Half Way in the 100-Day Campaign and we Already have a Result – BHA Announces a Recovery of Racing Plan …. But There is Still a Chasm to Cross

On 12th July, Ged Shields and I launched our Blueprint for Racehorse Ownership in the UK: Making retention and acquisition of owners the number 1 goal of a racing recovery plan, and since then we’ve been lobbying all the key stakeholders across the sport to design, launch and implement one. An enormous amount of time has been spent on Zoom conference calls as well as successfully launching a micro web site, www.keepownersinracing.com, where we’re building up a bank of Zoom videos and blogs in pursuit of our cause. The whole motivation is to encourage the top table of racing to work collaboratively and kick on with urgency to launch major initiatives designed to retain owners in the sport. At the heart of that is a requirement for substantially improved funding of the sport, not least to boost prize-money and radical reform to capitalise on the opportunity presented by the pandemic. A major milestone was reached on 25th August when Nick Rust, the outgoing CEO of the BHA, announced the launch of a Recovery Plan. While this was an encouraging step forward, there is still a huge amount of work to be done and, indeed, many owners and pundits, such as the Racing Post, were less than complimentary because it seemed to be more a “plan for a plan” rather than a robust set of initiatives and actions. We’ll doubtless see the evolution of the plan through the autumn.

If you haven’t already done so, please sign up on www.keepownersinracing.com and you’ll receive all the blogs before they are publicly released. Here are four from the collection that clearly show where Ged and I are coming from.

SIGNING THE PLEDGE – AND WE’RE NOT TALKING ABOUT GOING TEETOTAL

At the heart of our Campaign to Keep Owners in Racing we have advocated a strongly collaborative approach to be adopted by all the leaders of British racing. Maintaining unity and common purpose is vital, but poses a considerable challenge. Racing has never been more fractured; vested interests and protectionism prevail; trust and transparency are noticeable by their absence; frustrations are building rapidly and threaten to blow strained relationships apart. The very last thing that racing needs after the damage already done by the pandemic is a self-inflicted wound of its own creation.

You only have to consider TLAs – the curse of three-letter acronyms – to understand the cat’s cradle complexity of our sport: BHA, RCA, THG, ROA, (HR)BLB, NTF, GBR, JCR, ARC, TBA, ABB, TRF, RSA, PJA. Corralling this lot is a complete nightmare and raises the question of whether it is even achievable, and whether racing needs fundamental restructuring of its governance: which we will revisit in the blog soon.

In the immediate future, Q3 / Q4 2020, our recommendation is for top leaders in the sport to produce a one-page Pledge summarising the way forward for British Racing, a statement on required collaboration and ten key actions, which all stakeholders must sign up to. Such a pledge provides much-needed vision and focus, and will be a real spur to leadership endeavour. The actions must be bold enough to enable our sport to recover from the crisis. We fear that many owners are already leaving the sport, or planning to do so, and this will cause real damage. Our call to arms is for a Racing Recovery Plan – RRP. Let’s get on with it – PDQ.

“MONEY, MONEY, MONEY” – IT’S A HORSEMEN’S WORLD

Our 100-day campaign to apply pressure on British Racing to develop a highly practical Recovery of Racing Plan broadly coincides with the first 100 days in office of the new Chairman of the Horsemen’s Group and President of the Racehorse Owners Association, Charlie Parker. Without any doubt he has the hottest seat in the sport, and we wish him well. What he achieves (or doesn’t) during Q3 / Q4, particularly on media rights transparency and apportionment, will have a huge impact on racing and ownership.

All roads, inevitably, lead back to the dire, unsustainable state of racing’s finances and the urgent need for cross-industry agreement on the most effective ways of harnessing new income streams. Without that, we all flounder. Mark Johnston, in our Perspectives in Racing film, argues that applying sticking-plaster to the problem has minimal impact and that we now need to be coming up with financial initiatives that “cross the gaping chasm”.

We believe that there is a need to generate £200m+ of annual income and that there are three principal ways of achieving that goal. Firstly, work with government at ministerial level on a second round of Levy development and reform. That was on the table in 2018 and some of racing’s leadership, for whatever reason, made a disastrous decision not to pursue it. Secondly, devise a much fairer revenue-sharing deal with the racecourses on media rights by the end of this year and then extend it into a much stronger media pooling operation. Thirdly, develop a betting strategy that targets the global gambling market through betting innovation and Tote co-mingling with other countries. And, of course, do everything possible to retain owners with the promise of more prize-money.

There is no shortage of income to be picked up – as we say, “Money, money, money”. Racing’s leadership needs to stop falling out over dividing cakes and get on with producing a radical new funding plan that bakes an altogether bigger and different one.

THE BASE OF THE PYRAMID CRUMBLES – IGNORE AT YOUR PERIL

British racing is a big industry, and at the top tier of the sport a considerable amount of money can be made. In the Blueprint we examined the profitability of all the stakeholders. In 2019, the aggregate of the top five yearling sales in England, France and Ireland made £250m for their consignors. The annual income earned from the top stallions at Coolmore, Godolphin and Juddmonte exceeded £200m. Despite all the aggressive noises being made by certain Flat trainers, the top 20 trainers in the UK make significantly more profit than the bottom 20 racecourses. It would be easy to conclude, perhaps unfairly, that the most vociferous members of the training community wish to maximise their returns even further. The platinum layer of the sport is being run by the few, for the few, with an over-concentration of income in the hands of those who don’t just make significant money every week of the year but also sit astride the downstream value chain that accrues from breeding rights.

How different it is at the bottom of the pyramid. The grass roots of our sport cover the vast majority of trainers, breeders, owners and horses. If the financial returns were terrible pre-pandemic, then they are nothing short of catastrophic now and the situation is only going to get worse. The majority of trainers and breeders are either technically insolvent or teetering on the edge of it unless they have other sources of income, and of course the vast majority of owners whose horses are running primarily at classes 4, 5 or 6 are losing on average 93p in the £ every year, with the returns not even covering the raceday costs of getting horses to the track.

These owners are spending £527m a year, to lose a collective £428m. If our forecast is correct, there will be a 20% contraction in the owner base over the next five years, which will lead to an immediate loss of £124m. But the far bigger damage is the 1:7 multiplier that leads to a much greater financial hit of £868m as the ownership contraction ripples through bloodstock, levy yield, media rights, racecourse attendance and the whole ecosystem of suppliers connected to training and racing.

Racing ignores the grass roots at its peril. This is where the contraction will be most felt, and hit hardest. We implore the leadership of the sport to produce, with urgency, a Racing Recovery Plan. Without that, the pyramid crumbles.

9-POINT RECOVERY PLAN FOR BRITISH RACING – A BIT OF A CURATE’S EGG

In the 1890s, Punch magazine ran a series of cartoons about a timid curate eating breakfast with his bishop. On being told by the bishop that he seemed to have a bad egg, the curate piped up: “Oh no, my lord, I assure you! Parts of it are excellent!” Seems an appropriate comment for British racing’s recovery plan, which made its appearance on Tuesday 25th August.

When we launched the blueprint in mid-July we challenged the top table of racing to produce a post-pandemic recovery plan, with retention and acquisition of owners as its #1 goal. Behaviourally we wanted the stakeholders to work collaboratively, proactively and urgently on it; analytically they needed to create a comprehensive, wide-ranging, multi-faceted plan of action with two clear phases of immediate initiatives in Q3-Q4 2020, and then longer-term, more transformational change in 2021-2025; and most importantly, it had to be operationally deliverable through practical, robust, well-defined projects. It couldn’t just be about papering over the cracks – there is a chasm to cross, because the only way in which British racing can be properly sustainable is through securing at least £250m of additional income while fundamentally reforming the sport. The pandemic presents a one-off opportunity to reimagine the future and embrace the “next normal”.

That the key stakeholders, within 50 days of our challenge, have produced a recovery plan is commendable and we applaud their efforts. However, rather than a set of very practical actions, Nick Rust, outgoing CEO of the BHA, launched nine broad goals, which unfortunately disappointed a lot of owners and certainly the pundits of the Racing Post, the editor Tom Kerr being quite caustic in his comment that: “as with Coronavirus itself it is not the diagnosis but the cure that is of utmost significance. For that, the wait continues.” To be fair to the stakeholders, while the nine goals seem to be “a plan for a plan”, there will doubtless be more specific recommendations for action soon – not least the publication of the long-awaited Ownership Strategy, under development since 2017. It had better be good!

We will scrutinise these ongoing developments and fervently hope that we don’t have to echo Punch, in the final issue in 1992 before it went under, when the cartoon was updated with a considerably more emboldened curate, who replied to the bishop: “This f***ing egg’s bad!” For racing’s sake, it can’t be.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Coming Out of Lockdown – The Resumption of Racing Appears to be Getting Nearer

Has anyone experienced an April like the one we’ve just been through? I was uncertain whether to start this blog with a small number of personal reflections, or to concentrate on the gravity of the situation and the grim news that we have all been encountering – lighter news prevailed, before the sombre.

