poundforpound

Is this NZTR’s view of the Racing Amendment Bill

12 posts in this topic

 

This email is being circulated by persons closely associated with NZTR ....read what you will in to it....I’ve chosen to protect the privacy of the author because there’s no reason to identify that person, but they’re very close to the action.

I’ve also edited out some irrelevant detail that might identify the author

Any thoughts ?

 

I thought I would check Dean’s VERY explicit statement that the SOLE objective of the new TAB board is, by the new statute, to maximise the profits for the racing codes.

It was untrue/or being kind, misleading or he doesn’t know that he has two bottom line objectives. See attached. There are 2 objectives…….the other is to maximise the returns to NZ sports.

Neither “profits” nor “returns” are defined , to me they are the same, or maybe returns to sports take precedence ?

AND  the maximised profits to  racing are only “long term “……………ie they wont be bound to maximise our profits in the short term, while they maximise the returns to sports, and we need maximisation now.

So with all 7 board members being appointed by the Minister , the board will do what the govt of the day wants them to so they keep getting re appointed…………just like Dean proudly states that he is acting for the Minister now , and is not pushing back on the things the govt rejected in the draft.

And like Michael Stiassny (when he was Chair of TAB) telling me 10/12 years ago that there was no point in him trying to put forward legislation to get a % from the aussie book makers as the govt wouldn’t be interested and he wasn’t going to waste any time on it.

If we lose the IP , I think we are stuffed for ever , just like we are now when the racing codes gave away their ownership of the Tab 30 years ago.

And the sports codes will not be handing over their IP , and will be able to negotiate with our TAB , and off shore betting agencies to screw deals out of our TAB which will diminish the racing share of the profits.

If racing codes don’t have board nominees and we lose the IP , I believe we are doomed.

What was supposed to be a reform to our advantage looks to me like a sell out to sports betting in the future.

Sports betting is of course huge and needs to be provided for , but it looks to me like the sports lobby is going to be the big winner out of racing’s “reform”?

Regards,

 

E91CD5F9-D51A-4333-A836-EB43A317550C.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two areas that concern me:

 

Wagering Board objective

 

Dean mentioned on more than one occasion that the number one objection of the Wagering Board will be to maximise profits.  I think maximizing profits as your number one priority can be dangerous.  This is often done for the short term benefit at the expense of the long term benefits.  Many businesses hit the maximise profit stage (aka cash cow)  in their product life cycle when they hit a mature stage with slowed growth.  I am aware that RITA is a 1 year transitional board but I think a longer term strategic plan is essential.

 

TAB platform

 

Our current TAB platform (that cost $50M and an annual contract of $19M) is still way behind the offshore bookmakers and in an fast changing environment (where our competitors can spend up to $100M a year on product development) I don’t believe we will ever be competitive.  Especially being government run.  I can show numerous examples of where our initiatives (cashout for example) are up to 20% behind offshore bookmakers.

 

Intellectual Property and Board appointments have enough others investigating.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe this S100M a year is purely speculative scaremongering.

They seem to be trying to develop by take over activity and struggling to make a return to their shareholders.

We do not have to make money for our shareholders, instead, distribute profits to the codes.

The proposed model is probably the best we can do for now without risking everything.

NZTR should get in behind because their continuous chorus of dissent may bring down the entire system leaving us all betting with off shore entities whose prime goal is performance measured by dividends to their shareholders and NO distributions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nerula said:

The racing industry has provided stakes funding (of varying types and levels), meeting funding, venue funding, infrastructure grants, race meeting compliance funding and club compliance funding to clubs to enable them to hold race meetings and meet compliance obligations. Clubs have, therefore, benefitted significantly from the financial support provided to them by the racing industry over many years. In addition, Clubs have relied on the support of the industry for their meetings (i.e. the industry has “come to town”). Without the Codes’ financial support and the industry’s support, their meetings could not have proceeded.
 

It really pisses me off when Nztr continue with this garbage..

FFS.  They are talking of supporting Clubs like Woodville 4 or 5 racedays a year Stratford 1 raceday a year (used to) .and other clubs .due for the axe.

The truth is that in reality  Woodville Stratford and many of the other clubs support the code with horses they train for 365 days  they share their hard work with all the clubs so are entitled to the so called funding listed above.

Nztr’s 4 or 5 days work   against 365 days work. Not hard to see the anomaly.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Nerula said:

I bloody near choked on my gin when I read the bit about wanting to make sure local communities had easy access to race meetings. And then I read the bit about not wanting a dates calendar imposed on them because they know best. Is this the outfit that conceded Sundays to the trots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, We're Doomed said:

I bloody near choked on my gin when I read the bit about wanting to make sure local communities had easy access to race meetings. And then I read the bit about not wanting a dates calendar imposed on them because they know best. Is this the outfit that conceded Sundays to the trots?

