Freda

You are pretty vocal yourself. Is your opinion worth more than mine, or those of others? Dont forget, those of us who choose to exercise our right to have an opinion are not getting paid to get this business right, nor are we responsible for the livelihoods and/or wellbeing of thousands. I respectfully suggest that if more opinions had been taken note of over a good few years we may not be in this situation. JMO. Of course.

Oh, yeah....plenty of that on those circuits...plenty of down-to-earth drinking too, in the Railway Hotel....Jimmy Melton and Garth Jackson after a few Long Island Iced Teas....but that's telling tales so I'd better stop.

Can't recall seeing that. The old photos of the sailing ships lined up down Gibson Quay are amazing, the sailors of those times must have been pretty damned good to get the old girls across the bar.

Hokitika looks fine, wide clean streets and [generally ] attractive homes. Interesting little stores, glass-blowing and greenstone/gold operations. Very different to the dilapidated Greymouth. If the track area is what you are referring to, the club gave the council cash as well to help with the costs of removing old buildings, etc. However, the West Coast Riding for the Disabled has a good complex down the hill, the barn used to be borrowed from them for racetime stabling. The arena is well set up and the place also holds riding lessons, dressage days, etc. with some keen local participation. Boys' Brigade has an excellent building up the hill, overlooking the track. So a valued and still valuable community asset.

The Hokitika Museum is a fascinating window on history of the place. I go in for a wander whenever I'm over there....sadly, won't be often now.

Probably.

Well, yeah...but can't see that happening!

That was just stupid bloody greed from that iwi. Trots would still be there if not for unreasonable demands....now it's just rusting tin and weeds. The prize would be Avondale, surely....has to be worth more than some plots of rural land , you'd think.

Don't agree, sorry. Clubs' assets have been property donated by early citizens, or developed by councils and/or local sporting bodies for community use. They should be returned to the community if not to be used for racing purposes. I can't think of one example where NZTR - or its predecessor, the NZRC, gifted land to a racing club. But, if you think that grandstands etc. have been funded by the industry, I'm sure any club would willingly give them back.

Of course I agree. That should be obvious from my posts over period of time. Clearly now, travel won't be a valid reason for the Guineas moving. Horses can travel again and by November, staff should be ok to travel with them. It will remain to be seen how much the CJC will fight, or whether they just assume that the northerners will drop their pressure, and allow the Guineas to return. As for shutting tracks, again, that argument has been going on for years. I think discussion here and elsewhere has highlighted how flawed that thinking is, and that with consultation, many clubs could manage to bring their facilities up to safety levels using their own resources. NSW Racing recognises how vital many country clubs are to the overall tourist experience of rural Australia, and provides significant support to that end. You have missed my point, though. Because appalling mismanagement, we have now been brought to this point, where there is no choice. THERE IS NO MONEY left.

Just another example of how badly wrong executives across the board have got all this. But, in the end, irrelevant now. Regardless of who did or didn't do this or that, or what could have been, should have been, or wasn't done...the result is the same. Bankruptcy. The days we fondly remember of how it was, are gone. We either accept that there will be racing [ if at all ] on two or three tracks, and we have to look forward and make the best of things. The biggest kick of all, will be if there are no structural changes, and, once [ if ] things start to tick along again, the staff numbers creep up again because of the 'increased business ' . We might as well pull the sign down then.

Even the socks tone in with the outfit, Chief! Colour co-ordinated.

Stakes are bulk funded by NZTR. The club doesn't [ these days ] have to find the money. If a club chooses - or is forced - to give away racing at its own track and use another deemed more suitable, the stakes funding and meeting payment also goes with it to the alternative track. So no savings there. Anyway, under current straitened circumstances, the existence or otherwise of clubs other than the few designated under the 'new' calendar, will be an historical fact. Consign it all to fond memories. Without radical restructuring, there will not be funding for anything much at all.

