Why aren't owners revolting over $4,500 races in Vic

[Messenger]

We are seeing an increase in races for a little more than the standard $7k
Eg Maryborough on Wednesday has two $8k races and one $9k race
and yet at the same meeting we have two $4,500 races
If they found another $1k and redistributed the 'extra' funds from the races for $8k and $9k
The whole program could have been racing for $7k

Sounds fairer to me. $4,500 races were brought in by razor Martin because we were going broke. Now they are becoming entrenched

[Messenger]

I would think that HRV should be embarrassed to have two $4,500 races on a Friday night card at Melton

http://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=MX180222

[Yabbie]

Is Friday night card a metro meeting? Could be the answer. Main meeting for week being Terang Cup

[Messenger]

Carol, I know it is not a metro meeting but it is still embarrassing stakemoney. Do you see it at Menangle. It is the equivalent of Flemington having a midweek meeting and having a couple of races for what they race a Healesville picnic for

[Messenger]

The prize money for the gallops picnic meeting at Woolamai tomorrow is $5k

[Messenger]

If we had made the two $8k races $7k and one of the $10k races a $7k, we would have the $5k to boost the $4,500 races to $7k

[KTQ]

My dad refuses to race in the $5000 races over here. Costs the same to train them to race in a $7500 so why would he want to instantly lose $1500?

[Showgrounds]

My dad refuses to race in the $5000 races over here. Costs the same to train them to race in a $7500 so why would he want to instantly lose $1500?

I remember the late Leo O'Connor saying it cost him the same money to train Gammalite as it did to have a slow maiden in the stable. I have learnt you will never own a horse capable of earning the lion's share of the stakes while you are paying up for horses that bottom feed with the mice.

Victims of the punt will bet regardless of the stakemoney. HRV, bu continuing to program $4500 races at prime tracks demonstrates its priority is for punters not owners.

[Messenger]

My dad refuses to race in the $5000 races over here. Costs the same to train them to race in a $7500 so why would he want to instantly lose $1500?
Good on him Katie, imagine if every trainer did that ;)
Problem fixed

[Messenger]

Booming Mildura has 12 races again tonight
But the $10k and $12k races are at the expense of the Three $4,500 races (they could all have been $7k races)
They haven't attracted anything special
They appear to be a donation to the Douglas Superannuation Fund

[Messenger]

Ballarat tonight has $20k races but it also has $4,500 races!
R2 has 4 last start winners, 2 of which were $7k races - why are they racing for only $4,500 tonight

http://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=BA250222#BAC25022207

[aussiebreno]

You only take a 2 point penalty for your Net Rating so it has some appeal in that respect.

[Messenger]

Have a look at these 2 races at Horsham today, why is one of them for only $4,500

[Messenger]

12 races at Ballarat tonight. Forget the APG heats as their prizemoney is set.
The first two races are for only $4,500 but they didn't have to be
Taking $7,000 as the standard, there are 5 races that have been allocated a total of $6,0000 more than $42k expected (6x$7k=$42k)
$5k of this $6k would have been enough to see the first two races also run for $7k

Similar thing at Shep last Tuesday, 12 races again and all but R.10 for $7k plus, the pluses were enough to make the $4,500 race a $7k, instead of discriminating against one group of owners

[Messenger]

The first 3 races at Hamilton today are $4,500 races
2nd prize is only $700
It feels like 6° in Hamilton right now
You would have to pay me $700 to go to Hamilton today
even though I am only 70 minutes away
(we oldies are soft :o)

[Theoldfox]

It's tough for the owners and trainers. They are wedged like workers protesting for better conditions from employers whilst they don't have a reasonable basic minimum wage in place.

If trainers/owners boycott nominations either the race is scrapped or someone else will nominate with an inferior horse and take what little is on offer. It's natural human behaviour during desperate times.

