the galah

About 15 years ago i worked for a company that had about 40 in the workforce,and about 30 of them bet on the horses . Most of them have now retired or passed away. Now days,,the same company still has about has about 40 with a lot younger average age,but only 3 would bet regularly on the horses,and 3 occasionally. Thats why i always say the focus on attracting punters should be on the people over 40 as that is where the customers come from. The first workplace i was in was a govt department of about 12 and they ran a betting syndicate and everyone participated and took an interest. I even remember the boss lady used to let me finish early if there was a local twilight meeting. mind you that was over 30 years ago. There is no doubt interest is waning. I think the lack of free to air tv and no exposure in the local paper has speed that up. and now they have taken away the radio. Reading the previous posts and everyone seems to be looking at the negatives. If people within the industry can't start talking in a positive way,then why would anyone not currently involved want to take an interest.

Just as a footnote to that. It was the incumbent business that won out. How did they do it. They simply got rid of the people who had got them in mire with their poor decision making /leadership,and replaced them with people who made smart decisions. The core product never changed, just the new people who made the decisions were smarter.

What i am saying is you are describing our tab/rita as a lazy fat monopoly. I don't agree that is the reason for their failing. I believe they have tried to remain relevant. They are not doing things over and over. The reason they have failed is simple. They have made incredibly dumb decisions. The people who made the changes had the best intentions but weren't up to the job. In an attempt to stay relevant they made changes that destroyed their customer base and drove their customers away. Taking away their monopoly or not,either way they will fail unless they make the smart decisions,and not the dumb ones. Now rita has new leadership. They have to look to the future.The government with the bailout simply put a band aid on the problem,as evidenced by the cuts announced that are sure to hurt the racing industries income in the future. I think they need a cash injection from government greater than they received. Without it they will limp to a slow death. The government is far better off getting revenue and tax from the betting and employment with such an investment. Unfortunately the idiots who ran the tab in recent years undermined the merit of such an investment,nevertheless it is needed.. You give the farming subsidy in the 1980's as an example. Fair enough.I will give you an example of a small business i am familiar with. That business ,in a large part because of their own poor decision making,got a competitor in a market that could only sustain enough income for 1. So they fought it out,eventually 1 succeeded,the other failed. But while that scrap went on for customers the income of the 2 competitors was significantly impacted. So really its a no win situation in a lot of ways if you are the racing industry.

O.k. i stand corrected there in respect of overseas bookmakers. Obviously things have changed in the last 12 months. I'm a bit sceptical of the 80% australian on line claim. And besides 80% of what? It may be next to nothing if they are getting say 3 c in every dollar invested whereas they could make at least 12c if the betting was done on the nz tab. RITA always talk about the racing industry in press releases like that. My point there is there PR often seems to be trying to placate the racing industry by making out it is the sole focus of such deals,yet we know the sports betting side of that would be a major part,and what % percentage actually goes to racing and not sport. And the other thing about that is. Why are we still being told that it is the leakage to overseas operators that is hurting the returns to the racing industry. Is that a fabrication if they have these deals in place,or are the deals not what they are made out to be.

I know nz was only a little fish as you put it. Still effected the 800 punters that bet here regularly. I agree the turnover does'nt seem much. John allens figures in a news article,mind you we know he exaggerates a bit or in this case probably underestimate.. Really the point is about generating income for nz racing ,and how much profit is lost to overseas bookmakers.

Splitting hairs. I said a law was passed in 2017 to stop people in australia betting on the nz tab. Yes they could set something up in australia to allow it,but they haven't so far. If the australians thought it worthwhile to pass such a law,you would think they believed they had reason to. According to the nz tab ,at the time there were around 800 customers in australia effected and they had a turnover of about 1 million.

In 2017 there was a law passed in australia that stopped betting on the nz tab. I assume that is still the case. No one is suggesting nz punters can't bet on overseas racing or sports,just that it should be done through the nz tab. Its only a suggestion at this stage. Nz racing currently gets nothing from the overseas operators even though they supply the product.

