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

WARNING: Racing Act Amendment Bill 2017 288-1 Introduced To Parliament

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, hesi said:

and therefore they deserve a substantial fee/payment, for the use of their facility by Sports to make money.

Except it's NOT  racing's facility, like it or not. And if anything, it's about to become substantially less so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest 2Admin2
2 hours ago, hesi said:

Was always on the cards that 'Sports' would start to push their weight around.  After all, they have many more people of influence than Racing.

As Sports FO increased, so was the likelihood that Sports would want more.

To be fair to Racing though, and I stand to be corrected, wasn't the TAB infrastructure and branding built up over the years on the back of racing wagering turnover, and therefore they deserve a substantial fee/payment, for the use of their facility by Sports to make money.

That's a sense of entitlement that has got us into trouble.  Arguably the ivory tower the TAB has built isn't worth anything hence their efforts to exert more monopoly powers to stop "leakage."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this has come about from the so called Working Group on Offshore Betting.

Thats what racing people were told but it wasn't it was the Working Group primarily on Sports Betting.

Take a look at the makeup.

Chris Tremain (Independent Chair)  was Sport Hawke’s Bay Chairman for 5 years until stepping down to become Member of Parliament for Napier. His father, All Black legend, Kel Tremain was a founding trustee of Sport Hawke’s Bay.
 John Allen (New Zealand Racing Board) Probably more sport than racing.
 Greg McCarthy (New Zealand Racing Board) Involved NZTR would appear as " go with the flow" type.
Sir Paul Collins (Chairman Sport NZ) ex Brierleys heavily involved sponsoring sport.
Raj Krishnan (DIA) unknown. Probably anti racing
Stephen Reilly (DIA) unknown good chance pro sport more than racing.

So Chris Tremain was "Independent Chair" What a joke. Now Kel Tremain was one of my sporting heroes and Chris being his son as expected has been involved in several sports organizations. You could not find anyone in New Zealand more non independent.
Don't know his involvement with racing it could be significant nevertheless its obvious where his priority is. None of the above would have the slightest knowledge or experience of overseas wagering. 
It would seem the phrase "ensuring sports viability" is required legally otherwise the plans these gentlemen have for the TAB run into difficulty. Note that the rates payments to Sport NZ will be set by regulation not legislation. Very easy therefore to tinker with it based on "sporting pressure".
Now why have  on a "working committee" People like Collins and Tremain. Seems an overkill. Obviously Glenda Hughes politically biased choices to push the sports takeover of the TAB.
If grass roots sports was benefitting it wouldn't be so bad. But Sport NZ is a government organisation infiltrating into racing with all the backslapping handouts to political buddies.
Inserting the sports agenda into the amendment is an age old political ploy to deceive the public thinking they are voting for something popular whereas they aren't aware of the "extra"

Very good read  below ...Sport NZ take on it. Note the plan to disguise the sports agenda within the Race Fields legislation.

http://www.sportnz.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Regulatory-Impact-Statement-Sport-NZ-Sports-betting-apportionment-formula.pdf

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest 2Admin2
5 hours ago, hesi said:

It is worth something, despite all the horrible things that people who have dealt with it for years know.

The 'average NZ'er', will use it for sports betting, many have been or will be new market entries, unaware of the exorbitant take out rates or monopoly demeanour.  They just want a bet, and don't want to go to the rigmarole of setting up an offshore account.

The rigmarole of setting up an offshore account is a damn sight easier than setting up one with the NZ TAB!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, slam dunk said:

All this has come about from the so called Working Group on Offshore Betting.

Thats what racing people were told but it wasn't it was the Working Group primarily on Sports Betting.

Take a look at the makeup.

