RaceCafe..#1...Tipsters Thread.... Share Your Fancies For Fun...Lets See Who The Best Tipsters Here Are.
scooby3051

DEAN MCKENZIE RITA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Recommended Posts

Previously, when the 2nd TV channel came to life we (NZ) were promised a better more in depth coverage of NZ meetings, especially the bigger meetings. Sadly this has not happened!  There was some use of Youtube, which was great! but that option to seems to have floundered!  Under your watch will there be any improvement with local coverage??

Also, one area in the digital world where  Racing is drifting way way way behind (read nearly being lapped!)  compare to other 'professional sports' is in the area of using the likes of Wikipedia for recording Historical information,   google the names of say all our top jockeys, trainers and horses and there is almost Nothing to be found.   The word Pathetic comes to mind!  I could talk at length on this subject!

  1. Asking for a friend 

 

There will be increasing focus on using the likes of YouTube for non-race action, which you are right, was used with great effect during the Auckland Cup. The Codes also have a big role to play in this through their own channels. Trackside continues to be primarily about providing constant product for betting, but I agree, there’s definitely more to be done to show other aspects of race meetings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spoke to Dean this morning and I have sent him the relevant questions, hope to get some answers back in a day or so as we promised...thanks to everyone who contributed...and thanks Dean for doing this we were the only site he offered to do it for...and thanks for putting some great questions for him to answer.Cheers...Scooby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone I ended up submitting about 26 questions to Dean, there were a few I did not submit, but he has said he will get back with answers to maybe half by tomorrow and the balance by the weekend,I really appreciate the time he is taking to do this as he has plenty on his plate, hope everyone here does too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK 26 questions submitted 26 answered...some that were not submitted were repeats of others or considered not relevant so some may not be happy...but I think he gives honest and full reply and once again I really appreciate as we all should him taking time to do this....thanks again Dean.:rcf-happy-7:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, scooby3051 said:

Here is all the questions as they come just in case anyone wants to see the original answers...there are a few naysayers out in cyberland.

Race Café Questions 3.10.19.pdf

Dean should be commended for providing these answers....whether you agree with them or not. Going in the right direction it seems....:rcfe-like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (Exemptions) Amendment Regulations 2018

Exemption of Racing Industry Transition Agency from some duties under section 31 of Act

 

The Racing Industry Transition Agency (the Agency), in carrying out its duties under section 31 of the Act, is not required to link a cash transaction between a person and the NZRB involving less than $10,000

 

if i have a $50  bet and manage to win $1200 how is that money laundering ...if i placed a bet of $5,000 then sure ask the question...this stupid rule has nothing to do with someone who manages to jag a win ...why should have to prove to your organisation who i am...change this invasive rule to those placing bets in large amounts..

 

  1. Voice of reason

 

We 100% agree with your comments. This “rule” resulted from government Anti-Money Laundering (AML) changes that came into effect on 1 August and not from TAB policy or the like. We lobbied hard for the limit to be higher - ideally more closely aligned with Australia however we weren’t successful at the time. We can assure you that we are actively working with the Ministers Office and also the Department of Internal Affairs, who oversee these matters, to encourage change. In the interim, it’s really important we’re very clear with punters about what is required, particularly as we come up to the Spring Carnival, so we’ll be working hard to get the message out. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So who reduced it to the crazy amount of 1K?  Doesn't sound by the reply it could be the DIA so that leaves one outfit which doesn't surprise me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, LightsOut said:

 

if i have a $50  bet and manage to win $1200 how is that money laundering ...if i placed a bet of $5,000 then sure ask the question...this stupid rule has nothing to do with someone who manages to jag a win ...why should have to prove to your organisation who i am...change this invasive rule to those placing bets in large amounts..

 

  1. Voice of reason

 

We 100% agree with your comments. This “rule” resulted from government Anti-Money Laundering (AML) changes that came into effect on 1 August and not from TAB policy or the like. We lobbied hard for the limit to be higher - ideally more closely aligned with Australia however we weren’t successful at the time. We can assure you that we are actively working with the Ministers Office and also the Department of Internal Affairs, who oversee these matters, to encourage change. In the interim, it’s really important we’re very clear with punters about what is required, particularly as we come up to the Spring Carnival, so we’ll be working hard to get the message out. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So who reduced it to the crazy amount of 1K?  Doesn't sound by the reply it could be the DIA so that leaves one outfit which doesn't surprise me.

