The ASBP Report: How can they be serious? Bad news for harness owners

[The Big Mile]

First time poster on this forum, I see that there is a topic on this report under 'Breeding' but as this affects all aspects of the industry potentially, I feel it is right to discuss one particular part of their recommendations here.

The ASBP should be commended for their efforts to address problems with breeding and exploring avenues on how to sort these issues out.

They recommend a National Breeding Credit Scheme for mares which it is anticipated will stimulate the greater participation in racing by those fillies and mares, by funding F&M racing, giving credits to horses themselves so as to be used as credits against future stallion fees against that mare and so forth.

This scheme requires funding and one area that the Panel suggested funding the $2.1 million per year that was needed was by the introduction of IMPORT FEES on horses that are bought from overseas to come here to race.

The suggested fee was $1500 for 4yo and up mares, and $5000 for C&G.

In NSW this fee stands at $150 and $500 respectively and the suggestion is to increase 10 fold to fund this breeding intiative.

I am really disappointed that this has been recommended as the major source of funding for the Breeding Proposal. There seems very little consideration given to owners, in fact a small percentage of owners whom source their racing product from overseas.

Can anyone tell me how creating such a disincentive for ownership can be good for the sport? Harness Racing struggles enough as it is to attract owners and let alone retain them. One very attractive way to do this is to source horses from NZ because you can get them here and race them soon after. Australians don't sell and are habitual overpricers.

According to the figures 13% of racing horses are from NZ. If you create barriers or make the sourcing of horses from NZ not as attractive, then there will be less horses coming over here to race.

I saw in the other thread some suggestions that the NZ breeders will absorb the costs.

What rubbish.

At the end of the day a $5000 impost in importing horses from NZ will equate to a greater cost to owners no matter which way you look at it.

A $20k horse now based on its relative ability will not be $20k in the future with the $5000 import fee. There will be other horses for sale at that price, but they will generally be ones of lesser ability, and therefore the import fee would encourage the importation of lesser grade animals as a result.

I find this recommendation to be completely at odds with what we are trying to achieve in the wider industry. By all means the breeders need supporting but breeders themselves are to blame for a lot of their woes with the ordinary stock they bring to sales. How can they expect to generate a return when they produce a product that people swat away? Any look at a sales catalogue shows it is often a great reference point for ordinarily bred horses, that any sensible yearling purchaser will simply shun.

And another consideration too: Breeders complain about the rising costs making it harder to attain or reach break even. Do the Breeders think that increased feed costs, fuel costs, general costs are only felt by Breeders?

No they are not. Everyone in the industry feels these costs. One cost they might be relatively alone in feeling is the cost of servicing mares. Breeders themselves create the demand that determines the pricing of stallions. Breeders want greater access to better stallions and the NBCS should give them that over time, but as we have seen by Alabar and so forth, service fees are coming down this season. They realise you need it to make it more economical to prudce good quality racing stock.

There is plenty more to debate on this topic, but this ridiculous IMPORT FEE needs to be stopped dead in its tracks.

[triplev123]

My most sincere & most humble apologies TBM. I don't know what I thinking.
Posting a link to the HRA Breeding Panel report under the Breeding Section of this Forum and then commenting on same & in same...it was indeed very remiss of me to have done so. :p

Btw TBM...I was wondering how long it would take you to show up here mate. ;););)
You're getting slow in your old age. Trust you and yours are well. Happy to go back & forth here but if you prefer, ring me if you want to discuss over the phone or over a few coldies.

[smithy]

i agree with whoever posted this - you can't support breeders at the expense of owners - they are one and the same

can someone explain (as it was ignored on the other thread) why the import fee is only on colts? i thought they were trying to increase the value of aussie horses particularly fillies - wouldnt this make them less valuable as fillies from nz will be swimming over in 100's

[triplev123]

G'day Smithy,

There seems to be a fair amount of confusion here.
The Panel that produced this paper was not charged with addressing any factors other than those which have Australian Breeding Industy implications.
They were wholly and solely charged with the addressing of Australian Breeding Industry issues and with suggesting ways in which the lot of the Australian Breeding Industry could be augmented. No more, no less.
This was NOT in any way intended to be a wide ranging paper addressing the Australian Harness Racing Industry as a whole & a reading of the HRA Panel's brief confirms same.

Did you send in your own submission with your ideas for their consideration?
They received somewhere in the vicinity of 1500 replies I believe.

On the proposed charges, it's not only on colts, geldings & entires (5k) each. It is also on fillies, only not quite as much (1.5k).

[The Big Mile]

G'day Smithy,

There seems to be a fair amount of confusion here.
The Panel that produced this paper was not charged with addressing any factors other than those which have Australian Breeding Industy implications.
They were wholly and solely charged with the addressing of Australian Breeding Industry issues and with suggesting ways in which the lot of the Australian Breeding Industry could be augmented. No more, no less.
This was NOT in any way intended to be a wide ranging paper addressing the Australian Harness Racing Industry as a whole & a reading of the HRA Panel's brief confirms same.

Did you send in your own submission with your ideas for their consideration?
They received somewhere in the vicinity of 1500 replies I believe.

On the proposed charges, it's not only on colts, geldings & entires (5k) each. It is also on fillies, only not quite as much (1.5k).

Hello Mr Triple V. Why then if the above was true would those in charge of trying to address these issues push forward ideas that have implications for the wider industry?

Coming up with a suggestion 'just because it suits the breeding industry' without contemplating the wider ramifications is ignorant at best. In fact it is downright dismal. I certainly would have expected more on that front than they have presented.

Smithy said 'you can't support breeders at the expense of owners'. How true.

Incidently I should point out I am a small time breeder and an owner whom in the last 12 months has bought yearlings, racing horses domestically and from abroad.

To make a suggestion as an import fee is creating a barrier to entry to the market that has the potential to discourage potential ownership. It is the last thing harness racing needs as it struggles to compete with other entertainment mediums.

[Don Corleone]

Hi Big Mile,
Totally, 100% agree with you. I am a small time breeder/owner/trainer/buyer. Over the past 20 odd years 75% of my horses have gone to you guys in OZ and it gives me great pleasure when my horses arrive and have success there. I have sold horses from 6k to 160k. Most of what I buy and train are mares and are in the 10k to 30k price range. I might consider absorbing the cost in a 100k sale but wouldn't consider it on anything less.

[triplev123]

Hello Mr Triple V. Why then if the above was true would those in charge of trying to address these issues push forward ideas that have implications for the wider industry?
Coming up with a suggestion 'just because it suits the breeding industry' without contemplating the wider ramifications is ignorant at best. In fact it is downright dismal. I certainly would have expected more on that front than they have presented.
[VVV] Hello Mr. TBM. Rightly or wrongly they were not free to consider any of the wider ramifications.
Perhaps there was also a certain level of detachment from the whole 'put a syndicate together, buy going stock in NZ & race in Oz' angle in there too...one that was either pre-existing or that was otherwise thrust upon the Panel by way of their initial brief. I can only speculate.

Smithy said 'you can't support breeders at the expense of owners'. How true.
[VVV] I think that is particularly relevant because, as the Panel's own paper suggests, these groups are effectively one and the same. It is also relevant from the point of view that so many have subsequently joined the ranks of the Breeders by way of first enjoying their involvement with a racehorse.

Incidently I should point out I am a small time breeder and an owner whom in the last 12 months has bought yearlings, racing horses domestically and from abroad.
[VVV] Indeed you are and this is without question.

To make a suggestion as an import fee is creating a barrier to entry to the market that has the potential to discourage potential ownership. It is the last thing harness racing needs as it struggles to compete with other entertainment mediums.
[VVV] The potential owner entry point aspect carries a great deal of weight I have to agree. If there are possible alternative sources of funding, which I've no doubt you've investigated, then please, by all means they should be considered.
There is nothing to stop you from sending in a submission to HRA, one which deals with that aspect of the Panel's report/paper.
Having spoken to Andrew Kelly a few times both before and since this whole thing came to pass I'm sure he'd be only too happy to hear from yourself and anyone else. As our mate Mightymo has said a number of times...put it in writing and send it in.

Keep well,

[The Big Mile]

Triple V the problem here is that the HRA CEO is actually secretary of the Panel and that is the panel whom have made a FINAL RECOMMENDATION to go to HRA. So essentially Mr Kelly knows what he is going to get.

There are many avenues for revenue collection and it amuses me to hear that avenues where Breeders will be asked to support themselves (like broodmare registration) has been shot down in flames as a massive no, no.

Lets slug owners, lets make them pay. But oh no, anyone associated with the ACTUAL breeding side cannot.

This kind of ignorance I simply cannot cop.

[gutwagon]

The point of this report was to help Australian breeding. Buying horses from NZ does not help our breeding in any way. As a small time breeder and owner I support every part of this report. Persoally I think that there are too many NZ horses here, I would make the import fees even higher. With the Aus dollar so high we will be flooded with them even more.
One part of the report that I found amazing was the fact that 50% of foals are female yet only 6.6% of races are for fillys or mares. This needs to be lifted to 20 or 30% asap.

[smithy]

import substitution does not work!

the import fee is clearly aimed at helping the fillies going through the sales, but the statistics show most people don't sell - someone make some sense of that for me

[smithy]

The point of this report was to help Australian breeding. Buying horses from NZ does not help our breeding in any way. As a small time breeder and owner I support every part of this report. Persoally I think that there are too many NZ horses here, I would make the import fees even higher. With the Aus dollar so high we will be flooded with them even more.
One part of the report that I found amazing was the fact that 50% of foals are female yet only 6.6% of races are for fillys or mares. This needs to be lifted to 20 or 30% asap.
how about kiwi stallions CUF and christain cullen..mach three stands there too - we better ban them because they are kiwi horse.. while we are at lets ban all the US horses and stallions .. because we don't want our money going overseas

see the ludicrousness of this idea

[gutwagon]

smithy, Stallions do help our breeding industry. Nz racehorses don't. I didn't mention banning anything. I can't see anything ludicrous about my statement, you just don't seem to understand it.
Where does it say ban nz horses in my statement ?

[The Big Mile]

The point of this report was to help Australian breeding. Buying horses from NZ does not help our breeding in any way. As a small time breeder and owner I support every part of this report. Persoally I think that there are too many NZ horses here, I would make the import fees even higher. With the Aus dollar so high we will be flooded with them even more.
One part of the report that I found amazing was the fact that 50% of foals are female yet only 6.6% of races are for fillys or mares. This needs to be lifted to 20 or 30% asap.

Smithy. Unfortunately the above is a too common theme amongst harness racing participants in Australia. It is a mentality that will see the sport continue its downward slide in most states, NSW exempt of that.

Problem is in harness racing in general is that many - well certainly a high proportion - have a seriously delusional view of the industry, and their niche within it. Breeders are one that sit on some other plane alltogether. You only need to waltz around a yearling sale, any yearling sale and hear the delusion bellow from the boxes with the ridiculous expectations placed on their horses. Harness Breeders are habitual over-valuers. Both ones that go to the sales and ones that don't.

[gutwagon]

i agree with whoever posted this - you can't support breeders at the expense of owners - they are one and the same



If they are one and the same it would be imposible to support one and not the other. Your statement contradicts its self.

[gutwagon]

I do agree that many breeders want way too much for thier yearlings, they should let the market determin the value of thier stock. They are just the same in NZ.

[triplev123]

G'day The Big Mile,

Mate, just one thing that's worth noting in relation to the Oz Yearling Sale values and in particular, the biggest sale here...the APG as compared to buying going horses out of NZ.

Going horses from NZ are NOT eligible for the APG, NSW Breeders Challenge etc...in fact for the most part they're not eligible for a whole lot at all...and this, combined with a 26-27% & sometimes as high as 30% kick in the Fx means that NZ going horses can be purchased rather advantageously as compared to their Oz bred compatriots.

I don't for one minute doubt that the going concern end of the market here in Oz is more often than not overpriced however to be totally fair you really need to compare apples to apples if you're looking to aim up on relative asking prices.
An Oz bred yearling that's sold in the APG and is eligible for a swag of futurities has one price tag relative to its earning potential while an NZ bred going concern with few if any futurity eligibilities has another.

[smithy]

smithy, Stallions do help our breeding industry. Nz racehorses don't. I didn't mention banning anything. I can't see anything ludicrous about my statement, you just don't seem to understand it.
Where does it say ban nz horses in my statement ?

no but im representing the owners here, and by banning US stallions the aussie stallions will be worth more...so breeders will just have to cop it because its good for owners


does this idea still not seem totally stupid?

[smithy]

If they are one and the same it would be imposible to support one and not the other. Your statement contadicts its self.

how does making horses more expensive help owners who don't sell at yearling sales? this report is aimed directly at supporting the yearling sales breeders/sellers - not ordinary breeders who race their own stock who are under pressure from rising costs

it looks imo like its trying to bring back the nsw sires stakes program which is dead and buried

the report makes absolutely no difference between yearlings and going horses - they are clearly different products and if people want going horses they will simply buy 5+ mares.. and then watch the kiwi horses win all the races when they get handicapping kickbacks when their imported

[The Big Mile]

G'day The Big Mile,

Mate, just one thing that's worth noting in relation to the Oz Yearling Sale values and in particular, the biggest sale here...the APG as compared to buying going horses out of NZ.

Going horses from NZ are NOT eligible for the APG, NSW Breeders Challenge etc...in fact for the most part they're not eligible for a whole lot at all...and this, combined with a 26-27% & sometimes as high as 30% kick in the Fx means that NZ going horses can be purchased rather advantageously as compared to their Oz bred compatriots.

I don't for one minute doubt that the going concern end of the market here in Oz is more often than not overpriced however to be totally fair you really need to compare apples to apples if you're looking to aim up on relative asking prices.
An Oz bred yearling that's sold in the APG and is eligible for a swag of futurities has one price tag relative to its earning potential while an NZ bred going concern with few if any futurity eligibilities has another.

Triple VVVV: What is proposed is something that will tax a certain percentage of OWNERS, to meet the shortcomings of the breeding industry.

That includes all breeders as all will be eligible.

You breeders (well I am actually one, but I am a breeder whom is generally appalled by the constant 'help me, help me' cries that bellow from the breeding industry) need to realise if you want to make your(our) progeny more attractive, then what you need are BUYERS. BUYERS = OWNERS.

The industry at large has done a large slice of very little in trying to attract new owners. Where do they go generally to seek horses? NZ. A-la the Number One Club.

What YOU blokes need to do is create a culture of cultivating the owners within the industry that breeding is worth a tilt, or at least a gamble at the yearling sales. But do not discourage their general interest in the game by silly things like excessive Import fees.

Problem is, investing in yearlings is a gamble that rarely pays off. The term 'you may as well slit your wrists' is commonly bandied around and given my experience at yearling sales, that rings pretty true.

You can only bleed owners for so much.

Am I meant to be sympathetic towards breeders whom should have culled poor broodmares years ago but persist with them?

The Credit Scheme could easily see more of this happen - persistence with poor mares at the races then at stud. Is it a good thing? Well if we need two headed gorillas on the race track so punters can wager on them, so be it.

Maybe the drops in foals in recent years is evolution in motion, the culling of the weakest.

[gutwagon]

This report was about the breeding industry in Australia, not about owners, they may get their own report one day.
So you blokes think Aus breeders should just give it all away and all owners just buy from NZ. You seem to think you cant buy going horses in Aus, only overpriced yearlings ! I know several people who paid good money for nz horses and had very little luck. They then brough Aus stock and are doing much better, it can work both ways.
And Smithy nobody wants to ban US or NZ stallions. Nowhere in the report do they suggest this, they only recomend increasing the import fee on racing stock from o/s, to encourage owners to buy Australian.Also if there are no breeders there will be no owners !

[smithy]

gutwagon - my problem with the report is that it is taking the side orf yearlings going through the sale, i dont see alot of help being given to fillies being bred and raced by their breeders (there is some mention of creating more races for them, but this topic should have taken up 10 pages in the report)

simply do some research on how import substitution works and then say it is good for the breeding industry to shield it from competition

[The Big Mile]

This report was about the breeding industry in Australia, not about owners, they may get their own report one day.
So you blokes think Aus breeders should just give it all away and all owners just buy from NZ. You seem to think you cant buy going horses in Aus, only overpriced yearlings ! I know several people who paid good money for nz horses and had very little luck. They then brough Aus stock and are doing much better, it can work both ways.
And Smithy nobody wants to ban US or NZ stallions. Nowhere in the report do they suggest this, they only recomend increasing the import fee on racing stock from o/s, to encourage owners to buy Australian.Also if there are no breeders there will be no owners !

Gutwagon I think you miss the point. Yes it was about the Breeding Industry. BUT it proposed to fund a breeding initiative by slugging OWNERS.

Lets look at a proposed OWNERS report. We are losing owners (parallels to the number of foals reducing) and a proposal is made to have the NOCS (National Owners Credit Scheme). To help keep owners in the game, it is proposed that each time their horse runs, they receive credits which are able to be used to purchase future horses.
The Owners panel go to the owners associations and ask them how do we fund this project, it will cost around $2.2 million a year.

Ok, like the breeders lets source from within our own (meaning see if we can raise funds from within ownership ranks). A annual registration is proposed on each and every racing animal (like it was to Breeders concerning broodmares).

Owners associations go up in arms, NO YOU CANT DO THAT!!!!! (Just like the Breeders said).

So the panel need to look at alternative methods of funding. Well, we can't raise the money from within ownership ranks, so lets go and slug another part of the industry.......whom can we target.....ummmm......yeah, breeders. Lets smack them.

So in the final report, the recommendation put forward was to slug breeders at the sales a $400 registration to be able to commercially sell your progeny. So you are targeting a certain percentage of breeders, the ones whom supposedly 'make a buck' from it.

Now you tell me, do you think that breeders would cop that - funding an owners scheme?

Didn't think so.

You can buy going horses in Australia. You can buy them from NZ. If there was a $5000 fee on the purchase of going horses in Oz, how do you think that would go down?

You want people to support Australian breeders right? Well produce the right kind of product, one that will be attractive enough for OWNERS to fork out the dollars for. It happens, it happens every day. You tell me why Australian breeders cannot compete?

I ask you Gut to ask me - will being forced out of purchasing horses from NZ to race make me more likely to purchase horses from Australia?

Don't worry about asking because I will answer: Categorically not.

And - to make the proposed Import Fee all the more preposterous it is a flat fee. So it hurts the bottom end of the market more than the top end.

It is like the govt introducing this carbon scheme that will impact on everybody, but providing no relief for anyone at all in the lower income tiers.

By all means raise funds for the NBCS because it has merit, but you have to slug EVERYBODY, not a select group - a group whom those that can least afford it will be the ones affected the most.

[eliteblood]

gutwagon - my problem with the report is that it is taking the side orf yearlings going through the sale, i dont see alot of help being given to fillies being bred and raced by their breeders

Smithy, the NBCS scheme is very much supportive of fillies bred and raced by their breeders. As is the initiative to promote more racing opportunities for mares.

[smithy]

Smithy, the NBCS scheme is very much supportive of fillies bred and raced by their breeders. As is the initiative to promote more racing opportunities for mares.

paid for by owners

[Greg Hando]

can someone work out as i'm not that good with math show much to produce a yearling for sale right from conception to sale day and let's say you own your land where the mare and foal runs use the service fee of $3000 it is a nice round number and would it be about the average price of service fees? Itemised if possible it might explain cost's of breeding to some people who don't breed

[Greg Hando]

The Big Mile are breeder's not owner's as well the percentage of breeder's who breed to race is very high can't remember the number so aren't they then classed as owner's

[smithy]

ill put some up for you greg, its the amounts for bills i have on hand atm for bring a mare across from nz and getting it in foal
Mare 25000
GST import 2500
Southern cross transport (truck from dock to property) 480
Shipping 3,000
Mare rego in nsw 150
Vet fees for breeding the mare (also includes extras) 739.5
breeders challenge 275
Vicbred 175
foal rego 275
freeze branding 60
vaccines 43.6
breeders crown 80

apg entry 385
apg sustaining on day of sale 140ish

[Greg Hando]

Start's to add up would the mare have to be DNA'd on top of your foal rego ? Are the cost's in VIC and NSW the same or similar for rego etc ?

