I am sure Blasi and others (he has several contingents across the country) have check writing power as they are part of his business

Richi,
No racing board has any right at all to go after bank or phone records of any trainer.
Violation of a suspension IS NOT a criminal offense, not by a long shot.
This is the United States, and racing boards do not have rights that supercede those guranteed to all citizens.
Lets put it this way, if someone attempted to pull you over, and said they were with the CHRB, LOL!!!, they would be breaking the law.
They are not boards with the powers of Federal powers like the SEC. They have no authority whatsoever off the racetrack, none. And any attempt to breach the privacy of citizens off he track by attempting to acess their personal records would be met with lawsuits or arrests of the indivuals who attempted to illegally gain acess.

As I just said, sometimes they will ask you to voluntarily turn over your bank records. If you refuse, then they may refuse to re-license you. At that point, you could sue them if you wanted to and the courts would decide. It usually doesn't get that far. The trainers will usually cooperate and turn over their bank records. What I'm telling you is straight from the horse's mouth. My friend was on the CHRB and they used to do this. I just got off the phone with him an hour ago and we talked about this in detail.

At $85 a day -- you have to be talking about a major circuit. I have a high % trainer in NY and he is charging $85 a day. There is so much more to this and it's an exercise in futility to attempt to have a holistic discussion. Even if you are correct, and I am not saying you are, because not every trainer in North America is running their business like you say they are, there is still a misnomer that the trainer gets to keep the entire 10%. Some may. No arguement there. However, due to operations and structure, some don't. Also, the alleged $50k in salary, yeah, that's the deal breaker -- in the NY/Metro area -- covers the mortgage, real estate taxes, (and maybe the nice car or a portion thereof) on the "decent" house where this hypothetical trainer lives and sends his hypothetical kids.

I think the entire discussion is taking place in this trainers home town -- "Fantasy Land". LOL.

Eric

In reality, this entire conversation comes down to a very simple issue -- the specific terms and conditions of a suspension. I am sure this differs between jurisdictions. If there is a criminal aspect to the suspension then I am sure it would take on an entirely different size and complexion.

Eric

I was talking about Southern California. I'm not sure what you are saying. There are plenty of trainers not only in Southern California, but on small circuits whose horses are making under $300,000 a year. Do you think these guys are making under $30,000 a year? If you think they get less than 10%, then you are confirming what I am saying. If they make less than 10% and they aren't taking a salary, then how do you think they make a living?

It is obviously more expensive to train out here than other places. We have three trainers out here right now, one charges $100 a day, one charges $90 a day, and the other charges $80 a day. The one who charges $100 a day has a night watchman, so his expenses are a little higher.

Anyway, I know several trainers out here and I know approximately how much money they make a year on average. The bottom line is that most of these guys make around $10 a day ( give or take a couple of dollars) per horse. That is where their salary comes from. So if a trainer out here has 40 horses, he's probably making around $140,000 a year($400 a day, 7 days a week) just on the day money. If his horses earn $1 million for the year, then he makes an additional $90,000-$100,000 for a grand total of somewhere between $230,000-$240,000 a year. My trainers charge between 12-13%, so the groom, assistant trainer, etc. get a piece of the purse and the trainer is still left with close to 10%. Since the exercise rider, foreman, etc. may get a piece of the purse, the trainer's share could drop down to around 9%.

All of this talk proves that the key players in all the barns is a creative bookeeper.a underhanded lawyer, and a very shady Vet. Optional is the Cal goveners nutritionalist,,or maybe just go to the master Bonds and get the good stuff.

The bottom line is that its extremely hard for any trainer to stay in the business for an extended period of time at major tracks on purse winning %'s alone.
What trainers really build their finances or retirements on are commissions from selling a horse(Most trainers receive 5-10% when they sell one privately) and moreso on breeding rights in stallions or the 5-1% they get from the owner if the horse is sold as a stallion(most owners do pay this, not all(like one guy I know), but most).
Guys like Zito, Pletcher, Mott, Baffert, etc build up these breeding rights which can be sold each year or used.
A guy like Zito has a breeding right to Unbrdidled's Song(trained him at the end of his career) and each year he can sell that on the market or do a foal share with someone who has a mare and then race or sell the foal.
Guy like Pletcher will soon be making more money on his breeding rights than he will on the purses, and when you sell a horse like Ashado for over 9 mill, its customary to give the trainer who trained the horse 5%.
If you train a horse that the owners sell outright as a sire, its customary to give the trainer 5% of the money received.
Simply living on purse money at the highest level of racing is a non stop rat race thats hard to take.

Rather than debate issues where we are counting other people's money, I for one would like to get some clarification on the "suspension" issue. The terms and conditions of the suspension will dictate how a person has to abide. As I said, this will vary from state to state.

