G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

0 Members & 33 Non Members

RWWA's strategic plan for racing in WA

West Australian Racing

Comments

  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,246 posts
    Tivers said:

    Costs the same / marginally increased.
    Stakes doubled / tripled in some areas.

    really?
    I know that when i started syndicating about 8-9 years ago, we budgeted on monthly bills of about $2200 per month up to $2400 per month. 
    Now... you rarely see a bill (in full work and racing) under $3000 to $3500 and several up to $4000.
    I would say thats a substantial increase in cost. 

    Ofcourse, Im generally speaking... different trainers vary quite dramatically.
  • TiversTivers    7,720 posts
    Seriously ?
    Couldn't tell you the last time we changed our fees. (certainly not in the last 5-6 years).
    Just worked on reducing costs instead.

    Hmmmmmmmm

    paraletic likes this post.

  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,246 posts
    yep, seriously! 

    RIO likes this post.

  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,660 posts
    Tivers said:

    Seriously ?

    Couldn't tell you the last time we changed our fees. (certainly not in the last 5-6 years).
    Just worked on reducing costs instead.

    Hmmmmmmmm
    Then you're a long way behind the curve. Most horse reductions I have had conversations around have centered on increased training fees so overall numbers have been reduced. Nothing under $3,000 now for a Trainer of any ability in Saturday class and $3500 is the norm with add on's. One day we will end up in the domain of private Trainers on retainers plus percentage of stakes won, if that already isn;t the case in a couple of cases.
  • FastmoneyFastmoney    4,912 posts
    Reindl`s latest
  • RIORIO    14,882 posts
    edited August 2017
    Tivers said:

    RIO said:

    Tivers said:

    Costs the same / marginally increased.
    Stakes doubled / tripled in some areas.

    Midweek stakes still the same as 2009......Costs have close to doubled since then. Just checked and costs have increased of 60%
    What costs have doubled ???
    Labour has gone down.
    Fuel has gone down.
    Rent has gone down.

    Midweek stakes haven't gone up as much as Saturday's, no, but across the board there'd have to be 30-40% increase in stakes. 
    WestSpeed payouts alone have increased 50% since 2009 ($1.2m 2008/09 - $1.8m 2015/16)




    My trainers costs have gone from 1800 all up to 2500+++. And come out on average at 3k

    We had a horse win a 3yr old midweek in 2009 and the prize money was 22.5k. We had one win a 3yr old midweek race last month for prizemonymof 22.5k

    I don't think the extra 600k or 50% increase in bonuses for the wealthy 10% of operators is a good barometer for fundignincrease to the entires industry.

    In 2009 a midweek win and a top 3 place would pay your yearly bill. In 2017 you need a Saturday win and top 3 place to break even. And it is rare to get one of those hors s, let alone every horse at that level....very year

    On a tablet and after 5 years still cant drive it properly...apologies for the spelling!!!!
  • meatpiemeatpie    410 posts

    Mid week stake money hasn't increased because a few years ago it was decided that Pinjarra, Bunbury, Northam and surprisingly Kalgoorlie would have 100% funding to mid week stake money levels.

    So any increase to mid week stakes would see the other 4 clubs have similar increases which would impact the whole stakes budget.

    RIO likes this post.

  • FastmoneyFastmoney    4,912 posts
    edited August 2017
    Not sure you can isolate one race type and the comparison to now as a guide to what has happened.

    People may suggest that it should have been spent differently but the bottom line is that in ten years the return to industry (all 3 codes) has doubled.

    Payment of 6th to 10th on Saturday comes at a cost of $1.25m is another example of increased stakes.

  • bookieloverbookielover    2,623 posts
    Rio, is absolutely correct in pointing out that in 8 years, his horses that have won a city midweek race were racing for the same amount of prize money.

    In Victoria, City Mid-week prize money has gone from 30 grand a race, to 40 grand a race. That is a 33% increase. AND they also pay down to tenth, with 9th and tenth receiving $800. There are also starters subsidies and a generous Vobis scheme.

    But, putting those last two aside, Victoria have gone forward, and W.A have gone backwards when you allow for inflation. And that's all the comparison you need.

    There is absolutely no comparison between training fees and vet fees of 9 years ago, with today. 

    Perth Racing, and the powers that be, have let prize money stagnate to such an extent, that the battling owner, can't make a go of racing horses. And most of us are fully aware, that racing horses is a sure way of turning a lot of money into a very small amount of money.

    If, in fact, the "return to the industry has doubled in the past 10 years", in W.A, I'd love to know who got that "doubling" of the increase.

    It certainly wasn't Rio, when his horse won that mid-week race.
  • TiversTivers    7,720 posts
    Two things I'll take from your last post Rio (getting too much there now to "quote").

    1. Your trainer in 2009 was massively undercharging, so I'd suggest more so that's been corrected than increased. (They'd have been tearing money up at that).