Chris Tremain (Independent Chair)  was Sport Hawke’s Bay Chairman for 5 years until stepping down to become Member of Parliament for Napier. His father, All Black legend, Kel Tremain was a founding trustee of Sport Hawke’s Bay.
 John Allen (New Zealand Racing Board) Probably more sport than racing.
 Greg McCarthy (New Zealand Racing Board) Involved NZTR would appear as " go with the flow" type.
Sir Paul Collins (Chairman Sport NZ) ex Brierleys heavily involved sponsoring sport.
Raj Krishnan (DIA) unknown. Probably anti racing
Stephen Reilly (DIA) unknown good chance pro sport more than racing.

So Chris Tremain was "Independent Chair" What a joke. Now Kel Tremain was one of my sporting heroes and Chris being his son as expected has been involved in several sports organizations. You could not find anyone in New Zealand more non independent.
Don't know his involvement with racing it could be significant nevertheless its obvious where his priority is. None of the above would have the slightest knowledge or experience of overseas wagering. 
It would seem the phrase "ensuring sports viability" is required legally otherwise the plans these gentlemen have for the TAB run into difficulty. Note that the rates payments to Sport NZ will be set by regulation not legislation. Very easy therefore to tinker with it based on "sporting pressure".
Now why have  on a "working committee" People like Collins and Tremain. Seems an overkill. Obviously Glenda Hughes politically biased choices to push the sports takeover of the TAB.
If grass roots sports was benefitting it wouldn't be so bad. But Sport NZ is a government organisation infiltrating into racing with all the backslapping handouts to political buddies.
Inserting the sports agenda into the amendment is an age old political ploy to deceive the public thinking they are voting for something popular whereas they aren't aware of the "extra"

Very good read  below ...Sport NZ take on it. Note the plan to disguise the sports agenda within the Race Fields legislation.

http://www.sportnz.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Regulatory-Impact-Statement-Sport-NZ-Sports-betting-apportionment-formula.pdf

 

Yes, that paper issued earlier this year was based on the assumption that:

We have also assumed that this arrangement should continue to be set out in legislation or regulation. We have assumed this is necessary because the NZRB’s statutory objectives incentivise it to maximise betting profits for the long term benefit of the racing industry, as opposed to NSOs.

Yet as I noted above, in the meantime, that imperative has been changed in the new bill from:

(c) to promote the long-term viability of New Zealand racing.

to:

(b) promoting the long-term viability of New Zealand racing and sports:

 

Just read the latest NZTA newsletter. Not a dickie bird about this legislation. Presumably trainers are not concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are once again in a mess and it would seem that the organisations that are mandated to assist us either don't get it or are politically motivated in another manner. It was quite clear that in 2003 Bill, the government wrested ownership control of the TAB by throwing out the Transition Act portion of the Bill, settling all claims in respect of historic ownership and vesting the appointment of board members and signing off the accounts in the hands of the Minister.

We all cried foul, attended the select committee submission meetings and argued that the TAB was owned by racing, and that the clubs should maintain their right to operate their own totes. I place Gary Chittick, Rick Bettle, Murray Aklin and Jim what ever his name is of HRNZ solely responsible for allowing the current proposed amendments to have oxygen. They really allowed us to be fucked over back then and the current shambles is a continuation of that. They didn't fight for our corner and to this date I will never know why.

Now to the current proposed amendments. There is all sorts of flower in the language but the key screaming points are:

- The Bill is now for the benefit of sports and racing;

- All new bets are approved by the Department (thought to be the Department of Internal Affairs);

- All distributions from betting are now approved by the Minister and the Department (not the board); and

- Racing has no guarantees in respect of returns from sports betting;

There are other issues but these are seen to be the most important in respect of our future revenue generating potential. It is obvious that sports are crying out for a big piece of the pie. This is not only for grass roots, but is at the discretion of the Minister. The lotteries are not as profitable as before so funding needs to be created from somewhere.

As we can't get in all bet types (discretion of the Minister and DIA), we are locked out of any bet types that challenge the lotteries. As the lotteries supported sports before, revenue for sports can now be created by introducing bets conducive to supporting sports and not racing.

