The Centaur

The logic of some industry stalwarts baffles me. On the one hand they go on how incompetent the TAB has been then on the other assume TAB have got the expertise to make such a significant decision for the racing industry. The TAB board has been appointed to run the TAB by the government. I can't see how legally they can give up the asset (wagering licence) and pass it on to an overseas outfit. If that is to happen, given the history of parliament debate around TAB and wagering then the decision should only be made by the government after allowing scrutiny from parliament. There are so many questions about this deal mostly not mentioned yet I can't see how any decision can be made within 6 months.

Lets take on the "lawyers" Racing Act 2020 54 (4) TAB NZ must not enter into a partnering arrangement without written approval of the Minister. ___________________________________________________ So what is a partnering arrangement? Its one where "working together towards a shared objective" The objective of Entain is return profit to shareholders. The objective of NZTAB is to return profit to racing codes and sport. Therefore there is no shared objective. Perhaps the string of "legal minds" can explain that one.

I don't know but my computer makes reading the "Gazza" piece tough going. But concur with everything in it. Where is NZTR in all this? Below note the feeding frenzy by lawyers and the self congratulations but no mention of NZTR. Mike Roberts TABNZ (Chief driver of the deal) A rare chance to take stock at the end of an incredible week, in an incredible year. Starting the year, we had a goal to deliver a game-changing outcome for domestic racing and sport, and subject to the Minister for Racing's consideration of TAB NZ's statutory objectives and functions - and the Racing Industry Act's purpose - we are almost there before the quarter-time siren. A special thanks to our advisors, including the weapons at Barrenjoey and the unreal legal talent at Allens who ran (and who continue to run) so hard at this day in day out. Despite being Australian, they showed the tenacity of Phar Lap to produce what we believe to be a generational outcome for New Zealand. Our domestic advisors Chapman Tripp provided unique insights at every turn, and AP2 Advisory's Paul Bittar and Bronte Campbell sewed fertile ground in the early stages. Congratulations to Entain Australia, and the wider Entain Group, for taking up the challenge of making big commitments to our industries and communities on this side of the Tasman. Finally, a special mention to my TAB NZ colleagues and our supportive Board. In particular, project colleagues Sam Moncur, Cameron Rodger, and Simon Thomas - none of whom we could have done this without. And our brilliant CEO Mike Tod. It has been an absolute privilege to have a front row seat to witness Mike's impact in just one year. MinterEllisonRuddWatts We are delighted to have advised Entain on its selection as the preferred partner to TAB NZ for a 25-year strategic arrangement. Partnering with TAB NZ, Entain will be the only domestic provider of sports and racing betting and wagering in New Zealand. John Conlan and Isaac Stewart co-led the deal team which included Senior Associate James Marriner, Senior Solicitor Ethan McAuliffe, and Solicitors Brayden Print, Meg Donnelly and Russell Busby.

Perhaps we should inquire about the Minister's know-how. Its seems ridiculous that the future of racing in NZ should depend on Macanulty's judgement. Being a politician not having job losses is a goal. That cuts right across business principles where costs have to be trimmed. Straight away that a conflict. Just who is Macanulty listening to? The mind boggles.

The clubs would combine having one outfit doing it for them. Give more responsibility to banks services for ID and financial transactions. Inputing bets could be several ways eg scanning, voice or just sending a few numbers without the need for a flashy website. The key is market the sponsors products and services not spend millions on pushing one half witted bet type promotion over another. RACING DOES NOT NEED THE TAB. ( or any other parasitic outfit)

Absolutely you have nailed it. Sponsors are not interested sponsoring the TAB but are with clubs. Therefore in order to give sponsors maximum exposure a way has to be found legally merging sponsors with the betting platform. Modern technology should have meant greatly reducing the the cost of processing bets. Instead these parasites have done the opposite in order to line their pockets. Clubs can run their own pools due to technology with cost being offset by sponsors. In fact just for local racing, clubs can go it alone without the TAB. Why should they worry who bets on sport, greyhounds or overseas racing.

In all this TAB maneuvering where is NZTR? The Racing Act states in black and white that when there are proposed significant changes in TAB operations NZTR along with the other codes have to be consulted. Yet Sharrock has admitted he doesn't know the full details of the Entain deal. Not only Sharrock but his offsiders plus NZTR board have to know. Not knowing is breaking the law.

According to the TAB statement of intent's timeline there is supposed to be a review of totalizator betting mid 2023. Does anyone have some info? Entain are not into tote betting so it would be foolish preempting the review by placing restrictions on tote betting in order to appease Entain. If Entain gets involved some way in NZ I'd like to see tote betting competing head on with bookmaking. That would seem fair. Competing to the point that tote betting is just a piece of software with no overheads. i.e. no middle men or as Freda has noted a skeleton staff.

Before you get into any deal there has to be a purpose or goal. Have we just heard what the end game is? You can't tell me the end game is a commercial secret.

