REPORT ON THE NOVEMBER ABANDONMENTS AT AWAPUNI & RICCARTON

[Chief Stipe]

1 hour ago, Reefton said:

What do you mean 'one dimensional'?

To only look at fatalities instead of including hospitalisations and injuries to jockies and dare I say it injuries to horses.

[Special Agent]

I'm not sure what dimension some of these officials are on.  Everyone involved in the racing industry should want the same things.  We mainly want to win but, we also want a fair contest, a safe surface, good fields, a big crowd and a top entertaining day out.

Reading all the information available, and from my own observations on the day, officials were just plainly vindictive towards Reefton and should hang their heads in shame.  Poor form, and poor human beings.

Edited April 17, 2023 by Special Agent

[Reefton]

1 hour ago, Special Agent said:

I'm not sure what dimension some of these officials are on.  Everyone involved in the racing industry should want the same things.  We mainly want to win but, we also want a fair contest, a safe surface, good fields, a big crowd and a top entertaining day out.

Reading all the information available, and from my own observations on the day, officials were just plainly vindictive towards Reefton and should hang their heads in shame.  Poor form, and poor human beings.

It wasn't just us SA it was the entire West Coast

He was keen to stop Greymouth and dead set desperate to stop Kumara as well

In fact you wonder if it is not a jealousy thing on the part of the bloke that here are three examples of where people actually want to go to the races and accordingly the nere do well attitude of 'we have to stop this' comes in.  There was never any trouble until a certain person turned up.

I could question why NZTR don't strive as well to give the Coast another day when it is clear that you are attracting potential new devotees to the game(and not just from the West Coast District either)

It isn't great racing but it is atmosphere and it is easy to get very close to the action.

 

 

 

[Special Agent]

The turnover at Kumara tells the story.

You talk about it not being great racing.  The Melbourne Cup is a glorified hack race but the public LOVE it and couldn't care less about the quality of the runners.

I am just baffled by just about everything NZ racing administrators do.  Certainly not for the good of the entire industry.

[Reefton]

32 minutes ago, Special Agent said:

The turnover at Kumara tells the story.

You talk about it not being great racing.  The Melbourne Cup is a glorified hack race but the public LOVE it and couldn't care less about the quality of the runners.

I am just baffled by just about everything NZ racing administrators do.  Certainly not for the good of the entire industry.

difference in the MC is probably the stakes, the quality of the horseflesh and the quality of the horsemanship plus it is on a track twice the size of our dumps

[Special Agent]

You may question quality horse flesh and horsemanship some years with the number of overseas runners dying and breaking down.

There are some awesome horse people in NZ with at times horses to test the best in the world.

Edited April 17, 2023 by Special Agent

[Freda]

11 hours ago, Reefton said:

It wasn't just us SA it was the entire West Coast

He was keen to stop Greymouth and dead set desperate to stop Kumara as well

In fact you wonder if it is not a jealousy thing on the part of the bloke that here are three examples of where people actually want to go to the races and accordingly the nere do well attitude of 'we have to stop this' comes in.  There was never any trouble until a certain person turned up.

I could question why NZTR don't strive as well to give the Coast another day when it is clear that you are attracting potential new devotees to the game(and not just from the West Coast District either)

It isn't great racing but it is atmosphere and it is easy to get very close to the action.

He hates the place, seemingly.     He could have made himself unavailable, surely?  and let someone else do the job?

After all, a junior employee was set 'in charge'   but didn't, in the end, make the call.

And no question about giving another day.  It doesn't fit with the NZTR grand plan.

The line trotted out by Sharrock about 'rationalising' venues and putting the money realised into a managed fund to produce an income stream for the future,  has absolutely no relevance or bearing on the Coast situation.

11 hours ago, Reefton said:

 

 

 

 

[Chief Stipe]

11 hours ago, Special Agent said:

You may question quality horse flesh and horsemanship some years with the number of overseas runners dying and breaking down.

There hasn't been as many as the perception that has been allowed to develop unchallenged.  It just happens that the focus is on the Melbourne Cup as the sole advertisement for the social license supposedly granted by society to allow horse racing.  Quite frankly it's bollocks and the industry lays down and perpetuates the nonsense.

[Reefton]

3 hours ago, Freda said:

The line trotted out by Sharrock about 'rationalising' venues and putting the money realised into a managed fund to produce an income stream for the future,  has absolutely no relevance or bearing on the Coast situation.

 

In our case he might get $150k as our share(and then he would need to get the Trotting Club sold as well).  Kumara is leasehold, swamp and worth jackshit and Greymouth is hugely floodprone, poor access and only really worth the gravel that lies underneath it.  

Sharrock might net $550000 - $600000 for the lot.

