Peter Jenkins 2,120 Report post Posted November 3, 2017 https://racingthoughts.blog/ Noted racing journalist Mary Burgess has produced a fascinating blog on some quite breath-taking overheads at NZRB and some deck-chair shuffling. Worth a read: More climb aboard the NZRB gravy train NOVEMBER 3, 2017 / LEAVE A COMMENT In my job in the real world I joke with one of my academics about a certain media topic being “the gift which keeps on giving.” “The gift” is one of those stories which is continually evolving and of which the media is never going to tire. Pretty much how I felt when, just days after writing my last post about the salary excesses of the Racing Board, an email was circulated announcing some new appointments. Obviously those 488 permanent employees mentioned in my previous post weren’t cutting it when it came to government and industry stakeholder engagement. The email in question stated that NZRB had reviewed that area of its communication earlier this year and after an extensive recruitment process claimed they now had the right team to work more closely with stakeholders. Faced with that task is a team of five. Yes, you read that right – five people to focus on that area of communication. It was another of those jaw-dropping moments which made me ponder how many people at the Racing Board it might take to change a lightbulb. Of course, they would probably need to undertake a review before any bulb was changed and quite possibly advertise externally to ensure they found the right people! The cohort of five is headed by an Irishman Ian Long, who previously held a similar position at NZ Rugby and, like NZRB CE John Allen, also worked at NZ Post. Given the onerous task in front of him, he is going to be “supported by” parliamentary refugee Bill de la Mare, who comes to NZRB from positions with various ministers, including former racing minister Nathan Guy. Propping the other side of this front row will be James Wigley, who boasts a marketing background according to the NZRB email, though Green Grass Marketing Services where he was a Marketing Consultant for a number of years, does not appear to have any visible digital footprint. Wigley also has two years’ experience as a senior marketing manager with the NZRB’s Event Marketing and Logistics team. The final two making up the team both have interesting titles, with Pete Lane tagged as Operations Specialist and Dan Smith carrying the poisoned chalice as Strategy Manager – Calendar Optimisation. Presumably the former will provide protection when the latter advises clubs of changes to their dates! You’d think that just reading this email would be enough to confirm that NZRB is not even paying lip service when it comes to looking at ways to cut its costs. But it gets better, or worse depending upon your level of tolerance for black humour. While the email is signed by one Stephen Henry, General Manager Services, it is actually sent by an executive assistant. I am always suspicious of people who need others to send their emails, they engender memories of black and white movies where women were in the typing pool while blokes did the “real work.” It may well be that Henry is indeed too busy to deal with emails to industry stakeholders or maybe it is something which was common practice during his time at MFAT. The last time I received an email from someone, but actually generated by someone else, it came from Henry’s CE, John Allen, who also came to the Racing Board via MFAT. Given Allen proposed job losses of close to 300 when at MFAT (that was later reduced to a mere 79) one would be forgiven thinking he would be capable of bringing NZRB staffing levels back to a manageable level. However, based on this latest announcement expect the following – come the annual report there will be savings of between $3-$5million in salary expenses and we will be expected to be grateful for a job well done. Try and shake off the Stockholm syndrome, instead we now need to channel the crazy newsman from Network, meet outside those offices in Petone and yell: “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!” Will Winston slay the NZRB’s excesses? OCTOBER 31, 2017 / LEAVE A COMMENT The race has been run, all parties have weighed in, correct weight has been signalled and the country has a new government. It is one which those in racing are now expecting to deliver on the ten point promise outlined in NZ First’s racing policy. Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters has also claimed the Racing portfolio, to the surprise of those who were unaware such a thing even existed, and expectations among those who were aware are high. Prior to the election, there were two aspects of the policy which I did try and gain clarification around – without any joy. They weren’t major issues. I just asked some questions around timing and planning. Like everyone else, I will now sit back and wait for the policies to implemented and see just how my concerns are addressed. One point which I hope the Minister will address straight out of the gates though is the following: Urgently review the operations and costs of the New Zealand Racing Board. About damned time really. Earlier this year, with time on my hands, I delved into the NZRB annual reports online and charted the terrifying increase in staff numbers over the years, accompanied by an escalating cost to the industry in salaries. By 2016’s annual report staff expenses totalled $66million – a fairly healthy chunk of the operating costs. Those earning in excess of $100,000 – a mere 130-odd at the time of the 2016 Annual Report – were listed in $10,000 bands. For example, just 30 NZRB worker bees struggle along on salaries of $100,000-$110,000; 23 were finding it a little easier to afford their avocado-toast in the $110,000-$120,000 band – and so it went on right up the $350,000-$360,000 slot where there was just one lone body and then a leap to – presumably – the top man, all alone in the $650,000-660,000 bracket. It was galling to discover there are apparently that many people employed at the NZRB who are considered to be doing enough to progress our industry to warrant that level of remuneration. Would it be more palatable if we were travelling better? Personally, I don’t think so. So, because I had time on my hands I crafted an OIA request to determine how much they pay the other poor sods who are employed there. Possibly the ones who actually do the work! The breakdown, when it came, was pretty depressing. Given the letter was dated February 2017 the “categorisation of NZRB employees” was dated “as at 31/7/2017” – quite possibly they meant 2016, or maybe they were gazing into the future. Anyway, at whatever date we are looking at, the permanent full-time employees totalled 488; permanent part-time was 270; fixed term 37; and casual 78, giving a grand total of 873. The majority of those fulltime employees fell into the $40,000-$59,999 band (116); 65 were in the $60,000-$69,999; 53, $70,000-$79,999; 53, $80,000-$89,999; and 32, $90,000-$99,999. The response to my request also broke the staffing down into business units, listing job titles (but no numbers under each title) total staff and total salary. Each business unit reports to the GM of that unit and seven GMs, along with the CEO, comprise the “Leadership Team.” One GM, according to the information I was provided, manages both the Customer and On Course business units, the others control just one area. The breakdown just to pay the people the Racing Board deems it necessary to run our industry is as follows (and please note, this includes permanent, fixed term and casual staff of NZRB as at February 2017): Betting – total staff 69; total salary $4,667,624.75 Customer – total staff 341, $15,117,582.02 Finance – total staff 42, $4,500,671.94 Media & Content – total staff 181, $10,767,257.49 On Course – total staff 43, $1,940,530.06 People – total staff 10, $926,298.72 Services – total staff 99, $6,962,574.40 Technology – total staff 61, $5,743,734.00 In addition to the positions listed there were an additional 20 jobs listed under “current active recruitment” – some of these were seeking multiple appointments. If you haven’t read these numbers and had to pick your jaw up off the floor then I would respectfully suggest you are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. For too long we have tolerated a bloated, blinkered organisation which has ignored the needs of the industry it was set up to serve. Even as it blundered along, all the time telling us things were fine, we were on the cusp of something great, it assured us we needed to trust it. If you still believe this then you are a textbook case of Stockholm syndrome! I may have become more than a little obsessed with the salary levels it takes to run racing because, as the Board was cranking up its staff numbers and the dollars WE forked out to pay them, out in the real world companies were streamlining. The industry I moved back into when I left employment in racing had faced huge disruption and, accordingly, was cutting its cloth to embrace those changes. Over a period of eight years restructures and jobs being “disestablished” became the new normal and fewer people were left to do more work. And forget about wage increases and incentive payments! Interestingly, I wouldn’t have been anywhere else. There is something inspiring about learning new skills; adapting to overcome problems as safety layers were removed; and taking your staff with you on a journey to a new frontier. That happens when you have a passion for what you are doing! In the meantime accountable, seemingly to no one, the Racing Board was morphing into a cumbersome, lumbering beast suckling 800+ employees, many who seemed to be there purely for the money. Will Winston be the knight in shining armour to slay the dragon of the Board’s excesses? There are more than a few with actual skin in the game hoping that will be the case. Stay tuned! rdytdy, Pam Robson, Breeder and 3 others 4 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
More climb aboard the NZRB gravy train NOVEMBER 3, 2017 / LEAVE A COMMENT In my job in the real world I joke with one of my academics about a certain media topic being “the gift which keeps on giving.” “The gift” is one of those stories which is continually evolving and of which the media is never going to tire. Pretty much how I felt when, just days after writing my last post about the salary excesses of the Racing Board, an email was circulated announcing some new appointments. Obviously those 488 permanent employees mentioned in my previous post weren’t cutting it when it came to government and industry stakeholder engagement. The email in question stated that NZRB had reviewed that area of its communication earlier this year and after an extensive recruitment process claimed they now had the right team to work more closely with stakeholders. Faced with that task is a team of five. Yes, you read that right – five people to focus on that area of communication. It was another of those jaw-dropping moments