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

John Allen

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, tripple alliance said:

 

 A successful racing future will be 5/6 tracks , only approved trainers and first class patrons facility's , perhaps the young will return , without them racing will disappear .

Currently the majority of trainers are elderly (50plus) and have no interest in change , they complain but are happy to ride it to the bottom .

Can you elaborate on how you see that working? Surely you don't want the 5 or 6 tracks to be in Auckland, Wgtn and ChCh, and racing there every week. Many people would suggest that those cities under-perform as it is.

And who is going to approve those selected trainers, and on what basis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, slam dunk said:

What a silly statement !!

AGE ANALYSIS OF LICENCE-HOLDERS 
 
I presume you doubt the fact that most trainers are abit long in the tooth .

350 trainers are 55 yrs old or younger , of that 350 only 171 are 45 or younger . 

469 are 56 years old or older of these 229 are 65+ (about a quarter of trainers are pensioners)  , do you really think many of those 469 are interested in uprooting , moving to a new town , many couldn't afford to buy in the bigger more expensive city's  , their only choice is to sit tight , resist change and continue to do what they are doing .

These figures include all category of trainers A B C .

A little extra  I read this somewhere , the average age of a racehorse owner (2015?) is 59 .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, tripple alliance said:

AGE ANALYSIS OF LICENCE-HOLDERS 
 
I presume you doubt the fact that most trainers are abit long in the tooth .

350 trainers are 55 yrs old or younger , of that 350 only 171 are 45 or younger . 

469 are 56 years old or older of these 229 are 65+ (about a quarter of trainers are pensioners)  , do you really think many of those 469 are interested in uprooting , moving to a new town , many couldn't afford to buy in the bigger more expensive city's  , their only choice is to sit tight , resist change and continue to do what they are doing .

These figures include all category of trainers A B C .

A little extra  I read this somewhere , the average age of a racehorse owner (2015?) is 59 .

 

Then that makes most of us above average :rcfe-laughing:   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trump said:

To be fair, the CEO has to deliver on the Strategy outlined by his Board of Directors. So really, there’s got to be a huge finger pointed at the Board and Chairman he answered to. Surely he can’t be chastised too much if he’s done what the Board have commanded him to do?

Trump, you are not too far away from reality, or what it really should be. But if you have seen him in action, you can see how he could convince the “Board” he was going in the right direction. The chair was the culprit, she of little upstairs, but plenty everywhere else. JA convinced her, and she wouldn’t know what he was talking about because she didn’t understand the industry anyway, as exampled by the resignation statement.

JA will show up again, possibly as the new President of the Labour Party as he and Jacinda would get on well together, both smiling and shallow and trying to provide answers to everything.

Sorry folks, there is still a funding shortfall of significance, so there has to be less racing or races, to consume the less money available for stakes. Betting levels will be a real challenge but if the second part of the plan is franked in Parliament before Christmas then there is light ahead, but a wee way off as yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tasman man 11 said:

John Allen was on a hiding to nothing from the moment he took on this job....put the boot into him ,he was paid a huge salary and had worked in other ailing industries.

He did his best.

He was approachable and willingly  gave you an ear if one took the time to approach him.

He didn't stand a chance with the NZ Racing Board.

Sure ,he should have kept tabs on costs and staff numbers.

Hindsight is an exact science.

He's gone now , give him heaps.

But NZ racing and the TAB is still a sick puppy ...in a small and competitive market.

He also blew $50 million of the games cash on a completely crap (lemon) TAB platform with a $17 million annual cost to the industry... just to squeeze the shit out it produces.:rcf-monkey::rcf-angry-3:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, TurnyTom said:

Total fckuen loser who got away with it for 5 years - why did we let it happen, he has only bailed as he fcuked up 50mil on the new site that dont work

...and we must not let this continuous gravy train of fly by night CEO's continue to rape and pillage our industry.

The next to be appointed to this role should not be signed up until a complete due diligence process is approved from the people invested in this industry!

Why can't license holders vote for the best applicants?.... like we do for local council governance.

