mardigras

All you're doing us throwing around hearsay. Like Waller. We know all your punting is based on hearsay. Not facts.

No, but surely punters want readings across and all around the track. It's a punters right to know this stuff. Or that's what you keep saying. Preferably at 0.2m intervals across the track and every 3m around the track. Can you organise that. Thanks.

So show us where the increase in information that Waller apparently realises relates to punting can be shown to be true?

I've never heard one out of any of the last 100+ times I've been to Flemington. And I hear all announcements. And anyway, you still haven't covered off 'most'.

How does he realise this. Has he analysed betting? And why has investment on NZ racing gone down continually even with new info being added?

They put the info out, but most punters aren't getting it. Yet you claimed that most wanted it. Why haven't they then decided to get it, since it's there?

It is across the track at Flemington. And can you give me the readings at the 650m, 800m, 1100m and 1650m points for Flemington as well - for 1m, 1.5m, 2.0m and so on out to 10.0m. Thanks.

That it is unrelated to the penetrometer.

And it makes no difference as to which part of the track the straight races run on.

Punters followed NZ racing more before penetrometer readings, before being in foal notifications and change of tactics. Suddenly the new breed need to be spoon fed everything. Time they grew out of nappies.

Also, can't leaders run around the bends 3 wide or 5 wide? Barrier 7 is good. Horses starting with G and barrier 7, even better.

It's relatively trivial. It's a poor form of handicapping instead of just using WFA. They might be crap, but they aren't as bad as NZ handicaps. And you endorse black type handicap racing.

Aside from where they might go, it is a valid question. So much is being asked of the industry to provide. But nowhere is it detailed how that will aid the industry. If it's just more information for the sake of it, what's the point? The NZ industry is struggling, and some want more info that is questionable as to how that will improve things industry wide. Surely there has to be a point to it all?

Whatever that is, but it is superior to the category where black type handicap races go.

Says you. Since most punters in Oz aren't getting this info. I wonder why.

It may have evolved but was set up as a facebook group - with people putting 'tips' up. There are a number of positives. Getting people involved on a decent scale. Wouldn't call it a business although some might be trying to lead it that way.

I wouldn't pick holes if there weren't any. They could bet a lot more and you'd be up for paying the rebate. Because the model doesn't have any relationship with them actually providing the club any profit, you are quite happy to offer them a rebate where they could take money off the industry and more money than the club itself even makes from their hospitality spend. If food and drink is where the club plans to make money, why not offer them effective rebates on the food and drink. That way you cannot give them back more than they give you. I'm not suggesting rebates can't be involved. But if you offer a rebate on something that has zero relationship with your own profit, then it is open to abuse. And will be abused.

Really. Can you give a quick example of just how you would offer them rebates. Let's see your initiative at work. Rates etc, what basis, etc etc.

I think rebates should be a commercial decision. So from an overall perspective. If they were account based and lost, then a percentage of their losses would fit in with standard business rebates in most industries (over a qualifying period). Pay rebates to losers, as you want to retain them. Pay rebates to the company buying 10000 TVs at profit making prices, so that they might do the same again.

If they're winners, good on them. But don't pay them extra to stay. If they're winners, they should be happy with what they are getting.

But they are two different things. Why don't you give them a rebate on the food and drink they buy. Or offer them a special drinks and food package. Why have NZRB (who ultimately are responsible for the betting financial side of things), pay your customers money when for NZRB, they aren't a valuable customer? So if I spend $20k with you on food and drink. And then do $1.5m on bets. Make $100k on bets. Then you give me 5% rebate? Is that how it works? How do you define a level of rebate on something that has no profit, compared to something (the food and drink), that has a profit?

If I buy from your shop but you make zero gross revenue from me, will you give me a rebate?

For sure. If a NZ punter managed to win from non NZ pools, the reconciliation would provude NZ TAB with the funds to pay the punter, leaving them with their allowable takeout (less race fields fees). Previously NZRB have reported that the reconciliation process was causing NZ TAB to owe Tabcorp, which means NZ punters were being outperformed by their Australian counterparts on commingled events. Which makes the reconciliation process a negative, not a positive as NZ punters overall lose at a rate faster than the takeout rate would suggest they should.

So the club's they attend like Ellerslie get more whilst the industry as a whole gets less. Brilliant. Very much in line with NZTR policy as well. Well done. I'm not talking about losers, I'm talking about paying rebates to winners. Can you point me to the part where clubs get a % of fixed odds betting.

On the tote, they are not valuable as a winning tote punter will increase the rate of losses of the other punters, and the actual revenue from tote betting is equal to the sum of losses from losing punters, less the sum of profit from winning punters. Losing punters don't just keep forking out more and more. Reading the NZRB annual report will indicate that. Take away the winning tote punter leaves NZRB getting all of the losses from losing punters. Leave them in (and even give them a rebate) leaves NZRB with less than that. Fixed odds rebates to winning punters is madness as well. There is no NZRB revenue derived from fixed odds bets made by a winning punter. And then some want to pay them more for fleecing them.