which made me ponder how many people at the Racing Board it might take to change a lightbulb. Of course, they would probably need to undertake a review before any bulb was changed and quite possibly advertise externally to ensure they found the right people! The cohort of five is headed by an Irishman Ian Long, who previously held a similar position at NZ Rugby and, like NZRB CE John Allen, also worked at NZ Post. Given the onerous task in front of him, he is going to be “supported by” parliamentary refugee Bill de la Mare, who comes to NZRB from positions with various ministers, including former racing minister Nathan Guy. Propping the other side of this front row will be James Wigley, who boasts a marketing background according to the NZRB email, though Green Grass Marketing Services where he was a Marketing Consultant for a number of years, does not appear to have any visible digital footprint. Wigley also has two years’ experience as a senior marketing manager with the NZRB’s Event Marketing and Logistics team. The final two making up the team both have interesting titles, with Pete Lane tagged as Operations Specialist and Dan Smith carrying the poisoned chalice as Strategy Manager – Calendar Optimisation. Presumably the former will provide protection when the latter advises clubs of changes to their dates! You’d think that just reading this email would be enough to confirm that NZRB is not even paying lip service when it comes to looking at ways to cut its costs. But it gets better, or worse depending upon your level of tolerance for black humour. While the email is signed by one Stephen Henry, General Manager Services, it is actually sent by an executive assistant. I am always suspicious of people who need others to send their emails, they engender memories of black and white movies where women were in the typing pool while blokes did the “real work.” It may well be that Henry is indeed too busy to deal with emails to industry stakeholders or maybe it is something which was common practice during his time at MFAT. The last time I received an email from someone, but actually generated by someone else, it came from Henry’s CE, John Allen, who also came to the Racing Board via MFAT. Given Allen proposed job losses of close to 300 when at MFAT (that was later reduced to a mere 79) one would be forgiven thinking he would be capable of bringing NZRB staffing levels back to a manageable level. However, based on this latest announcement expect the following – come the annual report there will be savings of between $3-$5million in salary expenses and we will be expected to be grateful for a job well done. Try and shake off the Stockholm syndrome, instead we now need to channel the crazy newsman from Network, meet outside those offices in Petone and yell: “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!”
Will Winston slay the NZRB’s excesses? OCTOBER 31, 2017 / LEAVE A COMMENT The race has been run, all parties have weighed in, correct weight has been signalled and the country has a new government. It is one which those in racing are now expecting to deliver on the ten point promise outlined in NZ First’s racing policy. Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters has also claimed the Racing portfolio, to the surprise of those who were unaware such a thing even existed, and expectations among those who were aware are high. Prior to the election, there were two aspects of the policy which I did try and gain clarification around – without any joy. They weren’t major issues. I just asked some questions around timing and planning. Like everyone else, I will now sit back and wait for the policies to implemented and see just how my concerns are addressed. One point which I hope the Minister will address straight out of the gates though is the following: Urgently review the operations and costs of the New Zealand Racing Board. About damned time really. Earlier this year, with time on my hands, I delved into the NZRB annual reports online and charted the terrifying increase in staff numbers over the years, accompanied by an escalating cost to the industry in salaries. By 2016’s annual report staff expenses totalled $66million – a fairly healthy chunk of the operating costs. Those earning in excess of $100,000 – a mere 130-odd at the time of the 2016 Annual Report – were listed in $10,000 bands. For example, just 30 NZRB worker bees struggle along on salaries of $100,000-$110,000; 23 were finding it a little easier to afford their avocado-toast in the $110,000-$120,000 band – and so it went on right up the $350,000-$360,000 slot where there was just one lone body and then a leap to – presumably – the top man, all alone in the $650,000-660,000 bracket. It was galling to discover there are apparently that many people employed at the NZRB who are considered to be doing enough to progress our industry to warrant that level of remuneration. Would it be more palatable if we were travelling better? Personally, I don’t think so. So, because I had time on my hands I crafted an OIA request to determine how much they pay the other poor sods who are employed there. Possibly the ones who actually do the work! The breakdown, when it came, was pretty depressing. Given the letter was dated February 2017 the “categorisation of NZRB employees” was dated “as at 31/7/2017” – quite possibly they meant 2016, or maybe they were gazing into the future. Anyway, at whatever date we are looking at, the permanent full-time employees totalled 488; permanent part-time was 