Has There Been A Death In The Family?

Yes the original intent of the thread was to stimulate conversation and invite fresh faces and ideas. It has become a hotchpotch of views with a sprinkle of vitriol thrown in for good measure. Brenno, the 3 heat series will always be my preference for the ID, but then again if I had my way we would still be racing at Harold Park. Times change and I am moving right along with them. NSW really deserved one centre of excellence and what they are building out at Menangle is worthy of such praise.

In regard to the increased tax on imports, I am 100% in agreement with someone like Johnny Tapp who to me is the embodiment of the smaller owner/trainer who is appalled by the huge increases. These may be trifling numbers for the folks with big pockets but if the 90% of hobbyists as alluded to by Harvey is to try to help stimulate growth in that sector, well it just does not make sense. There are a couple of conversations going on here at the same time. Is the aim to invigorate the Oz breeding industry? Are the hobbyists really being helped with the impost of a grossly unfair tax (and how does that help them, let alone stop them from just walking away)? Is this designed to keep the breeders happy by selling for premium prices with stock being aimed at breeders bonus scheme races where very few owners ever reap the majority of prizemoney/bonus's? And again as Anne has mentioned where will all this money really go? How is this not just an attack on the NZ marketplace where there are plenty of horses at 'the right price' available for sale?

Surely if we are trying to save our racing stock from an early demise through lack of opportunity after they reach their mark at an early age/are not competitive in breeders races etc, surely the programming of events such as mares/fillies etc needs to be looked at. Just because the animal is slow shouldn't mean it still cannot be competitive amongst similarly graded horses/geldings/mares/fillies. Surely harness racing authorities need to shoulder some of the blame or atleast work towards a fairer solution for all. Condemning slow horses and the owners that foot the bills to extinction is not the way to go.

Yes Bailey, this is the Carbon Tax the industry did not need to have.

Brad

You have certianly hit on something that has been a big issue - handicapping. There is no doubt that some handicappers have tried to be innovative in recent times and should be complemented for this. However, this is still a very big issue and one which results in a huge amount of odds on favourites which is very bad for turnover.

As for the import fee and yearling sales, my experience suggests that the vast majority of people who buy going horses are not the same people buying at the yearling sales. Arguably three of the biggest buyers of kiwi imports are Gary Hall, Greg Bond and Dean Braun. In the last 5 years I dont think they would have bought 3 yearlings between them.

I cant speak for HRA and the various states, but I really dont believe that the intention or a likely unintentional consequence is a increase in yearling sale prices. On the other hand, I can certainly see a link to the ready to run concept which finally seems to be gaining traction in Aust.

I forgot to comment on how the import fees would help the hobby breeders.

In short, on its own it will do nothing. The breeders panel I was on NEVER recommended a hike. We recommended a national mares credits scheme(aimed at lower class mares to give them some value) and increased racing opportuinities for fillies and mares.

These initiatives require funding and my hope is that HRA and the states have increased the import fees in order to fund these ideas and stimulate the hobby breeding industry. If not, I will be bitterly disappointed and extremely frustrated.

I understand Andrew Kelly from HRA is going on In The Gig next week, so hopefully the picture will become clearer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mightymo

Brad

You have certianly hit on something that has been a big issue - handicapping. There is no doubt that some handicappers have tried to be innovative in recent times and should be complemented for this. However, this is still a very big issue and one which results in a huge amount of odds on favourites which is very bad for turnover.

As for the import fee and yearling sales, my experience suggests that the vast majority of people who buy going horses are not the same people buying at the yearling sales. Arguably three of the biggest buyers of kiwi imports are Gary Hall, Greg Bond and Dean Braun. In the last 5 years I dont think they would have bought 3 yearlings between them.

I cant speak for HRA and the various states, but I really dont believe that the intention or a likely unintentional consequence is a increase in yearling sale prices. On the other hand, I can certainly see a link to the ready to run concept which finally seems to be gaining traction in Aust.

Pretty simple I would have thought.

Import fee = Higher priced NZ purchases
Higher priced NZ horses = less NZ purchases.
Less NZ purchases = less horses in Aust fields.
Less horses in Aust fields = need for more Aust horses in fields
Need for more Aust horses in fields = Higher demand for Aust horses
Higher demand for Aust horses = They cost more

It's either that or Less horses in Aust fields = reduce amount of races. OR Import fee = NZ owners prepared to sell horses for even less - thus crueling their industry. (Edit: And going by your twitter you seem to think thats ok - "I think kiwi agents should wear the import fee")

Take your pick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mightymo

I forgot to comment on how the import fees would help the hobby breeders.

In short, on its own it will do nothing. The breeders panel I was on NEVER recommended a hike. We recommended a national mares credits scheme(aimed at lower class mares to give them some value) and increased racing opportuinities for fillies and mares.

These initiatives require funding and my hope is that HRA and the states have increased the import fees in order to fund these ideas and stimulate the hobby breeding industry. If not, I will be bitterly disappointed and extremely frustrated.

I understand Andrew Kelly from HRA is going on In The Gig next week, so hopefully the picture will become clearer.

But wasn't it for each win you got credits for a serving. Lower class mares don't have that many wins.
http://www.vicharnessbreeders.org.au...r-2011-update/
That link says that you did recommend a hike. Sue for defamation Harvey.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mightymo

I forgot to comment on how the import fees would help the hobby breeders.

In short, on its own it will do nothing. The breeders panel I was on NEVER recommended a hike. We recommended a national mares credits scheme(aimed at lower class mares to give them some value) and increased racing opportuinities for fillies and mares.

