poundforpound

Big news right here

99 posts in this topic

27 minutes ago, Whyisit said:

Of course he’s just looking after himself     Racing will become only for the rich.

Arguably so.....and what the rich spend creates jobs, pays wages, rent, feeds the kids, pays the taxes.....blah blah......and in amongst all “the rich” will be the successful who just happen to have upskilled themselves to such a degree that they make a good honest living out of the game......and then you find the detritus, settled at the bottom of the pond of life.....the whingers and the nillers....they’ll be unsuccessful, spectacularly so, but they take no responsibility for their inability to achieve anything useful, instead they’ll blame the racing world for their predicament 

I don’t want to be too brutal here but the above is how life works in virtually every sector, and only you as an individual can change it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Huey said:

I'm sure he didn't get rich by wanting to sell off stuff that wasn't his to sell?

No he didn’t, he got rich by identifying an opportunity and creating Ryman Health, then taking undervalued assets ( real estate ), building new facilities, and giving the market / community what it wanted, and creating a demand for what he produced in the process, thereby enhancing its value 

Does that model ring a bell ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, poundforpound said:

No he didn’t, he got rich by identifying an opportunity and creating Ryman Health, then taking undervalued assets ( real estate ), building new facilities, and giving the market / community what it wanted, and creating a demand for what he produced in the process, thereby enhancing its value 

Does that model ring a bell ?

That's wonderful , but it doesn;t ring any bell in this context? 

So assets that don't belong to the industry , haven't been created or sustained by the industry are being identified as undervalued?? Then sold off to enhance value for the industry? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, poundforpound said:

Arguably so.....and what the rich spend creates jobs, pays wages, rent, feeds the kids, pays the taxes.....blah blah......and in amongst all “the rich” will be the successful who just happen to have upskilled themselves to such a degree that they make a good honest living out of the game......and then you find the detritus, settled at the bottom of the pond of life.....the whingers and the nillers....they’ll be unsuccessful, spectacularly so, but they take no responsibility for their inability to achieve anything useful, instead they’ll blame the racing world for their predicament 

I don’t want to be too brutal here but the above is how life works in virtually every sector, and only you as an individual can change it.

I look at it like this 20 little country tracks closed ,average 10 trainers each ,  80% will give up training not wanting to relocate although having the same dedication and nous as Kevin .

so that leaves 160 trainers less opposition looking at it in a business sense .  As I said Racing will soon become for the rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, tripple alliance said:

And here it is , racefields  ex Bernards blog .

The two Bills to be introduced will amend the 2003 Racing Act, with the first to be enacted by 1 July and putting in place the Racing Industry Transitional Authority (RITA) which will drive the transition of the industry over the following months.  RITA effectively replaces the NZRB with new personnel who will be charged with Business As Usual responsibilities combined with the necessary change management to introduce the new look and direction of the industry.

This first Bill will also see the introduction of a racing information charge (Racefields) and a point of consumption charge, with overseas betting operators being required to finally pay for the use of New Zealand racing.

 

I note there is no mention of altering the original version of racefields which's begs the question , why was it delayed . If the figures published are to believed and were proven then this delay has cost the industry around $15 Million which would have lead to apathy and resistance .  The only logical reason was to create a situation that squeezed the industry into change and to silence objectors to change .

If this was the tactic then I support it .

In my opinion if we don't make big changes racing is doomed , bring it on . Most of racings financial supporters are  approaching or are on the pension which means a little more care with spending or they are approaching departure , I know a couple of lifetime supporters who have departed recently , we need a younger generation to get involved , the only possible way to do this is a massive upgrading of facility's and going upmarket .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Huey said:

You're correct it appears to be heading that way, it's got very little future in this country if it heads that way.

Interesting on FB the only people sharing these media reports are the Studs . Avondale Rich Hill Westbury and so on .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Melbourne a million more people than NZ but only 4 thoroughbred race tracks. One races mainly mid-week (Sandown), the others share sat racing. Imho NZ has far too many tracks, many of which punters won’t bet on and we know where horse racing gets its money don’t we? Punters - especially big punters. They only bet on well designed and constructed tracks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Trump said:

Melbourne a million more people than NZ but only 4 thoroughbred race tracks. One races mainly mid-week (Sandown), the others share sat racing. Imho NZ has far too many tracks, many of which punters won’t bet on and we know where horse racing gets its money don’t we? Punters - especially big punters. They only bet on well designed and constructed tracks. 

You're correct most of the ones they won't bet on are the Metro NZ tracks that are currently being overused, its become a snore fest and its going to get worse if this type of thinking is allowed to elaborate into action.

Based on youre thinking Victoria should be getting rid of Kilmore,Cranbourne,Packenham,Benalla,Geelong,Ararat.Avoca,Bendigo,Colac,Casterton,Mornington,Werribee,Yarra Valley etc etc etc?