So at least we know, in CA, the suspended trainer can communicate with whoever he wants. No phone record incriminations or anything of the like. I am sure if this positive test was elevated to a criminal matter then the circumstances would change. However, as one person pointed out, a positive test is not a criminal matter -- at least not initially. Anyway, I checked with local counsel and the same applies in NY and NJ.

I would think that the terms and conditions not only spell out what the trainer can and cannot do to in order to abide, but it would also spell out what the governing body can and cannot do.

Thanks in advance to anyone who is able to clarify some of these issues. Somewhat ironic -- we need someone who has been suspended to clarify this for us, LOL.

Eric

There is only an extremely small percentage of trainers that are making money on breeding rights. You are talking about way less than even 5% of the trainers when you include all the tracks across the country. There are plenty of trainers out there who have nothing but $20,000 claiming horses. At some of the really small tracks, it's more like nothing but $5,000 claiming horses.

Anyway, I would estimate that well over 95% of trainers make the majority of their money from their salary(which comes from day money), rather than from purses. Even on a big circuit like the Southern California circuit, I would estimate that over 80% of the trainers make more money from their salary than from purses.

Interesting stuff, Rupert.

--Dunbar

So you want trainers to work for free?

I would estimate that 5% of trainers make enough on the day rate to not be considered poverty level.

I have 7 bank accounts with 3 different banks. What would keep me from having owners send money to a different account?

I was suspended for 15 days once. The notice that I received from the stewards said only that I was denied access of the grounds of the racetracks in that state. Thats all. They told me that the suspension would be honored nationwide but said nothing about anything else.

Furthermore I don't care what Richi says, hes dead wrong. Not one of those racing commissions has the power to acess your bank records. The most they coud do is report suspected criminal activity to the proper authorities, and violating a suspension is NOT criminal activity. The authorities wouldn't waste their time. These suspensions are enforcable by these boards, but they do not have powers that supercede the rights of citizens of this country.
They could indeed request bank records, but you would be under no obligation to give them bank records.

That was the point of my post that Richi took issue with and tried to disprove.
Perhaps Richi only deals with higher end guys, but I know quite a few trainers who people would think are "successful" guys to some extent who really have to scrape by.
The point of my post was that be financially successful at the higher end venues as a trainer, you must develop horses that are sold for good money or train one who gets a stud deal.

I would estimate that more trainers make money trading horses than training them. I'm positive that a lot of trainers are losing money. And with expenes continuing to rise i'll bet the % goes up every year.

No, not at all. I have no problem with trainers taking a salary. Most trainers could not survive without taking a salary.

All I was saying was that many people that aren't in the indusrty and even a few in the industry, don't realize that trainers take a salary. People hear trainers say that they don't make anything on the day money, and some people take that to mean that the only money that trainers make is from purses. These people don't realize that the trainer gets a salary.

Would a trainers salary not be considered a legitimate expense?

Being that we are dealing with hypotheticals here try this: Trainers expenses exceed training income regardless of trainers salary. Racing income (10%) puts stable back in black. Does trainer make money on the day rate?

Nah,
You should be training them out of the goodness of our heart in exchange for a lotta grief and aggravation and an occasional free meal at Sergios.
What the hell is the matter with you!!!??? Don't you know that?

Are you including their salary? There are hundreds of trainers across the country whose horses earn under $200,000 for the year. These guys are obviously making more than $20,000 a year. I'm not saying they're getting rich. I'm not saying that by any means. I'm sayng that they're getting by and making a living. Let's say you have a trainer at one of the smaller tracks and he has 20 horses and they earn a total of $200,000 for the year. Let's say the trainer is charging $55 a day. What would his salary be? He'd probably be making around $6 a day per horse. That means he's making $120 a day, so his salary would probably be around $3,600 a month. So this guy would probably be making a little over $50,000 a year total. That's not a lot of money, but it's enoiugh to get by, especially in a small town.

What about the owners who stick you for bills of an amount to small to waste lawyer fees on that he has to eat?
YOu got that figured into the equation?
Unless you are talking about a place where that never happens. Its called Fantasyland downs.

Of course you have to stake the grooms and employees when they travel also.
You figure that in as well?
Or maybe the guys who dont like to pay high vet bills so you do one out of your own pocket to win a race. You get that?

Yes, it's a legitmate expense. I already said that.

I don't understand why trainers are so sensitive about this subject. They are always crying poverty, yet they have nice houses and drive nice cars.

If a trainer(in Southern California) has 40 horses and he is taking a salary of $130,000 a year, I'm not going to feel sorry for him if he's losing $10,000 a year on day money after all the salaries are paid including his own. That means he's still making $120,000 a year and that does not include what he makes on purses.

No, they all don't.

Sure there will occasionally be people that don't pay their bills. That happens in any business.

I'm not saying they all do. It's like any other business. Not everyone survives. Some trainers go out of business. If you have a trainer in Southern California that only has 8 horses and he rarely wins races, this guy will be barely be squeeking by if he's lucky. A guy like this probably won't last very long unless he can somehow live on $30,000-$35,000 a year.

