hesi Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 Surprised there has not been comment on this "Based on the recent Size and Scope Report prepared by IER in February 2018 the revenue foregone by Government would be distributed to the Codes in the following proportions:" Thoroughbred 67.2% (2018 53.7%) Harness 27.1 (29.6) Dogs 5.7 (16.7) If you run the figs, then approx 40% of the extra money to raise stakes for thoroughbreds to 100 mil comes from the change in percentages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 12 minutes ago, hesi said: Surprised there has not been comment on this "Based on the recent Size and Scope Report prepared by IER in February 2018 the revenue foregone by Government would be distributed to the Codes in the following proportions:" Thoroughbred 67.2% (2018 53.7%) Harness 27.1 (29.6) Dogs 5.7 (16.7) If you run the figs, then approx 40% of the extra money to raise stakes for thoroughbreds to 100 mil comes from the change in percentages In my opinion that is completely wrong and sends the wrong market signals. It is based on the contention that because racing a Thoroughbred is more expensive they should get a bigger slice of the pie. I'm sure national sporting bodies won't stand by this time and get shafted i.e. they'll seek a fairer share of the pie than they currently get. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 I don't see any justification for an industry receiving funding based on such a metric - even if it were a reliable one. Surely, an industry should get what it earns. Seems gallops wants even more of a handout for some odd reason. What's with this entitlement view they seem to have. If there's no money, adjust to fit your means. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 i think it is their contention any galloping earnings whether it be here or overseas should fall to them correct me if i am wrong but the current model has overseas earnings distributed based on the domestic earnings percentage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 58 minutes ago, Rangatira said: i think it is their contention any galloping earnings whether it be here or overseas should fall to them correct me if i am wrong but the current model has overseas earnings distributed based on the domestic earnings percentage S16 worked that way (when followed) although not on earnings - on turnover. But clearly there is no relationship between NZ gallops and off-shore gallops from a revenue perspective. So their contention has no basis - they want it that way because they want all they can possibly get their hands on. They are getting a lot more than they should in my view. An approach that distributed earnings not earned by the codes themselves, based on net revenue - would be considered more standard. Problem with that is that NZ gallops likely doesn't have any net revenue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hesi Posted September 2, 2018 Author Share Posted September 2, 2018 Surely Greyhounds could not survive on one third of what they get now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BitofaLegend Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, hesi said: Surely Greyhounds could not survive on one third of what they get now The current stakes are very poor. Losing more would damn near close 90% of trainers down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 1 hour ago, Rangatira said: i think it is their contention any galloping earnings whether it be here or overseas should fall to them correct me if i am wrong but the current model has overseas earnings distributed based on the domestic earnings percentage If you include turnover on overseas racing on a code basis it is easily manipulated. Who decides what races to show? Not only would changes kill dog racing but also harness in NZ. Note that the report contends 20 out 48 racecourses should go. What does that tell you given that those courses are galloping courses!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 14 hours ago, mardigras said: S16 worked that way (when followed) although not on earnings - on turnover. But clearly there is no relationship between NZ gallops and off-shore gallops from a revenue perspective. So their contention has no basis - they want it that way because they want all they can possibly get their hands on. They are getting a lot more than they should in my view. An approach that distributed earnings not earned by the codes themselves, based on net revenue - would be considered more standard. Problem with that is that NZ gallops likely doesn't have any net revenue. What planet are you on ...Seriously? The Thoroughbred code...who have sewn a seed into the minds of potential thoroughbred purveyors...deserves every bit of that revenue from fostering that growth... A Kiwi horse who then proceeds onto the world stage...should not be contributing a dot to the hounds through wagering... Its as clear az Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 6 minutes ago, Thomass said: A Kiwi horse who then proceeds onto the world stage...should not be contributing a dot to the hounds through wagering... I quite agree. None of the revenue should go to any of the codes. It's unrelated to them. It should go to the business owner, the government where they can put it to some use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomass Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 Messara's clear on this... Each code should live and die on they're own...without having hound/Harness leach hanging off the teet Thoroughbred Punters have every right to invest on any Thoroughbred throughout the world and expect that investment to contribute to the welfare of that code... The 'Tri Code' days are over Im afraid...but I'm not Its blardy marvellous actually Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boxie Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 13 minutes ago, Thomass said: Messara's clear on this... Each code should live and die on they're own...without having hound/Harness leach hanging off the teet Thoroughbred Punters have every right to invest on any Thoroughbred throughout the world and expect that investment to contribute to the welfare of that code... The 'Tri Code' days are over Im afraid...but I'm not Its blardy marvellous actually Rubbish! So if you use that flawed concept I'd expect you to support Sports to get their fair share of the betting pie? If you did some proper analysis which you seem incapable of doing you would understand that Thoroughbred Racing has been subsidised as much as anyone. I assume you want to see Pokie money go back to the communities it was fleeced from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted September 2, 2018 Share Posted September 2, 2018 13 minutes ago, Thomass said: Messara's clear on this... Each code should live and die on they're own...without having hound/Harness leach hanging off the teet Thoroughbred Punters have every right to invest on any Thoroughbred throughout the world and expect that investment to contribute to the welfare of that code... The 'Tri Code' days are over Im afraid...but I'm not Its blardy marvellous actually I agree 100% with Messara except it should be 'each entity' not each code. They are each a business entity on their own. Only people who deal in fluff think otherwise. Messara wants that because he is one eyed towards thoroughbreds, like you. Sadly, the view has nothing tangible to support it. I wonder why Australia doesn't work the way you state Messara thinks it should. Very strange since Vic thoroughbreds do not receive the funding generated from NZ thoroughbred betting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.