Reefton

No I bloody wasn't. I never go near anyone's President's bar unless I am lucky enough to have a share in a winner and then invariably I am driving (as I was yesterday) so am not likely to overtax the entrainment budget. Re your photos I would be a bloody sight keener to see dust that clods at Riccarton and the comment about times slowing coincides with the longer races spending more time running into the wind down the back straight. This is a non debate in my view.

I was there, thought it was a beautifully presented track (and God knows that is not always the case at Riccarton) and you need to factor in the tail wind and the fact it is a huge track so you expect fast times in the right conditions. Didn't see or hear of too many jarred up horses. Let's just be pleased to get back to decent tracks again - I will have a G2/G3 any day over an H11. If they can run 57 for a 1020m at Reefton it is not unreasonable to expect them to run 55 for a 1000 at Riccarton. Or 1.07 for 1200. And Pitty is right - one of the greatest character horses of our lifetime Grey Way would have long since faded from the memory had he raced in the current day with them pissing water on tracks at every turn

Ah you see - you guys didn't have the leader of the PGF party in your pocket to rubber stamp the application immediately. No need for detail, full investigation or planning with Win on the team!

Thats always been my attitude. Utter waste of time. Very rarely if ever have I attended one nor their monthly dial in BS sessions. And as for a free beer and a sausage roll - well that is one of the most irritating things of the lot. They are spending industry funds on catering which is not required. The bloody meetings are only for two hours and they insist on lavish spreads??? Even when I travelled ten hours to Oamaru after the Messara report - for Gods sake I will buy my own pie and a drink if I want one. They even insisted on catering when Bernard came to the Coast to meet us. It is minor expenditure but it is the sense of entitlement that annoys me and again the spending of money willy nilly when the industry is in trouble.

its bloody easy to spend money when it is not yours An bad habit of many many politicians, government departments, and local authorities in this little land of ours

Did Foxton always own its own land? It just strikes me a as way to secure your future to own the ground you walk on that's all. I was not suggesting they should have brought it to develop or subdivide(at the time when racing was booming and they probably had money in the bank there probably was not the demand for housing in the area) but just to secure their future on the property. Not doing now leaves them in a very susceptible position if they were to choose to do the common sense thing and relocate.

For instance Greymouth's land was, I understand, held in a Community Trust but the Club took steps to buy it off the crown(long before Treaty Settlements of course and given its habit of being covered in six feet plus of water Ngai Tahu might not have wanted it anyway)

Ngai Tahu, under their treaty settlement, have first dibs on any crown land that comes up for sale. Clearly in this case the land was considered crown land. Nick Smith would not have swung anything it would just be Ngai Tahu exercising their right.

What I mean is they should have approached the Trustees years ago with a view to 'buying' the land and therefore having the freehold title for themselves.

Some sort of community/charitable Trust isn't it? They had to get legislation to change the use of the part they 'sold' and it must be crown land of some sort because Ngai Tahu got first dibs on buying it. Yet another disaster for NZ racing though - from the sounds of things Ngai Tahu has not yet paid the CJC any money from the section sales and for God's sake after all those years of prosperity(admittedly a long time ago) you would wonder why the CJC had never moved to freehold the bloody place. NZ racing seems to stagger from one shit hole to the next and the only ones with any common sense are all being eyed up to get them out of the current mire

Foik you guys are doing a lot more research into this than I have. Where will this leave Cambridge and Awapuni if they come to the end of ten years and the track needs re-laying at $7m plus each? I knew there was a problem with some horses not liking them and trainers likewise but NZ racing needs to produce a comprehensive plan as to how they are going to fund these things down the track. At the time of the venue review I read that on a average day in Victoria on the polytrack they turn over $7.5m - they will be lucky to turn over $750,000 in NZ and they are already broke. Seems like utter madness to me and a guarantee of massive track fee increases at Riccarton leading to exactly the opposite of what is intended(ie no horses in training at the centre). Even more reason to get rid of the dump and relocate somewhere less valuable and which can be purpose built for the modern needs at a fraction of the cost both initial and ongoing. That info about the problems with temperature changes should be really ringing alarm bells in a place like Christchurch where it is 25 degrees one day and 5 degrees the next. Saundry - being a Victorian - will be well aware of all these issues I presume - what is he doing to make Clubs and stakeholders aware of what they are looking at long term? Or is it just the 'let tomorrow worry about itself' attitude at play here?