This can go for the board members as well!
We can vote every 3 years to keep existing industry leaders or vote to change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same epitaph as Glenda., Good fucking riddance to an absolute disaster whose legacy consists of wasting years of time and energy on the ridiculous "Race Fields Legislation" project and then doubled down by spending $50 million plus on an abortion of a website and outsourcing the crown jewels, the fixed odds operation. But as others have pointed out, it's not his fault he was hired, the people who hired someone with absolutely no racing OR betting experience should be at least fired or preferably put up against a wall and shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Hedley - Is there 700 still employed :o that number needs to be only 150 to 200

Triple Alliance - One day you might get your wish but that will be when the industry has shrunk by a good 60/70%

700 still employed so shrink that by your 70% =  190 which equates to around Hedley's number of only needing around 190 employed. Individual NZ Racing Codes will take over racing and Industry responsibilities which will help reduce numbers. If Racing joins Sports and is outsourced that will help to reduce employment numbers. The purpose of RITA is to reform the Industry now not one day. Procrastination and management unable to forecast the changes needed to adapt to an ever changing market that is chasing the gambling dollar is why the Industry now struggles to perform. In order to return the figures needed today income needed to be in line with inflation rises each year but sadly the only figures rising were the costs to run the NZRB. The Industry didn't need an Empire to run the NZRB but unfortunately manager numbers now verse past numbers show Empire Building has been a major downfall. 50 plus years in existence operations should be streamlined and along with more modern technology staff numbers should have decreased. Phone bet employees are only hand full compared to past numbers and Agency's are near existent so employee numbers are down and sports trading is outsourced so numbers well down there also . So how can 700 still be employed? Hard to go from 700 to around 200 in a short period but unfortunately when you have no assets left and owe $20 million plus in overdraft and your $50 million dollar Industry life saver never delivered as promised its not had to see that there is only one option remaining.  

Codes take over there own marketing so huge staff reductions there. Race field fees won't make up the shortfalls needed to sink into a betting platform that in relation to cost to build and the  ongoing updating and servicing yearly fees were too much for the Industry to absorb as advised by Deloittes would be the case.

The NZRB never had the management knowledge and experience to commit  the Industry to the tens of millions of development and future expense incurred that on paper couldn't return the figures required. NZTR spent $100,000 plus on that Deloitte Report on a business decision effecting all the codes and the tens of thousands who survive from it . The NZRB should have appointed Deloitte's to carry out the report then at least it could be shown they did seek a second opinion and they addressed areas of concern to make it a more practical proposal to put forward to the Industry. People lacking the knowledge needed argued the points of concern raised by Deloittes which have now proven to be correct as one would expect from a world rated powerhouse accounting firm. The two companies who were involved sold the platform to NZRB management who didn't have the business acumen needed in the largest expense ever undertaken by the TAB or NZRB . Those two companies only concern is returning a higher dividend to their Investors and to achieve that Industry concerns by Deloitte's would have been whitewashed and NZRB management advised we are right and they are wrong. The figures generated and given to the Industry in support of the new platform wouldn't have initially come from John Allen as he would have no idea so who put the figures together eg doubling customers and turnover increasing by tens of millions? If it was Paddy Power and Open Bet who sold the proposal to clueless management then they should be taken to task for failing to provide a system based on returned figures and profit as promised that it would return. If those two companies didn't promise the results forecast to be delivered the person or persons responsible needs to be taken to task for falsifying numbers to seal the deal to the Industry. John Allen did the correct thing by the Industry yesterday he cost the Industry each year $650,000, those in charge of the betting platform disaster make that look like pocket change in cost verse return thye need to also do the right thing.      

 

Quote

Triple Alliance - NZ cannot sustain a racing industry in it's current form , nothings changed today 

Something did change yesterday the CEO of the Industry resigned. You fail to back-up your own statements ' you say that one day you may get your wish but that will be when the Industry has shrunk by a good 60/70% and then you say the NZ can't sustain its Racing Industry in it's current form. If the Industry is going to shrink as you say by 60/70% you help to sustain it by cutting costs and obviously employee numbers need to be reduced now to factor in that shrinkage. Racing Codes are having their numbers reduced venue wise now to allow for shrinkage of public participation and overall Industry costs and as Hedley points out the same principal re NZRB employees needs to be applied to save a huge expense that has got out of hand.  

