KEEPING TRACK

Catsmug,

You ask a question which gets answered adequately by hacker.

Suggest you start at the beginning & read it again.

Hacker so if you are an owner/trainer or not..are you happy with the state of horseracing in SA??..I cant make it out thru your insults??

Karel exactly how does Hacker answer Catsmugs question?

cats...maybe Hacker is a RA or P boy.

Cat,

Are you questioning the existence of a stakes agreement, or the details of such an agreement?
If it is the latter, is your concern about local or international contribution to the 'stakes pot' (for want of a better word)?

Karel,

I ask you are you happy with the way in which Horseracing is run in SA?

I am neither. That you think I am just means I'm not toeing the ABC party line.

Cmug asked ' As an owner, I ask all owners this simple question - are you better off today than what you were before the Phumelela asset strippers came to town?'

That's not a question but a statement. And pointless because it goes nowhere.

Let's be blunt. The RA and P coalition exist. They're locked in now, and unlike the previous club structure there is no more members discretion with regards assets. That part has been decided.

Now to continually bash at a billion rand public company achieves what? Not that anything can't be criticized, but what is the point of your question/statement?

Oscar,

Of course I am happy with the way horse racing is run.
It is a massive improvement on 'the way we were', which if it had been allowed to continue would have would have been disastrous. We probably wouldn't be here now.
Common sense tells me that anyone would have done what P. did in the early years - rationalising was a must. Remember that P. is a public company and that share holder interests (profitability) must come first. That's the way public companies work, whether you like it or not.

That is not to say that further improvements aren't necessary.
Let's see what they come up with. They have to keep delivering, and now that the rationalisation is behind us that will probably become a lot harder.

On a negative note, it seems to me that one of P.'s biggest short comings is its lack of openness and total arrogance in dealing with interested parties in racing, including the press (!), or chat group environments like ABC.
Such an arrogant attitude is highly unusual in the corporate world.
I can only think that will come to haunt them one day.
To regard other interested parties in your own industry as enemies is, if nothing else, pretty stupid. Everyone, after all, has the same goal of creating a sound racing & betting environment. Profitability is the name of the game.

To get something off my chest: I am mighty amused by the comments made by CEO Attenborough in recent chat shows, where the bookmakers are presented as evil opponents - even though P. & GC have recognised the need for themselves to be part of that 'shady side'. The continuous knocking of bookmakers who are taking open bets is laughable - the courts certainly didn't side with P. when it was tested last year. P & GC should work with the bookmakers, not against them. The best environment for punters is one where both are present - after all, bookmaker & tote serve a vastly different market of betting.

...and if i may add to the point Karel is making, the perception that bookmakers do not pay enough is a red herring: whether it is correct or not, it is the very structure of racing that makes it so.

how happy P and GC must be that at the time of the great rationalisation it was decided that bookmakers should suffer the handicap of having to charge tax to punters in addition to their margins, and then the insult of having to pay that tax over to the tote as their competitor.

in the great mixed-up scheme of things is it therefore unjust that the laws of the land specifically state that bookmakers may offer the open bet?

Tnx for that..the reason they give me for the low stakes and small increases is the fact that they P are providing large subsidies to the industry via low stable rentals, free transport etc.what do you think of that argument?

Cat,

How can you deride the corporate structure.

The days of individual race clubs were horrendous.
They were used as individual power bases where there was no penalty for incompetence.
Some examples.
They closed the off course Totes at midday, even if the queues came out of the door around the block. The thinking was if you wanted to bet, you had to go to the track.
In the Cape the two raceclubs installed different computer systems for 'their' Totes, instead of pooling. Insane.
They build new stands at Milnerton and Kenilworth when crowds were dwindling. What's more they build those stands past the winning post. We're still stuck with the Kenilworth abortion. The architect of the Milnerton stand was a steward of the Club. At Kenilworth there were similar vested interests. What if it failed - it wasn't their money. And so on. Thankfully all the people responsible are no longer there.

Now at least there is accountability for failure.

I still am not persuaded Karel..I see it

1.The financial structure to racing in SA is flawed by the admin own admission through subsidies which try to keep costs to the owner and trainer artificially low (stables, transport etc)
2.This keeps owners who cannot afford to be in the game in as well as trainers who do not have a critical mass of horses to enable them a living out of the fees alone.
3.The training fees anyway are too low in SA with or without subsidies as even large stables battle with cash flow.
4.The recent sales prices have been artificially lifted over the last 36 months due to successes of a few SA horses in Dubai and this is now causing a stronger lobby by owners to lift the stakes locally.
5.There has been a increase in the buybacks and not solds on the two most recent sales whilst many horses bought at the NYS still have not been paid for.
6.P have tried to rectify some old problems of a "country club" type nature that used to prevail a few yrs back but in doing so have created their own form of 'country club" ie information is given out on a strictly need to know basis.
7.Taking over a bussiness run like racing was in the old days is any consultants dream especially when there are assets to sell and heads to chop..so please dont use that argument of oh they saved racing as one to be grateful for!
8.P own an industry in part with extremely loyal passionate customers and they know that and therefore for a period will be able to get away with whatever they want..its unfortunately in the blood as they say..so they will be able to ride on that for some time.
9.P own the only televised version available in SA in regards to horseracing and obviously use that to their advantage.
10.Very little is being done to maintain or upgrade the training facilities in the country..speak to the Jhb based trainers.
11.Very little is being done to upgrade facilities at the racetracks for racegoers except of course for the over-advertised Elevation Room.

My prediction is that if the new guy doesnt get it right first time round..Eskom here we come although I do think he might put a good team around him and just do it!

Oscar,

I am with you on most of the points you make.

But your original question was whether I was happy the way racing was run, in the context of questions about P.
I took your question to mean whether I was happy with the way P. has been performing.

You have widened the net big time, but many of the things you mention are caused by entirely different elements in racing, who aren't related and do not necessary influence each other's actions. It's a big can of worms, wriggling in all directions.