 

so even when given the actual answer you still can't accept it...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Rasputin said:

so even when given the actual answer you still can't accept it...

 

Of course not. It is wrong isn't it based on the current legislation which Lights Out cited? Why were they lobbying for a higher limit when they already had it? Or was that wiped out by the Racing Act amendment? Please explain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, scooby3051 said:

Here is all the questions as they come just in case anyone wants to see the original answers...there are a few naysayers out in cyberland.

Race Café Questions 3.10.19.pdf

I can't seem to open the PDF. Don't know why. Any chance of it being sent or posted elsewhere. All I get when I double click onto it is a temporary arrow pointing down on the left bottom of my screen then nothing else. Tried copying the address into a new window but still didn't work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Race Café Questions
October 2019
1. Nerula
RITA does not directly influence the structure that incentivises racing clubs to
promote race days. Racing Clubs and their on-course activities are primarily funded
via their own governing bodies (codes) funding policies but the TAB (presently RITA)
also obviously plays its part in promoting race days in a general sense.
Each of the codes operates their own individual funding policy to directly reward
their clubs for on-course wagering, so in other words each code has profit
distributed to it from RITA and they decide how best to allocate that to fund their
own racing clubs. In the post Messara world, the TAB’s focus will be more centred on
maximising commercial returns for the industry as a whole.
2. Voice of reason
We agree Te Aroha is a wonderful venue but RITA has limited direct connection with
individual venues themselves from a strategic sense, indeed our involvement is
limited primarily to being a member of the “Future Venue Plan (FVP)” group.
This group of code and RITA representatives has been assembled to drive the various
venue related initiatives that make up the Messara report. Ultimately the codes
(NZTR, HRNZ, GRNZ) are responsible for developing the FVP for their respective
sports and RITA’s involvement has been around attempting to put together, in the
second Bill, the framework to deal with the issues that naturally flow out of this
process, ensuring evaluation of a venue is clear and as objective as possible, and a
dispute resolution process is available for the industry should club and code differ on
the makeup of a FVP decision. We await government decision in this space for
possible inclusion in the second bill.
3. Voice of reason
We 100% agree with your comments. This “rule” resulted from government
Anti-Money Laundering (AML) changes that came into effect on 1 August and not
from TAB policy or the like. We lobbied hard for the limit to be higher - ideally more
closely aligned with Australia however we weren’t successful at the time. We can
assure you that we are actively working with the Ministers Office and also the
Department of Internal Affairs, who oversee these matters, to encourage change. In
the interim, it’s really important we’re very clear with punters about what is
required, particularly as we come up to the Spring Carnival, so we’ll be working hard
to get the message out.
4. Gubellini
You are 100% correct that alternative revenue streams are the key for us to grow the
business, however the examples you have used are appropriate for the code
governing bodies (NZTR,HRNZ, GRNZ) than RITA. My understanding is there are
existing levies in place with the codes akin to the examples you have used. As far as
RITA goes the reform process underway is the single greatest opportunity the
industry has had to diversify and grow its revenue streams. In the first bill passed in
June, we secured the repeal of the betting levy over the next three years, passed
necessary legislation to establish Betting Information Use Charges (BIUC) and Point
of Consumption (POC) and also widened the scope of betting on sport, in certain
circumstances, where a particular sport is not represented in NZ by a national
sporting organisation (NSO). RITA has also made strong submissions that a suite of
new wagering products be included in the second bill, currently being considered by
government, including virtual racing, in-race betting and a number of others. All
these give the industry new opportunities to grow revenue.
5. Tauhei Notts
Per 3 above
6. Slam Dunk
I agree many problems facing the racing industry in New Zealand are systematic
worldwide and there is much we can learn from what is happening in other
jurisdictions, indeed I understand the codes are very active in this space. RITA itself is
presently focused on delivering the Ministers reform programme, with the second
bill hopefully in the house before Christmas and has its riding/driving instructions
outlined in a “Letter of Expectation” from the Minister which sets out our priorities.
This is a public document and can be found on the Department of Internal Affairs
website but it focuses on us transitioning the industry from its present state to a
more sustainable, revitalised future state.
7. Bezerk
(1) RITA is actively involved with the codes developing a “Future Venue Plan (FVP)”
which will act as a blueprint to take industry forward, with investment in
infrastructure and facilities a key component. This group of code and RITA
representatives has been assembled to drive the various venue related initiatives
that make up the Messara report. Ultimately the codes (NZTR, HRNZ, GRNZ) are
responsible for developing the FVP for their respective sports and RITA’s
involvement has been around attempting to put together, in the second bill, the
framework to deal with the issues that naturally flow out of this process,
ensuring evaluation of a venue is clear and as objective as possible, and a dispute
resolution process is available for the industry should club and code differ on the
makeup of a FVP decision. We await government decision in this space for
possible inclusion in the second bill.
(2) Regrettably the limitations on punters from Australia using the TAB website or
mobile app occured because of a decision made by the Federal Government in
Australia. The Australian Government's interactive Gambling Amendment Act
stops people in Australia betting with overseas bookmakers who don't have a
licence in Australia and that includes the TAB. Unfortunately there’s no sign of
this changing.
(3) The Industry has made a significant investment in our new website and RITA
remains focused on getting on with developing it by listening to our customers
and improving its performance on a daily basis.
8. Stables
I can assure you that RITA is extremely focused on driving any organisational
efficiency that may be available. The Minister has made it very clear in his Letter of
Expectation that we should look for efficiency gains in RITA operations without
compromising organisational capability, minimise transitional costs and ensure the
