To me this looks like a first push to close out all the small trainers within our industry maybe i am wrong .

The writing was on the wall years ago that the GRV and the big city clubs would in fact bring in it's own race dogs to fill slots for the PRO'S ..

This is the end of the way we will train and rear dogs in the future they are pushing out the little breeder and trainer and if we don't stop this rot then we will have a Racing system based solely on the USA system CLOSED TRACKS and the only chance we have is to give our dogs to these so called PRO guys to train ..

There is a REASON why these BIG PRO GUYS go along with the PTB and have REMAINED QUIET ..

We are all being shafted now not only by the PTB in each state now we have the BIG NAME clubs doing there own thing .

Who come up with this plan and why ..

The GRV pulled out of the deal with Sandown Park but i see Sandown still feel the need to have dogs reared and trained solely for there own amusement by who .

Who runs the Syndicates and who is involved in this decision and who are the players behind this BOLD move .

Who makes the money and how do they spend it .

Who allowed millions to be wasted this way and this is a attack at us all from within.

How OWNS the money that Sandown and the Meadows get from there Asian Casino ...

Where does all the money GO ...Who gets what and what % gets filtered back to us the OWNER TRAINER BREEDER .

What % gets spent on its Members at both Vic City Tracks ....

Millions of $$$ year after year ...what happens to it all who is accountable for bad GREYHOUND DECISIONS Bad dogs bad buys who makes the most out of it when you get people PAYING OVER INFLATED PRICES FOR BROODS AND PUPS . ...Who is going to put there hand up and say it is my decision to pay OVERS for dogs ...

Who are the breeders who will get payed the big bucks .....for supplying these pups .....

Great to have a OPEN CHECK BOOK ..

What happens if they FAIL ...Who cleans up the mess ..

We have seen this before when these big bold plans start off with the best intentions but most always FAIL ...

...Stop the ROT

PS
I intend on following this as it unfolds ....Accountability ....Duty of care ...
More dogs to fill up GAP...

Wasting money on someones DREAM ....

The Sandown Syndicate will be made up of the boys club ...You know those old boys who sat back rubbing the backs of the people who steam rolled us all ....

The so called movers and shakers of these tracks will have a very big hand to play in all of this.....

Who makes the big money from this all will be very interesting to see .....

Hayden this is so wrong that i am pissed off to the point that i feel any person behind this should be SACKED ..
I will have a lot more to come but please understand that this is OUR MONEY and this is a GIANT SLUSH FUND

The GRV say they have nothing to do with this and the Labour Government wants this as there show piece so they have WASTED money also on this idea this concept ..
Who BUYS the dogs
Who makes the money from this and why is it NEEDED in this climate

THIS IS THE VERY FIRST STEP IN RIPPING APART OUR INDUSTRY ..

This FARM will take up GAP spots and this will further push back our dogs .
This is the place i believe they purchased

EXTERNAL LINK
Like the GAP Cafe
300K to fit out the dump ...
Who comes up with these idea's

The GAP cafe has almost folded after bleeding out each week and maybe that had something to do with the free Coffee ..

PS
They say this will create jobs and local Syndicate will be called SPOLLY'S
Who is behind this and what circles do they travel in ..

We have all seen these kind of Kennels Breeders sprawl out year after year but MANY FAIL ...

I want to know what prices they will pay the breeders for there dogs and what breeders will be used to buy from .

Hayden
Where is AA ..and Charlie Wilson when u need them....lol

PS
It is in the mail today also Mate so many trainers in Victoria will get this over the coming days and just because they have it registered with ASIC does not mean it will work ..
They seem to have crossed all the boxes now i wonder how they will go with there local Council in regards to PERMITS lets see how fast this happens and lets see what obstacles they get thrown at them JUST LIKE WE ALL HAVE HAD TO ENDURE from every COUNCIL..
I believe the labour Government have backed this also so i wonder how this will go over the next few months ..

Interesting stuff when you consider the environment we are now in and i believe they have some great counter action slogans to run on...Jobs Local Jobs Strong Labour Seat ...so on so on it just goes on and on .

