Read it and weep...

[NZRacing]

https://www.tabnz.org/sites/default/files/documents/TAB NZ Statement of Intent 2022-24.pdf

[Doomed]

So the only prospect for increased income in the next couple of years is from an increase in betting profit? And yet NZTR is prepared to use up their reserves for the next 8 months in the hope things come right.

In any other industry the shareholders would be up in arms and the board would be called to account and asked what they are doing to get things back on track.

I'm not sure that sitting on their hands would be considered a constructive strategy.

[curious]

15 minutes ago, Doomed said:

So the only prospect for increased income in the next couple of years is from an increase in betting profit? And yet NZTR is prepared to use up their reserves for the next 8 months in the hope things come right.

In any other industry the shareholders would be up in arms and the board would be called to account and asked what they are doing to get things back on track.

I'm not sure that sitting on their hands would be considered a constructive strategy.

That strategy is bizarre. They are going to use up the last of their reserves to maintain stakes for the next 8 months in the context of an $8m cut in revenue. What are they thinking. It is almost certain there will be further distribution cuts for next certain. If so, there will be no option but to reduce stakes for FY24 to align with that on top of the current reduction. They seem to just bury their heads in the sand and hope the golden goose is going to revive. Any other business would be making immediate cuts. It just doesn't make sense.

[nomates]

GEO blocking guys , the saviour .

[curious]

37 minutes ago, nomates said:

GEO blocking guys , the saviour .

It is like they are expecting the golden goose to land in the interim. But if that's it (geo), and I doubt it, it won't be here in the next 8 months. If the rest of us were faced with revenue cuts of that magnitude with further cuts almost certain, we'd be immediately cutting expenditures to match or we'd be out of business.

[Doomed]

37 minutes ago, nomates said:

GEO blocking guys , the saviour .

They have been relying on something like that for years. No windfalls so far.

I have often said on here that I can't understand how we can manage the stakes we currently have based on turnovers. Others keep saying we need to increase stakes.  Looks like I might have been right. Sounds like the only prospect for future stakes increases will be based on turnovers.

As long as I have been involved in racing income has always been dependent on turnover. We seem to have forgotten that. I don't think abandoning the on course experience and discouraging clubs from any innovation will help turnovers in the long term.

[Doomed]

2 minutes ago, curious said:

It is like they are expecting the golden goose to land in the interim. But if that's it (geo), and I doubt it, it won't be here in the next 8 months. If the rest of us were faced with revenue cuts of that magnitude with further cuts almost certain, we'd be immediately cutting expenditures to match or we'd be out of business.

I don't think they really treat it as a business. They kept getting paid regardless of performance, although one day that will come to an end.

[Chief Stipe]

Slash Group and Stakes races.  Won't make a difference to who starts.

Stop the tiered BS between so called Premier Days and Industry Days.  Reduce the high end and raise the average across all rating 85 and below.

Orchestrate a few more abandonments - that wouldn't require any managerial effort.  On that point what would the deficit be if they had raced all the races that had been scheduled!

 

[nomates]

40 minutes ago, Doomed said:

I have often said on here that I can't understand how we can manage the stakes we currently have based on turnovers. Others keep saying we need to increase stakes.  Looks like I might have been right. Sounds like the only prospect for future stakes increases will be based on turnovers.

 

One way to keep stakes higher is to reduce racedays , we have too many days with 6/7/8 races with less than 10 runners , run 1 midweek a fortnight with 10-12 races or more if the horses are there , making sure we have full fields by open nom's , horses nom'd for the distance they want to race not rating then make fields up by picking lowest 14 rated horses then the next 14 go into the next race . Needs tweeking but something like that .

Or just change the rating system and how horses are handicapped , set weights for lower rated races .

Running fewer racedays with larger fields . No " Carnivals " , there shite now anyway , run Iconic days , once every 3/4 weeks in the NI , maybe every 5/6 for the SI .

It means ripping up everything as we know it and rebuild it but something has to change and change big time , and that includes the way we are managed .

Just ideas but that's what is needed , some will work some won't , some will morph together but if industry participants are included we could be amazed at what can be achieved . 

 

[curious]

5 minutes ago, nomates said:

One way to keep stakes higher is to reduce racedays ,

That's only sustainable if the less race days generate the same revenue. Don't think that's likely. The wagering spend will just go to other codes and other jurisdictions. Why have a goal of higher stakes anyway? The goal should be a more attractive wagering product that generates sufficient revenue for whatever stakes.

Anyway all this is a decade or so too late and while restructuring the stakes distribution like CS suggests makes sense, it is way too late.

Edited December 3, 2022 by curious

[nomates]

Here's something i don't get , next week we have Hastings Wed , nothing Thurs , Tauranga on Fri and 3 meetings on Saturday all with Saturday stakes , why do we need to run 3 meetings on a Saturday ?

They are just diluting the available punting dollars , people aren't going to spend more they will just spread it out , but how many northern punters are going to bet on Invercargill , i don't bet on SI races as the riding is so poor , but many will just bypass it .

It's bullshit programming , i simply do not understand it .