transfer of functions to the codes does not result in an overall increase in cost to the
industry.
9. Southland
We have no choice given the parameters of the Ministers Letter of Expectation that
we closely examine the operating framework of our organisation to drive any
efficiency that may be apparent, without compromising organisational capability.
We have not targeted a certain %, rather we are taking an organisational wide view
to identify what cost savings may be achievable and this will be an on-going process.
10. Poundforpound
You are correct, we have to drive more revenue as our number one priority, we
won’t ‘save ourselves to success’, so to speak. The various revenue streams outlined
in the final MAC (Ministerial Advisory Committee) report to the Minister is the best
summary of these. The combination of those already passed in the first bill (betting
levy repeal, BIUC, POC etc.) and the balance that will hopefully be included in the
second bill will produce significant new revenue streams for the industry. In race
betting, spread betting, betting exchange options, fantasy betting, virtual racing,
novelty betting etc. are all examples of products that could contribute to these new
revenue streams should the Industry have the approval mechanism available to it to
introduce these (and other new products in the future).
With regards to costs, we are examining these on an organisational wide basis and
are committed to driving any efficiency that may exist. This is an on-going process
and won’t finish at any particular time.
With regards your suggestions around “good data”, I can’t make any immediate
promises in that regard but agree it is essential that the industry provides our
customers with the best experience possible and it would be fair to say at the
moment we have not yet reached that mark. We do need to work more closely with
the codes to provide our customers with ready access to the data they demand, in a
format that makes it easy to consume. I know that answer won’t specifically have
you doing cart wheels but put simply we do need to lift our game in this space.
11. Trump
(1) RITA doesn’t have visibility of the Code’s future costs but if we look at their most
recent reports we know NZTR operating expenses were in the region of $9m, HRNZ
approximately $4m and $5m for GRNZ. For the same period, the former NZRB’s
operating expenses were $144m, with the total at $162m. I can’t speak for the Codes
but I expect RITA’s expenses to be less on a consolidated basis.
(2) There is an absolute commitment from the RITA board to achieve real reductions
in running costs going forward, as outlined by the Minister in his Letter of
Expectation.
(3) We have not focused on a targeted % number at this point but instead have a
strategy of examining all parts of the business to ensure any available savings, that
doesn't compromise performance, can be made and drop to the bottom line.
(4) Given the fact the industry has been living beyond its means the last couple of
years, our first focus has been to at least maintain industry funding (per the
Ministers Letter of Expectation) and then look to pass the new revenue streams
created through the reform process and relevant cost savings onto the codes once
this base is secure. Debt repayment is most definitely something that also needs to
be considered in the short to medium term, obviously balanced against the need to
kick start the industry through getting these funds flowing back to stakeholders, a
demanding balance to strike.
12. Berri
Without commenting on any one particular code governance model, the pursuit of
best practice governance has been covered in the second bill, which the government
are presently considering. Building on the direction contained in the Messara review,
it is obviously essential that we have the best possible people in key industry
governance positions. We await feedback from the government.
13. Patiti
RITA have not specifically commissioned a review of the new betting platform costs,
although this matter was covered in the normal annual audit conducted by PWC and
in the section 14 Audit undertaken by Grant Thornton. As you will be aware the
platform was commissioned at the beginning of the year so the organisations focus is
now making it the best it can be and ensuring we quickly address any concerns our
customers may have as to its on-going operation.
14. We’re Doomed
There are many different variables that go into the creation of the dates calendar
itself and then also the programming of races etc. within that framework. The
outcome of the dates process is coordinated by RITA but in effect the matters you
have raised are for the most part the domain of the code body (NZTR in your case)
and their regional programming committees which seek to optimise horse
participation and thereby maximising industry revenue etc. History would show this
is a very complex process and when you mix in other variables like weather,
abandonments etc. it is always difficult to get this 100% right all the time.
The Messara Review recommended the establishment of three synthetic tracks at
Cambridge, Awapuni and Riccarton. Our understanding is that NZTR are still looking
to progress these projects and RITA has certainly committed funds to the Cambridge
option. Ultimately it is NZTR’s decision to progress the business case for each venue
and RITA has yet to be formally approached with regards Awapuni and Riccarton. I
am sure NZTR would have considered the points you have raised in its overall
analysis of the Riccarton business case.
Being a member at Riccarton I am aware that the public grandstand is currently out
of commission but it is not something we are currently involved with.
15. John Clydesdale
The decision to move away from phone betting was taken in 2016. Like other
industries, TAB customers were increasingly shifting online. At the time, more than
70% of customers over 65 were using online channels and very few new customers
were using the Phonebet service. The TAB has continued to provide touchtone
betting and a phone service for medically restricted customers. As we look to
increase distributions to industry we have to be very conscious of our spend as well
as what our customers want. Returning to phonebet is not an investment we are
looking to make.
The retail network remains a very important part of the TAB offering . However,
given the ongoing migration of customers to other channels, we are constantly
reviewing our network to ensure it’s fit for purpose and commercially viable. We
have more than 500 TAB outlets around the country and we continue to invest in our
branches to improve the customer experience. But it’s also a very costly part of our
business so we need to continue to be mindful of driving efficiencies where we can,
including through our online offering.
16. Berri -
As the wagering operator, TAB needs access to the best information possible to drive
wagering. Improving the quality of our form is an area of focus, making sure
customers have all the information they require (video, trials, sectional information,