We’ll all have our own personal memories of the crisis, and for me they will be triggered in future years by the five photographs. Without any doubt (subject of course to disasters!) I’m going to come out of the lockdown in a far healthier state than when I went into it. My wife and I are having an hour’s walk around the Cotswold hills every day, and the trudge back to our house is quite steep. We’ve both enjoyed watching the newborn lambs, and our local farmer amused the village by painting “NHS” on the heaviest lamb that had been born to date, and his mum.

Earlier in the month, our mare Mayfair Rock produced her first foal, and we’re all hoping that this lovely grey filly will go on to great things. She is by Gr.1-winning Havana Grey, trained by Karl Burke, and he very generously helped us with a free nomination to this stallion, who has been well supported by breeders.

It has been very interesting to see all the various forms of communication being adopted by the racing world, not least our network of trainers, studs and pre-training yards. Several of them have really risen to the challenge of keeping owners fully informed and in touch with their horses, and I particularly want to commend Claire Hart and Martin Keighley for the almost daily flow of super photos and videos. Claire is looking after Luttrell Lad, who was due to race at Stratford, but alas the meeting had to be cancelled due to the lockdown. He’s a horse we’re particularly looking forward to seeing out and he’ll run for Philip Hobbs in bumpers at the end of the summer or early in the autumn.

Many of us have been disappointed by and / or incredulous about the performance of politicians. There has often seemed to be a considerable gap between the rhetoric of what they blather on about and the reality on the ground. If that has been a frequent public criticism in the UK, it has been nothing compared to the reactions to the “Leader of the Western World”, President Trump. A new drink has even made its appearance – although one quickly expressly prohibited by all right-thinking people. No-one wants to consider a Gin & Trump made of disinfectant. Nothing is further from my mind – indeed, every Saturday my wife and I have been enjoying a top-quality wine tasting, the latest being a superb 2003 Château Léoville-Barton from St-Julien. This estate is owned by the admirable Anthony Barton, who represents the longest-standing vineyard ownership in Anglo-Irish hands. His philosophy has always been to produce top-quality Claret and sell it for a (relatively) reasonable sum. Superb.

Now back to the grim reality. As of the end of April there had been 165,000+ confirmed cases of coronavirus infections in the UK, and 26,000+ deaths in hospitals, care homes and the wider community. Apparently 1:3 who have been ill enough to be admitted to intensive care have died. It’s hard to comprehend the sadness of this, nor the amazing dedication of the NHS and the front line of care. The country has been rightly appreciative of the bravery of all these staff, and none of us will forget the accomplishment of Captain (now Honorary Colonel) Tom Moore who has raised £31m for NHS charities by walking 100 laps of his garden.

Doubtless there will be many commissions of enquiry into the preparedness of the country for dealing with this pandemic. Already several experts, with vastly more insight than I possess, have been highly critical. As one example, Richard Horton, the Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet, has published a number of articles accusing ministers and their advisers of failing to scale up capacity for testing, contact tracing and intensive care, and adopting a laissez-faire response and a misguided strategy of “herd immunity”. The first paper on the existence of Covid-19 was published in The Lancet on 19th January, but the assessment within it was passed over by Whitehall. Horton’s withering accusation is that this has become “the biggest science policy failure in generations”.

There has been no racing in the UK since Taunton and Wetherby on 17th March, but very encouragingly the whole of racing has come together to work collaboratively in the Resumption of Racing Group, and it is looking increasingly likely that Flat racing will come back behind closed doors around the middle to end of May, with the return of NH racing provisionally announced for 1st July. The breadth and detail of work within this group has been impressive, as has its close liaison with government and, particularly, the Department of Culture, Media & Sport. The government has provided considerable sums of money to support businesses and many trainers have taken advantage of grants and loans. In addition the Horseracing Levy Board and the Racing Foundation have provided £22m of emergency funding to help sustain racing and its participants through the pandemic, particularly concentrating on the most vulnerable. This has been an excellent piece of self-help.

Unfortunately one major crack in the collaborative endeavour made its appearance when the frustration of trainers Ralph Beckett and Mark Johnston spilled over, with calls for the immediate departure of BHA Chief Executive, Nick Rust. The timing and tone of this outburst could not have been worse, as it is essential for racing to present a united front to government while also being sensitive to, and reflective of, public opinion. It would be potentially damaging for racing to be seen to be putting a mere sport ahead of public health and the needs of the population. Apart from this, the level of co-operation has been magnificent, although without any doubt deep divisions and factions remain within the sport. Once racing resumes, the various stakeholders will most certainly need to concentrate on an even more demanding plan – the Recovery of Racing. Achieving co-operation and consensus on that plan will be a huge challenge for the leadership of racing, which will be the theme for the next blog.

Normally the blog for 1st May would have been reflecting on the end of the NH season at Sandown, the pleasures of the Punchestown Festival and the excitement of the Guineas meeting coming up at Newmarket. Alas, not this year, but at least there is likely to be fine racing ahead, and who knows – we might see some of it in May. Stay safe and well.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

The Owners for Owners Vision of an Ownership Strategy – Without a £1.65m Tab!

In the spring and summer of 2018 I read about the Racehorse Owners’ Association’s leadership role in the creation of a “new ownership strategy for British racing”. Excellent, I thought – just what the industry needs, and I was keen to have a look at it. I sent emails off to the ROA requesting a copy, but received nothing in return. Eventually I decided to up the ante and write to all the top leaders in racing – BHA, GBR, RCA, NTF, Horsemen’s Group and, of course, the ROA. Doubtless I ruffled a few feathers and I received a very emollient note back from Nick Rust, the CEO of the BHA. Collaboration and communication were duly emphasised, and not surprisingly I was placated and waited to see the strategy. I have continued to wait for the last 15 months, but so far nothing formal has appeared, despite the ROA receiving £1.65m from the Racing Foundation to produce their magnum opus. Finally, in frustration, I decided to launch my own twitter campaign, with one tweet a day throughout October outlining my own thoughts on a suitable blueprint for ownership. Indeed, if you really wanted to see these tweets you could just scroll down the twitter box on the home page on my web site, www.ownersforowners.co.uk. I suspect you’ll have better things to do! The twitter exercise and all the various comments associated with it led me to produce the diagram below.

Apparently there is going to be a round of communication about the ownership strategy throughout the autumn. If so, I’m going to be very interested to see whether the ROA’s blueprint is as comprehensive as mine. At the moment they appear to be playing around at the edges of ownership with lots of “mini-initiatives”. I learnt a long time ago that you can have strategies with a small s and Strategy with a big S. My approach is to go for a big, bold vision, whereas it looks as though the ROA – despite the expensive involvement of the Portas consultancy – are lost in the minutiae of the strategic margins. Surely it is time to put a big strategy centre stage, and actually do something significant. Anyway, I’ve made my contribution and it certainly doesn’t come with a £1.65m price tag. Even if you don’t agree with what I’ve outlined, the input can hardly be better value for money as I’m not charging anyone anything. I do hope that the ROA strategy eventually surfaces - “hope springs eternal”!

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Economic Sustainability of Trainers, Part 2: How Shaky are the Foundations?

As an avid reader of the Racing Post (the online version only, as I have zero interest in football, greyhounds and fourth-rate Irish racecourses and I hate throwing away 90% of newspapers as being irrelevant), my eye was caught by two features during the week which I thought I would use as a lead into this second blog on the economic sustainability of the training profession in the UK (although it equally applies to Ireland).

The first concerns Nick Rust and the latest strategic aims for the sport. The content of the piece covered how racing should be looking to promote betting, as the sport aims to work with the betting industry. It actually wasn’t the content, though, that interested me, but learning more about what the top five strategic aims for our industry now actually are. Long ago in my consultancy career, I learnt a lot from a chief executive of a big American company who mastered the art of holding his hand up in the air and going through his five digits outlining a key strategic aim. He said, very simply, that if you have to use your other hand you have lost sight of the key goals and deliverables for your business. Very good advice, I thought, and ever since, whenever I’ve been involved with influential stakeholders, I’m always keen to see whether they can articulate those five aims. I suspect that if you asked the top hundred people in British racing what those five were, you’d come up with 100 different aims – or at least the balance and emphasis between them would vary enormously.