The only way to fight this is by grouping together and acting as a block, enough to show HRV that the participants are the lifeblood of the sport, without the participants it falls over completely. It may require action that will cripple meetings in the short term for longer term change. But it's not without pitfalls either. One may ask "What will such action do t the reputation to a sport already in decline?" It's a very troublesome predicament. Then there is the question of where the savings will come from to put into increased (actually let's call it restored) stake money.



HRA has been at the helm during the decline and decreases in prize money. They should be focused on ideas and lobbying for grants to re-invigorate the sport on behalf of the day in and day out owners, trainers and drivers. There is no quick fix. The participants are the people that will bring in the new people and train the new people on participating in the sport. At the moment, I bet if you ask random trainers at a meeting as to whether you should join the sport, they will say "It's not worth it, don't do it".

Getting money from agencies such as Government requires a strategic business plan for the purse strings to open to make the sport healthy again, then there is a need to capitalise by bringing in new people whilst the sport is healthy. I haven't seen a HRV or HRA annual report with an extensive plan. Perhaps it happens behind closed doors, but I doubt such documents exist... And don't get me started on the Eureka!

[Messenger]

Well said

It particularly irks me when you have other races on the card in excess of $7k which if run for $7k would have negated the need for the $4,500 races. That was only the case to a small extent at Hamilton today but even so if races 5 & 9 were for $7k then we could have had one of the $4,500 races run as a $7k

[aussiebreno]

She Will Wantano wins one. Hadn't gone close racing over 50 raters. Got its chance today and only goes up a couple points so will be competitive next start not going up too high in rating.

Shady Dancer was the favourite in the other one and ran 2nd. Was an outsider and hadn't been sighted in $7K races after winning a $4K race not long ago.

I think they have their place for some horses.

Maybe I picked the 2 best examples to look at but these were the only two I looked at.

[Messenger]

Have you got them in NSW?

[aussiebreno]

Have you got them in NSW?

Nope

[Messenger]

I know NSW/Menangle Club has lots of money but I don't think Vic are so skint that we have to have them either - they are just a carry over from when we had nothing but an accountant as CEO
Irks me that stables equally putting on the show are expected to work for below award wages
Pretty soon Menangle will not have any races below $10k even on a Tuesday, at Melton we can have whole programs of $4,500 races - Headquarters LOL, sounds more like Bottomhalf to me

[aussiebreno]

I think those two horses I mentioned done better collecting something out of $4k than collecting nothing out of $7k. As for also rans/outsiders if they are unfancied/cant do well in $4k races how are they going to do well in $7k races.

Also, whats wrong with accountants ����

[Messenger]

You know what I mean, he was a number cruncher and nothing more
We supposedly don't have an abundance of horses so if all races are $7k (with conditions) I think that there is a fair chance those horses will end up in similar races

[Theoldfox]

I think those two horses I mentioned done better collecting something out of $4k than collecting nothing out of $7k. As for also rans/outsiders if they are unfancied/cant do well in $4k races how are they going to do well in $7k races.

Also, whats wrong with accountants ����




This is a false argument, the races are ratings based and horses need to be nominated whether it's for 4.5k or 7k. If the rating keeps dropping they'll eventually end up in a competitive race irrespective of prizemoney. The product the industry sells to the betting public is the same no matter if the race is 4.5k or 7k or even 10k for that matter.


If there isn't some meaningful reforms Victoria will end up on the path to South Australia's 2k races. Winning doesn't even cover the month's training cost. Justifying 4.5k races as better for lower class is no solution in my opinion. It is akin to claiming that the minimum wage should not exist, that unskilled workers should be happy to get paid $5 an hour because it's better than nothing. Surely we can do better that this.

[aussiebreno]

This is a false argument, the races are ratings based and horses need to be nominated whether it's for 4.5k or 7k. If the rating keeps dropping they'll eventually end up in a competitive race irrespective of prizemoney. The product the industry sells to the betting public is the same no matter if the race is 4.5k or 7k or even 10k for that matter.


