Kunigal is a solution, but it is not the
finish line
By Sharan Kumar
The proposed compromise deed between the Karnataka
Government and the Bangalore Turf Club should bring some relief to owners,
trainers, jockeys, breeders, racing professionals and race-goers who have been
anxiously watching the uncertainty surrounding Bangalore racing.
Yes, Kunigal is a solution, but it is not
the finish line.
The settlement gives Bangalore racing a possible way
forward, but important questions over finance, arrears, development and
licensing still have to be answered.
The most important message is simple: Bangalore
racing has a road ahead.
But there is a significant price for this settlement.
BTC has to give up its claims over the present premises. Under the agreement,
the Club unconditionally acknowledges the State Government's title and waives
and abandons claims relating to ownership, adverse possession, permanent
tenancy, occupancy rights, easement and other rights. It also gives up claims
for compensation, damages, refund, set-off or restitution against the
Government, except where expressly provided for in the agreement.
In effect, BTC is giving up the battle over its
existing premises in return for a structured route to Kunigal. That makes the
compromise significant, but it also underlines why the terms of the new
arrangement need to be financially and operationally workable.
There is another uncomfortable reality that cannot be
ignored. The compromise is heavily weighted in favour of the State
Government. BTC is giving up its long-standing claims over the present
premises, accepting the Government's title and agreeing that its future
occupation will be entirely under lease. In return, it receives the Kunigal
land and the limited retention of four acres at Race Course Road.
But did BTC really have much of a choice? The dispute
has been running since the original lease expired long ago. The Karnataka High
Court had directed BTC to vacate the racecourse premises and hand them over to
the State, following which BTC approached the Supreme Court and obtained an
interim order maintaining status quo. The appeals remain pending.
Against that backdrop, the compromise can perhaps be
viewed less as a conventional negotiation between equals and more as an attempt
by BTC to secure the best possible exit from a difficult position. The question
now is whether what BTC has secured at Kunigal is sufficient to give the racing
industry a viable future.
But the settlement is not the end of the problem. In
many ways, it is the beginning of another challenge, with a far greater effort
now required from the Government machinery to make the relocation a reality.
The mandarins will have to move heaven and earth to make a new racecourse
possible, while BTC itself faces the daunting task of raising the finances
needed to build it.
Under the proposed agreement, BTC will get 110
acres and 20 guntas at Kunigal Stud Farm on a 29-year lease, with provision
for a further 29 years subject to conditions. BTC will also retain four
acres at Race Course Road, including the heritage building, club house,
administrative block, paddock and betting area.
The existing racecourse can continue to be used for two years after
possession of the Kunigal land is delivered, giving BTC a transition period
to develop the new facility.
That should reassure the racing community that the
settlement does not mean the gates at Bangalore will suddenly close.
The real challenge is building Kunigal
Race Course
The agreement provides the land, but BTC has to
develop the new racecourse at its own cost and obtain the necessary
permissions, sanctions and clearances. The development period itself has yet to
be specified in the draft.
This raises the biggest question of all:
Where will the money come from?
BTC's finances are already stretched. The compromise
deed does not provide for any Government grant or assured tax holiday for the
construction of the new racecourse.
And the financial burden does not end with
construction.
BTC has an outstanding liability to the Government
relating to its occupation of the present premises from January 1, 2010
until the date of handing over the surrendered land. The exact amount has
not yet been incorporated in the draft. The rate, calculations and total in
Clause 5 are still to be filled in.
That figure could be critical to determining how much
money BTC will actually have available for Kunigal.
There is also the continuing cost of the four acres at
Race Course Road. The Government decision referred to in the compromise
provides for the retained land to be leased at 0.5 per cent of the
prevailing guidance value, which is understood to work out to around ₹1
crore a year. However, the 0.5 per cent figure has not been inserted in the
present draft itself; Clause 4.3 still leaves the percentage blank.
The Kunigal land, by comparison, carries an annual
lease rent of 2.5 per cent of the prevailing guidance value, with the
rent automatically revised whenever the guidance value changes.
So BTC is being asked to build a new racecourse, meet
its historical liabilities, pay rent on both properties during the transition
and continue financing its normal operations.
That is a formidable financial challenge.
The revenue question
The problem becomes even more serious when BTC's
revenue model is considered.
The 40 per cent GST burden on turnover has severely
affected the club-operated tote business. At the same time, bookmakers are
among the major contributors to BTC's revenue through stall fees, entry fees
and other charges.
This creates a potential vulnerability.
What happens if bookmakers decide to
bargain hard?
If bookmakers push for lower fees or reduce their
participation, BTC could face another substantial squeeze on revenue at
precisely the time it needs large sums to develop Kunigal.
A new racecourse cannot be built on hope. It requires
a credible financial plan, and that plan has to survive the realities of the
present racing economy.