Quote

Currently the majority of trainers are elderly (50 plus) and have no interest in change , they complain but are happy to ride it to the bottom

That's a very condescending and arrogant statement to make,  that type of comment mirrors what i would expect to come from another quarter that is lacking in the required Industry experience  and knowledge to be taken seriously. The majority of trainers are no doubt 50 plus and that's because its not financially viable for the younger generation to derive an income due to rising costs and lower returns to consider horse training as an employment opportunity. Many of those 50 year  plus trainers have been involved in the Industry from the start of their working life and many were following their family's working involvement. The changes they have seen they have had a huge personal interest in eg  decreasing stakes from years gone by which equates to decreasing owners and the bottom line decreased financial returns to themselves.  Now you explain why these 50 year plus trainers would have no interest in change, if changes in the Industry results in better returns to them of course changes are in their best interests. If your company reduced your yearly salary to levels of years ago your saying your sitting back and not complaining? I would say its a very high % of trainers in NZ that are struggling to be a viable operation and you can honestly say they are happy to ride it to the bottom, exactly what planet are you on? Those 50 year old plus trainers have contributed to ensuring the Industry has a product to generate income, by working 7 days a week work in a reducing market where they are struggling to make ends meet but they battle on because they love the Industry. No trainer i believe is happy to ride the Industry to the bottom.   

They have interest in change all right and just remember they didn't ride the current state of the Industry to the bottom. The only plus is once you reach the bottom you have to at some point reach the top again to survive.  

You have said you have a percentage in a racehorse but your comments reflect a hidden agenda that doesn't align well with the true facts. 

I hope your trainer reads your ill informed comments and gives you the swerve you deserve.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, LightsOut said:

700 still employed so shrink that by your 70% =  190 which equates to around Hedley's number of only needing around 190 employed. Individual NZ Racing Codes will take over racing and Industry responsibilities which will help reduce numbers. If Racing joins Sports and is outsourced that will help to reduce employment numbers. The purpose of RITA is to reform the Industry now not one day. Procrastination and management unable to forecast the changes needed to adapt to an ever changing market that is chasing the gambling dollar is why the Industry now struggles to perform. In order to return the figures needed today income needed to be in line with inflation rises each year but sadly the only figures rising were the costs to run the NZRB. The Industry didn't need an Empire to run the NZRB but unfortunately manager numbers now verse past numbers show Empire Building has been a major downfall. 50 plus years in existence operations should be streamlined and along with more modern technology staff numbers should have decreased. Phone bet employees are only hand full compared to past numbers and Agency's are near existent so employee numbers are down and sports trading is outsourced so numbers well down there also . So how can 700 still be employed? Hard to go from 700 to around 200 in a short period but unfortunately when you have no assets left and owe $20 million plus in overdraft and your $50 million dollar Industry life saver never delivered as promised its not had to see that there is only one option remaining.  

Codes take over there own marketing so huge staff reductions there. Race field fees won't make up the shortfalls needed to sink into a betting platform that in relation to cost to build and the  ongoing updating and servicing yearly fees were too much for the Industry to absorb as advised by Deloittes would be the case.

The NZRB never had the management knowledge and experience to commit  the Industry to the tens of millions of development and future expense incurred that on paper couldn't return the figures required. NZTR spent $100,000 plus on that Deloitte Report on a business decision effecting all the codes and the tens of thousands who survive from it . The NZRB should have appointed Deloitte's to carry out the report then at least it could be shown they did seek a second opinion and they addressed areas of concern to make it a more practical proposal to put forward to the Industry. People lacking the knowledge needed argued the points of concern raised by Deloittes which have now proven to be correct as one would expect from a world rated powerhouse accounting firm. The two companies who were involved sold the platform to NZRB management who didn't have the business acumen needed in the largest expense ever undertaken by the TAB or NZRB . Those two companies only concern is returning a higher dividend to their Investors and to achieve that Industry concerns by Deloitte's would have been whitewashed and NZRB management advised we are right and they are wrong. The figures generated and given to the Industry in support of the new platform wouldn't have initially come from John Allen as he would have no idea so who put the figures together eg doubling customers and turnover increasing by tens of millions? If it was Paddy Power and Open Bet who sold the proposal to clueless management then they should be taken to task for failing to provide a system based on returned figures and profit as promised that it would return. If those two companies didn't promise the results forecast to be delivered the person or persons responsible needs to be taken to task for falsifying numbers to seal the deal to the Industry. John Allen did the correct thing by the Industry yesterday he cost the Industry each year $650,000, those in charge of the betting platform disaster make that look like pocket change in cost verse return thye need to also do the right thing.      