Why would you get rid of something that contributes to your product for nothing? I understand the part about stealing it , but too many tracks that's up to the communities that operate them to decide not the MAC fairy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Trump said:

Melbourne a million more people than NZ but only 4 thoroughbred race tracks. One races mainly mid-week (Sandown), the others share sat racing. Imho NZ has far too many tracks, many of which punters won’t bet on and we know where horse racing gets its money don’t we? Punters - especially big punters. They only bet on well designed and constructed tracks. 

I'm afraid I find that argument totally illogical. You seem to be saying that because Melbourne only needs 4 tracks for 4 million people then NZ doesn't need any tracks in the SI because we have 3 tracks in and around Auck.

Personally I find the whole track debate to be a total red herring, it is only a bit of detail. NZ's problem is not the number of tracks. We are gradually losing tracks by attrition anyhow. Hardly any industry funding goes into the small tracks. The 500,000 spent at Waimate came from the locals. You are totally deluded if you think the good folk of Waimate would have raised $500,000 and gifted it to Riccarton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Whyisit said:

I look at it like this 20 little country tracks closed ,average 10 trainers each ,  80% will give up training not wanting to relocate although having the same dedication and nous as Kevin .

so that leaves 160 trainers less opposition looking at it in a business sense .  As I said Racing will soon become for the rich

You are assuming 80% will give up , that may be true but not the younger ones who  have almost no chance to succeed in the current environment will relocate , perhaps more private tracks will become available in the smaller locations .

The biggest reason many of these effected trainers will give up is their age , over 50/60% of trainers  are 61 years of age or older , by the time these changes are fully implemented they will be pensioners and most likely downsize or retire , what happens to racing then if changes aren't planned for and implemented for what is life's and racings escapable future .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, poundforpound said:

No he didn’t, he got rich by identifying an opportunity and creating Ryman Health, then taking undervalued assets ( real estate ), building new facilities, and giving the market / community what it wanted, and creating a demand for what he produced in the process, thereby enhancing its value 

Does that model ring a bell ?

It certainly rings a bell P4P. It's exactly the model that should be or should have been applied to NZ Racing and wagering. Unfortunately, the latter's pending demise has at least partially been founded on the views and actions of people who have more or less successfully applied it in other spheres then gotten involved in racing and completely lost sight of it. Mr. Hickman appears to be following that path.

 

Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain to the rest of us how contracting NZ Racing to a handful of metro courses fits with that successful business model? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, poundforpound said:

No he didn’t, he got rich by identifying an opportunity and creating Ryman Health, then taking undervalued assets ( real estate ), building new facilities, and giving the market / community what it wanted, and creating a demand for what he produced in the process, thereby enhancing its value 

Does that model ring a bell ?

Oh, and in the interests of accuracy, he didn't "take" any undervalued assets. He bought them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Leggy said:

It certainly rings a bell P4P. It's exactly the model that should be or should have been applied to NZ Racing and wagering. Unfortunately, the latter's pending demise has at least partially been founded on the views and actions of people who have more or less successfully applied it in other spheres then gotten involved in racing and completely lost sight of it. Mr. Hickman appears to be following that path.

 

Perhaps you would be kind enough to explain to the rest of us how contracting NZ Racing to a handful of metro courses fits with that successful business model? Thanks.

No I don’t subscribe to that model

If you were a disciple of the maestro you’d know I support tiered tracks, maybe 4 or 5 of a global ( let’s dream and say Hong Kong ) standard on which we can produce a global product.

It logically follows that those few tracks would be the beneficiaries of most industry support and resources.

At the other end of the spectrum I fully acknowledge and support any cluster of racing folk who wish to conduct races on a beach or in a paddock, anywhere, as long as it’s safe, but those tracks wouldn’t be afforded resources like ( for example but not limited to ) Trackside or RIU services, and they might not even be given totalisator services 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You’re all bonkers. The problem with racing in this country has been, and still is, the attitudes of all the players. The rule book was there. Everything that could be done in the future could have been done in the past. The only thing that has happened is that the idiots in charge have given more control to government.  There was nothing preventing any activity!!!

who has ever said that the industry couldn’t improve the race surfaces? No one.

Who has ever said we couldn’t improve the racing product/ betting opportunities: media coverage etc...no one

We’ve been very good and accomplished at leaving it up to government to try and steer the children in the play pen. It has been - and still is - a disgraceful performance by all involved 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, poundforpound said:

No I don’t subscribe to that model

If you were a disciple of the maestro you’d know I support tiered tracks, maybe 4 or 5 of a global ( let’s dream and say Hong Kong ) standard on which we can produce a global product.