So why am I so pissed off, disillusioned and disappointed? Why hasn't Alan Jackson and the NZTR objected with the terms of the Bill. They should be negotiating a guaranteed rate of return for racing from sports betting due to the TAB taking the bets. Why hasn't this happened? The same could be said for the HRNZ and GRNZ. Why aren't the Trainers Association, Owners Association and Breeders Association going to war?

This is serious shit. I simply cannot believe this is happening again and it would seem that no-one is fighting the fight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Berri said:

We are once again in a mess and it would seem that the organisations that are mandated to assist us either don't get it or are politically motivated in another manner. It was quite clear that in 2003 Bill, the government wrested ownership control of the TAB by throwing out the Transition Act portion of the Bill, settling all claims in respect of historic ownership and vesting the appointment of board members and signing off the accounts in the hands of the Minister.

We all cried foul, attended the select committee submission meetings and argued that the TAB was owned by racing, and that the clubs should maintain their right to operate their own totes. I place Gary Chittick, Rick Bettle, Murray Aklin and Jim what ever his name is of HRNZ solely responsible for allowing the current proposed amendments to have oxygen. They really allowed us to be fucked over back then and the current shambles is a continuation of that. They didn't fight for our corner and to this date I will never know why.

Now to the current proposed amendments. There is all sorts of flower in the language but the key screaming points are:

- The Bill is now for the benefit of sports and racing;

- All new bets are approved by the Department (thought to be the Department of Internal Affairs);

- All distributions from betting are now approved by the Minister and the Department (not the board); and

- Racing has no guarantees in respect of returns from sports betting;

There are other issues but these are seen to be the most important in respect of our future revenue generating potential. It is obvious that sports are crying out for a big piece of the pie. This is not only for grass roots, but is at the discretion of the Minister. The lotteries are not as profitable as before so funding needs to be created from somewhere.

As we can't get in all bet types (discretion of the Minister and DIA), we are locked out of any bet types that challenge the lotteries. As the lotteries supported sports before, revenue for sports can now be created by introducing bets conducive to supporting sports and not racing.

So why am I so pissed off, disillusioned and disappointed? Why hasn't Alan Jackson and the NZTR objected with the terms of the Bill. They should be negotiating a guaranteed rate of return for racing from sports betting due to the TAB taking the bets. Why hasn't this happened? The same could be said for the HRNZ and GRNZ. Why aren't the Trainers Association, Owners Association and Breeders Association going to war?

This is serious shit. I simply cannot believe this is happening again and it would seem that no-one is fighting the fight.

 

 

Could not agree more. What puzzles me is that the Offshore Betting working group should not have been involved with Sports Betting revenue. Somewhere at someones behest the  scope was changed.

Terms of reference: offshore racing and sports betting working group

 https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Racing_Terms-of-Reference/$file/Racing_Working-Group-Terms-of-Reference-April-2015.pdf

Out of scope

Other forms of gambling such as casino gambling, gaming machine gambling, instant games, purchasing lottery tickets, submitting entries into prize competitions or any other form of “gambling”, as defined in the Gambling Act 2003, is not within the scope of the working group. Page 2 of 4 Any consideration of the application of revenue from sports betting, as outlined in the Racing Act 2003, is not within the scope of the working group.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thinking out loud here....the government wouldn't have made a deal with the breeders to get them to support this legislation....at the expense of the domestic racing industry?  After all, more and more horses are being exported....domestic market not really their focus...and because there is no visible opposition from other industry stakeholders. No one is officially speaking up for the industry.  Is that because the grass roots people don't have a voice and government can ride rough shod over us?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, slam dunk said:

Could not agree more. What puzzles me is that the Offshore Betting working group should not have been involved with Sports Betting revenue. Somewhere at someones behest the  scope was changed.

