"Racing United"

[Homer J]

When I believe that punters miraculously fund racing, I'll be glad for them to have their own consumers' group (cheap beer all round! Free entry!). What underpins racing is picture rights and the racegoer, per se, not the punter as such.

The Levy yields for recent years can be found here http://www.hblb.org.uk/document.php?id=12

The Levy is derived from 10% of the profits of UK betting operators on British horseracing. If the Levy was £100m, that means that punters as a group lost £1bn. Punters are not the only group funding the sport, but we are being told that the Levy reduction from around £100m to £70m odd is a catastrophe for the sport. If it dropped to £0 because punters stopped betting on it, where would that leave the sport?

 

[richard]

Prufrock, let me try to make it a bit more intelligible. The levy board is a statutory body, ie set up by goverment legislation. Racing's members of the board are the Horseman's Group, the RCA and the BHA. These three organisations have come together under the banner of Racing United to address what they percieve as betting operators' ways of getting round paying the full levy or not paying it at all. No one else can speak on behalf of racing because of the statutory make up of the Levy Board. Like it or not , that is the way it is under current legislation. What is so important is that these three afore mentioned organisations have come together and agreed a specific agenda to take to the government to try to get legislation changed so that betting operators pay the due amount for their extremely profitable revenue from racing. Within recent memory this is the first time they have done this, which I think should be applauded. From a statutory point of view, only they can do this because the other statutory members of the Levy Board are it's own appointees, government appointees and the betting operators, who currently can out vote racing. More to the point, the bookies can veto any proposal agreed by the Levy Board.

So,as said before, I'm at a total loss as to what you are on about. Under current legislation, no one else but the three previously mentioned groups can speak on behalf of racing because of the statutory way the Levy Board is set up. If you think punters are getting a raw deal fom bookies, good for you, but that has nothing to do with the Levy board, it is outside their powers.

richard

 

[Grey]

From Scottish paper The Herald:

First Minister Alex Salmond has warned that "serious job losses" are looming in the horse racing industry unless action is taken by the UK Government.
The SNP leader, a keen racing fan and former tipster, will present the Gold Cup at Ayr Racecourse on Saturday and has called for more urgency on the future ownership of the Tote.
The Horse Racing Levy Board, the mechanism which funds the sport, has seen income fall by almost £40 million as many betting operations move offshore to avoid UK tax.
Mr Salmond said: "There have been no steps to address the reformation of the Horse Racing Levy Board, which has seen income slip from £115 million three years ago to a projected £76.5 million this year.
"Horse racing in Scotland is worth £213 million to the economy and generates in excess of £60 million for tourism - but if the levy income continues to slip at this rate, we could be looking at serious job losses across Scottish racing.
"The Westminster Government has to act now to protect the second biggest sport in the country and protect 18,600 full-time equivalent jobs within its core industry."
The board collects a levy from betting profits to finance a range of activities, with over half going on prize money.
A campaign has already been launched within the industry for an overhaul of the levy system.
Its falling income is a "major concern" for Scottish and British horse racing, Mr Salmond added.
He went on: "Like many sports, racing is having to ride the storm of economic turbulence and it is essential that the Westminster Government act now."

 

[krizon]

It's not just the 'storm of economic turbulence' it's riding, though. We're all - well, most of us with less than £500m in assets, anyway - are still riding that particular bronc, while some have fallen off already and been taken away with severe concussion. Racing is riding the disappearance to offshore tax havens by the betting ops which so love their British and Irish racing and continue to do very well from it. They were disappearing before the recession bronco bucked into town, and have taken £40m away with them. Canny and clever if you're one of them. Deep doo-doo for owners as a result.

 

[Irish Stamp]

Indeed they do but they only do well out of it as a result of the customers who choose to bet with them.

In the ideal world we'd have all bookmakers based in the UK and would take a bit of the pie from each of them. As it is that's not the case and it looks like the government aren't going to do a thing about it - so it's up to racing to get together and think of other ways to raise the funds that is no longer coming from the levy.

Reading elsewhere that just three or four years ago the BHA were wanting a cut of all profits on South African racing, German racing, French racing, US racing, even virtual racing. With an attitude like that ie. wanting a piece of pies that have nothing to do with them it's no wonder that the bookmakers no longer want to play ball.

 

[J Alfred Prufrock]

Thank you for indeed making yourself a bit more intelligible, richard.

Your point about the Levy Board is a fair one. You do not address the fact that "Racing United" claims to speak on behalf of racing - all of it, not just the narrow constituency that has put its weight behind this initiative - to the government, and to the rest of the world, as well as to the Levy Board.

The government is likely to view the call for a levy settlement of £130m-£150m as totally unrealistic. If you do not think so then perhaps you could lay me a bet on the outcome. You presumably think it is highly attainable if you are willing to support this charter.

The situation with exchanges has been reviewed already, and, predictably, it has been found that they are being treated fairly. I, for one, am not going to support a charter which refuses to acknowledge this simple fact. The government is likely to regard the suggestion of levying punters for bets placed on events which British racing does not provide or pay for as deeply suspect also.

If you wish to sign up to this, then good luck to you. I, meanwhile, am off to sign the "Santa Claus really exists" charter, as it seems to be more based in reality.