Sigh,
Richi if you reread my post that started this, which you responded to, you'd see thats exactly WHAT I WAS SAYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First of all how many trainers in S. Cal have 40 horses? 15? That leaves the majority under that #. 2nd why do you think trainers are making enough money to pay themselves $130000? We are not asking for sympathy but would like owners to pay their bills on time and quit acting like we are raking in all this money. It simply is not so. I train between 30-45 horses and charge a competitive day rate and understand the finances very clearly. You are living on a razor thin margin that can change in a heart beat if a big owner fires you or doesn't pay his bill. We have to put up all the money in front so that the show continues to go on. Then we have to chase the money that is owed to us to try to catch up to the money that is paid out. Then there are all the little things that you fail to account for. Like if 2 or 3 horses get claimed or hurt, do you drop your employees salaries because you lost income? No you bite the bullet and make up the difference. If your feed supplier raises his rates do you not pay him? What about when your workmans comp goes up? Who pays for that?
You are implying that trainers who drive nice cars and live in nice houses are all making big bucks and crying poverty. That is complete BS. That attitude is why so many owners are so bad when it comes to paying bills. They see it as a luxury for a trainer as opposed to what it really is.

I was not implying that trainers are getting rich just because they live in a nice house and drive a nice car. I am simply saying that they are making a decent living. They're not getting rich. It's hard to get rich out here. It is very expensive living in Southern California.

With regard to your question about how many trainers in Southern California have over 40 horses, I think there are a lot. I would say that there are at least 25-30 trainers that have 40 horses or more. And there are probably only about 80-100 trainers here altogether I would guess.

i saw this one trainer walkin around with a huge piece of bling platinum chain in the shape of a slice of pie..it must have cost 150k....not...trainers should get all they can its no picknick dealing with a bunch of workers and the aniimals themselves..then add the owners in the mix ,,,oh man excedrin city..my hats off to anyone that can do it.....

Thank you very much for the clarification. So there we have it -- a qualified opinion -- thank you! At least in this one jurisdiction (whatever state it was) those were the terms and conditions of the suspension.

Eric

Ladies and gentlemen --

I am quoting myself here to clarify something. The paragraph I have bolded and that starts out "Here is what he told me" IS NOT MY WORDS. I cut/pasted this from another poster so that I could answer the questions and I forgot to remove it. I apologize as those are not my words and I do not believe them to be true.

Thank you! And I will be removing the paragraph from my post. I say this because someone else already quoted me and it was a mistake.

Eric

You can say that again.
Man i feel sorry for some of em i know.
Up every ****ing day at 4:30. No days off, none.
Deal with problems with horses and employees, owners, etc.
To represent what a luxurious like they live is nuts.
Then you get owners who stiff em out on bills(that never happens right Canon Shell?) who keep right on claiming horses each day that cost more than what they owe the trainer whos gotta fill out the claim slip!!!!!!!
Amazing more of em aren't completely insane.

This is where your theory is inaccurate and flawed. If a trainer were charging $55 per day they wouldn't be living in a small town and couldn't be making a decent living at $55,000 per year. We are completely neglecting the real cost of living and I am not talking about some hypothetical nonsense where we believe that the inflation rate is 3%, and a person's cost of living is stagnant.

I have a trainer at Penn National -- a high %, leading trainer. The guy shoots very good. He charges $45 a day. So your theory of "he'd probably me making $6 a day per horse" is, a) completly hypothetical and nothing more than a guess, and b) flawed because the $55 per day is not realistic. He couldn't possibly make the same amount of money you claim he is making (in your purely hypothetical claim) at $45 a day as he would be making at $55 a day. The economics make no sense.

I think most trainers don't make money on their daily rate and if there is a salary built into the equation, there is not enough room to make a so called "living" exclusively on the daily rate. At best it might pay for some personal expenses. I know too many trainers who aren't "making a living" off of just training horses. I think the money is in the portion of the 10% they get to net or keep, the bonus or commission, if you want to call it that, on a big horse being sold, and other variables.

There are economies of scale that most trainers cannot take advantage of unless and until they get their operation to a point of scale where they can make money. I have heard of trainers making money on the daily rate by potentiallycutting corners on help, doing the work of a man/woman themselves, cutting corners on feed, equiptment, or cutting corners some other way.

We have a trainer here telling us the real and accurate situation. I see no reason not to believe that other than to perpetuate some massive facade.

Eric

Excellent post.

Eric

I think this is semantics. "Making money" is a very relative term, and just because a trainer is taking a salary doesn't mean the trainer is "making money" per se (on the/that salary). Making money, to some, is being able to take that money and "put it away" -- invest it, allow it to become a capital asset, etc. To others, "making money" might just mean using that money to "live" and pay some personal, neccessary living expenses. I am in the financial business -- the latter is not "making money" -- it really means "getting by" and/or "paying your bills" and that's all it might mean.

Eric