The second piece was a very interesting article from Richard Hughes advocating that we should be following the French model and limiting handicap rating rises to winners only. He feels that the handicapping system would be improved by radical change, which is something I’ve advocated in this blog on a number of occasions. I’ll come back to Richard’s recommendations very soon, because racing needs to acknowledge that the handicapper isn’t just there to rate horses and protect the betting public. He (or she) should also be working to retain owners in the sport and therefore strengthen the economic viability of racing. Richard’s recommendation that beaten horses shouldn’t be re-rated until they’ve won is something I completely agree with, and there’s nothing more frustrating than having your horse narrowly beaten and then re-rated so that it can’t win. It is that sort of thing that can drive owners out of the game through pure frustration.

So what is the link between these two articles? Racing needs very clear strategic goals and plans, which must genuinely impact the various tiers of racing in a way that attracts and retains owners, without whom the sport is not economically viable. As you’ll see in the diagram, I argue that the foundations of British racing are incredibly weak, from a structural and financial perspective. 80% of horses fail to cover their costs, by a huge margin; 80% of trainers are making so little money out of the sport that they are technically insolvent; and 80% of owners are surviving and sustaining themselves more with hope than any real confidence in covering their costs or even winning nice races. Having said that, I am the embodiment of the supreme optimist when it comes to racing and none of this reduces my ongoing enthusiasm and commitment for our great sport.

 

You may wonder why the only figure in that diagram is “100”. In the last blog I was looking at the amount of winnings of the top 100 trainers, and comparing that with the minimal returns for the other 450 or so trainers who have had runners on the Flat this year. In many ways the whole of our industry focuses on Tier 1 because that is the exciting, glamorous end of the sport frequented by top owners, top trainers and top horses. Let’s say that there are 100 of these in each category, and without any doubt they spend their time at the best tracks, in the best races, with the big wins and big money. Alastair Down came out with an amusing phrase that I mentioned in the last blog, that they “live like maharajas”.

The major worry is what happens when you come out of that top 100 and drop down into tier two, which I’ve called “The Grassroots”, or even worse tier three, “The Graveyard”. I haven’t made any attempt to put numbers in these two tiers, but will do so if I can obtain the information. The point I’m trying to get across is that as you drop down those three triangles, the economics of the sport become increasingly precarious, until we arrive at the bottom where there are “few wins” and “no hope”. Some would argue that none of this matters and the competitive reality of sport and business is such that the “winners will win and the losers will lose”. Personally I don’t believe that, and neither do most governments, which is why there is a concerted drive to support the SMEs (small and medium enterprises) in the economy.

My challenge to the key stakeholders of our sport and their five digits is: where would the economic viability of the training profession sit within the strategic aims of British Racing, and what strategies would they deploy to strengthen the profession? My serious concern is that I don’t believe that is even on the radar screen on the sport in any meaningful fashion. I’ll develop that further in the next blog.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Have You Heard About the New Ownership Strategy for British Racing? I Bet You Haven’t

Towards the end of July full details of the 2019 Fixture List were published with all the powers that be in British Racing claiming it as a great example of the tripartite structure working together well to balance the different requirements of the sport and the betting industry. A quick summary is that there will be a record 1,511 meetings next year, three more than in 2018: 951 Flat fixtures, 596 Jumps; 23% of the total will be all-weather meetings with floodlit fixtures January to April starting at 4pm (including 20 at Southwell); there will be a three-week gap between the Cheltenham and Aintree Festivals. It was very easy to access and while not everyone agrees with the precedence of quantity over quality, at least it was an announcement with transparency and lots of detail. Well done to all concerned.

Unfortunately the so-called Ownership Strategy for British Racing appears to be at the other end of the scale for transparency, detail and ease of access. Indeed, has anyone actually heard of it? If you are an assiduous reader of the Racehorse Owners’ Association Annual Report 2017/18 you will have found a couple of pages on it, but it is devilish tricky to find out any more. Your diligent Owners for Owners blog writer has been sleuthing the case for almost a year now, with repeated email requests to the chief executive of the ROA, Charlie Liverton, but alas, to no avail. There is a total refusal to provide any meaningful insights or detail about the strategy, which is pretty scandalous because significant industry funds (almost £1m) have been committed to the strategy, its promotion and marketing, with the ROA as the lead body on behalf of the whole industry.

Owners for Owners has a particular interest in ownership strategy, not least because I was one of the unpaid volunteers who sat on the original strategy pillar team launched by the BHA, and spent a considerable amount of time examining ownership issues and requirements with substantial input going into the business case that proposed 1,000 extra horses in British Racing by 2020. That clearly counts for nothing with the ROA. You would have thought that my involvement in the pillar team would have guaranteed access to the latest strategy, and that is before you consider the large investment that OfO has made in bloodstock in recent years – indeed under various banners we are managing almost 30 horses in training and a substantial network of owners. Ironic that this doesn’t seem to count for anything with the ROA either. And then finally I’m on the committee of the Racehorse Syndicates Association which wants to work on an “inclusive” and “collaborative” basis with other stakeholders in British Racing to ensure that ownership strategies properly reflect the needs and demands of the ever-increasing numbers involved in syndicates. I put “inclusive” and “collaborative” in inverted commas because these are words much used across the tripartite structure of the BHA, Horsemen’s Group and Racecourse Association. With the ROA being central to the Horsemen’s Group, it is again somewhat surprising that they are not prepared to apply the same principles and values in their everyday dealings with owners whom they purport to represent.

Here is a summary of what the ROA terms their “development of a collaborative and inclusive ownership strategy for British Racing”. The ROA project highlights “the continued importance of the role of owners within racing. The strategy will give owners an enhanced brand and identity, emphasising their role as supporters of the sport in so many different ways.”

Apparently four work streams have been developed within the framework of the Ownership Strategy for British Racing:

• Retention: “the project focuses on the key elements of retention of existing owners.”
• Ownership Promotion: “investment in the development of a united identity for ownership will open the door to further simplification and streamlining of the ownership journey.”
• Trainers: “a key element of the project relating to trainers is about enhancement of the service and the improvement of information provided by trainers for owners.”
• Racecourses: “this work stream addresses owners’ racecourse experience on a number of levels. There will be a focus on creating minimum racecourse standards and assisting courses to deliver these”.

Nothing at all wrong with those four work streams. Bearing in mind that they have been described in a report dated 2017/18, then presumably all the different facets of the strategy have now been developed. What I am trying to find out are the specifics, i.e. exactly what initiatives are going to be launched, by whom, at what cost and by when, to achieve what specific goals? It is true that the ROA does flag up a number of goals, but they are far too woolly.

When I was a management consultant I was working with major companies where the problem wasn’t a lack of strategies, but too many. You would often find hundreds of strategies but scant evidence of their successful implementation. Indeed while I was working with one international bank they even had a strategy to reduce the number of strategies!! Seeing the rather comic side of this, I used to refer to “Yeti strategies” – much talked about, never seen. I do hope that isn’t the case with the one that Charlie Liverton is leading.

The intention after this blog is to approach all the leading executives across the tripartite structure, namely Steve Harman, Nick Rust, Richard Wayman, Charlie Liverton, Philip Freedman, Stephen Atkin and Rupert Arnold and see if they can help me obtain more details of the practical implications of this strategy for owners.

I’ll keep you posted through this blog!

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

A Turning of the Tide on Prize-Money in 2018 – New Year’s Resolutions Being Put Into Practice

Firstly, Happy New Year, and may it be a truly successful one with lots of winners for all our owners. May the horses all be happy, healthy and improvers. One of the horses we are closely involved in running – Buckle Street, with Martin Keighley and the Condicote Clan – definitely fits into that category, putting in a really game performance to win at Catterick over 3m 2f. That was a super Christmas present for all. While up there, a number of us had an excellent discussion over a beer with the BHA’s Chief Executive, Nick Rust, whose horse Paddling was also running. This horse won at Catterick the following week, so well done to Nick and his co-owners. Indeed, he was the first person to come up to me in the winner’s enclosure to congratulate the Clan.

During the discussion with him, he flagged up the imminent announcement that prize-money in Britain is likely to reach a record £160 million in 2018, an increase of £17 million from 2017. This is a really welcome development, particularly as it follows on from an autumn announcement that £8 million of central levy funding is being channelled into grass-roots racing. Readers of the blog will know that I believe raising prize-money is the number one issue in British racing, because without it the risk is that the sport is in a downward spiral, with owners not being attracted or retained, the number of horses in training declining, and through that a lack of competitiveness in the sport that is the lifeblood of gambling.

Although the discussion with Nick over a pint and a very unusual-coloured and flavoured Catterick lamb curry was anything but formal, his statement to the press on this announcement was rather more measured. He said: “It is very important for all those involved in our sport that we are due to see such significant prize-money increases in 2018. Although there has been a gradual recovery in total prize-money in recent years, driven by increased investment from racecourses, the returns to our sport’s owners and participants have not been sufficient, in particular to those who are not competing at the top echelons. The support we received from the government and, indeed, all political parties in establishing the new levy has been crucial and means that we can target support towards those operating at the racing’s grass roots. The increased prize-money on offer in 2018 does not resolve the sport’s prize-money situation outright, but it is a step in the right direction. We hope that this good news will serve as an incentive to racehorse owners who are thinking of putting horses in training, and provide a timely boost to jockeys, trainers and stable staff, who rely in part on prize-money for their livelihoods.”

