Australia, Australia, Australia

In between charging from pillar to post today, during which I picked up an exciting new client, I've been enjoying another fabulous piece of analysis from Cyberhorse on the SMH advert that I mentioned yesterday.

I don't have time to write anything else today, and if you have a spare moment, you'll want to be reading that anyway... But as it happens I've written plenty more about Australia in the last month which I have not yet published: if you're interested, you can see thoughts about the court case over there here and here, and the stuff I wrote relating to the Productivity Commission report here.

Judgment

I received a text yesterday morning from a name well-known in the racing industry which read: "Have you seen the news about the Findlay fine? It makes the BHA look like twats."

Harsh words, perhaps, but to the point.

I can picture much wailing and gnashing of teeth on High Holborn. But as I mentioned yesterday, they need only create a decent rule and they wouldn't get themselves into this sort of pickle. I see Greg Wood has written as much in typically robust and sensible terms in the Guardian today.

I lunched soon after (someone asked me in the afternoon if all I do is have lunch and dinner; not far off, I admit) with another racing face, whose view it is that there'll be a change of leadership by November, on the grounds that increasing numbers of people are scratching their heads in dismay at the insistence on a strategy and numbers never justified when they were announced in 2008 (before the world's economy fell apart), but adhered to since, nonetheless; and supported with dubious theories and crazy plans. There are previously unpublished posts relating to each which I have published today here and here.

Meanwhile, Down Under, it appears possible that Peter V'Landys time as Chief Executive of NSW is finally drawing to a close. If you compare the interviews he is giving newspapers and the adverts that his organisation is putting out about there being a logic to their strategy (in the Sydney Morning Herald today on page 36) with the no-confidence vote they are receiving from the trainers in their state - brilliantly, as ever, written up by Bill Saunders on Cyberhorse - you will draw your own conclusions about that particular racing leader's rationality.

Me? Well, no time for that. I'm off for another client pitch. :)

Productivity Commission

It doesn't surprise me to find myself amused by the reaction of Tabcorp's Chief Executive to the findings of the Productivity Commission report in Australia, but somehow, despite everything, I still find myself astonished at the way some people believe that they have a right to protection from market forces that everyone else has to deal with as a way of life.

I'm not suggesting that everything in life should happen without regard to potential consequences, but to argue that the Productivity Commission's report 'shows a serious lack of understanding of these industries, both in Australia and around the world" is just arrogant and insulting.

I would say precisely the contrary is true: the report shows a complete understanding of the industries and the issues, and, shaking its head in bewilderment at the way in which those who are part of them believe that they should be able to maintain the status quo which has seen them spend many years in the sun, it suggests ways to allow more people to play.

Cyberhorse put it like this yesterday: "This clutch of multi-millionaires want a racing industry structured so that literally millions of little people - punters, low paid workers, small breeders and hobby owners, dutifully contribute to bloated service fees and artificially inflated bloodstock values. They have achieved this position over a long time by basically ignoring the Trade Practices Act and the Australian Constitution, arranging state laws and Rules of Racing to bolster their position."

For the second time in a week, well said Bill Saunders.