Racing NSW CEO Peter V'Landys needs to see an eye specialist.

First he claims that Justice Perram has endorsed the use of turnover as a basis for calculating race field fees when there is no such conclusion in his Betfair judgment.

Then yesterday he claims to be unable to see anything in the Productivity Commission's recommendations on the Australian wagering sector which are good for punters.

It seems also that V'Landys vision is seriously impaired if he thinks his TabCorp centric view of the wagering landscape will endure much beyond the next few months.

Pretty well everything that V'Landys has fought for while CEO of Racing NSW is being exposed as the wrong way to go, with the Federal Court and the Productivity Commission, two respected and independent observers, highlighting that favouring TAB's over other wagering operators is not acceptable.

The only group who seem to support V'Landys views these days are the little cabal running the Thoroughbred Breeders Association. There is a remarkable conformity of view amongst this group with V'Landys tactics, but far from supporting the position of the 50,000 industry participants that V'Landys claims to represent, their platform is principally designed to protect the hundreds of millions of dollars flowing to no more than a dozen major studs.

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.

The current bluster over race field fees and foolish attempts to maintain a TAB monopoly should be seen as the last desperate rearguard action by a very privileged minority to hang on to their position.

They do not seem to understand that entrenching an environment where horse race wagering is more expensive than most other forms of gambling and owning a racehorse is a bigger investment than most people's houses is a guaranteed way to destroy racing.

The Productivity Commission report also puts in perspective the oft repeated notion that owners somehow have to be better rewarded to stay involved with racing. It says:

"Owning a race horse is both an investment and a recreational activity. In either case there is no clear basis for regulation aimed at guaranteeing that a set proportion of the cost of horse ownership is returned to owners:

• Investment aspect: Government generally does not seek to guarantee any level of return for individuals or firms who voluntarily decide to invest in a new business, project, on the stock market etc
• Recreation aspect: It is usually the case that entertainment and recreational activities are entirely paid for by those who voluntarily engage in them. In specific circumstances governments do intervene to reduce the cost of certain recreational activities (for example youth participation in sport to promote health and well being). However, it is dubious that returning a predetermined percentage cost of racehorse or greyhound serves any wider societal purpose. For example, people who own a horse merely for the joy of riding (outside of competitions), do not receive such a subsidy.

Moreover, the rate of return to owners is a dubious metric for government or industry to target, or to use to measure one country’s racing industry against another’s. The return to owner is partially driven by prize money and partially driven by the factors that influence the costs of ownership and the number of people willing to enter the market. For example, should prize money rise significantly, presumably more owners would enter the market, reducing their expected winnings and generating upwards price pressure on the goods and services that owners require (breeders, trainers etc). For these reasons, there is no guarantee that higher prize money would increase the return to owners on average, or vice-versa."