NZ Racing & Queensland Racing

[MrBigStuff 398]

29 minutes ago, TOM(the other Molloy) said:

Which smaller Clubs?????

Virtually every effing one has a superior turnover

Didn't they say on another recent thread that Riccarton turned over $15000 on course one recent day?  How does Mr Big Stuff and his cronies explain that?

19 days out of 20 nobody goes to these prestige tracks you lot are flogging as the be all and end all and every one of them has major issues with its surface.

In an ideal world yes but as it stands they are not up to taking on all that extra racing.

If this theory worked Ellerslie should be turning over approximately $56m oncourse on any given day to keep up with Reefton.  

Otherwise cut it loose I say! 

 

 

 

Cut it loose, you are bewildered 

[skelly 53]

2 hours ago, puha said:

Compare Waipuk and Avondale recently on turnover on course. Also Waipuk was up 100k off course this year compared to last. What's better having a population of close to 1 million and 200 people turn up or a population of 20 thousand and 800 people turn up? 

I wasn't really talking about Waipuk, but I'll play.

Hypothetically, let's say Waipuk didn't exist. How much worse would the turnover have been if it had been run at Awapuni or Hastings? Hastings had a meeting a few weeks earlier and did 12k extra oncourse and 200k extra offcourse. Which is the better result for the industry? Waipuk?

Why keep two courses going when one will suffice? It's the same damned horses no matter where the course is.

I don't get the logic behind keeping extra courses, it seems to be emotional. But I'm a robot, so what do I care.

[MrBigStuff 398]

1 hour ago, skelly said:

I wasn't really talking about Waipuk, but I'll play.

Hypothetically, let's say Waipuk didn't exist. How much worse would the turnover have been if it had been run at Awapuni or Hastings? Hastings had a meeting a few weeks earlier and did 12k extra oncourse and 200k extra offcourse. Which is the better result for the industry? Waipuk?

Why keep two courses going when one will suffice? It's the same damned horses no matter where the course is.

I don't get the logic behind keeping extra courses, it seems to be emotional. But I'm a robot, so what do I care.

More sense spoken! Good on ya buddy

[puha 2,177]

I don't get how you think closing down tracks for the sake of it would help ? The two courses you mention actually compliment each other not work against each other. One the clubs has one part time paid employee is well of financially and is a great asset to the wider community and stands on its own to feet. Your weak and pathetic argument is let's close it down why? 

[Huey 2,037]

6 hours ago, skelly said:

I wasn't really talking about Waipuk, but I'll play.

Hypothetically, let's say Waipuk didn't exist. How much worse would the turnover have been if it had been run at Awapuni or Hastings? Hastings had a meeting a few weeks earlier and did 12k extra oncourse and 200k extra offcourse. Which is the better result for the industry? Waipuk?

Why keep two courses going when one will suffice? It's the same damned horses no matter where the course is.

I don't get the logic behind keeping extra courses, it seems to be emotional. But I'm a robot, so what do I care.

Unfortunately you're as naive as 90% of the population when it comes to this argument.

You can't just pull out an isolated comparison between two venues and claim it has some sort of meaning to it.

What happens to racing in these communities when you stop racing there? what happens to horse numbers from these areas if you close the venues(they don't just move to a new venue, they are more than likely gone) , can your alternative venues handle the racing ? Why shouldn't the racing happen at these venues as it costs the industry nothing, they are more than likely self funded , why close these venues when there is likely nothing in it for the racing industry in doing so?

[porky 900]

18 hours ago, MrBigStuff said:

Goat tracks 

Ellerslie...follow the leader'

Although i suspect your date changes and improvements to favour certain tracks under this regime, may well happen.

Like Puha , Huey and co.... I rue the day, if it happens, and many industry participants and punters give the big finger and move on at these venues affected.

Another sure and certain way to ensure racings continued loss of interest and popularity. 

 

[TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774]

10 hours ago, MrBigStuff said:

Cut it loose, you are bewildered 

I think we know who is bewildered.

Your friends at Ellerslie only have about $57,800,000 of average oncourse turnover per day to catch up 

Oh and it they could sort their dung hill track out so it can be raced on more that five months a year that would be good too

 

[MrBigStuff 398]

And I am sure they will.

its the same old people who run to the defense of the country goat tracks on here every time while the industry continues to go backwards.

when will we learn

[TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774]

8 hours ago, skelly said:

I wasn't really talking about Waipuk, but I'll play.

Hypothetically, let's say Waipuk didn't exist. How much worse would the turnover have been if it had been run at Awapuni or Hastings? Hastings had a meeting a few weeks earlier and did 12k extra oncourse and 200k extra offcourse. Which is the better result for the industry? Waipuk?

Why keep two courses going when one will suffice? It's the same damned horses no matter where the course is.

I don't get the logic behind keeping extra courses, it seems to be emotional. But I'm a robot, so what do I care.

The point you miss Skelly is that Waipuk probably costs absolutely zero to retain.  The Committee there(and I have no idea who any of them are) will be fundraising and getting stuck in themselves at working  bees and chasing sponsors.  Their two or three days per year probably generate $25 - $30k in extra dosh going into the industry by way of sponsorship and free labour that would,if the days were simply transferred to Awapuni or Trentham or somewhere, simply disappear.

Shift those two or three days to Awapuni and no doubt there will have to be another admin person employed plus extra track staff and promotions men - next thing $50+k of industry money is down the toilet and when it comes to the raceday there will be nobody there.

My own case is a classic example.  The thousand bucks(plus GST) I put up as sponsorship for Reefton returns me not one single cent.  It is purely for love of the game and loyalty to the Club that I do it.  When the inevitable happens(and it will) there is not a hope in hell of me transferring that sponsorship elsewhere.  There is also the personal effort I and the committee put in - for instance I doubt too many ARC committeemen scrub the birdshit off the grandstand seats before raceday.

No to mention the continuous piffle on topics of no relevance whatsoever to the advancement of NZ racing that Petone in particular insist on pounding us with relentlessly.  If there is one thing I will not miss when this is all over it is the tripe that lot insist on hammering us with. 

 

[TOM(the other Molloy) 1,774]

1 hour ago, MrBigStuff said:

And I am sure they will.

its the same old people who run to the defense of the country goat tracks on here every time while the industry continues to go backwards.

when will we learn

And I am sure they will??????

They and all the rest of them have their beady eyes on the value of those assets you and your ilk want to close down and sell. It is clear Petone intends to divert that dosh to the big clubs for what might loosely be called 'infrastructure'. 

If past history is any guide they will piss all that money up against the wall as well and where will they get their funds from then?

Attrition of clubs and courses is inevitable but as far as some halfwit in Petone telling me we are shut down well they can go and get stuffed.  We will cease in our own good time and I am certain there will be a deluge of small clubs the same soon after.