 

Something did change yesterday the CEO of the Industry resigned. You fail to back-up your own statements ' you say that one day you may get your wish but that will be when the Industry has shrunk by a good 60/70% and then you say the NZ can't sustain its Racing Industry in it's current form. If the Industry is going to shrink as you say by 60/70% you help to sustain it by cutting costs and obviously employee numbers need to be reduced now to factor in that shrinkage. Racing Codes are having their numbers reduced venue wise now to allow for shrinkage of public participation and overall Industry costs and as Hedley points out the same principal re NZRB employees needs to be applied to save a huge expense that has got out of hand.  

That's a very condescending and arrogant statement to make,  that type of comment mirrors what i would expect to come from another quarter that is lacking in the required Industry experience  and knowledge to be taken seriously. The majority of trainers are no doubt 50 plus and that's because its not financially viable for the younger generation to derive an income due to rising costs and lower returns to consider horse training as an employment opportunity. Many of those 50 year  plus trainers have been involved in the Industry from the start of their working life and many were following their family's working involvement. The changes they have seen they have had a huge personal interest in eg  decreasing stakes from years gone by which equates to decreasing owners and the bottom line decreased financial returns to themselves.  Now you explain why these 50 year plus trainers would have no interest in change, if changes in the Industry results in better returns to them of course changes are in their best interests. If your company reduced your yearly salary to levels of years ago your saying your sitting back and not complaining? I would say its a very high % of trainers in NZ that are struggling to be a viable operation and you can honestly say they are happy to ride it to the bottom, exactly what planet are you on? Those 50 year old plus trainers have contributed to ensuring the Industry has a product to generate income, by working 7 days a week work in a reducing market where they are struggling to make ends meet but they battle on because they love the Industry. No trainer i believe is happy to ride the Industry to the bottom.   

They have interest in change all right and just remember they didn't ride the current state of the Industry to the bottom. The only plus is once you reach the bottom you have to at some point reach the top again to survive.  

You have said you have a percentage in a racehorse but your comments reflect a hidden agenda that doesn't align well with the true facts. 

I hope your trainer reads your ill informed comments and gives you the swerve you deserve.

 

Quote

Only time will tell what happens about the 700 staff remaining but Allen thinks they are likely here to stay  and we know  HE IS HERE TO STAY  , that will surprise many

Ha anyone with their finger on the pulse wasn't surprised. Unfortunately a lack of Industry knowledge and understanding of how poor financial management decisions will impact on an Industry  will result as they say with egg on ones face. Here's a tip for you 'don't ever quit your day job to read peoples tea leaves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, poundforpound said:

But you lot say exactly the same things about every CEO of the Racing Board.

Brown.....”we’ll be the envy of the racing world in five years”....”and my CV is as genuine as Donald Trumps tan”

Bayliss....”you can’t snort a line off a female employees back and not wonder about her hopes and dreams”. ....................    “ we’re shifting head office to Parnell because it’s closer to the airport “

And JA.....well to the best of my knowledge he didn’t do much wrong other than maybe not deliver on the new betting platform.

 

My point is this....you’re never satisfied, you level the same criticisms at every CEO....have you ever stopped to think that maybe the board structure is a dysfunctional ass, that maybe the legislation is unworkable, and that just maybe the industry is fucked, the model is broken, and NO ONE can fix it.