 

You know I am a disciple. One of the twelve. So, you can expect I'll be at the last supper. Will that be at HQ? 2 or 3 global standard tracks would do me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, poundforpound said:

But Berri fruit you can only spend your money once..and as long as the industry ( mainly owners ) remain transfixed with stakes ahead of investment we have no chance 

I’m also in agreement that 4 or 5 super tracks need to be built. I’ve provided all and sundry a plan to do this. My main beef though is training tracks. That’s where our horses get screwed.

But lessons of the past indicates that this industry is only as good as its weakest link, which in this industry is numerous links.

There are those that say the answer is all weather tracks. They are Apart from being seriously expensive to maintain, and boring racing, go and have a look at the statistics. Most of our race cancellations are not in the winter. They are at tracks who haven’t managed their surfaces and a rain cloud comes along. You can’t change where a race meeting is 3 hours before the event!!! Duck me. Just get the tracks right in the first place. We’ve tried. Been to visit all and Saundry and haven’t got anywhere. Nothing has been done as a universal initiative. All talk no do.

So we sell off a dozen race tracks. So what? What’s going to change. Betting? The way the other tracks are? 

What we are lacking is a clear vision and that won’t come until the right people are in the play pen and it’s not government 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Huey said:

You're correct most of the ones they won't bet on are the Metro NZ tracks that are currently being overused, its become a snore fest and its going to get worse if this type of thinking is allowed to elaborate into action.

Based on youre thinking Victoria should be getting rid of Kilmore,Cranbourne,Packenham,Benalla,Geelong,Ararat.Avoca,Bendigo,Colac,Casterton,Mornington,Werribee,Yarra Valley etc etc etc?

Why would you get rid of something that contributes to your product for nothing? I understand the part about stealing it , but too many tracks that's up to the communities that operate them to decide not the MAC fairy.

Well for starters, Mornington, Pakenham and Cranbourne are all set up as major training centres. Hundreds of horses in work at those 3 tracks. Geelong and Pakenham have Synth tracks to race on in winter rather than the H10 bog grass tracks in Melb’s shit winter weather. There’s no point in keeping tracks open because there are “10” horses trained there. JMHO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Trump said:

Well for starters, Mornington, Pakenham and Cranbourne are all set up as major training centres. Hundreds of horses in work at those 3 tracks. Geelong and Pakenham have Synth tracks to race on in winter rather than the H10 bog grass tracks in Melb’s shit winter weather. There’s no point in keeping tracks open because there are “10” horses trained there. JMHO. 

Plenty of reasons to keep them open so long as there is enthusiasm to do so and the place can operate financially and from a safety perspective. Youre not one of these dreamers who thinks we can replicate the Asian model are you Trump?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot is made of Greenfields in the MAC Report.

This was almost dead in the water a few weeks ago.

Its like the whole industry is waiting on Waikato to lead the charge.

Lots of challenges ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, poundforpound said:

 

It logically follows that those few tracks would be the beneficiaries of most industry support and resources.

At the other end of the spectrum I fully acknowledge and support any cluster of racing folk who wish to conduct races on a beach or in a paddock, anywhere, as long as it’s safe, but those tracks wouldn’t be afforded resources like ( for example but not limited to ) Trackside or RIU services, and they might not even be given totalisator services 

I agree with your sentiment, but isn't that what is already taking place and been pissed up against the wall? 

Why would you take the races away from the events and locations that the people want to go to?Doesn't make any sense to me, plenty of opportunity to go to the big days at the few tracks youre mentioning and on many occasions they ain't well patronised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Huey said:

Plenty of reasons to keep them open so long as there is enthusiasm to do so and the place can operate financially and from a safety perspective. Youre not one of these dreamers who thinks we can replicate the Asian model are you Trump?

Not savvy  with the Asian model but at a guess I think my answer would be no. Look, Aust is NZ’s closest racing jurisdiction. It is probably the best in the world - not perfect but still the best. Participation, prize money, punting options, breeding etc etc, Aust has a model that is working. The Industry works in unison with State Govts - some better than others. NSW and Melb lead the way. NZ doesn’t need to send reps on junkets to USA, Asia, Europe, China etc. Across the ditch they have everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Huey said:

I agree with your sentiment, but isn't that what is already taking place and been pissed up against the wall? 

Why would you take the races away from the events and locations that the people want to go to?Doesn't make any sense to me, plenty of opportunity to go to the big days at the few tracks youre mentioning and on many occasions they ain't well patronised.

They aint well patronised. That's a huge understatement . I could fire an RPG into stands on some Group 1 days here  and not harm a fly and cause only a minor delay , some tracks it may even do them a favour and improve facilities , Riccarton's old stand would be one such place . 

If they close all the country tracks , take your assets and you not happy , vote with feet , bet only on Aussie races using Aussie accounts , don't buy at NZ sales , only buy shares in Oz horses  and race in OZ  and let the big noters have  the run of their empty racecourses , all by themselves , without no filthy riff raff to ruin there day and make the empty stands look untidy . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now