Land is only one part of the solution
There is another important issue for owners and
professionals to understand.
The compromise deed does not guarantee BTC a racing
licence at Kunigal. It expressly states that the agreement gives no assurance
regarding the grant, continuation or renewal of any licence or permission,
which will remain governed by law.
So three things have to come together:
Land. Finance. Licence.
The proposed compromise provides a framework for the
first. The other two still require considerable work.
And this is why the issue matters beyond Bangalore.
Indian racing is an interconnected sport. Owners move
horses between centres, trainers and jockeys follow the racing calendar,
breeders depend on racing opportunities and thousands of professionals depend
on the sport being conducted regularly.
Each club benefits, directly or indirectly, from the
racing conducted by the others.
If Bangalore racing is weakened, Indian racing as a
whole will feel the consequences.
The compromise therefore deserves to be welcomed as a
possible solution to a long-running dispute. But it should not be mistaken for
the completion of the journey.
The Government has to make the relocation possible.
BTC has to find the money to build it. The financial terms have to be
sustainable. The licensing position has to be clear.
For owners, professionals and race-goers, the message
should be one of cautious confidence rather than anxiety.
The settlement may have found a new piece
of land for Bangalore racing. The real challenge now is finding the money and
the regulatory certainty to put a racecourse on it. The settlement is only the
beginning of a new struggle.
At the same time, BTC will have substantial existing
liabilities.
The Government is claiming arrears for BTC's
occupation of the present premises from January 1, 2010 until the date the
surrendered land is handed over. The actual amount, however, has not yet
been incorporated in the draft. The relevant rates, calculations and total are
still marked as to be determined.
That is a liability which the racing fraternity cannot
ignore.
What about the four acres?
The four acres retained at Race Course Road are an
important part of the settlement.
The Government's unstated stand is to provide for a
lease rent of 0.5 per cent of the prevailing guidance value, which would
reportedly work out to around ₹1 crore a year. But it is important to point out
that the 0.5 per cent figure has not actually been filled into the present
settlement draft. Clause 4.3 still leaves the percentage blank.
The Kunigal land, meanwhile, carries a lease rent of 2.5
per cent of the prevailing guidance value, with the rent automatically
increasing when the guidance value is revised.
So BTC will have to finance a new racecourse while
meeting its historical arrears, continuing operating expenses and taking on
substantial future lease obligations.
The revenue equation is the real worry
There is another issue which deserves serious
attention.
The 40 per cent GST burden on turnover has already
severely affected the club-operated tote business. A substantial part of BTC's
revenue is also generated through bookmakers, including stall fees and other
charges.
This makes the financial position particularly
vulnerable.
If bookmakers decide to bargain hard over fees or
reduce their participation, BTC could find its revenue under further pressure
precisely when it needs large amounts of money to develop Kunigal.
A club with stretched finances cannot
build a new racecourse simply on optimism.
There has to be a credible financial plan.
And there is one more uncertainty
The settlement does not itself guarantee BTC a racing
licence at Kunigal.
Clause 8.2 specifically says that the agreement does
not provide any assurance regarding the grant, continuation or renewal of a
licence. Those matters remain subject to the law and the State's regulatory
powers.
Therefore, three things have to come together for this
settlement to succeed:
Land. Finance. Licence.
The proposed agreement provides a framework for the
first. The other two require considerably more work.
Why everyone in Indian racing should care
This is not merely a Bangalore issue.
Indian racing is an interconnected sport. Owners move
horses between centres. Trainers and jockeys follow the racing calendar.
Breeders depend on a healthy racing industry. Thousands of professionals and
employees depend upon racing being conducted regularly.
Each racing club benefits, directly or indirectly,
from the existence of the others.
If Bangalore racing is weakened for a prolonged
period, the repercussions will not stop at the Bangalore racecourse. They will
be felt across Indian racing.
That is why the proposed settlement should be
welcomed, but not celebrated as though every problem has been solved.
A road ahead, but a difficult one
After years of litigation and uncertainty, BTC finally
appears to have a possible route to a new home at Kunigal while retaining a
foothold at Race Course Road.
That is significant.
But the settlement must now be made financially and
operationally workable. The Government's arrears claim has to be quantified.
The exact lease terms for the four acres have to be incorporated. The cost of
developing Kunigal has to be assessed realistically. A sustainable revenue
model has to be found. And the licensing position has to be made clear.
Owners need to know where their horses will race.
Professionals need to know where their livelihoods
will come from.
Race-goers need to know that Bangalore racing has a
future.
And the rest of Indian racing needs Bangalore to
remain a strong racing centre.
The settlement may have found a new piece of land for Bangalore racing. The real challenge now is finding the money and the regulatory certainty to put a racecourse on it. The settlement is only the beginning of a new struggle.
Comments
Post a Comment