Syndicate "the complete racing experience"

"If that ship really comes in I might just take more than 1 share. They might not be contenders for July but hey who knows, JJ was thought to be a throw away and then....? "

YES but in this case you buying 0.0000000000 and paying out 100% +25%

the heading of this thread is all wrong "the complete racing experiance"

Now imagine issay 10 people lease one horse. In order to have that complete racing experiance you would love to go to the stables and visit your horse and on top of that you would want to speak to the trainer on a regular basis. Now I am positive that the trainer would not like to have 10 different visitors and 10 different times of the day coming to visit the horse and getting 10 different individuals phoning up about the same horse. So to have the "complete racing experiance" falls flat in the first instance.

True Easy. With respect, with many debates / criticisms on these forums we often read the attack but often very very little alternates or suggestions are offered. Surely we should be reading this in its pure form i.e. this is an attempt to make racing horses reachable for many who thought that they could never have a chance at racing a thoroughbred.

There are many on here who have criticised and supported the idea, who in their own right, could have come up with something such as this and who, with their experience and means, could do more to bring in new people into the game through racing horses by lease or ownership. But they don't. Yet, when an attempt is made to do this all types of things are said or suggested and a dishonesty slant is put on it to kill the whole idea off. (Not everything you read is gospel)

We all know its about risk and reward. We all risk different levels of money when we punt. Mostly the risk exceeds the reward but when the reward is good it is very good. Why should it be any different with this offer. Small time punters / potential new entrants might find this offer attractive and if it does fall flat at least they have had a taste of racing horses and had exposure to behind the scenes. With this experience you will definitely have repeat business. Without exposure to racing horses you just continue to secure racing for the elite.

Any offers Mr Irwin?

Great posts Alcaponee, and well done to Scotia as well.

alcaponee just to get away abit fromthis thread but can you explain to me why in sa the number of registered owners has dropped from 8000 to 3000 and why the average timespan of an owner in sa is 2 years.?

The average lifespan for an owner in most places is 3 years.

Al Capone, racing is NOT poison.

Racing has given more pleasure to more people that are involved than any competitive sport you can possibly name, because it is the only affordable sport in which an average bloke can own all or part of a franchise.

Can any of us afford to own a rugby, soccer, baseball, football, basketball or cricket franchise?

The only thing that even ever came close was to "own" a prize fighter; but that "sport" was so riddled with gangsters and crooks that they did themselves in.

For all of its problems, horse racing still offers EVERYBODY a piece of the action on a certain level.

As for this latest "offer," nothing personal to those involved, but it seems to me to have been designed to give the creator an opportunity to show what he can do without putting up anything of his own and to pay a trainer's monthy expenses.

That is not what racing is about.

Racing is about prospecting, acquiring and running a horse to prove that your horse can beat another's horse in a race. Along with that enterprise, if an owner is able to glean some punting information and that interests him, that should be considered an added bonus.

People that gamble and people that own horses to gamble, by and large, are setting themselves up for a great fall, because there is nothing more difficult in the world of athletics than cashing a gamble on a horse. The best chance to do so, honestly, is to have inside information on a first-time starter. But unless one makes bets with illegal bookies, they are going to kill their price anyway.

Punting can be a fun "hobby." But anybody that tells you that they consistently make money gambling is, in my experience, completely and utterly full of horse pucky.

There are many types of racing partnerships throughout the world. There are ones with just two guys and there are some with thousands of people as they have in Japan. The only thing that matters if how much pleasure a participant derives from the activity. Most people are highly competitive and they want to win and will accept nothing else. Others just want to be involved.

In my own enterprise, we do not market our product as a traditional investment, because I don't think that people can buy a racehorse and reasonably expect to make a profit. Do I try to make them a profit? ABSOLUTELY! But can the participants expect a "return on their investment?" No freaking way. Have a lot of people made money owning horses with me? Yes, lots. But none of them go into the venture with absurd, unrealistc expectations.

Most of the people that I have attracted to ownership over the years joined one of my partnerships because they wanted the chance to own a horse that might be able to make a mark in a stakes race. They didn't get involved just so they could experience what it is like to own a horse. They wanted to win and come away with a profit.

Unless somebody markets a product that involves the achieving of success, which I define as winning a good race or making a profit, they have very little to offer.

The only reason I have been able to attract customers for 25 years into my racing partnerships is that I have established a track record for winning and making profits. But it doesn't take a track record to attract customers. ANYBODY....that's right...ANYBODY can put together a group of a few friends and buy a cheap horse and show what they can do. If they are talented, they will succeed. If they are not, then they fail and move on. That is why we have a lot of turnover in this game, because it is extraordinarily difficult to win in horse racing.

I have been told that I have brought a lot of pleasure to a lot of people and that is the primary driver that fuels my continued participation in horse racing.

Bringing pleasure to people is a worthy goal.

So anybody that wants to take a shot and prove they can find a winner and win races, go for it. It does not take a lot of money to put a group of friends together and try it. That's how I got started and that's how most people got started.

Thank u guys for all your valuable contributions, much appreciated.

Alcaponee

For me "attracting " people to horseracing this way holds ZERO water. Ill tell you for why.
Lets look at the contributors on this thread ONLY.
1: How many of you have siblings (not half brothers or sister but full sibling born and rasied in the same home)
2: How many of those siblings are as passionate about racing as you are?
3: How many times have you tried and failed to get that sibling involved in horseracing
4: How many times has your sibling tried and failed to get you involed in squash or Jesus?
5: NOW throw millions at syndicates (from prospective new blood) and other bollocks and i bet you the return of interested people will be less than those attending a paedophile's funeral.

