#41
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
What if Bernardini or a similar type of horse worth the same money was owned by a working class guy, or someone who did not have wealth per se. If that person did not have other assets or couldn't get a farm to offer up enough real cash, etc., and they could not "afford" the premium -- would people feel differently? What about if there was an estate tax/liquidity issue (ie: Joe Robbie and the Miami Dolphins)? Any thoughts? Thank you. Eric |
#42
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Seek respect, not attention. |
#43
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Seek respect, not attention. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I can think of a good analogy. When an athlete has some type of great streak going, sometimes when the streak finally ends, you will actually hear the athlete say that they are sowewhat relieved that the streak is finally over. The pressure can almost be unbearable. Once your horse reaches the level of a Bernardini, you really don't gain much by going on. I'm not talking about just financially. I'm talking about all the other stuff involved too, like a lot of the stuff that Oracle mentioned. There can just be so many things on the line that there really is very little pleasure for the owner at that point. Everyone expects you to win when you have a horse that good. If you win, it's like "So what. Everyone expected him to win. He was the odds-on favorite." But if you lose, then it's a big deal. People will start to say that the horse isn't that good and that type of thing. I'm not saying that it's not fun to own a great horse. It's a lot of fun, but by the same token there is a lot of stress involved and it can be very nice to make a big syndication deal and go out on top. It's not just a matter of the money. Another good analogy would be if I went to Magic Mountain tomorrow and rode their best roller-coaster. Even if I had a great time on the roller-coaster, I wouldn't neceassarily get on it again the same day. I'd appreciate the one good ride and then move on to something else. |
#46
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
So right now they are buying the best broodmares the best studs and the best racehorses...to go along with all of their yearling puchases....Sooner or later they will have what they need and there is no doubt in my mind that they will stop participating in the buying and selling because they will have what they need on the farm already...Look @ Juddmonte. They don't buy and sell because they have one of the best groups of brrodmares in Kentucky. If they Sheik's go this route (and it may take another 10 years 15 years who knows)...then the breeding/auction market suffers and the trickle down affect could be severe. JMO
__________________
Seek respect, not attention. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
And on that note, it's time for me to log off. |
#48
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#49
|
||||
|
||||
The best thing to do is personally ask every 2 dollar bettor at every track if its alright with them to retire a 60 million dollar animal. If they said its alright, then maybe the owners could sleep better at night?
|
#50
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I have clients that sold a horse for $750k a few years ago. After they had paid expenses, consignor fees, sales company %, and a cut to the agent who bought the horse thier take was down to $400k. Considering that the stud fee was 125K and the mare cost them 220K, the amount of "profit" was not all that much. And to the outsider it looked like a home run. As stud fees rise, it is harder to make a profit on horses. The few farms that are big enough to stand many high dollar stallions still do well but the medium sized farms with the hard knocking stallions that cant afford to go after the bigtime stallions are going to suffer as their expenses keep rising but thier market(the middle to lower) is stagnant. The reason that this whole economic situation affects racing is that because the "end users" are forced to spend more to purchase horses. With purses being flat with the exception of slot tracks and regular expenses rising, the odds that an owner can make any money decrease therefore causing owners to buy fewer horses which ultimately hurts the middle market more than the high end where the expenses are less important. The bloodstock market CANNOT go up forever and when it slips due to industry problems, global problems (terrorism/ another 9/11) or the fact that the democrats in control of Congress are far less likely to pass economic relief to the "rich" through tax cuts or incentives, the flood of farms and trainers going out of business will be ugly. Now this is not all due to the Arabs spending habits but they are the big carrot dangling out in front of this whole industry. |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#52
|
||||
|
||||
Cannon Shell and ELA make great points. It's simple for fans and bettors to say "they are rich...they dont need the money." Because a wealthy owner has income from non racing sources does not mean that he or she should run the racing enterprise like a charity.