speed maps etc) to help place a bet is important and will be a priority over the next
12 months
17. Ohokaman
(1) The venue issue is one that has hovered around New Zealand racing for generations
so we are under no illusion that there is no magic wand, so to speak, that we can
wave to solve some of the issues you have alluded to. What we have attempted to
do in the development of the second bill is put forward an evaluation and dispute
resolution framework that the industry can potentially use to drive some reform in
this area. Driven on the back of the Future Venue Plan process, which is an industry
wide initiative, this framework can hopefully help provide a clearer pathway as to
why the industry may believe a venue is now not required for racing (by measuring
certain agreed criteria) and if after going through this evaluation process there is
disagreement between code and club, that there is a formal dispute resolution
process the industry can work through to get to an end point. We await direction
from the government on the considerable on-going work that has been done in this
area.
(2) The Messara Review recommended three synthetic racing and training tracks be
constructed at Cambridge, Awapuni and Riccarton. I can see how you have read from
the Messara Review that the cost of that is $190m, given how it was written, but
that included his estimated cost of upgrading the racing and facilities infrastructure
at all the remaining tracks. Although I am not privy to any actual numbers, the
approximate cost of the three synthetic racing and training tracks is probably more
in the $35m to $45m range I would have thought. NZTR, along with the Cambridge
Jockey Club, are driving the Cambridge project and my understanding is there has
been extensive involvement of track specialists in this process. You are also correct
that it would be prudent for the industry to bed down the Cambridge project prior to
moving further down the synthetic track pathway but ultimately that is the decision
of NZTR.
(3) You are right, again, that the success or otherwise of the reform programme will
predominantly be measured on what increases in prizemoney eventuate. Ultimately
how prizemoney is structured/paid is up to the codes and our job at RITA is ensure
the reform programme is successfully implemented and the commercial focus of the
TAB is enhanced to ensure revenue to the codes (to pay prize money) is maximised.
The reality is there is no single silver bullet that will make this all happen, rather a
collection of initiatives that together will drive these outcomes. As I type this reply,
we are probably around 60% through the reform programme and await clarification
of some crucial aspects over the next month or so to give us a clearer guide as to
where we are going. Provided these dominos fall in the right order, the industry can
be confident that we are better placed than we have ever been to deliver a
financially sustainable, revitalised future.
(4) Good question. We have just reviewed this document at our last board meeting on
September 25 and this should make its way through the formal process over the next
month. You can be assured however that there is a strong desire by RITA to manage
its business in the most efficient way possible.
18. Insider
We will be advertising for a new Chief Executive in the very near future to take us
through the remainder of the transition period and beyond. I understand salary
levels are always something of interest to the industry but ultimately that would be
negotiated with the successful applicant and reported in RITA’s annual financial
statements as required. My own personal commitments wouldn’t allow me to apply
for the role.
19. Leicthin
The TAB’s approach is in line with standard bookmaking practices and RITA does
impose betting restrictions on a small number of customers, whilst we don't have a
minimum ‘bet to lose amount’, by international standards are limits are generous,
particularly on race day.
20. We’re doomed
It’s difficult to determine a ‘typical’ race. If we look at last Sunday’s racing at Te
Aroha, as an example, there was $750k turnover on the day (all races) with a gross
betting margin of 8%, but obviously the $$ can vary significantly depending on field
sizes, conditions, quality of products etc.
Ultimately the decision to allocate prize money, split races etc. is one taken by the
Codes themselves when programming and there are many variables that go into that
decision being made. RITA’s focus is to increase distributions to the codes so overall
prize money can be raised.
21. Rusty
Historically in the pure tote only years, turnover was the number one measure of
revenue, given the standard deductions made in the various bet types. As customer
preferences have shifted more to fixed odds, the number one measure for revenue is
now gross betting revenue or in other words what margin or profit we are making
when we sell a bet.
The TAB is a commercial business with significant competition from overseas and it’s
not sensible to make our commercial information freely available, however RITA
does provide such information to the Codes.
22. Gerrymir
The dates calendar for the current season contains a similar number and flow of
midweek meetings to prior years, which has seemed to work well for the codes.
There are a number of drivers that the Dates Committee look at with a particular
focus on optimising betting revenue from the meetings. There are more than 1,000
meetings every year to schedule, with the majority of the most popular meetings
being held on the weekend. The scheduling is largely driven by the Codes but it is
also consulted with the industry on. Your idea of a “shutdown” for a couple of
months could be something worth investigating further.
23. Berri
It wouldn’t be appropriate to publicly discuss the performance of any individual RITA
employee. The Trackside team does appreciate feedback from viewers and continues
to look at improvements it can make, including bringing on new presenters, which is
has done recently.
24. 47 South
The TAB have driven a number of innovations in this space with racing now being
available on Spark Sport as well as on SKY.'s Trackside. There are active
conversations underway to look at having some racing content available on free to
air television and also through online media. RITA has been actively working over
recent months to support a new punting magazine following the Informant closing,
We are hopeful of being able to confirm a new publication in the next month or so.
25. Eclipsed
The Minister has appointed the current RITA board, including myself as Chair, until
30 June 2020.
26. Asking for a friend
There will be increasing focus on using the likes of YouTube for non-race action,
which you are right, was used with great effect during the Auckland Cup. The Codes
also have a big role to play in this through their own channels. Trackside continues to
be primarily about providing constant product for betting, but I agree, there’s
definitely more to be done to show other aspects of race meetings.

