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

Gooder or Worser?

Recommended Posts

Interesting times. 

A couple of months ago, or a couple of years ago you could have browsed Race Cafe to read about dissatisfaction with the status quo.

Now that there are many changes afoot - you guessed it - you can pop on Race Cafe and read about dissatisfaction with change.

If you like something, have the guts to say so.  If you dislike something then (briefly) suggest an alternative.

Having a whinge about inaction and also having a whinge about change makes little sense.

Going by their 2019 Annual Report the TAB pulls in just under $30m revenue a month.  This month they've pulled in $50m from Winston together with a wage subsidy and whatever they've made from Aussie racing.  So this must easily be the best month's revenue ever for the TAB.  Then there is another $20m for two more synthetic tracks and ongoing TAB staff costs are allegedly heading down $10m per annum - when has that ever happened?

Arguably NZ Racing's best time ever.

(BTW if you think that you disagree with this statement then do so by nominating a better time - because if you are unable to nominate a better time, then you must be in agreement.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Pickel said:

Interesting times. 

A couple of months ago, or a couple of years ago you could have browsed Race Cafe to read about dissatisfaction with the status quo.

Now that there are many changes afoot - you guessed it - you can pop on Race Cafe and read about dissatisfaction with change.

If you like something, have the guts to say so.  If you dislike something then (briefly) suggest an alternative.

Having a whinge about inaction and also having a whinge about change makes little sense.

Going by their 2019 Annual Report the TAB pulls in just under $30m revenue a month.  This month they've pulled in $50m from Winston together with a wage subsidy and whatever they've made from Aussie racing.  So this must easily be the best month's revenue ever for the TAB.  Then there is another $20m for two more synthetic tracks and ongoing TAB staff costs are allegedly heading down $10m per annum - when has that ever happened?

Arguably NZ Racing's best time ever.

(BTW if you think that you disagree with this statement then do so by nominating a better time - because if you are unable to nominate a better time, then you must be in 

Was there a time Racing was a sustainable industry without reliance on bailouts , if so would that be a better time maybe  ? .depends where you stand I suppose on life , a putter inner or a taker outta I guess .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Red Rum said:

Was there a time Racing was a sustainable industry without reliance on bailouts , if so would that be a better time maybe  ? .depends where you stand I suppose on life , a putter inner or a taker outta I guess .

Exactly RR , they just got Bailed Out and Pickel wants to send them chocolates and flowers to congratulate them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pickel said:

Interesting times. 

A couple of months ago, or a couple of years ago you could have browsed Race Cafe to read about dissatisfaction with the status quo.

Now that there are many changes afoot - you guessed it - you can pop on Race Cafe and read about dissatisfaction with change.

If you like something, have the guts to say so.  If you dislike something then (briefly) suggest an alternative.

Having a whinge about inaction and also having a whinge about change makes little sense.

Going by their 2019 Annual Report the TAB pulls in just under $30m revenue a month.  This month they've pulled in $50m from Winston together with a wage subsidy and whatever they've made from Aussie racing.  So this must easily be the best month's revenue ever for the TAB.  Then there is another $20m for two more synthetic tracks and ongoing TAB staff costs are allegedly heading down $10m per annum - when has that ever happened?

Arguably NZ Racing's best time ever.

(BTW if you think that you disagree with this statement then do so by nominating a better time - because if you are unable to nominate a better time, then you must be in agreement.)

 

12-15 years ago and prior when TR generated enough net wagering revenue to pretty much cover their stakes and operating costs. Now they are in the dole cue requiring revenue from pokies, sports, overseas racing and the taxpayer. How much worse can it get and where will it be when the $24m bailout (after paying the necessary $26m bills last week to avoid default) disappears in the next month or so?

Hope that helps.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick summary of the Score so far:  Huey & Eljay agree with me (they were unable to point to a better time).

Red Rum, like most of us, doesn't like how the money came - and believes that there must have previously been a time of sustainability.

Leggy puts forward 12-15 years ago...Remarkably right at the time Winston dropped Gaming Duty from 25% to 4%

Not sure I can concur with you Leggy.

In your corner you have:

a TAB earning just over $20m a month and run by Graeme Hansen.  The GFC was just getting warmed up & TAB Staff expenses about to grow from $32m to $55m in 6 yrs.

In the last month we have:

TAB gain $71m ($50m bail-out, $5m subsidy, $16m Revenue), run by Dean McKenzie. Another recession but TAB staff costs about to drop $10m and $20m for new tracks.

OK the handout feels like cheating BUT the money is real, I still believe Now wins on all counts.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pickel said:

Quick summary of the Score so far:  Huey & Eljay agree with me (they were unable to point to a better time).

Red Rum, like most of us, doesn't like how the money came - and believes that there must have previously been a time of sustainability.

Leggy puts forward 12-15 years ago...Remarkably right at the time Winston dropped Gaming Duty from 25% to 4%

Not sure I can concur with you Leggy.