My views are probably a bit simplistic...but, I've always thought, we reduce exposure to racing in the regions at our peril. HK , Singapore totally different, there are no regions to consider. No point looking at them as a model. The experience at a country club for many young people is what has sparked interest and the love of the racehorse, without doubt. The city experience can't compare for kids. I'm not sure , now, what percentage of turnover is received by clubs, on or off course, but there was a time when smaller clubs ( Chittick's graded A, B,C,D clubs) got significantly less, and those clubs deemed 'strategic' received more. Reefton reminded me of that fact in an earlier post, about the facilities at Greymouth compared to the rest of the Coast which didn't get preferential treatment. Obviously, many of those country clubs have battled on for years with few resources , hardly surprising their structures are rustic, to say the least. Dead flies aside, nothing wrong with getting a beer from the tractor shed though, as long as it is cold! Mardi's model has retention of ( say) 30% of funds for upgrades of facilities and tracks on a rotational basis. If we accept that there can't be enough funding to upgrade 56 tracks ( which is reasonable IMO ) then, give tracks the choice. No forced closures, but these are the standards you must comply with for H & S reasons. If you can, from your own resources, fine. If not, then become a tenant club at a suitable venue . But in the interests of fairness, all clubs must receive the same percentage of turnover funding. As it stands now many clubs have been starved of rightful share for years. Bulk funding of stakes has ameliorated that but leaves nothing for amenity upgrades that have been neglected for years. I know off the top of my head of two clubs who have - or had - the resources to significantly do upgrades. Riverton, a very wealthy club, earns 200k per annually from sale of grass seed alone, not to mention other income from hay baleage, and grazing/ sale of cattle. Insane not to retain Riverton. Also, Hokitika, with land assets and half a mill in the bank, could also have done significant improvements but probably left that option too late. With enlightened management from both ends ( club and Nztr) that venue could also still be with us. There will be others without doubt. The big stick approach just isn't right. A bit of discussion and thought and solutions can be found, if there's a will.

Keith Haub was the only contribution I could come up with!

It has occurred to me, that by replacing Rita/Nzrb by Racing NZ and Wagering NZ ( as planned ) we actually get an extra layer of management....that'll be an efficient move.

Beats me. However, they are not as profligate as the other outfit. Their policies and practices need sorting, but I think they are trying - although most of us would think, try harder..!

Yes. Fits with the notion that they cost money, but those costs not listed anywhere that I can see. I've mentioned elsewhere, that modern H & S requirements must be paramount. If industry money is needed to adhere to those, fair enough, that club should realistically face the firing squad. But, if, through prudent mangement there is funding for necessary infrastructure upgrades, then, why? And, don't forget, those smaller, oft-criticised clubs/tracks have for years been deprived of the level of turnover funds that the 'strategic' club receive. But as well, as Barry mentions above, if the 'low interest dumps' aren't getting good patronage, what is the benefit of keeping them at all? Common sense, again...a commodity in short supply.

Both of you have valid points; I like all of Barry's ideas, can't see why implementing some or all of them can't be done. Practically, the 20-25 minutes might take a bit of a re-think, but negative attitudes need to be kicked to touch. Huey does have a point too, about the traditional following...but implementing change isn't synonymous with cutting them out. Again, a bit of thought needed. But proactive thinking isn't widely done I'm afraid, and therein lies the crux of it all.

Health and safety must be considered however. But, if a club has the means to bring itself into the modern arena, then it shouldn't be arbitrarily closed.

A little bird told me that a large number of positions are to be lost at Rita/NZRB. If that is correct, that's great news, and an indication that things might be trending in the right direction. But, not confirmed, and even if so, just a drop in the bucket to what is needed overall. But - it shouldn't have taken a pandemic, a horrid balance sheet, and agitation [ at last ] from sector groups. I understand Reefton's comment elsewhere about not 'biting the hand that feeds you' in a reference to the continued silence/stonewalling from both Rita and Saundry....but that shouldn't have precluded succinct information. Their collective performance to date IMO has been disgraceful.

I tried to read that discourse between you and Bill about fibre, satellite, etc..but lost comprehension fairly quickly. Can you explain briefly and simply just why the 'fibre' option is a red herring?

Seems the slide from favour isn't confined to here then. No idea how well or otherwise this company is managed, however. Was reminded very recently that racing, in its infancy, was a rich man's hobby. The Sport of Kings - and the seriously wealthy. Still is ; the Arabs have stepped up and racing would be the poorer without them. Bottom line, you should never play with money you can't afford to lose.

Absolutely. Obvious. Big fish, small pond perhaps?

Quite. You have answered your own query, another ruse to get the Guineas - and keep them - that has been fomenting for years. I'm afraid I don't share Pitty's faith here, but of course, would be happy to be wrong. Was conversing with a very experienced, former member of the industry recently, he said that breeders have stuffed the industry and have done so wherever they have been allowed to get their own way. That's a view I've held for a good while also.