RA Trumps Sporting Post Updated on March 7, 2017

RA CEO Wainstein’s recent statement that the increased stakes for this year’s L’Ormarins Queen’s Plate and Sun Met came from the RA (“That money does not come from the sponsors. When a request was made to up the stakes on those races the guys came to me to see if we could afford it”) raised questions in a number of quarters.
Questions, questions
On 8 February 2017, we emailed the RA asking who serves on the stakes committee (if there is such a thing) and who made the decision to up the Queen’s Plate and Met stakes. After receiving a letter regarding Industry Liaison Meetings and the representation of Grooms Associations on the ILM, we enquired as to the RA’s role and involvement in that capacity as well.
The RA’s Merle Parker responded to ask that the queries be directed to Mr Wainstein as he is handling media inquiries directly, which we did. Following additional reader queries regarding the stakes issue, we followed up with a second email dated 9 February 2017.
With no response forthcoming, we followed up again on 6 March 2017 with the following:-
As advised by Merle Parker, I am contacting you in your capacity as media liaison.
Firstly, a follow up to my email of 9 February with regards to Stakes (and another request / reminder for a copy of the stakes agreement that you promised previously). The query was to ask who serves on the stakes committee and also to clarify your statement that the cash to raise the stake for both the Queen’s Plate and Met has come from RA coffers – is that correct or is it not?
Secondly, I am enquiring with regards to Industry Liaison meetings. It seems some information has got onto the African Betting Clan. Notwithstanding whatever the fuss is about, I’ll repeat my question of a few weeks ago as to why Industry Liaison meetings are an RA function and why are they exclusively chaired and controlled by the RA?
Why is the content of Industry Liaison meetings confidential?
Thirdly, I believe it was a Government mandate that grooms’ associations be represented at Industry Liaison meetings – why do they not attend?
The RA Responds
On 7 March 2017, Mr Wainstein, in his capacity of CEO of the Racing Association, furnished us with the following:-
In response to your email of 6 March 2017 I wish to respond as follows:
· The Boards of the Racing Association and the Thoroughbred Horseracing Trust have both taken a decision not to interact with the Sporting Post.
· The reason for the decisions by these Boards is due to the fact that in their opinion, the Sporting Post chooses to publish mostly sensational and unsubstantiated articles based on the opinions of persons who are negative towards the sport of racing.
· Further, these two Boards do not respond to other social media platforms whose main purpose is to criticise, make personal innuendoes and insult persons dedicated to all aspects of the industry.
Sign up for our weekly Sporting Post DIGEST and join thousands of racing fans receiving the best news and insights




· I wish to place on record that I am answerable to the RA Board and to the RA members only and further, to make it clear that I am under no obligation to answer to you or the Sporting Post.
What To Make Of It
Mr Wainstein’s response is disappointing as via the relationship between Phumelela, the Thoroughbred Horseracing Trust and the RA, Mr Wainstein is directly responsible for the management and administration of stakes. As the RA is allegedly also taking charge of Industry Liaison Meetings, he is also in the driving seat as far as this function is concerned.
The racing community funds the RA (and its salary bill) partly with membership fees, but mostly by way of contributions from our nomination and acceptance monies (approx R10 million annually). That means that the RA is funded by any colour holder who has ever paid nomination or acceptance fees for horses running anywhere in the country (with the exception of KZN), regardless of whether they are an RA member or not. That is as compelling a reason as any to regard this organisation as not only a servant to owners, but also accountable to all owners for their actions.
Secondly, the RA acts in an administrative capacity for the Thoroughbred Horseracing Trust (usually referred to as the Racing Trust). The Trust is funded by the dividends it earns from its controlling shares in Phumelela. The Trust is paid those dividends with the mandate of safeguarding the interests of racing. The Trust is run by a board which, according to the latest RA Annual Report, currently constitutes Brian Finch (Chairman), Johann du Plessis, Mark Currie, Chris Gerber, Louis du Preez, Gideon Sam and Vinesh Maharaj. Five of the Trustees are nominated by the RA and two by SASCOC.
Between the Racing Trust and therefore by default, the Racing Association, they administer the all important Stakes Agreement with Phumelela, which controls the level of stakes.
Altogether a pretty compelling reason to expect transparency.