[smithy]

thats nsw, i think the dna is in the foal rego or the freezebranding

[Greg Hando]

o'k

[triplev123]

TBM wrote [You want people to support Australian breeders right? Well produce the right kind of product, one that will be attractive enough for OWNERS to fork out the dollars for.
It happens, it happens every day. You tell me why Australian breeders cannot compete?]

Triple says - Apparently 'compete' is a euphemism for breeding & raising paddocks full of largely un-staked horses until they're 4yo+ C1's then selling them for 10k a piece or less. Not sure that I could 'compete' in such a fashion TBM.
The only competition that approach is sure to engender is competition for a position in the soup kitchen line outside the Matthew Talbot Hostel.

[triplev123]

There are many avenues for revenue collection and it amuses me to hear that avenues where Breeders will be asked to support themselves (like broodmare registration) has been shot down in flames as a massive no, no. Lets slug owners, lets make them pay. But oh no, anyone associated with the ACTUAL breeding side cannot.

Well mate, you know full well where that head buried right up their own backsides attitude is coming from. You did your time there like I did only I, after having left in absolute disgust once, was stupid enough to go back for a 2nd term only to vacate again soon after wondering why in the Hell I'd ever even considered it in the first place. I wouldn't have any big issues with a modest annual charge of some sort. Most reasonable people wouldn't. You are not dealing with reasonable people however. Cast you mind back if it is not too painful to do so. See what I mean?

[gutwagon]

Going by the figures in that report less than 20% of horses racing in Aus are from Nz. So increasing the import fee will effect less than 20% of owners. And I dont think the increase will stop many people from buying from NZ. With the Aus dollar so high Aus buyers have never had it so good.

[triplev123]

Hey TBM,

You might have missed my previous post to this effect.
Just wondering, have you come up with any ideas as far as alternative sources of funding is concerned?
You've aimed up on this 5k proposal and that's fine, it's there for discussion, and as far as your particular racing model is concerned I can completely understand why you're doing it. What I'm interested in however is alternatives.
If you really want to knock this 5k fee over then you've got to offer them other avenues to explore. Any ideas what they might be?

Incidentally, the way you've been painting this...as though the Breeders will skate...is not correct. If you also consider the $$$ that are expected to be raised by new/increased fees and specifically which will directly and indirectly fall upon the breeder to pay...then there's some $900,000+ that's being proposed to come out of their end.

On a personal note, here's a bit of a case study.
A basic calculation of what we can expect to pay by way of those proposed changes will see the cost of PTIF service fees from NZ based sires go up by around $400-$500-$600 per mare across the board & depending on the fee of the sire. It is unlikely Studs will absorb any of those costs. Breeder pays.
If those services then result in colt foals...it will serve to all but double registration costs.
Each & every colt foal resulting from imported chilled or frozen semen will cost his proud breeder approximately $725 more.
Essentially, breed half a dozen mares to chilled semen shipped from NZ, get all colts and what do you reckon the damage is for us? I make it to be somewhere around $4,350 and I think that's conservative. Food for thought.

[The Big Mile]

Going by the figures in that report less than 20% of horses racing in Aus are from Nz. So increasing the import fee will effect less than 20% of owners. And I dont think the increase will stop many people from buying from NZ. With the Aus dollar so high Aus buyers have never had it so good.

Only 20% of owners? Tell me something gutwagon, do you think the sport has trouble attracting and retaining owners?

If ownership ranks were deep and pockets deep, then a lot of troubles breeders face would not be happening.

Unfortunately it is not the case.

[gutwagon]

Tbm these reports never please everybody, thats why they release them for discusion. If only one recomendation upsets you then they haven't done to bad. It's not perfect and maybe needs some fine tuning. The increase in import fees doesn't effect me or 80 odd % of other breeders/owners.If I did import horses I would be mad about the increase too. Maybe they could take some prizemoney away from the big races to fund this, or stop increasing the prizes in the big races. But this will upset some owners and breeders too.
There are a lot of good ideas in this report, I was very pleased when I read it. When I filled in the survey I didn't think anything good would come of it.
Who else on here bothered to fill it in ? I hope you all did.

[The Big Mile]

Hey TBM,

You might have missed my previous post to this effect.
Just wondering, have you come up with any ideas as far as alternative sources of funding is concerned?
You've aimed up on this 5k proposal and that's fine, it's there for discussion, and as far as your particular racing model is concerned I can completely understand why you're doing it. What I'm interested in however is alternatives.
If you really want to knock this 5k fee over then you've got to offer them other avenues to explore. Any ideas what they might be?

Incidentally, the way you've been painting this...as though the Breeders will skate...is not correct. If you also consider the $$$ that are expected to be raised by new/increased fees and specifically which will directly and indirectly fall upon the breeder to pay...then there's some $900,000+ that's being proposed to come out of their end.

On a personal note, here's a bit of a case study.
A basic calculation of what we can expect to pay by way of those proposed changes will see the cost of PTIF service fees from NZ based sires go up by around $400-$500-$600 per mare across the board & depending on the fee of the sire. It is unlikely Studs will absorb any of those costs. Breeder pays.
If those services then result in colt foals...it will serve to all but double registration costs.
Each & every colt foal resulting from imported chilled or frozen semen will cost his proud breeder approximately $725 more.
Essentially, breed half a dozen mares to chilled semen shipped from NZ, get all colts and what do you reckon the damage is for us? I make it to be somewhere around $4,350 and I think that's conservative. Food for thought.

It will be done. Again I don't want to appear a hippocrit - the NBCS has plenty of merit (might need a tweak here and there) but I fully support it. I fully understand the need to fund it and the avenues of funding. $5k as an import fee - if there needs to be one - needs to be reduced. It is simply too high.

I do personally feel objectionable to the belief that a certain group should be slugged - especially when this group are not necessarily earning / winning / making more than any other group. I am a strong believer in the spreading of a fee for minimal impact across a broad spectrum of the sport.

We will see what happens.

[smithy]

Going by the figures in that report less than 20% of horses racing in Aus are from Nz. So increasing the import fee will effect less than 20% of owners. And I dont think the increase will stop many people from buying from NZ. With the Aus dollar so high Aus buyers have never had it so good.

again a misrepresented stat.. that 20% of owners probably contribute 50% of all owners money.. look at the horses they are buying lanercost NZ imthemightyquinn NZ smoken up NZ

[smithy]

if your right about that cost triple v i can't see how any breeder could possibly support this part of the paper

[The Big Mile]

Another point worth considering: Don't you think that if similar horses could be purchased domestically they would be?

I am sure many, if not all purchasers of horses from NZ would actually like to spend the $5k it costs for transport and associated costs to go straight into 4 legs, a head and a tail.

Problem is many horses for sale in Oz actually lack one of those 3 essentials.

[justdoit]

I have had it with The Big Mile putting shit on the Australian standardbred, If you do not like the proposed fees you can do a BRUCE?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hgZmZhwczk

Watch the police interview near the end.

[The Big Mile]

I have had it with The Big Mile putting shit on the Australian standardbred, If you do not like the proposed fees you can do a BRUCE?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hgZmZhwczk

Watch the police interview near the end.

LOL Justdoit. That is funny.

[smithy]

that guy is on ice.. hes not drunk

as far as i am concerned the paper will not be implemented because there will be a riot if it is - they've wasted their time - end of story

[gutwagon]

@smithy. The import fee will provide around 3/4 of the funds needed. Each horse only pays once.
The stats show that NZ horses win more prizemoney than Aus horses on average so even after paying the $5000 they will still be infront.
Allmost 20% of Aus prizemoney is won by NZ horses. This is fine if that money goes to Aus owners and is reinvested in Aus Harness racing, but I'm sure a large part of it goes to Nz and doesn't help our industry much at all.
Most of the people at your riot will be nz breeders and import agents. I'm sure those police from the above video will keep you all safe.

[Greg Hando]

75 NZ horses imported to AUS in July that's got to help the breeding industry in AUS (NOT)

[gutwagon]

75 NZ horses imported to AUS in July that's got to help the breeding industry in AUS (NOT)

That number will skyrocket now when they all panic and try to beat the fee increase.
I suppose one good thing with the kiwis making all that money, it might stop them migrating to Aus !!!

[smithy]

there will be no fee increase! breeders do not run harness racing.. you are not bigger then the game

HRNSW have just changed the rules to let MORE nz bred horses in the nsw breeding scheme, clearly they have different priorities to this breeding paper

[mango]

@smithy. The import fee will provide around 3/4 of the funds needed. Each horse only pays once.
The stats show that NZ horses win more prizemoney than Aus horses on average so even after paying the $5000 they will still be infront.
Allmost 20% of Aus prizemoney is won by NZ horses. This is fine if that money goes to Aus owners and is reinvested in Aus Harness racing, but I'm sure a large part of it goes to Nz and doesn't help our industry much at all.
Most of the people at your riot will be nz breeders and import agents. I'm sure those police from the above video will keep you all safe.

Hi Gutwagon

As a breeder i don't believe that people who purchase horses from n.z should be made to prop up the breeding industry, these people are taking the risks in buying horses in the hope of racing them and winning there purchase price back and some more. There horses make up fields which in turn is more turnover. Let's look at stud's and stallion owners how come more pressure is not put on them to put more into the industry. By the way how much do studs pay per live foal.

[smithy]

no no no mango, don't say BREEDERS should have to pay, not the poor breeders!!!

[mango]

75 NZ horses imported to AUS in July that's got to help the breeding industry in AUS (NOT)

Over 100 in June

[dizzy]

haven't study the paper in depth but why aren't all horse coming to oz even temporarily slugged the fee after all most of the temporary imports are likely to remove the most money from the pool for aussie owners.

For mine ALLl imported horse should pay a minimal fee but pay a levy on their earnings to fund the breeders scheme. This way new owners can continue to buy entry level horses at a minimal cost at ANY time rather then have to wait until a yearling sale and then another year or there abouts. Owners buying more expensive therefore expected to win more horse will pay proportionally more if they are successful.

New owners are going to have to come from Gen Y their interest will only be held with immediate gratification. But after they are "hooked" they can be encouraged to buy yearlings from the sales with all the bells and whistles (ie sales race/futurity eligibility) because of their greater earning capacity.

Just a thought, should still make breeders happy and only the successfull owners of imports are charged out of money that they earn, not have to find from somewhere else.

[gutwagon]

Most of you don't want people who import horses to pay for this plan, but your not suggesting any viable alternatives. If you come up with something better they might consider it. And don't just think about protecting your own pocket. Don't forget that the Aus harness racing industry has been propping up the kiwis for years now. If they couldn't sell their horses here and come and take our big prize money they would be in big trouble.

[aussiebreno]

75 NZ horses imported to AUS in July that's got to help the breeding industry in AUS (NOT)

How does it make the breeding industry worse off though?

I'm going to guess the answer. Because the Aus bred horses aren't getting purchased.

Well maybe if the Aus Bred horses were bred better they would get purchased. (That probably came out wrong, I am aware NZ have a lot of crap bred horses and Aust has a lot of awesome bred horses)

Let's say Optus can only supply dial up internet. They can't get cranky when people choose to go to Telstra who have broadband. I'm not drinking VB when I can drink Bourbon (or visa versa for some).

[Greg Hando]

How does it make the breeding industry worse off though?

I'm going to guess the answer. Because the Aus bred horses aren't getting purchased.

Well maybe if the Aus Bred horses were bred better they would get purchased. (That probably came out wrong, I am aware NZ have a lot of crap bred horses and Aust has a lot of awesome bred horses)

Let's say Optus can only supply dial up internet. They can't get cranky when people choose to go to Telstra who have broadband. I'm not drinking VB when I can drink Bourbon (or visa versa for some).

Thought it was pretty obvious It is 75 less horse's that may have been purchased here allowing the breeder to breed better quality through the money they may have made mare's could have been put to better stallion's and better stallion's purchased and/or leased to stand at stud perhap's we might see a few more better credentialled sire's coming out here

[The Big Mile]

Most of you don't want people who import horses to pay for this plan, but your not suggesting any viable alternatives. If you come up with something better they might consider it. And don't just think about protecting your own pocket. Don't forget that the Aus harness racing industry has been propping up the kiwis for years now. If they couldn't sell their horses here and come and take our big prize money they would be in big trouble.

Gutwagon - you are not alone in your view.

Let me give you a telling fact.

FACT: The panel approached the breeders looking at a registration fee for broodmares on an annual basis to help fund the NBCS in part 'from their own'. It was SCREAMED down. Breeders not willing to help themselves.

FACT: Australian breeders produce a lot of rubbish. And then cry poor. I breed, but I have very little sympathy for those whom roll the dice and get burnt. It is part and parcel of the game. The Import Fee was one of two things and two things only that pissed me off about this report. The other was the failure to acknowledge that EVERYONE ELSE in the industry is battling under increasing costs.

What - Breeders are the only ones whom have costs going up? Please. Fuel price rises after EVERYONE.

FACT: The Import Fee attacks the bottom end of the food chain in terms of NZ purchases. The cheapest point of entry (meaning cheapest horses) are the ones hurt the most.

This flat rate import fee benefits the wealthy owners because it is chicken feed to them.

FACT: Harness Racing isn't travelling that well (barring NSW). Any fee must be diluted over the entire participant population (something mentioned many times but you seem to continually ignore that) so that it does not mean one less horse is purchased. This $5k fee WILL lead to less horses being purchased net.

The Breeders will argue that the plan will be to replenish those Kiwis that would otherwise have come over, BUT - they play a dangerous game of losing owners / owners reducing their interest in the sport.

What makes me laught is the rank stupidity that so many in harness racing exhibit. It is like Peter VLandys whom steadfastly believes that if you ban all competition from the TABs (wiping out corporate bookmakers and betting exchanges), every single betting dollar would migrate to the TAB dollar for dollar.

It seems just as many think if you make it harder for people to afford the affordable end of the Kiwi market, they will simply transfer their purchasing to the domestic market horse for horse. Well I think we have some news - you are sadly deluded.

Thats harness racing.

[aussiebreno]

Thought it was pretty obvious It is 75 less horse's that may have been purchased here allowing the breeder to breed better quality through the money they may have made mare's could have been put to better stallion's and better stallion's purchased and/or leased to stand at stud perhap's we might see a few more better credentialled sire's coming out here
Never before has an accountant/business processed the sales BEFORE the cost of sales. Why should breeding be different? Spend first; then recieve the sale.

[aussiebreno]

I mean you don't see owners asking for the stakesmoney before paying the import fee

[aussiebreno]

Most of you don't want people who import horses to pay for this plan, but your not suggesting any viable alternatives. If you come up with something better they might consider it. And don't just think about protecting your own pocket. Don't forget that the Aus harness racing industry has been propping up the kiwis for years now. If they couldn't sell their horses here and come and take our big prize money they would be in big trouble.

Next ANZAC Day can somebody remind me not to play 2 up with a Breeder. Their rules are heads they win, tails I lose.

[mightymo]

I have to jump in here just for a second. Not to argue the merits of what was proposed, but rather to alert some of you as to why action was needed.

Fact 1: Harness racing is dependant upon horses

Fact 2: Harness racing prizemoney is dependent upon turnover derived from racing. Racing requires HORSES

Fact 3: The amount of HORSES being bred each year is dropping at a significant rate

Fact 4: Unless more horses are bred, we will not be able to fill fields and there will be less races which will result in less prizemoney and which will ultimately lead to less owners and harness racing will die a slow, painful death.

In order to address these issues, HRA seeing that we need more horses decided to commission a panel to try and INCREASE THE NUMBER OF AUSTRALIAN FOALS .

Now to date, very few, if any people have argued that the recommendations put forward are not fantastic iniatives. These proposals need to be funded by the INDUSTRY as a whole(breeders, stallion owners and owners). To date, a very small section has voiced their disapproval at some of the suggested measures and that is perfectly fine. My suggestion is that if you dont like something come up with a viable alternative.

Hopefully, this will bring the debate back to the critical issues.

PS - if you feel strongly and have some good ideas, put them in writing. I can assure you that they will be given serious consideration

[mightymo]

How does it make the breeding industry worse off though?

I'm going to guess the answer. Because the Aus bred horses aren't getting purchased.

Well maybe if the Aus Bred horses were bred better they would get purchased. (That probably came out wrong, I am aware NZ have a lot of crap bred horses and Aust has a lot of awesome bred horses)

Let's say Optus can only supply dial up internet. They can't get cranky when people choose to go to Telstra who have broadband. I'm not drinking VB when I can drink Bourbon (or visa versa for some).

yes, Aussie breno that is correct, but guess what. You pay more for a Telstra service than an Optus service and more for bourbon than beer!

[Love Of Courage]

Hello All,

Not sure if it has been mentioned previously, however I would have thought that a sliding fee would have had merit. If you pay 5K on a 10K import this is worse than 5k on a 100k import.Probably a few issues with this but to me seems a little fairer.

I would have thought a good way to help standardbred breeders would be to target some buyers that normally buy thoroughbreds. 50 K is going to get a topline standardbred yearling, but the same money will get a handy thoroughbred.

[aussiebreno]

I have to jump in here just for a second. Not to argue the merits of what was proposed, but rather to alert some of you as to why action was needed.

Fact 1: Harness racing is dependant upon horses yep, so why charge an extra $5000 for these horses.

Fact 2: Harness racing prizemoney is dependent upon turnover derived from racing. Racing requires HORSES Yep, so why charge an extra $5000 for these horses?

Fact 3: The amount of HORSES being bred each year is dropping at a significant rate There is too many possibilities for this for me to go into.

Fact 4: Unless more horses are bred, we will not be able to fill fields and there will be less races which will result in less prizemoney and which will ultimately lead to less owners and harness racing will die a slow, painful death. You have started to make inferences and opinion here despite prefacing your comments as FACT. Lessened field and less horses = more chances of winning; which will cycle in more horses being introduced through breeding/purchases. Take NSW for example. With the increased prizemoney and trainers coming to the region yes there may be more horses and fuller fields but this isnt promoting or particularly useful for hobby trainers. The full fields will push small time particpants out. (VVV thats called the supply/demand gravitating towards the market equillbrium right?). Some small time hobby trainers have made a killing recently and been able to purchase more horses but that will slow down soon.

In order to address these issues, HRA seeing that we need more horses decided to commission a panel to try and INCREASE THE NUMBER OF AUSTRALIAN FOALS .

Now to date, very few, if any people have argued that the recommendations put forward are not fantastic iniatives. These proposals need to be funded by the INDUSTRY as a whole(breeders, stallion owners and owners). To date, a very small section has voiced their disapproval at some of the suggested measures and that is perfectly fine. My suggestion is that if you dont like something come up with a viable alternative.

Hopefully, this will bring the debate back to the critical issues.

PS - if you feel strongly and have some good ideas, put them in writing. I can assure you that they will be given serious consideration
If foal numbers are down then doesn't that mean demand is down? If the demand was there the foals would be being purchased. Another point saying demand is down is that even with lower foal numbers breeders are still complaining of low sale prices. So if MORE foals are born under this initiative then breeders will lose out more as supply will outweight demand too heavily and sale prices will go down. Either the industry and overpopulated or consumer demand needs to increase.
They are trying to increase consumer demand of Aust foals by taxing imports. Yes this will work. But the side affects are not worth it (a stagnant breed, a fishbowl)
The other way to increase demand is create a better product. This will create a better breed of horse. Side affects will be increase costs for breeders.
Another alternative is for breeders to accept lower prices. But this means breeders lose out on sales and the breed is stagnant.
So my conclusion is the breeding industry is either over-populated or a dying industry. You don't see the pie shop getting taxed by the sausage roll shop just because the pie shop is more popular. Breed to race; and as I said earlier; if field numbers go down then there will always be owners importing in and trying to take advantage of easier competition.

[aussiebreno]

yes, Aussie breno that is correct, but guess what. You pay more for a Telstra service than an Optus service and more for bourbon than beer!

Yep, and I will pay more for a Village Jasper/5LTW mare then I will for a River Khan/Maiden Mare.
But too many breeders (I'm led to believe you are not one of those though) wonder why their 1LTW win mare being bred to Pass The Mustard didnt fetch 10K.
You're fixed costs are always going to be same, feeding, breaking in, agistment etc but the variable cost and the cost that can help you get rewards isnt valued enough. That being the service fee. And I am well aware even higher end stallions progeny don't fetch much more than their stud fee. I've never seen a studmaster shopping at Vinnies so maybe service fees are too high? What are your thoughts

[mango]

Hi Mightymo

Fact 1: Harness Rcaing is dependant on horses. By adding a $5k import fee could lessen the number of imports which means less horses racing.