I fully understand how competition works. You say "grows customer demand by offering more attractive prices,better options and all round superior quality of service". Sounds like that came straight from a John Allen seminar. The point rutherford has made,and i endorse ,Is the business is failing because they have alienated customers,provided inferior product and still seem to lack understanding of what customer services/product are necessary to maintain turnover,let alone increase it. So instead of you saying rutherfords ideas are "half baked" you first need to acknowledge that the bulk of what he said related to why the tab/rita has come to be in its current financial trouble. The most pertinent point at this point in time is how can the most income be generated for the racing industry,and that is the approach rutherford was addressing. If we were to introduce the free market approach you advocate then obviously the nz tab would no longer be viable. Simply put,the timing is wrong for the approach you advocate. So using your approach would immediately inflict even more pain on the already strained nz racing income streams. Quite simply the racing industry may no longer be sustainable, and the free market approach would become irrelevant as nobody would have any product to sell. It really comes down to choosing between two unpalatable options. And the best of those is to stick with the one betting operator in the expectation that they will have increased revenue and therefor increased return to the industry. What other industry provides a product with no return like nz racing does to overseas operators. Of course the big if,and its a very big one,is will it make any difference to rita/tab when they keep making decisions that have a negative impact future revenue. Its certainly not good.

"The fields for the february meeting were great" ??? The field size in the first 5 races were hardly inspiring betting races?. 3 fields of 6 and two of 7.

That's a good question. Hopefully they have moved on. Otherwise why would we expect anything to change. There has been no transparency as to accountability. One thing that always bothered me when i watched them promoting the introduction of the $50 million website. Why were they promoting sports betting at the expense of their core product,the racing industry? Why undermine your main revenue earner? I always got the impression they liked the image of the tab to be based around sports,not racing. Who,when and why drove that focus?

Rutherfords solution doesn't seem half baked to me. The comparison to John Allen is a bit ridiculous. John Alllen had no understanding whatsoever of his customers,none whatsoever. Did you ever watch him give those talks on how the new website was going to create all the extra turnover. I saw a video of one and just shook my head. I thought either this man is very clever or he his is an absolute idiot.,because he appeared to have no idea about punting,yet was making out he was an expert. Rutherfords advice is simple. Put people in charge who know actually understand the business they are overseeing. How can anyone grow any business if they have no idea of their customers needs,as we have seen in the past.. you say to increase competition. I just don't know how that would work. Have you seen the size of some of the betting pools. How is diluting the pools size going to increase overall spending. And don't all those overseas bookies simply close a punters account if they win on the fixed odds.

"Allen was delusional and didn't understand the product." I like that quote. So accurate as are all his comments. One thing is clear from Rutherfords comments. He actually understands punters. The sad thing is he,along with the rest of us who are punters,can see the cutbacks they currently are making ,will only lead to reduced turnover and less customers. John Allen was delusional,but given some of the proposed changes currently being made by RITA,they don't seem much better. I wish they had someone like Rutherford having influence on their decision making.

Therein lies your problem. They appear to be your industries most recognizable figures media wise. So given the court cases,and given the details will no doubt get widespread media coverage, then how can your whole industry not be tainted in the view of the casual observer. And i just can't work out why this mass production of animals and the obvious disposal thereof of those that are not viable is being allowed. It all seems to be heading down the path that australia found themselves in. I'm not a greyhound expert and only follow the waikato/auckland region but i sure hope that they keep the c/d dogs out. Surely the northern region should introduce a preference to start policy now in favour of their regions dogs. Better to act now than turn off the punters they currently have.

Mr allen says re-energise nz's relationship with china. United states no longer a reliable leader. The only thing missing is sell our souls. Obviously looking to stand for national.