Now if he had the brains(and the balls) to say to the ARC 'your real estate is too valuable for a racecourse we are cashing you up' there would be a couple of billion at least.  Trentham $500m Riccarton(I know it is leasehold) $500m, Te Rapa $750m.  then develop the likes of Matamata, maybe a course north of Auckland, one in West Melton/Darfield.....

Now that would be wise use of industry funds(at the end of the day the industry funded an awful lot of those facilities way back when and it is made pretty clear to us that we(apparently) owe our existence to the NZ racing Industry so sauce for the goose... )

[Doomed]

11 hours ago, Freda said:

He hates the place, seemingly.     He could have made himself unavailable, surely?  and let someone else do the job?

After all, a junior employee was set 'in charge'   but didn't, in the end, make the call.

And no question about giving another day.  It doesn't fit with the NZTR grand plan.

The line trotted out by Sharrock about 'rationalising' venues and putting the money realised into a managed fund to produce an income stream for the future,  has absolutely no relevance or bearing on the Coast situation.

 

Pointless having an income stream for the future if the industry can't survive the next few years.

The Auckland trots are a good example of making one cock up and seeing everything implode pretty quickly. The rest of the industry needs to learn from that.

[Doomed]

7 hours ago, Reefton said:

In our case he might get $150k as our share(and then he would need to get the Trotting Club sold as well).  Kumara is leasehold, swamp and worth jackshit and Greymouth is hugely floodprone, poor access and only really worth the gravel that lies underneath it.  

Sharrock might net $550000 - $600000 for the lot.

Now if he had the brains(and the balls) to say to the ARC 'your real estate is too valuable for a racecourse we are cashing you up' there would be a couple of billion at least.  Trentham $500m Riccarton(I know it is leasehold) $500m, Te Rapa $750m.  then develop the likes of Matamata, maybe a course north of Auckland, one in West Melton/Darfield.....

Now that would be wise use of industry funds(at the end of the day the industry funded an awful lot of those facilities way back when and it is made pretty clear to us that we(apparently) owe our existence to the NZ racing Industry so sauce for the goose... )

The industry has lost more than 25 galloping tracks, plus several trotting tracks, over the last 30 years, largely through natural attrition. Suddenly that isn't good enough and NZTR wants to pick and choose which other clubs to eliminate. Ironically, some of the clubs the industry has tried to eliminate in the past are still ticking away quite well, Kumara being a classic example.

We now have the most perfect case studies to show how closing tracks can benefit the industry in Banks Peninsula, Waikouaiti, Blenheim, Wairoa etc. There must be so much information, financial, attendance figures etc, gained from those clubs that could be used to justify further closures. 

I do not understand why NZTR doesn't come out with a detailed analysis of all the benefits and the financial goldmine from shutting down the tracks listed above. I'm sure it would be enough to sway some of us who are still a bit dubious about the current approach. I can even imagine Reefton saying "wow, you're convinced me, I'm a convert." Why do they not do this?

[Special Agent]

I agree with a lot of what Doomed and Reefton are saying.

Indeed we should learn from the Auckland Trotting Club.  Even the story on the news about the museum there was embarrassing from the point of view of the ATC.  Noel Taylor donated a lot of money for that venture.  A bit like the RSA's around the country where land has been gifted for the sole use of the RSA, now knob heads want the money.

No one in authority would want a detailed analysis put out on what happens to a club when they merge and give up their assets.  A classic example would by Feilding.  That track should never have been sold and their membership is just a few.

I am strong on selling at least Ellerslie and Awapuni.  If ever there was a case for a better use of land these two tracks are it.

[Freda]

12 hours ago, Doomed said:

The industry has lost more than 25 galloping tracks, plus several trotting tracks, over the last 30 years, largely through natural attrition. Suddenly that isn't good enough and NZTR wants to pick and choose which other clubs to eliminate. Ironically, some of the clubs the industry has tried to eliminate in the past are still ticking away quite well, Kumara being a classic example.

We now have the most perfect case studies to show how closing tracks can benefit the industry in Banks Peninsula, Waikouaiti, Blenheim, Wairoa etc. There must be so much information, financial, attendance figures etc, gained from those clubs that could be used to justify further closures. 

I do not understand why NZTR doesn't come out with a detailed analysis of all the benefits and the financial goldmine from shutting down the tracks listed above. I'm sure it would be enough to sway some of us who are still a bit dubious about the current approach. I can even imagine Reefton saying "wow, you're convinced me, I'm a convert." Why do they not do this?

 

None of these tracks you mentioned have been 'cashed up' as far as I am aware.    So, no financial benefit whatsoever.   Just more of the line being pushed that to retain these tracks 'costs us money'.   How, given the voluntary input in them all, I have yet to understand.

The 'I raced ninety' fella was in favour of rationalising, but let it be known that there would be no forced closures, rather that NZTR would work with those clubs that wished to race elsewhere on a supportive basis.