270; fixed term 37; and casual 78, giving a grand total of 873. The majority of those fulltime employees fell into the $40,000-$59,999 band (116); 65 were in the $60,000-$69,999; 53, $70,000-$79,999; 53, $80,000-$89,999; and 32, $90,000-$99,999. The response to my request also broke the staffing down into business units, listing job titles (but no numbers under each title) total staff and total salary. Each business unit reports to the GM of that unit and seven GMs, along with the CEO, comprise the “Leadership Team.” One GM, according to the information I was provided, manages both the Customer and On Course business units, the others control just one area. The breakdown just to pay the people the Racing Board deems it necessary to run our industry is as follows (and please note, this includes permanent, fixed term and casual staff of NZRB as at February 2017): Betting – total staff 69; total salary $4,667,624.75 Customer – total staff 341, $15,117,582.02 Finance – total staff 42, $4,500,671.94 Media & Content – total staff 181, $10,767,257.49 On Course – total staff 43, $1,940,530.06 People – total staff 10, $926,298.72 Services – total staff 99, $6,962,574.40 Technology – total staff 61, $5,743,734.00 In addition to the positions listed there were an additional 20 jobs listed under “current active recruitment” – some of these were seeking multiple appointments. If you haven’t read these numbers and had to pick your jaw up off the floor then I would respectfully suggest you are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. For too long we have tolerated a bloated, blinkered organisation which has ignored the needs of the industry it was set up to serve. Even as it blundered along, all the time telling us things were fine, we were on the cusp of something great, it assured us we needed to trust it. If you still believe this then you are a textbook case of Stockholm syndrome! I may have become more than a little obsessed with the salary levels it takes to run racing because, as the Board was cranking up its staff numbers and the dollars WE forked out to pay them, out in the real world companies were streamlining. The industry I moved back into when I left employment in racing had faced huge disruption and, accordingly, was cutting its cloth to embrace those changes. Over a period of eight years restructures and jobs being “disestablished” became the new normal and fewer people were left to do more work. And forget about wage increases and incentive payments! Interestingly, I wouldn’t have been anywhere else. There is something inspiring about learning new skills; adapting to overcome problems as safety layers were removed; and taking your staff with you on a journey to a new frontier. That happens when you have a passion for what you are doing! In the meantime accountable, seemingly to no one, the Racing Board was morphing into a cumbersome, lumbering beast suckling 800+ employees, many who seemed to be there purely for the money. Will Winston be the knight in shining armour to slay the dragon of the Board’s excesses? There are more than a few with actual skin in the game hoping that will be the case. Stay tuned!
Trump 2,741 Report post Posted November 3, 2017 The whole Board should resign in disgrace. Every one of them. They are a joke and obviously have not worked "in the real world". My first directive as Chairman of NZRB would be to get each General Manager to present to me within one month, a plan to cut expenses in their area of responsibility by a minimum 15%. No less, no more. Within one month of presenting their plans, they would either be fired (for incompetance) or be given one month to enact the reductions. End of story. It's typical of govt business - full of excess. Now compare that with the NAB Australia. They announce a $5b + profit and at the same time announce 6000+ redundancies over 3 years- in order to adapt to the change in banking practices. Black Kirrama, napier and Midget 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leggy 4,076 Report post Posted November 3, 2017 Well going by this, it appears that NZTR are expecting the taxpayer to fix everything and the government to do and pay for their and NZRB's jobs. MEDIA RELEASE 3 November, 2017 NZTR CHAIRMAN OUTLINES KEY THOROUGHBRED ISSUES New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing (NZTR) has identified six key points to discuss with the new Government. In his address to the NZTR Annual General Meeting on Thursday, Board chairman Dr Alan Jackson outlined the major racing issues which needed to be addressed over the next three years. NZTR will ask that the Government: Finalise and enact the Racefields legislation in a manner which ensures NZTR can charge commercially competitive fees, to encourage overseas operators to offer betting on New Zealand racing. Support NZTR to modernise key racetrack infrastructure, to deliver a sustainable programme for thoroughbred racing. Consider reinvesting totalisator and gaming duty into transformational projects such as infrastructure and racing showcases. Ensure that the operations and costs of the NZ Racing Board (NZRB), and its business model, are at scale and internationally competitive in a global wagering world. Provide financial and regulatory support for a key racing showcase between November and February that creates tourism through a racing carnival that will focus on increasing participation in wagering and customer activity from Australia and Asia. Review and update the structure of the Racing Act, to clarify