-
Available Subscriptions
Trotting Chat
3,019 topics in this forum
-
- 8 replies
- 141 views
-
- 19 replies
- 649 views
-
- 21 replies
- 826 views
-
- 14 replies
- 590 views
-
- 5 replies
- 313 views
-
- 2 replies
- 211 views
-
- 26 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 33 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 7 replies
- 381 views
-
- 2 replies
- 163 views
-
- 10 replies
- 735 views
-
- 19 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 15 replies
- 682 views
-
- 7 replies
- 776 views
-
- 1 reply
- 241 views
-
- 8 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 0 replies
- 287 views
-
- 37 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 36 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 8 replies
- 806 views
-
- 12 replies
- 804 views
-
- 1 reply
- 342 views
-
- 0 replies
- 251 views
-
- 0 replies
- 257 views
-
- 111 replies
- 9.5k views
Announcements
-
Posts
-
I don't think Reefton suggested that it did. No club does. You've gone off at a tangent to the topic. The point is that the wagering revenue generated by the likes of Reefton goes a lot further towards covering the cost to racing of providing their stakes than the likes of ATR does. -
By Chief Stipe · Posted
Well you've forgotten a shit load. Tell all the listeners why and hoe Reefton adds positive revenue to racing? -
No problem at all for my bestie until he foolishly got himself restricted. -
Listen halfwit. The ‘Yield’ facts clearly displayed in Curious’ table are that every dollar of industry money that goes into the stakes on those blood sucking big days gets far less of a ‘yield’ turnover wise than does the likes of Kumara Wairarapa or the other two Coast Clubs. I’d have forgotten more about ‘yield’ than you would ever know in ten lifetimes. -
What the hell do you mean yield? That's exactly what's not there in sufficient quantum. There's stuff all other revenue. 90% comes from wagering revenue..
-
-
Topics
-