I agree. As I’ve said before, The Board of Directors and especially the Chairman must accept some responsibility. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LightsOut said:

700 still employed so shrink that by your 70% =  190 which equates to around Hedley's number of only needing around 190 employed. Individual NZ Racing Codes will take over racing and Industry responsibilities which will help reduce numbers. If Racing joins Sports and is outsourced that will help to reduce employment numbers. The purpose of RITA is to reform the Industry now not one day. Procrastination and management unable to forecast the changes needed to adapt to an ever changing market that is chasing the gambling dollar is why the Industry now struggles to perform. In order to return the figures needed today income needed to be in line with inflation rises each year but sadly the only figures rising were the costs to run the NZRB. The Industry didn't need an Empire to run the NZRB but unfortunately manager numbers now verse past numbers show Empire Building has been a major downfall. 50 plus years in existence operations should be streamlined and along with more modern technology staff numbers should have decreased. Phone bet employees are only hand full compared to past numbers and Agency's are near existent so employee numbers are down and sports trading is outsourced so numbers well down there also . So how can 700 still be employed? Hard to go from 700 to around 200 in a short period but unfortunately when you have no assets left and owe $20 million plus in overdraft and your $50 million dollar Industry life saver never delivered as promised its not had to see that there is only one option remaining.  

Codes take over there own marketing so huge staff reductions there. Race field fees won't make up the shortfalls needed to sink into a betting platform that in relation to cost to build and the  ongoing updating and servicing yearly fees were too much for the Industry to absorb as advised by Deloittes would be the case.

The NZRB never had the management knowledge and experience to commit  the Industry to the tens of millions of development and future expense incurred that on paper couldn't return the figures required. NZTR spent $100,000 plus on that Deloitte Report on a business decision effecting all the codes and the tens of thousands who survive from it . The NZRB should have appointed Deloitte's to carry out the report then at least it could be shown they did seek a second opinion and they addressed areas of concern to make it a more practical proposal to put forward to the Industry. People lacking the knowledge needed argued the points of concern raised by Deloittes which have now proven to be correct as one would expect from a world rated powerhouse accounting firm. The two companies who were involved sold the platform to NZRB management who didn't have the business acumen needed in the largest expense ever undertaken by the TAB or NZRB . Those two companies only concern is returning a higher dividend to their Investors and to achieve that Industry concerns by Deloitte's would have been whitewashed and NZRB management advised we are right and they are wrong. The figures generated and given to the Industry in support of the new platform wouldn't have initially come from John Allen as he would have no idea so who put the figures together eg doubling customers and turnover increasing by tens of millions? If it was Paddy Power and Open Bet who sold the proposal to clueless management then they should be taken to task for failing to provide a system based on returned figures and profit as promised that it would return. If those two companies didn't promise the results forecast to be delivered the person or persons responsible needs to be taken to task for falsifying numbers to seal the deal to the Industry. John Allen did the correct thing by the Industry yesterday he cost the Industry each year $650,000, those in charge of the betting platform disaster make that look like pocket change in cost verse return thye need to also do the right thing.      

 

Something did change yesterday the CEO of the Industry resigned. You fail to back-up your own statements ' you say that one day you may get your wish but that will be when the Industry has shrunk by a good 60/70% and then you say the NZ can't sustain its Racing Industry in it's current form. If the Industry is going to shrink as you say by 60/70% you help to sustain it by cutting costs and obviously employee numbers need to be reduced now to factor in that shrinkage. Racing Codes are having their numbers reduced venue wise now to allow for shrinkage of public participation and overall Industry costs and as Hedley points out the same principal re NZRB employees needs to be applied to save a huge expense that has got out of hand.  