The next incumbent just went ahead and did it anyway, without any specific financial evidence either for or against such a practice.

And the Hokitika situation was a case in point.    They didn't want the outfit to continue, but the reason ?   if there was infrastructure upgrading required, or track re-alignment, the club had the money and the volunteer base to get it sorted.  They didn't need to call on industry funds at all.    

As Reefton has alluded on several occasions, when folk don't go to your meeting, bother to bet, or turn up with their horses,  that is the time to put up the white flag.

But no. No raceday licence issued, and then started the rubbing of hands with glee with the prospect of dosh to be realised from the handing over of the asset.  Nah, go the Hoki crew, and gave it back to the community.  The club was allowed ONE raceday at Greymouth, and from then, no.   Sour grapes as punishment the most likely reason,  and very poor behaviour from [ supposedly ] professional administrators.

[Freda]

9 hours ago, Special Agent said:

I agree with a lot of what Doomed and Reefton are saying.

Indeed we should learn from the Auckland Trotting Club.  Even the story on the news about the museum there was embarrassing from the point of view of the ATC.  Noel Taylor donated a lot of money for that venture.  A bit like the RSA's around the country where land has been gifted for the sole use of the RSA, now knob heads want the money.

No one in authority would want a detailed analysis put out on what happens to a club when they merge and give up their assets.  A classic example would by Feilding.  That track should never have been sold and their membership is just a few.

I am strong on selling at least Ellerslie and Awapuni.  If ever there was a case for a better use of land these two tracks are it.

Unfortunately the millions invested in the Stathayr make that highly unlikely, ever.

[curious]

10 hours ago, Special Agent said:

I agree with a lot of what Doomed and Reefton are saying.

Indeed we should learn from the Auckland Trotting Club.  Even the story on the news about the museum there was embarrassing from the point of view of the ATC.  Noel Taylor donated a lot of money for that venture.  A bit like the RSA's around the country where land has been gifted for the sole use of the RSA, now knob heads want the money.

No one in authority would want a detailed analysis put out on what happens to a club when they merge and give up their assets.  A classic example would by Feilding.  That track should never have been sold and their membership is just a few.

I am strong on selling at least Ellerslie and Awapuni.  If ever there was a case for a better use of land these two tracks are it.

The only decent analysis that I recall was following the termination of Nelson as a galloping venue. When was that? I had that report at one time but can no longer find it. Of course there was no asset sale there either and harness continue to race there. Anyway, a few years later I'm sure an analysis was published which showed a significant decline in TAB turnover originating from that area. At the time I thought that might put a stop to removing licences from smaller self sufficient clubs. Boy did I get that wrong.

[Doomed]

2 hours ago, curious said:

The only decent analysis that I recall was following the termination of Nelson as a galloping venue. When was that? I had that report at one time but can no longer find it. Of course there was no asset sale there either and harness continue to race there. Anyway, a few years later I'm sure an analysis was published which showed a significant decline in TAB turnover originating from that area. At the time I thought that might put a stop to removing licences from smaller self sufficient clubs. Boy did I get that wrong.

I think Nelson would have closed late 80s. As you say, there used to be a lot of owners and enthusiasts around the top of the South, but largely all gone now. And sadly not being replaced by an upsurge of new involvement in the big cities excited by the prospect of AWT racing rather than country track racing.

[Freda]

2 hours ago, Doomed said:

I think Nelson would have closed late 80s. As you say, there used to be a lot of owners and enthusiasts around the top of the South, but largely all gone now. And sadly not being replaced by an upsurge of new involvement in the big cities excited by the prospect of AWT racing rather than country track racing.

With Marlborough now closed to gallops, Rangiora gone and Reefton hanging on by the skin of its teeth, there will be no galloping presence in the South Island north of Christchurch.  And with the development in North Canterbury post-earthquake, a huge catchment there for the taking...but, no.

The decline in TAB turnover from the area following eliminating Nelson/Westport gallops, clearly meant nothing to the bean-counters, and that decline will have increased exponentially since, I think.

[Reefton]

3 hours ago, curious said:

The only decent analysis that I recall was following the termination of Nelson as a galloping venue. When was that? I had that report at one time but can no longer find it. Of course there was no asset sale there either and harness continue to race there. Anyway, a few years later I'm sure an analysis was published which showed a significant decline in TAB turnover originating from that area. At the time I thought that might put a stop to removing licences from smaller self sufficient clubs. Boy did I get that wrong.

Same applied when they closed Hutt Park for Harness.  Per capita Harness spending in Wellington is NZ's lowest and per capita Thoroughbred spending in Nelson is NZ's lowest.  That is my understanding anyway

[Special Agent]

11 hours ago, Freda said:

clearly meant nothing to the bean-counters

Because it's south of Taupo.