image.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Berri said:

I can't seem to open the PDF. Don't know why. Any chance of it being sent or posted elsewhere. All I get when I double click onto it is a temporary arrow pointing down on the left bottom of my screen then nothing else. Tried copying the address into a new window but still didn't work. 

Works fine....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

So who reduced it to the crazy amount of 1K?  Doesn't sound by the reply it could be the DIA so that leaves one outfit which doesn't surprise me.

 

so even when given the actual answer you still can't accept it...

The actual answer doesn't exactly clarify in any form why the 10k allowed for in the Act was subsequently reduced to 1k and by who so no I can't accept it. It would have been obvious to most with half a clue that the 1k figure was crazy we are talking just 10% of the amount stipulated in the Act. It can't exactly be that hard a task for either RITA or the DIA to determine by who and the reasoning behind it. Just another financial burden on the Industry by having to increase staffing levels to accommodate a 90% decrease in what was a realistic financial reporting figure in line with overseas racing organsations..  Something definitely doesn't add up when comparing the Acts requirements to what the NZRB requirements are. Why the hell wouldn't someone have questioned the huge decrease when you have a legislated Act to back up your claim that 10k is the figure for the NZRB to be held accountable with any financial transactions. Bizarre but bizarre situations have a habit of occurring more often than not in the NZ Racing Industry.   