If there isn't some meaningful reforms Victoria will end up on the path to South Australia's 2k races. Winning doesn't even cover the month's training cost. Justifying 4.5k races as better for lower class is no solution in my opinion. It is akin to claiming that the minimum wage should not exist, that unskilled workers should be happy to get paid $5 an hour because it's better than nothing. Surely we can do better that this.
There is still some races for $7k at those ratings. True their ratings go down but this fast tracks to find a suitable race rather than waiting for it to "eventually" go down. A NR50 $7k race will likely be stronger than a NR50 $4k race. Plus they only go up 2 pts if they win so they don't go straight back up to an unwinnable rating.

I'd love for top class to be $50k, mid class $40k and bottom class $30k so no min wage debate here, just that theres a spot for the bottom class.

[Messenger]

Connections putting on the show on Sunday night of a long weekend are all racing for $4,500 bar one race
Those poor gallopers putting on the show at Swan Hill today (for the 3rd day in a row) have a $175,000 Cup and most of the other races for $50,000

[Messenger]

There is an $80,000 race at Flemington - those poor owners - every other race is $130k, $150k or $200k

[trish]

Just read the prizemoney increases in the Gallops. Wow!!.
A picnic race is $7 grand !!
Wonder if harness will follow...hmmmmmm

[Messenger]

Nearly half the program at a Tuesday night Kilmore meet for only $4,500 - so not good enough

https://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=KI160822

[Messenger]

I think they are on the increase as there are another 3 at Shep tonight

https://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=SP170822

[Theoldfox]

unfortunately the wrong type of increase....
I think they are on the increase as there are another 3 at Shep tonight

https://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=SP170822

[aussiebreno]

Between Kilmore and Shep there was 7 $4500 races out of 19 races.

The three lowest turnover races of all 19 races were $4500 races.

5 of the lowest 8 turnover races were $4500 races. A 2yo and a Trot race with $1.55 and $1.35 faves are in those 8. So just one ordinary $7000 race made the bottom 8.

Low sample size but I think it paints a pretty clear picture punters don't want to bet on plodders (for want of a better term).

I think by having plodders race for $4500 HRV have met the middle ground between juggling current turnover/income and trying to keep non-winning participants engaged for longer.

Of course thats not to say $4500 prizemoney is good. Would love bottom tier prizemoney to be say $20000 but we need to be realistic with what goal posts HRV are working with in regards to income and budget.

[Messenger]

I know it is not the start of a new racing season anymore but it is the start of a new weather season so it is as good a time as any to start a count on just how many $4,500 races are being foisted on us
My intention is to keep the count to draw attention to what extent HRV is undermining the industry's standard of living

01/09/22 - 4/9

[aussiebreno]

I know it is not the start of a new racing season anymore but it is the start of a new weather season so it is as good a time as any to start a count on just how many $4,500 races are being foisted on us
My intention is to keep the count to draw attention to what extent HRV is undermining the industry's standard of living

01/09/22 - 4/9

To what extent do these poor turnover races with poor performing horses undermine well performing horses earnings/owners standard of living for those that bring in their fair share of turnover but are taking reduced prizemoney to subsidise non performers? Always two ways to look at things.

Quick look at their 2021 financials. Extra $10M revenue from 2020. $5M went towards stakemoney and $5M went towards arresting a Net Current Asset position of around negative $15M. Not sure what else the current admin are supposed to do? Long term for the industry its important to have a better liquidity position, would undermine the industry a lot more if it was allowed to continue sliding.