Ignorance.....= Big Al

The word ignorant is an adjective that describes a person in the state of being unaware, and can describe individuals who do not deliberately ignore or disregard important information or facts, or individuals who are unaware of important information or facts. Ignorance can come in three different types: factual ignorance (absence of knowledge of some fact), objectual ignorance (unacquaintance with some object), and technical ignorance (absence of knowledge of how to do something

syndications system

Unworkable in practice NEVER MAKE money and GA passed laws a few years ago that basically make every commercial syndication business like spolly's illegal..

GRV or specifically Alan Claytons mantra was overbreeding, when there was none.

I am also aware that Tim Bull has been following this with interest ..

Please Email your concerns to
Mr Tim Bull
[email protected]

PS
Also hear that the MGRA (meadows)

are building a straight track ..
This comes as the GRV have dismantled Healesville and Warrnambool Committees and Clubs ..

These two vibrant Clubs have been run by the Committees and it's Members for years well before any funding was handed out and today the GRV have destroyed ever part our of INDUSTRY from the ground up totally DESTROYED under the control of
ALLAN CLAYTON .
The GRV have over 300 Employees ...WHY

I repeat who come up this ridiculous idea and why ...

Strong Labour Seat .....Jobs jobs jobs they say ...

Who takes the losses who controls the buying of stock ..

Why is the Government spending any money on this for it to only FAIL ..

Why should we fill up GAP with these rejects the wastage this group will bestow on us ..

I believe there is a lot of people behind this but these same people have sat back when they should of been the ones stepping up to support us all..

So many people INNOCENT people have been strung out to dry and what impact this has had on many families has been so far reaching well beyond anyone can imagine for some ..

Now we have this little adventure FULLY 100% BACKED by the GRV and GA ..

This is why..

We have the very best breeder in the World who was supplying us with the dogs year after year ..

We had our biggest breeders in the industry forced into breeding less

We now have a Club going out on it's so called own
...doing the exact same thing that all of these breeders where doing before they were FORCED to stop breeding .

What is the logic and thinking behind this ...

Why take away the very best breeders and then turn around and come up with this RIDICULOUS guaranteed to FAIL PLAN ..

Sandown Club and it's Committee really did not have on there thinking caps with this Bold NEW plan ....

A conflict may exist because of:

Personal interests, particularly re: personal gain or the potential for personal gain
Organisational interests, particularly where the same matter is being considered within a different organisational setting
Other commitments or arrangements individuals have, within and outside the organisation
Family interests.
An example: A Board Member's brother's company is being considered by the organisation to undertake work.

The Conflict of Interest should be declared in the Minutes and on the Interests Register
A fair / transparent selection process be put in place e.g. tender process and criteria for selection established
The Board Member removes themself from the room (noted in Minutes) during any discussions, decisions relating to this work appointment.
Sometimes a Board Member may have a pre-existing conflict and only realise this when a matter is raised in a meeting or after a meeting. As soon as it is recognised he or she should advise the Chair.

It is suggested that calling for declaration of any Conflicts of Interest becomes part of the standard meeting opening and these are documented in the Minutes and register.

Specific Measures that a Board / Committee may choose to adopt:

Process 1: The Chair gives members the opportunity at the start of each meeting to declare any conflict or raise any concerns regarding potential conflict that have arisen or may arise in tackling the agenda for that meeting.

​Process 2
On being advised of a potential conflict, the Chair acting on the advice of the Board decides whether:

A conflict exists, and it is substantial enough to act upon
Whether the member needs to step out from the meeting / discussion or refrain from voting
Any other action needed - noting it is worth being on the safe side.
Actions must be documented in the Minutes for transparency.
Process 3
For ongoing matters where a Board Member has a conflict, the Chair needs to make appropriate arrangements with the member and others to ensure there is no impact from the conflict.

This is recorded in the minutes each time. If the discussion of a conflict of interest involves the Chair, then a Temporary Chair needs to be appointed by the rest of the Board to manage the discussion.