Casinos have a 6k threshold which again shows a huge distortion when compared to Racings 1k level. If I wanted to wash money the casino is a far better outlet than the Racing Industry.

Quote
New regulation 6AB inserted (Exemption of Racing Industry Transition Agency from some duties under section 31 of Act)

 

After regulation 6A, insert:

6ABExemption of Racing Industry Transition Agency from some duties under section 31 of Act

 

The Racing Industry Transition Agency (the Agency), in carrying out its duties under section 31 of the Act, is not required to link a cash transaction between a person and the NZRB involving less than $10,000.

Regulation 4 heading: amended, on 1 July 2019, by section 25(2) of the Racing Reform Act 2019 (2019 No 32).

Quote
5New regulation 7A inserted (Certain transactions with Racing Industry Transition Agency exempt from section 49(2) of Act)

 

After regulation 7, insert:

7ACertain transactions with Racing Industry Transition Agency exempt from section 49(2) of Act

(1)

This regulation applies to 1 or more of the following transactions that take place between a person and the Racing Industry Transition Agency (the Agency):

(a)

the purchase of vouchers below $10,000:

(b)

the redemption of vouchers below $10,000:

(c)

the exchange of coins below $10,000 into different denominations of the same currency:

(d)

the exchange of notes below $10,000 into different denominations of the same currency.

(2)

A transaction to which this regulation applies is exempt from section 49(2) of the Act.

(3)

To avoid doubt, the exemption in subclause (2) does not affect a reporting entity’s duty to carry out customer due diligence in accordance with subpart 1 of Part 2 of the Act or keep records in accordance with section 50 or 51 of the Act.

(4)

In this regulation, voucher has the same meaning as in regulation 15(3)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

What does the Board have to do to comply with the AML/CFT Act?

Initially, you’ll have to:

  • designate someone in your business as an AML/CFT compliance officer
  • assess and document the money laundering and terrorism financing risks your business may face
  • establish an AML/CFT compliance programme setting out how you’ll detect and manage these risks.

On an ongoing basis, you’ll have to:

  • verify the identity of customers before providing any service covered by the AML/CFT Act. In some circumstances (such as if they represent a company or trust), you may also need to ask for information about where money came from and the other people involved. For more information about verifying customers’ identities, see:
    Information for customers about anti-money laundering laws
  • submit a Prescribed Transaction Report to the Police Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) if a client wants to conduct a transaction in cash that is $10,000 or more, or an international wire transfer of $1000 or more
  • monitor customers’ accounts to identify potential warning signs of money laundering and terrorism financing. You must report any suspicious transactions or activity to the FIU. For more information, see:
    Reporting suspicious activities

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

De Minimis Threshold (DMT) DIA guidance proposes to deal with the forming of a business relationship for retail and on course settings using a de minimis threshold (DMT), meaning that until a threshold is reached, there are no AML/CFT obligations attached to that transaction14. These transactions can be via cash, voucher or electronic payment methods. DIA has assessed a DMT amount of $1,000 to be appropriate in these circumstances. This means any transaction at or above $1,000 will attract full AML/ CFT obligations. The transaction will include any money deposited by a customer to make a bet as well as any prize money or voucher that is returned to a customer that is over the DMT. The DMT does not have a cumulative effect, meaning the threshold is applied to a single transaction that is at, or above $1,000, and is not as a result of cumulative or linked transactions that add up to the DMT. Regardless of the DMT if the NZRB notices anything suspicious about particular transactions or activities you must submit an SAR to the FIU. 

We 100% agree with your comments. This “rule” resulted from government Anti-Money Laundering (AML) changes that came into effect on 1 August and not from TAB policy or the like. We lobbied hard for the limit to be higher - ideally more closely aligned with Australia however we weren’t successful at the time. We can assure you that we are actively working with the Ministers Office and also the Department of Internal Affairs, who oversee these matters, to encourage change. \

https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/AML-CFT-Guidance-for-NZRB/$file/AML-CFT-NZ-Racing-Board.pdf

#$%^ me so the DIA on their own accord assessed the figure to be $1,000 rather than the 10k legislated figure. So RITA lobbied hard for the limit to be higher, no you would lobby for the figure to be the 10k allowed for under the Act.  just lobby for the figure to be the $10,000. How the $#^% could you not be successful when RITA was set-up by the Racing Minister whose role as Minister is to ensure that the regulatory settings support the racing industry to flourish. The Department of Internal Affairs supports the Racing Minister by providing policy advice and support through the legislative process.