    2. Would it be fair to say your recent midweek winner was a not as good horse and in a lesser quality race than the 2009 specimen ?
    Would the 2017 horse been able to run in and win the $22.5k race in 2009 ?

    Certainly have heard the comment more than once of recent along the lines of "wow, much easier to win races now. No way this horse would have won this race 5 years ago" etc.
    Therefore the stakes race to race certainly may not have increased, but the earnings horse to horse certainly have.
  • FastmoneyFastmoney    4,912 posts
    edited August 2017
    Any Victorian comparison needs yearling price average for some sort of perspective.

    Vic ave $120k
    WA ave $50k
  • RIORIO    14,882 posts
    I had 3 different trainers in 2009/2010 and the difference in bills was within $200 and all were under $2k all up.

    Hard to say about quality of horses. The 09 horse was a Testa Rosa bred gelding that never won another race. The 2017 horse was a Flying Pegasus filly that destroyed one of Mr Peters Highly fancied Piero's. I could give you my opinion of which one is better, but it'd be different to the somebody else's

    Having increases to the total stakes paid out isn't supporting the industry in total. It is rewarding the owners of Saturday city winning horses. If we want full fields week in week out; meeting in meeting out, we need to reward the winners of all races. The people winning the big dollar races will keep coming back as they have had significant stakes increases. But who will continually invest 30k/year per horse to hope to get a Saturday win and break even???? That group is reducing massively, and continues to go unaddressed.

    It is ludicrous to keep the prize money the same for midweek races for close to 10 years and expect that people will keep playing that game. I actually think it was about 30k in 07/08 and then went down in 08/09 to 22.5k.. but can't be bothered checking
  • RIORIO    14,882 posts
    Fastmoney said:

    Any Victorian comparison needs yearling price average for some sort of perspective.

    Vic ave $120k
    WA ave $50k




    I'm not sure the best horses in WA go through the sales ring anymore FM, so that may not be as good an indicator as it once was??

    Tivers likes this post.

  • FastmoneyFastmoney    4,912 posts
    Think there is 2 different discussions happening here.

    First, total distribution to the 3 codes has doubled in 10 years.

    2nd, is about the way that funding has been distributed.

    Can disagree about the way it has been spent but can`t deny it has been spent.

    RIO likes this post.

  • TiversTivers    7,720 posts
    Yep, was about to say exactly the same.
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,660 posts
    WA ave $50K ? Seems high to me
  • Wasn't paying 6th-10th on a Saturday taken from the winners prizemoney?

    runyon, RIO likes this post.

  • RIORIO    14,882 posts
    Tarantula said:

    Wasn't paying 6th-10th on a Saturday taken from the winners prizemoney?

    Tarantula said:

    Wasn't paying 6th-10th on a Saturday taken from the winners prizemoney?




    Yes good point so I don't know how it cost 1.25mil to instigate?

    Did I split the conversation?? Sorry about that I was just trying to highlight how overall funding has increased significantly from RWWA, but there are still large holes in the funding for participants. If Saturday racing is the be all and end all of this codes futrue, then if it doesn't support the pathway for participants to progress through we will have a vacuum of horses coming through..... and I think that is what we have.

    As Carey has said for years - and Tivers and I have eluded go over the same period - no depth in the racing stocks. Which isn't good for anyone... Well good for east coast stallions, auction houses and bloodstock agents, but not the best for many parts of the WA industry.
  • careycarey    6,368 posts
    Tivers said:

    Costs the same / marginally increased.
    Stakes doubled / tripled in some areas.

    so i just looked at the very first saturday of my current database 19/08/2008.
    most races were 50k and some 60k, none less than 50k
    so how can the stakes be more if saturday prizemoney is less now than then?

    midweeks......
    ascot 22/10/2008....most races 22.5k a couple with 20k and 1 with 17.5k, and there is no way it's more now.
    also my memory tells me they were 25k midweek before then(2008) and there was a reduction.

    perhaps you are just wining more prizemoney these days, which makes you think stakes are through roof when they're not.

    dunno about provincials so they may be more.

    RIO likes this post.

  • runyonrunyon    569 posts
    Just having a quick look at it and it seems as if midweek prizemoney was $17500 in 2006 and $20000 in 2007.
  • FastmoneyFastmoney    4,912 posts

    image

    image

    image
  • FastmoneyFastmoney    4,912 posts
    Total distribution is now $152m


    image
  • paraleticparaletic    3,750 posts
    speaking from my experience only, i think things are tracking along pretty well and have purchased small shares in a number of horses in the last few months. 

    - I have shares in 3 X 2yo's that will hopefully race for 70K on Saturday's which will more than cover their purchase price. (fingers crossed). 
    - The training fees are affordable, and my horses want for nothing. They get the best of everything thus increasing their chance of a return on investment. (3k a month training fees are OTT as far as im concerned). 
    - Less horses going around and less horses being bred = less starters - thus increasing the chances of a return on investment. 
    - Bob doesnt race 2yo's. Thus increasing the chances of a return on investment in that first racing year. 