In your corner you have:

a TAB earning just over $20m a month and run by Graeme Hansen.  The GFC was just getting warmed up & TAB Staff expenses about to grow from $32m to $55m in 6 yrs.

In the last month we have:

TAB gain $71m ($50m bail-out, $5m subsidy, $16m Revenue), run by Dean McKenzie. Another recession but TAB staff costs about to drop $10m and $20m for new tracks.

OK the handout feels like cheating BUT the money is real, I still believe Now wins on all counts.  

 

 

Play what ever game you like, keep the score yourself if you like makes no difference to me , I still think your point is non existent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Pickel said:

Quick summary of the Score so far:  Huey & Eljay agree with me (they were unable to point to a better time).

Red Rum, like most of us, doesn't like how the money came - and believes that there must have previously been a time of sustainability.

Leggy puts forward 12-15 years ago...Remarkably right at the time Winston dropped Gaming Duty from 25% to 4%

Not sure I can concur with you Leggy.

In your corner you have:

a TAB earning just over $20m a month and run by Graeme Hansen.  The GFC was just getting warmed up & TAB Staff expenses about to grow from $32m to $55m in 6 yrs.

In the last month we have:

TAB gain $71m ($50m bail-out, $5m subsidy, $16m Revenue), run by Dean McKenzie. Another recession but TAB staff costs about to drop $10m and $20m for new tracks.

OK the handout feels like cheating BUT the money is real, I still believe Now wins on all counts.  

 

 

Hard to know what your game is Pickel: either simple minded or a troll, possibly both. Whatever it is you are talking absolute rubbish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're Doomed - of course if it truly is "absolute rubbish", you should effortlessly be able to suggest a better time. 

As you are not able to suggest a better time, than you must be in agreement with me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Leggy said:

12-15 years ago and prior when TR generated enough net wagering revenue to pretty much cover their stakes and operating costs. Now they are in the dole cue requiring revenue from pokies, sports, overseas racing and the taxpayer. How much worse can it get and where will it be when the $24m bailout (after paying the necessary $26m bills last week to avoid default) disappears in the next month or so?

Hope that helps.

 

Would be interesting to see a balance sheet and profit and loss statement for the last period of years since the McCarthy? report (how many years ago?) to see where it all went so wrong so we do not repeat history

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NZ's best time ever!?!?! 

Debatable. Depends on what factors one wishes to compare. 

The TAB was pretty close to going belly up last Friday, and it was only the taxpayer throwing coin at it, that has kept it afloat. For the time being. 

Season 1978-79 was pretty good.

I would say a lot "gooder" than today. 

Let me list the reasons: 

1) The NZ TAB made a profit of $14.13million. That's over $14 million pure profit, in the late 70's! In the 70's!!! How much would that be in today's money? That would buy a few pairs of flares. What were house/land prices back then? The purchasing power of that amount of money... imagine what it could have bought back then, that amount of money. 

2) Racing coverage within the print media back then, was a lot more extensive that what it is today. Sh!t, they even printed the fields in the major daily newspapers. Several racing publications were prominent and sat on many more bookcases back then, than today. 

3) Racing could be heard on a radio wherever radio reception could be received. Unlike today, where no races are heard on any AM/FM radio transmission. The only requirement back then, to hear a race, was a set of ears, and a radio. No internet required. Thus much more cost effective (for the punter) than today. 

No doubt others more knowledgeable than me would be able to provide more reasons as to why racing, or more specifically, the state of NZ racing was a lot better back then, than what it finds itself in today. 

I will finish by referring to Winston's comments last week. He wanted "racing to be made great again." By making it great again, he is saying the current state is not great. We all know that, but maybe Pickles is the exception. "Again" can mean repeated. So perhaps, racing can return to the heights, not to mention the profitability, of the late 1970's.

Perhaps it can. Maybe it can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it Rusty, back in the day of yellow tickets at TAB and the $50 window at the track.

I cant access the 79 TAB annual report so will guess that the $14m was for a year (and distributed to clubs over the Next year, as was the funding policy of the day)

The Reserve Bank has a website tool for NZ's CPI and they say that $1 in 1979 would be worth $5.94 in 2020.

Lets call it $6, so that $14m would now be worth $84m - which works out at $7m per month.  Giving this month's $71m gross revenue plenty of scope to smash that out of the park.

I no longer own a radio, and subscribe to the Herald on my phone.  I even watch racing live on my phone.  I used to read Barry Lichter in the racing section of the Star, but now I can also read him, and a bloke called Rusty, on the same phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pickel said:

 

The Reserve Bank has a website tool for NZ's CPI and they say that $1 in 1979 would be worth $5.94 in 2020.

 

Can anyone tell me what the minimum bet size was in 1979, I was two years away from been earthed that year. 

I am amazed the minimum bet size hasn't increased with inflation. would it be a fair comment that every win and place pool would be 5 times bigger now if it had? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Aaron Bidlake said:

Can anyone tell me what the minimum bet size was in 1979, I was two years away from been earthed that year. 

