Dean McKenzie-Time for some truth mate

[Chief Stipe]

4 minutes ago, curious said:

I thought the work of understanding the business had already been done by Messara and the MAC and that the boards job was to promptly implement those recommendations. Surely they should have been able to hit the ground running, not spend another 9 months assessing the options?

Especially when the MAC and RITA's Board are the same people.

Also is it correct to say RITA continued with the new season stakes commitment based on the borrow and hope policy of the previous Boards?

[curious]

54 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Especially when the MAC and RITA's Board are the same people.

Exactly. All the ground work, consultation with codes etc. had been done.

[curious]

58 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Also is it correct to say RITA continued with the new season stakes commitment based on the borrow and hope policy of the previous Boards?

They were instructed by the Minister to sustain those distributions but also to ensure they did so without further negatively impacting the balance sheet. They were on  track with that as of the October report.

Edited June 17, 2020 by curious

[Chief Stipe]

1 minute ago, curious said:

Exactly. All the ground work, consultation with codes etc. had been done.

And no doubt full access to the NZRB's financials.

[Chief Stipe]

Just now, curious said:

They were instructed by the Minister to sustain those distributions but also to ensure they did so without further negatively impacting the balance sheet.

Which meant they needed to slash costs straight away instead they drew down the rest of the revolving credit and stopped paying creditors.

[curious]

28 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Which meant they needed to slash costs straight away instead they drew down the rest of the revolving credit and stopped paying creditors.

It's hard to know what they have and haven't done isn't it? The transparency that the MAC recommended for the RITA seems to have completely disappeared.

We have worked effectively with what we already have

The committee has focused on using existing industry resources and channels to drive our reform programme. These are the most effective vehicles to drive quick, cost-effective, inclusive and transparent reforms.

Edited June 17, 2020 by curious

[Freda]

Wow,  that's clear.....not.

[Chief Stipe]

15 minutes ago, curious said:

The committee has focused on using existing industry resources and channels to drive our reform programme. These are the most effective vehicles to drive quick, cost-effective, inclusive and transparent reforms.

The withheld half-yearly report would have shown us:

1. What actions had been undertaken to reduce costs;
2. The status of the revolving credit drawdown;
3. Senior Executive salaries including the new CEO's;
4. The RITA Board members remuneration, number of meetings and meeting attendance;
5. Shortfall in creditor payments;
6. Most importantly - 6 months of the new betting system and impacts on revenue.

 

[KickintheKods]

I am reliably informed that the Sgt Shultz policy of "I see nothing", together with the young blond gold digger's policy of "you can have a quick peek but no touching" has been well and truly mandated by Dean and the Board of RITA.

To expect quick, cost effective, inclusive and transparent action is living in wonderland and total bullshit.

[curious]

1 minute ago, Chief Stipe said:

The withheld half-yearly report would have shown us:

1. What actions had been undertaken to reduce costs;
2. The status of the revolving credit drawdown;
3. Senior Executive salaries including the new CEO's;
4. The RITA Board members remuneration, number of meetings and meeting attendance;
5. Shortfall in creditor payments;
6. Most importantly - 6 months of the new betting system and impacts on revenue.

 

Yes, but releasing that now is not a lot of help is it given it will be 5 months old and we since have the effects of COVID and the shortfall of creditor payments obviously extended since January, they had the benefit of earnings without any distributions, duty relief, at least 80% of the expected racefields revenue flowing in etc.

[Chief Stipe]

1 minute ago, curious said:

Yes, but releasing that now is not a lot of help is it given it will be 5 months old and we since have the effects of COVID and the shortfall of creditor payments obviously extended since January, they had the benefit of earnings without any distributions, duty relief, at least 80% of the expected racefields revenue flowing in etc.

But it would have at least given us a view that the necessary actions were being taken however I suspect there was a lot of hand sitting, borrow and hope, and waiting for the Racing Reform Bill White Rabbit.

Covid-19 was an external risk that although not exactly able to be quantified could have been broadly identified as one of those risks that reserves (rainy day) are used for.  With regard to the very quick depletion of substantial reserves we have had years of constant mist and drizzle rather than a torrential downpour.  The latter being Covid-19.

Essentially my point is the half-yearly report would have shown us that the new management was taking steps to address the fundamental issues quickly.

As for racefields revenue - what is your calculation on its quantum?  Enough to cover the fees of the 80% of the races broadcast that come from other jurisdictions?

[curious]

4 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

As for racefields revenue - what is your calculation on its quantum?  Enough to cover the fees of the 80% of the races broadcast that come from other jurisdictions?

No idea. Another thing that the reports should quantify. I originally thought it was grossly overestimated by the RB (and so did the DIA and Treasury). It may have grown a lot in recent months though.

[Chief Stipe]

20 minutes ago, curious said:

No idea. Another thing that the reports should quantify. I originally thought it was grossly overestimated by the RB (and so did the DIA and Treasury). It may have grown a lot in recent months though.

Maybe not in recent months.  By December 2019 RITA had done deals with 80% of the online Australian Bookmakers.  So you are right this would have shown up in the half-yearly report.  That information would have given a solid indication of the returns to be expected from this channel.  If it was good news then the release of those figures would have gone some way to appease those of us that have doubts about RITA's predictions on the returns.

In the last annual report $22m was received in fees from offshore agencies for betting on NZ races.  $28m was paid in fees for offshore races shown and bet on through the NZ TAB.  A deficit of $6m.  Which is not surprising given we imported 88,000 races and exported 10,000 races.

