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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by justdoit
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
@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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
I suppose one good thing with the kiwis making all that money, it might stop them migrating to Aus !!!
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
Hi GutwagonQuote:
Originally Posted by 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.
no no no mango, don't say BREEDERS should have to pay, not the poor breeders!!!
Over 100 in JuneQuote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
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.
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.
How does it make the breeding industry worse off though?Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
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 hereQuote:
Originally Posted by aussiebreno
Gutwagon - you are not alone in your view.Quote:
Originally Posted by gutwagon
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
I mean you don't see owners asking for the stakesmoney before paying the import fee
Next ANZAC Day can somebody remind me not to play 2 up with a Breeder. Their rules are heads they win, tails I lose.Quote:
Originally Posted by gutwagon
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
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!Quote:
Originally Posted by aussiebreno
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by mightymo
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.
Yep, and I will pay more for a Village Jasper/5LTW mare then I will for a River Khan/Maiden Mare.Quote:
Originally Posted by mightymo
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
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.
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....'
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
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 ?Quote:
Originally Posted by aussiebreno
Just a bit confused by what you mean
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Love Of Courage
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.
Demand for an inferior product (some Aust foals) isn't parallel with demand for superior product (some imports).Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Hando
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.
I'm not the best at spelling but your butchering of the word eligible sums up that post.Quote:
Originally Posted by gregcattell
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
firstly - download google chrome as a web browser it has a spell checkQuote:
Originally Posted by gregcattell
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
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.
@ 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 !
/PostQuote:
Originally Posted by gutwagon
ask lance justice and gary hall if they agree with youQuote:
Originally Posted by gutwagon
Agree smithy!Quote:
Originally Posted by smithy
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!!Quote:
Originally Posted by justdoit
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
Ummmmm because they are to different entities.Quote:
Originally Posted by gutwagon