Reefton
-
Posts
1,702 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
99
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Store
Gallery
Posts posted by Reefton
-
-
1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:
Te Akau's owner churn can't be too bad. I know someone who has tried to buy a share or two in the last two seasons and has missed out because the syndicates were full. So that would indicate that there is not much churn because attracting new players in the current economic environment and the public perception of racing would make it extremely difficult to sign up newbies. As for "fluking" a winner - it seems that Te Akau have at least 2 or 3 of those a year!
Just remind me how many they buy a year so I can put that claim that about their judgement in picking top horses into perspective? For every Gingernuts or Melody Belle they have quite a selection listed on Gavelhouse. For all that I am not knocking their judgment in horse selection. We all know it is bloody hard to win a maiden let alone a Derby or G1 so good luck to D Ellis in that. They do not produce two or three 'Gingernuts' per year either. I'm not talking about a Group1 winner I am talking about a multiple Group1 winner including in Aussie.
1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:Is it any better or worse elsewhere? If you were "well heeled" wouldn't you be better to take 5% in 10 Te Akau horses than buy 50% of one with someone else given Te Akau's record? You know the odds of getting a horse that can even win a race is very long.
Well I have had shares in nags with Trainers who have trained a lot more winners - if not group winners - than them(so not mugs) and would have horses there again so in my experience it is different elsewhere yes.
1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:I would say that the biggest determinate of customer churn in the coming two years will be the economy. Te Akau have been surprisingly loyal to the NZ Racing industry but I can't see how that can continue forever given the huge difference in stakes between here and Australia. I was very surprised that Jamie Richards chose to go to Hong Kong and not carry the Tangerine flag to a satellite stable in Australia. I give Jamie no more than two seasons in Hong Kong.
Surprisingly loyal? They are probably like Pike and Sharrock who both - at different times in the last several years - announced they were leaving NZ but are notably still here. Going to Aussie or Hong Kong(difficult anyway to get invited) means going form being a big fish in a small pond to the little fish in the big pond. Not as simple and straightforward - nor as lucrative in many cases - as it appears.
And as for whether Jamie goes well in HK or not well he has done unbelievably well to be invited. There were a lot bagging hm early on in his TA career('it was all Autridge', 'anyone could do it with that quality of stock') but he proved he was well up to the mark. He follows NZ racing royalty(PD O'Sullivan) to HK but he is the first in ten plus years to go there direct from here. I wish him all the best and hope he smashes them over there. Not that I know him well but whatever I have seen of him he is class(he ought to be - he is bred that way). Good luck to him.
-
3
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:
NZ Bloodstock don't offer Te Akau any better payment terms than any of their other major customers. Payment in full within 30 days.
Shows how much you know about the way NZB works. They are massive financiers of horses sold at their sales. Half the people buying there would have arrangements with them to finance the nags until owners are found. There was the famous case a year or two ago of a very prominent buyer/syndicator who was not allowed to bid unless someone was guaranteeing him.
I do not know(and more importantly do not care) if David Ellis uses those financing facilities with NZB nor whether he gets favourable terms from them but they are certainly available. You would imagine that given the volume of his purchases he would have a pretty sweet deal if he does make use of them but as I say that is his business and between him and Peter Vela. There is no impact on the run of the mill stakeholder in the game so it is none of their concern.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Gospel of Judas said:
What about Waterlea? thought done it like three years ago?
Not sure that they did actually(though I could be wrong). I know they were seriously considering it and seeking legal advice(we did too) but Covid got in the way and we did not progress it and I don't think they did either. We were in contact with them.
Kurow may have done something - not 100% sure there either
-
1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:
Yet at least one stable is very successful using that model of operation and have a solid loyal and large customer base.
I'd like to know their owner turnover. Yes they might have a lot of owners at any given time but I suspect there would not be a terrible lot of people coming back for a second dose(unless they fluked a Gingernuts or something the first time). Other than the studs investing in Colts syndicates and the likes of the Lindsay's who will (I will bet) will have a special deal(as will the studs in the colts I imagine)
I know I was once bitten twice shy and I know someone who is VERY well heeled who will be the same one their nag is finished(and it ain't much good so that will not be far away). For all that they were very nice to deal with and quite happy to talk and talk on racing even with a very minor client.
-
49 minutes ago, Gospel of Judas said:
Usually old story pissing in pockets of Waikato breeding magnets. For grand glory races and forgetting about other 90% of owners don't make any money on racing horses. Nothing really changed by two AWF tracks and want more.
Can see why all smart track put there in trusts, so NZTR on behalf of NZ First mates in Waikato don't along and piss up against the wall. Since they be the ones, keeping it for multi generations.
