"The time for action is now. My first cab off the rank would be to massively increase advertising. That will not help prizemoney today but it will keep the interest alive and return dividends when the good times come back. Be bold!"

Increase advertising?

Who to? The mugs in the pubs, or attracting more on-course patrons.
Both categories do not exist at present.

And just what are you trying to sell?

On average, 6 dog fields (that offer little punting value) and short course races that are just a lottery.

Bruce, concentrate your efforts on improving the product, before trying to flog it.

many people nowadays aren't aware of what a non chaser is as all they look at is the data and don't really watch the race, how can he provide any data that can improve it?

people with his attitude and self serving, survey conducting, ill informed do gooders have tambooted it....I suppose anything they do now can only be an improvement, and they'll be the first to stick their hands up to say "I achieved this!" its how the corporate world works.

the last 3 dogs I backed a few wks ago, 2 were fought by other dogs and one was about to win and turned its head on the line.....when do you think my next bet on a greyhound will be ?

Keen to get as much time on my hands as you -

When reading the media, its very easy to slip into the trap of ignoring contributions from people you dont like. I do it myself sometimes. For example, I never believe anything the ABC says unless I can check the claims from a couple of other sources. The Sydney Morning Herald is, if anything, even worse as every headline and most of the Letters to the Editor amount to Morrison-bashing, page after page. But I still subscribe (admittedly mainly for the sport) so I know what everyone is thinking. It can be boring but it is necessary.

Many writers here on G-D have a habit of dismissing or rubbishing anything I or some others might say, which they are quite entitled to do. But by failing to study the message they run the risk of missing out on valuable information. Worse, they then sit back and rely on their own fixed views, whether good or bad, right or wrong. They learn nothing new.

None of us is perfect, mistakes will be made, but only wide discussion will advance the cause or your own knowledge.

Preferably, those discussions should include as many verifiable facts as possible. Yours often don't. ("the betting is huge" would be the whopper).

As for the Pitstock article (with an "s" please), it addressed a potential dilemma for NSW but it may well apply in part of whole to Victoria as well. Still worth reading. Indeed, the Victorian GOBTA has already written to GRV on the same subject.

Ian,

My first and most important advertising campaign would revolve around promoting the greyhound breed to the general public. The vast majority of people do not understand it and therefore vote No.

Ryan,

Non-chasers are an interesting subject but have little to do with this one. Why not analyse the issue and start up a thread on it?

My first and most important advertising campaign would revolve around promoting the greyhound breed to the general public. The vast majority of people do not understand it and therefore vote No.

Bruce,

Please tell us the benefits you see in promoting the greyhound breed, when 99% of the general public only see greyhound racing as a gambling sport, designed for battlers who cannot afford racehorses.

Why should the general public endear themselves to the greyhound breed, in preference to Alaskan malamutes, or Cocker spaniels?

Promoting the greyhound breed may assist the GAP, but does little for increasing the gambling dollars, that are the lifeblood of the industry.

It is already out of control.

1. no rewards for the dogs
2. centre track lures/ dual lures
3. lack of dogs to run a meeting

Some hard decisions need to be made immediately if the sport is to attract more punters in the very near future......nothing worse for a punter or participant for that matter, to either have the dog they back or own, fight or have another dog fight theirs, or pull up.

Lets leave the dogs that run up to the leader and wont go past out for the moment as they are harder to rate, but the fighters and the nonnies need to get 30 days for their first offence, 90 days for their 2nd, 12mths for their 3rd offence etc. At the moment they get a few days with an injury excuse.

I realise this will place a heavy burden on meeting numbers but they just have to bite the bullet and take a very hard line now.

All 3 points have definitely contributed to the state of racing today, the ptb need to recognise that they have erred badly and need to do do something to correct the situation.

Bruce you are always on about no one suggesting anything to improve the sport, well there it is.

