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

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Big Mile

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by montana

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.

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

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

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.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by eliteblood

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by montana

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by montana

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eliteblood

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?

Quote:

Originally Posted by eliteblood

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.

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.

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.

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."

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Big Mile

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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...

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by triplev123

[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.

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by aussiebreno

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.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Big Mile

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!!!

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............

Quote:

Originally Posted by aussiebreno

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.

"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.

[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.

"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:)

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

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.

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

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?

Quote:

Originally Posted by aussiebreno

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

That's $10,172 per unit

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

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midfrew

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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:

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

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.

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

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.