[nomates]

Just now, curious said:

That's only sustainable if the less race days generate the same revenue. Don't think that's likely. The wagering spend will just go to other codes and other jurisdictions. Why have a goal of higher stakes anyway? The goal should be a more attractive wagering product.

Anyway all this is a decade or so too late and while restructuring the stakes distribution like CS suggests makes sense, it is way too late.

The majority of average punters have a set spend for a week of betting , unless they are winning but as a rule most punters i know work on an affordable loss , so doesn't matter if there is 1/2/3 or 10 racedays they stop when the money is gone .

I'm only talking reducing races by maybe 8 a week .

As i said only an idea , we need a lot more . Some one might come up with something brilliant , who knows .

[curious]

10 minutes ago, nomates said:

The majority of average punters have a set spend for a week of betting , unless they are winning but as a rule most punters i know work on an affordable loss , so doesn't matter if there is 1/2/3 or 10 racedays they stop when the money is gone .

I'm only talking reducing races by maybe 8 a week .

As i said only an idea , we need a lot more . Some one might come up with something brilliant , who knows .

True. If that spend stays with NZ racing, it might help. I've been arguing for less races and race days for 15 years or more.

Edited December 3, 2022 by curious

[Doomed]

1 hour ago, nomates said:

One way to keep stakes higher is to reduce racedays , we have too many days with 6/7/8 races with less than 10 runners , run 1 midweek a fortnight with 10-12 races or more if the horses are there , making sure we have full fields by open nom's , horses nom'd for the distance they want to race not rating then make fields up by picking lowest 14 rated horses then the next 14 go into the next race . Needs tweeking but something like that .

Or just change the rating system and how horses are handicapped , set weights for lower rated races .

Running fewer racedays with larger fields . No " Carnivals " , there shite now anyway , run Iconic days , once every 3/4 weeks in the NI , maybe every 5/6 for the SI .

It means ripping up everything as we know it and rebuild it but something has to change and change big time , and that includes the way we are managed .

Just ideas but that's what is needed , some will work some won't , some will morph together but if industry participants are included we could be amazed at what can be achieved . 

 

My natural inclination is to disagree with parts of that, especially the bit about fewer race-days equals higher stakes. But I can't comment with any confidence because I don't have crucial information. Obviously a 10 race card with $14,000 races costs $140,000 to run. If that meeting was generating $1.4m in turnover and if 10% of that turnover was allocated to funding stakes then that industry meeting breaks even; roughly, I know there are other costs. But I don't have access to any information like that so I can't make an informed comment.

Yesterday's Trentham meeting cost almost $800,000 in stakes money, so on my unscientific 10% commission figure that would require $8m in turnover to fund. I'm not aware whether it got to close to $8m in turnover or not, but I would be slightly surprised if it did.

[Special Agent]

How many industry groups were told by the TAB that each horse or dog that starts in a race represents a dollar value?  Campbell Moncur showed us a model of how increasing the number of runners would inject more money into stakes and how the racing industry would grow.  It all seemed plausible on the information given.

Subsequently the dogs put on more and more races.  Then Bernard Saundry told us racing could not afford to have so many race day tracks and so many race days and so many races so, they all needed to be drastically reduced.  This did not make any sense and still doesn't.

Edited December 4, 2022 by Special Agent

[Doomed]

27 minutes ago, Special Agent said:

How many industry groups were told by the TAB that each horse or dog that starts in a race represents a dollar value?  Campbell Moncur showed us a model of how increasing the number of runners would inject more money into stakes and how the racing industry would grow.  It all seemed plausible on the information given.

Subsequently the dogs put on more and more races.  Then Bernard Saundry told us racing could not afford to have so many race day tracks and so many race days and so many races so, they all needed to be drastically reduced.  This did not make any sense and still doesn't.

The other thing to remember is that trainers and jockeys need a certain number of opportunities to remain viable.

Some SI jockeys might only get 3 or 4 opportunities a week and they often have to make a 10 hour round trip to get those few opportunities to race in $14,000 races.

[nomates]

1 hour ago, Doomed said:

My natural inclination is to disagree with parts of that, especially the bit about fewer race-days equals higher stakes. But I can't comment with any confidence because I don't have crucial information. Obviously a 10 race card with $14,000 races costs $140,000 to run. If that meeting was generating $1.4m in turnover and if 10% of that turnover was allocated to funding stakes then that industry meeting breaks even; roughly, I know there are other costs. But I don't have access to any information like that so I can't make an informed comment.

Yesterday's Trentham meeting cost almost $800,000 in stakes money, so on my unscientific 10% commission figure that would require $8m in turnover to fund. I'm not aware whether it got to close to $8m in turnover or not, but I would be slightly surprised if it did.

It's an idea not a template , it's also not about getting higher stakes but trying to mitigate the damage , 14k minimum has to stay . The black type races need major reductions and premier day meetings need a substantial cut as well . 8.5mil reduction equates to 163k a week on average that needs to be cut ,

If we had access to any information regards costs and turnover profit etc for an " Industry " day then obviously we could be more certain .

