the galah

Why not? I pointed out crowd size does not necessarily point to turnover. Geraldine an example of that. Turnover is a major factor for income and no doubt is a factor when looking at closures for some clubs.

What strikes me is the 2017 on course turnover for 2 meetings was only $155,000. Those meetings were run in good weather. In 2017 one of the meetings had huge crowd which filled up the carpark,and some. Obviously people were there more for the occasion than to have a bet.I always think there needs to be a mobile tote, take the betting facilities to the crowd and if they don't come to you. When clubs like geraldine fold they will no doubt sell the plant and equipment to the locals in the know for next to nothing. In 2017 they had about $240,000 in the bank so a bit better off than waimate, but when you look at them in comparison to the other clubs mentioned earlier on here, you can understand why they were chosen for closure. The only surprising thing was South Canterbury had all 3 tracks closed and are only left with a galloping track,who will now struggle to maintain their course and facilities now they have lost the $66,000 which the trotting club contributed.

That is why i have continued to say Avondale need to be proactive and make the best of the situation they find themselves in. Tell me why can't they say"we will voluntary transfer our assets to the other club on..........these conditions. Just because rangiora might have negotiated a poor deal doesn't mean other clubs have to. But you are supporting the comments from the avondale jockey club that they would rather give their assets to plunket instead of racing. Thats what their representative said.You said you have no argument with her sentiments. Rugby clubs do merge.At least they have where i live. Not that common but there may be a couple more looking to do so soon. No argument about some of the past decisions by those running racing.. Idiotic some of them,and so obviously so, yet they couldn't see it.Beyond comprehension really. But its created an environment where licenceholders demand more stakemoney yet the clubs can't afford it because that would be spending more that they earn,. To me,clubs like yours need to look beyond those making the current calls around club assets. Its not only the previous mug decisions from the likes of those who ran the tab in the last 2-5 years,its also current trainers/owners demands that racing clubs continue to live beyond their means that has helped create this situation. I have sympathy for the clubs as to the situation they find themselves in,but get a bit tired of there being no acceptance from so many racing sectors that they can't turn back the clock and just have to move forward.

Why would you divest your assets when you could take them with you and use them to increase your influence at the club you have now merged/joined. Why would you not want to help the profitability of the club you now are a significant member of.

So the alternative is give up bowls and sit at home or go to the pub all day? Thats not what a true bowling enthusiast does. Its just a sport,like many,with similar participation issues to racing. Actually a lot of bowlers like a bet. Bowls obviously is not only about bowls,but also a place to meet people with similar interests in the club bar after. A sport with similarities to racing,except they are more accepting of the need for change.

Reefton, I was also thinking of your example of a bowling club. Where i live there used to be about a dozen. Over the last 10 or so years the 7 or so that have closed have sold their assets and combined with the remaining 5 or so that are left. Thats what bowlers do.

I fully understand the sentiment and passion behind such comments, ,but if i was a current member of a rugby club i wouldn't want our clubs assets going to the plunket society,womens refuge or whatever other organisation you can think of.I just can't see a rugby club behaving like that. Babies or battered woman may be good causes,but rugby is their passion,thats who they would support. Like i said,why can't they be an integral part of the club 25 minutes down the road and help direct that club. Its not a them and us thing at all.Its just been made to be that way. I don't know why some country clubs who are viable can't continue if they want without industry funding if they feel they can,but i can't work out why Auckland needs two racing clubs.

I remember clubs like timaru always used to have on course turnovers between $120,000 to $150,000 at each meeting 30 years ago. Now that takes 7 meetings to get.Shows you how things have deteriorated. I was talking to a bloke who went to the last timaru meeting and he said he couldn't believe that not one person was in the bar area when he went in. It was only 10 or so years ago they had some meetings where the bar area was a hive of activity. . Orari did get a good crowd,but the numbers were shrinking from what they were 6 or so years ago when they started the xmas at the races theme. I think the novelty aspect was wearing off with those looking to use it as a xmas work function, along with the unfortunate wet weather,the stopping of byo alcohol and the doubling of the cost for those doing the xmas function thing. .Thats the feedback i heard from the many that i spoke to who went. Although everyone always said they had a good day. Having the xmas at the races theme every second year may be a better way to keep its popularity relevant,thats my theory when using the same track with a smaller population base as your customers. Maybe methven may struggle to get as good a crowd,but then again if they target christchurch workplaces with the xmas at the races on a grass track event, then they may get more.They certainly have a much greater population to sell it too.