the accountability, roles and responsibilities and performance expectations between the New Zealand Racing Board and the codes. “We are looking forward to meeting with the new Minister for Racing, the Rt Hon Winston Peters, who has proved very supportive of the industry in the past, to discuss the thoroughbred code’s needs,” Jackson said. NZTR had welcomed the introduction of the Racefields legislation, which had passed the first reading, but considered that adjustments were needed. “The proposals need further work to deliver a package that allows the thoroughbred code to establish a competitive and appropriate fee in Australia,” Jackson said. Discussions with Australian racing authorities and corporate bookmakers had indicated that there was little leakage from New Zealand punters but that there were significant opportunities to raise the level of Australian betting on the NZ product. “The original proposals are not competitive, given point of consumption tax expectations in Australia and New Zealand and the fact that the corporates now pay GST on digital transactions to New Zealand.” However, there was an acceptance by the corporate bookmakers of the need to pay when the legislation was in place and NZTR was in discussions with publishers and racing websites to increase direct exposure for the NZ thoroughbred product in Australia, in anticipation of the Racefields legislation being passed. NZTR, the other racing codes and the NZRB maintained the aim of achieving income flows from the Racefields legislation in the current racing year and were working together to achieve this outcome. Jackson also referred in his address to NZTR’s reservations over the direction of the current NZRB business plan and its focus on “optimising New Zealand.” “NZTR has regularly promoted to the NZRB the need to secure cost efficiencies and links with a global wagering operator rather than try to optimise New Zealand.” Multiple pieces of work, which NZTR had been involved with or undertaken, had shown that an outsourcing arrangement would provide significant financial gains. “We are not promoting a sale, but a commercial outsourcing arrangement to achieve these goals,” Jackson said. A Deloitte report, which had analysed margins, wagering growth, totalisator loss sensitivities and the value of potential synergies from outsourcing, had indicated that there were substantial potential gains for the NZ industry. The report estimated that several hundred million dollars of additional revenue could be returned to the total industry, over the next four years, by following an outsourcing approach versus insourcing and developing the fixed odds platform. These figures were also consistent with previous estimates by external parties. “The difference in our views versus NZRB is fundamentally in these areas,” Jackson said. “NZRB and NZTR disagree on the level of the outcomes likely to be achieved and the risks involved. However, NZTR can consult but we cannot decide and the NZRB is pursuing the strategic initiatives outlined in the SOI.” But there had been recent changes in the wagering landscape and, as a result of Australian gaming legislation, the NZRB was no longer permitted to take bets from Australia. “This has the potential to have a significant impact on the accessible market for New Zealand and limit exposure to the $30bn Australian wagering market,” Jackson said. “NZTR therefore is continuing to push hard on the need to urgently initiate discussions with possible Australian wagering partners, focusing upon parimutuel opportunities as a minimum. “But no matter what strategy is pursued, a modern and competitive totalisator will be essential and provides a safety net to the industry. Turny and hedley 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohokaman 5,830 Report post Posted November 3, 2017 3 hours ago, Leggy said: Well going by this, it appears that NZTR are expecting the taxpayer to fix everything and the government to do and pay for their and NZRB's jobs. MEDIA RELEASE 3 November, 2017 NZTR CHAIRMAN OUTLINES KEY THOROUGHBRED ISSUES New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing (NZTR) has identified six key points to discuss with the new Government. In his address to the NZTR Annual General Meeting on Thursday, Board chairman Dr Alan Jackson outlined the major racing issues which needed to be addressed over the next three years. NZTR will ask that the Government: Finalise and enact the Racefields legislation in a manner which ensures NZTR can charge commercially competitive fees, to encourage overseas operators to offer betting on New Zealand racing. Support NZTR to modernise key racetrack infrastructure, to deliver a sustainable programme for thoroughbred racing. Consider reinvesting totalisator and gaming duty into transformational projects such as infrastructure and racing showcases. Ensure that the operations and costs of the NZ Racing Board (NZRB), and its business model, are at scale and internationally competitive in a global wagering world. Provide financial and regulatory support for a key racing showcase between November and February that creates tourism through a racing carnival that will focus on increasing participation in wagering and customer activity from Australia and Asia. Review and update the structure of the Racing Act, to clarify the accountability, roles and responsibilities and performance expectations between the New Zealand Racing Board and the codes. “We are looking forward to meeting with the new Minister for Racing, the Rt