I can only raise a glass to Nick and the BHA for both the extra money and the sentiments expressed. Having said that, there will probably be a wry smile on his face when he sees the prize-money summary after deductions on the next BHA or Weatherbys statement relating to Paddling’s win at Catterick, which as an independent is definitely not the most generous of courses with its prize-money.

At the same time as this announcement, a couple of racecourses also confirmed the way the tide is now flowing. A few years ago I took issue with Newbury on a number of fronts, and like to think that I was one of the pressure points for change that led to the previous CEO being dismissed. I have a lot more time for the latest CEO, Julian Thick, so was pleased to read that prize-money is set to exceed £5 million in 2018 following an injection of £250,000 by the racecourse. As a result, total prize-money at all the track’s 29 fixtures will amount to at least £50,000, with the feature race at three-quarters of all meetings offering £20,000. Thick commented to the press that: “As an independent racecourse, Newbury is committed to ensuring prize-money levels increase as and when we can afford to make additional investment, and 2018 will see a continuation of that policy with our own direct prize-money spend increasing …. Since 2013 we have increased our executive contribution by over £1 million and 2018 will see us break the £5 million mark for the first time …. This is a reminder of our commitment to reinvest in the sport, and complements well the substantial capital investment we’ve made on fabulous new facilities for horsemen in the past three years.”

Time therefore to raise the glass again to Julian and his team at Newbury. A couple of years ago we ran our horse Shantou Magic in the Challow Hurdle, and I complained strongly to Newbury that the prize-money was less than it had been ten years previously, so it is great to see a reversal in that trend. Also for those who haven’t been there recently, the new Owners’ Club is superb. Great to see this track being improved so radically, and it is now a course that owners really like to go to, even if the preponderance of “luxury executive apartments” is not to everyone’s taste.

Finally another glass to be raised to the very progressive Chief Executive of Perth, Hazel Peplinski, who is increasing their prize-money by 35% this year to nearly £1.25 million. That also includes a new appearance money scheme across their 15 fixtures with average prize-money per race increasing to £11,500 from £8,500, with the hope that it will stimulate a rise in field sizes. Personally I am going to do everything I can to support Perth this year and will be suggesting to our trainers that if we have suitable horses, we take them there.

I’m definitely a believer in credit where credit’s due, so it’s most encouraging to be able to start the year on a positive note on the prize-money front. Don’t worry, I’ll still be applying pressure on those tracks that don’t yet seem to have picked up the message that prize-money really matters.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

British Racing Industry Road Show: A Case of Onwards, Upwards and Occasionally Sideways.

My wife and I were invited to the road show at Cheltenham Racecourse at the beginning of March. It was exceptionally well organised and informative, and well hosted by Lydia Hislop. I don’t think I’ve ever seen quite so many of racing’s leaders at the same venue; I chatted to Steve Harman, Chairman of the BHA, and then listened to Nick Rust (CEO of the BHA), Richard Wayman (COO, BHA), Philip Freedman (Chairman, Horsemen’s Group), Stephen Atkin (CEO, Racecourse Association), Rod Street (CEO, Great British Racing) as well as the leaders of the Professional Jockeys Association and Arena Racing Company. There was also a presentation dedicated to staffing, training and welfare issues with a panel led by the Human Resources Director of the BHA and well supported by other specialists in this field. Those who know me well will know that I was not sufficiently intimidated to refrain from asking questions, which I addressed to Messrs. Rust and Atkin.
Just to summarise the key targets that the tripartite group of the BHA, Horsemen’s Group and Racecourse Association signed up to in 2015, and which still guide the industry:

• 1,000 additional horses in training by 2020;
• Betting participation levels up 5% by 2018;
• Racecourse attendances to reach 7 million by 2020;
• £120m of extra income for the sport per annum by 2018.

At the same time there was open acknowledgement of the challenges that face British Racing, particularly:

• Sole ownership in decline;
• Shortage of skilled stable staff;
• Statutory Levy forecast to drop under £50m in 2017;
• Need to develop a constructive partnership with the British betting sector;
• Low returns to horsemen at grassroots level.

Within the various presentations there was certainly plenty of encouraging news, with good progress including:

• £30-40m potential increase in revenue to be raised by the new Levy; ABP scheme expected to raise more than £10m in extra revenue in 2016/17; 2% growth in total betting activity since 2014; ITV channel.
• £8m prize-money paid to the industry via Plus 10 bonus scheme; ownership decline halted; 505 additional horses in training since 2014; 3% growth in number of syndicates and partnerships.
• In The Paddock web site launched to promote syndicates; 2.9% growth in racecourse attendance since 2014; 12% growth in prize-money to almost £138m since 2014; new approach to the Fixture List under way; 4.7% growth in races with 8+ runners since 2014; 5.4m social media followers.

Phew! Lots of statistics there. Lydia did a show of hands on “optimism” for the industry, and very encouragingly it was skewed positively. There are many initiatives under way or in the pipeline, and there was a definite feeling of momentum for the next couple of years – hence the “onwards and upwards”.

But that doesn’t mean that all will necessarily be plain sailing. The questions I raised were all to do with “Grassroots Racing”. Very encouragingly the leaders of our sport are planning to focus much more effort and money on to the base of the racing pyramid, as they need to, because the most startling figure I heard was that the average cost recovery for those at the bottom of the sport is now only 8p in the £. When you look closely at the various graphs, the horses in training figure over the last five years has barely increased (13,716 to 14,033 in five years) while ownership has actually declined, although apparently that trend has now been halted (8,215 to 7,946 registered owners in five years).

I genuinely believe that this grassroots racing focus is both long overdue and absolutely essential to the long-term sustainability of the sport. If the grassroots owner retires or leaves the sport, the economics and competitiveness crumble. When you look at a race meeting such as the Cheltenham Festival on this week, all looks exciting with prodigious prize-money everywhere, but that is most definitely not how it seems on “normal” racedays. In fact I prefaced my question to Messrs. Rust and Atkin with a statement: “With Owners for Owners involved in 23 horses, I am an archetypal grassroots owner, enjoying 8p in the £ cost recovery, the dubious pleasures of minimum value racing when the total prize-money is only £3,500, endless hassles on badges, over-crowded lounges and nowhere to sit …. and yet I still remain optimistic.” I am just hoping that we see significant improvement over the next few years to 2020 to justify that optimism.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

On NH Racing, Couch Potatoes and Collaboration with Bookmakers

Normally I’m criss-crossing the country supporting our horses, but with the dreadful winter and apparently never-ceasing soft ground it has been one of the quietest few months for ages, notwithstanding attending all four days of the Cheltenham Festival and the three of Aintree. However, since then I have to say that I have been “enjoying” the delights of sitting at home, wood burner blazing and chilled white wine at my elbow while cheering on my (mainly losing) bets at Sandown and more recently, Punchestown. So, as I knock on the door of becoming a pensioner, I’m also becoming a couch potato. Bliss!

It was absolutely terrific to see Richard Johnson finally become Champion Jockey after all those years of being runner-up to AP. There isn’t a better rider over jumps at the moment, and there certainly isn’t a nicer guy. He’s marvellous with owners and it is always a pleasure when he is riding one of our horses for any of our trainers but, obviously, mostly Philip Hobbs. Indeed we gave him his 100th winner of the recent season when He’s A Bully won for him at Wincanton. With typical modesty, when I complemented him on the ride, he said, “They’re always easy when they win”, despite our horse hanging badly over most of his fences.

Reflecting on the NH season, who would now be your top three horses? For me the performance on Thursday of Douvan would make him my top jumper. This was his 11th consecutive win, and he has won the last three by a cumulative 32 lengths, bagging all three top novice chases at Cheltenham, Aintree and now Punchestown. We have a Getaway with Anthony Honeyball, and he keeps referring to him as “Douvan”. Dream on, dream on. My second top horse would be the wonderful Thistlecrack, who waltzed home in the World Hurdle and then the Liverpool Stayers’ Hurdle, on both occasions by 7 lengths. I’ll then have three joint thirds: Annie Power (could she become the first mare to win the Champion Hurdle twice?), Don Cossack (not just for the Gold Cup but because we have a Sholokhov 2yo who we have nicknamed “Don Caster”), and then Sprinter Sacre (as well as the superb training performance by Nicky Henderson in bringing him back, and similarly My Tent Or Yours, Simonsig and Bob’s Worth).