There's also another $1.5m in commingling fees.

Interesting too that 50% of the races we export are greyhound races.

[curious]

I say in recent months because with no domestic events, all NZ punter racing expenditure has been on offshore events, so I would expect that would have significantly increased.

[Chief Stipe]

4 minutes ago, curious said:

I say in recent months because with no domestic events, all NZ punter racing expenditure has been on offshore events, so I would expect that would have significantly increased.

True but we imported most of if not all of those races.  I hope they are analysing the data they captured during Covid-19.  

[Weasel]

On 17/06/2020 at 2:18 PM, Chief Stipe said:

They used up their revolving credit facility of $45m which has to be paid up or renewed April 2021.  I would assume they will need a Government guarantee to either repay, renew or refinance.  For that to occur it would probably need an amendment to the new racing reform bill!

what's another $50M in the context of this COL government post-Covid??...they'll do whatever Winnie wants to get re-elected, while Winnie distances himself from Labour in order to curry favour from the Nat/ACT supporters going in to the election.Racing industry fans had better vote for Winnie again, cos the Nats did nothing useful in 9 years

[Chief Stipe]

10 hours ago, Weasel said:

Racing industry fans had better vote for Winnie again, cos the Nats did nothing useful in 9 years

I'll resist diverging into a wider debate comparing past and present Governments and stick to racing.

Other than throw money at racing (in return for NZ First funding and votes) what has Winnie really done for racing?  Compared to many industry's in New Zealand, Racing has had many many more advantages and privileges than all of them.

What has the Racing Industry done for itself?  From a privileged position it has steadily turned itself into a beneficiary.  

[curious]

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

What has the Racing Industry done for itself?

Sucked tit until it went tits up?

[Noodlum]

2 hours ago, curious said:

Sucked tit until it went tits up?

Yep.  My interpretation of the "reforms" that the Racing Bill is imposing won't change things.  In my opinion will make them worse.

The industry needs to be weaned off the tit in cold turkey fashion.  

 

Edited June 19, 2020 by Noodlum

[Kopia]

8 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

I'll resist diverging into a wider debate comparing past and present Governments and stick to racing.

Other than throw money at racing (in return for NZ First funding and votes) what has Winnie really done for racing?  Compared to many industry's in New Zealand, Racing has had many many more advantages and privileges than all of them.

What has the Racing Industry done for itself?  From a privileged position it has steadily turned itself into a beneficiary.  

And it transpires that the only hope for the industry is to off-load the NZ TAB. Thats what RITA is hanging its hat on. But who would buy it. Why would you buy an agency like this? Who-apart from NZers would bet on racing in NZ? Or sport? There are so many other world wide betting agencies to bet with. RITA is trying to force punters to bet on the Nz TAB to attempt to make the figures look good to a ' prospective' buyer.  Don't hold your breath.

[curious]

9 minutes ago, Kopia said:

And it transpires that the only hope for the industry is to off-load the NZ TAB. Thats what RITA is hanging its hat on. But who would buy it. Why would you buy an agency like this? Who-apart from NZers would bet on racing in NZ? Or sport? There are so many other world wide betting agencies to bet with. RITA is trying to force punters to bet on the Nz TAB to attempt to make the figures look good to a ' prospective' buyer.  Don't hold your breath.

Don't think outsourcing necessarily means selling the NZTAB does it? As you say, who would buy it? I'd have thought it means licensing and reaching a commercial agreement with another operator or operators.

[Kopia]

19 hours ago, curious said:

Don't think outsourcing necessarily means selling the NZTAB does it? As you say, who would buy it? I'd have thought it means licensing and reaching a commercial agreement with another operator or operators.

You might be right there curious. But anyone doing due diligence on the nz TAB would eventually get to the bottom line...profit? When costs are offset against ' punting' there aint much left, that must be obvious as its the reason stakes are still not announced. And while RITA blame the virus effects, the cupboard was clearly bare before the virus struck..the first time. IF it is on the way back, then all bets are off. 

The best option that I can see is for an off shore body owns the nz TAB, the nz TAB gets a fixed amount per annum plus a % of turnover. And the new owner gets whats left. To the victor, the spoils?

[Noodlum]

11 minutes ago, Kopia said:

You might be right there curious. But anyone doing due diligence on the nz TAB would eventually get to the bottom line...profit? When costs are offset against ' punting' there aint much left, that must be obvious as its the reason stakes are still not announced. And while RITA blame the virus effects, the cupboard was clearly bare before the virus struck.

Not entirely correct.  If RITA hadn't promised to fund stakes at a level that required the consumption of reserves their financial situation would be better.

If they funded stakes at around 60% of the current level they'd be OK.  Of course they could fund more if they slashed costs and somehow reneged on the two cockup strategic decision deals namely the betting system and broadcasting contracts.

[Freda]

18 hours ago, Noodlum said:

Not entirely correct.  If RITA hadn't promised to fund stakes at a level that required the consumption of reserves their financial situation would be better.

 

Which funding level was expressly directed by Winston as I understand.   Doesn't show a lot of comprehension on his part.

[Freda]

On 19/06/2020 at 6:03 PM, Kopia said:

And it transpires that the only hope for the industry is to off-load the NZ TAB.  RITA is trying to force punters to bet on the Nz TAB to attempt to make the figures look good to a ' prospective' buyer.  Don't hold your breath.

If that is the case - and I'm not saying it isn't - then the removal of form information and reducing the ease of betting for older enthusiasts isn't the best way of doing this.

Fumbling around in the dark.