Fact 2: Harness Racing prizemoney is dependant on turnover derived from racing. Racing require's horses. This is why we need imports to fill fields.

Fact 3: The number of horses being bred each year is dropping at a significant rate. I think service fee's have been partly to blame for this and i commend the stud's for there reduction in fee's. I also think a payment plan would be the way to help assist mare owner's breed more as paying 3 service fee's at once is costly maybe studs could say pay 1 now 1 in 3 months and the 3rd 90 day's of foaling date.

Fact 4: I agree fully

These proposals need to be funded by the industry as a whole (Breeder's, stallion owner, owners)

So when i look at the proposal i read that there is approx 600 imports per year which with these new fee's will equate to $1,702,843 to this breeding fund. But i also read Stallion Registration is $587,952 where in the 09/10 season live foal service's were $16.3mil. What else do studs and stallion owner's contribute to the industry because if people expect import fee's to rise to that level i think owner's will be asking the question why arn't the studs/stallion owner's matching it.

[The Big Mile]

Mightymo wrote:

I like this idea of coloured responses :) Thank you for coming along and enaging in this.

Now to date, very few, if any people have argued that the recommendations put forward are not fantastic iniatives. These proposals need to be funded by the INDUSTRY as a whole(breeders, stallion owners and owners). To date, a very small section has voiced their disapproval at some of the suggested measures and that is perfectly fine. My suggestion is that if you dont like something come up with a viable alternative.

Lets put this in perspective Mightymo shall we. Of course you are going to be showered with compliments and praise, because the claer majority of breeders will be cock-a-hoop because they see their costs potentially go down. Why wouldn't you be happy. The fact that it comes at the expense of another group within in the indsutry doesn't matter to those doing cartwheels. so long as their costs are lowered, to hell where it comes from.

For the sake of alternatives, can you do us a favour.

The panel obviously explored a whole plethora of different potential funding options / scenarios. To come up with the one in your final recommendation, you would think that several options / scenarios were unable to be pursued.

I am wondering if you could list these and the reasons as to why they were not made part of the final recommendation.

I would be very interested in to the reasoning as to why there was such brick wall stance to some funding being sourced from 'within' the breeding industry. Maybe you could enlighten us.?

Hopefully, this will bring the debate back to the critical issues.

Now Mightymo I hope you are not attempting to trivialise the fact that there is a $5000 Import Fee being pushed forward as part of the final recommendation? Maybe trivial to some, but certainly not to others. Critical issues for some might not be critical issues for others and by the way I reckon I could put forward a pretty good argument as to why the Import Fee actually contradicts some of what you are trying to achieve from what is written above.

In fact, I think parts of 5.1 in your paper contradicts part 5.6? Especially the first two lines of 5.6.

PS - if you feel strongly and have some good ideas, put them in writing. I can assure you that they will be given serious consideration

'....thank you for your submission but we have already decided to go with an import fee....'

[gregcattell]

bring back sires stakes races where you do not have to pay $287 each year to be elledgable breeders challange & state bred bonus races it is not just service fees its all other cost for horse elledgability races owners/breeders have to pay to get top $
for there horses when they sell

[Greg Hando]

If foal numbers are down then doesn't that mean demand is down? If the demand was there the foals would be being purchased. Another point saying demand is down is that even with lower foal numbers breeders are still complaining of low sale prices. So if MORE foals are born under this initiative then breeders will lose out more as supply will outweight demand too heavily and sale prices will go down. Either the industry and overpopulated or consumer demand needs to increase.
They are trying to increase consumer demand of Aust foals by taxing imports. Yes this will work. But the side affects are not worth it (a stagnant breed, a fishbowl)
The other way to increase demand is create a better product. This will create a better breed of horse. Side affects will be increase costs for breeders.
Another alternative is for breeders to accept lower prices. But this means breeders lose out on sales and the breed is stagnant.
So my conclusion is the breeding industry is either over-populated or a dying industry. You don't see the pie shop getting taxed by the sausage roll shop just because the pie shop is more popular. Breed to race; and as I said earlier; if field numbers go down then there will always be owners importing in and trying to take advantage of easier competition.

Refer to no #54 is this what you mean by producing a better product.You say if the demand was there the foal's would be purchased. if the demand is not there to buy the foal's then why are we importing as many NZ horse's ?
Just a bit confused by what you mean

[gutwagon]

600 imported horses adding $1.7million to the fund each year.
The report fails to take into account that this figure may drop because of the increased fee. If only 300 come next year thats only $850,000. They don't say what they would do if this happened .
$16 million spent on service fees. I agree that the stallion owners could contribute more to this fund. I think many stallions are over priced. I don't think any of them are worth more than $5000. But people keep sending their mares to the $10,000+ stallions so the price will stay up.
Some of you are saying we need to improve our breed, we use most of the same stallions as nz breeders now, so how do we improve our breed ? I know you will say stop breeding with rubbish mares. I'm sure NZ has plenty of rubbish mares also, it's just that we only see the better NZ horses over here. The rubbish is culled and doesn't make it to Aus. Even Mark Purdon has started coming to our sales and has been very successful with his purchases.
From what I can see the only reason NSW harness racing is doing ok is because of the sale of Harold Park, and that was just lucky that land values have incresed. The 1400m track at Menangle was also a great idea, so was getting rid of V"Landys.

[The Big Mile]

Hello All,

Not sure if it has been mentioned previously, however I would have thought that a sliding fee would have had merit. If you pay 5K on a 10K import this is worse than 5k on a 100k import.Probably a few issues with this but to me seems a little fairer.

Hey Love Of Courage. Yes on face value it would appear that a tiered or sliding scale of Import Fee would at least appear more equitable amongst those getting slugged.

Maybe mightymo could inform us why this wasn't considered so everyone is clear?

I know the answer but feel it is high time for the panel to let us know the alternative funding models explored and why they were rejected, just like a tiered system being rejected in favour of a flat fee.

[aussiebreno]

Refer to no #54 is this what you mean by producing a better product.You say if the demand was there the foal's would be purchased. if the demand is not there to buy the foal's then why are we importing as many NZ horse's ?
Just a bit confused by what you mean
Demand for an inferior product (some Aust foals) isn't parallel with demand for superior product (some imports).
If I go down to Harvey Norman to buy a big screen TV lets say 60inches, the $5000 tax may mean I change my mind about it (eg I won't buy the import). But I will simply I will go without the TV; rather than buying a small 5inch tv (eg I wont buy any horses at all instead of downgrading to the Aust foal).
The imports and foals are two different markets with two different demands.

[aussiebreno]

bring back sires stakes races where you do not have to pay $287 each year to be elledgable breeders challange & state bred bonus races it is not just service fees its all other cost for horse elledgability races owners/breeders have to pay to get top $
for there horses when they sell
I'm not the best at spelling but your butchering of the word eligible sums up that post.

[smithy]

liking your last post gutwagon

the MAJOR thing i think breeders aren't getting here, is that imported NZ horses are for the majority - up and going, mature, highly exposed form wise and experienced horses - this is a different PRODUCT to what breeders are producing to be sold at auction or prebreaking, so you can't say demand will be switched straight from one to the other

trainers are always going to push hard for kiwi's because they are getting training fee's straight away and a going horse to race - bar fitzpatricks in nsw very trainers can muster the number and quality of youngsters required to make a mark in classic races to be worth their time

[smithy]

bring back sires stakes races where you do not have to pay $287 each year to be elledgable breeders challange & state bred bonus races it is not just service fees its all other cost for horse elledgability races owners/breeders have to pay to get top $
for there horses when they sell

firstly - download google chrome as a web browser it has a spell check

second - your post has given me an alternative idea to pay for certificate scheme... DOUBLE ALL PAY UP FEES FOR STATE BRED CLASSICS, using the same ideology as the current paper this increased cost will just be absorbed without question and demand will actually increase despite these fees slugging people

i figure with a doubling of all pay up fees ($550) for nsw breeders challenge, you now will win 5k for your first win and 6k to the nominator for the win.. and thats not even including the left over to boost the finals/heats series

[justdoit]

I need help with this.

We would like 2.1 million a year? OK, .
How many fee's /taxes are payed industry wide each year(the number of, not the cost) example:trainer licence, foal reg, import tax,etc answer?__________.
Now the individual total number(the number of, not the cost). example:trainers licence 100, foal reg 4000, import tax, etc answer?__________. 2.1mil divided by this number?
The 2.1mil should be collected industry wide, if the resulting benefit is industry wide.

[gutwagon]

@ aussiebreno, my down market Aussie horse has beaten many upmarket NZ horses.
It take patience and for sight to breed your own good horses or pick them out at a sale. Buying going horses from nz is for impatient people after quick returns.
If there were any Victorian politicians on the panel they would have recommended more speed cameras to pay for the scheme.
You can get spell check from this site, most of them give American spelling. Those bloody stallion owners must run them !

[aussiebreno]

600 imported horses adding $1.7million to the fund each year.
The report fails to take into account that this figure may drop because of the increased fee. If only 300 come next year thats only $850,000. They don't say what they would do if this happened . Agree
$16 million spent on service fees. I agree that the stallion owners could contribute more to this fund. I think many stallions are over priced. I don't think any of them are worth more than $5000. But people keep sending their mares to the $10,000+ stallions so the price will stay up. Which shows demand for stallions is high, yet come sales time breeders are crying poor so demand for the foals once born is low. This to me says the breeding industry is overpopulated.
Some of you are saying we need to improve our breed, we use most of the same stallions as nz breeders now, so how do we improve our breed ? I know you will say stop breeding with rubbish mares. I'm sure NZ has plenty of rubbish mares also, it's just that we only see the better NZ horses over here. The rubbish is culled and doesn't make it to Aus. Even Mark Purdon has started coming to our sales and has been very successful with his purchases.Yeah exactly, we don't see the rubbish Kiwis - so I am not saying they have a stronger breed. But, if we replace our rubbish with good Kiwis then that is an improvement for Aust breed.
From what I can see the only reason NSW harness racing is doing ok is because of the sale of Harold Park, and that was just lucky that land values have incresed. The 1400m track at Menangle was also a great idea, so was getting rid of V"Landys. True, but land value was always going to increase, not luck.
/Post

[smithy]

@ aussiebreno, my down market Aussie horse has beaten many upmarket NZ horses.
It take patience and for sight to breed your own good horses or pick them out at a sale. Buying going horses from nz is for impatient people after quick returns.

ask lance justice and gary hall if they agree with you

[aussiebreno]

liking your last post gutwagon

the MAJOR thing i think breeders aren't getting here, is that imported NZ horses are for the majority - up and going, mature, highly exposed form wise and experienced horses - this is a different PRODUCT to what breeders are producing to be sold at auction or prebreaking, so you can't say demand will be switched straight from one to the other

trainers are always going to push hard for kiwi's because they are getting training fee's straight away and a going horse to race - bar fitzpatricks in nsw very trainers can muster the number and quality of youngsters required to make a mark in classic races to be worth their time
Agree smithy!

I need help with this.

We would like 2.1 million a year? OK, .
How many fee's /taxes are payed industry wide each year(the number of, not the cost) example:trainer licence, foal reg, import tax,etc answer?__________.
Now the individual total number(the number of, not the cost). example:trainers licence 100, foal reg 4000, import tax, etc answer?__________. 2.1mil divided by this number?
The 2.1mil should be collected industry wide, if the resulting benefit is industry wide.
See how much f***ing around this one part of the industry means for the whole industry. Not worth it imo. Using your idea (not criticising just making a light hearted comment) come 6 months time participants will be up in arms. Then a prizemoney increase of the %%% will take place and we will be back to problem A lol!!

@ aussiebreno, my down market Aussie horse has beaten many upmarket NZ horses.
It take patience and for sight to breed your own good horses or pick them out at a sale. Buying going horses from nz is for impatient people after quick returns.
I bet it has and I bet there other stories similar to yours. Some people like burning cash! But at the end of the day whether its right or wrong the demand is where the demand is.

[gutwagon]

Victoria announced a stake increase of around $2 million in stakes for next season. Most other states will be increasing stakes next season. Why didn't they just take the money for the scheme from this increase? That shouldn't upset to many people and that spreads it across the industry.

[aussiebreno]

Victoria announced a stake increase of around $2 million in stakes for next season. Most other states will be increasing stakes next season. Why didn't they just take the money for the scheme from this increase? That shouldn't upset to many people and that spreads it across the industry.
Ummmmm because they are to different entities.

[mango]

Breeders do have to bare some of the problem's on themselves, you see a breeder with 3 average bred mare's and he send's one to Art Major and can't afford to send the other 2 out to stud that year and then it's not worth taking to the sale cause he would be lucky to get his service fee back. Now that breeder would of been better off sending 3 mare's to say Live or Die for the same cost of Art Major and have 3 chance's of winning money at the race's. I think there are a lot of breeders today who think there mare's are better than they are and these people need educating on this and maybe if they understand and breed 3 for the price of one maybe breeding number's will pick up.

[aussiebreno]

Good one Mango!

[Greg Hando]

From gutwagon Some of you are saying we need to improve our breed, we use most of the same stallions as nz breeders now, so how do we improve our breed ? I know you will say stop breeding with rubbish mares. I'm sure NZ has plenty of rubbish mares also, it's just that we only see the better NZ horses over here. The rubbish is culled and doesn't make it to Aus. Even Mark Purdon has started coming to our sales and has been very successful with his purchases.
From Breno
Yeah exactly, we don't see the rubbish Kiwis - so I am not saying they have a stronger breed. But, if we replace our rubbish with good Kiwis then that is an improvement for Aust breed.

Yes some NZ horses will improve the breed: Mares will a gelding or colt won't get it done unless the colt is a topliner from a top family and a very fast time .
NZ replaced a lot of their mares with Aussie mares over the year's and now we are paying for it and have to try and play catch up

[The Big Mile]

Spot on Mango.

There are too many breeders whom think because they go to Art Major or Bettors Delight, they automatically have a $25k yearling. Problem is you look at the mare, its track record and so forth and shake your head.

I guess the NBCS is aiming to allow those breeders to go to the top sires, and be able to afford to then send the remaining mares to other sires with the credits.

[smithy]

i feel so so so sorry for the poor breeders who sold yearlings for 20k+ or more, they've only at a minimum doubled their money breeding that horse in 12 months... poor bastards

[aussiebreno]

From gutwagon Some of you are saying we need to improve our breed, we use most of the same stallions as nz breeders now, so how do we improve our breed ? I know you will say stop breeding with rubbish mares. I'm sure NZ has plenty of rubbish mares also, it's just that we only see the better NZ horses over here. The rubbish is culled and doesn't make it to Aus. Even Mark Purdon has started coming to our sales and has been very successful with his purchases.
From Breno
Yeah exactly, we don't see the rubbish Kiwis - so I am not saying they have a stronger breed. But, if we replace our rubbish with good Kiwis then that is an improvement for Aust breed.

Yes some NZ horses will improve the breed: Mares will a gelding or colt won't get it done unless the colt is a topliner from a top family and a very fast time .
NZ replaced a lot of their mares with Aussie mares over the year's and now we are paying for it and have to try and play catch up
Well...yeah correct I agree! I thought it went without saying though. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article962151.ece I thought wrong though!!!

[Greg Hando]

How many do you breed smithy just out of interest and by the way it takes over 2 year's to get that foal to the sales not 12 month's

[Greg Hando]

Well...yeah correct I agree! I thought it went without saying though. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article962151.ece I thought wrong though!!!

He's still a mare though

[smithy]

How many do you breed smithy just out of interest and by the way it takes over 2 year's to get that foal to the sales not 12 month's
i breed a couple mate, but i also own race horses... don't think that i must just hate breeding because i think this paper is stupidity

oh sorry how terrible, 2 years in attempting to make enormous returns... absolute battlers

how can breeders be doing it so tough and yet art major gets full books? is there no other stallion that would be suitable that individual mare?

[aussiebreno]

He's still a mare though
Instead of sending retired geldings to the glue factory (sadly) we can use them as surragotes! That way breeders can race their mare and earn prizemoney and still breed. Winning idea or what haha

[Greg Hando]

i breed a couple mate, but i also own race horses... don't think that i must just hate breeding because i think this paper is stupidity

oh sorry how terrible, 2 years in attempting to make enormous returns... absolute battlers

how can breeders be doing it so tough and yet art major gets full books? is there no other stallion that would be suitable that individual mare?

No don't think you hate breeding or you wouldnt have bought a mare
Yes their probably is other stallion's for the mare but i suppose they wan't to breed to the best they can afford.
Not all breeder's are loaded from the money they make from horse's a majority are actually battler's and i'm one of them. What some forget is to have a close look at their mare's and price the foal's they want to sell accordingly as a lot don't do that they put on telephone number price's then wonder why they can't sell If they went to a sire that was cheaper they may well make a higher percentage of profit on their initial outlay.

[Greg Hando]

Instead of sending retired geldings to the glue factory (sadly) we can use them as surragotes! That way breeders can race their mare and earn prizemoney and still breed. Winning idea or what haha

It would be good i could get rid of the old girl, get a bloke and make money instead of spending it ha ha

[mightymo]

i feel so so so sorry for the poor breeders who sold yearlings for 20k+ or more, they've only at a minimum doubled their money breeding that horse in 12 months... poor bastards

Smithy you are living in dream land.

if you use a 5K stallion, you need to get 15000 at the sales just to break even!

Now go look at the sales, and see how many horses made money for their breeder.

Ill give you a scary fact - between 75-80% of foals sold at the most recent sales, LOST money for their breeder.

[mightymo]

If foal numbers are down then doesn't that mean demand is down? If the demand was there the foals would be being purchased. Another point saying demand is down is that even with lower foal numbers breeders are still complaining of low sale prices. So if MORE foals are born under this initiative then breeders will lose out more as supply will outweight demand too heavily and sale prices will go down. Either the industry and overpopulated or consumer demand needs to increase.
They are trying to increase consumer demand of Aust foals by taxing imports. Yes this will work. But the side affects are not worth it (a stagnant breed, a fishbowl)
The other way to increase demand is create a better product. This will create a better breed of horse. Side affects will be increase costs for breeders.
Another alternative is for breeders to accept lower prices. But this means breeders lose out on sales and the breed is stagnant.
So my conclusion is the breeding industry is either over-populated or a dying industry. You don't see the pie shop getting taxed by the sausage roll shop just because the pie shop is more popular. Breed to race; and as I said earlier; if field numbers go down then there will always be owners importing in and trying to take advantage of easier competition.

Aussie breno i dont think you actually understand the purpose behind the panel being put together in the first place. it has nothing to do with increasing sale prices for commercial breeders. 93% of foals bred are bred to be raced by their owner/breeder. They are hobbyists. The problem we have is that a huge number of hobby breeders are no longer breeding. We NEED them to stay in the game

[justdoit]

You are forgiven aussiebreno:)
Peoples hobbies are the first in line to cease when a strain on finances comes around.
All the great stallions that we now have in Australia are still over priced for the market place?)/(&%$"· haha is that new to anyone?

[aussiebreno]

Aussie breno i dont think you actually understand the purpose behind the panel being put together in the first place. it has nothing to do with increasing sale prices for commercial breeders. 93% of foals bred are bred to be raced by their owner/breeder. They are hobbyists. The problem we have is that a huge number of hobby breeders are no longer breeding. We NEED them to stay in the game

Lessened expense (of the credits) means breeders SHOULD use the benefit of going to a better stallion (if aim is to breed to sell) and sale price will increase for that breeder.
Making an import of $5000 will draw down the number of imports (or didnt the scheme think of this). Because the imports (which someone said is only 600 a year which is a SMALL number in terms of total foals per year) are higher to purchase I believe the scheme also wanted the effect that those owners buying imports will take their cash to the yearling sales. More buyers drives up sale price. But as I've said earlier they are two different markets and the demand isn't paralel.
For the breed to race; see Mango's post #81 in the thread.
You say 93% of foals are bred to race. Why aren't people breeding to race then? Maybe the rewards are not there. Prizemoney needs to increase. A $5000 import fee is not going to increase prizemoney. Breeding credits probably will increase the number of foals born; but the funding of it is a joke. Don't breeders get 5% stakemoney? How about they rush that off to the bank and save it for when they want to breed. Or make it an increased figure to say 7.5%.