Darley is a business. I have no idea how much Sheik Mo has spent on it this year but lets assume that it's $100M. Add up his purchases, his expenses in running several farms (everything from grass seed to matching jackets for grooms + insurance and related business expanses/salaries) the fees charged by trainers and the trainer and rider fees for winning performances, insurance for his stock, global shipping, medical care and farriery... It could easily exceed $100M. That said, why begrudge the man for wanting to recoup some of those expenses in stud fees from one of the hottest young properties in the stallion market? Everyone loves Sheikh Mo when he's buying something and hates him when he's selling. Why? Just because owners like Sheikh Mo and others seem to have a bottomless pit of money doesn't mean that they should operate their business as such. I would like to see horses race more often. I'd like to see top 3yo's stay in training at 4. I'd like to see more matchup between top class runners all season long. I'd like a gazillion dollars and a new Mercedes too... |
#53
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
http://www.facebook.com/cajungator26 |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#55
|
||||
|
||||
ill give a little owners perspective from my point of view. alotta owners especially people who have been in the game/business for a long time will take the money while its there more times than not. theyve had past experiences(or heard ofa thousand times over) where theyve been offered money for their horse and they turned it down only to have negatives to follow such as the horse being injured/broke down or not running up to the potential that was once seen in the animal. it happened in my case with my horse. 3 starts after i had him with only 1 3rd i was offered actually a little more than what i claimed him for by a guy@mountaineer who saw him run 3rd on the grass in indiana. i turned the money down and have come out- obviously ever since financially. i dont regret my decision at all becuase i love dan and got personal attachment to the horse but most owners in my same spot woulda said sold in a heartbeat. lol i promise if i ever own a derby winner they will return for their 4yo year on the track. speaking of the derby were running 1@CD next week
|
#56
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
http://www.facebook.com/cajungator26 |
#57
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I would think, though, that many owners get in the game with the dream of owning a top-notch horse that can compete at the highest level. When that unlikely dream happens to arrive, it seems to me that these same people are too quick to end it. It's as if once they hit the jackpot, they forget what motivated them in the first place. Perhaps having had the incredible luck to get one of these horses, they think it will happen again. Your Magic Mountain analogy does not hold, because you know you can go back to that ride any time you want. Yes, you want to savor the feeling, but if you knew that (realistically) you could never ride it except for that day, you would almost certainly ride it again immediately. IMO, horse owners should be looking at it the same way, unless money was their #1 interest from the get go. (I'm not disparaging a money-oriented goal; I just think many owners get into racing for different reasons that don't revolve around money.) But as I said at the start, I understand your point about getting out before something bad happens. --Dunbar
__________________
Curlin and Hard Spun finish 1,2 in the 2007 BC Classic, demonstrating how competing in all three Triple Crown races ruins a horse for the rest of the year...see avatar photo from REUTERS/Lucas Jackson |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I don't see many, if ANY, of these owners who take stud deals cutting bait and taking the money and then leaving the game. Its not like they played the game to just make a score and then get out. They take that money and renivest it into more horses, which helps perpetuate the industry. The Sheikhs may not be the geratest example as the money has little meaning in itself to them. But I look at a friend of mine like Lansdon. He sold Offlee Wild to the Arabs and then part of First Sam(he still owns a great deal of him and will be breeding to him this spring), and alls hes done is get back what hes spent in the industry. The nice scores hes made with those two stallions is going back into the business. Hes compiled some broodmares and has been breeding hsi own horses the last few years, but this upcoming year those mares will be getting serious upgrades in terms of the stallions they will be going to. Hes also bought seasons in both Johar and Flower Alley. My point is that many owners do what he is doing. They don't stop playing the game or chasing the dream, they simply take the money from a stallion and put it back into the game chasing the next grade one winner. It seems funny actually, but thats what so many of these guys do. They want that "buzz", or "high" of owning a big one again so they spend even more money at sales, on broodmares to breed to the portion of the stallion that they retain, and on more horses and higher sire fees. Its actually healthy for the whole game in terms of wealth redistribution. The money earned by the owners off a stallion or broodmare sold for a huge fee doesn't just stay in the bank accounts of those folks. The money is redistributed on a broader scale to people selling yearlings, two year olds, broodmares, people standing other sires, and trainers who get to train more horses and agents who get commissions for buying these horses or selling these stallion shares. The only way I could see this an unhealthy for the business would be if these folks simply "took the money and ran" and didn't pump it back into the industry. Imagine how many folks have benefitted from the success of people like the deceased Bob lewis and his wife Beverly who is STILL playing the game. They never cut bait and ran away after their success, they continued to buy horses and more horses. Racing may be one the best examples I've ever seen in the trickle down effect of money being made on the highest end. That money is put back into racing's economy and then MANY people benefit from it. While I understand the disappointment of someone like Darley retiring a horse like Bernadini to stud, it could simply be that the Sheikh can't wait to have many little Bernadini's running around instead of one regardless of how slim the chances are that he will sire a replica of himself. |
#59
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
"They don't stop playing the game or chasing the dream, they simply take the money from a stallion and put it back into the game chasing the next grade one winner. It seems funny actually, but thats what so many of these guys do. They want that "buzz", or "high" of owning a big one again so they spend even more money at sales, on broodmares to breed to the portion of the stallion that they retain, and on more horses and higher sire fees." What you say "seems funny" is something that I think is (in some cases) irrational. You get what you've always dreamed of, so you sell it fast so that you can try to get what you've always dreamed of again, even though the odds of that happening twice are miniscule. And it's not like an owner has to risk huge parts of the profit by retiring quickly. Insurance can be bought, partial ownership can be sold. I agree there is a cost to the risk, but I'm trying to weigh that in comparison to the original dream that many owners start with. Every owner has the right to cash in whenever he/she wants. I don't think anyone is disputing that. But whether retiring the stars is good for racing and whether it's even good for each owner's own satisfaction is open to debate. --Dunbar
__________________
Curlin and Hard Spun finish 1,2 in the 2007 BC Classic, demonstrating how competing in all three Triple Crown races ruins a horse for the rest of the year...see avatar photo from REUTERS/Lucas Jackson |