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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aussiebreno

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

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

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

---

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

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

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

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

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

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

JOHN MOONEY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gutwagon

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

vvv

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Two conclusions from this study are:

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

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

John Mooney

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Just admit its a ridiculous and terrible scheme mightmo.

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

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

http://www.celebrityhq.com/wp-conten...htonpunked.jpg

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gutwagon

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance Justice

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

---

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

Right for he record:

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

My beef is quite clear with the import fee:

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

...and the list goes on.

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Midfrew

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

---

Well said John. Excellent post.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Big Mile

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

Right for he record:

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

My beef is quite clear with the import fee:

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

...and the list goes on.

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

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

---

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Hando

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

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

---

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roosters

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

---

Just a myth Genes don't change

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roosters

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

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

---

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance Justice

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

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

---

If TAB has more turnover we get more outside funding. This is probably the most important source of inflow of cash for the sport. We
That said; the plan won't increase fields anyway.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance Justice

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

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Hando

Just a myth Genes don't change

---

besides Sushi are there any other good ET horses?

How much does it cost to do the ET?

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roosters

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

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

---

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

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

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

Good day :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance Justice

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


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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eliteblood

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

---

Hey Eliteblood

Are you sure you know the owner's lol.

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

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

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

Both of these suggestions make more sense to me.

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

Hi Justdoit

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

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eliteblood

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roosters

besides Sushi are there any other good ET horses?

How much does it cost to do the ET?

---

Kid Coconut is another I think is an ET. Not a bad horse.

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mango

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

---

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

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

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

MENANGLE tonight:

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

MENANGLE Tuesday:

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

MENANGLE Monday:

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Hando

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

---

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Big Mile

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

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

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

MENANGLE tonight:

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

MENANGLE Tuesday:

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

MENANGLE Monday:

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

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

---

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