Freda

I don't know how this all works....but in a general sense, if someone or some institution breaks a law, there will be a complaint or a charge made. Therefore, someone has to take action and make the transgression plain to the appropriate body. Who would do that in this situation? NZTR? A club or club official? A concerned individual? And to whom/what body would the claim of illegal behaviour be made? The Minister? If he had an in depth understanding of the matter he would have woken up himself, surely.

Yes.

Yeah...as far as I know, there was little or no consultation. But, I see Kevin Myers has a couple in tomorrow on the synthetic.

The middle day all synthetic, no jumping at all on that day, unlike last year.

Thanks. Yeah, that worked.

No argument there. But my reading material was not about the NZ experience.

BTW I can't watch 'Silenced' .

That was my thinking too...and I'm not saying I've had a complete mindset alteration. But my reading material does give me some food for thought that a different way of operation may be of benefit at this time. Debate is good.

Or not? I thought it might have happened when he got the record.

Shocking aim, Mikey.

Another thought of mine - although the devil is in the detail, of course...IF the deal with Entain goes ahead, there has to be a split of revenue between them and NZTAB. Depends on what legislative unravelment transpires, but the Govt may require TAB to conduct betting on the local front with Entain managing the overall. With the TAB taking costs out of their portion, and forwarding the balance to the Codes, and Entain, with their portion, fulfilling obligation to shareholders and other normal business costs, taxes, duties, etc....is there a chance that racing may actually get less than before? The carrot pointed out by Centaur about a backdoor entry to a huge online gambling market, as well as the perceived possible conflict with Sharrock right in the middle of the pond...hmm.

Interesting. Was it Sir Woolf Fisher who commented that any staff cleanout/reduction should start top-down ? Leave the bottom tier alone, he reportedly said, they do the work.

No more responses..yet. But, seemingly, Zane Tate won the men's section of the best-dressed at Cup meeting.

Back to the Grand National meeting; the programme is not yet out on the online calendar on the LoveRacing website. Yet I'm sure I saw it in print, somewhere. Anyone have any idea?

A response from one, when questioned about the rationale in spending supposedly scarce resources. Also mentioned in the query was the impassioned plea to ticket holders 'not to pursue the refund option' because of the financial hit facing the club following the Cup Day fiasco. Not sure where you’re looking but if re fashions, then I suspect it is simply a replacement for June Youngman who Co-ordinated Fashion in Field at Cup Day. A lot of folk contacted us to say they had a great day, even without the racing on Cup Day, and didn’t want a refund. Most of the refunds we made were for GA . If we don’t have income then we can’t run the show and supply facilities for trainers to use.

The above-quoted 15% figure is the proposed PoCt tax take in Victoria of which 7.5 % is to be returned to racing. Or that is my understanding, at least. We have a PoCt as well, what is that figure, can anyone tell me?

Can't comment about Awapuni, but when it is very wet, we at Riccarton have none apart from the AWT. Pacework or gallops.

I'll let you know what the Board members I have contacted have to say on the matter.

I fear so. I wonder how he goes fixing potholes?

I think the gap would be filled...but those horses, generally, would be lost to NZ. We get to see some lovely animals race here, that wouldn't be happening without T.A IMO.

I was astounded when I saw the announcement..and even more astounded when I saw the list of congratulatory comments.

It's a mind-boggling sum, no doubt. But as a percentage of overall income? Not so sure.

Probably, because he doesn't KNOW how it is going to operate. If Sharrock claims not to know any 'detail' htf will anyone else? It is, as far as I understand, a legal requirement to get buy-in from the codes before anything else happens.

The only surprise is that it hasn't already happened.

No, you're quite right, but selective notice is clearly being taken. Factional self-interest is definitely rife. An impartial fact-finding mission would be a good idea bur doesn't seem likely to happen.