Quote " The reason for the decisions by these Boards is due to the fact that in their opinion, the Sporting Post chooses to publish mostly sensational and unsubstantiated articles based on the opinions of persons who are negative towards the sport of racing."

Are we Pro professionalism to improve the game or are we just a bunch of people who constantly criticize the industry .

Sounds like the current situation in South Africa - Do when you want , Think what you want - But the plebs that contribute ( Tax Payers ) everyday must not complain. Okey Dokey

It concerns me the negative press that racing/sporting forums receive.

In the case of ABC we supply a platform for owners, trainers, punters etc to voice their concerns, opinions, praises and exchange views on sporting events and for their voice to be heard.

We run an open 24/7 service for our approved posters, we don't have a frozen period where we evaluate each comment, we allow the site to flow and at times this can be rather problematic keeping the fine line between decency and freedom of speech.

The posters at ABC are not our customers but they are potential customers of the bookmakers and operators and use us to highlight a concern or frustration and to hopefully get resolved as they may feel the normal channels ignore them.

It's normally the case that the negative press gets selectively highlighted to use as an excuse to halt feedback as an easier option than actually supplying a proper customer service and feedback loop.

Good punting and good posting

Plus consider before you hit the submit button, would you like to be on the receiving end of what you are about to post?

Unbelievable ..... one would think that a publication like the SP would be the ideal place to explain your thinking .... failure to do so just re-enforces public opinion that 'daar is 'n slang in die gras' .... and seemingly in this case, more than one snake ....

What is most disconcerting to me, is that Mr Wainstein and the various 'boards' do not seem to grasp the simple fact that they are answerable to all owners (not only the few dwindling RA members) as all owners contribute to their coffers by paying the nomination fees ... and then they spent the money in any which way they please :ohmy:

Ignorance is bliss

As much as constant criticism can be annoying it is also indicative of something that is wrong and requiring attention.

The majority of those who post on this forum has racing's best interest at heart and actually cares for the industry and as such the criticism should be put to better use than acts of denial and disdain.

The powers that be should be much more concerned about the day that these dry up as that will be the day that racing has officially died.

LSU wrote: As much as constant criticism can be annoying it is also indicative of something that is wrong and requiring attention.

The majority of those who post on this forum has racing's best interest at heart and actually cares for the industry and as such the criticism should be put to better use than acts of denial and disdain.

The powers that be should be much more concerned about the day that these dry up as that will be the day that racing has officially died.

very well said

[quote="Frodo" post=658641

What is most disconcerting to me, is that Mr Wainstein and the various 'boards' do not seem to grasp the simple fact that they are answerable to all owners (not only the few dwindling RA members) as all owners contribute to their coffers by paying the nomination fees ... and then they spent the money in any which way they please :ohmy:[/quote]

.....one would think that in today's age of advanced communication that there would be more openness on the function of an organisation that was put in place for the stewardship of owning and racing horses...ever since the "concerned owners" debacle that put the the then RA chairman into the power seat and then a CEO position created for him, has caused a major faction in the race horse owners fraternity and rights of all owners have not been prioritized but instead a aura of clandestine affairs that are being conducted without owners direct input or full participation.....
unless this changes there will no progress and the mud slinging will continue.....this too is damaging the industry.....

has larry got this job for life or how does it work does anyone know?

Sadly we all need to look at ourselves when an issue such as this arises.

It is WE who have failed to ask the pertinent questions in the correct forum and hold these 'representatives' accountable.

How?

The simplest way is to join the RA ( I am guilty of not being a member) and raise these issues at the AGM or any other meetings that might be called.

It is much easier to bang out a post & see what transpires. Unfortunately the struggle for real accountability & transparency requires quite a lot of hard work; often over a long period of time for no thanks or reward. The majority of us have neither the time nor the inclination as racing is our HOBBY rather than our WORK.

To borrow from that famous saying : Ask not what racing can do for you but what you can do for racing.

........which is why I gave up on local racing quite some time ago. My latest horse will definitely be my last as supporting this operators' (sic) infrastructure leaves me feeling uncomfortable & grubby.

pirates wrote: has larry got this job for life or how does it work does anyone know?

.....perhaps a rhetorical question.....