A conflict of interest may exist even if the person involved has not acted improperly. This is called a perceived or potential conflict of interest and can be just as damaging to the club
Examples may include

The Club President also sits on the local council. The two organisations are about to become involved in a dispute about the relocation of the clubs home grounds.
One of the people on the Board recommends his sisters business for a consulting contract with the club.
A club member is asked to mediate in a dispute between two parties, one of whom is a close work colleague.
How to avoid conflicts of interest
The best strategy to avoid any conflicts of interest is to avoid situations that may lead to them occurring. This is easier said than done. The key is declaring any potential or actual conflicts of interest which may arise from your private or professional interests up front, so appropriate action can be taken to remove that conflict. The other option is to retain your position, but remove yourself from discussions and/or decisions where a conflict may exist.

In essence, it is up to each person to make decisions that are unbiased and ethical and to behave with integrity at all times when undertaking their responsibilities at their club.

How can clubs manage conflicts of interest?
Every club should include guidelines for managing potential conflicts of interest in their Code of Conduct or Code of Behaviour. The document should outline examples of the types of conflicts of interest that may occur in sporting clubs and include:

strategies designed to avoid conflicts of interest (e.g. the establishment of a team selection panel with no vested interest in the outcome, thereby resolving a parent coach of that responsibility).
policies outlining the responsibility of all club administrators and officials to disclose any real, perceived or potential conflicts of interest
the actions to be taken when a conflict of interest is identified.

If my comments disrupt the Government GA GRV the RSPCA and the Samdown club then i have done my job .

WASTAGE COMES TO MIND when venturing into to syndicates....

I wonder how GAP will cope with the extra slow dogs this new venture produces and do they think they can buy instant success..

Success comes from years of hard work with no short cuts ...

To buy success is fraught with DANGER ..

Words still cannot describe why they thought this would be a positive for the industry when in fact it is there to serve the FAT CATS ...

Someone needs there ass kicked ....

I also hear Mr Tim Bull is also interested in the goings on from within the GRV ...

They own the lot and have spent many millions each year doing each track up and they are the very best by far in the World ..

There main revenue is the POKIES at Sandown and you cannot move in there most days ...
Springvale is very Unique as it has one of the largest Asian communities around so they spend up big ...Hence the name Asian Casino ...

This money is divided between those two city tracks nothing gets handed down to the grass root clubs from this venture Sandown and the Meadows keep millions every year ....TAX FREE
Being a sporting Club has it's perks ..

Both Tracks have been run by the same Committees for as long as i can remember mostly a Boys Club mentality ..

Sale Track is also a little Cash Cow that we also OWN ..

These tracks are OWNED by us all and the select few who feel they can do things without input from it's OWNERS US ....

We are being railroaded by the PTB

GRV. GA . The RSPCA .. The Government all have approved this and they are trying to fast track this so that it gets off the ground before many notice ..

Truly many do not believe what i am saying but please trust me i am 100% on the money....

Allan Clayton got it wrong in regards to breeding we in Victoria were not over breeding it was the other States that were over breeding with no real direction for after race care ...

Believe it or not a Club is going to go out spend MILLIONS on racing stock to HELP WHO to support WHO .....

This is wide open for corruption IMO ....

Why should we all have to clean up the mess that will follow this decision ..

The GAP CAFE is just one more Bleed out for us all ....HOW many FREE coffee's are handed out and i cannot wait to see there profit and loss statement...

PAW would have no problems breeding 200 of the best pups every year if Victoria would take care of his dogs after racing like they will do with this new Sandown GRV Labour Government venture ..

I think any big commercial breeder would breed dogs for Victoria if they did not get shafted by the PTB after racing ..

If Big Al said to PAW that he will take 200 dogs a year into GAP then PAW would be the best person to deliver the goods regardless of who wins at least you don't have over 70% WASTAGE in your first few years of a BRAND NEW Puppy Farm starting up

If we look at every person in last 30 years who has set up a breeding farm how has there success been ..

