nomates

I would call the Windsor folk smart , it's the TAB and associates that are the dumb fucks .

Mr Chittick is in the game of bullshit and spin , so perhaps he's been talking it for too long to recognize it when he see's it . Studs are another part of the industry that needs NZ racing to meander along as it is for as long as possible , if racing stumbles the breeding sector will take a hit , they still need NZ racing .

The owners assn i don't get , they should be jumping up and down after the increase in jocks fee along with training fees going up annually . Now the TA , they're as weak puddle water , they should be prosecuted for theft , people being forced into joining them to get their license , and what do they get for their money , probably less than the one time i got conned into joining 10 years ago , which was SFA then . The big names are just going to continue to get as much out of the game as they can before the lights are turned off , most can just up sticks and jump the pond , the weak will just get buried . That IMO is why no one questions the bullshit reports or the financial reports .

It's bad enough they have as you say " no effing idea " how to fix the issues , they actually appear not to have any idea where to start . The bit that pisses me the most is the amount of bullshit spin they put out that things are sweet and on the up and that we are all taken in by it . But there are people out there that are swallowing it hook , line and sinker .

I've got no idea why anybody would be investing in any substantial way in racing a horse in NZ at present . You only require a half decent ability to smell bullshit to be able to see thru the spin in McKenzie's report or BS's smoke and mirrors piece , both giving the impression that we are travelling better than Winx in a midweek mdn . There is no substantial or for that matter insubstantial plan telling participants how they are going to trade their way out of this shitfest . All the big hitters must be privy to the plan because no one in their right mind would spend the kind of money they do in this current racing climate . I said i wouldn't get back involved again until i seen some light at the end of the tunnel , 2-5 years ago my wife and i had the majority share in 5 horses , at present i feel like the tunnel is actually starting to collapse in on itself . They think the A/Ws will be a god send , good luck to them , but if the administrators continue to follow old models , as they appear to and looking at the figures we discussed last week around revenue and cost/stakes etc i can't see anything improving in the least for a very long time .

Reduce the stake on all the over valued group races , then you can pay out the whole stake for that race plus they will have extra money for extra races , not that there is more races in relation to seasons past . Just another short sighted plan by BS and his cronies , like being smart enough to realize that it was a positive to pay a starters bonus but dumb enough to take it out of the winners prize , so now the winners of the vast majority of races in NZ , namely the 10k industry stake , so now the winner only gets 54% of the purse against the old 62.5% . The monies saved from reducing the higher end races would cover the extra starters bonus on top of the 10k , but no they take from the poor and keep giving to the big boys , when the industry is battling it's time for a complete overhaul of our race funding and group races . Take todays Wakefield , G2 100k , completely over valued race , never a G2 nor worth 100k , classic example of need for a change . Will it happen , doubtful .

No one is taking Trenthams assets , they are part of Race , might have changed , not 100% on that , i know Otaki opted out a couple of years back . They , Race or Trentham of their own volition would make that decision . As the Auckland clubs are doing . Westland's assets were getting taken from them and cashed in and banked , no more track , completely different scenario .

Totally agree , 8 meetings last season , lost a couple thru covid but for a metropolitan track it is pretty much redundant . And i say that as someone who grew up attending every possible meeting i could , loved the place , now just a shadow of its former self . Has more to offer the industry in terms of cash . What is your opinion on moving it to an A/W tho .

Been advocating it for years, not the Wairarapa , to far away , definitely north of Foxton , plenty of flat expanses of farmland , sandy based . Sell Palmy as well , worth more as real estate . Make Foxton and Levin training hubs . But you didn't really answer the question .

I agree , but what is the best for the industry , which would be on a financial hiding to nothing staying at Trentham . Also the question of , should black type races be run on A/W's ?

Nom's out , 9 in G1 and 10 in G2 , also light numbers in 3 of the other races , i would think a lot haven't even bothered to nom in the expectation of the track being heavy on race day .

We have a meeting at Trentham on Saturday , track at present a H11 and raining , so would suggest at best and going on history track will be a H10 at best and probably gluey . The hypothetical question is ; If Awapuni had it's A/W up and running and had been used regularly for racing for 12 months , would you be happy for Trenthams meeting to be xfered to Palmy and run on the A/W . Keeping in mind that there is G1 and a G2 programmed along with another 7 races with 30/40k stakes . I haven't seen the nom's yet but even allowing for them being good does not mean they will all run , could well be all races with 8 or fewer runners if track stays heavy . I ask this is as it could be a possible scenario in years to come .

Where do you find those figures Mardigras .

That is scary , so what is it that the powers that be don't see ?

We've all had a fair idea that this was an issue for a long time . Smaller clubs are to a large degree aren't dragging the industry down , they're happy to be the small fish , but others seem to think getting rid of them will rebalance the listing ship . The figures that Mardigras supplied would suggest that the more we retrench to the big tracks and clubs the deeper the hole will get .

Your opinion , give me figures , it's your argument for fucks sake .

Wow is that you backing your argument , giving me a one off scenario , fuck me that's why we should be worried , you giving me as much confidence as the ones with the power to actually implement what you are suggesting . GIVE ME SOMETHING SUBSTANTIAL . You have nothing , just a piss poor opinion , i'm done with you .