[mightymo]

It looks like you have all the solutions.

Increase prizemoney you say. Well , that's a novel idea. I doubt anyone thought of that one before.

Now, why dont you tell us how we increase prizemoney....

[The Big Mile]

It looks like you have all the solutions.

Increase prizemoney you say. Well , that's a novel idea. I doubt anyone thought of that one before.

Now, why dont you tell us how we increase prizemoney....

Why dont you tell us the avenues pursued in terms of where funding for the NBCS was coming from.

Tell us what was shot down in flames and what wasn't.

If we know all the avenues explored, we might be able to look further afield in the attempt to get a solution.

[mightymo]

Somewhere in this thread it was mentioned that studs should be contributing more. Well therein lies a very big part of the problem. Of the $16M odd dollars spent on service fees each year, a HUGE proportion is simply going back to the US stallion owners. As things stand, the Aust studs are not making a whole lot of money as many of the deals to get the top class stallions were done on significantly unfavourable terms.

[aussiebreno]

It looks like you have all the solutions.

Increase prizemoney you say. Well , that's a novel idea. I doubt anyone thought of that one before.

Now, why dont you tell us how we increase prizemoney....
I don't believe there needs to be a solution. Individual breeders need to increase their product, or as a collective the breeding industry needs to accept its shrinking because at the moment buyer pattern shows it is overpopulated. There is no problem that needs fixing.

And now we just go in a circle. You will come saying but foal numbers are down, race field are going down. Well if they go down I will go around the circle again and say that less fields mean more chance of winning meaning people will buy horses in search of that win; which will again naturally increase the breeding industry.

Breeders need to realise the demand is not there and live with it. Not steal from somewhere else.

[mightymo]

oh dear. breno your attitude is part of the problem the industry faces. Rather do nothing and watch the industry die. With your view we would be racing for ribbons in 10 years

PS - do you actually own/breed any horses

[aussiebreno]

Somewhere in this thread it was mentioned that studs should be contributing more. Well therein lies a very big part of the problem. Of the $16M odd dollars spent on service fees each year, a HUGE proportion is simply going back to the US stallion owners. As things stand, the Aust studs are not making a whole lot of money as many of the deals to get the top class stallions were done on significantly unfavourable terms.
Flipping through the trotguide this week I read something simple but brilliant. The current Menangle Club was congratulating its forefathers who had the nous to BUY instead of LEASE land at Harold Park. Buying > Leasing goes for everything. Studs probably don't get access to farm management loans; but if they do they should use them if not they should lobby to get them. They will be so much better off if they have the money to buy stallions rather than rent.

[gutwagon]

Ummmmm because they are to different entities.

Your spell check didn't work very well there aussiebreno, two not to .
I think you just pointed out one of the major problems here. Unless all the states and bodies work together and join together we face an uphill battle.

[aussiebreno]

oh dear. breno your attitude is part of the problem the industry faces. Rather do nothing and watch the industry die. With your view we would be racing for ribbons in 10 years

PS - do you actually own/breed any horses
What part of if racing fields drop off it encourages people to buy/breed more horses as winning become easier do you not understand? Numbers will not go down long term.
Imports are a strength for the industry. Why do we have to lose strengths to support a weakness?

No I have never owned or bred. Because I understand it is a hobby and for entertainment; not to make a quid. At this stage of my life I don't have the money to enjoy such entertainment.
Harness racing will never be a business for the majority of participants; the only thing that can make it a business is big prizemoney from outside sources (TAB, a brainwashing campaign that turns Gen Y to harness racing), not taking money from one set of participants and sharing it with another set.

[aussiebreno]

Your spell check didn't work very well there aussiebreno, two not to .
I think you just pointed out one of the major problems here. Unless all the states and bodies work together and join together we face an uphill battle.
A national controlling body that actually controls; or the states all coming together has one. Are you new to harness racing!!!!!
But yes it would provide unison, consistency and a stronger force. Harness racing seems the only thing in Australia still seperated into states.

[gutwagon]

@ aussiebreno less horses means less races and less prize money paid out and less turnover. They dont just run races with smaller fields, they scrap the race ! Small fields = less turnover.
If punters see a field of only 5 or 6 runners they just move on to the next race.

[aussiebreno]

@ aussiebreno less horses means less races and less prize money paid out and less turnover. They dont just run races with smaller fields, they scrap the race ! Small fields = less turnover.
If punters see a field of only 5 or 6 runners they just move on to the next race.
I don't. That way I'm guaranteed to finish in the top 5 or 6 rather than 10th as I usually do.
If this situation was to arise it would pick up again within the next 3 or 4 years. We are no where near that situation though.

[smithy]

oh dear. breno your attitude is part of the problem the industry faces. Rather do nothing and watch the industry die. With your view we would be racing for ribbons in 10 years

PS - do you actually own/breed any horses
but with your solution mightymo the breeders will be rich for 5/6 years and by the then the owners will be broke or left sick of supporting the broodmare funding and there will be the same problem again

i suggested that pay ups to schemes that already pay out 1 win bonuses to owners AND breeders were increased in size... but i havent heard anyone comment on that, maybe because breeders would have to foot the bill equally with owners

[smithy]

@ aussiebreno less horses means less races and less prize money paid out and less turnover. They dont just run races with smaller fields, they scrap the race ! Small fields = less turnover.
If punters see a field of only 5 or 6 runners they just move on to the next race.

don't start on puntiing - we'll be here all year

[gutwagon]

It takes 3 years from when you send your mare to stud until you have a 2yo ready to race. If services are down this year it wont effect racing for 3 years. Services have been droping , if they continue to drop we will have a shortage of horses in 2 or 3 years. We can't just sit on our hands and do nothing just because things seem fine at the moment. I am pleased they are trying something now before it is a major problem.

[mightymo]

but with your solution mightymo the breeders will be rich for 5/6 years and by the then the owners will be broke or left sick of supporting the broodmare funding and there will be the same problem again

i suggested that pay ups to schemes that already pay out 1 win bonuses to owners AND breeders were increased in size... but i havent heard anyone comment on that, maybe because breeders would have to foot the bill equally with owners

Breeders getting rich?????

I really dont understand how it is remotely possible to come up with that conclusion. This is not the gallops!

The whole idea behind the NBCS is that OWNERS of fillies and mares, decide to breed from their mare and race the progeny. This has noting to do with sales. As has been mentioned numerous times before, this is about getting the 93% hobby breeders to continue to breed

[aussiebreno]

They obviously are continuing to breed if they make up 93% of them. 93% would be a huge number of foals per year. The problem isn't a small 600 imports a year, so why tax imports?
You can't just come up with a poor idea and use it; just because the other ideas are poorer.

[smithy]

Breeders getting rich?????

I really dont understand how it is remotely possible to come up with that conclusion. This is not the gallops!

The whole idea behind the NBCS is that OWNERS of fillies and mares, decide to breed from their mare and race the progeny. This has noting to do with sales. As has been mentioned numerous times before, this is about getting the 93% hobby breeders to continue to breed

but my idea is about doing exactly the same thing but the cost is on everyone and the benefit is for everyone - your solution is the majority of costs on one individual sector and the benefits to another individual sector

as part of that survey did you ask why fillies weren't bred or raced? and was being not good enough an option for either? and how many people answered this way

aussiebreno - great post, exactly right

[mightymo]

They obviously are continuing to breed if they make up 93% of them. 93% would be a huge number of foals per year. The problem isn't a small 600 imports a year, so why tax imports?
You can't just come up with a poor idea and use it; just because the other ideas are poorer.

back to school boys

6000 foals becomes 5000 becomes 4000. the percentage then will be irrelevant. We simply wont have enough foals and prizemoney will be greatly reduced, but that doesnt affect you breno, as you dont own a single horse!!

[aussiebreno]

Mighymo you continue to ignore, less horses means less to beat home and more chance of winning = people want to get horses as they have more chance of winning. So breeding will increase.
Mighymo; if there were no horses and no races I wouldn't get to watch the sport I love and have posted on about 20times in the last 24 hours. But yeah it won't affect me.
And maybe that 6000>5000>4000 becomes smaller because the demand isn't there. If the demand isn't there it doesn't matter what initiatives you have. To increase demand breed better. But you want to make this about breeding to race so that point is a bit negligent so admit the breeding industry is over populated at 6000 and needs to drop to 4000 to meet proper demand levels.

[mightymo]

you are very wrong. For most owners, its not about winning. Its about the excitement of racing a horse and the possibility of winning. No one buys horses thinking they are going to make money...

[The Big Mile]

you are very wrong. For most owners, its not about winning. Its about the excitement of racing a horse and the possibility of winning. No one buys horses thinking they are going to make money...

Wow. Some real sunday spice. I agree totally with Mightymo on this one and it is a pretty important point to note. HOWEVER, owners aren't going to piss money away for the sake of it. The desire to minimise losses will always be forefront in owners decision making.

Thats why an import fee will act as a barrier to entry, for it will immediately decrease the ability to minimise losses.

The more likely an owner is to minimise losses, the more likely they are to re-invest. If you love the sport like many do, then for a couple of grand people might be willing to cop it as the cost of their entertainment.

This is why this ridiculous impost is bad for the sport. It erodes the above.

Also - what is the crux of the NBCS:

It will benefit the WHOLE industry.

Therefore the WHOLE INUDSTRY NEEDS TO PAY. Very simple. Not a minority group whom do more for racing than has been alluded to on here (and in some sense, trivialised by the panels report).

[mightymo]

agree 100% - owners, breeders, stallion owners all need to contribute

[The Big Mile]

Aussiebreno / Smithy - do you agree with the credit scheme and if so, do you think that it is right and fair for the whole industry to pay (where costs are diluted and pretty insignificant)?

[montana]

the credit scheme imo is a good initiative and is on the right path. perhaps there could be issues down the track where it can be exploited by stallion owners and the prices of the stallions may go up disproportionately with the market. while i dont agree with the entire report i can see they do probably want to put the the import duties up not only to fund the scheme but to support Australian made. the 5k a horse wont make any difference to the top end of the market but it will to the bottom - mid end and many less horses will be imported and therefore they wont have enough to fund the scheme and additional funding will have to come from elsewhere.

Perhaps they should look at a scheme where you can apply credits to buy yearlings/weanlings at the sales or privately that way the whole breeding industry could benefit from the potential market inflation rather than just the stallion owners.

[montana]

It will benefit the WHOLE industry.

Therefore the WHOLE INUDSTRY NEEDS TO PAY. Very simple. Not a minority group whom do more for racing than has been alluded to on here (and in some sense, trivialised by the panels report).

you are correct.

however i can see where they are coming from , if they slow down imports perhaps more people will support the australian breeding industry as well as it partially funding this new scheme. i think 5k is too much though because it basically takes out the bottom end of the market and there is definitely a market for people wanting to buy a cheap up and running horse and the aussies are not sellers so this will be an issue.

a mix of an increased import fee , imported stallion owners contributions and owner breeder contributions would seem like a more logical way forward.

[eliteblood]

Perhaps they should look at a scheme where you can apply credits to buy yearlings/weanlings at the sales or privately that way the whole breeding industry could benefit from the potential market inflation rather than just the stallion owners.

Montana, you have fallen for the common misconception that the stallion owners will be the main beneficiaries. It is not the case -the broodmare owners will be the main beneficiaries. The stallion owners will derive some benefit but only equal to the marginal difference in breeding decisions resulting from the scheme. In most cases, the mare would have been bred from in any case and the broodmare owner will simply get his service fee for nothing rather then have to pay for it. In this instance, the most likely outcome IMO, the stallion owner has derived nothing extra.

[smithy]

the big mile - no i dont agree with the idea of the credit scheme for a couple of reasons,
we already have a stack of bonuses available for breeding horses
adding onto number 1 i dont think we need anymore bills added onto what it already costs to breed a horse and make it available for big money races
i think the bonuses will only encourage low quality stock being increased - mainly because the lower quality horses have low resale value and a lower potential for recouping their costs, less chance of making the races due to genetic issues being passed along, so obviously when things get tougher breeders will cull these mares, the credit scheme will bring these mares back into rotation
if it is as suggested on here, a participation scheme, it will encourage lower quality horses to be flogged around to gain these credits, this raises welfare issues and the general 'look' of the industry where horses are being beaten 50m to gain a few credits before retirement

so i think the first thing that needs to be done is race programming, begin with spilting metro class races in separate sex races (same as the lordship and ladyship races already programmed) as i believe these are the quality horses that should be encouraged to keep racing and if these races stand up gradually push the splitting of races down through the grades (top down)

i totally agree with other recommendations in the paper, taxation relief, education, transparency in costing, changes in handicapping

[smithy]

MONTANA - will you personally downscale your nz buying if it costs you 5k per horse,
and would just import more fillies from nz,
breed more
or purchase aussie horses

[montana]

MONTANA - will you personally downscale your nz buying if it costs you 5k per horse,
and would just import more fillies from nz,
breed more
or purchase aussie horses

well i bought 10 fillies last year so i am set for awhile :-)

now that i live on a property my long term intention is to breed more , over the years i have changed my strategies for no real reasons other than to try different things.

as far as costs go well this is my hobby and if i want to be honest with myself if i actually looked how much it all cost me i think i would take up playing chess instead.

to answer your question though i wouldnt buy a 20k horse if i had also to get it to AU and pay a 5k import fee , but i would for a 50k plus horse. i could probably live with a 10% surcharge capped at 5k.....

[montana]

Montana, you have fallen for the common misconception that the stallion owners will be the main beneficiaries. It is not the case -the broodmare owners will be the main beneficiaries. The stallion owners will derive some benefit but only equal to the marginal difference in breeding decisions resulting from the scheme. In most cases, the mare would have been bred from in any case and the broodmare owner will simply get his service fee for nothing rather then have to pay for it. In this instance, the most likely outcome IMO, the stallion owner has derived nothing extra.

maybe , but imo i think there would be no incentive for stallion owners to drop their fees such as they did this year if this scheme was in place. also i think broodmare owners would be more likely to select higher priced stallions if they are getting their fees fully or partially supplemented by this scheme. i can see there is obvious upside for the broodmare owners i am just saying there is for the stallion owners too.

[triplev123]

there will be no fee increase! breeders do not run harness racing.. you are not bigger then the game

HRNSW have just changed the rules to let MORE nz bred horses in the nsw breeding scheme, clearly they have different priorities to this breeding paper

They have indeed changed the eligibility of the NSW Breeders Challenge to allow foals at the foot of imported NZ mares to be made eligible... and they do indeed have different priorities but I'll hazard a guess & suggest that they are somewhat different to those that you may be thinking of.
Instead, they've done so because they've quite rightly assumed that such mares will be at the upper end of the scale...nobody in their right mind is going to shell out the amount of $$$ required in order to ship over over lesser lights. Having been imported it is rightly expected that those mares, for the most part, will subsequently remain in NSW and so bolster the quality of the State's broodmare band.

[The Big Mile]

you are correct.
i think 5k is too much though because it basically takes out the bottom end of the market and there is definitely a market for people wanting to buy a cheap up and running horse and the aussies are not sellers so this will be an issue.

Hey Montana. Good to see someone with the interest in the sport like you have getting that oar wet. You (and I am sure you will admit this yourself) play at the 'top end' of the Kiwi market. The lower echelons are so important as it is the cheapest possible entry point into the sport barring sourcing horses locally. We have flogged it to death as to why we don't source them locally, so the next entry point is a very important one. The inequality of the import fee as a flat fee for mine is the biggest sticking point.


a mix of an increased import fee , imported stallion owners contributions and owner breeder contributions would seem like a more logical way forward.

Some interesting documentation has emerged re the legality of the import fee overall so it will be interesting to see how it plays out. Would HATE to see something introduced like an import fee with the caveat 'Take us to court then' hoping the prospect of legal fees will stop that happening at the Aussie buyers end of the market.

Everyone needs to contribute. Been the argument from post 1. EVERYBODY. Not a select few decided on the whim of committee people whom want to limit decision impact upon their vested interests.

[triplev123]

Another point worth considering: Don't you think that if similar horses could be purchased domestically they would be?

I am sure many, if not all purchasers of horses from NZ would actually like to spend the $5k it costs for transport and associated costs to go straight into 4 legs, a head and a tail.

Problem is many horses for sale in Oz actually lack one of those 3 essentials.


There are 4 main reasons why similar going horses of a given class can be purchased to advantage in NZ and why those same horses are basically not available here in Oz.

(1) Excess production-Way more foals bred in NZ than needed to fill race fields.
(2) The NZ handicapping system- Harsh. Horses basically reach their marks faster.
(3) Lack of racing opportunities in NZ- There are more races in Oz in a single day than there are in 1 week in NZ.
(4) Advantageous Exchange Rate- Ranging between 26-30% up your sleave on any given day.

If those factors were reversed the same horses would be flowing out of Oz into NZ. It's as simple as that.

[The Big Mile]

The stallion owners will derive some benefit but only equal to the marginal difference in breeding decisions resulting from the scheme.

Eliteblood do you really think the impact of the NBCS will be marginal? If this is the case, then why are we bothering going down this path?


In most cases, the mare would have been bred from in any case and the broodmare owner will simply get his service fee for nothing rather then have to pay for it. In this instance, the most likely outcome IMO, the stallion owner has derived nothing extra.

If what you are saying here is true, then the scheme has failed abysmally. The idea is to encourage breeding through NBCS credits, accumulated through a prolonged track career. Maybe this is why the credits cannot be allocated to the owner for the exact reason you mentioned.

The net benefit of the scheme is to pump an additional $2.2 million into service fees. This is where it will end up. How much of that overlaps (in terms of mares whom accumulated credits but would have been bred with anyway) well that is anyones guess and no one will ever know the actual answer, even after looking back on data, let alone looking forward.

This is maybe why credits need to be allocated to lower echelon races. This then will contradict with wanting to ensure improvement of the breed as the scheme effectively entices the quality to be diluted simply to get more foals on the ground. I can see how that is problematic.

I do feel though that to suggest there will be marginal benefit to stallion owners overall from the scheme is a bit short of the mark.

[eliteblood]

The more I think about it, the more dubious I am about its effect in terms of increasing the number of mares bred.
Almost all mares that are good enough to earn a reasonable amount of broodmare credits would have been bred from anyway IMO.
In my case, nothing would change except I would be getting some or all of the service fee paid for me. I suspect that would be the most common scenario. I am sure there will be some additional mares bred and some will also be bred to a better stallion than would otherwise have been the case but I believe the overall breeding impact will be less than what I initially imagined.
I think the scheme would be beneficial in terms of increasing the pool of racemares and therefore the ability of mares to race against their own sex and therefore the earning capacity of mares and therefore the value of fillies. The breeding and the racing segments of our one harness racing industry would both derive some benefits as a result of that.

[triplev123]

Hey TBM,

When you write...
FACT: Australian breeders produce a lot of rubbish.

and then...
FACT: The Import Fee attacks the bottom end of the food chain in terms of NZ purchases. The cheapest point of entry (meaning cheapest horses) are the ones hurt the most.

[VVV] Those points are contradictory because, while I agree wholeheartedly with you in regard to the entry point aspect, the cheapest horses...the entry points...are those which are considered to be the rubbish in NZ.
You can't on one hand come out and berate Oz breeders for producing horses that you don't think are up to standard (QUOTE- Australian breeders produce a lot of rubbish), turn around and shop at Crazy Prices or Chicken Feed for your going concerns in NZ ...then hold those prices up as the yardstick to which Oz Breeders should be selling their yearlings /going horses at.
If Australian Breeders produce so much rubbish, have a look at the last 10 years worth of 2yo & 3yo $ earners here in Oz and make note the % of NZ bred imports that have been able to earn anything like their Oz bred counterparts.

[triplev123]

TBM writes [Lets put this in perspective Mightymo shall we. Of course you are going to be showered with compliments and praise, because the claer majority of breeders will be cock-a-hoop because they see their costs potentially go down.]
That's not quite right mate. In fact, if Breeders avail themselves of NZ based sires their costs WILL go up via the % of the Stallion fee being passed down the line + the fact that a colt foal resulting will cost them more to register. Essentially this plan serves to both actively & tacitly financially nudge breeders towards using Oz based sires.
In fact, I find it more than just somewhat interesting that the venerable committees of the various Oz Standardbred Breeders Associations are NOT out in the streets banging the pot lids on that score as this aspect essentially imposes a restriction on the choices available to their members. Could it be that they're in bed with the Australian based studs?
Nah, perish the thought. Totally independent them. (bullshit, bullshit, bullshit) It reminds me so much of Monty Python's wonderful sketch...Nudge Nudge, Wink. Wink http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ona-RhLfRfc "A nod's as good as a wink to a blind bat eh? Nudge nudge, wink, wink, say no more, say no more."