We couch potatoes also have lots of time to read the newspapers from cover to cover. Two articles about gambling and bookmakers caught my eye. The Sunday Times Rich List goes into the category of tittle-tattle with me, but I noticed that a number of Britain’s wealthiest tycoons in the betting industry saw their collective wealth jump by almost £3bn to £19bn in 2015/16. Amazing really when you think that their normal stance is that they aren’t making money, particularly through racing. And yet the Coates family, who founded Bet365, saw profits double to £410m and their fortune increase to £1.4bn; the co-founder of Betfair, Ed Wray’s wealth jumped by £68m after the Paddy Power merger; and that almost-destitute winner of Group 1s on the Flat, Michael Tabor, the majority stakeholder in Bet Victor, added another £25m to his net worth of £600m. Never believe a bookmaker when they tell you times are tough.

While the Sunday Times article produced steam out of my ears, another in The Times I found really encouraging. When I attended the BHA strategic forum at Newbury on 1st March, Nick Rust emphasised that three of their four strategic goals for British Racing are to grow betting participation by 5% by 2018, generate £120m of extra income for the sport and increase racecourse attendance to 7m by 2020. In the last couple of blogs I have been praising Jockey Club Racecourses for their investment in facilities and prize-money and now, according to The Times, their Racecourse Media Group (RMG) (which recently negotiated the £30m racing rights deal with ITV) are facilitating plans to bring the Tote under the control of British racing. RMG have an excellent track record and indeed in 2015 ploughed back over £80m to their 34 racecourse stakeholders via profits from Turf TV, pay-TV channel Racing UK, streaming pictures to online mobile betting sites and the current deal with Channel 4.

If you’re an avid reader of the blog you’ll know that I’m highly critical of the way the Tote, as a gaming asset, has been milked by Betfred and also the dismal lack of innovation on the part of many of the retail bookmakers, particularly the non-ABP partners Ladbrokes, Coral, William Hill and Betfred. Apparently RMG is likely to broker a collaborative business model between racecourses and a number of bookmakers so that they can take the contract back over when it comes up for renegotiation in 2018. There could be significant money for racing if this collaboration were successful: when Betfred took over the Tote, they paid £265m and committed to making annual payments back into racing of around £10m. RMG intend to involve all 58 racecourses to come up with an agreement with as many bookmaking firms as possible to develop a credible alternative to Betfred’s control of the Tote. If successful it would be a really significant step forward, not just in generating more revenue for British racing but also facilitating a far more creative use of the Tote’s assets and betting possibilities, both in the UK and worldwide.

On that note, I’ll put a few more logs on the burner and pour another glass of white wine. Cheers to RMG!

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Ides of March for the Bookies: Whacked by Whittingdale and Mauled by Mullins. But Who is the April Fool? Please Step Forward, Paul Darling

So how was Cheltenham for you? I always like the turn of phrase of Alastair Down in the Racing Post, and he described this year’s festival as “the antidote to cynicism”. Having been critical of Cheltenham’s facilities in the past, it is marvellous to be able to praise the course for everything that has been done to transform Prestbury Park and make it one of the best sporting venues in the world. Indeed, in many racegoers’ eyes, it is now the best race meeting in the country and certainly this year it proved to be a punters’ paradise. Even I made money on every single day, which shows how easy it was!!! It’s a long time since I’ve had a Heinz in, but how could anyone fail to perm lots of winners from Douvan, Annie Power, Vroum Vroum Mag, Yorkhill, Vautour, Thistlecrack, Limini, Ivanovich Gorbatov, Don Cossack and then the three JP McManus-owned and top amateur-ridden hotpots of Minella Rocco, Cause Of Causes and On The Fringe – laid out, or what?

The stand-out performances for me were Douvan in the Arkle (first horse since Flying Bolt in 1965 to do the double with the Supreme Novices’); Sprinter Sacre’s emotional comeback in the Champion Chase; Any Currency’s win as a 13-y-o in the Cross Country for our trainer Martin Keighley (who attended our OfO champagne picnic with his wife Belinda that day and convinced most of those present to entrust their cash to “Woody” and Aidan – a superb ride); Vautour’s romp in the Ryanair; Thistlecrack’s sublime win in the World Hurdle; and then Don Cossack demonstrating why he is the top chaser in training in the Gold Cup (and OfO has a particular interest in him as we have a Sholokhov 2yo, nicknamed “Don Caster”). Great to see first festival wins for Dan Skelton, Harry Fry and Ian Williams as well as Martin, while you can’t help but be envious of Patricia Pugh, whose horse Altior won the Supreme Novices’ and is only the second horse she has ever owned. Victoria Pendleton, quite rightly, was lauded for her personal poise and riding performance on Pasha Du Polder, although she has a veritable mountain to climb to catch Ruby Walsh, who passed his landmark of 50 winners at the Festival on Black Hercules. And after Gold Cup day, the debates on whether Cue Card would or would not have beaten Don Cossack will continue for many years. Phew – a magnificent meeting. Now on to Aintree, where Willie Mullins is expected to send a team of over 20 horses in a bid to win the UK jump trainers’ championship crown. The last Irishman to do that was the legendary Vincent O’Brien, one of my all-time heroes. Willie is now odds-on for the title and is 6/4 to land seven or more winners in Liverpool. I wonder if we’ll see a repetition of the stats from Cheltenham – four owners managed to win half of the races. I definitely hope not.

Throughout March the backdrop to British racing has been all about the announcement by the Government on the Racing Right, and on Budget Day, Wednesday, 16th March, Chancellor Osborne reiterated that offshore betting operators will contribute to racing’s finances, and in Nick Rust’s phrase, the Government is clearly committed to a “fair, enforceable and sustainable return from all betting activity on our sport”. The timetable to introduce the new funding system was outlined by the Chancellor with consultation planned over the summer, notification to be given to the European Commission, a statutory instrument to be published by the end of the year and then the new funding model in force from April, 2017. A huge win for racing.

So I was delighted when Paul Darling, Chairman of the Association of British Bookmakers, made a short speech in which he said that “we’re clearly entering a new era of partnership between betting operators and racing. It’s time for all of us in the betting industry to admit our past failures and lack of innovation, and embrace the new spirit of partnership that will strengthen the whole of racing, its sustainable funding and our own profitability.” On behalf of the big operators that had previously declined to become Authorised Betting Partners (ABP), such as William Hill, Coral, Paddy Power, Betfred and Ladbroke’s, he announced the launch of the Aintree Betting Pledge (ABP), whereby any registered owner will be entitled to a £100 free bet that can be placed on any of the Mullins runners.

If only, if only ….. What Mr. Darling actually said is that the amount of money racing now receives from betting shops is “completely unsustainable” and that racing is a product that is now a loss-maker in his industry. He believes that the current levy is unaffordable and that it makes the racing product less attractive than others. Indeed, “racing must be willing to treat betting as a partner and not as the enemy from whom as much cash as possible must be extracted by whatever is today’s latest device”. Alas, therefore, the sniping and skirmishing is bound to continue. There are some real dinosaurs in the betting industry.

The excitements of Cheltenham prevented me from doing the promised summary of the BHA Newbury strategy forum that I attended at the beginning of March. More on this in the next blog ….. provided of course that Aintree doesn’t distract me next time, which is highly likely.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Announcement by the Government on the Racing Right – Huge Milestone for British Racing

By the time this blog is posted, I’ll be down at Cheltenham Racecourse with friends and owners cheering on the start of National Hunt’s Olympics. For the occasional visitor to Prestbury Park, everything looks rosy in the racing village – huge crowds, fabulous facilities, majestic horses, big prize-money and enormous betting turnover, with this festival alone generating over £350m. What could possibly be wrong in British racing?

Unfortunately over the last couple of years it has become increasingly apparent that the levy system set up in 1961 is no longer fit for purpose, particularly with the migration of betting operators offshore, and with the accelerating use of remote channels the levy has halved. Without legislative change, racing faced a funding crisis, which is why the “Authorised Betting Partner” arrangement was put forward to secure voluntary payments from bookmakers of 7-8% on their online profits, in exchange for access to racing sponsorship, shaping of the fixture list and preferential media rights for certain services.

In my last blog I mentioned that I had been to the BHA’s forum at Newbury on 1st March, and that I had intended to summarise that today. However only two days later, on 3rd March, the Culture Secretary John Whittingdale announced to Parliament that new funding arrangements would be created to stop this levy leakage and that all bets placed on British racing by any British-based customer, whether in a retail betting shop or remotely, would come into the scope of proposed legislative changes to be fast-tracked through the House of Commons so that hopefully a new system will be in place by April 2017. The full endorsement by the Government of the so-called Racing Right is probably the most important proposal for British racing in 50 years, and is a tremendous enabler of the BHA’s Strategy for Growth developed by Steve Harman, Chairman of the BHA and Nick Rust, the Chief Executive, together with the active support of all the major stakeholders in British racing.

