or presenting an international quality product so cut them out of the loop, get rid of the liability that is NZTR, but you, the NZRB, should invest in half a dozen key clubs John and treat their upgrade as an above the line S16 expense so that we can have international quality product produced on an international quality stage, to sell to a discerning international audience.

4. Read the Racing Act John. In particular this.

Functions of Board

(1)

The functions of the Board are—

(a)

to develop policies that are conducive to the overall economic development of the racing industry, and the economic well-being of people who, and organisations which, derive their livelihoods from racing:

 

Absolutely Midget, in fact reverting to your point 2, by introducing said incentives owners will be encouraged to participate, then many owners will be enthused, excited and satisfied, so much so, they will become breeders, breed from their successful mares and race the progeny rather than sell, even if they do sell, there will be more owners to buy, bigger fields, bigger turnover, win win…..history repeats, the best racing chairman AUS ever had former STC boss, Bill Picken introduced this scheme to Sydney racing, the fields went up immediately and jocks, trainers, owners were rewarded……MEL racing did same, and their racing went ballistic. It's not rocket science, all it needs is an exec with foresight and aptitude, the backing of the board and away we go,,,,,,in a positive way, not like Paul Belsham and many other poor buggers who just went away!

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.