[triplev123]

Eliteblood do you really think the impact of the NBCS will be marginal? If this is the case, then why are we bothering going down this path?



If what you are saying here is true, then the scheme has failed abysmally. The idea is to encourage breeding through NBCS credits, accumulated through a prolonged track career. Maybe this is why the credits cannot be allocated to the owner for the exact reason you mentioned.

The net benefit of the scheme is to pump an additional $2.2 million into service fees. This is where it will end up. How much of that overlaps (in terms of mares whom accumulated credits but would have been bred with anyway) well that is anyones guess and no one will ever know the actual answer, even after looking back on data, let alone looking forward.

This is maybe why credits need to be allocated to lower echelon races. This then will contradict with wanting to ensure improvement of the breed as the scheme effectively entices the quality to be diluted simply to get more foals on the ground. I can see how that is problematic.

I do feel though that to suggest there will be marginal benefit to stallion owners overall from the scheme is a bit short of the mark.


[VVV] In all seriousness TBM...if you were made aware of the nitty gritty financials behind the majority of these high profile horses & you were then asked if you wanted a piece of the action I can guarentee that it that you would run away screaming. Having been direct & indirect witness to a number of them over recent years...I'd be prepared to swear on a stack of Bibles that nobody out there other than the American syndicates are making any real money out of these Southern Hemisphere rights/shuttle deals.
That is why it is my long & very strongly held belief that the sooner the Australian Breeding Industry moves to a culture of breeding our own sires, the better off we will all be.

[aussiebreno]

you are very wrong. For most owners, its not about winning. Its about the excitement of racing a horse and the possibility of winning. No one buys horses thinking they are going to make money...

If its about excitement of racing and people expect to lose cash (which yeah you're right and when I get the cash I will be part of that group) then why are numbers dropping and why is cash an incentive to stay when you just said cash isn't a motivation for those involved? How queer is that.

[aussiebreno]

[VVV] In all seriousness TBM...if you were made aware of the nitty gritty financials behind the majority of these high profile horses & you were then asked if you wanted a piece of the action I can guarentee that it that you would run away screaming. Having been direct & indirect witness to a number of them over recent years...I'd be prepared to swear on a stack of Bibles that nobody out there other than the American syndicates are making any real money out of these Southern Hemisphere rights/shuttle deals.
That is why it is my long & very strongly held belief that the sooner the Australian Breeding Industry moves to a culture of breeding our own sires, the better off we will all be.
Much love to you VVV.

[mightymo]

why do people buy lotto tickets??

The possibility of winning, or in our case the possiblity of getting a good horse who can win good races/money

[The Big Mile]

If its about excitement of racing and people expect to lose cash (which yeah you're right and when I get the cash I will be part of that group) then why are numbers dropping and why is cash an incentive to stay when you just said cash isn't a motivation for those involved? How queer is that.

Gee Aussiebreno. You had me fooled as I thought you would have been an owner and breeder. You said yourself you are neither.

Would hate to see how involved you got in discussion once you actually dip your toe in the water and speak from experience.

It will be carnage.

[Flashing Red]

Triple V -
I haven't read this whole thread, but the reason why at this stage I would prefer to breed to American sires is because I think, simply, they are still better. I'm not illusioned by 1:47 miles - but what the top horses could do over there, I don't think ours could match it. I mean if Shark Gesture raced her 12 months ago IMHO none of our Grand Circuit horses would have seen where he went. I think Rocknroll Heaven would have made a mess of our Grand Circuit horses too. I think the gap between the Southern and Northern Hemisphere is closing, rapidly, but the gap isn't closed yet.

[aussiebreno]

why do people buy lotto tickets??

The possibility of winning, or in our case the possiblity of getting a good horse who can win good races/money
No need to go to the third umpire and get out the snickometer, it was a clear deflection off the bat and you've been caught out at 1st slip.
Maybe like many umpires you just didn't see it; I asked if money isn't a motivation for owners then why is it being offered as an incentive? The newsagent doesn't give me $4 to get my $5 scratchie.

[The Big Mile]

Hey TBM,

When you write...
FACT: Australian breeders produce a lot of rubbish.

and then...
FACT: The Import Fee attacks the bottom end of the food chain in terms of NZ purchases. The cheapest point of entry (meaning cheapest horses) are the ones hurt the most.

[VVV] Those points are contradictory because, while I agree wholeheartedly with you in regard to the entry point aspect, the cheapest horses...the entry points...are those which are considered to be the rubbish in NZ.
You can't on one hand come out and berate Oz breeders for producing horses that you don't think are up to standard (QUOTE- Australian breeders produce a lot of rubbish), turn around and shop at Crazy Prices or Chicken Feed for your going concerns in NZ ...then hold those prices up as the yardstick to which Oz Breeders should be selling their yearlings /going horses at.
If Australian Breeders produce so much rubbish, have a look at the last 10 years worth of 2yo & 3yo $ earners here in Oz and make note the % of NZ bred imports that have been able to earn anything like their Oz bred counterparts.

Hooked him. You are confusing yourself there VVV.

I said Australian breeders breed a lot of rubbish. You will see if you trawl through other posts that I put it hand in hand with the kinds of mares that they produce with. You conveniently forgot to tie that in but thats ok.

The lower end of the food chain in NZ is purely on expense, it doesn't mean they are badly bred horses and so forth. And by the lower end maybe I should have been more specific - up to $20k NZ (so say rougly $16k australian).

Have a look at the sales catalogue VVV. you are an experienced pedigree man. How many pages -and there are hundreds - where you wouldn't and dont get a bid.

Why so many buybacks at sales?

Outside of that when you look at the Breeders whom breed to race, why is it not economically viable for them to keep going?

[aussiebreno]

Gee Aussiebreno. You had me fooled as I thought you would have been an owner and breeder. You said yourself you are neither.

Would hate to see how involved you got in discussion once you actually dip your toe in the water and speak from experience.

It will be carnage.
I'll probably be saying up the import fee to $10000 and make the breeders percentage to 20% of the prizemoney and call for studs to halve service fees! It is much easier to make logical, rational discussion when you are unattatched and emotionless (you know, like outside reviews they have of footy clubs or business's etc). There's been a couple threads on this forum where I have just as big as an opinion but because it is closer to home I have mellowed my response or not posted in thread at all. And vice versa a couple in hindsight I've been wrong but went over the top!!!

[The Big Mile]

Can I also add:

93% of breeders breed to race. (wasn't it 79%? ) Well it was one of those figures.

If they breed to race, then the expectations they surely must have as owners (which they become once on the track) are exactly the same as all other owners?

That is, they don't expect to finish in front when investing in a racehorse.

I cannot see why there is differentiation. So that 79% or 93% must have the expectation that they will come out behind.

So this whole process is about making up the shortfall.

We are starting to skate into dangerous grounds............

[The Big Mile]

I'll probably be saying up the import fee to $10000 and make the breeders percentage to 20% of the prizemoney and call for studs to halve service fees! It is much easier to make logical, rational discussion when you are unattatched and emotionless (you know, like outside reviews they have of footy clubs or business's etc). There's been a couple threads on this forum where I have just as big as an opinion but because it is closer to home I have mellowed my response or not posted in thread at all. And vice versa a couple in hindsight I've been wrong but went over the top!!!

Aussie fair enough. There isn't any sport that sees vested interest pushed to the forefront like harness racing. It is disgusting how it stifles the sport. Outside views can often be a great leveller.

I am sure many that read this forum think I am a bloodstock agent. Well I can dispel that theory but even people whom have exactly the same involvement as say I or you, can have polar opposite views.

The thing is if more came to light about this entire thread and the machanations behind it all, the revelations will disgust you and many others.

[justdoit]

"The thing is if more came to light about this entire thread and the machanations behind it all, the revelations will disgust you and many others."

Do tell us please.

[triplev123]

[QUOTE=The Big Mile;8474]Hooked him. You are confusing yourself there VVV.
[VVV] Might have confused yourself there TBM. That was no early spring Mulloway. It was a lump of Kelp.

I said Australian breeders breed a lot of rubbish. You will see if you trawl through other posts that I put it hand in hand with the kinds of mares that they produce with. You conveniently forgot to tie that in but thats ok.
[VVV] There are no such mare/sire combinations anywhere in NZ then?

The lower end of the food chain in NZ is purely on expense, it doesn't mean they are badly bred horses and so forth. And by the lower end maybe I should have been more specific - up to $20k NZ (so say rougly $16k australian).
[VVV] Depends solely on what you view as being badly bred.
It's a very widely encompassing term. The lower end of the going horse food chain is by & large populated by horses that are the progeny of a swag of sires who are, for various reasons, either no longer or otherwise never were...commercial. Artiscape, Julius Caesar, Red River Hanover, P Forty Seven, Pacific Rocket, Presidential Ball, Big Tom, Barnett Hanover, Peruvian Hanover, Man Around Town etc. This list goes on & on.
That doesn't neccessarily preclude any one or more of them from producing a going horse that can be competitive. Once they have proven they can pace a certain trip that is their value, not their parentage.

Have a look at the sales catalogue VVV. you are an experienced pedigree man. How many pages -and there are hundreds - where you wouldn't and dont get a bid.
[VVV] See above. If you were to somehow be able to turn back the clock and put many of these going concerns into the sale ring as yearlings I can guarentee you they'd join the no bid ranks.

Why so many buybacks at sales?
[VVV] Here in Australia the vast majority of thebreeders are also racing owners. That has been very cleary established in this most recent paper.
If they go to the sales & don't get a price they deem to be reasonable...especially so with fillies, then more often than not they're quite prepared to race them themselves. Buybacks at Sales is not a specifically Oz phenomenon by the way. Check out the NZ Sales. It is little different in that respect...only their buybacks tend to end up being more of a break in, get them up going and if their future is deemed to be in the handy/moderate/marginal area under the NZ handicapping system...then aim to sell them off to Oz venture.

Outside of that when you look at the Breeders whom breed to race, why is it not economically viable for them to keep going?
[VVV] The breed to race crew? Well, I honestly don't believe that to be the case.
This report, as current as it is, IMO is already out of date as far as the financials of that particular exercise (breed to race) is concerned. I say that because, in the period that ensued from the time submissions were called for until the present, the prizemoney has lifted a fair cog at Menangle & it will soon do so again as well across the State for that matter. It is fast approaching the point of never having been more economically viable to race a horse in NSW...and this will become even more so of a fact in the coming years.

[justdoit]

"The thing is if more came to light about this entire thread and the machanations behind it all, the revelations will disgust you and many others."

Waiting to be disgusted...............................waiting... .............................waiting.............. .................................
Don't tell us that a member of the breeding Panel was posting on this very topic, answering questions and giving us the facts so this topic could continue without people being mislead???
I will be disgusted:)

[triplev123]

Triple V -
I haven't read this whole thread, but the reason why at this stage I would prefer to breed to American sires is because I think, simply, they are still better. I'm not illusioned by 1:47 miles - but what the top horses could do over there, I don't think ours could match it. I mean if Shark Gesture raced her 12 months ago IMHO none of our Grand Circuit horses would have seen where he went. I think Rocknroll Heaven would have made a mess of our Grand Circuit horses too. I think the gap between the Southern and Northern Hemisphere is closing, rapidly, but the gap isn't closed yet.

At the top of his game Shark Gesture would have blitzed everything comparable that was down here at that point in time, no question, as would have Rocknroll Heaven, however the relative worth aspect of their sires vs ours is more a function of numbers than anything else Flashing.
Here in Oz & over in NZ superstars do come along that could've matched it with anything that the Northern Hemisphere has to offer...a horse like Christian Cullen could have gone with anything I've seen, anywhere...as for that matter would have Courage Under Fire...but because we breed fewer foals such horses just don't come along in every single crop or in nearly every single crop the way they do in the US/CAN. Instead here they'll turn up at a far lesser rate of twice or three times in a decade.
Adding to that, and I keep harking back to the comment made to me at the NSW Breeders Challenge Finals by a well known NSW Breeder, ...there is currently no Big $/ High Profile/ Classic / Group 1 race for 3yo colts over the mile in this country that, should such a horse or horses come this way again, would allow them to fully showcase their wares. That's the single biggest impediment we face as far as breeding our own sires is concerned.
I agree that the gap hasn't fully closed yet but a large part of it is current perception & the implementation of such a race would serve narrow it considerably.

[triplev123]

Just to underline what I'm getting at and in addition to #146...

At Menangle today there are three or four NZ bred horses in to go by the likes of Pacific Rocket, Artiscape & Red River Hanover. At Menangle again on Saturday night there are nine or ten NZ bred horses in to go by the likes of Julius Caesar, Fully Loaded, Thunder N Lightning, Partywiththebigdog, Pacific Rocket, Lislea & Union Guy. As good as these horses have been, a number of them have paced very quick miles & earned plenty of $$$, I very much doubt there are too many/any commercial come yearling sales breeders anywhere in NZ or AUS that are sending mares the wayof their respective sires.

[aussiebreno]

http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=91313

[triplev123]

Hmmmm. Interesting.
Not that I don't think the concerns expressed there are legitamet but I'm nevertheless left wondering, in keeping with their legal and trade agreement stands as expressed there ...and as a general show of good faith...if the Kiwis will see their way clear to repeal their long standing ban on the use of Australian made race bikes in NZ?

[Greg Hando]

http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=91313

That's $10,172 per unit

[Midfrew]

Let me declare an interest straight up: an NZ breeder, owner and I love racing. Winning is everything! Also member NZ Breeders Assn.

Why is it that a culture has been created in Australia in the last 20 years (i.e. thanks to Johnnie Howard and the current one paying lump sums of $5k here and $10k there to buy votes, to bred babies, to buy houses, to fund dodgy insulation schemes (that killed people without any real questioning)) etc etc that someone else has to pay for other people's bad decisions. It is a fundamental flaw to these aspects of this whole report - someone else should pay! Why does anyone other than a breeder owe the breeders a living? If breeders want a subsidy scheme to fund big studs and stallion owners then they should pay. But hey 'no', the Panel go to the refuge of fools and scoundrels and say "tax" someone, in this case imports and registrations from imported semen. Oh dear is this the best we can do?

Some questions as starters for 10:
1. Why tax owners to fund breeders and big studs and stallion owners?
2. If the imported product meets the market needs why not buy it?
3. The scheme will increase stallion fees. Every subsidy does. True or false?
4. The scheme will increase the use of poor stallions (people will use credits to bred to the local stallion that should not be in the gene pool) will it not?
5. Are there too many stallions in Australia at 330+?
6. Is not $16 million net return to studs extraordinarily poor for an industry in which everyone has to survive? How can the studs envigorate the gene pool at this level. Congratulations to the few far-sighted folks who are taking risks with the best imported bloodstock. They deserve to make a living and a return.

Just so that no one is in any doubt I believe that the punter if KING. From the punter comes the gold. The gold comes from competitive evenly matched drug free racing. Everyone else enters this industry with their eyes wide open, and if not they deserve everything that happens to them and no one owes them a cent.

John Mooney

[justdoit]

I`m not to sure of the $5 here and $10 there to buy votes, but there has been in the past schemes that reduce the amount of tax payable on purchases, to help industries. If a government body is doing or looking at what needs to be done for the best interest of its country/sector as a whole what is wrong with that?
The increase has just been looked into, other options are being considered.

sounds like bad apples to me

[The Big Mile]

It is a fundamental flaw to these aspects of this whole report - someone else should pay! Why does anyone other than a breeder owe the breeders a living? If breeders want a subsidy scheme to fund big studs and stallion owners then they should pay. But hey 'no', the Panel go to the refuge of fools and scoundrels and say "tax" someone, in this case imports and registrations from imported semen. Oh dear is this the best we can do?

Well said Midfrew (John) and your points above are 100% spot on.

The proposal was put to the breeders to help themselves and they categorically rejected that. So the best the panel could come up with is their final suggestion. Disappointing really.

Suggestions for alternative souces of funding have been made but it will make no difference.

EVERYBODY WHOM OPPOSES THIS RIDICULOUS IMPOSITION, DONT EMAIL YOUR OBJECTIONS TO THE PANEL, IT IS A WASTE OF TIME.

FIND YOUR LOCAL HRA BOARD MEMBER AND CONTACT THEM DIRECTLY.

[triplev123]

Let me declare an interest straight up: an NZ breeder, owner and I love racing. Winning is everything! Also member NZ Breeders Assn.

Why is it that a culture has been created in Australia in the last 20 years (i.e. thanks to Johnnie Howard and the current one paying lump sums of $5k here and $10k there to buy votes, to bred babies, to buy houses, to fund dodgy insulation schemes (that killed people without any real questioning)) etc etc that someone else has to pay for other people's bad decisions. It is a fundamental flaw to these aspects of this whole report - someone else should pay! Why does anyone other than a breeder owe the breeders a living? If breeders want a subsidy scheme to fund big studs and stallion owners then they should pay. But hey 'no', the Panel go to the refuge of fools and scoundrels and say "tax" someone, in this case imports and registrations from imported semen. Oh dear is this the best we can do?

Some questions as starters for 10:

G'day John, by way of a distinction have replied in bold.

1. Why tax owners to fund breeders and big studs and stallion owners?
The studs are effectively being taxed too though that will be passed onto the breeders (see the proposed additional fees per chilled semen transport ex NZ as well as increased registration fees for the resultant foals...I make it another $725 per colt for every one that is produced by imported semen...be it fresh chilled or frozen)

2. If the imported product meets the market needs why not buy it?
I don't disagree with this point however as I tried to underline to my friend The Big Mile, the justification for doing so is not that going 4yo+ horses from NZ are the equivalent of Oz bred yearlings being sold through the sales in AUS). The fact is the two are poles apart in terms of age, eligibilities and so comparitive earning capacity. Those who will shop at an APG sale are there for significantly different reasons to those who just want a horse to race on the average Saturday night at Menangle. eg. I'm sure that Mark Purdon didn't show up to buy Mr. Nickel & Fly Like An Eagle as yearlings with those intentions in mind.

3. The scheme will increase stallion fees. Every subsidy does. True or false? True

4. The scheme will increase the use of poor stallions (people will use credits to bred to the local stallion that should not be in the gene pool) will it not? True again, though for the most part I wouldn't say poor, rather lesser sires than would otherwise have been used.

5. Are there too many stallions in Australia at 330+?
Yes, no doubt, however if you look at the majority of them they'd have been lucky to cover 20 mares and many of those were done for free.
The breed to race culture over here will always see to it that there are a lot of homebreds being produced in such fashion and I doubt that'll change very much in the future.
What we need to focus on more, what we really need to do, what me must do is produce a very different article... our own home-grown sires by the best of the current shuttle sires.

6. Is not $16 million net return to studs extraordinarily poor for an industry in which everyone has to survive? Definitely, especially when you consider how much of that is then repatriated to US/CAN based syndicates.
How can the studs envigorate the gene pool at this level. They can't, at least not under their own banner. (see previous point)
Congratulations to the few far-sighted folks who are taking risks with the best imported bloodstock. They deserve to make a living and a return. Indeed. Three Cheers!

Just so that no one is in any doubt I believe that the punter if KING. From the punter comes the gold. The gold comes from competitive evenly matched drug free racing. Everyone else enters this industry with their eyes wide open, and if not they deserve everything that happens to them and no one owes them a cent.
The more I think about it the less comfortable I am with the broodmare credits aspect. Firstly because if I wanted access to handouts then I'd be lining up at the Matthew Talbot Hostel Soup Kitchen every night...and secondly, because I really doubt it will see more foals produced. Rather, all it will do is somewhat offset the Breeder's costs of producing to the current levels.

Ultimately what will definitely drive demand for horses, what has always & will always drive demand are owners willing to shell out their hard earned to have them trained...and that, in turn drives the entire breeding machine.
It's all well and good to produce more foals but if at the end of the process there is no bastard there that is willing to take them on...then there's no point.

John Mooney

Rgds VVV

[roosters]

hi everyone

Long time reader, first time poster.

