JIMMIE SAYS … Horsemen must ask the right questions

Having procured a copy of the Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure for the Year Ending March 2027 - which includes ‘Audited 2024/25’, ‘Original 2025/26’, ‘Estimated 2025/26’ and ‘Projected 2026/27’ - the Jamaica Racing Commission’s (JRC) income and expenditure, especially ‘Projected 2026/27’, poses many questions, of which horsemen should concern themselves.

Why should horsemen be concerned? Bear in mind that all figures to be discussed are only possible through the industry-equity — whether it be goods (owners’ horses) or services (provided by the various professional bodies) — the basis of all income pouring into the coffers of the JRC, also forming a lesser portion of the Betting Gaming and Lotteries Commission’s revenue stream.

The ‘suffering’ horsemen, as Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association of Jamaica (TOBA) president, Andrew Azar, is wont to describe breeders, owners, trainers, jockeys, grooms, farriers, exercise riders, and stable hands, deserve to know that the JRC, which ended 2024-25 with an audited net surplus of $54.86 million of horsemen’s money, is estimating a deficit of $6.98 million for 2025-26, projected to be $106.5 milion in a year’s time, almost an additional $100 million added to its ‘operating expenses’.

On what exactly is the JRC signalling to spend an additional $100 million of horsemen’s money for 2026-27, totalling $777.4 million, more than three-quarters of $1 billion, from a projected operating income of $670.90 mllion, just shy of 2024-25’s audited $680.47 million of which its expenses were $625.61 million?

What earth-shattering development is expected to impact the JRC’s projected expenses for 2026-27 as opposed to audited 2024-25?

Let’s take a look, starting with salaries jumping from an audited 2024-25 of $211.35 million to an estimated $235.87 million for 2025-26, an increase of $24.52 million.

The JRC states that it intends to “maintain” a complement of 59, not “increase” to 59, suggesting no additional staff for projected 2026-/27. However, salaries are projected to increase by $29.84 milion, moving from an estimated $235.87 million to $265.71 million. Overall, that is an increase of $54.36 million on the audited figure of $211.35 milion for 2024-25.

Next in line, administrative expenses, projected to be $121.78 million. Audited administrative expenses were $134.44 million in 2024-25, lowered to an estimated $97.71 million for 2025-26, a $36.73 million downward movement, which jumps back up to $121.78 million projected for 2026-27, an increase of $24.07 million, giving with one hand and taking back with the other.

What would the JRC have seen to impact its audited administrative expenses, $134.44 million, 2024-25, that it could boldly estimate to be $36.73 mllion lower for 2025-26? That must be some substantive savings, which should be continued, or, hopefully, decreased, not a projected increase of $24.07 million for 2026-27.

Merger costs, of which the BGLC’s expenditure is listed at an estimated $3.07 million for 2025-26, is on the JRC’s books at $21 million for that period, projected at $41.3 million in for 202627, an increase of $20.3 million.

‘Industry Projects’, whatever that is, moves by more than 100 per cent over the audited 2024-25 figure of $82.3 milliion, to a projected $176.64 million for 2026-27, thus ending the summary of why the JRC projects a deficit of $106.50 million for 2026-27, moving from an audited surplus of $54.86 million in 2024-25.

Returning to horsemen — whose industry-equity allows the wagering wheel to spin, from which horse-racing promoting company, Supreme Ventures Racing and Entertainment Limited, pays over 49 per cent of its sales on local racing to purses — should they not be concerned about what their money is doing at the JRC?

Why aren’t horsemen similarly and astutely not pursuing a model of deducting and allotting a greater percentage of the JRC’s income (horsemen’s money) to purses before all the other whistles and bells (operating expenses) come into play?

What is so unique about Jamaican racing that its horsemen choose to ignore economic models pursued in Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, France, the United Kingdom, and North America in which substantial revenue from the betting dollar is returned to purse money and the industry, overall, via legislation, praising the progress of those jurisdictions while lamenting the state of local racing?