Offcourse the TAB should partner but not with a competitor. Thats crazy. Better partner with an outfit that has nothing to do with wagering i.e. an IT or marketing development company as long as straight away 50% staff reduction. Perhaps they could come up with an invention selling for $1/2 billion. That would really be a boost NZTR should themselves be partnering with similar outfits to cut costs. So many options but TAB picked the worst and one which makes no sense. TAB managers/board have got a great way out. Just blame it on Messara if things go bad.

Exactly. Particularly as its stipulated "no job losses"

Will Tabcorp and the other parasitic outfits be keen on promoting NZ racing if Ladbrokes has the box seat. Its not like Aussie punters are going to sign up to Ladbrokes just for NZ racing. Now if there is no job losses at TAB plus Ladbrokes brings in their own chaps hell even TAB offices in Petone will be over crowded. If all the TAB agencies are going to be repainted, refurnished etc into the Ladbrokes brand that's more workers. Then when Ladbrokes leave who will repaint the betting shops? I am sure shareholders of Entain would not allow there not being an escape clause.

There is another aspect. Entain is so big it could possibly buy up Sky City casino in New Zealand. Sky have had a few problems of recent times so getting in with Entain could be an option.

Yes but you don't see where the new road goes.

So what you are saying anything is good enough as long as its different. Therefore it shouldn't be examined. That's strange logic.

Its just a mystery. Why isn't there more comment on this TAB deal given the importance to all facets of racing??????? I'll throw in a couple more swerves. 1. the law says its illegal to promote overseas bookmakers. Therefore just contemplating a partnership, outsourcing etc is illegal. 2. How will club sponsors react when their sponsorship goes into putting profits into an overseas bookmaker. As Garry Chittick says. "Is there something I'm missing."

Garry Chittick's column on the Waikato Stud web site always worth a read. this is an extract ... We no longer pay wagering duties so we have nothing to offer other than our shareholders wagering license, this clearly has a value hence the supposed competition but the promise of greater returns to the owners is dependent on our belief that our new partners will achieve results not only for us but them also. So, we are to carry our infrastructure on, share our bottom line, and still have increased stakes. There must be something I am missing. Full piece here ..... https://waikatostud.com/the-corner-with-garry-chittick-53/

I'll tell you what will happen. Entain will expose to the NZ population all their other gambling brands meaning millions more will flow out of the country. e.g the so called $10m racing carnival will be the Ladbrokes carnival and who are Ladbrokes ... just part of Entain with all those other betting options. English racing is so extremely poor because the proliferation bookmakers such as Ladbrokes hardly the experience NZ needs. Setting up the TAB came from countless debates in Parliament and subsequently since. TAB's Tod has no right to sell off a government induced monopoly for 25 years. Tod has no experience in racing or wagering and neither have the board. Sharrocks great business experience must also be queried. Getting on the phone and selling sport sponsorships hardly rounded business experience. Guerin is a TAB employee so naturally would ask non-questions.

Yes with both squabling over the ever diminishing profit meaning the workers get less. Just watched Weigh In and Bruce Sharrock. This is just beyond unbelievable. The most we got from Sharrock about the deal is "it's going to be exciting" The questions Guerin asked were just beyond stupid if there is such a thing. Like with the deal will it be possible to race Saturdays on All weather tracks?....Really !!!. There seems a great cop out. It all depends on changing legislation. Would it not be better change the legislation then look at deals.

Some of the regular posters on racing social media have gone into retirement. One guy although not always right by any means was Berri. At least he had some involvement with the offshore parasites.

Now its standard practice for stipes to enquire into "improvement" shown by some form reversals. e.g. yesterday Pure Zambezi. Why don't they ask the trainer just straight up and down. "1. Since the previous race has the horse received an injection.? 2. Has the horse had any manipulation e.g. for back. 3. Has the horse had a change of diet. 4. Was something post race rectified from its last race. Four easy questions. Instead we have the same standard explanations e.g. needed blinkers. Needed to be ridden from behind/handy. etc etc. Best of all however "Trainer wasn't able to offer explanation!"

Quite a bit of material on the three pages. Note the little article reports Analei winning the Doncaster Handicap which would have been a red letter day for Te Mania Stud and the Wilding family who also later bred Zonda not to mention the Angus Stud operation. Blast.. Ryan Fox another bogey.

1973 (50 years ago) Saturday Auckland R.C. Rotorua R.C. Feilding J.C. Wairarapa R.C. Riverton R.C. Monday Auckland R.C. Rotorua R.C. Feilding J.C. Wairarapa R.C. Canterbury J.C. Riverton R.C. Trots Saturday Hawera Harness, Addington Harness Trots Monday Hawera Harness, Roxborough Trots Tuesday Hawera Harness, Total for Easter = 17 meetings n.b. due to large horse numbers some races in divisions. Monday Newspaper with results and fields https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/press/1973/04/23/6 N.B. another 2 pages. Click next page. Click any article to read it.

Yes I would. Stealing $1m gets higher penalty than stealing $10.