I am a 3rd generation harness person. I breed and race 3-4 horses every year. Recently, I have cut that back to 1-2 as i could not afford the service fee of a good stallion and didnt want to be breeding just for the sake of it and getting a horse that was not competitve.


Im really not fussed if a few less kiwi horses come over the ditch. There are so many of them that are still owned by kiwi owners and all they are doing is coming over here and taking the better prizemoney because their industry is stuffed. Im sure and know that many other hobby/ breeders fell like me.

For mine, the NBCS is the most valuable document I have read for many a long time. I really hope all the recommendations come to fruition, so that i continue to be involved in the industry I love so much and which has been part of my family for such a long time.

[aussiebreno]

Hi roosters and welcome,

Is cutting back because of money you have lost within the industry or because of your outside industry income you can't justify injecting more funds in to the industry? Perhaps a combination.

There is few Kiwis in the grand scheme of things anyway. Just 600 per year. Most, a very large majority in my experience, are bought by Aust owners. The ones that are Kiwi owned and race over here (I can barely think of an example) won't have the import fee apply as they aren't actually imports so this won't help you there.

Yes it is valuable, you are correct. It is valuable for breeders. Of course you are going to like it, there are no two ways about that. But it doesn't have everybody's interests at heart and is unfair in nature. People independent of the situation know its ridiculous.
Mightymo put the figure at 6000 yearlings a year, someone else put the figure at 600 imports a year. Forgetting that a large portion of the imports race in either WA or Vic the average field has 1 import in it. The average races won by import, (if racing was 100% even and lucky and no horse was better or worse than any other horse) would be 1 in 11. You can't blame imports for taking prize-money away from you with small figures like that. I don't think even mightymo or anyone else on your side of the ledger has blamed imports for taking your prizemoney.
If they can credits, properly sourced, then great. If not, don't wreck other things.

[roosters]

Hi roosters and welcome,

Is cutting back because of money you have lost within the industry or because of your outside industry income you can't justify injecting more funds in to the industry? Perhaps a combination.

There is few Kiwis in the grand scheme of things anyway. Just 600 per year. Most, a very large majority in my experience, are bought by Aust owners. The ones that are Kiwi owned and race over here (I can barely think of an example) won't have the import fee apply as they aren't actually imports so this won't help you there.

Yes it is valuable, you are correct. It is valuable for breeders. Of course you are going to like it, there are no two ways about that. But it doesn't have everybody's interests at heart and is unfair in nature. People independent of the situation know its ridiculous.
Mightymo put the figure at 6000 yearlings a year, someone else put the figure at 600 imports a year. Forgetting that a large portion of the imports race in either WA or Vic the average field has 1 import in it. The average races won by import, (if racing was 100% even and lucky and no horse was better or worse than any other horse) would be 1 in 11. You can't blame imports for taking prize-money away from you with small figures like that. I don't think even mightymo or anyone else on your side of the ledger has blamed imports for taking your prizemoney.
If they can credits, properly sourced, then great. If not, don't wreck other things.

I disagree aussiebreno. i dont think this is about breeders. I think this is something really important for the whole industry. It just needs to start with breeders as they make the decision to begin with as to whether a mare should go to stud.

The way i see things is that if more foals are bred, and bred to better stallions, then we will have more horses to make it to the races. This in turn makes for fuller fields and more even racing which ultimately leads to higher prizemoney for OWNERS. In the interim there is more money in the whole system and so everyone from stud owners, to trainers to vets to transport companies are all better off. Circular flow of money as my yr 12 economics teacher explained it.

I cant see why people wouldnt want this.

[mango]

Hi Roosters

Why should someone else pay for you to go to better stallion's so you can race them or sell them, i'm a breeder myself and when i got involved in the industry i knew it would be hard to make money by either racing them or selling but in know way do i expect other parts of the industry to fork out so i can go to a better stallion . There's breeder's bonuses, cash bonuses that helps towards thing's like service fee's. You say this in turn make's for fuller fields, well isn't the kiwi horses helping out in this way.

[roosters]

Hi Roosters

Why should someone else pay for you to go to better stallion's so you can race them or sell them, i'm a breeder myself and when i got involved in the industry i knew it would be hard to make money by either racing them or selling but in know way do i expect other parts of the industry to fork out so i can go to a better stallion stallion. There's breeder's bonuses, cash bonuses that helps towards thing's like service fee's. You say this in turn make's for fuller fields, well isn't the kiwi horses helping out in this way.


its the ultimate goal thats important. My understanding is that the report tries to address the issue of falling breeding numbers and the fact that our racing population is dropping fast. yes,

i dont see any problem with incentivising breeders in order to attain that goal which then has significant benefits for the whole industry, but especially owners.

Once again, harping back to my yr 12 Economics studies. Sometimes you have to give a kick along to certain industries for the benfit of the country. Imagine where Aust would be now without the mining industry?

Im not looking for a free kick. i still pay my money.

[aussiebreno]

A circular economy or a circular argument......

[triplev123]

Assume a spherical horse Breno, assume a spherical horse. :p

[The Big Mile]

Hi Rooster and good to see another point of view here. On what you wrote below:


Im really not fussed if a few less kiwi horses come over the ditch. There are so many of them that are still owned by kiwi owners and all they are doing is coming over here and taking the better prizemoney because their industry is stuffed. Im sure and know that many other hobby/ breeders fell like me.

I don't think you are correct in saying 'so many of them are still owned by Kiwi owners'. Speking form experience in NSW, there are very few whom are still retained by Kiwi interests although the numbers are increasing with the Menangle money going up.

Tell me, do you think it right to slug a small percentage of owners with the burden of funding the majority of NBCS? Wouldn't you feel it more equitable if everyone pays - after all it is for the benefit of the entire industry apparently, then if so, everybosy should assit.

[Midfrew]

There were 771 NZ horses exported to Australia in the NZ seaon ending 31 July. Other than a handful they will all have been transferred into Australian ownership.

A further 48 at the top level completed a round trip from either NZ or Australia for Interdominions or Grand Circuit races.

John

[aussiebreno]

771 (number) x 4500 (increase in import fee if they are all boys - do you have mares breakdown Midfrew?) / 6000 (no of yearlings born per mightymo) = $578.
So thats $578 for each mares credits on average (not taking into account that import fees for mares is lower and that demand for the imports will go down). That isn't the difference between going to River Khan compared to Village Jasper. Let's say total costs from service fee right through to foal turns 2 and becomes a race horse is 15'000. Is that fair? If so then the credits account for 4% of total costs. Remembering I have used amounts that are very generous to the breeders side of the argument. It is hardly going to make a difference to anything. Heck I am going to go as far to say as it would make things worse. The amount of horses being imported would drop MORE than the amount of extra horses that get bred!

[mightymo]

771 (number) x 4500 (increase in import fee if they are all boys - do you have mares breakdown Midfrew?) / 6000 (no of yearlings born per mightymo) = $578.
So thats $578 for each mares credits on average (not taking into account that import fees for mares is lower and that demand for the imports will go down). That isn't the difference between going to River Khan compared to Village Jasper. Let's say total costs from service fee right through to foal turns 2 and becomes a race horse is 15'000. Is that fair? If so then the credits account for 4% of total costs. Remembering I have used amounts that are very generous to the breeders side of the argument. It is hardly going to make a difference to anything. Heck I am going to go as far to say as it would make things worse. The amount of horses being imported would drop MORE than the amount of extra horses that get bred!

you clearly are not very good with numbers!

Firstly, you are assuming every horse born makes it to the races!!! Lets say half do for arguments sake. That then means your $578 becomes $1156

Secondly, if the first crop it affects is the foals born this year, then there are 3 years before the credits get used, so multiply $1156 x 3 = $3468

Suddenly, maybe you can see some value being added in that having this value and in making it vest with the horse, the owner will breed from it, and as he has credits he will be able to send it to a better stallion than he otherwise would have been able to.

This then means the resultant foal has more chance of getting to the races and of being more competitive. Fuller and more competitve fields result in higher turnover which results in higher prizemoney for owners.

That is exactly what people that responded to the survey asked for, and that is what we are trying to deliver.

If you cant accept that, then that's a problem i cant help you with!

[mightymo]

Also, I forgot to add, that you are assuming by having the increased import fee, that the number of horses being imported will drop dramatically.

I disagree. I do anticipate that there will be a drop off of some sort for the cheaper horses. However, in general I see kiwi vendors getting less for their horses, as Aust buyers will say i have $X dollars to spend and will include the import fee. Kiwi sellers have no choice to accept the reduced price, as their racing system doesnt allow the horses to race there and their prizemoney is so inferior.

As for kiwi owners sending their horses to race here, there has been a significant increase in this. Graeme Rogerson, John Green, Brian West plus others have all sent a number of horses over in recent times. far more than a handful.

Anyway, thats enough from me.

the Aust industry as a whole now has the opportunity to provide comment, and HRA can then decide what, if anything, they wish to implement. At least we gave it a go...

[aussiebreno]

Is you're 6000 figure foals born or horses that make it to the races? Hard to play if I don't know the goalposts.

Regardless we only have 3.5mill to work with (771 x 4500). If its 6000 foals born per year then I am correct in $578. If its 12'000 foals born per year then its actually $289. Who's not good with numbers???
And if you're trying to say its 6000 foals born per year but only 3000 make it to the races...well those 3000 that didn't make it still used the Credits anyway so thats a blackhole expense...great for the industry NOT.

So for the first three years it is $289 x 3 = 867. Then for eternity (using current figures) its $289 (using generous figure).

Thanks for the laugh anyway Mightymo!

[aussiebreno]

Also, I forgot to add, that you are assuming by having the increased import fee, that the number of horses being imported will drop dramatically.

I disagree. I do anticipate that there will be a drop off of some sort for the cheaper horses. However, in general I see kiwi vendors getting less for their horses, as Aust buyers will say i have $X dollars to spend and will include the import fee. Kiwi sellers have no choice to accept the reduced price, as their racing system doesnt allow the horses to race there and their prizemoney is so inferior.

As for kiwi owners sending their horses to race here, there has been a significant increase in this. Graeme Rogerson, John Green, Brian West plus others have all sent a number of horses over in recent times. far more than a handful.

Anyway, thats enough from me.

the Aust industry as a whole now has the opportunity to provide comment, and HRA can then decide what, if anything, they wish to implement. At least we gave it a go...
No I haven't. I have used current figures in my calculations as FACT. Then stated opinion. You state opinion as Fact.

[triplev123]

Just one point which I don't accept and have never accepted.
IMO there's long been a big-time furphy doing the rounds here that the Australian foal crop is not big enough, that we're not producing enough horses to fill the fields.
I don't believe that this is the case. I believe we are producing more than enough foals to fill the race fields. What we have is not a lack of horses. Instead, we have a lack of Owners that are willing to shell out their hard earned in order to have a larger number of the annual foal crops trained.

This is due to a combination of factors, the main two being....
(1) prizemoney, which to a very significant degree is going to be rectified here in NSW by way of the increases that have and are set to occur...
(2) the appalling lack of genuine racing opportunities afforded 50% of the annual foal crop, the fillies & mares.

Currently, and I think the Panel's report stated that only 6% of the racing opportunities were for fillies/mares only, we have a situation where half the annual foal crop is basically being ignored...yet at the same time there are moves afoot to increase the number of foals born each year??????????

This I just can't fathom from the point of view that would it not make more sense, would it not be a far more prudent & would it not be a far more cost effective approach, to first attempt to far better utilise the many filly foals that already exist, that are already born and are very soon to be born...rather than to simply boost overall numbers only to continue the practice of virtually ignoring 50% of them???

I realise that there are aspects of the report which deal with greater racing opportunities for fillies and mares but honestly, I'm not holding my breath. If I had a $1.00 for every time I heard that idea bandied about... only to see it come up as empty as a piss-head's wallet in the early hours of Saturday morning....I'd be living in Monaco next door to Mick Doohan.

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD...LET THE FILLIES AND MARES FILL THE FIELDS FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! before you go cranking out greater numbers.

[gutwagon]

Agree with your last post triplev123. If we have 8 races at a meeting 4 should be for females only. Don't think we will ever see that happen. The way things are at the moment we should only ever breed colts and hit the fillies on the head.

On the subject of improving the breed, going to a so called better stallion in no way guarentees a better foal, it will increase your chance of getting a better foal slightly. Most of the better horses around at the moment are from broodmares that are sired by 2nd and 3rd string stallions.Decreasing the amount of stallions available to breeders is not good for the breed in the long run.
If some breeders want to spend their money on a lesser known stallion then thats their bussiness. If it was up to you people horses like Popular Alm and Lylle Creek would never have been bred,
On a final note we are wasting our time arguing about this report on here, THE BOARD HAS DONE AND ALLWAYS WILL DO WHAT IT LIKES AND WE JUST HAVE TO LUMP IT !!

[eliteblood]

TripleV has hit the nail on the head. Increased racing opportunities for fillies and mares is the greatest opportunity to breathe some life back into the breeding industry. And, it doesn't require any additional money, just some intelligent and co-ordinated race programming.

[aussiebreno]

Agree with VVV.
Maybe not 4/8 races for filles. Maybe 2/8. We don't want two separate pools of races. Plus fillies and mares will generally be at stud by age 7 even with increased racing oppurtunitues.

[The Big Mile]

Mightymo you seem to run with the foxes and hunt with the hounds. Sorry to find you out, but I am going to have to, because you are talking crap here.


I disagree. I do anticipate that there will be a drop off of some sort for the cheaper horses. However, in general I see kiwi vendors getting less for their horses, as Aust buyers will say i have $X dollars to spend and will include the import fee. Kiwi sellers have no choice to accept the reduced price, as their racing system doesnt allow the horses to race there and their prizemoney is so inferior.

Again you are trivilaising things to make your panels decision try to carry water that is clearly doesn't. 'drop off of some sort for the cheaper horses'. Geee. The average horse price has been estimated by the NZ Breeders @ $18k NZ. The sport excange rate at 4.18pm Thursday 4th August is AUD$1 = NZ$1.25387 so the average price of horse leaving NZ is roughly $14,400.

An import fee of $5000 equates to 34.7% of the value of an average priced horse.

You think the Kiwi breeders are going to drop the price of their stock by 34%?

What about the ones where they are $10,000 NZ or less (about $8,000? ) The import fee of $5000 equates to 60% of the value of the horse.

You and your panel are clutching at straws if you think the end of the market where most horses come from will simply absorb costs. In fact it is downright dismal to think that you make that assumption but given the fact that your panel are quite keen to recommend funding a breeding intiative by slugging owners shows that vested interests are to the fore.


As for kiwi owners sending their horses to race here, there has been a significant increase in this. Graeme Rogerson, John Green, Brian West plus others have all sent a number of horses over in recent times. far more than a handful.

Please Mightymo. Rogerson has sent over 3. Brian west has 4 here. John Green not sure but harldy 'far more than a handful'. These numbers will go up. But if you are so concerned with money flowing out to NZ, why then do you offer up a such a low fee for the 90 day entrants to come over compared to the $5000 for permanent imports? Surely you would want to stop the instances like last year where $418,000 left for NZ on Breeders Crown day? So you want to plug the permanent arrivals (whom remain in the country and generate benefit for the domestic industry) while wave through the high end ones whom come over on hit and run missions? Seems a massive contradiction.



the Aust industry as a whole now has the opportunity to provide comment, and HRA can then decide what, if anything, they wish to implement. At least we gave it a go...

I am sure the HRA will see the benefits in some areas but hopefully will be much more aware (or at least not blinded by vested interests) to realise that the funding recommendations are not suitable nor acceptable to the industry at large and explore more appropriate and equitable means of sourcing funding.

[The Big Mile]

TripleV has hit the nail on the head. Increased racing opportunities for fillies and mares is the greatest opportunity to breathe some life back into the breeding industry. And, it doesn't require any additional money, just some intelligent and co-ordinated race programming.

Well said Eliteblood and VVV.

6.6% of races for fillies and mares shows the problem right there. In NSW things are getting better, mares M0's are standing up every week and the benefit at Menangle is that with genuinely run races, it give the mares an opportunity to put a big number next to her name. Look at a horse called Modern Classic. 3 months ago you wouldn't breed from her in a pink fit, but on Tuesday she banged out a 1.53.6 mile and voila, the temptation to breed will be massive.

[triplev123]

Increased racing opportunities for fillies and mares is the greatest opportunity to breathe some life back into the breeding industry. And, it doesn't require any additional money, just some intelligent and co-ordinated race programming.

TESTIFY BROTHER ELITEBLOOD! Amen.

[Greg Hando]

Well said Eliteblood and VVV.

6.6% of races for fillies and mares shows the problem right there. In NSW things are getting better, mares M0's are standing up every week and the benefit at Menangle is that with genuinely run races, it give the mares an opportunity to put a big number next to her name. Look at a horse called Modern Classic. 3 months ago you wouldn't breed from her in a pink fit, but on Tuesday she banged out a 1.53.6 mile and voila, the temptation to breed will be massive.

Why wouldn't you breed from Modern Classic she had run under 2.00 a long way before the other day had won 8 race's her dam has had 4 to race for 2 winner's both under 1.57 her grand dam has 2 under 2.00 incl a 1.52 horse she is also from a good solid family with strong 2yo form isn't that what people are after 2yo money races early but i might be biased perhap's you should refrain from giving examples without properly looking up the mare's.

[gutwagon]

I'm sick of people saying I wouldn't breed from this mare or that mare. Well when you own them and race them and feed them and look after them you fall in love with them, you can't put them on a dog truck. They have personalities they eat breath and shit , if we just wanted to make money we would stay away from horses, its in your blood .WE are all after the excitement and the thrill of winning and the love of the sport, it's not just about money !!

[gutwagon]

Breeders wait 11 months for a live foal with 4 good legs and another 2 years while you wean them and educate them to lead and teach them to load in the float, send them to a breaker , some don't make it that far. We do it because we love horses and racing. In my view people who buy going horses are just looking for a quick profit, they love money.I like money but I love horses and horse people more. I would much rather be around horse people than money people any day , call me an idiot if you like but that wont bother me.
80 odd % of owners are breeders so they know how I feel .

[The Big Mile]

Why wouldn't you breed from Modern Classic she had run under 2.00 a long way before the other day had won 8 race's her dam has had 4 to race for 2 winner's both under 1.57 her grand dam has 2 under 2.00 incl a 1.52 horse she is also from a good solid family with strong 2yo form isn't that what people are after 2yo money races early but i might be biased perhap's you should refrain from giving examples without properly looking up the mare's.

Greg you are right. Should have done that and was going only on racetrack experience. My fault.

Breaking 2 minutes is nothing at Menangle. 1.56 and you start to revv it up. But her worth has considerably risen since banging a 1.53.6 on the table. Remembering 1.53.0 was Make Mine Cullens Australasian mark not that long ago.

[The Big Mile]

I'm sick of people saying I wouldn't breed from this mare or that mare. Well when you own them and race them and feed them and look after them you fall in love with them, you can't put them on a dog truck. They have personalities they eat breath and shit , if we just wanted to make money we would stay away from horses, its in your blood .WE are all after the excitement and the thrill of winning and the love of the sport, it's not just about money !!

What you say is 100% correct in most aspects. This is why people do persist with mares that probably aren't commercially viable, but they don't care they are happy to breed and race.

This is where the credit scheme falls down, because at the end of the day the breeder as you mentioned becomes the owner (like all other owners) and they are asking other owners to finance their splurge.

[The Big Mile]

In my view people who buy going horses are just looking for a quick profit, they love money.

You obviously don't know too much about going horses then Gutwagon.

Quick profit? Gee. Its not insider trading or a rort you know.

Buying going horses is because you love money? Nup. Afraid not. You actually despise money if you invest in horses. Don't see too many fund managers suggesting to their clients 'buy going standardbreds'.

If you really want to burn money, buy yearlings.

(oh shit, here comes the incoming......)

[gutwagon]

Not many fund managers make money now days TBM, thats why they have suicide barriers on the westgate bridge.
Buying going horses is because you are trying to get a quick return at the expense of a breeder who is trying to cut their losses. I don't buy yearlings, I breed my own, its much cheaper.No breeders means no horses, here or in NZ.