Ian,

There have been a few public surveys about attitudes to greyhounds over the years but none have seen the light of day. Not too long ago, GRV commissioned one but advised results were "commercial in confidence" only. Fair dinkum - using punter's money, too. However, just reading a few Letters in the newspapers would tell you a bit more.

Otherwise, there was a large one a couple of decades ago by Ernst & Young for QGRA. It found that some two thirds of the public regarded greyhounds as bloodthirsty, nasty, rabbit killers etc.

I have no reason to believe that things have changed much since then.

But it partly answers your query as to why the public should endear themselves to greyhounds. Clearly, they don't. So they stay away. They don't want to own, train, support, bet and they would very likely pass on those views to friends and neighbours. It is also a reason why people like Baird, Grant and Rushton (the counsel assisting McHugh) have a built-in antipathy to greyhounds, all of which cost the industry a great deal - and still is, ably assisted by druggies and live baiting exponents, as well as folk like my ex-wife.

This was why I saw the recent SMH article by Robson as not too bad(to the horror of some readers here) because it highlighted what a wonderful companion the greyhound could be. In addition, it promoted the concept that the industry is very supportive of lifetime care of the animal.

("The retirement adoption program saving greyhounds", by Frank Robson, SMH 14 Feb 2020).

People love dogs but they hate greyhounds. It's about time we did something to reverse that attitude.

For an intelligent man I suspect your brain may have got out of gear by going round and round the velodrome to often.

Your 21 April - All very interesting points but huge ones with many aspects to delve into. As such they deserve their own thread, particularly #2 which is no more than a personal opinion.

nah, that'd be too easy .lol.

For an intelligent man I suspect your brain may have got out of gear by going round and round the velodrome to often.

Tut , tut , tut, Bruce. You are showing signs of sinking to the same levels of your detractors.

***************************************************************

Now let us get down to basics with your advertising campaign ..

You are behind the eight ball, and will never get anywhere as long as greyhounds, ( GAP and pets excepted ) have to wear muzzles in public and on the track. The public perception of greyhounds will always be there,.. in your words, as bloodthirsty, nasty, rabbit killers etc.

Over the years, when walking greyhounds in the street, I have been asked on numerous occasions as why the greyhounds are muzzled. My only reply is it is the law, but dont worry , they are harmless. To demonstrate that, I would poke a finger into the greyhounds mouth.

The last time I checked, I still have five fingers on each hand.

Bruce, I can only spare you the time for this friendly advice, because I am stuck in the only @*F#! State in Australia, where I am not allowed onto a golf course.

If you could not see it, then you are nave

In no way did he ratify that racing was good for greyhounds as a breed

Plus the article was published in the ABC loving leftist rag called the Sydney Morning Herald

WE have been round this before - I was simply offering one of several examples of views from outside the bubble.

First, those nasty words were not mine but those of people interviewed for the survey.

Second, there is no justification for "Frank Robson's article had ulterior motives". He is an experienced journalist who happened to latch on to what he thought was a topical view and who found industry records and knowledge lacking in this case.

Third, the article's title was "The retirement adoption programs saving greyhounds" - which is having a bit each way but nevertheless it does tell the world that the industry is taking some action on lifetime care.

Fourth, absolutely we would all like to have edited out some words and themes but that is not how the world works. If the industry has a problem with outside publicity it should first look in the mirror and work out why that is so. Start with its failure to adequately rubbish many of the items in the McHugh report.

Note - this is precisely why I champion the need for a marketing program headed up with an in-depth story on what makes the greyhound tick, and its 6,000 year history. Some parts of Robson's story actually did that to some extent, other bits did not.

Bruce Teague wrote:

First, those nasty words were not mine but those of people interviewed for the survey.

Yes, but you seem to support them. So that is a cop out

Bruce Teague wrote:

Second, there is no justification for "Frank Robson's article had ulterior motives". He is an experienced journalist who happened to latch on to what he thought was a topical view and who found industry records and knowledge lacking in this case.