Racing’s leaders are to be thoroughly commended for this development, and it is most encouraging that the relationship with government is so strong and that the tripartite structure of the BHA, the Racecourse Association and the Horsemen’s Group has provided real clarity and cohesion throughout a turbulent time with a number of the traditional bookmakers such as Betfred, Ladbrokes, Coral and William Hill. Indeed I think this is the first Cheltenham Festival since the early 1980s where the Gold Cup is not being sponsored by a bookmaker (on Friday it will be Timico), and Ladbrokes are no longer associated with the World Hurdle (which goes to Ryanair). Indeed it is pretty symptomatic of the behaviour of some of these “traditional” (I’m actually tempted to use a much more pejorative description) operators that their reaction remains negative. As an indicator of that, Ladbrokes have had a right old strop and are refusing to open their betting offices at Cheltenham.

I’ll do a more detailed summary of the Newbury forum in the next blog. You may remember from previous communications from me that the BHA’s strategy is all about creating the right conditions for growth for the industry and particularly: seeking £120m of extra income for the sport by 2020; 1,000 additional horses in training by 2020; betting participation up by 5% by 2018; and racecourse attendance up to 7m by 2020. Clearly there are many interdependent factors in play to achieve these goals, but without any doubt at all, replacing the levy with a new funding platform backed by legislation is probably the single most important lever for growth. Without that, there would be a foreboding sense of racing being well and truly in decline, purely as a result of woefully insufficient income to fund the growth of the whole sport. Putting that in context, and quoting from the Newbury presentation, we’re currently 38th in the global league table of owner prize-money, and if we are ever to escape that lamentable position it is absolutely vital that there is a much greater and sustainable revenue pipeline.

Since I started doing this blog four years ago, it is the first time that I have felt that racing has finally turned a corner and that the sport is genuinely beginning to arrest the decline that could easily have become terminal. Hats off to everyone involved in this extremely significant and encouraging step forward. Doubtless there will be lots of detail to sort out, but the government’s backing for the racing right is of huge importance.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

At Last, One Voice for British Racing – and a Lot of It Focused on Bookmakers and Betting

Racing politics around the 55th Levy Scheme can be difficult for most of us to comprehend, but there have been a number of very significant and really positive developments recently reflecting months of hard work, particularly from CEO Nick Rust and Chairman Steve Harman of the British Horseracing Authority (BHA) in conjunction with the Racecourse Association (RA) and Horsemen’s Group (HG).

While we don’t yet have an enforceable horserace betting right, we do have a new tripartite governance structure underpinned by a signed Members’ Agreement; a Members’ Committee representing the BHA, RA and HG, meeting quarterly; and an Executive Committee dealing with the implementation of strategy, meeting monthly. Credit where credit is due: this is potentially a milestone moment that will dramatically improve and strengthen decision-making and introduce a far more coherent and unified approach, with British racing able to speak with one voice and hopefully rise above the infighting of the past. Obviously there will be some big challenges to address, not least over the race programme and fixtures. Indeed Nick Rust has insisted that the agreement will only be in place initially for 18 months, and the next step forward will be dependent on a Memorandum of Understanding on the reshaping of fixtures – which, of course, goes right to the heart of the economic model of racecourses.

It sounds complex stuff, but it is all part of a genuinely strategic approach to the strengthening and growth of British Racing. Nick Rust has made a couple of TV appearances recently in which he emphasised the need to achieve three easily understandable goals: increase the number of racegoers, increase the volume of betting, increase the number of horses in training. Central to all of that is clearly the need for investment and funding across the sport, which is why bringing the bookmakers to the strategic party in the right way is so critically important.

Alas, while the developments mentioned above are a very big step forward, the breakdown on 31st October in the negotiations over the Levy for 2016/17 was definitely a big step back – at least in the short term. Basically about 40% of all bets by UK customers on British racing are not contributing anything at all to the sport or its workforce. Normally on a £10 bet, about 15p makes its way into racing. At the moment there is zero contribution to the levy from the digital, offshore businesses, and that is an estimated £30m currently being lost. The effect of the haemorrhaging of levy in this way is likely to reduce the levy yield from around £100m to £50m or lower by 2017, which is clearly going to have a hugely significant impact on racing, not least on prize-money for owners, which as we know is already at the bottom of the returns on ownership in any of the racing territories worldwide.

With the negotiations having broken down, the matter has had to be referred to the Government in the form of John Whittingdale, the Minister at the Department for Culture, Media & Sport, for determination. This is the last thing British racing wanted, since it shouldn’t be the Government’s job to sort out our problems. Having said that, there is apparently a lot of support for racing and, indeed, the Chancellor, in this year’s Budget, pledged that the Government will support a new Horserace Betting Right to replace the outdated levy mechanism.

The 55-year-old levy scheme is clearly nowhere near fit for purpose. Some would even argue that it rarely has been, since it started. The way that it was set up and operated has enabled bookies to under-pay for decades. Increasingly they have put out a smokescreen that the racing betting product is far less important than it used to be, but Nick Rust, as an ex-Ladbrokes man, is now poacher turned gamekeeper and knows the inherent nonsense of that statement. Racing is the only sport that provides a 7-day, worldwide betting product. It is inherently profitable but has the powerful advantage of bringing in punters to bet on other offerings. It is that leveraging of revenue which is at the heart of potentially huge growth for bookmakers if they could move away from denial and squabbling over the levy to a far more strategic debate about how to stimulate innovation in gambling and harness the enormous global market into and through the best racing in the world.

However, the bookies must make an appropriate contribution to British racing. One lever therefore is ongoing persuasion and negotiation, but the other is to be more coercive. So another significant development over the last month shows the huge benefit of having a Tripartite Agreement. British Racing – BHA, RA, HG – has introduced a new designation of “Authorised Betting Partner” (ABP) for bookmakers who “have a fair and mutually sustainable funding relationship with the sport”. This comes in on 1st January, and there are three firms already with that status: 32 Red, bet 365 and Betfair, because they are paying voluntarily on their digital businesses or, like Betfair, have a commercial deal in place. That is not the case with the likes of Betfred, Coral, Ladbrokes or William Hill. Although there was a voluntary agreement several years ago under which bookmakers committed to £18m of such contributions, only £4.5m has so far found its way into racing. All of this demonstrates that racing cannot rely on voluntary payments, and it must be underpinned by legally binding funding requirements – hence the need for an enforceable Horserace Betting Right. In future, if a bookmaker is not an ABP, because they are not paying levy or an agreed equivalent on their digital business, they will be banned from taking out new sponsorship deals on most races and festivals. Encouragingly both Jockey Club Racecourses and Arena Racing Company, who operate half the UK racecourses and 60% of the fixtures, have already stated that they will not enter into new commercial agreements with bookies that are not ABPs.

While the structural side of all of this is clearly complex, the basic goals, levers and requirements are straightforward. As this blog was written mid-way through the Paddy Power meeting at Cheltenham, it is to be hoped that the bookmakers change their behaviour, finally get behind racing’s strategy for growth and accept the need for a proper, sustainable contribution. At the moment, taking Paddy Power as an example, their initial reaction has been to question the legality of the ABP sponsorship model. Who knows, maybe it won’t be that long before Cheltenham is looking for a new sponsor.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Should the Handicapper Have a Responsibility to Retain Owners in British Racing?

If there are any certainties in life other than death and taxes, it is that owners and trainers will always argue that their horses have been badly treated by the handicapper. We always feel that as with golf handicaps we’re penalised quickly for decent performances while the official handicapper only reduces the penalties at a glacial pace. Recently one of our horses, He’s A Bully, a 13-race maiden, went up 7lbs for coming second. I thought this was very harsh, as did all the owners and connections. Having had quite a whinge about it, the horse duly won his next race by 9 lengths! But we had to run him before he could be re-handicapped, so for Owners for Owners there was a happy ending to the grumble and, indeed, the mark then stayed the same.

Throughout the intervening week between the 7lb hike and winning the race, there was a lot of discussion in our owner network about He’s A Bully, basically along the lines of how harsh it is to put up a maiden for not winning. Surely any horse should be entitled to win a race before being punished? There were even more painful examples however where the handicapper has put up horses significantly for not even completing races. Again, just because a horse is going well but then falls over, say, at the final fence, surely it is overly harsh to raise the mark without even getting home.

