AWT's

[Hesi]

I thought this was an accurate post on another channel, as opposed to some of the histrionic posting

Huey, I don't think it was ever thought that the AWTs would increase wagering revenue. As far as I can see, the objective was twofold. Firstly, to provide an excellent year round training facility in each region and secondly to take the pressure off the diminishing number of grass tracks over winter. They seem to be doing that.

As Freda says, they are unlikely to significantly increase or decrease wagering revenue overall. Mostly done with free money to the industry, I don't really see the problem. Like any surface, heavy or firm grass or AWT, they will suit some horses more than others and even that will likely vary given that the moisture content clearly affects the speed of the surface quite significantly. From a punting perspective, I don't really see much difference. I've certainly done a lot better on AWTs over the last year than on grass but the n for that assessment is limited.

 

[mardigras]

That's the whole thing. Tracks that are developed aren't designed to necessarily make more money. About the only thing that will make more money is offering a total 'package' that has greater appeal to more punters. One track here or there won't do it. So those going on about the supposed desire to make more money for the industry by way of AWTs, don't understand the business model.

[mardigras]

And having read this

Exactly @Huey!  If these AWT's don't increase revenue to not only cover their operation and maintenance but also increase stakes then what is the point of them?

On that basis, why would anyone be questioning the closing down of race tracks. There is no racetrack increasing revenue to cover its operation and increase stakes. None of them make any money to even cover the stake let alone anything else. Might as well close them all.

[Freda]

1 hour ago, mardigras said:

And having read this

Exactly @Huey!  If these AWT's don't increase revenue to not only cover their operation and maintenance but also increase stakes then what is the point of them?

On that basis, why would anyone be questioning the closing down of race tracks. There is no racetrack increasing revenue to cover its operation and increase stakes. None of them make any money to even cover the stake let alone anything else. Might as well close them all.

Exactly.

Another [ possibly hazy ] recollection from the Messara report;  given a window of [ punting] opportunity with our time zone, consistent tracks and decent-appearing facilities needed to be presented to attract such betting from discerning punters.

As the industry was [ is ] broke, the only identifiable source of extra funds for upgrading a selected few venues was to be from sale of redundant tracks.  Only thing is, the process of the sale of tracks is stuttering at best, the country venues are worth peanuts in the greater scheme of things [ and stridently resisted by most venues ] so the anticipated flow of money hasn't happened yet.   The real prizes are Avondale and other city venues which are highly unlikely to be be cashed in.

The sale/outsourcing of the TAB which was identified as being pivotal to the whole report hasn't happened and is also highly unlikely to.

So, no funds for upgrades, no extra punter appeal, a continuing loss-making operation...

Hesi is going to leap on this and point out the ATC initiative;   all fine and dandy, with super-duper facilities funded by selling stuff.   Once sold, it's gone.

And will that increase punter losses?  if it doesn't, it will only take some Govt boffin to decide that racing is a leech on society and with a stroke of the pen, remove the subsidies it receives.

Then we'll be back to ribbons, or Willy Wightman's bags of kumeras.

[Hesi]

The ATR initiative is an attempt to restore confidence in the industry, to get the ball rolling, by subsidising through the sale of their assets, new facilities, track and stake money.

I think they are to be applauded for this, along with the Winter Championships in conjunction with Whangarei and Waikato

It's a pretty standard business model, invest heavily in building your business in the early years, make sure you have a quality product etc etc, all for a payback in years to follow.

The Memorandum of Understanding signed between Waikato, Waipa and Cambridge, to form a joint club, somewhere, is another initiative to be applauded

Sure, these clubs and races don't attract enough betting revenue to make racing sustainable, and the only way out of that is to make racing more attractive, so they do become sustainable.  In the meantime, the Racing Act is getting them through, with revenue from other sources such as sport, but this must end eventually.

Not sure what happens at Avondale, more parochialism?  The sale of Avondale, to make available money to re-invest elsewhere in racing infrastructure, was the jewel in the crown.  This along with the outsourcing of the TAB, were the 2 key points of the Messara Report, neither has happened.

NZ Racing deserves what it gets, I've never come across an industry with so much chronic, parochial bleating.  Yet despite that, there are people trying to make a difference.

I found Murray Baker's parting shots, that trainers here should not hesitate to , give it a go in Aus, a bit of a kick in the teeth for the local industry.  Didn't the infrastructure of racing here, built up over many years by many before him, afford him the opportunity to display his horsemanship