THE SUNSHINE COAST NEWSPAPER COLUMN - MAKING THE WRONG CHOICE EQUATES TO A BAD DECISION

By Graham Potter | Sunday, December 6, 2015

Graham Potter writes a weekly column for the Sunshine Coast daily. Due to demand from those having trouble accessing the paper these columns are now also published on HRO courtesy of the Sunshine Coast daily.

Racing Queensland’s Tracking Towards Sustainability Report has been released.

The multitude of financial figures and graphs presented might have given some solace to an accountant in an office somewhere far removed from the action, but for many of those in racing’s trenches the report did little more than paint of picture of an abject failure to understand the significance of the true value of a strong racing product.

Watering down your product, as is arguably the case outlined in the report, diminishes the standing of that business, not necessarily in strict financial terms, but in far broader terms where a weak image can impact as negatively on future growth as any financial constraints.

Cut backs send out a message of insecurity. Those already with vested interests in the business get restless. The enthusiasm of potential investors falters and, before long, if you thought the business was in trouble before, a new crisis makes the old battle look like a walk in the park.

A strong racing product with a strong clientele (read punters) negates almost all of the above.

So, under what logic, would any racing authority move in the opposite direction?

Because, make no mistake about it, that is what Racing Queensland will be doing when it implements a reduction in prize-money.

The effect of that backward step could see owners take their horses away from Queensland to a more lucrative playing ground. Some trainers and might go with them.

The chances are that gradually the quality of horse racing for the stakes on offer in Queensland will become ordinary, at least for the most part, meaning punters will start looking elsewhere to bet while those owners who stay to race mainly in Queensland will logically invest less because of the smaller return now on offer ... and they will hang out with disgruntled trainers and jockeys who make less of a living than they did before.

Does that description overdramatise the scenario? Possibly.

But somebody has to point out in no uncertain terms how bad a decision it is to reduce prize-money, particularly at a time when almost every other state is taking a step forward in this important regard.

Cutting expenditure left right and centre in order to fashion a pleasing ‘bottom line’ balance sheet outcome is the preserve of accountants and, of course, it must be acknowledged that any business cannot continue to spend more money than it makes ... but there are two ways to attack that problem.

Racing Queensland has decided to radically cut expenses instead of taking the gamble, which after all is what racing is all about, of shoring up the racing product to make it a strong and attractive betting proposition to the punter which would bring in extra revenue.

Like I said, they are going in the wrong direction.

Not that it would be easy to build up to that strong product after what Racing Queensland has been through but, as Nelson Mandela once said, ‘It always seems impossible, until it is done.’

When reading that sentence authorities seemed to have stopped at the word impossible.

Tracking towards sustainability? Really!

It seems more like a slow suffocation to me!