[mango]

Hi Gutwagon

A lot of people buy going horses for various reasons compared to buying yearlings, they don't have to wait a long period of time to get the horse to the race's and another reason is you can see the horse going whether it is a knee knocker and so on so that eliminates problems right there and to be honest buying going horses is a smart move. If it's much cheaper to breed your own why are we trying to get a credit scheme going to help people pay for service fee's. The credit scheme might mean more mare's bred to but as i said before people have to look at there mare and really think should i breed from her and you hit the nail on the head when you said people fall in love with them well that maybe so but breeding from a mare that you love and has had 20 starts for nothing isn't going to strengthen the fields or racing.

[The Big Mile]

Not many fund managers make money now days TBM, thats why they have suicide barriers on the westgate bridge.
Buying going horses is because you are trying to get a quick return at the expense of a breeder who is trying to cut their losses. I don't buy yearlings, I breed my own, its much cheaper.No breeders means no horses, here or in NZ.

Aren't buyers of going horses allowed to do it for the love of racing, or even buying a broodmare prospect for down the line?

....at the expense of the breeder? Ummmm no. Don't think so. But I can understand that mentality because it is prolific in harness racing breeders circles.

No owners mean no breeders. If you manufacture something, you need a market to sell into.

[Love Of Courage]

I'm sick of people saying I wouldn't breed from this mare or that mare. Well when you own them and race them and feed them and look after them you fall in love with them, you can't put them on a dog truck. They have personalities they eat breath and shit , if we just wanted to make money we would stay away from horses, its in your blood .WE are all after the excitement and the thrill of winning and the love of the sport, it's not just about money !!

One of the best posts I have read on this site !

I think first and foremost most breeders breed because we love and receive so much enjoyment from the horses and harness racing. Whilst we would like to try to break even, most hobby breeders expect to run at a loss but considering the enjoyment we receive consider the money well spent. Even if you do not own the mares foal you still enjoy seeing it win.

If you have a mare that is considered of low commercial value and you send to a top stallion and it does not sell well then you have nobody to blame but your self. But the best way to upgrade a family is to send the mare to the best stallions that you can afford.

Look at the pedigree of "The Archduchess"
http://www.harness.org.au/ausbreed/reports/performance.cfm?horse_id=574498&CFID=19531230&CFTOKEN=43357240
A Perfect Art mare with a record of 11 starts no wins no second 1 third and $ 1,770. 2nd dam 47 starts, 3 wins 2 seconds and 5 thirds for $ 11,534.

Most would have said on mating the mare with Christian Cullen you must be mad send the mare to the "doggers" . The Archduchess is now 15 starts for 5 wins and nine placings and $ 210,576.

Breeding is hardly an exact science and good horses can come from nowhere.

[Greg Hando]

Greg you are right. Should have done that and was going only on racetrack experience. My fault.

Breaking 2 minutes is nothing at Menangle. 1.56 and you start to revv it up. But her worth has considerably risen since banging a 1.53.6 on the table. Remembering 1.53.0 was Make Mine Cullens Australasian mark not that long ago.

Yes 1.53 does look better but was just saying a bit more research and you wouldn't get criticism about your post all's o'k

[Don Corleone]

Why wouldn't you breed from Modern Classic she had run under 2.00 a long way before the other day had won 8 race's her dam has had 4 to race for 2 winner's both under 1.57 her grand dam has 2 under 2.00 incl a 1.52 horse she is also from a good solid family with strong 2yo form isn't that what people are after 2yo money races early but i might be biased perhap's you should refrain from giving examples without properly looking up the mare's.

I wish Modern Classic wasn't in that race because I have the mare that run second!!!

[triplev123]

I'm sick of people saying I wouldn't breed from this mare or that mare. Well when you own them and race them and feed them and look after them you fall in love with them, you can't put them on a dog truck. They have personalities they eat breath and shit , if we just wanted to make money we would stay away from horses, its in your blood .WE are all after the excitement and the thrill of winning and the love of the sport, it's not just about money !!


[VVV] I've never cared too much at all what racemares are by just so long as they are well put together and they have a good maternal family to back them up...and that's a direct extension of my dismissal of broodmare sires viewpoint.
If a mare's a good type with racetrack performance and maternal family to back her up then what she is by means about as much in the scheme of things as "There will be no carbon tax under the Government I lead".

[gutwagon]

There are only a small amount of breeders that breed to sell. Most of the horses in the APG sale are not really for sale, their breeder just puts them in the sale so they are ellidgable for the series and the big money. If a buyer wants to pay big money for the horse then they might sell it.Don't blame the breeder for this, it's the way the APG sale works, blame them.

A large amount of good broodmares never raced or were not good enough to win a race.Many good race mares don't make good broodmares.Take a look at Sushi Sushi its dam was a good race horse but it took 7 very average foals and 4 missed ones to get the good one. Her owners deserve a medal.You can't get good horses without breeders willing to throw money away chasing a dream.Breeders need some help if you want the industry to thrive.

[triplev123]

One of the best posts I have read on this site !

I think first and foremost most breeders breed because we love and receive so much enjoyment from the horses and harness racing. Whilst we would like to try to break even, most hobby breeders expect to run at a loss but considering the enjoyment we receive consider the money well spent. Even if you do not own the mares foal you still enjoy seeing it win.

If you have a mare that is considered of low commercial value and you send to a top stallion and it does not sell well then you have nobody to blame but your self. But the best way to upgrade a family is to send the mare to the best stalions that you can afford.

Look at the pedigree of "The Archduchess"
http://www.harness.org.au/ausbreed/reports/performance.cfm?horse_id=574498&CFID=19531230&CFTOKEN=43357240
A Perfect Art mare with a record of 11 starts no wins no second 1 third and $ 1,770. 2nd dam 47 starts, 3 wins 2 seconds and 5 thirds for $ 11,534.

Most would have said on mating the mare with Christian Cullen you must be mad send the mare to the "doggers" . The Archduchess is now 15 starts for 5 wins and nine placings and $ 210,576.

Breeding is hardly an exact science and good horses can come from nowhere.


Fate's smile is a wonderful thing. Rosario, G. Seymour & the Crew weren't even going to breed that mare. My brother knows the story but as far as I can remember it in the telling it went something along the lines of the semen arriving from CC and one mare wasn't ready and the other was so they served her instead...or something like that...and The Archduchess was the result. Couldn't have happened to nicer fellas. She can really scoot.

[Love Of Courage]

Fate's smile is a wonderful thing. Rosario, G. Seymour & the Crew weren't even going to breed that mare. My brother knows the story but as far as I can remember it in the telling it went something along the lines of the semen arriving from CC and one mare wasn't ready and the other was so they served her instead...or something like that...and The Archduchess was the result. Couldn't have happened to nicer fellas. She can really scoot.


Hey VVV !

I have spoken with G.Seymour and he seems like a very nice gentleman. I have seen the family many times at the races and they certainly do enjoy watching their horses race. They always bring along a large cheers squad when one of their horses is in a feature race. They have had some good horses like Armida, Il Tenore and the dam La Speranza.

I agree best of luck to them !

I follow these horses closely as I have mares from this same maternal family.

[triplev123]

Good fellas all, really good fellas. We met them for the first time in Melbourne a few years ago when we sold them a nice Bettor's Delight colt. He went on to win a Gold Crown Heat up at Bathurst at 2yrs but unfortunately he broke a bone in his knee & had to be put down after a few starts back at 3yrs.
In the interim Armida's had a colt & a filly by BD I believe.

[roosters]

There are only a small amount of breeders that breed to sell. Most of the horses in the APG sale are not really for sale, their breeder just puts them in the sale so they are ellidgable for the series and the big money. If a buyer wants to pay big money for the horse then they might sell it.Don't blame the breeder for this, it's the way the APG sale works, blame them.

A large amount of good broodmares never raced or were not good enough to win a race.Many good race mares don't make good broodmares.Take a look at Sushi Sushi its dam was a good race horse but it took 7 very average foals and 4 missed ones to get the good one. Her owners deserve a medal.You can't get good horses without breeders willing to throw money away chasing a dream.Breeders need some help if you want the industry to thrive.

It would appear that some people, especially The Big Mile, dont care about the industry. As long as he can buy going horses(but only NZ ones) then he is happy. He says breeders need owners. well, thats like the chicken and the egg. Owners need breeders too.

i dont know who you are The Big Mile, but its your sort of attitude that has forced the panel to make some of the recommendations that they have. For the sake of the industry, i really hope there are not too many people that share your views. Fortunately, im very confident that will be the case

[justdoit]

I could not agree with you more Roosters, The Big Mile seems to have just as much dislike of the breeding panel participants as he does of their recommendations? Why is that so?

[aussiebreno]

It would appear that some people, especially The Big Mile, dont care about the industry. As long as he can buy going horses(but only NZ ones) then he is happy. He says breeders need owners. well, thats like the chicken and the egg. Owners need breeders too.

i dont know who you are The Big Mile, but its your sort of attitude that has forced the panel to make some of the recommendations that they have. For the sake of the industry, i really hope there are not too many people that share your views. Fortunately, im very confident that will be the case
It's the recomendations that don't care about the industry.
717 imports, put a $5000 tax and it could go down to 500imports. 250x4500 + 250x1350 = 1462500 / 12000 mares serviced each year = $120 each on average. The above average ones would be getting bred to anyway. The below average ones will have even less than $120.
Cmon seriously is a <1% drop in costs really going to make a difference? It will make next to zero difference, it will pay the GST on a service to Pass The Mustard!!!!!!!! Yet the imports go down and race fields go down.

[roosters]

It's the recomendations that don't care about the industry.
717 imports, put a $5000 tax and it could go down to 500imports. 250x4500 + 250x1350 = 1462500 / 12000 mares serviced each year = $120 each on average. The above average ones would be getting bred to anyway. The below average ones will have even less than $120.
Cmon seriously is a <1% drop in costs really going to make a difference? It will make next to zero difference, it will pay the GST on a service to Pass The Mustard!!!!!!!! Yet the imports go down and race fields go down.


Your numbers seem laughable. Im very confident your numbers are wrong. I cant imagine the panel would go to that much trouble for such a tiny amount.Have you rung Andrew Kelly - that probably would answer the question

[mightymo]

Your numbers seem laughable. Im very confident your numbers are wrong. I cant imagine the panel would go to that much trouble for such a tiny amount.Have you rung Andrew Kelly - that probably would answer the question

Roosters

Rest assured that breno's numbers are so far off the mark it is laughable.

If the broodmare credit scheme becomes reality and details are then revealed, i expect him to be the first to come on here and publicly apologise for getting it so wrong.

Then again, he is prone to getting things wrong(ala NSW fillies trifectaring the Aust Oaks) but still hasnt been man enough to come out and admit that he was wrong:):)

im sure this will get a reponse...

[aussiebreno]

Mightymo the numbers are from YOUR report and what YOU have said. Your report says 600 imports for 2.1 million. Someone lifted this to 717 imports for the year.
YOU said 6000 foals bred a year. My numbers are from YOU yourself. So you are only laughing at yourself.

Lets go over the 3 horses who trifected the Aust Oaks and what the info available was AT the time of our discussion..not months later.
Baby Bling: In her very next start after our discussion; where she was being judged on available form she started at 20/1 in a $30K race. People would have laughed if you said she is part of a great NSW crop. Jennas Highview. Beaten at Wagga in a 32 final quarter. That isn't the stuff of champions. Vertigal. Gets beaten by interstate rivals. A 'great' crop does not get beaten by interstate horses. So Jennas Highview and Vertigal still haven't showed they are part of a great crop of 3yo fillies. It is just your average plain jane crop. Nothing stands out from prior years. Which was the whole point of the discussion.

"Im sure this will get a response"...well yeah thats the point of a forum...

[mightymo]

Mightymo the numbers are from YOUR report and what YOU have said. Your report says 600 imports for 2.1 million. Someone lifted this to 717 imports for the year.
YOU said 6000 foals bred a year. My numbers are from YOU yourself. So you are only laughing at yourself.

Lets go over the 3 horses who trifected the Aust Oaks and what the info available was AT the time of our discussion..not months later.
Baby Bling: In her very next start after our discussion; where she was being judged on available form she started at 20/1 in a $30K race. People would have laughed if you said she is part of a great NSW crop. Jennas Highview. Beaten at Wagga in a 32 final quarter. That isn't the stuff of champions. Vertigal. Gets beaten by interstate rivals. A 'great' crop does not get beaten by interstate horses. So Jennas Highview and Vertigal still haven't showed they are part of a great crop of 3yo fillies. It is just your average plain jane crop. Nothing stands out from prior years. Which was the whole point of the discussion.

"Im sure this will get a response"...well yeah thats the point of a forum...

or perhaps you're just a very poor judge of form...

[aussiebreno]

Just because they still beat other horses doesn't make the NSW fillies superstars. Our C0s do better then what Jennas Highview did that day. Shit I could have carried you and all the rocks in your head and still beat Jennas Highview home.

Once and for all if you know all the numbers what are they?
How many imports each season: Break this into fillies/mares and colts/geldings.
How many mares serviced per year, how many foals born per year and how many horses each crop actually make it to the races?

You've already answered those; but then backflipped on those numbers. Your (and/or your commitees) answers were 600 (later found to be 717), and 6000 (later to be argued 12'000?).

[Midfrew]

Someone asked for the breakdown of NZ imports by sex and age. These figures are ALL NZ Exports 12 months to 31 July, not reimported, including about 60 to USA and one to Sweden. Out of curiosity the oldest three were mares aged 17, 18 and 21!

Weanling 3 male 3 female
Yearling 26 male 24 female
2YO 64 male 28 female
3YO 136 male 63 female
4YO 128 male 57 female
5YO 116 male 38 female
6YO 57 male 15 female
7YO 16 male 6 female
8YO 14 male 1 female
9YO+ 17 male 18 female
Total 577 253
830

JOHN MOONEY

[triplev123]

there are only a small amount of breeders that breed to sell.
[vvv] true. Roughly a fraction below 20% but through the sales only it is probably closer to 15%.

most of the horses in the apg sale are not really for sale, their breeder just puts them in the sale so they are ellidgable for the series and the big money.
[vvv] not true. Most = a majority and as even the most jaundiced of eyes viewing the sales results would notice, most get sold.

if a buyer wants to pay big money for the horse then they might sell it. Don't blame the breeder for this, it's the way the apg sale works, blame them.
[vvv] see above.

a large amount of good broodmares never raced or were not good enough to win a race.
[vvv] interested to see the exact figures to back up that statement if you have them at hand.

many good race mares don't make good broodmares.
[vvv] see above.

take a look at sushi sushi its dam was a good race horse but it took 7 very average foals and 4 missed ones to get the good one. Her owners deserve a medal.
[vvv] she was better than good. She was a superstar.
unfortunately she tore her cervix when foaling her 1st one and was ET only from that day onwards. Sushi is an example of the quality of racehorse that she was destined to leave time & again but through circumstances/bad luck was largely unable to do so. Her owner does deserve a medal, though he will not get one for his golfing prowess & especially so for his composure whilst putting.

you can't get good horses without breeders willing to throw money away chasing a dream.breeders need some help if you want the industry to thrive.
[vvv] agree with that to some extent.


vvv

[Midfrew]

Not sure if the Panel engaged an analyst to look at the actual facts behind the Australian breeding and racing industry. In 2008 the NZ Racing Board commissioned supply chain reports for both the thoroughbred and harness industries/sport. The harness report was not published widely (I'll try to get it up on the NZSBA website over the weekend www.harnessracing.co.nz (http://www.harnessracing.co.nz)). Folks may be interested in the key figures from the analysis:

In all cases the numbers are for the 11 year period 1995 to 2006.

Across that period fillies:
- 51% of foals
- 50% to 52% of the available NZ horse pool after yearling exports
- 48% to 49% of the horses registered
- 43% to 45% of individual starters
- 39% to 44% of the total number of starters in each year.
(The percentages are the lows and highs which generally increased moving towards 2006)

Within the available pool 37% of ALL horses were never registered with a trainer and of those:
- 57% were fillies; and
- of that 57%, a quarter were subsequently bred at stud.

Of the horses that were registered with a trainer 9.5% never trialled or raced and of these 56% were fillies. In this sample one third of them went to stud.

Assuming that fillies and colts are equally prone to injury, the conclusion must be that owners in NZ quit fillies early, most probably because of a perceived lack of opportunity. What are the facts:

- fillies with trainers and which race = 45%
- fillies make up 46% of trial fields
- fillies win 42% of trials
- fillies make up only 39% of the races won and 40% of the race placings

In NZ just over 50 percent of the horses raced have the breeder as an owner in some capacity.

Finally only 46% of the total available pool of horses raced in at least one race. For NZ thoroughbreds the figure is 50%.

Two conclusions from this study are:

1. the pool of racing horses can be expanded by more races for fillies and mares; they will then increase the number of times they race per season and race for longer, changing owner/breeder and trainer perceptions on this may be the biggest challenge if more races are carded ; and

2. a decline in the number of colts and geldings racing in NZ will have a greater impact in the short term than a decline in the number of fillies racing. In the absence of increasing opportunities for F&M in NZ this is a real risk given the number of exports.

John Mooney

[aussiebreno]

Cheers Midfrew - these figures are over and above the Breeding Panels numbers where they say an average of 600. So trend is its going up.

Sorry everyone for posting the same dribble yet again but I just can't get my head around how mightymo thinks this is a good idea.

Breeding panels number: 7800 mares serviced per year with about 1000 foals not making it to the world. Foals to starters = 49% meaning 51% of foals don't even face the starter.

So here; with 100% absolute concrete numbers (well I actually I will still gear them towards being generous to Breeders.)

577 x 4500 + 192 x 1350 = 2855700 in total credits given out a year. In truth the Breeding Panel doesn't even think the figure will be this high.
Of course breeders may wish to use more/less credits when breeding comes around but using averages; 2855700 / 7800 = $366.

So in ONE year of breeding breeders can use their $366 but then their mare has ZERO credits left and we are back at Square 1 regardless. Or they could apportion the $366 in credits out over, lets say, the 10 foals the mare has in her lifetime. So $36 in credits each year!

Yes, these sort of figures are going to make a BIG difference to the number of foals being bred per year. In fact we might even get one more foal being born per year. But then we have the slight problem of the import fee meaning our field numbers DECREASE.

Oh and yes, the world doesn't work in averages. Those mares who achieve above the average will get higher breeding credits. But oh wait they would have been bred from anyway because they are already above average. Those ones below average who don't get bred from at the moment will have even less credits. Then we factor in the postage and admin fees and shit we are running at a loss here.

Just admit its a ridiculous and terrible scheme mightmo.

Hey theres 35 pages of the report and I am only cranky at about 1/2 of one page. Take it as a win that I've seen your ways for 34.5 pages.

EDIT: Also it says 51% of foals don't make it to races. That means 51% of the funding is just flushed down the drain!!!

http://www.celebrityhq.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/ashtonpunked.jpg

Cmon Mightymo; I've just realised now 21 pages into this thread that the panel and yourself are obviously pulling our legs. I congratulate you on that. Well played Sir. I doubt even VVV could have matched a stunt this big. You're a master Mightymo!

[gutwagon]

@aussiebreno What is it with 'Pass The Mustard' and you ? Did he kick you or something ? His average prize money to starters is $9491. Thats for an $800 service fee. Have a look at some so called better stallions who are not preforming- Elsu $7077. Real Desire $8720. Thats just to name a few. You have said you don't breed horses, what gives you the right to joke about the people who do ? Tell David Murphy what you think about that horse, I'm sure he would put your lights out quick smart. lol.

[aussiebreno]

Nah I just can't think of many other cheap stallions that are advertised; I'm using his fee as its one of the cheaper ones (I reckon I've seen $850 somewhere). I guess because he is advertised is why he sticks in my mind and I don't know any other ! Heck I couldn't have actually told you if he had 1000 foals for 1 winners or 100 foals for 90 winners and 80 of this in 2minutes I just see his name plastered everywhere for some reason. I'm not using his performance I'm using his fee as the talking point.

[eliteblood]

Many good race mares don't make good broodmares.Take a look at Sushi Sushi its dam was a good race horse but it took 7 very average foals and 4 missed ones to get the good one. Her owners deserve a medal.

I know the owners of Sabilize well and they were just too damned stubborn to give up on her. If medals get handed out for that then I agree, they deserve one.