Terms of reference: offshore racing and sports betting working group

 https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Racing_Terms-of-Reference/$file/Racing_Working-Group-Terms-of-Reference-April-2015.pdf

Out of scope

Other forms of gambling such as casino gambling, gaming machine gambling, instant games, purchasing lottery tickets, submitting entries into prize competitions or any other form of “gambling”, as defined in the Gambling Act 2003, is not within the scope of the working group. Page 2 of 4 Any consideration of the application of revenue from sports betting, as outlined in the Racing Act 2003, is not within the scope of the working group.

 

I don't think the working group went outside their scope? What has appeared in the bill that is the topic of discussion here has gone well beyond the working group recommendations and appears to have occurred during the drafting process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Leggy said:

I don't think the working group went outside their scope? What has appeared in the bill that is the topic of discussion here has gone well beyond the working group recommendations and appears to have occurred during the drafting process.

Could be but its strange that the Working Group was called the Offshore and Sports Betting group. The last sentence in the Out Of Scope paragraph seems to have gone in a later date as obviously it would look embarassing a group loaded with Sport NZ persons recommending more funds to Sport NZ.

Could it be that NZTR, HRNZ, GRNZ did not know about the changeto to functions of NZRB and therefore didn't make any submissions. Possible but Alan Jackson is on record in the Informant as praising the first reading of the Bill.

Its just impossible and unfathomable that NZTR would not discuss the issue with jockeys, trainers, owners, breeders and industry associates had they known. So the only conclusion is you may be right it was inserted at the last minute and Alan Jackson never read the final draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, slam dunk said:

Could be but its strange that the Working Group was called the Offshore and Sports Betting group. The last sentence in the Out Of Scope paragraph seems to have gone in a later date as obviously it would look embarassing a group loaded with Sport NZ persons recommending more funds to Sport NZ.

Could it be that NZTR, HRNZ, GRNZ did not know about the changeto to functions of NZRB and therefore didn't make any submissions. Possible but Alan Jackson is on record in the Informant as praising the first reading of the Bill.

Its just impossible and unfathomable that NZTR would not discuss the issue with jockeys, trainers, owners, breeders and industry associates had they known. So the only conclusion is you may be right it was inserted at the last minute and Alan Jackson never read the final draft.

I'd say you are probably right SD. No-one knew. The proposals that submissions were called on did not include that.

Proposals. 7

Proposal 1: Removing the prohibition that prevents the NZRB from taking bets during a race  7

Proposal 2: Removing the restriction that requires the NZRB to only offer bets on sports represented by National Sporting Organisations. 8

Proposal 3: Permitting the NZRB to expand its range of gambling products to include betting on novelty events. 10

Proposal 4: A consumption fee for offshore gambling operators accepting bets from New Zealand  11

Proposal 5: A ‘use of data’ fee for offshore gambling operators using New Zealand racing and sports information. 13

 

The actual submissions are also here: https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.NSF/wpg_URL/Resource-material-Our-Policy-Advice-Areas-Racing-Policy?OpenDocument#submissions

I haven't trawled through them to see where the change in function might have come from. I don't see how they can write the function change into the bill when it was never part of the proposals for which submissions were called? Surely, due process hasn't been followed here.

I think the name of the working group is fine as it was about both racing and sports betting offshore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leggy,

Yep I don't think there has been any mention.

So we get down to what could be the key factor and that is Bill Birnie being appointed to the Board of NZRB. Birnie has been seemingly very active Vice Chairman of Sport NZ. but recently resigned. So we've got all the heavy hitters from Sport NZ now taking over the Racing Board. I would say the majority on the NZRB are Sport NZ activists and those that aren't are not effective and just bow to the superior business credentials of the others. 

Their next step as has been pointed out is to rename the Racing Board by taking out the Racing. Already any blurb going out describing the TAB states "the only Sports betting provider in NZ which includes horse racing and greyhound racing". Not even a distinction between gallops and harness. No just something extra on top of sports betting.