Syndicates
IT was billed as Gai Living The Dream but in the end only 87 people gambled on a racing syndicate that aimed to win the Melbourne Cup.
Legendary trainer Gai Waterhouse has already distanced herself from the registered company that at its height tried to attract up to 10,000 shareholders and generate $35 million.

The company was put together by racecaller Bryan Martin, who has been left picking up a hefty whack of the bills spent promoting The Dream on radio and giant billboards.

The whole idea was for mums and dads to get involved for $96 a month and Live The Dream of having a horse in the Melbourne Cup, Martin said.

Unfortunately, we only attracted 87 people over four months. Their money was held in trust and we have paid them back.

The company is being wound up and it did not exercise its option to buy 5 per cent of English stayer and highly anticipated Cup runner Excess Knowledge.

Gai Living The Dream chairman Martin OConnor said: No other company was looking at $1 million horses that could run in the big races.

He felt the state of the economy and the collapse of the BC3 Thoroughbreds syndicate may have shaken investor confidence. It didnt work out and I would love some expert to tell me why, OConnor said.

University of Sydney Professor Phil McManus, the co-author of The Global Horseracing Industry, said conditions favouring Waterhouse in the prospectus might have made people stop and look more carefully at what was being offered.

The prospectus was selling up to 10,000 shares at $3500 each, or fortnightly instalments of $48 for a price of $4608. Waterhouse stood to be paid up to $1.5 million in training fees over the four-year life of the company.

Trainers normally take home 10 per cent of any prizemoney but the prospectus said because of her outstanding record as a trainer it would pay Waterhouse an extra 5 per cent of any winnings. She also would also pocket 2.5 per cent of the proceeds from any horse sold.

And it added the proviso that prizemoney might not go to the members but instead be used to buy and train more horses.

Professor McManus said: One of the reasons people invest in the horse racing industry is a sense of ownership. To have a syndicate with up to 10,000 members is alienating.

The risks may be quite small but the spread of prizemoney would be very limited as well.

Despite the club carrying her name, training the horses and heavily promoting it at the time, Waterhouse said she had no real involvement ... although I thought it was a lovely idea.

Winners of a Daily Telegraph competition for shares in Gai Living The Dream have instead been given shares in the Cup Club.

I have spoken to them all and they are all very happy, Martin said.

Has any research ever been done on the number of people hanging out to become syndicate members?

A licensed club like Sandown is controlled by directors and members under defined conditions (theirs and the state's). It beggars belief that a club would set up commercial enterprises in direct competition with its members. That may or may not involve the need for a majority of members to approve a major shift in activities or finances. Needs checking.

Subject to the above, it is always a good thing for raceclubs to develop alternative sources of revenue - ie not to be always subject to handouts from downtown. This is otherwise one of the greatest weaknesses of the greyhound racing system, especially in an era when track patronage is relatively poor (unlike pre-1990).

RE overbreeding - I beg to differ. All states were, and are, in pretty much the same boat, as authorities and governments were influenced by dumb conclusions drawn by non-experts who failed to properly investigate the subject (GA included). For example, all states are now suffering from empty boxes, including Victoria, and including those which were never involved in live baiting or independent reviews. Cancer spreads.

The real issue was never overbreeding but how to handle unrequired stock.

In any event, you (and the "experts") skip over the point that breeding is essentially a national issue, not a state limited one. The market tells you that every day. That's how it should be addressed.

As for the bloke with a 10,000 member syndicate - he's nuts. That defeats the whole purpose of the exercise. Still, modest sized syndicates could well be the source of significant industry growth - if well done. Amongst others, clubs could well make that a primary objective of their daily life.

And I would still eliminate the weekly Provincial meetings at Sandown and Meadows. They add nothing, patronage is poor and they would never be missed. Country meetings would be improved as a result.

GAP Caf? Too early to comment. Give it a full year.

I agree Bruce it is a Australia wide matter .

Each State has a agenda ..

The GAP Cafe will not even last one year Bruce ..but it is bleeding out Thousands each week ....FACT

I cannot wait for the PR machine to come rolling out from the PTB ...