[The Big Mile]

firstly i think everyone has started to lose the plot here a bit, especially rooster;- the big mile clearly imports horses from nz, so good on him - everyone is already trying to force more fees down his throat so no need to jump on him anymore on here

Thanks Lance. Wont bother responding to Roosters or that bloke (justdoit I think his name was). Makes you shake your head with some of the stuff people come up with :p

Right for he record:

I buy going horses from NZ
I buy going horses from Australia
I buy yearlings
I breed and have expanded my broodmare band (including 2 whom are racing but I will breed with) 4 fold in the last 12 months
I wasn't born into harness racing and got hooked
I love the horses
I want to see the industry prosper as much as anyone else

My beef is quite clear with the import fee:

It is inequitable
It provides a barrier to entry for ownership
It dilutes the ability to generate returns
It taxes one part of the industry to fund another

...and the list goes on.

If I did not love nor care for the industry I would say it would be pretty unlikely that I would spend the time I have on here looking at the pros and cons of what has been proposed.

Remember - I breed and I will be explanding my breeding operation BUT I know what I am getting myself into. I accept that if my breeding will not be successful then that is my fault, not anyone elses. I do not expect hand outs and while it would be lovely to reduce costs, as generally I will breed to race then if it goes pear-shaped, that is my fault, no one elses. I do not expect other owners to subsidise my ownership punt - because thats exactly what 79% of breeders whom breed to race are - OWNERS!

[The Big Mile]

1. the pool of racing horses can be expanded by more races for fillies and mares; they will then increase the number of times they race per season and race for longer, changing owner/breeder and trainer perceptions on this may be the biggest challenge if more races are carded

Well said John. Excellent post.

I thought maybe the main focus of the Report would have been on this area mainly because it is free to implement as well as being pretty much immediate.

More racing opportunities will have a positive impact on potential down the line to breed with. 6.6% of races programmed for F&M sais it all.

[gutwagon]

I notice that one person on the panel is associated with Alabar and another with APG.
The big winners of this plan will be stallion owners with the increase in prices and numbers of services, and the companies that run the yearling sales with people turning away from nz stock and going to the sales.
Strange that !!
Maybe the breeding bonus could be spent on service fees or at yearling sales on horses. This might keep more people happy ?

[aussiebreno]

There isn't going to be an increase in services though. The positives are very minimal, if any, in helping fill fields.
Although there may be an increase in prices yes; because the higher end mares who generally bred to the higher end stallions will get more credits. The report also found no correlation between service fees and prices at sales so, against my opinion, I guess the sales prices won't actually won't increase though that. But they may increase a little bit due to less imports. But remember they are two different markets.

[Greg Hando]

Triplev
[vvv] she was better than good. She was a superstar.
unfortunately she tore her cervix when foaling her 1st one and was ET only from that day onwards. Sushi is an example of the quality of racehorse that she was destined to leave time & again but through circumstances/bad luck was largely unable to do so. Her owner does deserve a medal, though he will not get one for his golfing prowess & especially so for his composure whilst putting.

Are you saying that because of Embryo transfer this is why her earlier foals (except the 1st ) weren't as good as people expected them to be? Trying hard to understand your comment to me it is suggesting ET changes the genes as all mare's have bad luck stories about some of their progeny from time to time.

[Greg Hando]

Gutwagon
Sabalize was a top mare and will be bred from all her life i would think if you look up her performance and family you will see why the breeding side is persisted with, a very strong family.

[roosters]

Thanks Lance. Wont bother responding to Roosters or that bloke (justdoit I think his name was). Makes you shake your head with some of the stuff people come up with :p

Right for he record:

I buy going horses from NZ
I buy going horses from Australia
I buy yearlings
I breed and have expanded my broodmare band (including 2 whom are racing but I will breed with) 4 fold in the last 12 months
I wasn't born into harness racing and got hooked
I love the horses
I want to see the industry prosper as much as anyone else

My beef is quite clear with the import fee:

It is inequitable
It provides a barrier to entry for ownership
It dilutes the ability to generate returns
It taxes one part of the industry to fund another

...and the list goes on.

If I did not love nor care for the industry I would say it would be pretty unlikely that I would spend the time I have on here looking at the pros and cons of what has been proposed.

Remember - I breed and I will be explanding my breeding operation BUT I know what I am getting myself into. I accept that if my breeding will not be successful then that is my fault, not anyone elses. I do not expect hand outs and while it would be lovely to reduce costs, as generally I will breed to race then if it goes pear-shaped, that is my fault, no one elses. I do not expect other owners to subsidise my ownership punt - because thats exactly what 79% of breeders whom breed to race are - OWNERS!

You really dont get it. This is not about giving breeders a free kick. This report is about increasing foal numbers.

Seem as though you are mr Knowitall, can you explain how you would address the problem of rapidly diminishing foal numbers?

[eliteblood]

Triplev
[vvv] she was better than good. She was a superstar.
unfortunately she tore her cervix when foaling her 1st one and was ET only from that day onwards. Sushi is an example of the quality of racehorse that she was destined to leave time & again but through circumstances/bad luck was largely unable to do so. Her owner does deserve a medal, though he will not get one for his golfing prowess & especially so for his composure whilst putting.

Are you saying that because of Embryo transfer this is why her earlier foals (except the 1st ) weren't as good as people expected them to be? Trying hard to understand your comment to me it is suggesting ET changes the genes as all mare's have bad luck stories about some of their progeny from time to time.

Her first foal was a very promising horse but he had a breathing problem that was operated on as a 2YO. The operation was a disaster and ended his career.

[roosters]

Trainers always tell me they dont like ET's? Is there evidence to support that, or is it just a myth?

[Greg Hando]

I liked the old NSW Statebred bonus' bloody lot of horse's bought and bred on them bring them back i say.
And Gutwagon another is with Egmont Park in QLD .
When people go on these panel's or board's they have to remember to take off their own cap and put the REPRESENT THE WHOLE INDUSTRY cap on and as with most panel's or controlling bodies in SPORT'S most Rep's are there for their own benefit and what they can get for themselve's and don't bother about anyone else Union's are another example of (wear 2 cap's) that i've been involved with.
I'm not saying the panel is there for their own benefit but sometime's people do wonder what their intention's are the betterment of the whole or the betterment of me.

[Greg Hando]

Trainers always tell me they dont like ET's? Is there evidence to support that, or is it just a myth?

Just a myth Genes don't change

[aussiebreno]

You really dont get it. This is not about giving breeders a free kick. This report is about increasing foal numbers.

Seem as though you are mr Knowitall, can you explain how you would address the problem of rapidly diminishing foal numbers?

And my numbers show the average benefit is about 1-2% of total costs for ONE year. Zero funding every other year. That isn't going to increase numbers.

About 20 foals might get a higher price at the yearling sales that is about it.

Why hurt something that is increasingly bring in horse numbers when the rewards of doing so are very minimal?

[aussiebreno]

we dont need foals we need RACEHORSES ! according to your fricking report half of any extra foals bred (fillies) because of the scheme will be under raced... hardly makes alot of sense to replace RACING nz horses with foals that your panel has already proven are under utilised

how will increasing foal numbers make our sport better? your side says more races = more turnover = more prizemoney ... how does that help anyone bar the tab? 1000 foals spiltting 100 million in prizemoney have the same returns as 2000 foals getting 200 mill in prizemoney
If TAB has more turnover we get more outside funding. This is probably the most important source of inflow of cash for the sport. We
That said; the plan won't increase fields anyway.

EDIT: Had a better look at what you said and yeah ignore my post.

[Greg Hando]

we dont need foals we need RACEHORSES ! according to your fricking report half of any extra foals bred (fillies) because of the scheme will be under raced... hardly makes alot of sense to replace RACING nz horses with foals that your panel has already proven are under utilised

how will increasing foal numbers make our sport better? your side says more races = more turnover = more prizemoney ... how does that help anyone bar the tab? 1000 foals spiltting 100 million in prizemoney have the same returns as 2000 foals getting 200 mill in prizemoney

Lance where do NZ racehorses come from ? FOALS that is why we need more foal's to turn into racehorse's so as to compete with the Import's is the way i understand it if we can have a better product here and more number's of that product perhap's there won't be the need for as many import's !

[roosters]

Just a myth Genes don't change

besides Sushi are there any other good ET horses?

How much does it cost to do the ET?

[aussiebreno]

Greg; the Credit scheme with funding from import fee is not going to increase numbers whatsoever. It is an average of $200 per mare for their lifetime breeding. It will take away the number of imports and fields will actually go down.

[The Big Mile]

You really dont get it. This is not about giving breeders a free kick. This report is about increasing foal numbers.

Seem as though you are mr Knowitall, can you explain how you would address the problem of rapidly diminishing foal numbers?

Now come on Roosters. Mr Knowitall? Far from. Love to learn all the time.

I have explained myself already so go back through the 23 odd pages and read.

I oppose the funding of the credit scheme, I do not oppose trying to get more foals but there are many inherent flaws that we haven't even touched on yet.

Good day :rolleyes:

[Greg Hando]

greg, i totally understand what your trying to get at - but the scheme is substitutional, replacing nz imported horses (the majority of which are horses already racing or winners) with aussie horses. 50% of these foals will be fillies, so 50% of these horses wil not be raced as much as the horses that would be otherwise imported


embryo transfer is 3k... i think the receipent still matters, needs to be a good mother who will bust themselves putting milk into their foal

i can see both side's of the arguement that is why we need more filly and mare race's as well as more foal's to try and compete with the import's . I think what the panel has come up with is good overall( Except the high import fee )and see it as a way of trying to stimulate the breeding side of our industry here in AUS and hope to get more quality foal's on the ground to be able to compete in an open market,
and by the way the Import fee is way too high it is a ridiculous number

[mango]

I know the owners of Sabilize well and they were just too damned stubborn to give up on her. If medals get handed out for that then I agree, they deserve one.

Hey Eliteblood

Are you sure you know the owner's lol.

[gutwagon]

I think ET is $5000+ , wish it was only around $3000.
Remember some people thought AI would produce weaker horses, well I think thats been shown to be wrong. ET should not effect the quality of the foal. It can effect the mares race form if she is racing and being served ect.

[justdoit]

I think it was Eliteblood that suggested a sliding scale for the amount payable on imports over? 90 days.

The BigGirl (think that's her name) posted that horses coming here for the big races, returning to NZ with the money should pay a premium.

Both of these suggestions make more sense to me.

The dropping of the origin (NZ) behind the horse names will lessen the pain, could that be the real issue that the panel members want to address?
It shits me to have to look at NZ NZ NZ NZ all the time... ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[mango]

Hi Justdoit

Some of them horses that would be expected to pay a premium are horses who have paid to be eligable to race in the Breeders Crown etc, the way i see it is they have paid the same fee as us here in Aus so they should be entitled to take there money and run and vice versa if we go over there as Sushi Sushi, Smoken Up and before them Divisive have done.

[nat]

Interesting point Mango how many NZ'rs contribute to our futurity races with making at least the first payment

I am opposed to slugging any owner or breeder higher fee's to start any council society or organization and any added mare race. I'm now millionaire and its expensive enough now and I don't want to be slugged just because I want the best for my dollar with a NZ horse. I want equality at least in 2-3 and 4yld between the sexes and gates considering its a 50/50 chance when breeding if you get a filly or colt

I don't know about anyone else but for me I breed, buy, own, race & train so I can try and get that top liner and win races and see that money go in my bank account if I wanted trophy's and accolades I'd start taking them to pony club and the royal shows

[triplev123]

I know the owners of Sabilize well and they were just too damned stubborn to give up on her. If medals get handed out for that then I agree, they deserve one.

Didn't he used to wear a snow white skull cap on the odd occasion when he took the drive?
Sat bolt upright in the bike...reminded me of Bert Alley. ;)

[Gtrain]

besides Sushi are there any other good ET horses?

How much does it cost to do the ET?
Kid Coconut is another I think is an ET. Not a bad horse.

[triplev123]

Invitro, a Camluck filly now mare from Canada is an ET. She has raced with distinction from 2-7 & has won over $1.9 million.
Nice family Kid Coconut's from. Hoppy O'Halloran bred his dam, Mi Coconut, from his good mare Milady. The Great One, Edgar Tatlow had that family back in the early 1960's in VIC, previously came from NZ.

[mango]

Interesting to see that 6 of the 7 horses that raced at Globe Derby in the first race tonight were nz bred.

[The Big Mile]

Interesting to see that 6 of the 7 horses that raced at Globe Derby in the first race tonight were nz bred.

Last night at Gloucester Park for their metro meeting 46% of horses were NZ'ers.

Take them out, you have no meeting = no turnover = no returns to the industry.

Take Take out half of the NZ'ers and you have 2.5 less races = less turnover = less returns to the industry.

MENANGLE tonight:

40% of all runners were NZ'ers. Take them out, no metro meeting conducted.

MENANGLE Tuesday:

39% of runners were ex NZ'ers. Take them out, no meeting conducted.

MENANGLE Monday:

27% of runners ex NZ'ers. Take them out, no meeting conducted.

The Ex-Kiwis would appear to be fairly important to our racing it seems like.

[Greg Hando]

How many horses nominated for each race would be a better way of looking at it

[The Big Mile]

How many horses nominated for each race would be a better way of looking at it

Hard to gauge with Menangle as so many horses are multiple noms but I don't think there will be any great disparity with any balloted out. I'd say that the percentages would be roughly the same with those horses too.

What it does show is the penetration into the local racing population of the Ex Kiwis. Certainly not insignificant.

[triplev123]

Last night at Gloucester Park for their metro meeting 46% of horses were NZ'ers.

Take them out, you have no meeting = no turnover = no returns to the industry.

Take Take out half of the NZ'ers and you have 2.5 less races = less turnover = less returns to the industry.

MENANGLE tonight:

40% of all runners were NZ'ers. Take them out, no metro meeting conducted.

MENANGLE Tuesday:

39% of runners were ex NZ'ers. Take them out, no meeting conducted.

MENANGLE Monday:

27% of runners ex NZ'ers. Take them out, no meeting conducted.

The Ex-Kiwis would appear to be fairly important to our racing it seems like.

WA is a particularly bad example TBM.
Vested Interests in WA Harness Racing saw to it that their State's Breeding Industry was destroyed and now their racing relies almost entirely upon a veritable river of high priced ready mades from NZ. Certain persons over there should hang their God damned heads in shame. Gloucester Park should be renamed Alexandra Park West or maybe Cambridge on the Swan.

[mango]

I think it just goes to show people prefer to buy going horses if anything, breeding and buying yearling's isn't for everyone.

[The Big Mile]

WA is a particularly bad example TBM.
Vested Interests in WA Harness Racing saw to it that their State's Breeding Industry was destroyed and now their racing relies almost entirely upon a veritable river of high priced ready mades from NZ. Certain persons over there should hang their God damned heads in shame. Gloucester Park should be renamed Alexandra Park West or maybe Cambridge on the Swan.

Particularly bad? I think it shows that without Kiwi imports, they would be struggling big time. In fact you would think that it is only been Kiwi imports that have saved the product over there.

Did the Sires Stakes series fall over because of lack of patronage from local owners?

[mightymo]

Last night at Gloucester Park for their metro meeting 46% of horses were NZ'ers.

Take them out, you have no meeting = no turnover = no returns to the industry.

Take Take out half of the NZ'ers and you have 2.5 less races = less turnover = less returns to the industry.

MENANGLE tonight:

40% of all runners were NZ'ers. Take them out, no metro meeting conducted.

MENANGLE Tuesday:

39% of runners were ex NZ'ers. Take them out, no meeting conducted.

MENANGLE Monday:

27% of runners ex NZ'ers. Take them out, no meeting conducted.

The Ex-Kiwis would appear to be fairly important to our racing it seems like.

The Big Mile

In trying to prove your point, you have actually highlighted the major problem our industry is facing and which the panel tried to address - lack of foals being born in Aust!!!!

Forget everything the panel has put forward, and starting from scratch, how would you and others address this situation?

[aussiebreno]

7800 being born @ 49% making it to the races. So 3822 make it to races. There is enough 2yo and 3yo racing imo; those fields always stand up and the smaller fields can be blamed on not as many make it to the races. So lets say the racing pool is made up of 4, 5 and 6yos. Thats 3822 x 3 = 11466 horses in our racing crop.
There is say 5 meetings a day x 8 races x 10horses x 363 days = 145200.
Horses divided by spots needing to be filled = The average 4, 5, 6yo only needs to be having 13 starts a year to fill our fields.

Those figures are guesstimates.

I don't believe the problem is lack of foals.
Retention of horses racing? Standardbreds are very capable of having 13 starts a year; a hell of a lot would double or triple; even quadruple this quota.
So why aren't horses racing? Not good enough? Lack of prizemoney? We need to program for lesser class of horses? Excusing the odd exception are there to many breeders breeding rubbish and then wondering why they can't break 2.10? Costs to high for horses once they are in training?

If you can't win races with horses in our market; or the ones winning aren't for sale, then of course you are going to go to NZ.
Are the influx of NZ horses ruining careers? Well programme more races for lesser class horses. Do we have the prizemoney for that? Maybe not, and if so then we have the right amount of horses as it is.

[mightymo]

"Excusing the odd exception are there to many breeders breeding rubbish and then wondering why they can't break 2.10? "

This is a very real issue - the fact that breeders cant breed competitive horses at the dollar value they have to spend. As a result they are simply not breeding. In allowing open books we have greatly improved the breed but at a cost, and the gulf between the lesser bred ones and the better bred ones has increased dramatically causing people to just give it away.

[mightymo]

Take a look at menangle next week - there are 3 races with only 8 starters, and 2 with 9 starters - why are they not full fields? They have the best prizemoney and the best handicapping conditions.

We need full, and competitive fields to maximise TAB turnover.

Irrespective of how you view any of the panel recommendations, the one irrefutable fact is the fact that our racing population is dwindling and each day there are fields that are not full, and that is something we need to address, and quickly.

Some of you might suggest we should give a subsidy to bringing NZ horses over... that might help things in the short term, but would not provide a sustainable long term solution. Like it or not, we do need to get more foals(and better bred ones) on the ground. Id like to know how we can do that.

[aussiebreno]

"Excusing the odd exception are there to many breeders breeding rubbish and then wondering why they can't break 2.10? "

This is a very real issue - the fact that breeders cant breed competitive horses at the dollar value they have to spend. As a result they are simply not breeding. In allowing open books we have greatly improved the breed but at a cost, and the gulf between the lesser bred ones and the better bred ones has increased dramatically causing people to just give it away.
Yes and $150 in credits for a mares lifetime is not going to stop this.
And they are part of the 51% that don't make it to races. What about retaining the 49% of those that do make it to the races?

[eliteblood]

This is a very real issue - the fact that breeders cant breed competitive horses at the dollar value they have to spend. As a result they are simply not breeding. In allowing open books we have greatly improved the breed but at a cost, and the gulf between the lesser bred ones and the better bred ones has increased dramatically causing people to just give it away.

That is very very true Mightymo. The Art Major's, Bettors Delight's, Mach Three's and Christian Cullen's are totally dominating. Many, many breeders cannot afford to breed to these sires but cannot afford not to.

[triplev123]

Particularly bad? I think it shows that without Kiwi imports, they would be struggling big time. In fact you would think that it is only been Kiwi imports that have saved the product over there.

Did the Sires Stakes series fall over because of lack of patronage from local owners?

Yes, particularly bad...particularly bad with bells on, a whistle, a novelty sound for the horn, a Fox tail on the aerial & a large rear-view mirror with a nice fuzzy purple Gonk attached. That's how bad. You're given to railing againts vested interests if, when and as you see them, you've made those calls with regard to various aspects of the Industry in the past...and good for you by the way. Well, in WA, under pressure from a small group of big $ spending vested interests in that part of the world, a combination of both active and passive lack of intent on behalf of WA Administration saw to it that...rather than $$$ being directed to where it would have done more longer term good by way of bolstering a strong local breeding Industry (ala the NSW Breeders Challenge system, VicBred & so on)...the WA Breeding Industry went to Hell in a hand-cart. Like it or not, those are the facts of the matter.
Painting the rafts of ready mades from NZ as though they rode over the hill as the saviours of WA Harness Racing is akin to admiration shown for the bandages worn by someone that quite intentionally shot themselves in the foot.

[mightymo]

Yes and $150 in credits for a mares lifetime is not going to stop this.
And they are part of the 51% that don't make it to races. What about retaining the 49% of those that do make it to the races?

Breno - stop complaining and actually add something constructive. you are in charge. What are you going to do to improve the situation....give us something useful