Yesterday is completely unsustainable , but we all said that when they topped up the black type races , but they knew better . I would be stunned if they got half of $8mil turnover yesterday .

But there is so much supposition around how much racedays cost and how much we make or lose on specific races , we have to have better races with good stake for good horses to aspire to otherwise the whole thing is pointless and we may as well run equalizator meetings . 

As i keep saying the industry leaders , and i use that term loosely , need to get together with industry participants and work out what works and what is needed to turn the game around , out of small seeds mighty oaks can grow . But they seem immune as ever to bringing participants into the conversation .

[nomates]

50 minutes ago, Doomed said:

The other thing to remember is that trainers and jockeys need a certain number of opportunities to remain viable.

Some SI jockeys might only get 3 or 4 opportunities a week and they often have to make a 10 hour round trip to get those few opportunities to race in $14,000 races.

I understand your argument but it is not the industries job to give a living to underachieving jockeys , there is plenty of jocks bludging on the back of a dearth of jockeys , up your game and you will get rides . Same with trainers .

It's the same in any line of employment .

I know it sounds tough but i have known a few jocks that have kept doing it even when they didn't want to but even 3/4 rides along with track work and J/O's and trials gave them a good living , better than emptying bed pans or stocking shelves .

Same with some trainers i've known , never done anything else and too scared to try even tho they have never achieved any great results training .

[The Centaur]

3 hours ago, nomates said:

Here's something i don't get , next week we have Hastings Wed , nothing Thurs , Tauranga on Fri and 3 meetings on Saturday all with Saturday stakes , why do we need to run 3 meetings on a Saturday ?

They are just diluting the available punting dollars , people aren't going to spend more they will just spread it out , but how many northern punters are going to bet on Invercargill , i don't bet on SI races as the riding is so poor , but many will just bypass it .

It's bullshit programming , i simply do not understand it .

Summertime is about getting people on track. If that means twilight then YES. If Saturday then YES. If mixing trots and gallops the YES. If More meetings less horses then YES. There are plenty betting options available everyday of the week so no need to program everything around betting.

[NZRacing]

4 hours ago, nomates said:

GEO blocking guys , the saviour .

Sadly not for the punters, it hasn't even started yet and I just pulled a random race from tomorrow race 2 at Gatton NZ TAB race fixed odds % = 138% and NSW TAB = 128%.  Thats a big differential.

Will only get worse if GEO blocking comes in. 

Payment of race fees from Australian bookmakers is done voluntarily by them, the ones currently paying might reconsider if they have current customers in NZ blocked from using their servicers via the internet. If it does come in the collateral damage in another area may cost them millions but I doubt that is getting factored in.

[nomates]

17 minutes ago, The Centaur said:

Summertime is about getting people on track. If that means twilight then YES. If Saturday then YES. If mixing trots and gallops the YES. If More meetings less horses then YES. There are plenty betting options available everyday of the week so no need to program everything around betting.

People don't go to the track anymore , look at yesterday , actually a very good betting card at Trentham , you could have let a shotgun off in the public area and not hit any one . Levin 2 weeks ago , which used to be huge on course , worse than yesterday . 

It's all about betting , without it we're going to be in a worse position than ever , without increasing betting we're dead .

8.5 mil not available for stakes for the next 8 months , god knows what for the following season .

More meetings , less horses just means we may as well turn off the light now and save the suffering .

[Freda]

Some very astute commentators have discussed these issues highlighted above not for weeks, months, or even years - decades.

The predicted chickens are settling  comfortably on their roosts,  and as Curious pointed out above ; some good ideas, but way too late.

[Reefton]

no no no you lot can't see the big picture......

We'll just shut down a bunch of tracks and take the money to use to prop up the stakes for the big Clubs

And when its all pissed up against the wlll we will just  ........ um.........um

Oh f*#k it by then we will have resigned anyway.

 

[The Centaur]

2 hours ago, nomates said:

People don't go to the track anymore , look at yesterday , actually a very good betting card at Trentham , you could have let a shotgun off in the public area and not hit any one . Levin 2 weeks ago , which used to be huge on course , worse than yesterday . 

It's all about betting , without it we're going to be in a worse position than ever , without increasing betting we're dead .

8.5 mil not available for stakes for the next 8 months , god knows what for the following season .

More meetings , less horses just means we may as well turn off the light now and save the suffering .

You forget that the whole purpose of racing was for social reasons. Gambling should only be secondary.

People do go to the races over summer. If they don't it can be poor weather on the day or poor marketing.

Trentham should have had a bumper crowd. During the week when a local race had finished instead of giving TV viewers insane greyhound ramblings there should have been build up for the Saturday meeting. Thats just one, even minor instance. There are so many ways to get people oncourse. If I was given half a chance there would be at least 10,000 ontrack. 

[nomates]

34 minutes ago, Reefton said:

no no no you lot can't see the big picture......

We'll just shut down a bunch of tracks and take the money to use to prop up the stakes for the big Clubs

And when its all pissed up against the wlll we will just  ........ um.........um

Oh f*#k it by then we will have resigned anyway.

 

Too late , they've tried that one .