That's a very condescending and arrogant statement to make,  that type of comment mirrors what i would expect to come from another quarter that is lacking in the required Industry experience  and knowledge to be taken seriously. The majority of trainers are no doubt 50 plus and that's because its not financially viable for the younger generation to derive an income due to rising costs and lower returns to consider horse training as an employment opportunity. Many of those 50 year  plus trainers have been involved in the Industry from the start of their working life and many were following their family's working involvement. The changes they have seen they have had a huge personal interest in eg  decreasing stakes from years gone by which equates to decreasing owners and the bottom line decreased financial returns to themselves.  Now you explain why these 50 year plus trainers would have no interest in change, if changes in the Industry results in better returns to them of course changes are in their best interests. If your company reduced your yearly salary to levels of years ago your saying your sitting back and not complaining? I would say its a very high % of trainers in NZ that are struggling to be a viable operation and you can honestly say they are happy to ride it to the bottom, exactly what planet are you on? Those 50 year old plus trainers have contributed to ensuring the Industry has a product to generate income, by working 7 days a week work in a reducing market where they are struggling to make ends meet but they battle on because they love the Industry. No trainer i believe is happy to ride the Industry to the bottom.   

They have interest in change all right and just remember they didn't ride the current state of the Industry to the bottom. The only plus is once you reach the bottom you have to at some point reach the top again to survive.  

You have said you have a percentage in a racehorse but your comments reflect a hidden agenda that doesn't align well with the true facts. 

I hope your trainer reads your ill informed comments and gives you the swerve you deserve.

 

Great post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, poundforpound said:

I’d be worried, and mainly because if JA thought there was genuine hope he’d be inclined to ride this rough patch out.....but there is no hope, and it’s certainly not his fault.

In the interests of his own reputation he’s taking the only sensible option.

Departed NZ Post, MFAT and now NZRB/RITA. That is some reputation and unlikely to be overtaken any time soon . One hopes he finds future employment  in a NZX company where the possibility exists for a party to go "short":rcfe-happy-1:
 

 

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems to be a pattern here re CEO's and Boards members , none of them see to have run a private business where when times are tough you cut costs. Whats been done by previous Board and CEO's is done and cant be reversed in any immediate manner.

Moving forward for me its essential that the next CEO is 

  • A Kiwi
  • Has previous CEO experience at private sector level
  • Has knowledge of the NZ and Global wagering markets
  • Maximizes the limited resources he will have at his disposal because cost cutting will be the first exercise they undertake

I'm sure  posters will suggest other perquisites, go for it

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem that we have had is that successive boards and the CEO's have each contributed to the degradation of the industry. One mob turned down the lotteries contract. Chittick's mob changed the Act taking away the rights for clubs to operate their own tote's and eliminating the racing industry's claim to the tote ownership. One tried to build a new tote (Typhoon) when they were told it wouldn't work. One spent a whole lot of cash (Fair Tax) on a non sustainable model promoted by the breeders. This latest mob developed a platform without understanding either betting, technology or the correct value of a commercial betting contract.

Successive governments have been slowly strangling the industry through inept governmental legislation. Successive boards have appointed CEO's with no/ very little experience in horses, betting, technology and gaming. This has led to indecisive and ill informed decision making.

The problem that you have is that the formal/ governance/ certification/ due diligence process required by government (DIA in particular) decrease the gain of the appointment filter where the right people/ person to help can't be appointed due to governmental process.

The same could be said for the NZTR but this is less a government issue and more of an internal appointment structure. The continued staggering of appointmental process promotes a legacy model where successive board membership needs to meet the approval of incumbent appointees, which promotes nepotism. To break that cycle is difficult. The only way to do that is to change the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JJ Flash said:

There seems to be a pattern here re CEO's and Boards members , none of them see to have run a private business where when times are tough you cut costs. Whats been done by previous Board and CEO's is done and cant be reversed in any immediate manner.

Moving forward for me its essential that the next CEO is 

  • A Kiwi
  • Has previous CEO experience at private sector level
  • Has knowledge of the NZ and Global wagering markets
  • Maximizes the limited resources he will have at his disposal because cost cutting will be the first exercise they undertake

I'm sure  posters will suggest other perquisites, go for it

Greg

Nothing like Amanda Elliott hopefully.......:rolleyes:

IMG_4126.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, tasman man 11 said:

John Allen was on a hiding to nothing from the moment he took on this job....put the boot into him ,he was paid a huge salary and had worked in other ailing industries.

He did his best.

He was approachable and willingly  gave you an ear if one took the time to approach him.

He didn't stand a chance with the NZ Racing Board.

