- This topic has 659 replies, 109 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
Wit as always interesting thought provoking post …
Silvoir /Glen …the one message to come out of the Jim Mc Grath affair , is that ugly beast called self interest just wont go away
It is the single and major reason why racing can never be united , or funded , or has a remote chance of succeeding in the world we live in today
Greed rules
Ricky
Silvoir /Glen …the one message to come out of the Jim Mc Grath affair , is that ugly beast called self interest just wont go away
It is the single and major reason why racing can never be united , or funded , or has a remote chance of succeeding in the world we live in today.
Interesting. I agree with your premise that self- interest won’t go away and that it is a big-problem, though in my view you’ve chosen a bad example, as I would fundamentally disagree with the premise that the Racing Committee members were acting out of self-interest.
The biggest failing of the BHB was self-interest and BHA is set-up to avoid that. However, the draw back is that the Jockey Club attempting to set-up an independent regulator in the HRA but could only go half-way because, in my view, self-interested parties blocked it. In the end, the BHA was set-up as an independent regulator but with very limited powers of Governence. We are therefore having to try to lead the sport on a wide range of issues without really the powers to fully do so. One of my biggest frustrations is that much of the criticism we receive, whether on here or in the press, is aimed wrongly at us – we’re having to lead on matters we weren’t set-up to be leading on because no one else is able to do it!
Whilst you might be right on your second point, I sincerely hope not. There is no one single cause of the current crisis, with factors ranging from decades of poor decisions, the failure of gambling policy, the pillaging of racing by betting, the impact of exchanges, loss of/lack of focus on the customer, changing times, recession etc. In so many ways it’s simply the chickens coming home to roost (add to all of the above the utterly ridiculous situation where so many parts of racing actively encourages people either to bet on something else or to bet with companies that have helped to drive down Levy).
However it’s not too late and the Government has it in it’s power to give racing back some of the control it naively and erroneously gave away decades ago, through changing legislation and doing the right thing with the Tote. Charlie Brooks pretty much nails it in the Daily Tel today. If the Government does that, combined with a renewed focus on the customer (worth reading about how Steve Jobs turned around Apple’s fortunes) there’s hope.
If it doesn’t, a large proportion of 20,000 mainly rural jobs are likely to go along with the game we know and, for the most part, love. But the bookies, and those that espouse their arguments (if not repeat them almost verbatim) will be alright, so that’s ok then…
Apologies for typos but had to write this on my mobile on the train home.
The Brooks article Silvoir refers to- http://bit.ly/aBoLrs
(unless the one in the printed version was something else entirely!)
Silvoir , thanks for the reply , good stuff and very much to the point
I agree its not a brilliant example , but in IMHO,the transfer of the Champion stakes , the whole ethos and mind boggling (if not downright stupid )change of culture and in so doing abandoning 200 years of heritage for nothing …
British Racing used to be the envy of the world , its quality of the pattern , made it second to none, and most of all the variances and downright challenging nature of the courses , made it a very true test for the breed , which should be the main reason for its continuance.
reading the reasons why Jim resigned , paints a very different picture , and if it was not self interest , then it is and was the most out of touch and hopeless change for change sake that’s ever been allowed to take place
Shameful …maybe in another era sanity will be restored, however lets not hold our breath
Agree with last para , however I think we will see pigs fly before any of that stuff actually happens ….and why not , yes you have guessed it , self interest again
best to you
Ricky
- Total Posts 17716
Thanks for the link, Corm – though I found the Charlie Brooks article itself less than constructive, and politically naive.
It isn’t up to the Culture Secretary to "get involved". It is up to the various powers within Racing to present a united and irrefutable case to him to do something specific, not just to "do something". All Hunt can – or will – say, is "get your house in order".
This united case, as Silvoir makes crystal clear, is something the BHA does not have power to compel the various self-interested parties to present. The disappointment has been to see the organisation failing to work as an effective honest broker, to help bring the Industries into line behind a common vision.
