In this Discussion
- Aquanita May 2016
- BenWolfenden January 2016
- bookielover March 2015
- brady March 2015
- buffy April 2016
- carey March 2016
- Carlosa March 2015
- Chris February 2016
- ColourfulRD March 2015
- CPL February 2016
- DamienWyer May 2016
- dungy May 2015
- DustyCarpet February 2015
- Fastmoney January 2017
- FreoHitman January 2016
- GaryH February 2016
- IntoIt November 2014
- JayJay February 2016
- lame March 2016
- Legless May 2016
- LuckyLongshots February 2016
- notapunta March 2016
- Pandora November 2014
- paraletic May 2016
- primemover May 2015
- Ridersonthestorm33 March 2015
- RIO May 2016
- Rodent March 2015
- SKIDS March 2015
- SuperSnoop April 2016
- TheDiva March 2016
- theduke February 2016
- thefalcon March 2016
- ThePunter April 2015
- TheSwooper February 2016
- Tivers March 2016
- tony April 2015
- TSS April 2015
- Voodoo March 2015
- watchingu April 2015
- Winsumlosesum March 2015
- youknowit March 2016
Who's Online
0 Members & 268 Non Members

Comments
Well stuff me that was deep!
My impression is that there is nothing to worry about, so long as the industry "locks in" whatever, whatever that is. That is what Mr Gunston wants us to beleive.
And i reckon they will sell sooner rather than later espicially as the figures are good right now, and attractive to the buyer. Any dip and the value will deteriorate.
The problem i see if racing starts costing the government/the public, their not going to like it..........forking out for racing will be as popular as whips and horse deaths in racing .
Thoroly_Bread likes this post.
TheFunkster likes this post.
SHOVHOG likes this post.
primemover likes this post.
If a new operator paid that amount of money they could afford or justify the current rate of return to the racing industry.
thefalcon likes this post.
1bill sounds like a lot of spondula - however in reality in how many years will they be at a loss?
Is the short term cash gain worth the long term loss?
Reading the report @Fastmoney linked to - sounds like he is still smarting about being rejected.
He cant be trusted - have a look at the state of the economy since he took over the reins.
Carlosa, RIO likes this post.
His scenario is to have Perth Racing close a track and Government to sell the TAB ?
All monies go to building a new track in an outer metro area , making it i assume harder for the ` low crowds ' to attend ?
So a TAB sale is for the purpose of having one track closed and a new track built with great facilities in an out of town location that makes it too hard for ` low crowds ' to attend and the revenue from the TAB sale not actually contribute to the state`s growing debt caused by poor governance ?
No mention from him as to how the Industry will then be funded after his scenario idea .
Have i interpreted that article correctly ?? if i have well then im quite happy being back in the 60`s !
Legless likes this post.
john McGrath must have some pull.
my cousin is very close to the Libs..i'll have a word in her ear.
be worth squat but .......
We can make the choice as members if we want it to survive.
thefalcon likes this post.
[Deleted User] likes this post.
but I fear it would cause internal problems...they are a govt. dept. afterall and we all know they fight like cats in a sack between themselves.
does the boss of one arm earn more than the other, who has the best car, whos closer to colin..the list goes on.
ffs don't say ascot...or broome or BC4E will suicide.... :))
Ridersonthestorm33 likes this post.
Unless wholesale changes are made that enable the TAB in its current format to compete aggressively with the sort of product offered by its more entrepreneurial competitors, it will continue to struggle and go downhill.
And that will probably leave the Government no option but to sell, which would be an enormous pity on many levels.
they are not in the same ballpark (TAB v corporates)
I just cant see why the TAB cant make it more commercial, they are making it harder for people to give them money.
The protest payout gets me!!!
Corporates (especially BET365) offer far more than any of the TAB`s simply because they quickly ban winning punters.
Basically the corporates are offering enticements that aren`t sustainable without banning winners.
The focus should be on legislating the Corporates against banning punters and limiting bets.
While some of Percy`s article has merit, his comparison regarding protest payouts and "best tote" is hardly a fair one when he chooses to exclude the Corporates propensity to ban winning punters.
RIO likes this post.
With the Corporates, banning winners is part of their business model.
There are plenty of punters on here but I would doubt any are banned from fixed odds on the TAB`s but there would be plenty who have been banned by the Corporates.
The Premier said he held fears for the future of the thoroughbred industry if Ascot or Belmont was not closed down for redevelopment into just one all-year-round major racing headquarters and a brand new complex in the outer metropolitan area.
But Mr Barnett said he believed the industry was at a turning point, mooting the development of a new state-of-the-art horse racing complex and training track in Jandakot if the TAB, valued as high as $1 billion, was sold.
“I am not trying to push people one way or the other on the TAB privatisation. But this is the one big roll of the dice for racing,” he said.
“If the TAB is privatised, racing could arguably get a lump of that money. We have not made any offers. At the moment, I’m just encouraged that people in the industry are looking at the future.
“As it is, I don’t think the future is very positive, I honestly don’t, and I want to see racing continue, it’s a big employer and the only traditional Australian sport.”
Key quote: "racing could arguably get a lump of that money".
The debate is pointless until we know what amount of the sale funds will go to fund the infrastructure/plans he refers to.
Winsumlosesum likes this post.
Tivers likes this post.
Would be almost certain the TAB would be run better but SA and TAS racing are examples of what you end up with after TAB privatization. Vic, NSW and QLD have all either had pokie revenue, tax relief or government handouts to maintain their position.
With no pokie revenue and little chance of tax relief or government handouts, WA would end up closer to the SA and TAS examples.