Oh re return on per meeting cost of capital we all know it is where the large glory meetings they want fund exist.
Unfortunately it is too late to be put in trusts or ownership transferred - the legislation puts a caveat on all club real estate - you cannot do anything with it without NZTR approval(or HRNZ as the case may be)
The only ones quick enough off the mark were the Westland Racing Club and haven't little Bernard and his cronies thrown their toys out of the cot about that. Did they think clubs would just bend over and let NZTR shaft them?
They must be bloody thick.
-
2
-
-
Bit fond of name dropping and telling us who he knows and what he has done
Makes you wonder if he is that good and that well connected why he would want to be part of a industry clearly close to capitulation
In light of this naughty boy TVNZ recently employed I also draw parallels with someone employed without a proper selection process
This is going to be interesting!
-
3
-
-
The greatest all right. RIP
That Arbre Chene ride - exactly the way CWJ will wait an wait and wait and then drive. Even gets headed and comes back regularly
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Huey said:
I would not be investing a dime in the Greyhounds, they are facing insurmountable challenges and association may not be a good thing.
Didn't look good on three tonight for the greyhounds. Got RSDF funding to correct a safety issue then promptly reinstated the same scenario with he same safety concerns.
Sort of like if you applied to the PGF for funding to benefit the provinces then used it to the detriment of the provinces. Nobody in racing would do that surely?
-
2
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Freda said:
An interesting flow-on from the above discussion is the plan to build more stabling at Ashburton.
Also in the discussion stage is the idea to build a dog track as well.
Where is the funding coming from? Hardly likely to be from private sources, one wouldn't think. Ashburton racing don't have the dosh.
So...NZTR? HRNZ? CJC ? given that Ashburton is their nominated 'secondary' Canterbury club with the intended demise of Timaru, Rangiora already lost to gallopers and the already completed deaths of Waimate, Geraldine and Motukarara venues.
Shiite I hadn't thought of it in that way
Canterbury down to two galloping venues. And the only southern galloping venues north of the Waitaki river other than our three.
No wonder the game is dying but equally what hope for us to retain three? Virtually none one would think. Still I suppose it is a way to get myself out of pouring dosh into a losing industry.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Doomed said:
I think Nelson just rent their track off the Agricultural people, at least that's how it used to be, much like Claudelands used to operate.
The precedent will probably be Forbury. Once it is sold and the money is used to fund the latest grandiose idea in the NI the flood gates will open. Anything that isn't tied down will be sold off to fund some extra consultants and add a new management tier at head office.
Even if they do rent it there will be an enormous value (in a place like Nelson) in forgoing the lease. I imagine it will be a perpetual lease so freeing up the ground would be worth an absolute fortune(the precedent of course being Riccarton getting big dollars for the ground it gave up to Ngai Tahu)
-
28 minutes ago, Freda said:
I would assume ( rightly or otherwise) that said assets would go to the CJC given their 'assumption' of the ownership of Rangiora.
well no Freda because you see the new Act makes it clear that when a venue is declared 'surplus to requirements' by the code governing body those assets, or the proceeds thereof, are, subject to negotiation, mediation and, if necessary, seizure(read theft) via Ministerial Order to be turned over to the Code body.
You can see that in train with the recent Timaru Herald article about how Harness is stopping racing at Orari, Rangiora and Washdyke. How long do you reckon NZTR will allow Thoroughbred racing to continue at Washdyke once Harness chuck the towel in? And while that venue is held on perpetual lease that lease would have a substantial value if the property were to be turned over to developers. And that value will not be going to the South Canterbury people as I bet the SCRC constitution says - it will be going into the hot little hands of Mr B Sharrock and his henchmen to be dished out to the bloated overfunded underperforming 'big' clubs.
And once the two codes smell the money pot how long do you think racing in either code in places like Waterlea, Richmond, Westport, Reefton, Oamaru, Gore or even Cromwell will carry on? At least in our case the property is small and worth eff all(comparatively) so we may be able to ward the hyenas off.
It's coming and in the case of Thoroughbred racing it is coming because the provincial growth fund has been allowed to be grossly misused
-
3
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Freda said:
Reefton has been tossing this idea for Riccarton around for a fair while, it's not a new concept. The difficulty would lie in overturning the 'deed of gift' or whatever it is called, of the parcel of land that is now Riccarton Racecourse. This was given to the people of Canterbury by the founding fathers of Christchurch City for the purpose of ' the racing and breeding of thoroughbred racehorses '. The breeding concept has obviously disappeared, but the intention was that it was never to be sold.