It says they review it in May of each year but if it is discontinued will honour the scheme until the end of the racing season on 31 july . It still currently has a list of horses close to achieving the bonus on their website.. But certainly would not seem prudent to continue it . You may have the inside word hunter,but i haven't read where they have announced that.

As far as Waimate goes. The article says they only have one or two trainers there. Orari is the same. The reason for that is because those that run those tracks won't rent out their facilities to harness trainers. I feel sorry for a track like Gore as they went out of their way to encourage trainers to train from their track. Also,Waimate supposedly spent $400,000 about 3 years ago to get their facilities up to raceday standard at a time when it was being suggested they would eventually close..

This club seems well run,but.......and it is a very big but.......... You can't help but see their income is going to be severely impacted by the fallout from the virus. 2019 books won't look too bad,but wait till next years result........................ $7,205,000 income from the Events Centre. The worst business you would want to have at this current time. $3,886,000 income from investment and developed property. $610,000 from rental revenue. The catering and hospitality side of their business. Pokie revenue down. Here's my guess. The met multiplier will go. They should cut stakes,but probably won't this year as they will be pressured into saving face for those who have made the decision to transfer all the extra meetings to addington. Stakes cuts will happen next year and be blamed on the virus. I'm not being a pessimist,just realistic. Lets hope cup week can have all their spectators,i'm optimistic about that.Otherwise it will get even worse.

Reading the above reports the opinion i come to is why do they need to stop racing at these tracks? Forbury certainly needs some sorting out given the losses they continue to have, but if they sold it what chance have they got of recouping the significant value of their buildings which are shown as assets. Why not just give them some decent dates at a better time of year to help them out,or change the way of funding them to reflect the poor dates they have had. Before reading the above financial accounts i thought it would show that most were eating away at their asset base,but quite the contrary. Given that,and if you accept that some of their funding needed to be redirected to the bigger clubs designated as being essential,then why not just do that, but throw the clubs mentioned above the lifeline of being given the opportunity to operate and see if they could continue to show reasonable balance sheets. Or why not reduce the number of race meetings and see how they go. Looking at a club like timaru. They pay $66,000 to hold those meetings to the trustees of that track to maintain and provide it for racing. Given the galloping club is still going in timaru,how are the trustees of the track going to be able to maintain the facilities without the trotting clubs contribution? Doesn't make much sense. I did note that the total on course turnover at the 7 timaru meeting was a pitiful $153,000. If you invited the contributors on here to all of their meetings we could probably turnover the same ourselves.

Mr Molloy blaming the south korea cluster on people frequenting "Gay dungeon bars". How did he know what those nightclubs clientle were. Something he's not been telling us? P.s. i value my own safety too much to make that joke to his face.

I thought the Messara report had recommended specified club closures. If the avondale club hadn't seen this coming and not made some contingency strategies then you would have to say they are at fault,no one else. Maybe they have,maybe they have the wrong person making comments to the media.

You would assume a club like avondale would want to negotiate some sort of representation on any future auckland racing club, so as to ensure decisions made can have their input/influence. That is what i would expect from the effected clubs. I haven't read anything like that in the media. Just the spiteful comments. Why is that

That may well be the case. They have gone beyond saying just that though haven't they. Why say what she did?. Well the reason is, that is what they are thinking. Its goes beyond being parochial, it is spiteful. No doubt there is more to the story then meets the eye, but surely its better to put the assets of that club in the hands of people who actually support thoroughbred racing.

It doesn't matter where they are running. Punters don't like races where there are dominant favorites like we used to get when they had all those penalty free races. Those penalty free races so often had about 25 nominate and then end up with 7 acceptors with a hot favorite. Waimate's pre lockdown meeting turnover was huge and clearly illustrated betting is more about exposure and having even fields with a bit of form. It was a low grade meeting but that will never put punters off if the fields are attractive. Had an auckland premier meeting been run under the same circumstances people would not have bet on it anywhere near to the same extent. NZ cup day has all the ingredients that waimate had,except higher quality. Run waimate fields at addington on cup day with the same pre race coverage, and the turnover would not be too dissimilar. Its only the media that tell us otherwise. In your answer happy you said as much as well.

