AWT those anti please look

[Pitman]

For those people who don't agree with how good AWT racing can be look at this

 

chelmsfordcityracecourse.com

read it!!!

[Chief Stipe]

Things to note about Chelmsford:

• 60 race meetings a year;
• NO horses trained on the course (generally supplied from Newmarket 80km away);
• To sustain more than 40 meetings a year 1,600 horses in full training are required;
• Chelmsford privately owned - majority shareholding a bookmaker.

So when making comparisons we should compare apples with apples.

[Pitman]

Yet another negative reply

so what if they don't train on it they hold 59 meetings a year ffs

who came up with 1600 horses

yes and maybe bookmakers should be allowed to operate in NZ

everyone acknowledges good for training heres an example of plenty of good racing.

 

Edited May 29, 2020 by Pitman

[Chief Stipe]

7 minutes ago, Pitman said:

Yet another negative reply

 

You've only viewed it as negative.  I'm just trying to put some numbers and analysis to the AWT case.  It would help if we could see the Business Plan - Cost/Benefit Analysis done to justify the race track.  It is "Commercially Sensitive" although it may be "Politically Sensitive."

9 minutes ago, Pitman said:

so what if they don't train on it they hold 59 meetings a year ffs

 

The "so what" is that they couldn't manage 59 meetings a year if they had to train 1,600 horse on it!  Which is what they are proposing for Cambridge and Riccarton (presumable Awapuni as well!) - that's 1,600 each!

11 minutes ago, Pitman said:

everyone acknowledges good for training heres an example of plenty of good racing.

 

But not BOTH at the levels being proposed.

 

[Pitman]

Riccarton may eventually get close to 40 meetings a year, as other tracks are closed, they will not all be run on the AWT. Can you not get your head around that

I train at Riccarton never heard of having close to 1600 horses there

Cambridge might but a lot of them are trial, sell, RTR horses that never race in NZ

[Chief Stipe]

14 minutes ago, Pitman said:

Riccarton may eventually get close to 40 meetings a year, as other tracks are closed, they will not all be run on the AWT. Can you not get your head around that

 

What's the business case say?  What is NZTR's plan?  Where did the figure of 40 come from?

14 minutes ago, Pitman said:

I train at Riccarton never heard of having close to 1600 horses there

 

So if other tracks are closing where will the required amount of horses be trained to sustain 40 meetings a year at Riccarton?

15 minutes ago, Pitman said:

Cambridge might but a lot of them are trial, sell, RTR horses that never race in NZ

Cambridge say they are the "Largest Thoroughbred Training Centre in Australasia" with 1,200 per month.  One trainer has been quoted as saying that they will have 52 AWT meetings a year on the new track!

[Pitman]

4 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Another FACT to consider about Chelmsford is that the max field capacity is LESS than 10.

That just sends your argument for 1600 horses out the door, but wait, they show a field of 14 runners on their website!!!!!

[Pitman]

4 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

What's the business case say?  What is NZTR's plan?  Where did the figure of 40 come from?

So if other tracks are closing where will the required amount of horses be trained to sustain 40 meetings a year at Riccarton?

Cambridge say they are the "Largest Thoroughbred Training Centre in Australasia" with 1,200 per month.  One trainer has been quoted as saying that they will have 52 AWT meetings a year on the new track!

Just add up the venues due for closure

Ashburton will become an important alternative to Riccarton

Not with an attitude like you have

[billy connolly]

46 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

It would help if we could see the Business Plan - Cost/Benefit Analysis done to justify the race track.

The cost/benefit gains are tantamount to paying puppets like Allen for far too long.

It's a travesty our half-baked, half-witted administrators have taken this long to action an all-weather surface.

Three or four all-weathers could have been installed ten years ago for the cost of one today.

[Chief Stipe]

11 minutes ago, Pitman said:

Just add up the venues due for closure

 

Why close venues that are making money for the industry?

11 minutes ago, Pitman said:

Ashburton will become an important alternative to Riccarton

 

Will you be training there?

[Chief Stipe]

30 minutes ago, Pitman said:

That just sends your argument for 1600 horses out the door, but wait, they show a field of 14 runners on their website!!!!!

I'll give you that one - I must have been reading an old British Racing Authority safety factor which said 10 which would also apply if they built their turf track.

However given all the horses trained within 80km of the course why is their average field size worse than NZ's?

They appear to have 8 or less races per meeting and at about a third of those of less than 7 horse fields.  Why is that?