if they were to go the Strathayr way what are the ongoing maintenance costs there?(as compared to an allweather I mean)

Not sure there are too many Riccarton Trainers against it to be fair. Some may just be a little worried about what the costs of maintenance will do to track fees(and that is I think a good reason to have a business plan so these people know what it is they are looking at in terms of fees). Logically he(Mills) would declare his support - it wouldn't look too good for the CEO of a joint that had just been given $10m ex the PGF to declare that he didn't like or support the idea surely?

I'm not saying I don't want an all weather just that they need to do some serious thinking about whether this is the opportunity to do something radical and really secure the future of the Canterbury Jockey Club and South Island racing by cashing up what they have and relocating to somewhere more suitable. There is no doubt that better tracks are required in the winter months especially and an AWT, if done correctly, might well achieve that aim. Equally a strathayr is obviously an option worth exploring but as it stands it appears there has been beggar all 'exploring of options' carried out just an arbitrary decision to plough onwards regardless with the AWT on the current site. In regards Tim and his position you would need to talk to some of the CJC committee on that but he has never done me any personal harm nor I do not believe the Reefton Jockey Club. Remembering the 'good old days' is all very well but you could apply that logic to virtually every major and a lot of other courses in NZ - Gore for instance used to have two fairly significant strings of horses attached to major Trainers but the loss of those stables is not the Secretary of the Gore RC's fault. It is just a sign of the times and what has happened to the industry - another thing to lay at the feet of those chappies in Petone methinks.

Fair comment. Yesterday I was thinking to myself how I would summarize racing's ills in a sentance Run by a bunch of people who vastly over-rate their own ability, vastly over-rate their own importance and vastly under-achieve. So until there is a mutiny/revolution(hopefully with some public guillotining of these useless wankers thrown in) there will be no significant change.

I think the differences are (1) that National don't have the blatantly quid pro quo thing going like Winnie does with his racing cronies(2)there are a lot more and diverse range of National donors than just the rural sector And one suspects there is some displeasure among Winnie's racing mates that he went with Jacinda and not Bill English. At the end of the day those people, being successful, hard working and Intelligent(notwithstanding the fact they are matey with Peters) are always going to tend towards the Nats. The fact National voted for the new Racing Act tends to suggest there has been some influence exerted in their party as well.

Fair comment re the pre race swabbing though maybe capacity constraints would preclude that. And I would be pretty disappointed if the post race swabs are not being processed properly - that is just somethng we presume of course(and I guess to be fair presuming can be dangerous - like Jacinda and co presumed there was border and quarantine testing0 Re growing revenue and stakes that is the point of realising these exceptionally valuable assets - use the investment income to support the stakes and the punter especially offshore will start to take notice, start punting and the snowball effect will be seen. Just takes a VERY brave administration to attack the poor performing parties in the industry not the easy targets(the smaller clubs with enthusiasm as their major asset and a realistic view of their place in the scheme of things). PLUS of course you get Stipes and Judiciary who DEMAND respect(rather than being like a circus sideshow), appropriate surfaces, quality facilities and good and improving fortune will inevitably follow. The lesser Clubs end up in a country circuit and look after the 'picnic meeting' aspect. AND since it is clear that the TAB doesn't want to know the industry throw the provision of gambling services open to all comers.

Exactly - sell off Waipuk and Winton, pour the lot into Riccarton and Ellerslie then in five years when they are in the financial shit again line some other poor bastard's venue up to be sold off. Wonderful innovative thinking really - what's that saying about making the same mistake over and over and over again and thinking each time you are going to solve the problem?

And they are all worth hundred of millions(if not billions) of dollars which is money the game could unlock, invest and use the profits to get the industry absolutely flying. You get a million bucks plus a week being paid in stakes in NZ Racing and watch the devotees multiply. Simple economics to me but I seem to be the only one who can see it

Lets think about AWT racing at Riccarton and the spectator experience Well two things - every time I go there it is invariably freezing cold with the nor-easter blowing straight into your face and secondly the main track is a long way away, the 1200m start diabolically so and the all weather will be inside it so even further away. Strikes me as a bloody good way to ensure nobody turns up on a regular basis. If there was anyone at the CJC with an ounce of imagination they would realise it is in the wrong place and that there is a great opportunity to shift to a purpose built facility out west where the product will be so much more attractive to on course attendees(and in all probability to off course attendees as well for that matter) But clearly there is not so I suspect they are going to deserve all they get.