I'm not au fait with the details relating to the personnel who have lead the decision making of the tab/rita. Clearly they have in recent times had a different leader. But what i do know is that decisions made in the last 7 to 8 years show they have been driven by the need to save costs while at the same time trying to improve turnover. Thats fine. But the problem is the decisions they have made,have shown a total lack of knowledge of what their customers want,and what the customer needs so as to continue as punters. And the sad thing is they continue to make decisions which will ultimately reduce customer participation to the point where dollars saved will be less than the dollars coming in as a result of the changes. They may well be clever businessmen in the areas they specialize in who have lead the industry,but past and some present decisions made show that lack of understanding of what funds racing,the punting. From free to air tv going to pay tv,,from the website that turned countless punters away from participation and focused on driving sports betting instead of the needs of the customers of its main earner, the future decisions to phase out operators,the radio decision(why couldn't they have a simulcast off the tv),even basic things like the betslips or reducing the % the tab agencies got to the the point where they no longer cared whether anyone bets, etc ,etc. Everything has been cost cutting resulting in less customer participation ,resulting in less turnover, which then leads to further cost cutting,further reductions in turnover...and so on. And all along the industry licenceholders/owners have demanded that they maintain stakes levels,knowing that their product does not justify the level of the stakes they are paid. It also happens at club level. Just look at the auckland trotting club. Some of those people that were on the board that made the original decision would have had no ideas of the possible pitfalls. Whats in a leading harness trainers background to think he could understand the pitfalls of building of a huge apartment complex. Clearly the same applied to the other board members. I know it all sounded good at the start. But i remember not long after they started that complex i just happened to speak to a fella from auckland for 10 minutes who was visiting locally and it turned out he was an expert in the field of advising on such projects and who also gave advice to councils. When i mentioned the Auckland complex,he said,there could be a lot of money to be made in such projects,but the construction companies operated on small margins so as to get the projects,and because of the volatility of product costs,labor costs, quality of product(chinese) etc he said there had been a few disastrous examples for those involved. Listening to him at the time made me wonder about aucklands decision, because the atc had seemed so confident in what they were doing in the media comments..

Personally i think the decision to phase out being able to walk up to the tote and get a operator to place a bet for you, as being incredibly stupid. So they want everyone to use one of those machines or their phone.This decision is a clear illustration that they have no understanding of punters. In my job i often spend hours sitting outside the local tab,looking in through the window watching. Its a well run pub/tab who interact well with their customers and always prioritise their tab customers close to a race start. They have different types of customers. Youv'e got the seamen who came in groups of 6 or 7 on weeknights. They may only be there a couple of nights during the week,and they are not the same ones depending on what boat is in, but those groups of a half dozen who chose to bet on the aussie harness/dogs can put a bit through the tote as they often bet on most races. You have to remember these are people who can hardly speak english let alone read it as it is not their language. They go up to the bar tote just before the race starts,look up at the trackside screen and say a number... Now there is no way these blokes are going to know how to download the tab app let alone navigate the website,and they won't muck around with a tab machine,they will simply go and play the pokies. They are not allowed of their boats at the moment because of the virus but one day they will be. Then you have the handful of blokes who go to the pub for companionship who like a chat with the bloke serving them Different people come and go depending at the time of night but they are the ones who are there at the quiet times. Once again they just seems to follow the tv screens placed next to the bar tote and have their bets just prior to start. They never fill in forms,. They may not be successful,but they are customers. Then the half dozen who come in midweek after work. Again they don't fill in forms and bet just prior to race start. Then you have the weekends. You look at those who bet on sport. One bet,then watch the game. All the while the ones betting on the horses have 10-20 bets in the same time. There is no way you can get a bet on anywhere near as fast on one of those machines,compared to an operator. And when i was out of town recently i used the app on the phone and found it took me 10 minutes to put on all the bets i wanted on a couple of races when i could have done the same thing in 2 minutes if i was at home or at a tab. And thats someone who knows how to use the website,how cis anyone who is a casual racegoer going to cope. Just like the website,the decision to phase out operators will cost way more than it will save. It reminds me of the businessman i knew who was solely responsible for one tab's big turnover about 15 years ago. He had a great food/hospitality business and plenty of cash. He used to wander across the road from where he lived to a tab which was in a tavern. Didn't bet all the time,just in big amounts. Well,one day i was talking to him about the tavern which was struggling as a business. We were talking about that taverns tab not having a turf digest anymore to look at. He told me he had said to them that he needed the turf digest so as to know what he was betting on as he really didn't know the form. Well 2 months later,the tavern still had no turf,but also no longer had the big punter who simply gave up out of principle. He only bet as a release from the business and instead just went and played more golf.

