Kennett nails issue but smashes thumb with solution

By Alfred Chan / Expert

Well done Jeff Kennett. You said a lot of things which administrators needed to hear and you said it their backyard. But one solution you offered would cripple the industry much faster than doing nothing.

A welcome change from his rent-a-quote style mutterings about the AFL, Kennett was articulate, accurate and empathetic in his address to trainers at Racing Victoria’s Open Day on Monday.

Two weeks ago, a lack of activity from the Kennett front leading into the Open Day had me concerned about the hardline approach he’d voiced earlier. Considering his political background, flopping on his stance would have come as no surprise.

But impressively, Kennett allayed any scepticism about political motives when he lambasted the racing industry which invited him to be their guest speaker. In classic Kennett style, he launched about a dozen provocative headlines.

And true to classic Kennett, it is unlikely anything will eventuate from his comments.

His political expertise has granted him the subtle skill of speaking scathingly about administrators for their past deeds without offering sustainable solutions.

Among Kennett’s multi-pronged diatribe he took aim at Racing Victoria for their handling of the Damien Oliver saga, he took aim at the “useless” Australian Racing Board, and he took aim at corporate bookmakers when he declared them a “cancer in our society”.

While Kennett’s aforementioned arguments are indisputable, his stance on the future of the industry and subsequent solution were puzzling.

“I have come to the conclusion if the industry continues as it is currently structured it is unsustainable beyond five, six, seven years,” Kennett said.

“It’s important that the industry comes together and makes a decision quickly [about the rising costs and decreasing revenue]. If you don’t do it, the industry in five to seven years will have shrunk dramatically.”

While his five to seven year estimation is unsubstantiated rhetoric which would require more professional research, his solution to the problem raised at least one set of eyebrows.

“If an individual owner has not paid his dues then all those horses linked to that owner should be suspended until fees are paid.”

In an era where syndication has enabled anyone to own a racehorse, the majority of horses are owned by multiple owners. Suspending a horse due to one owner not paying up makes no sense and would drive ownership numbers down in droves.

While syndication has brought more owners to the industry, it is a double-edged sword which has increased the burden on trainers. When those owners do not pay their fees, the stable must cover all unpaid costs in fairness to the owners who are paying up.

In a world where all horses make money, this wouldn’t be a problem but the reality of racing is a substantial amount of owners are purchasing a vastly enjoyable experience more than a financial prospect.

When bills don’t get paid, financial burdens cascade onto trainers and issues, both mentally and financially, arise.

Racing Victoria in association with the Australian Trainers Association and BeyondBlue, where Kennett sits as chairman, have jointly launched the Trainer Wellbeing Program. The program, which aims to educate trainers of emotional wellbeing and business management, will commence in September with four 90-minute workshops.

But the lead-up to spring is hardly an ideal time to be hosting events like these, which have a long-term focus. Short-term solutions are needed.

The recurring theme among all stress-related mental illness is the financial burdens.

Centralisation of suppliers is one area Racing Victoria and other administrative bodies should look into. It may come at the chagrin of private suppliers which rely on the free market economics but industry-subsidised resources would plummet financial burdens in the short-term.

Service costs often out of the control of trainers are: vets, transport and to a lesser extent farriers.

Industry-organised centralisation would mean Racing Victoria, for example, supply trucks from Victoria’s major training centres to that day’s race meeting. Where trainers lose flexibility, they could have enormous cost savings. The same could be applied to vets and other service providers.

Trainer subsidisation could then be applied on a sliding scale relative to the trainer’s circumstances. Because the services could be industry managed, it would enable accounts to be settled over much longer periods – potentially years – while lengthy debt collection processes play out in the judiciary system.

These trainer subsidies would be a short-term solution but they would enable trainers to keep ticking along with their jobs with significantly less financial burden. It would also be much more sustainable than suspending horses with unpaid accounts because those owners have most likely given up on the horse.

It was fantastic to hear Jeff Kennett voice many of the things which needed to be said in a public forum as a person of notoriety. His criticisms were valid and his concerns authentic, but Kennett must encourage more ownership rather than less if he has a genuine goal of improving trainer welfare.

The Crowd Says:

2014-08-20T22:25:33+00:00

Drew H

Guest


The whole thing must work like a Ponzi scheme - the new money covers the old money. (or is that like any investment) If the whole thing operates with inefficiency (which it does) then $100k in will eventually get you about $60k in returns. Surely a lotto ticket operates with more efficiency. Blame the administrators for collecting a wage.