I think you are being a bit tough on Hoki there Michael (1) they did NOT accumulate that money through racing activities - it came from the sale of land up the hill behind the racecourse. Land that would have originally been brought with NO help or support from NZTR, the NZ Racing Authority or any other racing hierachy organisation(unlike Riccarton, Greymouth, Wingatui, Invercargill, Trentham, Awapuni, Hawkes Bay, Ellerslie, Te Rapa et al getting massive stands and facilities built and tracks renovated then not looking after them) the Westland Racing Club could NOT get its snout into the Amenities fund trough due to the old District Committee structure of racing. (2) my understanding is that the Westland District Council refused to accept the property unless the Club gave them a substantial chunk of cash as well so their hands were tied - basically give the citizens of their District(who built them up after all is said and done) the vast majority of their assets or give it to the NZ Racing Industry who had just proceeded to drive the boot fair into their(the WRC) guts by removing their right to race on their course. It might not have been you personally who took that right to race away Michael but NZTR did it on your behalf(I know it wasn't your idea or that you were in favour so I am not saying that). How much wiser would it have been to take the stance that their time was extremely limited due to the state of their facility then after their inevitable demise the industry would have got the lot. Saundry and Co are responsible for the loss of that money to the industry NOT the Westland Racing Club Committee. And I told him so too. DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB!

I am sure in Bill Skelton's book he said Cloudy View had 11 starts in seven days That would be back in the fifties or earlier though so no show he was by Grey William Remember(and I do only vaguely as I was very young) when they could win successive maidens with a ten pound penalty each time(when noms were weeks ahead of the races and you could run them out). I think a horse called Fountain King won about four on the trot on the Coast in the early seventies - Graeme Mein rode it (again I think) Last horse I remember running twice in a day was at Greymouth - a horse of Peter Rudkin's called Trimax. Probably 13 to 14 years ago. They stopped it after that. Course some of the trotters would run three times in a day.

yes and it wasn't particularly short notice either - fair go it was at least four or five days before the meeting. They reckoned their truck drivers would exceed their hours(wrong excuse when the Club who had two truck drivers and a transport operator on the Committee)

Mills is a hard thing saying it will benefit the provinces. FFS they intend to close multiple provincial tracks(ours included eventually) to provide dates for that AWT. Having said that with the record of major Clubs in this country they will cock it up just like they cocked up the original Riccarton track renovation years ago. Anyway Riccarton is supposed to have got $16-$18m from the sale of that land near the chute(I know they might not have received any yet but they are getting it) and they have full replacement insurance cover on that Grandstand they will not rebuild(certainly not in a grand a form as it is now) so they should have plenty of money of their own without sucking on the PGF tit. And as I have said before they should be taking the opportunity all this money presents and moving to a better venue out west somewhere with better facilities, better viewing and out of that stinking nor east wind that seems to blow there every time I turn up. How can you justify retaining it when a significant portion of the people never go outside to watch the races just look at the TV's? Still it is the hierarchy of NZ racing so I guess it is drawing a long bow to expect common sense

Funny you should say that. I have got a sister who knows the media game rather well and who owned a couple of sky channels a few years back. Suggested to her to set up another to cover the industry but....... Your choice would be to affiliate with RITA/TAB in order to be able to use their footage or not affiliate and not be able to access it. Now I imagine the price of affiliation would be a no criticism agreement so where does that leave us? The prospect of being able to have some heavy hitters giving their views regularly appeals to me but not sure it would appeal to Dean McKenzie or Bernard Saundry and since they hold the power...... Of course if said heavy hitters started espousing the closure of tracks and seizing of clubs assets then it might not appeal to me either but I guess if you live in glass houses... You might be able to access it via sponsorship from an Aussie gaming outfit but that would not, as it stands right now, be of much benefit to the NZ racing industry.