[Brodie]

50 minutes ago, Pitman said:

Riccarton may eventually get close to 40 meetings a year, as other tracks are closed, they will not all be run on the AWT. Can you not get your head around that

I train at Riccarton never heard of having close to 1600 horses there

Cambridge might but a lot of them are trial, sell, RTR horses that never race in NZ

Allweather tracks are not the answer that Nzracing needs to get out of the shite.

How much more wagering is there going to, be done just because they are on an all weather track?

How many Riccarton meetings have been abandoned due to weather that makes it now financially viable?

Gallops are boring as hell, so not sure why I am posting on here anyway!!

 

[Nowornever]

1 minute ago, Brodie said:

Allweather tracks are not the answer that Nzracing needs to get out of the shite.

How much more wagering is there going to, be done just because they are on an all weather track?

How many Riccarton meetings have been abandoned due to weather that makes it now financially viable?

Gallops are boring as hell, so not sure why I am posting on here anyway!!

 

All weather tracks are a definite turnoff to me as a punting proposition and I would say it would be the same for a lot of NZ punters

[Chief Stipe]

20 minutes ago, billy connolly said:

It's a travesty our half-baked, half-witted administrators have taken this long to action an all-weather surface.

Three or four all-weathers could have been installed ten years ago for the cost of one today.

Is the spending of $48 million now and the closure of profitable tracks going to help?

Note:  $30 million from the PGF lolly box and $18 million from the three clubs ($6m each) = $48m. 

[Chief Stipe]

2 minutes ago, Brodie said:

Gallops are boring as hell, so not sure why I am posting on here anyway!!

 

Yep go back to your 77 meetings at Addington - 56 won by the All Stars team.

[Brodie]

2 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Yep go back to your 77 meetings at Addington - 56 won by the All Stars team.

Don’t think the AllStars will be around too much longer at Addington, in the scheme of things Chief!

Racing for $5k is not conducive to their racing module where one win at Addington will cover one months training bill!

The AllStars owners won’t be doing that and I would say that they will vote with their feet, and Mark and Nat will set up stables where the weather is better and stake money is better!

The way things are there is no way in hell that they will be able to race for $7,500 at Addington, the only way they can at the moment is due to the commercial out the back!

 

 

[Chief Stipe]

Well it took a bit of finding but I found the Annual Financial Report for the Chelmsford City Racecourse.  Took an effort because there are three shell companies under the umbrella of The Great Leighs Estates Ltd which was the original company.  

Their LOSS for the year was 2.8million pounds or NZD$5.6m.  Their retained losses are 10.2 million pounds or NZD$23 million.  Even with more than 3,000 horses trained within 80km of the track.

chelmsford-city-racecourse-annual-accounts-31-March-2019.pdf

[Chief Stipe]

Now you can call me an ANTI All Weather Negative Bastard if you wish however I have seen these schemes from the NZRB/RITA for the last 25 years and I believe I can be excused for having some doubts.

If anyone has the detailed Business Plan for the AWT's then please post it or even send it to me in confidence.  Surely industry stakeholders deserve this transparency.

[aquaman]

Punters are the beginning and the end as far as racing goes, and punters do not like all weather tracks. They can of course run for ribbons.

[nomates]

5 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Now you can call me an ANTI All Weather Negative Bastard if you wish however I have seen these schemes from the NZRB/RITA for the last 25 years and I believe I can be excused for having some doubts.

If anyone has the detailed Business Plan for the AWT's then please post it or even send it to me in confidence.  Surely industry stakeholders deserve this transparency.

Nobody ever wants to answer the hard questions , especially around transparency and the financial viability .

We are all just supposed to jump on board and ride the gravy train of success . Unfortunately history has shown us that the train more often than not end up a costly and expensive wreck .

[theshu]

54 minutes ago, Nowornever said:

All weather tracks are a definite turnoff to me as a punting proposition and I would say it would be the same for a lot of NZ punters

As they are in Australia also.Most punters wont even look at all weather tracks to bet on.

[aquaman]

All weather tracks are boring, and only suit compulsive gamblers.

[aquaman]

Further to the above, you may as well have virtual racing, and cut out the horses altogether.

[nomates]

1 minute ago, aquaman said:

All weather tracks are boring, and only suit compulsive gamblers.

Which is exactly what RITA/TAB thinks we all are , we don't need any information to bet or to see or hear the race , just pick a number/s and wait for the result . Could just call it RACEO .

[Chief Stipe]

28 minutes ago, aquaman said:

All weather tracks are boring, and only suit compulsive gamblers.

Which probably reflects that by far the majority of races in Australia are on Turf tracks.  Only 10% of the race meeting in Victoria are on Synthetic Tracks.  41 out of 409.

NZ's plan - although this is based on anecdotal evidence from hearing trainers who are "in the know" is 130 out of 300 or roughly 41%.