2014-08-20T04:45:53+00:00

EricBloom

Roar Rookie


That doesn't solve the problem if a 10% owner is not paying up when the other 90% are.

2014-08-20T03:10:18+00:00

Matthew

Guest


and having the Trainer pick up the costs is unfair to the Trainer. Jeff is right, if the Owner cant pay up then the horse shouldnt race.

2014-08-20T02:25:45+00:00

Mitch

Guest


Believe it. No one wants to be on the wrong end of a bad tip there!

AUTHOR

2014-08-20T02:23:09+00:00

Alfred Chan

Expert


Yes, trainers can do this but the problem is; it is the horses that are not earning prize money which the owners do not pay up for. When a horse is regularly winning and brings in prize money, those owners are happy to pay up. But when you have a horse which is on the brink of winning and then loses their racing spirit, they put in a few shocking runs and owners suddenly have unpaid bills from a few months back. For an owner with a large share - it can be a lot of money.

2014-08-20T01:40:22+00:00

Brent Ford

Roar Guru


Yeah true! I've heard some stuff from punters in my tab that used to work at the tracks in Hong Kong, and they said they can't believe the stuff people get away with here. They also said that the law gets a bit of help from some underground figures, but I don't believe any of that stuff.

AUTHOR

2014-08-20T01:29:16+00:00

Alfred Chan

Expert


If Ollie was in Hong Kong, we'd probably never have seen him again! Chris Munce just had some number written on a piece of paper and he got 2 years of time! I actually like the Hong Kong authoritarian system. They take a hard line and stand by it. They have zero tolerance and they have about as clean a system as there is.

AUTHOR

2014-08-20T01:23:16+00:00

Alfred Chan

Expert


I definitely agree that we need a national body. The scheduling of races is a big problem but this is largely due to the abundance of Group 1 races we have and that falls on the Pattern Committee. The ARB have just taken over the Stud Book are also taking over RISA so perhaps we could be moving closer towards a real national body. The taxation laws between each state is the biggest issue and why we have three totes. If we had just one tote, everything else would probably fall into line quite quickly. It would be very difficult to assign prize money though.

2014-08-20T01:16:11+00:00

Linda

Guest


I'm pretty sure that trainers can apply to their local racing authority to hold any prize money payable to any shareholder. Penalising a horse because of one defaulting owner is unfair on the other owners.

AUTHOR

2014-08-20T01:12:14+00:00

Alfred Chan

Expert


What they offer on racedays is fantastic. If a horse runs well below expectation, an RVL vet will assess the horse there and then with no cost to the trainer or owners. This is something which could potentially be offered outside of raceday for trainers at the major complexes at significantly reduced fees if the vets are employed by RVL rather than operating their own private practice which is what is currently happening.

2014-08-20T00:48:31+00:00

The Oven

Guest


"His political expertise has granted him the subtle skill of speaking scathingly about administrators for their past deeds without offering sustainable solutions." That is a cracking line... hahahahahaha!

2014-08-20T00:45:32+00:00

Corinna

Guest


your last comment is so spot on , but Jeff doesn't seem to get he fact that you can't penalise good paying owners for non payers

2014-08-19T23:06:19+00:00

Brent Ford

Roar Guru


Kennett sounds like he had a good go too! Virtually saying Ollie was lucky he wasn't in HK or he would be rotting behind bars!

2014-08-19T21:35:58+00:00

Mitch

Guest


The Australian Racing Board has to the the most irrelevant national jurisdiction in the world. It creates so many organization issues between states due to their lack of power and we literally wouldn't lose anything if it dissolved. Merge all the state racing bodies if you want an efficient industry that is more appealing to owners.

2014-08-19T21:14:42+00:00

EricBloom

Roar Rookie


While they may be good with horses, most trainers are terrible businessmen. There are quite a lot of trainers which have been banned by Inglis and Magic Millions from bidding at sales because they bought horses and werent able to sell them. When this happens, the sales company have to reposses the horses and auction them again. They always go for a lesser price so feel for the breeders!

2014-08-19T20:59:44+00:00

Glenn

Guest


A very interesting idea here. As an owner, the cost of vets and transport add up to a bit more than I expected. Obviously these services are non negotiables but I can understand how frustrating they are to pay when your horse is no good.

Read more at The Roar