Firstly, if he is an experienced journalist, he could have dug a lot deeper to find the relevant facts that he needed.

He did not interview or refer to greyhound industry participants to find out their views on the way greyhound adoption was working

Being an experienced journalist, he relied on the facts that suited his agenda and those of his employers and twisted the situation to again paint the industry as acting inadequately

It was an unbalanced article

Bruce Teague wrote:

Third, the article's title was "The retirement adoption programs saving greyhounds" - which is having a bit each way but nevertheless it does tell the world that the industry is taking some action on lifetime care.

He wasn't particularly complimentary in the way we are doing things and failed to recognize that the industry is in a transitional phase

Again, he only looked at it from the view of the people who are against racing

Bruce Teague wrote:

Fourth, absolutely we would all like to have edited out some words and themes but that is not how the world works. If the industry has a problem with outside publicity it should first look in the mirror and work out why that is so. Start with its failure to adequately rubbish many of the items in the McHugh report.

I have never had a problem with outside publicity

However, what does get up my nose is when there are one-sided articles being ratified by a body of people who seem to be hell bent on closing the sport down despite all good efforts made i.e. SMH readers seem to represent the bulk of these people

What's worse is that the SMH like the ABC hold themselves out as having the highest standard of independence and truth in journalism, but in fact, their strings are being pulled by the left side of politics

They are no better than an underground rag

Bruce Teague wrote:

Note - this is precisely why I champion the need for a marketing program headed up with an in-depth story on what makes the greyhound tick, and its 6,000 year history. Some parts of Robson's story actually did that to some extent, other bits did not.

What Robson should have exploited was that there is not enough funding provided by our governments to GAP rehoming programs

He then could have spoken to greyhound industry participants to determine the difficulty they had and still have in placing a greyhound into the GAP or into foster homes

Instead he only got a one-sided view from 'friendly'foster agencies who relished the opportunity to bag the industry

Your marketing proposal is useless whilst the GAP and foster agency rehoming industry remains underfunded because the responsibility is falling back unnecessarily on participants to look after a growing number of dogs

Fix that then start marketing aggressively

Hi Bob,

In Victoria, where all golf clubs are closed full stop, until further notice.

I, too, routinely find coverage in the SMH and the ABC appalling.

Why is this so?

And how can it be fixed?

I am sure you have many skills but one of them is not an appreciation of how the media works.

In passing, here's a different example.

GRV has just posted a fascinating article on a Tracey Salter litter of 15 pups,(Moriera x Eminence) which may well be a world record (needs checking). Mum is not too good so the pups are farmed out to a friend with two dogs - a greyhound and a Scottish Terrier, both of which are doing a fine job of nurturing the youngsters.

That's a great job done by GRV to publicise the event but only to readers of a dedicated greyhound site, not to the public. Has GRV tried to get the national or regional dailies or even TV interested? Don't know but they should. It could be packaged up in all sorts of different ways and get rewritten by professional journalists or whoever. A great opportunity. (Tracey lives near Ararat so the Ballarat media might have a go).

For a start, anything with mothers and babies is going to be a winner. If they are at risk - even more so. If a Terrier is helping to look after them - double the interest. A female breeder also adds flavour. Etc etc. (A parallel example is in Taronga Zoo's current stories about the family and community interest by the elephant group in the birth of a newcomer).

PS: Robson spoke to two major greyhound organisations and clearly did some background study of the breed and the code. A pity no-one gave him your number (or mine) but that's life. Either way, whose fault is it that a permanent and updated source of information and data is not maintained by the ptb?

PS2: Much earlier, the SMH main anti - Natalie O'Brien (now gone) - rang me to ask about a critical matter. She did not like what I told her and so it did not get printed. That's life, too. Think about it.

PS3: I am aware that at least two state CEOs were interviewed by the ABC about LB. Almost none of those conversations made it through to the final item. Why is that so?

All you have stated just confirms what I have said

Dishonest, biased journalism for organizations running agenda's

Am I wrong?