That line of discussion got me thinking more about the handicapping system, and the core principles behind it. On the BHA web site there is a detailed guide to handicapping which contains nine formal aims:

1. To achieve a competitive race with a close finish with a view to providing an exciting sporting spectacle.
2. To ensure that every horse’s handicap rating gives it a theoretical equal chance of success on its best recent form under its optimum conditions.
3. To set an interesting puzzle that the public find intriguing to solve.
4. To aim for competitive betting in handicap races, thereby indicating that the public believe that horses have a reasonable chance of success.
5. To re-evaluate ratings after a race so that horses that have raced competitively together are weighted to, theoretically, equalise the form if they were to meet next time they ran.
6. To reduce the rating of horses which appear to be deteriorating with a view to giving them a fair chance of success.
7. To favour the majority at the expense of the minority. If one horse is rated too highly, then that one horse may not have an equal chance of success on its next start. If one horse is rated too low, however, then every horse it races against may not have an equal chance of success on their next start.
8. To keep the median ratings of all horses on file as consistent as possible with previous years. Both ‘slippage’ and ‘uppage’ within the overall rating file are undesirable as they can lead to a mismatch between the racing population and the race programme.
9. To be as open as possible with trainers and owners seeking information about their horse’s handicap rating.

You’ll see that owners only get one mention, and quite clearly all the aims are essentially to do with racing as a spectacle, and particularly betting. But as regular readers of this blog will know, the owners are the number one stakeholders in racing, making the greatest financial contribution. Nick Rust, Chief Executive of the BHA, is leading the drive to bring owners into the sport and for there to be an additional 1,000 horses in training by 2020. The other side of the coin, of course, is what to do about retaining owners who leave racing for all sorts of reasons.

Unfortunately there is very little properly gathered data examining the churn rate of owners, and I’ve certainly never seen anything at all that examines the frustration and disillusionment that can set in due to horses being handicapped to a level where it is just about impossible for them to win. Similarly I am not aware of any study having been made of owners quitting the sport and selling / retiring their horses as a result of inappropriately high handicapping. However, anecdotal evidence abounds on this subject and a number of trainers’ blogs definitely argue that the principles of handicapping are a contributing factor to high churn rates. To what extent should there be a formal aim of handicapping that focuses on the requirement to retain owners in the sport through ensuring that their horses can win or be placed a sufficient number of times? Do let me know your views on this subject. After all, there is no point pursuing expensive marketing initiatives to bring owners into the sport if it is driving them out through inappropriate handicapping of their horses.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

The Growth Strategy for British Racing, Part 3 of 3: Many Positives, Credit where Credit’s Due, but also Some Major Areas Still to Focus On

On the eve of Royal Ascot, it’s easy for the outsider to look at our sport and believe everything is very rosy. Over the last few months we’ve had huge crowds at the Cheltenham Festival, Aintree, Newmarket, and Epsom on Derby day where they had over 120,000 attendees. Bloodstock prices at the sales are booming and sponsorship, particularly through Qipco, is injecting the highest level of investment that British racing has ever achieved. The quality and integrity of racing in Britain are by a considerable margin the best in the world, so there are many positives.

And yet as flagged up in the last two blogs, there are deep-seated problems in the sport, particularly around funding with a major dip forecast in a couple of years. When Steve Harman was appointed Chairman of the BHA, he was determined to develop a more strategic approach to racing and drive significant changes, initially around governance and leadership at the BHA. In effect the Board has now been transformed; there is a new CEO in place in Nick Rust; and relationships with Government have never been better, with a commitment to implementing the Horserace Betting Authorisation Right within this Parliament. British racing has never had a clear strategy, and credit should be given to Steve for driving through a process that encouraged all the main stakeholders to rally round, bury their differences and for the first time, “speak with one voice”. Full marks for that. The new Strategy for Growth is actively supported by Owners for Owners and we even made a contribution into one of the pillars, on ownership. Not surprisingly, therefore, we are very much in favour of the approach, although we are also prepared to argue that there are some additional areas to emphasise.

Key Targets for Growth in the Coming Years

BHA summary: increase the number of horses in training – 1,000 new horses by 2020; raise betting participation levels – up 5% by 2018; increase racecourse attendance levels – reaching 7 million by 2020; new income for the sport - £120m p.a. by 2018.

OfO appraisal: setting clear targets is a huge step forward for racing. However we would have liked to see at least two more: return on ownership at 23% (with owners losing on average 77p in the £) is abysmal compared to almost any other country in the world. The BHA should commit to improving that in a defined way between now and 2020. Also, the targets set are in effect focusing solely on increasing revenue, but like any other turnaround strategy racing should also set clear goals for cost down. Cost reduction is not mentioned at all in the Strategy for Growth. We believe that a cumulative target of £100m cost savings over five years could be achieved, with the savings reinvested into the sport. There is enormous scope for such savings in racing administration, contractual commitments between owners and trainers and standardisation of procurement.

Growth Pillar: Customer Growth

BHA summary: national survey of attitudes towards racing; consumer insight project with the involvement of all racecourses; improvement of sponsorship leverage.

OfO appraisal: it appears that racing from a spectator standpoint is going through a structural change. The average race-goer is now attracted to big events. Top race-days and those with themes such as Ladies’ Days are increasingly popular. At the same time the lower end of racing, and particularly the all-weather, has been abandoned. Terrestrial broadcasting is in decline. As an example, viewers for the Derby dropped from 4.1m in 2006 for the BBC to 1.47m on Channel 4 this year. There is a real need to improve the attractiveness and appeal of British racing. Two immediate areas require focus. The BHA needs to be given the authority to exercise centralised control over fixtures and the race programme. This will be an interesting test of the new tripartite governance structure between the BHA, the Horsemen’s Group and the racecourses. Secondly, and as a result of this, a much more holistic approach can then be adopted towards race planning, particularly based around much-needed data analysis of the preferred pattern of race-days and race types.

Growth Pillar: Horse Population, Ownership and Breeding

BHA summary: more efficient and cheaper ownership administration; easier access to syndicates to encourage new ownership; creation of wider options for colours to encourage associations with brands and clubs; improvement of the overall ownership experience.

OfO appraisal: having influenced the goal of 1,000+ additional horses in training by 2020, we are looking forward to a range of centrally-led initiatives aiming to achieve that. Similarly a dramatic simplification of ownership administration is a “quick win” – or at least it ought to be. We have a concern that because ownership administration and the cost associated with it is a revenue generator for Weatherbys and the BHA, it will suffer from a lack of urgency. While adding to the number of horses and, as a result, the number of owners is absolutely necessary, so there should be a similar focus on decreasing the churn rate and retaining owners. The Strategy for Growth doesn’t really address this issue. So for example while we can only applaud the investment at the top of the sport, there is a concern that the “ordinary owner” remains neglected, particularly in terms of prize-money. As an example, the minimum values prize-money at Class 2 level and below is far less than it was a decade ago, with place-money in particular at derisorily low levels. There is no point investing resources in bringing lots of new owners in, if racing can’t retain them.

Growth Pillar: Racing and Betting

BHA summary: “own Thursdays”; align GB and Ireland race timings and other race timing improvements; creation of a Racing & Betting Forum, key leaders from racing, betting and the media examining ways of improving participation in betting on British racing.

OfO appraisal: in many ways the ordinary punter has been a neglected stakeholder within British racing, and we applaud the commitment to engage the “voice of the gambling customer”. However from a betting innovation perspective we were very disappointed by the lack of transformational recommendations in the Strategy for Growth. Obviously the racing right, if secured, will be a huge step forward, but we felt that there should have been more insightful analysis of the opportunities presented by the decline of the on-course betting trade and the transformation of the off-course market, particularly through digital and online gaming. Furthermore, in only three years’ time the Betfred exclusive seven-year tote pool betting licence expires. There will be considerable benefits for the racing industry in acquiring that licence, and we hope that will come back on to the agenda. Finally, British racing remains undeveloped as a global betting opportunity and that needs examining in far more detail, together with the emergence of new betting platforms to capture it.

Growth Pillar: Ultra High Net Worth (UHNW)

BHA summary: create a short list of UHNW targets and identify potential assets for investment; integration of existing efforts and resources; develop a more formal relationship with UK Trade & Investment (UKTI).

OfO appraisal: one definition of a UHNW individual is that they don’t just own a company – they own a country. This area by its very nature is extremely sensitive and confidential and therefore it is not surprising that this section lacks specific detail of implementation. As has been seen, however, with the huge investment from the Middle East, securing a small number of extremely wealthy individuals can generate a massively positive impact in racing. Likely to be a prime focus for the Chairman of the BHA and we wish him well in pursuing it.

Foundation Pillar: Integrity and Regulation

BHA summary: enhanced equine anti-doping measures; rewrite the rules of racing.

OfO appraisal: obviously an essential foundation because without integrity there is no faith whatsoever in the quality of British racing. However we feel that it is time to put a number of other integrity issues properly on the table and would like to see a cross-racing investigation into the integrity of the bloodstock industry, sales houses, agents and syndicate racing managers. We all know of many rumours in this sector and there is definitely a need for greater openness, transparency and, as a minimum, “light touch” regulation through the framing of required minimum standards, codes of conduct and penalties for proven breach.