[Messenger]

The $4,500 races were brought in because we were supposedly broke and needed to balance the books
With our improved financials I believe in sharing the spoils.
Like I said - you don't have them in NSW
If a horse is putting on the show - say in a leg of the Quaddie, it should be in the running for a decent collect
We obviously need the numbers to have enough racing product, why is it Vic risks pissing them off

I think we will find that some of our very biggest races are subsidized and don't actually pay their way

ps Your very small sample size last time Brendan was not proof - if you want to do it again for September+, that would be good
Of course there will always be the other factors such as what race (number) they are etc etc

[aussiebreno]

The $4,500 races were brought in because we were supposedly broke and needed to balance the books
With our improved financials I believe in sharing the spoils.
Like I said - you don't have them in NSW
If a horse is putting on the show - say in a leg of the Quaddie, it should be in the running for a decent collect
We obviously need the numbers to have enough racing product, why is it Vic risks pissing them off

I think we will find that some of our very biggest races are subsidized and don't actually pay their way

ps Your very small sample size last time Brendan was not proof - if you want to do it again for September+, that would be good
Of course there will always be the other factors such as what race (number) they are etc etc
With net current assets still at negative $12M (at 30 June 2021) there is still a long way to go for the industry. Whilst there is other factors to consider textbooks will tell you the benchmark ratio should be $1.5-$2 current assets to $1 of current liabilities. HRV is at around $0.5. That is a long way to go (around 5 years if trading is consistent with 2021). If you had $1000 in the bank and $2000 worth of bills to pay I don’t think you’d be volunteering to up your spending.

While they could refinance some cash on the Melton land value to fix this, that’s just a stopgap solution and doesn’t change the fact that from industry operations the figures are bleak. You can run a two speed business successfully, by that I mean where the trading breaks even and the cash flow is just reliant on capital asset growth, but that’s not the right attitude. The attitude needs to be to have the industry profitable and generating cash flow on its own two feet, not just because of Austs property bubble.

The three avenues to generate cash flow (or minimise cash outflow):
1. The most important but also the hardest to do as harness fans dwindle is increase income. They have achieved this though.
2. Cut prizemoney. They have done this including cutting big races like Vic Cup significantly. Cutting on a handful of races doesn’t have the same impact as cutting on races that are run 365 days of the year.
3. Cut other expenses. They have done this.

I’m really not sure what else the current admin can do. There isn’t a magic money tree that keeps prizemoney levels ticking along to meet CPI at the same time as interest in harness racing declines rapidly as it has done for the past 30 years. Sure try harder to arrest the dwindling interest but they would need to be successful in that first over a sustained period of time before significantly changing prizemoney levels. Pinning the last 30 years of decline onto the decision to cut prizemoney made by the current admin is just emotive rubbish.

It doesn’t matter what HRNSW are doing. What someone else is doing isn’t the marker of whats right or wrong. Racing NSW are making up new multi-million dollar events yearly, does that mean HRV should be doing that as well just because that’s what someone else is doing?

Whether its slicing the pie differently so these $4500 races are worth a bit more and the other races go down the net result is still that prizemoney needs to be cut and there is less pie to go around. I really don’t see how any solution to the finances doesn’t involve having less pie available for total prizemoney. At some point the increase in land value could be utilised but that should be for capital or financial investment.

What is your solution? I don’t think I’ve seen any ideas on this forum in the past 10 years that would generate an extra $10M annually in income which would sustain the $4500 races being at normal levels while still cutting into the current asset position. I don’t think any of us are close enough to operations to make a very decisive call on cutting other expenses (maybe theres a few glaring ones I’m not sure). I don’t think we should be utilising the capital growth in Melton to fund prizemoney (earnings on investment could go towards it though but this would be limited and unpredictable). Or just put the $4500 races up and be damned about the liquidity position, opening self up if you were to experience 2x years of 5% declining income and the industry is on its knees. There just has to be prizemoney cuts somewhere, evil position to have to pick where from because nobody will be happy with wherever the prizemoney is taken from.

Also yes biggest races are probably subsidized. Moreso talking about the ordinary races for N50+ horses.

