kickbacks alleged in suit

One more thing about buying privately, an agent may call a guy up and say how much? The seller might say 100 grand. The agent may send in a signed contract that gives him 5 days to pay the money and have the horse vetted. In the meantime someone else may think the horse is worth 200 grand. If he contacts the agent who has the horse under contract, the agent can commit arbitrage and sell his contract for cash. Meaning he can sell the contract for a chunk of cash to the guy who thinks hes worth 200 grand.
very often, after buying privately, the guy who bought the horse will sell pieces of the horse at a higher value than he bought the horse for.
I know for a fact that this happens often. Guy may buy one for 250 and sell half the horse to a partner for 175 before it runs.
Although that may seem unethical, its really not. You are simply telling someone what they have to pay to get what they want.
At a sale, its quite different. Auction means auction. Its supposed to mean that people bid against one another and that the guy with the highets bid gets the horse. If someone is planted in the crowd to run up the price who isn't really bidding, then thats wrong.
What I don't understand is why guys do it the way that they do it and risk this.
If the same guys just went to an owner before the sale and said "hey, we love this horse and can buy it before the sale for x amount" and the client does so, they can then get a legal commission from the seller(so long as they dont bill the buyer as well). If someone wanted to, they could pay a 50% commission on a private sale, its their money and they can do what they want with it.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by oracle80

One more thing about buying privately, an agent may call a guy up and say how much? The seller might say 100 grand. The agent may send in a signed contract that gives him 5 days to pay the money and have the horse vetted. In the meantime someone else may think the horse is worth 200 grand. If he contacts the agent who has the horse under contract, the agent can commit arbitrage and sell his contract for cash. Meaning he can sell the contract for a chunk of cash to the guy who thinks hes worth 200 grand.
very often, after buying privately, the guy who bought the horse will sell pieces of the horse at a higher value than he bought the horse for.
I know for a fact that this happens often. Guy may buy one for 250 and sell half the horse to a partner for 175 before it runs.
Although that may seem unethical, its really not. You are simply telling someone what they have to pay to get what they want.
At a sale, its quite different. Auction means auction. Its supposed to mean that people bid against one another and that the guy with the highets bid gets the horse. If someone is planted in the crowd to run up the price who isn't really bidding, then thats wrong.
What I don't understand is why guys do it the way that they do it and risk this.
If the same guys just went to an owner before the sale and said "hey, we love this horse and can buy it before the sale for x amount" and the client does so, they can then get a legal commission from the seller(so long as they dont bill the buyer as well). If someone wanted to, they could pay a 50% commission on a private sale, its their money and they can do what they want with it.

Unless an owner is offered a really pretty penny before the auction it is in his best interest to set a high reserve and put it through the ring...you never know what sort of bids you could get and if those prospective buyers who offered to buy before the sale were truly interested in the horse they will call you up after the horse has RNA'd and purchase privately.

Another evil of auctions is the horse entered who that was a foal share...certain farms will really run up a price to make their stallion look good.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by oracle80

One more thing about buying privately, an agent may call a guy up and say how much? The seller might say 100 grand. The agent may send in a signed contract that gives him 5 days to pay the money and have the horse vetted. In the meantime someone else may think the horse is worth 200 grand. If he contacts the agent who has the horse under contract, the agent can commit arbitrage and sell his contract for cash. Meaning he can sell the contract for a chunk of cash to the guy who thinks hes worth 200 grand.
very often, after buying privately, the guy who bought the horse will sell pieces of the horse at a higher value than he bought the horse for.
I know for a fact that this happens often. Guy may buy one for 250 and sell half the horse to a partner for 175 before it runs.
Although that may seem unethical, its really not. You are simply telling someone what they have to pay to get what they want.
At a sale, its quite different. Auction means auction. Its supposed to mean that people bid against one another and that the guy with the highets bid gets the horse. If someone is planted in the crowd to run up the price who isn't really bidding, then thats wrong.
What I don't understand is why guys do it the way that they do it and risk this.
If the same guys just went to an owner before the sale and said "hey, we love this horse and can buy it before the sale for x amount" and the client does so, they can then get a legal commission from the seller(so long as they dont bill the buyer as well). If someone wanted to, they could pay a 50% commission on a private sale, its their money and they can do what they want with it.

That's interesting stuff. Thanks for the look in.

When an offer is made and a contract signed, is there earnest money wired? If not, how does the contract get enforced upon the buyer? I.E., the horse vets fine then the buyer has remorse and doesn't pay?

I assume the veting process is done and paid for by the buyer? Does the seller have any recourse if the buyer claims the horse did not vett out well? i.,e., another 3rd party review?

I assume these contracts are generally written in favor of the buyer.

Thanks again.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

That's interesting stuff. Thanks for the look in.

When an offer is made and a contract signed, is there earnest money wired? If not, how does the contract get enforced upon the buyer? I.E., the horse vets fine then the buyer has remorse and doesn't pay?

I assume the veting process is done and paid for by the buyer? Does the seller have any recourse if the buyer claims the horse did not vett out well? i.,e., another 3rd party review?

I assume these contracts are generally written in favor of the buyer.

Thanks again.

Unfortunately the blood-stock business isn't as protecting as say selling/buying real estate. Herein lies the biggest problem.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Unfortunately the blood-stock business isn't as protecting as say selling/buying real estate. Herein lies the biggest problem.

Welll, why not?

If a person were to buying or selling something for say $200,000 (or even $20,000) be it real estate, consulting services or a horse ... why would they do so without nominally reasonable terms?

Or is it just "business as usual" for people to get screwed consistently when buying or selling a racehorse?

