DAY BY DAY.

Waikato Times, Volume 99, Issue 16653, 19 November 1925, Page 6

DAY BY DAY.

A very striking annual decrease in totalisator investments The Cost is recorded since 1920 of in connection with Cup The Sport. Week in Christchurch. High water mark in 1920 was reached with the astounding total of £599,217 in seven days' gallops and trots, but the figures have gradually gone back to £196,930 in 1921; £jBI,BCS in 1922; £448,238 in 1923; and £437,094 in 1924, while in the week just past the figures have slumped to £385,683. The decrease is decidedly welcome, for ihere is too much gambling in New Zealand, and generally speaking the average man bets more heavily than he can afford, andv racing can be enjoyed just as much, or even more, by modest investments than by plunging. The surprising thing about betting in NewZealand is that Hie "investors" submit so tamely to the heavy toll taken of their investments. In the past week the public have paid away through the tax levied by the totalisator £57,852. This is made up of the J2J per cent, deducted from every investment; and the 2. per cent, deducted from every dividend. It is impossible to say exactly what amount of money the public are prepared to lose during a given race meeting, since reinvestments constitute an uncertain part of the belting on each rate after the first, but it is noteworthy that the greatest amount invested on any race at Riccarton was £12,680, on the New Zealand Cup, while the Stewards' Handicap showed a total of only £10,663 10s. Whatever may bo said for the totalisator as a means of betting, the inescapable fact remains thai the Carnival Week crowds paid for their week's betting nearly five times as much as they were prepared to hazard on the biggest race of the week. And, of course, these figures take no account of tho heavy expense of getting to the course, and paying for admission, meals and refreshments. It is a very interesting indication of what New Zealandcrs are prepared to pay for their sport.—Christchurch Star.

The chairman of the Bank of New Zealand in his an-

A Question and The Answer.

nual report stated that "if the yield could be brought up

to 2501 b of butterfat per cow per annum, even though no increase took place in the number of cows, the value of butter and cheese exported would, at current pi ices, be raised by another eight million pounds annually." A correspondent in the Britisli Grocer comments: "What strikes me as being so utterly callous in that report is that there is no indication whatsoever that, even if by improving the strain of their herds the yield of butterfat per cow could be largely increased, there is any intention on the part of the Bank of New Zealand and the dairying industry of reducing the export price and bringing it somewhere approximating the export prices that obtained in 1914. It certainly seems to me that the dairying industry has a lot to explain away, as to why it needs 7d per lb more in 1924 than was considered satisfactory in 1914 for every pound of butter they export." The price for butterfat was ll.d in 1914 and the average for 1924 was Is G.d. There is no need for any explaining away to be done, as this increase is just' about CO per cent., which is the increase in the cost of living in New Zealand. A 60 per cent, rise on 1911 values is the fair price to be expected for meat, wool and butterfat. —Meat and Wool.