Great to see two areas that are overseen by Mr Peters working against each other. The Racing Minister should have told the DIA the figure is $10,000 and the purpose of your sole existence is to ensure that legislated Acts concerning the Racing Industry are adhaerd to your purpose is not to change them. The DIA have zero knowledge of racing Industry and its gambling customers and come up with a rediculous figure set at 10% of the stipulated Act amount. So they know more than RITA and consider themselves above a legislated Act and will determine themselves what the threshold will be.

I can't help but repeat myself but $#^&* me this is the Organisation assisting RITA to get the Racing Industry back on track.  

       

 

Quote

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Leggy a totally insane situation. Some serious questions need to and asked and on this occasion I have no doubt they will be.

The DIA apparently also knows more than Australia who based on the same requirements requiring their anti money laundering laws and racing wagering concerning it have a $10,000 and above amount to investigate. Imagine Aussie punters and the outcry if they had to contend with a pathetic 1k capping. 

You think they would have looked at Aussies requirements and straight away one with half a brain would realise dropping 900% less than them wouldn't work. All you would be doing is pissing off TAB customers and causing tons load more work to enforce it. And the rest they say is now history.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 October 2019
Screenshot%202019-09-03%20at%208.17.02%2

The Board met recently in Auckland for its September meeting - its fourth formal meeting since being appointed to lead the Racing Industry Transition Agency (RITA).

The regular Board agenda is split over two sessions to focus on TAB Performance and RITA’s Change Management programme on the reform of racing. I wanted to provide you with a summary of what was discussed.

Performance

As has been previously signalled, the performance of the then New Zealand Racing Board for the 2018/19 financial year did not meet budget or forecast projections.  There were a number of reasons for this: reduced turnover in the first half of the year with lower betting activity from Elite punters; lower margins in the second half, particularly in Sport; and customer disruption in January as we launched our new betting platform.

 While the full year results for RITA will be outlined at the AGM in November (and featured in the pending Statement of Intent), the unaudited net profit for the 2018/19 financial year at $137 million was significantly below last year’s result of $145.9 million and well below the budgeted $173.5 million. In spite of this, distributions to the Codes for both the 2018/19 and 2019/20 season have been held at the current level of $151.6 million.

Looking forward, the Board is optimistic the investments in the betting platform introduced last year and technology and broadcast enhancement will deliver significant benefits over time. RITA’s budget for this year is geared around profitability this season lifting to $165.8 million and is being based on projections on realistic and pragmatic revenue growth assumptions in combination with an ongoing diligent approach to the management of core costs.

It has been a reasonably positive start to the year with turnover and gross betting revenue both ahead of the same period last year. Our year to date net profit is in line with our budgeted forecast, so we remain cautiously optimistic of meeting our targets.

As you will know, promotional initiatives are in market to stimulate betting turnover for the Rugby World Cup campaign and it is tracking towards being a successful tournament. Turnover is above expectations, participation in the Try Time promotion is greater than originally expected and margin is up on expectations. While some of this is good fortune, there has been a considered effort to drive this through pricing, product promotion and market ordering decisions.

In the first week of the competition, 16,000 punters signed up for the TAB Tipping competition and there were more than 75,000 active customers - the most in a single week since Melbourne Cup week 2018.

Racing Reform

The racing reform programme is entering an important period as Cabinet policy papers covering the various elements proposed for Bill 2 are finalised. Once Cabinet decisions on policy have been made, a Bill will be drafted and introduced to Parliament and then considered by a Select Committee.

Here’s a brief summary of where we are at with the recommendations which were discussed by the Board:

  • NZRB becomes TAB NZ, focusing on commercial activities. The Board considered the feedback from recent consultation with the Codes and noted, while there was broad support from the Codes in relation to many of the proposals outlined in the consultation document, discussion with the Codes over the coming weeks was required to further develop and then confirm the change management plan. 

