-
Available Subscriptions
Trotting Chat
3,019 topics in this forum
-
- 10 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 28 replies
- 2.9k views
-
- 8 replies
- 999 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 8 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 31 replies
- 3.8k views
-
- 3 replies
- 496 views
-
- 3 replies
- 655 views
-
- 7 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 5 replies
- 1k views
-
- 69 replies
- 6.7k views
-
- 0 replies
- 497 views
-
- 1 reply
- 479 views
-
- 18 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 3 replies
- 712 views
-
- 2 replies
- 551 views
-
- 2 replies
- 507 views
-
- 3 replies
- 729 views
-
- 5 replies
- 768 views
-
- 6 replies
- 865 views
-
- 29 replies
- 3.3k views
-
- 12 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 14 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 22 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 3 replies
- 822 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
-