That, however, was shoved aside pretty effectively when a tract of that land was sold for the housing development now well on the way. I'm sure, given that actuality, that the rest could be flogged off if there was sufficient will. The property arm of Ngai Tahu will have done particularly well out of it so far, smart operators that they are.
But, interestingly, John Austin [ former head of the TAB and CJC Chairman ] also had that idea, many years ago. It was tossed aside as cloud-cuckoo stuff...but the man who is more known for refusing to consider that 'internet stuff' for TAB customers certainly had at least that innovative notion.
I was going to say hasn't there been someone on BOAY flogging that idea for years?
The whole bottom line is that racing is an immensely rich industry making piss poor returns on what it is worth. And the vast vast vast majority of that worth is held by the big Clubs in land holdings. AND if they cashed up those land holdings they would be in an incredibly powerful position to eradicate the smaller venues because of the stakes they would be able to pay.
The Victorians recognise it whether the sale of Sandown is popular or not.
Whether the CJC can get a decent percentage of any value out of Riccarton is the question and there seems a hell of a lot of mystery about how much they got out of Ngai Tahu, whether any or all of it has ever been paid, how much they got as a settlement on that grandstand,whether any or all of that has been paid, how they got ownership of Rangiora without apparent payment and what their plans are for Rangiora.
Let's see if the Rangiora assets now go directly to the Authorities under the new Racing Act. Not holding my breath
-
3
-
-
44 minutes ago, billy connolly said:
What is the problem with synthetic surfaces, these are modern well designed tracks?
With a few exceptions most of our current turf tracks are antiquated, poorly designed and dangerous.
IMO a horse who has won on a modern synthetic surface has won on its merits, a horse who has won at a bull ring like Reefton or a swamp like Kumara needs as much luck as ability.
Yeah that's right
Attimo broke 1.22 at Reefton. Amazing a horse could do that around a bull ring(actually it is astonishing a horse could do it at all at Reefton given how tight it is but that's another story)
The reason it did it was because the track was presented in superb condition as it invariably is. Unlike the track at the South Island's claimed premier venue which is so often a shithole with inside or(more likely) outside lanes caused by the way the track is laid and by inconsistent watering. We get to practice our irrigation once a year and ALWAYS get it right - how come they are doing it virtually every week but rarely get it right?
Ans the other difference between Reefton and Kumara (especially) and Riccarton is that people actually want to go to Kumara and in general they do not want to go to Riccarton. Oh and we pay our own way while they sponge off the NZ industry.
-
1
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, Doomed said:
They never come out and explain their decision making, always remain aloof and never respond to criticism.
That is the contempt I mentioned summed up in one sentence.
'We do not need to justify ourselves to these peasants'
-
3
-
-
On reflection and listening to that excellent Ray Hadley thing from Brisbane this just smacks of the utter contempt that these big clubs and industry hierarchy have for the ordinary run of the mill blokes who are the absolute lifeblood of the industry. It has clearly permeated down from Petone and Parnell and outfits like RACE(and other 'big' Clubs)have developed an arrogance towards the stakeholders. If it is the owners they are providing them with shiite facilities, crap tracks and(given the cancellations) no guarantee their horse will even get to run(and a piddly $200 if it doesn't), the trainers get talked to like shit, provided with disgraceful tracks to work and race on and, in this case, ejected with little or no notice. The punters have to play lucky dip as to track quality, form reversals and whether the races will even run from one day to the next and the jockeys - well there is no better example that Awapuni in recent years of the absolute cavalier attitude towards safety.
And then there are the starting gate issues that dive me nuts.
If you are not Pike or Te Akau(and no doubt now Sharrock) clearly you don't count in this game. I really ought to be chucking the towel in as far as racing goes. If I thought it would get traction I would be setting up a vote of no confidence petition but I know there would be a lot(even mates of mine) who would not sign it for fear of recriminations raining down on them personally.
And so we all just put up with these non entities, none of whom have ever actually done anything of note in racing themselves, driving the game into the ground.
I'll say it again 'it makes me sick'
-
3
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, The Centaur said:
"You try and support racing and get people involved... this is the crazy thing. Every time I race a horse I am supporting New Zealand racing. I'm paying ACC and employing staff."
I feel for you Gary. Everytime I go up and scrub birdshit off the grandstand seats or attend to any of the hundreds of hours of work and worry in organising a racemeeting I am supporting NZ Racing but according to Sharrock and his henchmen it is them doing all that work and they are entitled to the benefit. i know the way you feel
6 hours ago, The Centaur said:In an email to McKenzie, NZTR chief executive Bruce Sharrock said RACE was entitled at any time to exclude anyone from what was private property.