  • Establish Racing NZ as a consultative forum for the three racing codes. The Board agreed to re-establish the old Combined Racing Industry Group (CRIG) forum with the first meeting planned for later this month. It will provide a pathway for the Racing NZ forum to be further developed as we work through the transition period.

  • Request a performance and efficiency audit of the NZRB under Section 14. An audit of the previous NZRB has been completed by independent consultants Grant Thornton (GT) and we expect it will be made available by GT later this month. 

  • Amend the Section 16 distribution formula of the Racing Act. Each Code has had the opportunity to engage with GT (who are also doing work on this) through the preparation of their Section 16 Report and there are further meetings planned. This feedback process will assist the RITA Board to form its own position on the Report before sharing this with DIA Officials and the Minister for Racing for their consideration. There will be further consultation next year on the regulatory process, led by the DIA. 

  • Review the structure and efficacy of the racing integrity bodies and Establish traceability and re-homing as foundation of industry animal welfare. The Board considered feedback from the Codes on the final report from Malcolm Burgess and discussed the changes that may be required  to give effect to the recommendations. Feedback on the Codes’ submissions from subject matter expert, Paul Bittar was also considered. The exact pathway to implement the review’s recommendations is subject to further discussions with Codes which are getting underway soon and importantly, feedback from Government, which we hope to receive in the next month.

  • Investigate outsourcing NZRB commercial activities to an international betting operator and confirm the assignment of intellectual property (IP) by the clubs to the codes. Work remains underway with the DIA to ensure the Cabinet papers incorporate any legislative changes that may be required in the event we go down the outsourcing route. In relation to the assignment of IP, the matter is with the Minister to determine an approach.

  • Seek approval for a suite of new betting products to increase funding for the industry. There is considerable work underway to not only achieve Cabinet approval for new products, but also to demonstrate the TAB as a sector leader in responsible gambling. The Board received an update on Initiatives from RITA’s Harm Minimisation Strategy, Responsible Gambling Communications Plan and the RITA’s draft Submission on the Online Gambling Review.

  • Introduce Betting Information Use Charge and Point of Consumption tax legislation. The Board received an update on the development of Offshore Betting Charges Regulations. These regulations will be  drafted by the Parliamentary Counsel Office. The DIA are leading this process but RITA has provided significant support. We expect DIA-led workshops to get underway with the Codes and betting operators later this month. 

  • Legislate to vest club assets to code regulatory bodies, Reduce the number of venues and Upgrade facilities and tracks of remaining venues with funds from closed venues. There has been an enormous amount of work done in the venue space in an attempt to give the industry the tools it needs to tackle the hard decisions and successfully resolve them. RITA has provided feedback to the DIA on the need to build on the existing work programme, and if any legislative changes are required they are subject to a clear and transparent process between Codes and Clubs, but we await Government’s direction on this matter. In the interim, RITA continues to work with the Codes on the Future Venue Plan with a meeting expected to be scheduled over the next few weeks.   

Once the direction of the second Bill and relevant regulatory processes becomes clearer, our budget for 2019/20 is confirmed and our first quarter results are in, all prior to Christmas, the Board should be in a position to have a further look at the timing of distribution of some of the new revenue streams such as the betting levy which is presently being collected.

Balancing the requirements of the Minister’s Letter of Expectation along with getting greater surety around revenue growth targets and the need to show tangible outcomes for the industry from the reform process as soon as possible (eg distribution of the betting levy) is something the Board is very conscious of. We just can't put the cart before the horse!

Sincerely,

 

eqpKFDRuIpGuQ8FfNPyXbyQ4mcgWaqpby5NYX1EX

Dean McKenzie

Chair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, poundforpound said:

Very interesting reading 

The RIU has to be sorted out because a bonehead cop is running that shitshow and he doesn’t have a clue about racing 

I’m also very interested in the suggestion club assets become the property of NZTR ...a serious question though, would anyone trust Jackson, Carter & Saundry with their assets given their extraordinarily ineffective performance over recent years ??

Reverse of Robin Hood rob the country folk and give to the rich . W...kers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, poundforpound said:

Very interesting reading 

The RIU has to be sorted out because a bonehead cop is running that shitshow and he doesn’t have a clue about racing 

I’m also very interested in the suggestion club assets become the property of NZTR ...a serious question though, would anyone trust Jackson, Carter & Saundry with their assets given their extraordinarily ineffective performance over recent years ??

What performance?

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.