C'mon apathetic Racing people. You have been conned. The Racing Board is completely dominated by Sport NZ no wonder they are about to divert funds in that direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, slam dunk said:

Leggy,

Yep I don't think there has been any mention.

So we get down to what could be the key factor and that is Bill Birnie being appointed to the Board of NZRB. Birnie has been seemingly very active Vice Chairman of Sport NZ. but recently resigned. So we've got all the heavy hitters from Sport NZ now taking over the Racing Board. I would say the majority on the NZRB are Sport NZ activists and those that aren't are not effective and just bow to the superior business credentials of the others. 

Their next step as has been pointed out is to rename the Racing Board by taking out the Racing. Already any blurb going out describing the TAB states "the only Sports betting provider in NZ which includes horse racing and greyhound racing". Not even a distinction between gallops and harness. No just something extra on top of sports betting.

C'mon apathetic Racing people. You have been conned. The Racing Board is completely dominated by Sport NZ no wonder they are about to divert funds in that direction.

Yes, I've said this to trainers & owners at our track but they just don't seem to take it in or even understand there livelihoods are under threat.  They just continue on their merry way telling me racing is good & they're benefitting .....and that I don't know anything.....so I guess that sums everything up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2017 at 1:27 PM, Patiti said:

Should the "independent" tag also apply to sports as well as the three codes.

That would disqualify the chair and Birnie.

The Racing Act would disqualify the Vice Chairman of Sport NZ being on the board. I am surprized that Bill Birnie having been Vice Chairman Sport NZ for some eight years would resign that position in order to get on the board. Obviously the calling for applicants to fill the board positions was a sham as Birnie was always going to be appointed.

The Chairman of Sport NZ too can not get on the Board but lo and behold he is put on the Offshore Betting Working Group. Quite bizarre as it baffles the imagination just why an ex chairman of Brierleys knighted as well would get involved with the intricacies of horse betting. Then there is the so called "Independent" Chairman of the Working group" Chris Tremain an ex MP and heavily involved with Sport NZ. Once again what experience has he had with wagering, None. Yet he is the king pin for overseas wagering. Berri Shroeder with experience trying to launch RaceO would have been better.  

A good contact tells me  Chris Tremain is being "credentialed" to take over from Glenda Hughes as the next Racing Board Chairman.

Pity if Labour gets in all that planning goes out the window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/2/2017 at 8:39 AM, La Zip said:

Yes, I've said this to trainers & owners at our track but they just don't seem to take it in or even understand there livelihoods are under threat.  They just continue on their merry way telling me racing is good & they're benefitting .....and that I don't know anything.....so I guess that sums everything up!

La Zip perhaps you should frame it in the context of an own goal might help them understand.

Speaking of own goals then the decision to support the Paddy Power so called fixed odds platform would have to constitute a dozen own goals. This has no benefit to racing but is a huge promotion of sports betting. In fact by minimizing the odds on the "plunge horse" it will turn away horse punters as the a simple exercise of comparing different bookies  odds is fruitless.

I've asked before for someone to explain how this "platform" will help racing  There will still be local analysts employed by the TAB to set the odds. There is just no sense. 

TAB should be concentrating on point of sale technology then fixing the back end to cope with demand.  But thats not relevant to Sports betting so TAB don't care.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we've got to wake up to this notion. Under the proposed Act, racing isn't guaranteed anything....in fact our relevance is being diluted.

So why do you think that a $40m is being spent on a fixed odds betting platform with an annual cost of $17m to run it? Is it for racing?....

So I have a few contacts in the world of betting. I can secure a working fixed odds betting platform for about 5 million quid. May not have all the functionality that we need for the future (block chain and the like), but it would do a good job.....that's for racing. Simple selection options for the bet types because racing is racing....

Or am I spending the money on a platform for sports?.....far more options/ complications etc. So if I get this right, this platform is being built for sports using racing money without any guarantees to racing.

You all happy about that?

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.