Instead the BHA seems to have chosen to use what small power, influence and resource it has to pursue marketing goals which have alienated the customer base whilst exciting little enthusiasm from anyone outside a small coterie of (patently self-interested) executives with an eye to the commercial main chance.
The paradox is, that using successful (that’s to say
lucky
) business people to run the business has not worked. Paul Roy has shown himself incapable of generating wider interest in the sport (except negatively by his own commercial dealings) or inspiring a compelling vision to unite Racing’s many component parties against a "common enemy" which in fact funds a fair part of the sport.
We see these Princes of Commerce fail time and time again when it comes to "turning round" sporting or artistic organisations. This is because they do not understand that the web which holds cultural organisations together is not money, or management structures, or marketing flair, but something less tangible and far more potent. These city men know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Is it not time for the BHA to turn instead to someone who has credibility within the sport itself? Someone who has a genuine love and understanding for it, and the communication gifts to convey its special appeal to the millions out there who would respond to it – if only they were not being treated as "consumers" rather than people.
Silvoir, why not step up to the plate?
Well said Pinza, agree with all you say.
Sadly, and tragically, there doesn’t appear to be anyone from within racing itself who is going to break cover and lead racing out of the gloom and into the daylight. Otherwise he, or she, would have done so by now and we wouldn’t be having this discussion at this particular juncture.
Pinza , sheer class . great post
if only though …Silvoir could do a lot worse than run those salary parasites out of town
We are in the grips of the marketing men . the budget fantasies , best and worst case scenarios …meanwhile the game flounders and once again we are at a ministers door imploring help with the begging bowl stretched to receive any thing we can get
Farce …you bet it is
Ricky
Good post Pinza
Like so many who inhabit our cloistered little world Charlie-boy finds it necessary to try and accentuate racing’s place in the great scheme of things by repeated references to it as an ‘industry’. The racing of horses is no more an industry than is crown green bowls or synchronised swimming; like those it is just a game or sport that makes a contribution via the entertainment it provides to its followers to an enormous ‘leisure industry’ that has a myriad other sources that contribute likewise to the entertainment an eager public crave. All of which taken as a whole employ numbers of folk that render the 20,000 or so who work in racing very small beer.
We don’t hear about the football industry, golf industry or cricket industry so why does racing regard itself as different? It smacks of a wildly misplaced sense of grandiose self-importance and it’s plagued our sport since time immemorial
As Pinza and others have pointed out racing cannot and should not expect the government to help us sort out a mess that is wholly of our own making.
Frankly I doubt the government could really give two hoots about racing’s well-being and who can blame them?
It’s only a game Arthur
Agree great post Pinza.
Drone, here are a few figures to judge the impact of racing in this country and also whether Government would be wise in not giving ‘two hoots’ about racing:
Latest available figures from 2008:
# Tax contributed by British Racing – £325m
# Attendance fixtures for British Racing – £5.7m
# Direct, indirect and associated employment of British Racing – 100,100
# Capital Expenditure (5 years up to 2008) – £706m
# Contribution to Local Economy on racedays from racegoers -£222m (Estimate)
# Of the top ten attended sporting events in Britain in 2008 Racing accounted for – 2nd, 6th, 7th & 8th
# In total attendance of sporting events racing holds second place behind footballSource: Deloitte, Economic Impact of British Racing 2009
It isn’t up to the Culture Secretary to "get involved". It is up to the various powers within Racing to present a united and irrefutable case to him to do something specific, not just to "do something". All Hunt can – or will – say, is "get your house in order".
Pinza, apologies because I was typing on my phone and there are various confidences I have to respect, but this is exactly what we’ve done. And, I fundamentally beg to differ with regards to the minister’s involvement. The Levy is statutory, the white paper that gives dispensation to offshore bookmakers advertising is legislation, therefore to change any of it requires legislation, or in other words ministerial intervention.
The disappointment has been to see the organisation failing to work as an effective honest broker, to help bring the Industries into line behind a common vision.