Sure ,he should have kept tabs on costs and staff numbers.

Hindsight is an exact science.

He's gone now , give him heaps.

But NZ racing and the TAB is still a sick puppy ...in a small and competitive market.

many people at the coalface on the industry wer giving him 'the message' at various meetings around the country over the last three year...he put all his faith in the new FOB platform on account of the 'promised' revenue streams and allowed a $35m project blow out to $50m+ (with annual fees of $17m) ...it not only arrived months late (costing truckloads of lost income) but the loss of customers from poor TACustomer service attitudes/actions has cost the industry thousands of customers (= more lost $$$) ...and you reckon that's an example of doing your best? If that's the bbenchmark standard of leadership and competence you require from a man on $680k a year, no wonder the industry is suffering. 
.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, weasel57 said:

many people at the coalface on the industry wer giving him 'the message' at various meetings around the country over the last three year...he put all his faith in the new FOB platform on account of the 'promised' revenue streams and allowed a $35m project blow out to $50m+ (with annual fees of $17m) ...it not only arrived months late (costing truckloads of lost income) but the loss of customers from poor TACustomer service attitudes/actions has cost the industry thousands of customers (= more lost $$$) ...and you reckon that's an example of doing your best? If that's the bbenchmark standard of leadership and competence you require from a man on $680k a year, no wonder the industry is suffering. 
.

How did the delay cost truckloads of income? The new platform is generating way less profit than its predecessor. A permanent delay would have been a better result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The delay could have cost a lot if it had performed up to expectations.

The resignation memo states that he has laid a solid foundation that can be built on.

RITA should be more measured with what they say as all the evidence shows otherwise.

Still a bank loan to be sorted with a direction not to leverage the balance sheet.

Not sure how that can be achieved with the amount of work still required to be done on the platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Patiti said:

The delay could have cost a lot if it had performed up to expectations.

The resignation memo states that he has laid a solid foundation that can be built on.

RITA should be more measured with what they say as all the evidence shows otherwise.

Still a bank loan to be sorted with a direction not to leverage the balance sheet.

Not sure how that can be achieved with the amount of work still required to be done on the platform.

Some of the work required is possibly superficial so not that serious worry. However the non updating of tote prices in the last few minutes of betting would appear ominous. The OpenBet people just didn't realize that when percentage type bets are made that multiplies the number bets by hundreds whereas the fixed odds is a single bet. My guess is that come Melbourne Cup day the system will totally crash.

Listening to Bernard Saundry I got the impression he thinks the system could be totally scrapped. Saying that an outsourced operator would want to keep this system was plainly illogical and just a convenient copout to the question asked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, We're Doomed said:

Can you elaborate on how you see that working? Surely you don't want the 5 or 6 tracks to be in Auckland, Wgtn and ChCh, and racing there every week. Many people would suggest that those cities under-perform as it is.

And who is going to approve those selected trainers, and on what basis?

Ellerslie , Hastings , New Plymouth , Awapuni , Trentham , Christchurch , Wingatui . how's that for starters .

Approvals , who ever governs NZ racing , no different to Singapore etc and in fact trainers must apply to train at Flemington , Randwick etc .

T time , more to come .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, tripple alliance said:

Ellerslie , Hastings , New Plymouth , Awapuni , Trentham , Christchurch , Wingatui . how's that for starters .

Approvals , who ever governs NZ racing , no different to Singapore etc and in fact trainers must apply to train at Flemington , Randwick etc .

T time , more to come .

That's 7 and you missed out the Waikato. But yes this could work! Inject all revenue into 8 tracks! CLUB INC !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tripple alliance said:

Ellerslie , Hastings , New Plymouth , Awapuni , Trentham , Christchurch , Wingatui . how's that for starters .

Approvals , who ever governs NZ racing , no different to Singapore etc and in fact trainers must apply to train at Flemington , Randwick etc .

T time , more to come .

So you do want the selected tracks to be in Auckland, Wgtn and ChCh. Good on you; it's time the Waikato was told they aren't needed anymore. Their contribution to NZ Racing is totally over-rated.

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.