Originally Posted by SentToStud

Welll, why not?

If a person were to buying or selling something for say $200,000 (or even $20,000) be it real estate, consulting services or a horse ... why would they do so without nominally reasonable terms?

Or is it just "business as usual" for people to get screwed consistently when buying or selling a racehorse?

Stud it works both ways you know, due to the lack of regulation.
I know a lotta agents who have been stiffed on commissions that were verbally agreed upon before the deal. Its all on a handshake. Lots of times someone gets stiffed and the recourse is to spend more in legal fees to try and recover ten grand, then ten grand is worth.
All you can do is mother**** the guy over the phone and tell everyone hes no good.
I no longer speak to a guy I knew for years because of it.
He gave me his word that I had 24 hours exclusively to sell a brrodmare of his at a set price for a 5% commission. SO I got on the phone and fax and email and worked hard, 22 hours later I had a client ready to wire the money. So I called the client. He said, well Mike I thought you werent gonna get it done so I let someone else sell her an hour ago.
You never heard such profanity fly out of someones mouth like it did out of mine. It was an absolute tapestry of every four letter word you ever heard.
Whats my recourse Stud? None.
So don't make it out like the screwing only goes on one way.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Stud it works both ways you know, due to the lack of regulation.
I know a lotta agents who have been stiffed on commissions that were verbally agreed upon before the deal. Its all on a handshake. Lots of times someone gets stiffed and the recourse is to spend more in legal fees to try and recover ten grand, then ten grand is worth.
All you can do is mother**** the guy over the phone and tell everyone hes no good.
I no longer speak to a guy I knew for years because of it.
He gave me his word that I had 24 hours exclusively to sell a brrodmare of his at a set price for a 5% commission. SO I got on the phone and fax and email and worked hard, 22 hours later I had a client ready to wire the money. So I called the client. He said, well Mike I thought you werent gonna get it done so I let someone else sell her an hour ago.
You never heard such profanity fly out of someones mouth like it did out of mine. It was an absolute tapestry of every four letter word you ever heard.
Whats my recourse Stud? None.
So don't make it out like the screwing only goes on one way.

Precisely why I decided to not make a career out of it. It's good when you're watching races and enjoying the horses, but the headaches.......

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Precisely why I decided to not make a career out of it. It's good when you're watching races and enjoying the horses, but the headaches.......

How about this one?
How about the guy who has a verbal contract that says he gets a breeding right for any horse he buys the client who becomes a stallion.
Guy sells the horse as a sire to interests in another country for a chunk of change.
Agent says he wants the cash equivalent of a breeding right because the horse was sold.
Client with a straight face tells him that the agreement was a breeding right and since he doesnt own him anymore that hes not entitled to anything?
Yes, this has happened.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Stud it works both ways you know, due to the lack of regulation.
I know a lotta agents who have been stiffed on commissions that were verbally agreed upon before the deal. Its all on a handshake. Lots of times someone gets stiffed and the recourse is to spend more in legal fees to try and recover ten grand, then ten grand is worth.
All you can do is mother**** the guy over the phone and tell everyone hes no good.
I no longer speak to a guy I knew for years because of it.
He gave me his word that I had 24 hours exclusively to sell a brrodmare of his at a set price for a 5% commission. SO I got on the phone and fax and email and worked hard, 22 hours later I had a client ready to wire the money. So I called the client. He said, well Mike I thought you werent gonna get it done so I let someone else sell her an hour ago.
You never heard such profanity fly out of someones mouth like it did out of mine. It was an absolute tapestry of every four letter word you ever heard.
Whats my recourse Stud? None.
So don't make it out like the screwing only goes on one way.

Thans again. I certainly didn't mean to suggest anything regarding how it all works as I realy have no idea. Just asked a couple questions -- perhaps not framed aall that well -- and I'm grateful for the answers and insight.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by SentToStud

Welll, why not?

If a person were to buying or selling something for say $200,000 (or even $20,000) be it real estate, consulting services or a horse ... why would they do so without nominally reasonable terms?

Or is it just "business as usual" for people to get screwed consistently when buying or selling a racehorse?

I work in real estate now and I worked for a Blood-stock agent and I see a big difference in the "chance" you take on all sides in the Blood-stock industry. Certainly not all people are bad, but if there were more controls on the industry (The Task Force is a big step) I think you would see less law suits like this one and the one Jess Jackson filed. When a horse whose buyer's vet passed shows up at their trainers farm and the buyer makes up reasons to not pay, that is a problem.

Originally Posted by SentToStud

That's interesting stuff. Thanks for the look in.

When an offer is made and a contract signed, is there earnest money wired? If not, how does the contract get enforced upon the buyer? I.E., the horse vets fine then the buyer has remorse and doesn't pay?

I assume the veting process is done and paid for by the buyer? Does the seller have any recourse if the buyer claims the horse did not vett out well? i.,e., another 3rd party review?

I assume these contracts are generally written in favor of the buyer.

Thanks again.

No earnest money is usually wired.
Horse has to be vetted, and it CAN'T be by the vet of the trainer selling, thats a conflict of interest and can lead to real problems if the horse is later found to have a problem.
Vetting is paid for by the agent, who can then pass it on to the buyer.
If the horse doesn't vet the deal is off.
Oh yeah, agents get stuck with 500 dollar vet bills all the time. You have one vetted and he doesnt fly, so no deal. Can't pass it on to the buyer.
You can go from waiting for a vet to call to tell you that you have made a great commission, then he calls and says no good, chip in the ankle and then not only did you just lose on a commission, you now owe 500 bucks to the vet.
Its not exactly a business for those who can't take crushing blows and get up off the floor.