"NZTR has engaged with RACE in an attempt to seek mediation for a resolution... they have declined, which is their right," Sharrock said.
"It is in my view that NZTR is not the body to mediate disputes, beyond what it has to date, between industry participants, as these are clearly private commercial matters between parties.
"Correspondence between us on this subject is otherwise closed."
Gee he is covering himself in glory already isn't he? Wonder if his family are proud of him?
NZTR own the effing racecourse according to the Act so NZTR is entitled to DEMAND mediation not try to facilitate it.
Was the f*#k sort of organisation is RACE anyway doing something like that?
-
3
-
-
Yes well done guys. Bloody slick time too
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Reefton said:
I don't think there is so much a lack of interest in those areas in particular just a lack of interest in the South Island in general
We would like another raceday sure but the Westland situation clearly rankles with them still so we will not get that I wouldn't think.
The issue is no thought into the pattern of racing in the South. No logical two year old series especially south of Christchurch nor much for three year olds. Ten weeks with not one feature meeting within 5 hours of Christchurch and then series of probably ten feature meetings within eleven weeks. As stated seven weeks with not one grass track meeting in Canterbury. From our perspective too short a timeframe for our meetings(but we are a minor issue in the bigger scheme of things to be fair.
I think there is a pretty fair distribution of feature meetings (maybe the CJC has got a one of two too many - but clearly Mills has sway at NZTR(having plenty of time to be in their ear). Timaru definitely deserves one or two given the shit days they put up with in winter. There just needs to be a better pattern of racing that's all and it needs some innovators in regards the type of racing(claiming races, going back to the old 'for horses that have not won a race in the past year' or 'horses that have not won more than $10k in the last year'. That type of thing. Just some thinking re
It is just that the
FFS! That shouldn't have posted pushed save in error obviously - tried to edit it but it wouldn't let me
It should be:
I don't think there is so much a lack of interest in those areas in particular just a lack of interest in the South Island in general.
We would like another raceday sure but the Westland situation clearly rankles with them still so we will not get that I wouldn't think(won't stop us asking but I am a lone voice really and they - quite understandably - ignore me).
The issue is no thought into the pattern of racing in the South. No logical two year old series especially south of Christchurch nor much for three year olds. Ten weeks with not one feature meeting within 5 hours of Christchurch and then series of probably ten feature meetings within eleven weeks. As stated currently seven weeks with not one grass track meeting in Canterbury. From our perspective too short a timeframe for our meetings(but we are a minor issue in the bigger scheme of things to be fair).
I think there is a pretty fair distribution of feature meetings (maybe the CJC has got a one or two too many - but clearly Mills has sway at NZTR(having plenty of time to be in their ear)). Timaru definitely deserves one or two given the shit days they put up with in winter. There just needs to be a better pattern of racing that's all and it needs some innovators in regards the type of racing(claiming races, going back to the old 'for horses that have not won a race in the past year' or 'horses that have not won more than $10k in the last year'. That type of thing). Just some thinking required to try to keep old geldings in particular in work.
Your would still have your pinnacles(GN Meeting, Cup Meeting, Dunedin in Feb and Riccarton in the Autumn) and they would still be at the same time just a better pattern through the year. As I said I even offered to do it for them if they aren't up to it but I bloody shouldn't have to. Have they got nobody up there capable of a bit of actual innovative thinking? If they haven't then God help the NZ industry but from where I sit all they are interested in doing is pandering to the big Clubs and vested interests in the North.
-
1
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, Ludwig said:
So is there anyone on this dates programming committee who is looking out for the interests of West Coast, Otago, Southland etc? Or are they all focused on their own particular area of interest?
I don't think there is so much a lack of interest in those areas in particular just a lack of interest in the South Island in general
We would like another raceday sure but the Westland situation clearly rankles with them still so we will not get that I wouldn't think.
The issue is no thought into the pattern of racing in the South. No logical two year old series especially south of Christchurch nor much for three year olds. Ten weeks with not one feature meeting within 5 hours of Christchurch and then series of probably ten feature meetings within eleven weeks. As stated seven weeks with not one grass track meeting in Canterbury. From our perspective too short a timeframe for our meetings(but we are a minor issue in the bigger scheme of things to be fair.
I think there is a pretty fair distribution of feature meetings (maybe the CJC has got a one of two too many - but clearly Mills has sway at NZTR(having plenty of time to be in their ear). Timaru definitely deserves one or two given the shit days they put up with in winter. There just needs to be a better pattern of racing that's all and it needs some innovators in regards the type of racing(claiming races, going back to the old 'for horses that have not won a race in the past year' or 'horses that have not won more than $10k in the last year'. That type of thing. Just some thinking re
It is just that the
-
1
-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, mikeynz said:
So what is the present track rating for Reefton😀 nothing wrong with a early reading..
