The Michael Gill/Penn National Riders Saga

Cannon Shell · #1 01-27-2010, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey2315

But does he own each of those horses for the entire year?

of course not but when you factor in what it costs to purchase/claim each horse then how much earnings are there left? Not to mention the purse number used was a gross number not the net so the actual money to him from each horse is cut even further. If you use $7500 as the avg cost of each horse after you subtract the commissions from the 14k number you have about $11400 and then subtract the $7500 claim price and you have about 4k per horse. Since we have no idea how many were claimed off of him or what amount he got back the 4k number is low but probably not too low since it seems like he claims 10-12 horses for each one claimed off of him. I realize these are approximations but the reality isnt that far off especially since his horses usually have little residual value. You cannot make money running this kind of operation because there is no windfall, little residual value and far too many basic expenses.

freddymo · #2 01-27-2010, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

of course not but when you factor in what it costs to purchase/claim each horse then how much earnings are there left? Not to mention the purse number used was a gross number not the net so the actual money to him from each horse is cut even further. If you use $7500 as the avg cost of each horse after you subtract the commissions from the 14k number you have about $11400 and then subtract the $7500 claim price and you have about 4k per horse. Since we have no idea how many were claimed off of him or what amount he got back the 4k number is low but probably not too low since it seems like he claims 10-12 horses for each one claimed off of him. I realize these are approximations but the reality isnt that far off especially since his horses usually have little residual value. You cannot make money running this kind of operation because there is no windfall, little residual value and far too many basic expenses.

So basically he knows he is going to lose a few million a year, never have a windfall(I agree) and simply does it as a business to lose 40k a week. This makes sense to whom? Not Gill!

Cannon Shell · #3 01-27-2010, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freddymo

So basically he knows he is going to lose a few million a year, never have a windfall(I agree) and simply does it as a business to lose 40k a week. This makes sense to whom? Not Gill!

I dont know where the 40k a week number comes from but yeah he has to have no expectation to profit.

freddymo · #4 01-27-2010, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I dont know where the 40k a week number comes from but yeah he has to have no expectation to profit.

I get being willing to lose money. I dont get why someone would have an operation in order to lose money..

Kasept · #5 01-27-2010, 01:01 PM

No one has linked up today's addition to the saga? Maggi Moss weighing in?

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/ma...cing%E2%80%99/

An open Letter to Michael Gill
By Maggi Moss

Horse racing is already suffering in every regard. Among the public and handicappers, perception is at an all-time low. Owners are increasingly looking to get out.

I have followed Michael Gill horses for almost two years now. I follow patterns and read charts and I have also read Mr. Gill’s comments. He sought out to break a record in 2009 and did not achieve it. Horses were the means to that goal. In that process, how many horses died?

I know about trying to reach goals, break records, and stay on top of the National Standings. I realized after obtaining my own personal goal in 2006, that I too was guilty of using horses to achieve my own personal accomplishments. I, however, did not lose one horse that year.

I opted to change my program and immediately knew that I had to give back to a sport that I am passionate about. It was my job to keep track of my horses and protect them in every way I could. In thoughts of getting out, I realized that I could save more horses in racing then merely turning my back on the sport. Most of all, even if I chose to compete at a lesser level, I could still treat my horses like they are all worth a million dollars, by picking the right individuals, giving them time off, and protecting them in every way I could. Most of all, I could try and give back in every way I was able to financially.

Mr. Gill states that “he takes care of his horses and sends them to retirement homes.” I think it’s important for him to tell us: What homes? I also think he owes it to this sport to tell us what monies he has contributed to the welfare of his horses or what charities has he ever contributed to for the retirement of racehorses.

One only needs to watch his horses run at Penn National and see that his horses do not react as other horses that are injured. When horses hurt themselves, the jockey comes off, and the horse stops–in most cases. Mr. Gill’s horses continue to run around the track even with broken legs, as if they feel no pain. It is gruesome, grotesque and unnatural and would lead one to wonder if these horses are blocked. Has Penn National performed full autopsies and blood tests to find this out ? Way too many horses owned by Mr. Gill have died a painful death, and it’s not due to mere numbers.

Horses getting hurt is the worst part of the business, incredibly sad. It’s enough to make many get out and, worse, the public to look upon us as barbaric. The industry continues to study the problem, the outcries keep us in the hunt to find the answers. One can blame the veterinarians, the trainers, the owners, or the surfaces, but it is the one sad and tragic part of the business. Mr. Gill’s rates of horses vanned off, hurt, and worse—“breakdowns”–is not due to his numbers but due to the fact that he wants horses he can run through their conditions at all costs. It’s not about claiming horses, it’s about what one does with the horse afterwards.