Foundation Pillar: Participant Welfare and Training

BHA summary: restructure of the sport’s welfare and training provision; integrated recruitment; injury rehabilitation; funding reform.

OfO appraisal: impossible to disagree with any aspect of this pillar. It says everything about racing that until the latest reorganisation of the BHA there was no-one at the centre in a human resources leadership role. Full marks for finally acknowledging the criticality of people, skills and capability in any change management programme.

It is clearly early days in the Strategy for Growth. We will certainly keep a close eye on developments and update our readers through this blog. Best of fortune to all those involved in implementation.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

The Growth Strategy for British Racing, Part 2 of 3: Cuts are coming

In the last blog I looked at the overall context of the growth strategy for British racing, as presented by Nick Rust and Rod Street in early May as part of their road show around the UK. While lots of initiatives were outlined, there was also some doom and gloom …. and indeed only a few days later Paul Lee, chairman of the Levy Board, duly announced a £4m reduction in expenditure in 2016 (which is bound to affect prize-money) and more substantial cuts threatened for 2017 – a timely reminder that all the various parties in racing really need to give total commitment to the growth strategy. So in this blog, here is an outline of the recommendations. Doubtless other ideas and activities will be developed as the strategy is implemented, so this is not necessarily a complete list, but the main themes and pillars are as described in the presentation.

1. Racing Structure & Governance

Like it or loathe it, racing does not operate through a conventional integrated structure with clear lines of authority. Consensus and collaboration rule the day, despite the considerable downside that this can lead to lengthy delays in decision-making and also allows stakeholders to exercise negative authority by blocking much-needed changes and reform. Nick Rust emphasised the need for racing to help itself and pursue “one journey: one voice”. Hear, hear! There is going to be a governance change with a tripartite arrangement between the BHA, the Horsemen’s Group and the Racecourse Association. There will be a members’ agreement, a members’ committee to steer strategy, and executive committee to make the key decisions. This is a challenging arrangement which will need “collaboration with teeth”.

2. Critical Success Factors: Transformation vs. Incrementalism

One way of evaluating any strategy is to look at the recommendations which are essentially incremental vs. those which are genuinely transformational. This is not in any way to knock incrementalism, but there is normally a need for significant innovation in a small number of key areas to drive successful change. We will return to that theme in the third blog, with a more critical appraisal.

Four clear, quantifiable targets / CSFs were highlighted: 1,000 new horses in training and racecourse attendances to be at 7 million by 2020 (vs. 5.8m today); betting revenues to rise by 5% and a minimum of £120m of extra income to flow into the sport by 2018.

3. Racing and Betting Pillar

Vital need to reverse negative trends. Incremental recommendations included: connecting better to betting consumers; setting up a Racing and Betting Forum; improving sectional timings; closer alignment in race timings and broadcasts between GB and Ireland; and introducing an “Own Thursday” day, where betting can take place free of many of the other sporting distractions. Transformational recommendations: there weren’t any.

4. Customer Growth Pillar

Incremental recommendations included: developing better customer insight; using customer data more effectively; setting up a national survey; better promotion through social and digital media; seeking more sponsorship. Transformational recommendations: there weren’t any, although the vision of 7m racegoers may well need some.

5. Horse Population, Ownership & Breeding Pillar

Incremental recommendations included: simplifying owner administrative processes to lower the cost and complexity; liberalisation of colours; framing minimum standards for trainers, racecourses and the administrative experience; launching a data project on owner experience and owner churn rates. Transformational recommendations: although there weren’t many specifics, there is a clear intention to put funds behind the goal of 1,000 additional horses in training by 2020. That will be a centrally-led drive.

6. Ultra-High Net Worth Pillar

No real detail here, other than saying there is a need to “integrate and optimise new and existing resources”.

7. Integrity & Regulation

Strong commitment to maintain the world leadership reputation of British racing, and for there to be “impactful, cost-effective targeting of risk areas”. Incremental recommendations such as a plan to simplify and make more transparent the rules of racing; continued targeting of corruption, but making sure that the authorities are aware of “the danger of sledgehammers to crack nuts”.

8. Welfare & Training

Not many specific recommendations, although there will clearly be greater emphasis on integrated recruitment and learning and development; injury rehabilitation and broader education on relevant subjects such as nutrition for jockeys.

9. Funding

Running right through the presentation and discussion were continued references to “Where is the cash going to come from?” Part of that is the “need for fair and sustainable funding between betting and racing on a reasonable basis”; part through the introduction of the Racing Right; and part through the need for racing to be far more open to ideas for investment from outside the sport. A lot of that will have to be transformational.

Doubtless you will have your own views about the coverage and relevance of all these various ideas and recommendations …. together with key elements that you may feel have been neglected. More about that in the next blog.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

The Growth Strategy for British Racing, Part 1 of 3: “Proud History : Bright Future”

Last week I went along to the BHA presentation and discussion at Newbury Racecourse on the growth strategy for British racing. Nick Rust. CEO of the BHA, led the discussion, supported by Rod Street of Great British Racing. It was a lengthy morning in front of 150+ attendees, a number of whom it has to be said are fully paid-up members of the cynical brigade. Personally I think it is really important to give credit to the BHA for setting up these briefing sessions. The leaders of racing are extremely committed to getting everyone in the industry behind the growth strategy in a really collaborative and positive way. One of Nick’s key messages was that this must be a “self-help initiative”, since no-one is going to bail out British racing and we’re certainly heading into a difficult five years. It is the first time I have had contact with him, and you couldn’t help but be impressed by his open style.

Because of the importance of the growth strategy, I am going to cover it in some detail in this and the next two blogs. Part 1 looks at the overall context of the strategy (I didn’t detect anyone disagreeing with the BHA’s analysis); Part 2 summarises the proposed initiatives and road-map (based on the work of the pillar strategy teams launched by Steve Harman last year, which consulted with over 300 key stakeholders); and then Part 3 will be a critical appraisal of the overall approach, the areas which are relatively non-contentious, those which are much more likely to be challenged and also the areas I felt were seriously neglected.

Both presenters were determined to show that a lot of work has been under way, and that racing is a really important industry. 85,000 jobs are dependent on it; there is a £1.1bn core annual expenditure; on-shore and off-shore betting turnover is £10bn+; there were 1,429 fixtures in 2014, with 5.8m racegoers attending; prize-money was a record £130m, and we are the second-best attended sport after football. Great British Racing (admittedly with a paltry £1.2m budget per annum) has done a lot of work to raise the exposure of racing to the public; the British Champions series is a real success; 10-year sponsorship has been secured for the Derby; and an international network of ambassadors is encouraging inward investment. Not everyone at Newbury was comfortable with the “marketing jargon”, but a lot is clearly being achieved. Without any doubt the relationship with government is probably at an all-time high, as evidenced by the cross-party support for the “racing right” that was announced by the Chancellor in March. Having “one voice to government” really matters, and this is a notable success. Equally the work of the Horsemen’s Group / ROA in obtaining prize-money agreements with 56 courses has injected much-needed cash in a sustainable manner.

Unfortunately though, significant storm clouds are building on the horizon, and Nick Rust in particular made no attempt to conceal these. Horses in training, owners, betting and the traditional racecourse audience are all in decline. The return on ownership, which I have often emphasised in these blogs (and I put a question to Nick on that subject), is at a miserable 26p in the £, and is unlikely to move much. That poor return has disillusioned many owners. Not surprisingly there were 7% fewer horses in training over the last five years, and 15% fewer sole owners. Over the last ten years, there has been a persistent decline of £400m in the betting gross margin. Some racecourses are struggling with profitability, while virtually all trainers, breeders and jockeys outside the top tier are securing an inadequate return for their efforts. If that is not enough doom and gloom, the levy income may well drop to just £50m by 2017.

In effect, therefore, the growth strategy for British racing is a turnaround one. These trends must be reversed, with a clear requirement that the sport, through its own efforts and tapping new sources of funds, needs to generate at least an extra £100m over the next few years.

An explicit strategic framework was outlined, with four clear aims: improve the number attending racing and the quality of the experience; boost racehorse ownership; revitalise and innovate betting; improve media consumption of the sport in order to “make racing part of the nation’s fabric”. Based on the work in 2014, there are four growth pillars: customer growth; horse population, owning and breeding; racing and betting; ultra-high net worth individuals. In turn there are two foundation pillars: integrity and recognition; participant welfare and training. Finally there are five key enablers: government relations; the racing programme; racing’s future financial model; a community engagement strategy; and communications. The initiatives connected with these will be examined in Part 2 of this series on 1st June.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.