I live 50 miles away Michael but would imagine given we(the Coast) have had quite a bit of rain a slow 8(or is it a heavy 8 now). Natural irrigation only in the last 4 months
Thank you for asking
-
45 minutes ago, curious said:
With nominations for all races closing at 9am this morning, would you not think that someone could have got out of bed and posted updated weather and track conditions by now?
Wouldn't happen at Reefton
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, Freda said:
Unfortunately, Brian is another who - although he has real passion for the industry, and is not scared to speak - is blinkered about much of how it really works, and shifts his allegiance as well.
He and I used to have much dialogue about the wisdom of pinning racing's fortunes on Winston. Even the former Hokitika president, who was a NZ First member and had worked with Winston quite a bit, was positive that the old bugger would step up and 'save' Hokitika. Winston has always been about the regions, he used to say. We know how that turned out.
After the Messara report [ which Winston did get initiated ] we used to argue about track closures. He would dismiss my concerns, airily. That's just a red herring, he would say. You're hung up on that and it isn't important.
Now he's hammering the immorality of just such actions.
I do have to note my surprise at the way B de Lore changed from an absolute Messara devotee (I know he used to work for him) to quite strongly anti the concepts in a hurry. Would have to say the Messara report has drastically affected the morale of the local industry (which was bad enough before it came out). Any one who ever trusted Winston wants their head read.
-
3
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, curious said:
Gosh. Has Brian lost the plot again? I realise that the NZ breeding industry and pattern racing are intertwined with the racing industry but neither is necessary for the other. There are plenty of sources of horses for a racing industry here without a breeding industry. Hong Kong for example has a vibrant racing industry without a breeding one. It seems to me that breeding industry industry interests have been a big part of the downfall of NZ racing.
I agree with Doomed that the assets of the NZ racing industry are not the real estate but the racing events and the people involved with conducting them. The size of the foal crop or number of pattern races is largely irrelevant. That blog is just another side of what caused the demise of NZ racing in the first place. Shame.
The foal crops and pattern racing may be a little bit of a sideshow but they are a direct result of the demise of the local industry. When (many years ago) I studied economics they spoke of a country's 'comparative advantage'. Being an activity that a country was superior to in so logic said that that country should be producing that commodity for the world.
Well one of NZ's comparative advantage activity was breeding thoroughbred racehorses. Sad to think the breeding game is in serious danger of being buggered
-
4
-
-
10 hours ago, Doomed said:
I can't get over how we now have a totally different meaning of the word asset. Back in the day the provincial and country racetracks would have been considered assets as it meant racing could be taken to the masses and had a great spread around the country. Jockeys and trainers could originate from anywhere; and they did, as we all know. Owners could be based anywhere and could follow their horses at the local racemeetings and were happy to travel to watch them race elsewhere. These days if a small town based owner still has a share in a horse it is more likely to be with an Australian trainer.
Now in the eyes of that well known quarterwit Sharrock an asset is something that can be sold and any returns sent to the far end of the country to fund racing in Auckland. (I came across that quarterwit expression in the Guardian and couldn't resist using it)
Can you imagine if NZ Rugby said to clubs in Eketahuna and Masterton and all other small NZ centres: "We have exciting news for you, we are going to rationalise rugby in NZ and centre everything around the five super rugby teams. So we are going to sell off your grounds, clubrooms, uniforms, rugby balls, and anything else we can get our hands on, and send all the cash to the Blues. You will still be able to be involved as you can watch the games on TV and even travel to Auckland if you wish. The cash from selling your asset (thanks for maintaining it over the years) will help fund a PR position in Auckland for 12 months and a cultural advisor for six months. So your sacrifice will definitely be worthwhile. It is all for the greater good."
Plunket did it. All those wonderful people(mainly women I guess) who volunteered for years in the districts and fundraised to get their clinics built in all the rural towns then the national organisation grabbed the lot and sold them off. Disgraceful.
I don't doubt Rugby would do it if theh could but most of those grounds would be council owned or reserves.
-
3
-
NZTR CEO Sharrock Speaks..... 30 May 2022
in Galloping Chat
Posted
Couldn't read the first but read the second one. Thanks for that. Interesting. Surprised there hasn't be a real kickback on that like there has been for the Westland guys(though I suppose the taking away of their racedays was the payback and NZTR does not want to irritate them too much lest they stop thoroughbreds transiting there while waiting for or coming off the ferry)