I have had horses break down, and I have claimed horses that have broken down and it is the most heart-wrenching, sickening feeling I have ever experienced. It only can drive you to protect your own horses and try to save others. The responsibility for these horses lies squarely with the owners.

The difference Mr. Gill, is that your history and your cavalier attitude about losing a horse is what makes you public enemy Number One. You are always more concerned about “being picked on” or suing someone rather than doing something about it. You do not show compassion for your animals, nor do you contribute back to this industry; it’s all about you.

You want to stop being picked on? Then do something about it. Hire an outside vet to come to your farm and go through all your horses and tell you which ones are racing sound and healthy. Quit running some horses three and sometimes four times a month.

Quit trying to break records and take care of the horses you have. Publicly tell us where all your horses go when you are through with them or no longer have their conditions. Donate some of your winnings to the Thoroughbred Retirement Foundation or other worthy cause. Do something for the industry and save some horses in lieu of destroying them. Stop the perception that horses are a piece of property for you for your personal gain.

If you can’t do any of this, please just get out: you continue to hurt the industry, not help it.

Copyright © 2010, The Paulick Report

Sightseek · #6 01-27-2010, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kasept

The difference Mr. Gill, is that your history and your cavalier attitude about losing a horse is what makes you public enemy Number One. You are always more concerned about “being picked on” or suing someone rather than doing something about it. You do not show compassion for your animals, nor do you contribute back to this industry; it’s all about you.

The whole letter is really great, but this part struck me the most.

freddymo · #7 01-27-2010, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sightseek

The whole letter is really great, but this part struck me the most.

In the owners manual does it say you have to contribute to the sport and how? When they sell you a license does the state tell you how to run your business? This woman was Gill lite years ago and now lo and behold she found G-d and is preaching. A bit salty for my pallet even if the message is OK..

freddymo · #8 01-27-2010, 01:10 PM

How do you really feel Ms. Moss? I believe Ms. Moss is an attorney, I wonder if her allegations that Gill's horses are "Blocked" because they run thru pain would be considered factual evidence or just her observation? Don't you love listening to people preach after they have been saved from their past transgressions?

Nobody should or could defend Gill but have a heart Ms. Moss..

randallscott35 · #9 01-27-2010, 01:14 PM

Good for her.

The Indomitable DrugS · #10 01-27-2010, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You cannot make money running this kind of operation because there is no windfall, little residual value and far too many basic expenses.

What about Robert Cole? There is no way he's not making a nice profit at Charles Town.

2005 - 32-for-86 (37.2% wins)

2006 - 66-for-131 (50.4% wins)

2007 - 81-for-193 (42.0% wins)

2008 - 125-for-242 (51.7% wins)

2009 - 73-for-160 (45.6% wins)

2005 through 2009 : 377-for-812 (46.42% wins - $2.19 ROI - $5.4 million in purses)

He's averaging $6,650 in purses per start with cheap horses... and even though they're all getting bet like there's no tomorrow - the horses still show a huge profit against extremely deflated odds.

It's not like he's struggling at Penn National either ... but yeah, he's only winning at 32% at Penn Nat over the same time frame.

I guess it pays to have Steph Beattie juice. And they almost never break down either!! ... not until right after someone claims them anyway.

Duvalier · #11 01-27-2010, 08:59 AM

Midwest Thoroughbreds are no slouch when it comes to winning races either.

Cannon Shell · #12 01-27-2010, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

What about Robert Cole? There is no way he's not making a nice profit at Charles Town.

2005 - 32-for-86 (37.2% wins)

2006 - 66-for-131 (50.4% wins)

2007 - 81-for-193 (42.0% wins)

2008 - 125-for-242 (51.7% wins)

2009 - 73-for-160 (45.6% wins)

2005 through 2009 : 377-for-812 (46.42% wins - $2.19 ROI - $5.4 million in purses)

He's averaging $6,650 in purses per start with cheap horses... and even though they're all getting bet like there's no tomorrow - the horses still show a huge profit against extremely deflated odds.

It's not like he's struggling at Penn National either ... but yeah, he's only winning at 32% at Penn Nat over the same time frame.

I guess it pays to have Steph Beattie juice. And they almost never break down either!! ... not until right after someone claims them anyway.

Cole's operation is minature compared to Gill