I am amazed the minimum bet size hasn't increased with inflation. would it be a fair comment that every win and place pool would be 5 times bigger now if it had? 

That doesn't make any  sense, so if we make the min bet $100 we will have the pools 100x bigger? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Aaron Bidlake said:

Can anyone tell me what the minimum bet size was in 1979, I was two years away from been earthed that year. 

I am amazed the minimum bet size hasn't increased with inflation. would it be a fair comment that every win and place pool would be 5 times bigger now if it had? 

I would confidently say $1 was the minimum bet...on course there were different windows for collects[around the back] and machines punched out the tickets.Separate tickets for win and place.Doubles on course would have been exchange. From memory a $1 double may have been exchanged to 50 c ,as TAB's still had hand written tickets and 50cent bets.

Some areas had computerised tickets from 1974....and handwritten didn't stop completely till 1986.

Mid 70's Quinella started as did Trebles [one per meeting].

I think % betting was a 1990's introduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Pickel said:

Quick summary of the Score so far:  Huey & Eljay agree with me (they were unable to point to a better time).

 

 

 

What an astounding statement.    I never tried to "point to a better time"!    Pickel, did you ever queue up at the back of the tote?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eljay said:

What an astounding statement.    I never tried to "point to a better time"!    Pickel, did you ever queue up at the back of the tote?

Yea , holding his dad's hand back in the 70's . Fond memories as a teenager of queuing up at the back of the Trenthem totes to collect , everybody there was a winner so everybody was smiling .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Huey said:

That doesn't make any  sense, so if we make the min bet $100 we will have the pools 100x bigger? 

 

I just wonder if the minimum bet had increased slowly over that period of time then people would have just gone along with it. When the casual race goer  goes to the races they want a bet on every race so whilst the minimum is $1 they will spend that $1 to have an interest, I think the same would apply if we even doubled it to $2 now.  When I first went to the pub 21 years ago a pint was $3 so would have a couple and on my way, it's about $8 now but it hasn't stopped me having a couple. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Aaron Bidlake said:

I just wonder if the minimum bet had increased slowly over that period of time then people would have just gone along with it. When the casual race goer  goes to the races they want a bet on every race so whilst the minimum is $1 they will spend that $1 to have an interest, I think the same would apply if we even doubled it to $2 now.  When I first went to the pub 21 years ago a pint was $3 so would have a couple and on my way, it's about $8 now but it hasn't stopped me having a couple. 

Its an interesting thought, I don't think it would work like that. I think that's covered with the punters that start at a $ and move on .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aaron Bidlake said:

I just wonder if the minimum bet had increased slowly over that period of time then people would have just gone along with it. When the casual race goer  goes to the races they want a bet on every race so whilst the minimum is $1 they will spend that $1 to have an interest, I think the same would apply if we even doubled it to $2 now.  When I first went to the pub 21 years ago a pint was $3 so would have a couple and on my way, it's about $8 now but it hasn't stopped me having a couple. 

I get what your saying but i think where people went to the races with $10/$20 back in the 70s or 80s now they go with $100 + so it has incremented . When they put min spend on over the phone they lost a huge number of punters . Large walks of society still don't have large amount of discretionary spending so for a lot $20 for a day on the punt is still the norm . But the industry set there track on attracting more corporate types with more to spend , did it work ? i'm not sure , but i do know they have lost a lot of small punters . A beach is made up of a lot of small grains . I would lay money they wish they could go back on a few of those decisions .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aaron Bidlake said:

I just wonder if the minimum bet had increased slowly over that period of time then people would have just gone along with it. When the casual race goer  goes to the races they want a bet on every race so whilst the minimum is $1 they will spend that $1 to have an interest, I think the same would apply if we even doubled it to $2 now.  When I first went to the pub 21 years ago a pint was $3 so would have a couple and on my way, it's about $8 now but it hasn't stopped me having a couple. 

The owner of the NZ Tab Paddy Power accepts 10p online bets , maybe go downwards . Paddy Power could buy and sell the joint 10 times over . BetFred  and Fred Done allow 1p win , again Fred Done doing ok , he built and runs a new racecourse out of his own money,   million buck Godolphin and Gosden bloodstock racing round at most meetings there so it's good . 

Ladbrokes AU 50 cents . All the big players below NZ Tab bar Betfair .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check the Annual Report 2003.

Record turnover.

Percentage betting came in then. Yes, there had been 50pence/cents doubles previously but nothing like the breadth of % betting as it developed.

I am sure many on here remember being at Addington and holding a double ticket on the first-leg winner and ready to exchange. Out would come an employee and we would watch as he manipulated the divs according to the influx of betting. Oh, number 6 has come in. Number 8 is going out. Quite exciting it was  and occasionally, very occasionally, we would make the right choices.

As I have said previously: Those were the days, my friend, we thought they'd never end   ...

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.