21 May 1999 Pre-2014 Releases

BHB Chairman Peter Savill said today:
“”On 21st April the Levy Board Executive proposed that, as a compromise to the original BHB fixture proposal which eliminated many afternoon fixtures, the Levy Board should fund a fixture list which contained 18 consecutive Sundays and the removal of all Saturday evenings during the summer period. The proposal was not opposed by any of the Levy Board members except the BHB representatives who expressed concern that such a proposal would lead to less racegoer friendly opportunities resulting from the reduction of evening racing from four nights to three nights. The BHB was asked to make only ‘tweaks’ to the Levy Board funding compromise and returned on 19th May with a proposal which, in essence, added only 6 Thursday evenings as a ‘tweak’.
“”I am still unclear as to why this ‘tweak’ was unacceptable to elements of the Levy Board as the Levy Board paper put before the Board on 19th May confirmed that “”the new fixture proposals should produce a net positive position in terms of levy income””. Surprisingly, virtually no discussion took place in Wednesday’s Board meeting on the subject of whether the addition of 6 Thursday evenings constituted a ‘tweak’ and no reason was given in the Levy Board’s press statement as to why the BHB’s proposal did not command majority support.
“”The BHB is now faced with the possibility of having to accept the Levy Board funding compromise of 21st April, which will leave racing with fewer customer friendly fixtures than the BHB wanted. It is amazing to think that the RCA Chairman has created this situation by voting against the BHB proposal and I’m sure that racecourses will be as unhappy as the rest of the industry, especially since the BHB proposal would have increased annual racecourse income through the turnstiles by at least £800,000 compared to the current position.
“”On Wednesday I explained clearly to the Levy Board that the BHB, in almost 12 hours of discussions on the subject, had concluded that the status quo was unacceptable and that it had been unable to reach a satisfactory compromise with the RCA that was in the industry’s best interests. I also made it clear that the funding compromise tabled by Levy Board executives at the end of the discussion was unacceptable as to both content and procedure.””