Disagreements within the equestrian community are brewing as the Thoroughbred Group expresses its opposition to a proposed boycott of television interviews by trainers.The group, representing key stakeholders including the Racehorse Owners Association, the National Trainers Federation, the Professional Jockeys Association, the National Association of Stable Staff, adn the Thoroughbred Breeders’ Association, is calling for unity and collaborative solutions to improve revenue distribution within the sport.
At the heart of the conflict is the Professional Racehorse Association (PRA),which advocates for approximately 170 trainers.Dissatisfied with the current system, the PRA has threatened to withhold trainer participation in media interviews at the upcoming Sandown event unless a financial arrangement is reached.
“Unless the racecourses and media companies resolve this particular issue by Saturday, the PRA trainer members will refrain from giving interviews at Sandown on Saturday,” the PRA stated.
The PRA is demanding payment from media rights holders, reportedly £500,000 each from Racing TV and Sky Sports, to grant access to its trainers, aligning their compensation with jockeys, who receive an annual group fee for media appearances that contributes to their insurance scheme.
Savill, a key figure in these discussions, asserted that “the money would not go to trainers personally – absolutely not.” Instead,he proposes directing the funds toward “benevolent causes and the Injured Jockeys Fund,that need funding”.
The thoroughbred Group, though, rejects the PRA’s approach, expressing concern over its alignment with established governance structures. “While the Thoroughbred Group fully understands participant frustrations around how the sport’s income is distributed, with 2024 continuing the recent trend of falling real-terms prize-money, we cannot support the action proposed by the PRA,” the group stated.
They advocate for a more collaborative path, citing a “Commercial Partnerships proposal” currently under discussion, which aims to address these issues and pave the way for equitable revenue sharing across the industry.
Louise Norman, Chief Executive of the ROA, echoed these sentiments, emphasizing the need for a united front. “Whilst we need central agreements to reflect a fair and equitable finance model for our sport,” she asserted, “they must be embedded in a collective industry that prioritises engagement and recruitment across racing enthusiasts, racegoers and importantly owners.”
Norman further cautioned that the current standoff could alienate fans and owners. “The sport needs the media and broadcasting support,not a divisive demand that simply takes money for the management of the PRA via a trainers’ commission. At a time when the sport should be focused on driving increased revenue and engagement into the sport, these disruptive headlines simply accelerate the loss of fans and owners, and continue to harm British racing as a whole.”
Paul Johnson, Chief Executive of the NTF, offered a broader perspective, focusing on the bigger picture. “Trainers’ media work is just one example of the effort that participants put in to ensure that our sport can go ahead and be an engaging spectacle for the customer,” he observed. However, “My belief, however, is that it is counterproductive for us to focus on payments for individual aspects of what we do and that we need to focus on the bigger picture of a wider revenue sharing agreement with racecourses if we are to bring about the meaningful change required to set the sport on a more accomplished path.”
In light of the PRA’s concerns and the Thoroughbred Group’s proposed revenue sharing model,how can the British racing industry strike a balance between fairly compensating trainers for their media contributions and ensuring the financial sustainability of the entire sport?
Table of Contents
- 1. In light of the PRA’s concerns and the Thoroughbred Group’s proposed revenue sharing model,how can the British racing industry strike a balance between fairly compensating trainers for their media contributions and ensuring the financial sustainability of the entire sport?
- 2. Trainers’ Rights and Revenue: A Discussion with paul Johnson
- 3. How would you characterize the current tension between the PRA and the Thoroughbred Group regarding trainer media appearances?
- 4. The PRA has threatened to boycott media interviews at the Sandown event.What are the potential ramifications of this action?
- 5. What are the key arguments in favor of compensating trainers for media appearances, as advocated by the PRA?
- 6. What are some of the challenges in implementing a fair and enduring revenue-sharing model across all stakeholders in British racing?
- 7. Looking ahead, what are your expectations for achieving a resolution to this impasse and how can the racing industry foster greater unity and collaboration?
Trainers’ Rights and Revenue: A Discussion with paul Johnson
the British racing world is abuzz with debate over media rights and trainer compensation. Amidst this, Paul Johnson, Chief Executive of the National Trainers Federation (NTF), sits down with Archyde to shed light on the complexities of the situation.
How would you characterize the current tension between the PRA and the Thoroughbred Group regarding trainer media appearances?
It’s undeniably a challenging time. The Professional Racehorse Association (PRA) feels strongly that trainers deserve greater financial recognition for their media contributions, especially given the work involved. They’re advocating for fairer compensation, mirroring the arrangements already in place for jockeys. The Thoroughbred Group, meanwhile, is emphasizing the importance of a collaborative approach, highlighting existing discussions around a broader revenue-sharing model that would benefit the entire racing industry.
The PRA has threatened to boycott media interviews at the Sandown event.What are the potential ramifications of this action?
Such a boycott could certainly have a considerable impact. It would undoubtedly generate headlines and perhaps alienate fans and media outlets. Moreover, it risks overshadowing the exciting racing events themselves.It’s a delicate situation, and finding a solution that respects both the PRA’s concerns and the broader interests of the sport is crucial.
What are the key arguments in favor of compensating trainers for media appearances, as advocated by the PRA?
The PRA argues that trainers invest significant time and effort into media interactions, promoting the sport and contributing to its visibility. They believe this work, which often takes place outside of race days, deserves financial recognition.
What are some of the challenges in implementing a fair and enduring revenue-sharing model across all stakeholders in British racing?
There are numerous complexities involved. It requires careful consideration of the needs and contributions of everyone from racecourses to owners, trainers, jockeys, and media partners.
It’s also important to ensure that any new model incentivises growth and sustainability, attracting new participants and investment while remaining financially viable in the long term.
Looking ahead, what are your expectations for achieving a resolution to this impasse and how can the racing industry foster greater unity and collaboration?
Open and transparent dialog is essential.
It’s crucial to acknowledge the frustrations and concerns of all parties and work together constructively to find solutions that benefit the entire racing community. Shared interests must take precedence.
This isn’t just about money. It’s about ensuring the long-term health and vibrancy of British racing.
What are your thoughts on this issue? Shoudl trainers be compensated for media appearances? Share your opinions in the comments below.