Hon Winston Peters, who has proved very supportive of the industry in the past, to discuss the thoroughbred code’s needs,” Jackson said. NZTR had welcomed the introduction of the Racefields legislation, which had passed the first reading, but considered that adjustments were needed. “The proposals need further work to deliver a package that allows the thoroughbred code to establish a competitive and appropriate fee in Australia,” Jackson said. Discussions with Australian racing authorities and corporate bookmakers had indicated that there was little leakage from New Zealand punters but that there were significant opportunities to raise the level of Australian betting on the NZ product. “The original proposals are not competitive, given point of consumption tax expectations in Australia and New Zealand and the fact that the corporates now pay GST on digital transactions to New Zealand.” However, there was an acceptance by the corporate bookmakers of the need to pay when the legislation was in place and NZTR was in discussions with publishers and racing websites to increase direct exposure for the NZ thoroughbred product in Australia, in anticipation of the Racefields legislation being passed. NZTR, the other racing codes and the NZRB maintained the aim of achieving income flows from the Racefields legislation in the current racing year and were working together to achieve this outcome. Jackson also referred in his address to NZTR’s reservations over the direction of the current NZRB business plan and its focus on “optimising New Zealand.” “NZTR has regularly promoted to the NZRB the need to secure cost efficiencies and links with a global wagering operator rather than try to optimise New Zealand.” Multiple pieces of work, which NZTR had been involved with or undertaken, had shown that an outsourcing arrangement would provide significant financial gains. “We are not promoting a sale, but a commercial outsourcing arrangement to achieve these goals,” Jackson said. A Deloitte report, which had analysed margins, wagering growth, totalisator loss sensitivities and the value of potential synergies from outsourcing, had indicated that there were substantial potential gains for the NZ industry. The report estimated that several hundred million dollars of additional revenue could be returned to the total industry, over the next four years, by following an outsourcing approach versus insourcing and developing the fixed odds platform. These figures were also consistent with previous estimates by external parties. “The difference in our views versus NZRB is fundamentally in these areas,” Jackson said. “NZRB and NZTR disagree on the level of the outcomes likely to be achieved and the risks involved. However, NZTR can consult but we cannot decide and the NZRB is pursuing the strategic initiatives outlined in the SOI.” But there had been recent changes in the wagering landscape and, as a result of Australian gaming legislation, the NZRB was no longer permitted to take bets from Australia. “This has the potential to have a significant impact on the accessible market for New Zealand and limit exposure to the $30bn Australian wagering market,” Jackson said. “NZTR therefore is continuing to push hard on the need to urgently initiate discussions with possible Australian wagering partners, focusing upon parimutuel opportunities as a minimum. “But no matter what strategy is pursued, a modern and competitive totalisator will be essential and provides a safety net to the industry. Judging by that comment, they clearly don't expect, or want, changes to the current gravy train....let's see if Winston has any balls...... Midget 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Clydesdale 229 Report post Posted November 3, 2017 Clearly it is time for the Govt to float the TAB. Let the resulting shareholders decide as to positions held and by whom. Capital raised by the float to be shared between the industry and the Govt on a basis of who puts in and who takes. The industry takes 80% and the Govt gets 20% of the float value. Clear indication of capital input. TAB pays taxes like any other business and taxes on profits, the Govt will make more than they get at the moment in taxes, so they will be happy, because shareholders will demand profitability. A significant detail that is presently missing. Codes get representative shares of the betting pool raised annually on a recorded basis. Completely transparent both on and offshore records. Capital and profit returns are on the same basis, as are retained earnings to plan for future developments and capital expenditure. Present RIB chair and CEO can never lay claim to their roles as being successful, fiscals prove otherwise. As also do public disclosures and quotes on their own performance, JA can lay claim to being in carnival ghost train tunnel and never seeing the light at the end of the ride. Chair a significant conflict of interest. You guys need to leave the building...........pronto.................take the yes men with you as well Float the TAB and use commercial governance for goodness sake.......Lets get real with our industry. Swoopa and Peter Jenkins 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gubellini 3,995 Report post Posted November 3, 2017 John Clydesdale your comments are bang on. The government should have floated the TAB years ago. I note that yesterday Tabcorp shares closed at A$4.44. Very steady return for investors over a long period of time. Swoopa 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