So they could race on Mondays?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Whyisit said:

The racing industry has provided stakes funding (of varying types and levels), meeting funding, venue funding, infrastructure grants, race meeting compliance funding and club compliance funding to clubs to enable them to hold race meetings and meet compliance obligations. Clubs have, therefore, benefitted significantly from the financial support provided to them by the racing industry over many years. In addition, Clubs have relied on the support of the industry for their meetings (i.e. the industry has “come to town”). Without the Codes’ financial support and the industry’s support, their meetings could not have proceeded.
 

It really pisses me off when Nztr continue with this garbage..

FFS.  They are talking of supporting Clubs like Woodville 4 or 5 racedays a year Stratford 1 raceday a year (used to) .and other clubs .due for the axe.

The truth is that in reality  Woodville Stratford and many of the other clubs support the code with horses they train for 365 days  they share their hard work with all the clubs so are entitled to the so called funding listed above.

Nztr’s 4 or 5 days work   against 365 days work. Not hard to see the anomaly.

 

 

 

 

It's hilarious. How do they think the money is generated which they distribute to clubs? Isn't it from wagering on events that those clubs stage? Or do NZTR now think they earn that somehow and give it away to support clubs. Why can they not get their head around this? They are just a conduit. Those funds used to go straight to the clubs based on turnover.

 

 

Share this post


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

It's hilarious. How do they think the money is generated which they distribute to clubs? Isn't it from wagering on events that those clubs stage? Or do NZTR now think they earn that somehow and give it away to support clubs. Why can they not get their head around this? They are just a conduit. Those funds used to go straight to the clubs based on turnover.

 

 

A while back the  total annual turnovers were given on here for all clubs and it was obvious that many clubs would not 'cash flow' from their race days.......their cash reserves were not given but I suspect many would be surviving hand to mouth.

In a past life I audited a few clubs ,and way back then things were shaky. And they were the good old days !

There are many fixed costs which the National body pay for and spread over the clubs ,by location not racedays would be crippling to many. 

Sports also will be lining up for more funding.

They got $10mil from nearly 30% of turnover ,the codes got $150 mil in total even though surplus only $137 mil. And more and more Kiwis against horse racing ,including politicians.Expect sport to be canvassing hard for more ,facilities are lacking and participation dropping .!

Racing folk are very reluctant to accept that these changes are necessary and can't keep doing what we doing.

Racing folk also can't agree on solutions ,and often codes and clubs don't collaborate at all !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Leggy said:

It's hilarious. How do they think the money is generated which they distribute to clubs? Isn't it from wagering on events that those clubs stage? Or do NZTR now think they earn that somehow and give it away to support clubs. Why can they not get their head around this? They are just a conduit. Those funds used to go straight to the clubs based on turnover.

 

 

It would be funny if they didn't believe it. its the worst written piece I've seen for some time, so a 1 , 2, or 3 day club owes its existence ,growth and development to NZTR funding  FFS they are dreaming ? If thats the case what do clubs with leased land owe NZTR are they going to get a bill?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PRESIDENT’S

MESSAGE

TWENTY TWENTY has a ring to it and will hopefully be a year which will see change for the betterment of the Racing Industry!

This change must be driven from all sectors within the industry and not by bureaucratic government officials who are hell bent on derailing the intent of the Messara Report if the current wording and intent of the second Bill now before Parliament remains. We as Owners need to be vigilant in getting our message across as this will be the only opportunity to persuade the Select Committee and stop some of the draconian aspects of this Bill otherwise racing will be no further ahead than one year ago.

The Minister of Racing wants to control the industry (why I don’t know) rather than allowing the TAB and Codes to manage their own business affairs as was the intent of the Messara Report. Without going into detail and in depth, the clauses around ‘Intellectual Property Rights’, ‘TAB Board Appointments’ and ‘Industry Governance’ gives far too much power to the Racing Minister whose portfolio can change like the wind and no doubt will next year.

I believe RITA and the Codes have been treated with contempt since the Messara Report and I encourage you all to get along to one of a number of public forums that are being held during January to voice your views. These forums and dates are in the RITA message that follows. As previously pointed out we won’t have another opportunity beyond this Bill to get the reform the industry desperately needs. Submissions on the Bill close Tuesday 11 February 2020.

On a more pleasing note I congratulate all those owners who had success over the Christmas New Year period and may we all have a prosperous year ahead. Catch you at the races and do approach me and give me your views!

Happy Racing, Bernard Hickey

The above is the opinion of the Owners Federation. The executive of NZTROF discuss the subject and forward their collective submission.

I would suggest you all have an input through club, sector or as an individual. The Minister must see that he cant allow the bureaucrats to stuff the whole industry.

Good to kick it around on here though. Here is the "grassroots"

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