These initiatives require funding and my hope is that HRA and the states have increased the import fees in order to fund these ideas and stimulate the hobby breeding industry. If not, I will be bitterly disappointed and extremely frustrated.

I understand Andrew Kelly from HRA is going on In The Gig next week, so hopefully the picture will become clearer.

Not too mention page 20 of your own report. If that isn't recommending a hike I don't know what is.

http://www.harness.org.au/hra/breedi...t-July2011.pdf

The panel's view was that it would have a cap on wins similar to what WA has done. We even discussed that you would get a certain amount of credits for qualifying, for each race start etc.

Top racemares dont need the credits, they will be bred from no matter what

we didnt say we should hike import fees. We put forward various funding proposals for our breeding iniatives. We then put forward a variety of funding options, of which import fee increases was one. If there are no new breeding iniatives, then the panels view is that there should be no fee hikes
n
That twitter feed was in response to an agent friend of mine( who has bought and sold NZ horses for me) bemoaning that he might not have a business - it was tongue in cheek.

You seem to be a know it all on all facets of our industry Brendan. Can you tell me please:

1. How many horses you currently own?
2. How many you currently breed?
3.How many you currently lease?
4. How many you have imported?

Perhaps you should do a bit more reading before making silly snide remarks...

you make a huge amount of assumptions and I simply dont agree with them

How do you know it will mean higher prices? The seller will wear all or part of it. I suggest they will have no choice.

How does smaller fields force someone to buy a horse??

Quote:

Originally Posted by aussiebreno

Pretty simple I would have thought.

Import fee = Higher priced NZ purchases
Higher priced NZ horses = less NZ purchases.
Less NZ purchases = less horses in Aust fields.
Less horses in Aust fields = need for more Aust horses in fields
Need for more Aust horses in fields = Higher demand for Aust horses
Higher demand for Aust horses = They cost more

It's either that or Less horses in Aust fields = reduce amount of races. OR Import fee = NZ owners prepared to sell horses for even less - thus crueling their industry. (Edit: And going by your twitter you seem to think thats ok - "I think kiwi agents should wear the import fee")

Take your pick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mightymo

The panel's view was that it would have a cap on wins similar to what WA has done. We even discussed that you would get a certain amount of credits for qualifying, for each race start etc.

Top racemares dont need the credits, they will be bred from no matter what

we didnt say we should hike import fees. We put forward various funding proposals for our breeding iniatives. We then put forward a variety of funding options, of which import fee increases was one. If there are no new breeding iniatives, then the panels view is that there should be no fee hikes
n
That twitter feed was in response to an agent friend of mine( who has bought and sold NZ horses for me) bemoaning that he might not have a business - it was tongue in cheek.

You seem to be a know it all on all facets of our industry Brendan. Can you tell me please:

1. How many horses you currently own?
2. How many you currently breed?
3.How many you currently lease?
4. How many you have imported?

Perhaps you should do a bit more reading before making silly snide remarks...

Mare Gooden has 5 wins and Mare Ordinary has 1 win. Mare Ordinary might get a credit but she's still not much better off. Most of the credits will go to better performed mares (even with a cap). Mare Ordinary got 1 credit, whereas Mare Gooden got 5 credits. Instead of both having 0 credits Mare Gooden now has 4 more credits. The divide between rich and poor is now even greater. The aim of the scheme is quite well founded and I agree with, but in practice the policy falls down.
Also, if everybody has $100 to spend a fair service fee might be $100. But if everybody now has $100 + credits to spend a fair service fee could be $100 + credits. Is that going to be regulated or are stud managers laughing all the way to the bank? Meaning we are back at square 1.

Funding proposals for breeding initiatives, whatever Canberra political spin you want to put on it a possible reccomendation was increasing import fees, or 're-alignment' as your report says. I'm not even making judgement (good or bad), just stating that that's what been done.

I didn't know horse ownership was a pre requisite for commenting on economic factors. Perhaps you should give Wayne Swan a call and investigate whether his resume states horse ownership.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mightymo

you make a huge amount of assumptions and I simply dont agree with them

How do you know it will mean higher prices? The seller will wear all or part of it. I suggest they will have no choice.

How does smaller fields force someone to buy a horse??

So seller will wear all or part of it. That's quite plausible, thus crueling NZ industry. Others have mentioned Free trade agreement, I don't know about that side of things so won't comment.
Smaller fields = more chance of winning = more demand to buy a horse. I also think this will increase demand to breed more foals as kiwi horses aren't coming over and providing competition. More foals being bred a good thing hey? More chance for the breed to race owners to get a winner! See, I'm actually pro import fee. I'm not having a go at you saying you are looking after self interest or looking after commercial breeders, I've just been saying what I think will happen - and not judging (too much judging anyway) good or bad until now. I still dont like how the breeding credits work though - which as you say import fee is only there to fund that.

The seller will wear all or part of it. I suggest they will have no choice.

The only certainty in this whole saga is that that wont happen.
This is an Australian tax. It is a blatantly illegal tax on an imported product which is protected from such by ANZCERTA. (Australia New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement.).
The next closest thing to a certainty is that this issue will end up in the courts or Governments intervention. HRA were warned of this likelihood when such a course of action was first mooted.
In the interim...
Import fee = Higher priced NZ purchases
Higher priced NZ horses = less NZ purchases.
Less NZ purchases = less horses in Aust fields.
Less horses in Aust fields = need for more Aust horses in fields
Need for more Aust horses in fields = Higher demand for Aust horses
Higher demand for Aust horses = They cost more

No matter what face or shade you apply to it, this market forces analysis of Brenno's is the most obvious scenario should this tax stand IMO. It is as simple as that.