Australian
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
http://www.harness.org.au/news-article.cfm?news_id=31895
In 2011 HRNSW 'sold the farm' called Harold Park for $187m. They then sent prizemoney 'soaring', to quote them, from $10m to $15m p.a., based on projected investment returns of 7.2%. It turns out that they, like many others, are belatedly realising they've been living beyond their means and, good on them, doing something about it by reducing prizemoney to a more affordable level.
Looking at the ABS residential property index ( http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6416.0Sep%202016?OpenDocument ) Sydney has gone from a figure of 101.4 in mid 2011 to 159.3 in Sept 2016. So as a rough guide, if they'd kept the farm it would now be worth about $294m (159.3/101.4*$187m).
How much of that $187m is left? I looked through the HRNSW annual report and page 71 says they have $15.3m in investment funds in 2015/16. This sounds quite low and if someone has a better figure I would love to hear it. But if $15.3m is in fact the correct figure then HRNSW are currently $278m worse off than if they'd kept the farm.
I'm sure I'm missing a few details here but $278m sounds like a good conversation starter.
In 2011 HRNSW 'sold the farm' called Harold Park for $187m. They then sent prizemoney 'soaring', to quote them, from $10m to $15m p.a., based on projected investment returns of 7.2%. It turns out that they, like many others, are belatedly realising they've been living beyond their means and, good on them, doing something about it by reducing prizemoney to a more affordable level.
Looking at the ABS residential property index ( http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6416.0Sep%202016?OpenDocument ) Sydney has gone from a figure of 101.4 in mid 2011 to 159.3 in Sept 2016. So as a rough guide, if they'd kept the farm it would now be worth about $294m (159.3/101.4*$187m).
How much of that $187m is left? I looked through the HRNSW annual report and page 71 says they have $15.3m in investment funds in 2015/16. This sounds quite low and if someone has a better figure I would love to hear it. But if $15.3m is in fact the correct figure then HRNSW are currently $278m worse off than if they'd kept the farm.
I'm sure I'm missing a few details here but $278m sounds like a good conversation starter.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 7
|
By:
2016 Annual report
https://indd.adobe.com/view/3f2b4686-d984-4ee6-8315-bc94d0efb35b |
|
By:
Prize money is over-inflated in harness and thoroughbred racing.
Harness racing in NSW has gone to the dogs (so to speak). Six race cards, very inconsistent meeting pattern, no city/suburban/provincial meetings on Fridays, it's just dying a slow death in my opinion. Fairfield was the place to move to - not Menangle. |
|
By:
No.
Harold Park was the place to move to! Half mile track on a Friday night with moves a plenty during the race, unlike the boring barren wasteland that is Menangle. All they had to do was market it as a pre drinking on a Friday night out hotspot to a younger crowd, then head off to the adjacent city. NSW trotting's soul was at Harold Park......would the gallops sell off Randwick and head out to Campbelltown? Monica Monica |
|
By:
Fairfield Harness kicked out of Fairfield Showgrounds on 30 June 2017 after 65 years of harness racing history.
|
|
By:
thinking the trend towards big tracks may come to an end?
but they have Menangle? |
|
By:
You gotta laugh at these clowns building huge tracks in nsw where are they going to get the horses from to fill the fields.
Foal numbers are rapily decreasing every year.And hra want to charge you 2200 import fee to bring a horse out from new Zealand even if you own it.And who wants to race or punt at Bathurst with all their team driving and rorts. |
|
By:
Not quite correct khan. Harold park club (now club menangle) sold Harold park so the cash from the sale sits on their accounts - currently $166m. HRNSW would have $15m because Harold park owed them money and paid out after the sale.
Now the biggest issue I can see is that they earned 3% on that capital (super tough calc so might be wrong but we know it's under 7%). Inflation is typically modelled at 2.7% annually which means the club needs to be reinvesting 2.7% or 90% of their total return into the fund to ensure the nominal value of the fund isn't eroded over time. The second issue is that they really need to be increasing prizemoney by at least 3% a year to ensure the escalation of owners costs are accounted for. Third issue is how opaque the investment strategy is - $186m being held on behalf of members and only a single sentence about investing in property and a diversified fund with UBS. Hardly good practise good governance. |