Racing should be asking where are
1: Jose Maciel
2: Peter Dimakogiadis (sorry can spell the name but a fav owner of mine (white silks with blue chevrons))
3: Mike De Haast

I am sure there are more names i cannot remmeber, people that bought BIG and ended up not as prominent as they were before.

WHY did Mr and Mrs Jaffee invest trillions into racing and their offspring have made cut backs.

The answers i think are as follows
1: Racing needs to be "in you, in your deep insides, in your core"
2: Racing needs to look after the players like those named above and ask why have they made cutbacks and /or left the sport?

Then we can start looking at syndicates and "NEW" blood but how the hell can we attract new blood into the sport when they are asked to shell out 125% of costs with very little upside. If these okes want to get people into racing TRUELY then Gavin Van Zyl MUST donate 1 years training, A breeder must donate a horse, a jockey must donate his riding fees on that horse , then they must run a free competition at the local spar and let 20 families win a share in the horse for a year.

AFTER this excersise has been done 10 times (across the country) i reckon we have a chance of attracting 2 new owners to our beloved sport.

Barry Irwin makes loads of very very valid points, most of his argument makes the "upside in getting involed although risky , still attractive.

pirates Wrote:

---

> alcaponee just to get away abit fromthis thread
> but can you explain to me why in sa the number of
> registered owners has dropped from 8000 to 3000
> and why the average timespan of an owner in sa is
> 2 years.?


I am not even close to the ownership circle so whatever follows is pure speculation:

Perhaps we need to look to the reasons Dylan Cunha cited when he left the game. It went something along the lines of how can he compete against the super rich who import big priced horses from all over the globe and have horses in just about every race in every centre. Perhaps owners feel the same way. Lets be honest who is going to get the first call regarding a good horse from the breeders farm; owners of the KZN out of season plodders, or one of the big boys? Say what you like this must be the reality in racing. With no disrespect to the proposed syndicate, the horses on offer will probably only win out of season KZN races.

I do appreciate and respect BI's reply. The "poison" comment should be read in the context of this thread and perhaps horse racing Internet forums and maybe even the South African racing industry at large. I would have to be a masochist if I meant it literally. (taking my weekly dose of poison) The effect of "poison" had the desired effect however. Come to think of it my desire to own is not to win the MR69's, I would want the big races but so do so many that have been in the game for a lot longer than I have been around. The reality of the situation is that I, like many many others are not in a position in our lives (for now) to acquire the bomb horse, so that leaves us with opportunities such as these. I suppose if we had the means and wanted to get involved with Team Valor its as simple as going to the website and find out how! Mr Irwin, your clients and the people you attract and the people that enquiring are with respect chalk and cheese in terms of what they can afford in terms of investment.

Easy - you are hundred percent correct, it is hard to convert a non racing person. However I know of people that did not know the difference between a foot and a hoof who are now in the game through partnered ownership and the enthusiasm and excitement of the people who introduced them to racing. I have witnessed first hand how one particular owner on the coast had people gathered around the TV after a golf day to watch his horse run. I am almost certain that he has introduced some of these non horse racing people to ownership and the conversion to full blooded racer is happening. There is another who had all the parents of the kids at a kids birthday party gathered around the TV to watch their horse run. If I had a share in lease deal or in ownership there is a good chance people in the office and people who I socialise with would take an interest and perhaps have a bet on "my horse".

I do believe that this thread highlights a point and that is; thoroughbred ownership / leasing is a mystery to the average Joe. This is a tough game and you have to accept disparaging remarks are part of the whole thing. It really shouldn't be this way.

i race horses for fun and have had from my small outlay success that far exceeded my expectations...i have enjoyed owning with others because OUR ATTITUDE TOWARDS OWNERSHIP HAS BEEN THE SAME AND FOR this reason i couldnt get involved with people that i do not know and havent got the same attitude towards ownership...one of the main reasons i believe that owners get out the game as quick as they get in is because certain trainers breeders and bloodstock agents see them coming and literally take them to the cleaners...if you think about there is nobody in the racing structure that protects new or even current owners against this...i will get shot down for these statements but plenty of this has gone on and will continue to go on ...

Al

NOT once have i had a "go" at the horses offered. These horses (like others) could end up being superstars (some show little and rise, some show lots and fail) could be anything. Mr setaro and GVZ might have a "professional opinion on the future of these horses BUT till they get to the course no one knows what they might turn out to be exactly. FOR that reason the "upside/carrot/advantage" to the prospective members HAS to be favourable. @ 125% i dont think it is if the purpose of the excersise is to intice new blood.

You got to GIVE something to get back in return. When you LEND something and add a caviat then the deal looks like its driven by numbers and not the purpose that they say "the complete racing experience" So once again i say "go away and think again. If the people involved are saying that this is for the good of the game they should be doing this all for NOTHING.........Then the "complete racing experience" will be phenomenal because it will COST zero and the bug might infest 1 or 2.

Well I will never know whether this deal will work or not (at least for this weekend). Mr Edges horse hoofed me out in the first leg and the rest came home (just one out affliction) LOL

I understand where you are coming from and I think that its a good thing that posters on the site look out for each others interests. I do believe that with criticism should come a positive contribution or suggestion otherwise it is just a moaning and bitching exercise. You have made a suggestion that, if looked at from a neutral perspective, is positive. Probably not so positive from the proposer of the deal but this is where it could get interesting. There is room to move in both proposals and a middle ground can be found.

It may be argued that the trainer may not be enthusiastic to train at reduced fees and therefore the experience may suffer, but if this truly about the complete race experience, sacrifices should be made by all parties concerned.

Easy correct me if I am wrong, but had the proposer been someone other than LS I think people would have been critical but far less scathing?