Boxing

Why not? Would you not expect if the monopoly were going to recapture revenue lost to overseas operators, that would be evident pretty much immediately?

Galah, not sure I agree with you in regards to the current HRNZ Board having too much business success?

but if you look at the hrnz board and the ceo,they all have well credentialed backgrounds. so,.business success or not,does it make any difference. isn't the most important thing ,we need people who understand  what drives the harness product, how to maintain and maximise the profit making parts of the industry.,while mitigating the level of any loss making parts of the industry. in other words ,just common sense is needed. its clear who the industry leaders surround themselves with and who has their ear. then you have the likes of the fella peden. Its like he gets the word from mr steele,who says something like,"matt can you come up with another hair brained spending binge,but this time for the people  in the cheap seats,to keep them quiet'. Then peden comes up with some scheme ,so in effect they are not just overspending on the lords,but on the peasants as well. and to be fair to them,it works.It placates the peasants. They too think of how they pay the bills due today and not 3 years time. oh well,i had better get my focus back on the gallops at cromwell today. Money to be made on south island gallops as i have said before,they always have good betting races. Just as good as the grass track harness meetings.

I doubt the "casual punter" worries about any of those factors.  A regular punter might and a serious punter would.  Although the latter tends to look for value anywhere.

No why?  You are trying to find a link between the monopoly legislation AND the number of accounts AND an increase in revenue.  You are assuming that you know how many existing accounts with the TAB had accounts overseas AND that some of the new accounts were or weren't NZ customers with only overseas accounts that changed.  You are missing a whole lot of data before you derive causation.