NHA – Bloomberg Responds To Larry Nestadt

Staring down the barrel of a R50 000 fine...

Former NHA Chairman Larry Nestadt directed a letter to the Sporting Post Mailbag earlier on Wednesday suggesting that the recent proposed amendments to the NHA Constitution are not workable in his opinion.

See Mr Nestadt’s letter here

In response, owner and racing attorney Robert Bloomberg states in a communication of the same date  that Larry Nestadt’s statement that “this board should be democratically elected by its members and should serve the wider interests of the industry” and that there should be an independent chairperson, is exactly what SANTA has proposed.

Robert Bloomberg – explaining further as the NHA/SANTA saga rages on

What makes this so telling is that he currently sits on the Nominations Committee which he views going forward as being there solely for screening Independent Non-Executive candidates for the Board.

This is a far cry from the current Board of 12 Directors (no different to the number proposed in the Resolutions) that believes it is untouchable, infallible, beyond reproach and has zero accountability.

The unsubstantiated, unfounded, and quite frankly defamatory allegation by the Board under the pen of the Chairlady, although clearly legally drafted at further expense, “that SANTA’s ultimate objective is to CAPTURE the NHA” is as astounding as it is insulting to the 336 Members who signed the Requisition calling for the SGM which numbers include a multitude of the biggest players in the industry.

It is arrogance and narcissism in the extreme that there is an abject failure to recognize that the industry is decidedly unhappy with the performance of the regulatory body.

Mr Nestadt, whilst correctly stating that there is a process in place in terms of the Rules that allow for the lodging of complaints against management of the NHA, fails to importantly state – and perhaps he is unaware of this – that any complaint made against a Licensed Official including the CEO, must be accompanied by a deposit of R3,000 and that if the National Board in their opinion considers the complaint to be “unwarranted”, bearing in mind that they have in unison stated their unequivocal support for the RCE, that they have the discretion to fine you up to R50,000!

Why do you therefore think that there have been no formal complaints lodged against Arnold Hyde?

Have Your Say - *Please Use Your Name & Surname

Comments Policy
The Sporting Post encourages readers to comment in the spirit of enlightening the topic being discussed, to add opinions or correct errors. All posts are accepted on the condition that the Sporting Post can at any time alter, correct or remove comments, either partially or entirely.

All posters are required to post under their actual name and surname – no anonymous posts or use of pseudonyms will be accepted. You can adjust your display name on your account page or to send corrections privately to the EditorThe Sporting Post will not publish comments submitted anonymously or under pseudonyms.

Please note that the views that are published are not necessarily those of the Sporting Post.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments



Popular Posts