With some of the disparate interests involved, it’s hardly surprising that it’s damn near impossible to bring all parties together on everything. That said, and despite much criticism (some of it fair, some of it not) on here, in the media and on blogs, we did bring everyone together (or, in response to some of Pru’s well put points, all the respresentative bodies) for the Racing United campaign.
Instead the BHA seems to have chosen to use what small power, influence and resource it has to pursue marketing goals which have alienated the customer base whilst exciting little enthusiasm from anyone outside a small coterie of (patently self-interested) executives with an eye to the commercial main chance.
Again I disagree. Racing for Change is not the BHA, it’s Racing Enterprises Ltd, which is a ‘partnership’ between racecourses and the various horsemen groups. And that’s not me distancing myself from RfC – you name me one successful business, or one major sport, that doesn’t market or promote itself centrally?
Has RfC been handled brilliantly from day one? No. Have the achieved all they set out to do? No. Have they achieved anything? IMHO, yes, and especially on the media coverage front.
I’ve commented on here before about Champions Day, so I’m well aware that lots of people don’t like moving Champions Day, and certainly don’t like the compromises to the 2YO programme. I certainly, and personally, agree with the second half of that statement. That said, I’m willing to see if it works and hope that, if it doesn’t, those in charge aren’t too proud to make changes.
Believe or not, I, and the vast majority of my colleagues, form part of the customer base – punters, racegoers, some small time owners in modest syndicates. Aside from the fact that we’re fortunate enough to share a pool of RCA badges, almost without fail we go racing as a normal racegoer, not swanning around in corporate hospitality, racing at weekends and evenings. Speaking personally, and knowing many of my colleague’s views, whilst we might not agree with everything it doesn’t alienate us from the sport, or stop us from going racing, or stop us from betting.
Much of the criticism I’ve read, particular in the last few days, refers to ‘marketing men’ making the decisions. This either betrays a surprising degree of ignorance of the reality or simply a matter of ignoring the facts to suit the pen. Like Laura Thompson, I’d personally love it if the big meetings, the best races, had crowd big enough to create an atmosphere but small enough so our day isn’t hindered by too many others enjoying the day also. It’s one of the reasons why day one of both Cheltenham and Ascot are the best days in my view. But that’s a pretty selfish view is it not? After all, I’d quite like to poll up to Lords on the first day of an Ashes series and pay a tenner for a ticket and be guaranteed a seat, but it’s not going to happen.
And, whilst your comment was kind, I’m quite some way off top-brass level yet, and not convinced I have any more credibility/am though any better of than my colleagues who, for the most part, come in for much unfair criticism.
Anyway, I’m waffling, as Pru and Sean know I’m prone to do whilst typing on the train home…
Silvoir , defending the indefensible is hard for most , for you its an art form …..well done …
However whilst most of your answer to Pinza was kind and blandish ….it always gives one an opportunity to trot out the mantra (whatever the flavour is currently )…not withstanding all that , the BHA , RFC , and all other present participants are engaged in a blood bath with the bookies , to the ordinary racing fan its a mish mash of voices all singing different songs , and to us its a one horse race , the bookies and allies are winning by a country mile
Will Paul Roy be able to lead racing out of this mess , looks unlikely , will RFC make any material difference …nope , apart from tear up a perfectly good pattern racing structure and play around with a historic race , for nothing oh yes and maybe make saddle cloths even bigger ….that will be a biggie
Will the ordinary racegoer pay any attention , well maybe not: they will still turn up in droves whenever there is quality racing in the summer , and if there’s a band afterwards then all the better ….
