I'll agree to disagree on some of that, Glenn.

Some people (and "said person" in this instance) clearly CHOSE when to comment (and usually, when to refuse to do so) ... and the latter was clearly MOST of the time ...

NEVER have 'they' responded to DOZENS of legitimate and still-unanswered questions (put fairly and reasonably here and elsewhere, for that matter). Why was that?

'They' (The Alliance) get ONE collective 'tick', and that's for HELPING seeing the ban overturned. Note I said HELPING .... MANY other individuals and 'groups' did as much, if not significantly more (in my opinion). But I know that Brenton, Kevin, Ellen (and others) from within the Alliance / GBOTA did donate many hours towards helping achieve that aim. That I acknowledge, and thank them for.

But the main thrust of where we've found ourselves at now (the crossroads, perhaps?) is what is of greatest interest to me, and I bet, thousands of others.

So NOW let's see at what COST the ban being overturned, comes at ... I am beyond nervous.

1) We are $41m (over 5 years) better off.
2) I am confident with a competent Commercial board we will have a very strong case to receive our fair share of the taxation money when the review is up in 2020. If this is the case and we are able to negotiate our fair share it would equate to around $23M in 2022 and beyond.

If The Premier did not try to close the industry we would have had no chance of the $41m (but would still have the welfare costs and issues) and more importantly the chances of getting our fair share of the taxation money in 2020 was slim at best. I can assure you that we have zero chance of a change to the intercode as it is a commercial agreement (all be it a strange arrangement over 99 years). I think we have a bright future for TAB and Country racing remembering 8 months ago the position we were in.

There is still a lot of work to do over the coming years that will be critical to our future in particular getting the funding right.

For me Tuesday marked the beginning of a new industry, not the old industry given a second change.

kevin

I think that should say the industry and participants SHOULD see some benefits from the $30m (not 41m, 11m goes to board, wages, rent etc etc which there after will have large ongoing fixed costs that the industry must prop up each and every year)

Q. Do you think $8m per year is enough to implement the 121 recommendations and sustain the industry at its current model/level as of today ?

Thx
Anthony

Sorry yes you should be, you and your side kick "SCOTT NO BALL'S" should be ashamed .

Kevin,

Please don't take what I am about to write personally, because it is not intended to be so.
I believe you have put in a huge effort, along with others, to make the best of a situation that was unprecedented.
You did the best you could and it is appreciated.

The reality is this...
The members of the Alliance, nor the GBOTA, nor any other association in the past have not had the qualifications to deal with certain parties on important issues for the industry.
The members should not have been put in that position in the first place nor should they have put up their hand to do so.
History shows they have been outsmarted and manipulated, to the detriment of the industry.
This is undeniable and if members continue to take a reactive stance on important issues the rot will be irreversible.

I believe you have completely missed something, Kevin.
In reference to your 1st point, the 41m over 5 years equates to 8.2m pa.
With over 100 recommendations to implement and pay for, how much will be left for the industry?
The industry is NOT 8.2m better off as you suggest. You will be flat out having enough left over for a hamburger once all recommendations are costed.
The Govt budget is for only 5 years so once the five years is up, where will the 8.2m come from to pay for all the expenses involved with the recommendations?
It seems your answer is in your point number 2.
It's a reactive and hopeful solution that holds no guarantee whatsoever.
Do you really believe the industry can hold on to hope after decades of rape?
There are powers at work that will blow that away like a feather.
I'd suggest to you that if you are relying on a competent board to knock down the wall, you will need to rethink that.
It will be like trying to fend off a raging Lion with a twig...it won't happen...it won't be allowed to happen.

In summary, the 41m is a mirage.
It is a bridge that leads to another cliff.
The time has come for the industry to fight with its own power.
It needs to stand on its own feet and fight.
It needs to be fair, forceful, and demanding of its rights.
There is now no room for reactive, that is in the past.

For me, Tuesday marked the day for the beginning of the end for Greyhounds in NSW unless the whole industry starts to think like its adversaries and creates its own force.

Just my thoughts and again, nothing personal.

Mark,
I think you may have hit the nail on the head,i also think Mr Scott and a couple of others may have their hands up as well,i wonder if you will GET AN ANSWER to your QUESTION,dont hold your breath,

What ide like to see is Mr Scott put his GBOTA job up for AN INDUSTRY VOTE and if he were to win by MAJORITY it would put an end to all the bickering but i dare say he wouldnt have the GUTS to,he thinks he is untouchable,time WILL tell,

NOW THERES A READ FOR THE BOYS

Mark,

If thats the case i WISH that the GBOTA members would be smart enough to see how he has let US ALL DOWN [members and non members] with the way he has gone about things lately and in the past,its time for a big CHANGE in the RANKS and IMO the sooner the better for all OUR sakes

A good deal for WHO ???

The NSW Greyhound Alliance has stated that the injection of $41M is not what the industry was entitled too, however to answer your question yes I personally believe that $8M p.a.(if that is how you allocate it) is what we have to work with. Also remember that this is ADDITIONAL to all other income streams. The taxation allocation for last year (all be it only 10%) was $3.5M which GRNSW has received and grows p.a. I believe $4.5M this year. Anthony the industry can only work with what it has no one expects miracles in 10 minutes. Financially the most important issue a new commercial board has to address is to ensure we get our fair share of the tax harmonisation payments from 2020, which if achieved will equate to approx.$24M by 2022. As you know we are currently cross subsidizing the thoroughbred and harness racing codes by more than $25m a year. It will be very difficult from 2020 without an improved funding model to maintain and meet improvements to regulation, governance and animal welfare.

Craig
Good question I agree completely a 99 year agreement is crazy.

Mark
The Regulatory Board is selected by the Government and no person on this board is allowed have any ties with the industry. Commercial Board positions not advertised at this stage. Just happy at this stage to have played a small part in stopping a freight train and believe me that is what it was.

Also FYI Mark I did not appear on Paul (not Peter) Murray LIVE on Sky News. But if and many have asked me I would say I am happy that we have an industry and I believe we come out of this a stronger and more responsible industry.

Just call a spade a spade Kevin. It will be IMPOSSIBLE!

So tell us again how this is a good deal for us then.