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

[triplev123]

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?

[Greg Hando]

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

That's $10,172 per unit

[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:
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

[justdoit]

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

[The Big Mile]

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.

[triplev123]

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

[roosters]

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.

[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.

[roosters]

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.

[mango]

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.