I don't honestly know , but it will be well above the cost of holding the meeting , they certainly wont be costing the industry money , most races at smaller meetings are 10k , and their off course turnovers often punch well above the big clubs , but they make revenue for the industry . That's their job . Yet i again i ask , why can't the industry sustain the smaller clubs and venues , you say you have been outlining why where , so far it's only your opinion , what is the financial cost ? , it's minimal and if , big if , it was more than just minimal it is not going to be enough to make any financial difference to the industry , it's not going to be enough to help increase stakes , but really i have been hearing this argument for a number of years now and you are following the rest by not being able to back up your argument with any sort figures , even a rough idea at costs saved , and it is your job to come up with the numbers , your the one arguing for closures , so ante up . Now you say the industry can't sustain the number of meetings either , funny , i'm sure the powers that be are xfering meetings from tracks that are closed to other venues . So the clubs that do as you suggest and amalgamate as you said the coasters should do , they will still have their meetings . I will give you $100 bucks if in 5 years we have 20% less meeting than we do now , i would think it will be much the same as present or a small reduction , but with A/W's in play i think they will be putting on as many as the horse numbers can sustain , they know enough to understand it's all about revenue , and you need race meetings to garner revenue . And if we need to reduce the numbers of meetings because as you say it is unsustainable where is the revenue going to come from , or are you just relying on sports betting increasing and pokies and the odd Govt top up . So your argument , i'm with you or i want to be , so convince me , give me the plan that supports your argument for less clubs , venues and race meetings that is going to strengthen the industry and propel us into the future , i'm with you , but convince me that you have the plan , because our leaders haven't , no one has produced anything substantial that says this is the way to go .

Ok , finally you accept that the big days are not sustainable on their own , sweet , that's why we need the smaller days at the smaller clubs , the ones that don't cost the earth to run , the ones that give the non city class horse a chance to win a race for their battling owner , if they choose to travel there . The ones that garner revenue above their cost , and when that revenue is added to all the other " industry days " help prop up the big days . But guess who's not moaning about that process , the smaller clubs , they understand the process , they understand there is a chain that has to be maintained for the good of the whole industry . They just want some respect for playing their part in keeping the industry strong . But guess who is moaning , people like yourself that think they as sucking the industry dry , that don't understand that the strength and health of the industry is measured by how well your lesser clubs are doing . Like the old saying , look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves . Jesus, Mary and Christ , we are the one that want change , what part of it don't you get , go back and find some of the topics discussed over the last few months , WE WANT CHANGE , CHANGE FOR THE BETTER . Things still being done based on the past , stakes , handicapping/ratings , our black type races the way our industry is managed , the lack of track maintenance , these things are part of the old model that hasn't been working for a decade or more , but who isn't changing these things , the people you purport to support , they are the ones that are continuing to do things that are based on the past , things that have helped get us into the shit , so much so we needed a Govt bail out , if ever there was a wakeup call for change it was that , but no they continue to follow the same old model . Well good luck with that because a couple of new A/W track aren't going to solve it nor closing a multitude of tracks . We are in an ever decreasing circle , this will just continue that process .

That is part of his argument , yesterday one of his responses was that " propping up these lame duck tracks was costing the industry resources " namely horse numbers , therefor owners , and if we simply close these " lame ducks " then owners would come surging back into racing horses . All day his argument was that owners gave up because they had to travel too much and retrenching to where the horse numbers were was the solution . Couldn't give me any answers , around financial gains from closing the lame duck tracks and how these would flow into increased stakes and returns to owners , after many repeated attempts . He thinks we are all against the closure of any tracks , which far from the truth , we all understand that change has to happen . What we want tho is a clear plan along with consultation , a plan that gives clarity and direction .

There will plenty of people where the horses are tho , so all good .

Owner numbers has nothing to do with closing tracks , what part of it don't you get , they are getting out because of piss poor returns in the shape of stakes and the cost of getting a horse trained in relation to those stakes . You can close all the tracks bar 6/7 majors and it wont change ownership numbers , they wont come rolling back into ownership because they have to have their horse trained at one of those tracks remaining . Stakes need to increase , massively , simple equation although you are starting to behave a bit like a computer now . Get base stakes up so returns to owners increase substantially to offset training costs . That and that alone will get ownership up . Now if you don't get that then don't bother replying because your starting to give me an idea of what having hemorrhiods must be like . Got no idea what the Te Akau reference is about , got no affiliation with them .

You must be part of the NZTR brains trust if you honestly think that closing tracks is going to be the panacea for the return of owners to racehorse ownership . It's naive enough of an idea to have come out of head office . The call used to be " build it and they will come " , but no now it's " close them , they will return .

What the feck has horse numbers got to do with it , most of the small tracks have never had large numbers , doesn't/haven't stopped them having a meeting . I want the cost to the industry , not the cost to individual owners , you opt not to travel , others have the same option . They are not exiting in droves because of the cost of travelling , it's for what you say you wont travel for , crap stakes . So again what is the financial cost to the industry , your argument for closing them , not to individual owners . So if you get your wish for a significant closure of tracks , prey tell me how much the savings , roughly , will be for the industry and how much that saving will increase stakes . I'll give you an inkling , fuck all .

Why should i study to get your argument , answer the question . Your doing what everyone else in your position does instead of answers , smoke and mirrors . I was working in Matamata during early / ,mid 80's , horses numbers big then , still big , nothings changed there , numbers down in other parts of the country , sure , because of bad policy . So your answer is rather than bring in policy that starts getting those horse numbers up and reinvigorate the industries in those regions is to just retrench to where the current numbers are big . You have as little idea about getting the industry back up and strong as our current leaders