    All in all, im not going to complain. Good time to be involved. 
  • ChariotsonfireChariotsonfire    2,829 posts
    edited August 2017

    "However, in 2017, the wagering market is more diverse, with 80% of 
    wagering occurring via mobile devices. Added, less than a third of the 
    recently announced $150 distribution to the racing industry came from 
    the TAB's own operations. If not in 2016-17, other wagering providers 
    would seem to have contributed a greater share to the industry’s 
    distribution, than the WATAB."

    The above quote from Mike Reindl. He must be reading a different financial report than me. To say that a less than a third of distributions comes from the TAB's own operation is fanciful to the extreme.

    There has been a lot of rhetoric
    regarding the performance of RWWA and the TAB but the facts are that RWWA
    distribution to the racing codes has increased from $58.8m in 2004 to a record
    $152.2m in 2017 an increase of 158% against the Reserve Bank inflation rate of
    38% for the same period. This is an outstanding result and the information is
    not privileged or confidential and is readily available under Corporate Reports
    on the RWWA website. Most private enterprise businesses operating in WA would
    be envious of this performance. The WA racing codes continue to punch well above
    their weight on a national basis when comparisons are made on a population
    basis. Up until 2016 the increases have gone to Thoroughbreds 160.8%. Harness 113.2% and Greyhounds 112.2%.  The cost of RWWA's racing services has increased by 58.9% over the same period. 






    Fastmoney likes this post.

  • careycarey    6,368 posts
    Fastmoney said:


    image

    image

    image


    i don't know whay i do these things as it matters not at all to me, but.......

    things are not necessarily what they seem, or what you read in rwwa blurbs.
    for instance if you removed all black type races(ANY group or listed) from the equation, you would see where the extra money was given.
    it certainly was not given to run of the mill races.
    so it looks to me as if the guys that win all the big races, are the only ones to benefit.

    dunno why our $ sums don't match exactly, but mine is just all races at ascot or belmont for the relevant season.





    image
    png
    png
    whatever1.png
    24K
  • FastmoneyFastmoney    4,912 posts
    Think you`re confirming most of the funding.

    Total spend includes all 3 codes and funding to clubs.

    Everyone can disagree with how the money was spent but it was spent.

    Owners, Trainers, Jockeys and even Bookmakers Associations were involved in discussions on how stakemoney was distributed.
  • runyonrunyon    569 posts

    In the last 10 years the prizemoney in standard provincial races has gone up about 50% while the prizemoney at the midweek meeting in town has stayed the same. Some races are slightly more, some slightly less. The total prizemoney at todays meeting was less than it would have been back then.

    Standard Saturday races have gone from $45000 to $60000 but back then $45000 was also the minimum where as now we have some lesser grade races run on Saturdays where the prizemoney is $40000 or less.

  • ThumperThumper    820 posts

    Going back a few steps, how are these increases being funded? Having a look at the 2016 report RWWA lost $8M and I assume it is something similar for 2017 based on Reindl's commentary.

    Thankfully RWWA appear to be in a position at the moment where it can dip into the back pocket and fund these increases but is this sustainable long term? Probably not.

    I think this is the driver behind what Reindl is trying to get across that the current funding model is ultimately unsustainable. He like many believes the WATAB should be detached from RWWA and a funding model created to ensure the long term sustainability of the industry. As he rightly points out the ownership structure of the WATAB would be irrelevant in this model.

    RIO likes this post.

  • careycarey    6,368 posts
    edited August 2017
    Thumper said:

    Going back a few steps, how are these increases being funded? Having a look at the 2016 report RWWA lost $8M and I assume it is something similar for 2017 based on Reindl's commentary.

    Thankfully RWWA appear to be in a position at the moment where it can dip into the back pocket and fund these increases but is this sustainable long term? Probably not.

    I think this is the driver behind what Reindl is trying to get across that the current funding model is ultimately unsustainable. He like many believes the WATAB should be detached from RWWA and a funding model created to ensure the long term sustainability of the industry. As he rightly points out the ownership structure of the WATAB would be irrelevant in this model.

    good question, i would bet every thing i have that wa thoroughbred racing is not self sustaining(don't know anything about dogs or harness).

    probably same everywhere to a degree, but it must be the conservative in me, that says if they can't sustain themselves then it should stiff cheddar.
    government should not prop them up i don't believe.
    Fastmoney said:

    Think you`re confirming most of the funding.

    Total spend includes all 3 codes and funding to clubs.

    Everyone can disagree with how the money was spent but it was spent.

    Owners, Trainers, Jockeys and even Bookmakers Associations were involved in discussions on how stakemoney was distributed.

    it's only thoroughbreds for me, but i don't think it confirms anything.
    it actually decreased last season if my figures are right, and if they're not it's their info i have collated, not just taken a sum out of their report.
Sign In or Register to comment.