Hazey Maybe ..Bruce

Is it wrong of me to make people fully aware of this situation .......

A licensed club like Sandown is controlled by directors and members under defined conditions (theirs and the state's). It beggars belief that a club would set up commercial enterprises in direct competition with its members. That may or may not involve the need for a majority of members to approve a major shift in activities or finances. Needs checking.

Yes i agree we have a conflict of interest ..

Could you please check out the inner workings of this new Deal ..

I believe this is ..ILLEGAL

Under the Act of Clubs and Syndicates ...

At present Bruce many are getting knocked back for breeding .....
The PTB restrict us and our fare trade Laws ARE CONTINUALLY BROKEN .....

Many breeders have been told not to breed by the PTB and now we have a CLUB fully backed by the GRV and GA turning a club into a breeding rearing farm ... WASTAGE bruce pure 100% WASTAGE

I don't quite understand this ....

"At present Bruce many are getting knocked back for breeding"
"Many breeders have been told not to breed by the PTB".

Apart from the generality of the statement I am puzzled as to how this can occur.

As far as I am aware, there is no law preventing breeding so long as it is done under approved conditions with approved stock. Permission is not required. As you intimate, it is a normal commercial function.

NSW hinted at such controls at one stage but never proceeded with it - eg licensing breeding, one by one. That was also riding on the overbreeding myth, which is now debunked anyway.

To some extent, it would approximate the threat (?) about puppy bonds in NSW, which lacks legal or administrative backing. There are charges of various sorts related to breeding or licensing and they are attached to the administrative costs of looking after the process. But to continue on and demand a bond for no service at all is unacceptable and probably illegal. Doubly so when penalties would apply if rules are broken subsequently.

In theory, Vic (or GA) might well refuse to register a service or a whelping, but on what grounds? As a government-appointed body it has to have a law or at least a valid reason for taking such action. The misguided "overbreeding" nonsense is no justification, not least because of all the empty boxes. To say nothing about the fact that GRV has already taken steps to encourage breeding by reducing charges (as has GA and also Qld).

Or are we talking just about arm-twisting?

We then get into the question of discrimination by animal type, which is a real can of worms. When you need umpteen certificates just to cull some nuisance kangaroos it begs the question of how any bans or culling of dogs or horses can be applied.

Whatever it is, it amounts to contradictory and potentially illegal rubbish. Call the bluff, but get all the facts first.

As for Sandown - owners, breeders and trainers have an option - don't race there. (PAW already does that in respect to WPK, except for major events).

It now seems necessary to go a step further into the legal field. The active part of the industry now risks being dudded by politics and compliant racing authorities. Therefore combat must be engaged. Indeed, both those groups are intermingled to far too great a degree. Consequently, participants and stakeholders need stronger and more professional help from lawyers, amongst others.

Politicians, whether correctly or not, see strong action justified by the well-publicised abuses by a minority of participants. To please the public they then added more rules and more supervisory staff. Racing authorities - dependent on pollies for their jobs - keep charging down that same road, thereby making life more difficult and more expensive for those same participants.

Excessive kennel rules and potential puppy bonds and breeding restrictions illustrate the point.

The issue then is whether or not they have exceeded their authority - ie by making rules which have little or no formal backing in law, and/or which are generally unreasonable or discriminatory. The secondary argument is that excessive interference in a commercial business can and often does prevent that business from achieving a reasonable outcome, particularly profitability. Effectively, it tends to kill off the goose that laid the golden egg.

Clearly, Baird/Grant went overboard by banning the industry but were brought to heel by the general public, which deemed that action unreasonable. But now the underlying tidal flow is having much the same effect - death by a thousand cuts.

The task now is to stop those cuts happening in the first place. Attack them at the sources (a) politically, (b) administratively, and (c) legally. To do that, on-tap legal help is vital and urgent.
Vague moans and groans will never count; injunctions might.

Use crowd funding. The lawyer can supervise that - he will have a personal incentive to get paid.