[Messenger]

Simple - nearly every meeting is ripping off some to give extra to others
Nearly every meet with $4,500 races have $8k, $9k or $10k races
I don't look at NSW that much but I don't think that is the norm there - all the races at meets are for the same
Make it the same in Vic - every race in Vic $7k before any are for more

[Messenger]

I should address your listing of
1. The most important but also the hardest to do as harness fans dwindle is increase income. They have achieved this though.
As if it was an achievement

Harness fans dwindling has been on their watch
Their decisions have cost us dearly
Nobody knows we exist

The lack of promotion is just about harness's greatest crime
As you know, businesses often run at a loss for years while trying to gain market share - market share is everything. Eg public company Pointsbet announcing a $250m+ loss again this week as they concentrate on gaining traction in the USA. Sure we are not a listed co with ways of raising capital like them BUT market share is what it is all about.
Ministers, Chairmen, Boards, CEO's have failed to show urgency or find the right people to have a real dip

It is not this fan forum's responsibility to come up with the ideas but plenty have given it a go.
There are many threads for you to read Brendan

The only things I can think of that the authorities have done that has in any way been innovative are
The French experiment and Trots Vision

Having control of our product and selling it overseas are still IMO integral to our future but I am not sure HRV are going to make it happen

[aussiebreno]

That's just robbing Peter to pay Paul. That is admittance there needs to be cuts so its a decision towards cutting the non-performers, or cutting the performers prizemoney. As a horse goes from N50 to N80 why should they forego $20K+ prizemoney to subsidize non-performers? Sure be in one camp and prefer one option of cutting prizemoney over another, but its hardly this hangable offence this thread makes it out to be. In NSW so many of these under N50 races are made up of horses who have already had their turn of winning a few races anyway and the same was the case for the winners of the $4500 races at Horsham and Ballarat the past 2 days. Why are horses who have had their turn getting extra (under $7k flat model) when horses making their way haven't even had their first slice of the pie yet. I certainly wouldn't expect a reserve grade footballer to get the same as a first grader, or a top performer at work to get the same as a poor performer.

Pointsbet have a successful product (gambling) and there is a big existing market they could steal. Harness racing as a product is inferior to the general public. Track size, track location, marketing etc isn't going to make standies run faster than throughbreds. TV and Internet etc rule out for younger generations. Peoples wages have gone backwards compared to COL so have less disposable income to spend on hobbies. Just pointing out how hard it is, not saying its the forums responsiblity.

Pointsbet also have capital investors to pool funds from. To do some mass campaign using excess capital HRV would need working capital from having its balance sheet position completely reversed and having surplus current assets.

The past decline in revenue and reasons for such is irrelevant to evaluating this decision. Whats happened in the past is unable to be changed and was different people in charge. Any recent initiative would only be in the early stages and wouldn't have had time to generate cash where prizemoney could be lifted across the board either.

[Messenger]

You have got that completely wrong Breno

EVERYBODY USED TO RACE FOR THE SAME AND STILL DO IN NSW BUT THEY DECIDED TO ROB SOME PETERS TO PAY PAUL IN VIC

Now when I say it is time to go back to the way it was eg All racing for $7k not some for $4.5k and some for $8k or $9k, you say I am robbing them LOL

Owners, breeders, trainers are not happy about it - I can see you have never been a reader of the Australian Harness Racing Industry facebook page

Let's imagine you are a Carlton member and all members used to get a pie and coke when they came to games, now half don't get anything but half get chicken and champagne

You asked what should have been done so don't go labelling the answer emotive rubbish. The administrators should have done better/not stuffed up and necessitated Vic having to cop this

Then you wouldn't be writing rubbish like:
Harness racing as a product is inferior to the general public. Track size, track location, marketing etc isn't going to make standies run faster than throughbreds.

Harness racing was not inferior and we do not want 'standies running faster' - we want to take back some market share (from the Dogs actually)
It is still the premier code in many European countries and they could be a template for improvement

I often think we are fighting a losing battle - you seem to have given up
All this is an aside from how prizemoney is distributed at meetings
You are a New South Welshman who likes the Vic model
I am a Victorian who likes the NSW model

Maybe some of our difference is ideological and we may have to beg to differ
You do not see it as a hangable offence but it is a pretty big - well small deal really ($4,500 is a 36% wage cut)

[aussiebreno]