Reading an article where it quoted the Avondale vice president jan skinner as saying the club" would rather donate their assets to the local Plunket society" than let the racing industry get their hands on it. Seriously,if this is how a racing club views their own industry,the sooner the thoroughbred racing industry winds up the better. Why should an industry continue when it is full of people who hate the industry they are in? Must be a thoroughbred thing ?

If the quality of fields was a factor in turnover, then why did the latest Waimate meeting have such a huge off course turnover? The answer is its never been all about quality, thats just what they want you to believe.

I have just read that the thoroughbreds will still race at Timaru,just no trots. Not sure why they would keep a racecourse open for one code only,seems a bit of a strange decision. I guess that answers my own questions.

So they have announced which clubs will be closed as racing venues. I understand the need for centralisation. But does anyone know what happens to the venues as regards remaining open as training facilities? Where is the announcement about that. Should that not have been made at the same time? Take the likes of horses trained in South Canterbury. Orari, Waimate and Timaru gone as racing venues but you would think they must retain one of those as a training facility otherwise they would lose about 100 horses( thoroughbred or standardbred) who use those tracks . If those tracks close, trainers in that area would have no tracks to train from unless there was significant travel each day. A couple of the bigger trainers would have to make 2 round trips,totaling about 4 hours all up, thus incurring significant travel and extra wage costs. Given the time and cost involved you would expect none of those to continue if the tracks were closed. The owners would be gone as well. The Oamaru track is an interesting one. It appears to have remained open,yet there is not 1 thoroughbred trained there. And only a dozen or so harness horses,half of which have trainers in their seventies. Williamson may turn up now and again to give his horses a run but he has his own training track,unlike those in south canterbury. And of course 80% of the horses that race there from both codes drive past Timaru to get to Oamaru. So i hope they clarify quickly which tracks are to remain as training facilities. That way those training from there can pull the pin sooner rather than later. The other obvious question is if they do retain some courses as training tracks who pays for their upkeep given the funding they receive from their local racing clubs will no longer be there.

I think as a harness fan you have to be realistic and accept that the scales will tip in the gallops favor when it comes to the support the racing industry may get from government Comparing the 2 codes can be a divisive approach at this present time. I think each code needs to pick the right battles to fight,but i don't see synthetic tracks funding as being one worth complaining about. I don't see a contradiction as far as the closing tracks issue goes, as they are sticking with the centralisation theme. I do agree that if they are just to be training tracks only, then how does it help with the holding of actual race meetings on courses that will have more racing dates,and that already struggle with track surfaces. I don't know too much about those type of tracks and what it costs to maintain them so you would hope they prove to be an asset,and not a liability.

So they found it likely his details were leaked by someone from the ministry of social development. He tried to enforce the old motto, actions have consequences, but should have known some government department employees have their own agenda's and know how to not take responsibility.. National government was certainly no friend of racing., Winston has shown he has been the racing industries best supporter within government in the last couple of decades. I like his views on most things, but i guess those that support National really struggle to acknowledge anything he does.

So the north island trainers are advocating some changes to the handicapping system .. Some seem fair enough like the horses over R70 dropping back at a faster rate. But they are advocating for the return of more penalty free wins again. When will they ever learn that this is a policy that leads to less participation,smaller field sizes and more hot favorites resulting in less spending by punters. As i posted on another topic -last season the average starts per horse had gone up close to 3% and races with hot favorites dropped by 5% . Stats obviously don't mean much to those advocating for the penalty free wins.

I find this story a bit disturbing. They say they are going to transition to the self service machines because the ones they currently use that have operators are proving too costly to replace or service. Does that mean the self service machines will not require servicing or replacing in the future? It all seems so short sighted. Personally i never use a self service machine because i dislike them. I have tried on occasions to get used to them but just found them frustrating to use. I'm not one for filling in bet slips either because i think it ridiculous how small the writing is. Thats me,maybe others find them better. As has been pointed out by previous posters there are so many possible drawbacks to this proposal. Won't this proposal cost them more revenue than it will save while alienating many of their customers?