Will racing have any more cash next year ,unlikely , it will make do with what is has or gets
will striking owners make a jot of difference , ….no
so where does that leave the jolly band , in my view stranded like a beach whale ….gasping for air
Will any sensible government make an exception for racing , when councils , hospitals , and all other public sector services are being pruned to the bone …er no
Will a raft of MP’S suddcenly start protesting in the house at the lack of prize money for racing and whom or how much the Tote will be flogged off for ….nope
Its time to smell the coffee
have fun on your way home tomorrow
cheers
Ricky
Again I disagree. Racing for Change is not the BHA, it’s Racing Enterprises Ltd, which is a ‘partnership’ between racecourses and the various horsemen groups. And that’s not me distancing myself from RfC – you name me one successful business, or one major sport, that doesn’t market or promote itself centrally?
RFC might not be the BHA exactly, but when you have the BHA chairman in print on the BHA website stating how important it is, I think some people might wonder where the difference lies. The BHA endorse it – either willingly or not, they endorse it. That is good enough for me.
Drone, here are a few figures to judge the impact of racing in this country and also whether Government would be wise in not giving ‘two hoots’ about racing:
Latest available figures from 2008:
# Tax contributed by British Racing – £325m
# Attendance fixtures for British Racing – £5.7m
# Direct, indirect and associated employment of British Racing – 100,100
# Capital Expenditure (5 years up to 2008) – £706m
# Contribution to Local Economy on racedays from racegoers -£222m (Estimate)# Of the top ten attended sporting events in Britain in 2008 Racing accounted for – 2nd, 6th, 7th & 8th
# In total attendance of sporting events racing holds second place behind football
Source: Deloitte, Economic Impact of British Racing 2009
One should really be able to trust figures published by such a distinguished company as Deloitte. Maybe it’s not their arithmetic but their definition of “event” that causes me to think there is something akin to wishful thinking or “pleasing the customer” in their depiction of Racing as the 2nd, 6th, 7th & 8th best attended sporting events in 2008.
The Levy Board website shows that the highest Racing attendance was the Thursday of Royal Ascot at 73,130 and the second highest was the Friday of Cheltenham at 70,138. Third was Grand National day at 64,944. It is possible that non-paying guests increased the Derby Day attendance beyond the official figure of 38,250, but by how much is only a guess. Manchester United’s average home league match attendance was 75,304 for the 2008/2009 season. I think there is a fair chance that all nineteen home league matches were better than Ascot’s highest.
Maybe Deloitte chose Ascot Week, Cheltenham Week, Goodwood Week, etc. as an “event”. But to be fair, they would have to be placed against England’s Six Nations home matches, Henley Week, The London Marathon, Cowes Week, the Fourth Round of The FA Cup. It starts to get as silly as a Monty Python sketch. (Bring on the Country Gentlemen’s Association gathering at Blenheim which brings the surrounding area to a halt for three days).
It makes me question the other definitions in that list. How much value would I put on Deloitte’s valuations? Racing in general and the BHA in particular has to make sure it is not deluding itself on its value to the economy, and how quickly employment opportunities and finance would be redirected in the economy if Racing did not exist.
I have loved racing since I was twelve years old, but I realise one has be be completely realistic and honest with oneself to battle to save what one loves.
I think when historians look back on these troubled times they will point to Pinza’s post as the turning point.
I feel a groundswell of opinion verging on uniformity. For the first time in living memory racing speaks with one voice, the seven words eminating from its lips encapsulating the Zeitgeist:
Step Forward Paul Struthers and save usPaul Struthers says it makes “Perfect Sense”
Stall numbers from next season are likely to be changed with the number one stall always on the inside rail, like they do abroad eg number 1 stall at Beverley will be on the rail.
This will enable British racing to benefit enormously from the overseas betting market with increased turnover due to the switch, similar to what has occurred since the introduction of 48 hour declarations.
Onwards & upwards with our sport.
- Total Posts 17716
Maybe in the seemingly secluded world of the BHA it does make sense, but to the rest of us it’s another complete waste of time.
RFC money at work no doubt.
- Total Posts 17716
Not a waste of time, a good idea which will cost nothing. How will it be worked out, though at Windsor and Fontwell?
Don’t be such a Scrooge, AJ.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.