You have got that completely wrong Breno

EVERYBODY USED TO RACE FOR THE SAME AND STILL DO IN NSW BUT THEY DECIDED TO ROB SOME PETERS TO PAY PAUL IN VIC

Now when I say it is time to go back to the way it was eg All racing for $7k not some for $4.5k and some for $8k or $9k, you say I am robbing them LOL

Owners, breeders, trainers are not happy about it - I can see you have never been a reader of the Australian Harness Racing Industry facebook page

Let's imagine you are a Carlton member and all members used to get a pie and coke when they came to games, now half don't get anything but half get chicken and champagne

You asked what should have been done so don't go labelling the answer emotive rubbish. The administrators should have done better/not stuffed up and necessitated Vic having to cop this

Then you wouldn't be writing rubbish like:
Harness racing as a product is inferior to the general public. Track size, track location, marketing etc isn't going to make standies run faster than throughbreds.

Harness racing was not inferior and we do not want 'standies running faster' - we want to take back some market share (from the Dogs actually)
It is still the premier code in many European countries and they could be a template for improvement

I often think we are fighting a losing battle - you seem to have given up
All this is an aside from how prizemoney is distributed at meetings
You are a New South Welshman who likes the Vic model
I am a Victorian who likes the NSW model

Maybe some of our difference is ideological and we may have to beg to differ
You do not see it as a hangable offence but it is a pretty big - well small deal really ($4,500 is a 36% wage cut)

Horse racing through grades with ability getting the same reward as horses already with multiple wins who are out of form is robbing one horse. Equality doesn’t necessarily mean equal.

I do follow that facebook page and have seen stuff. Doesn’t mean I agree with it. People in the industry complain/ed the $7K racing doesn’t match the $9K races in NSW. In fact there is border hopping up to Wagga with good horses whereas it used to be the other way. I wouldn’t imagine HRV would want their in-form horses crossing the border too often or being sent to train elsewhere so having these $8-$9K races would be vital in that.

It wasn’t all that long ago most of these horses running around in these races wouldn’t have even had a race to run in, or would have been Restricted on even less cash. If you have the starting point of $7K you can say its gone backwards, but go back to a starting point of $2-$3K Restricted for these horses and its still an increase. Using what someone else is doing or what happened in the past as a marker is a fallacy though, the decision needs to be made somewhat free of that bias.

I would imagine when I’m having my pie and coke that a high performer like Pat Cripps gets paid more financial reward than a low performer like Corey Durdin.
I asked what else they could have done in the context of at the time and landscape of making this decision. Not going back and changing plenty of other prior decisions and happenings that led to the point of making this decision.

[aussiebreno]

In my backyard of Wagga today there is about 5 <NR47 races. I won't look twice at these race or do the form because with all due respect its pus racing pus. To end the card there is a couple N55 and a N60 race - theres some form about and worthwhile reading the formguide to have a punt and tune in to watch. Not surprising these 3 races were given quaddie status.

[Messenger]

If we were going to start a meeting with a Restricted Class race it would be R1 at Charlton today
It is a 4yo+ Maiden

We have an Odds On favourite with career form of

11 - 5 - 8 - 10 - 3 - 9 - 9 - 10 - 8

With his 4th trainer in his 10th start, no doubt he will grow another leg for Alex Ashwood today

https://www.harness.org.au/racing/fields/race-fields/?mc=CH050922#CHC05092204

The race includes a 7yo first starter

[gutwagon]

After all that it's scratched Kevin ! The 2 first starters could also go in the bad name section !

[aussiebreno]

I think it was really on show why lesser money races can have a place in the industry at Wagga yesterday.

7/10 races the winners were trained by non-locals (mix of Vics and trainers from other areas within NSW). 2 others going to the leading local trainer (with a combined margin of just 1.5Necks to visitors). So only one race (which was restricted to NSW trained horses only I believe) going to a bread and butter local trainer but that was largely due to a 10/10 drive by Victorian N Jack (albeit an ex-local).

100% of $4500 beats 0% of $9000.