A bloke was telling me a story the other day involving Mr Molloy. About 40 years ago the bloke was working at farmers and they had a division that sold stock feed. Often they would get trainers coming in buying bags of oats or chaff. This day Mr Lalor from ashburton came in and like they often did,the blokes in the grain store threw in a couple of extra bags for free and they would get a tip from the trainer for the races. Well Lalor told them he had a horse running at oamaru in a couple of days who he thought would win. They all backed it and tipped it to thier friends. And sure enough it won paying $8. What they didn't know at the time, was when Lalor saw the price pre race,he told the jockey.Leo Molloy the horse wasn't paying enough so he wanted him to give it a quiet run. Mr Molly replied that he can't do that as he had his own money on. Lalor apparently never used Molloy again because he wasn't happy he won.

Thanks for that,but it still seems ridiculous that the club,greyhound nz,or the trainer of the ballot were not aware a dog stood down from racing 3 days earlier, would not be starting. All rather amateurish.

Again Race 2 manukau 17 may. Atilas Arrow -Stood down from racing on 14 may for 5 days after a fall. Yet only comes up as a scratching on raceday,3 days later.. 2 ballots don't get a start. Is it just me,but isn't this just incompetence. Is anyone awake at grnz.

So there we go. The decision makers at the TAB had no idea what a punter wants, we all knew it,and given a couple of recent announcements which are sure to discourage betting,they still don't. What was that Bob dylan song ....where have all the punters gone.......

I was reading the other week about the discount Ohio licenceholders get on feed. And it got me thinking again about why is it nz racing does not have something similar. Well if there is, i'm not aware of it. So what about starting something for the licenceholders/owners/punters/clubs/supporters . Why don't we get 15-20c a litre of petrol like the small business i am a part of. Why don't i get 10 to 15% off animal feed products i buy from the likes of crt or pyne gould. They used to do that for me when i bought in bulk so why not when you buy in smaller amounts if your a cardholder.What about accommodation and travel,food and beverages. The list is endless. Why don't we have a card that licenceholders get issued with each year when they renew their licence and that anyone associated with racing can get for a small fee to cover the cost of issuing it and a small fee to go to racing groups. People would be happy to pay a basic fee if they knew they would quickly recoup it with future savings. Then you would have a data base for the people to target with racing promotions. It might be all wishful thinking but i can't see why someone like HRNZ couldn't organise it and make a bit of money on the side. Why can't it happen.

Australian turf club .different but some similarities?

Bathurst is in nsw so they would get more bet on the NSW tab. They aren't commingled with our tab. Thought i would check to tell you how much in their pool but its been so long since racing was on i have forgotten my password. It's normally not that much,but can get up around $5000 in the win pool for a meeting like that in nsw.. I have a few bets with the NSW tab on nz harness because of the different pool. Their pool size on our trots can vary a lot depending i guess on the level of pre race coverage over there, but its surprising how similar the dividends end up. Would rather bet with them than a bookie so NZ racing gets their cut . I was finding you can cut your dividend too much if you bet solely on the nz tab on the trots here. Actually its amazing how the NSW tab always put the videos of NZ races up before hrnz. The results are quicker too on their website than the nz tab. They also show the amount in the pools after the results as well.

not the ones shown on the tab site. It was only about 5 years ago oamaru had xmas at the races and the car park was full as well. Those clubs that have only a small population base to attract seem to have the xmas at the races go well at the start,but drop away after a couple of years.Workplaces like to do something different each year.

You've lost me a bit. I said timaru had an on course turnover of $153,000 from 7 meetings. I said big crowds don't always equate to big turnover.,and that geraldine on course turnover would be down if we saw the figures for the last couple of years. Personally I always look at money in the pools when placing a bet and i have always been interested in turnovers. I'm not sure,but you seem to be suggesting the synthetic tracks are a poor investment. Perhaps you should read what the president of the nz trainers association,tony pike said about them. His comments were very positive towards them. Is it just another example of the galloping code not being able to agree on anything? And tell me,why the fixation on synthetic tracks?