To no one's surprise, the CTBA announced today that its annual Del Mar yearling sale is no more. After last year's debacle, in which 50% of the yearlings were RNA'd and several of the sale toppers were "fake" sales, the CTBA decided to let Barretts take over its job.
It's a great pity that the 50 year old Del Mar sale, once the crown jewel of California breeding, has been destroyed by the ineptness of our "leaders." The Del Mar race meet is by far the most successful venue in California (and in the country as well), and has always been a natural place to sell future racehorses. Only the current rubber stamp CTBA board has been capable of ruining this market place.
The CTBA spin, of course, is to make itself appear as if it has made a wise strategic decision to join with Barretts. A lot of people still believe their press releases. To me, it's just one more piece of evidence proving that our breeding industry is being run by incompetents more concerned with self preservation than with the fate of the breeders.
Del Mar sale cancelled
Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn
-
louis finochio
- Darley line
- Posts: 9181
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:21 am
- Location: Alhambra-Calif.
- Contact:
What the Del Mar sale was lacking was the quality TB that bring quality prices. The two go hand and hand.
The Calif. breeders that have passed on would have been very disappointed that the Del Mar sale has been canceled.
The new joint agreement with Baretts is a positive for the TB industry in Calif. Lets hope it will bring quality TB to the sales and return the industry to the top.
The Calif. breeders that have passed on would have been very disappointed that the Del Mar sale has been canceled.
The new joint agreement with Baretts is a positive for the TB industry in Calif. Lets hope it will bring quality TB to the sales and return the industry to the top.
Those without sin cast the first stone.
Louis Finochio
Louis Finochio
You're right, Louis, about the CA leaders who have passed. Imagine what Lou Rowan, Mrs. Harper, Col. Koester, Charlie Russell, and Brian Sweeney would be saying to the present CTBA management!! Apparently the era of selfless leadership is long gone.
Still, until the racing structure is fixed, its not likely that breeders will spend top dollars acquiring broodmares. The return on them isn't that spectacular. Not to mention that the market is so focused on conformation, rather than pedigree, that those high priced catalog pages might be over rated. Hopefully, the selection committee for the new sale will be dedicated to choosing athletic yearlings in a consistent manner. One of the major reasons the CTBA failed is due to its inconsistent and undefinable criteria in its selection process.
Like the CHRB, the CTBA must also be overhauled by its members if there is to be any chance of progress. Their collective failures speak for themselves.
Still, until the racing structure is fixed, its not likely that breeders will spend top dollars acquiring broodmares. The return on them isn't that spectacular. Not to mention that the market is so focused on conformation, rather than pedigree, that those high priced catalog pages might be over rated. Hopefully, the selection committee for the new sale will be dedicated to choosing athletic yearlings in a consistent manner. One of the major reasons the CTBA failed is due to its inconsistent and undefinable criteria in its selection process.
Like the CHRB, the CTBA must also be overhauled by its members if there is to be any chance of progress. Their collective failures speak for themselves.
Neither. There will be no more sales at the Del Mar racetrack. The new Barretts format won't look much different than it did in 2004. The sale will still be in October at Barretts; the catalog will be limited to 350 yearlings. The bottom end yearlings will be replaced by those yearlings which would have been Del Mar bound. So, the catalog should be a much stronger one.
I imagine the 150 or so yearlings that don't make the new cut for Barretts will be sold in either the NorCal sale in September, the Arizona sale in November, or the Janaury Barretts mixed sale.
The good news is that the selection committee will be comprised of two Barretts execs (Jerry McMahon and Bill Baker) and one CTBA exec (young Doug Burge). Thus, the CTBA board will no longer decide on which yearlings are accepted. This move should help keep CTBA favoritism to a minimum. The other good news is that the physical inspection process will begin in June rather than April, giving more development time for those smaller individuals.
I think this resolution will help most breeders. I also think the two sales could have coexisted, and thrived, if the Del Mar sale had been run by professionals for the last decade or so. But due to its own self serving decisions, the CTBA board created a sales environment so hostile to buyers and sellers alike that it dug its own grave. In the end, the CTBA surrendered the most desirable venue in Del Mar, thereby ending much hope of attracting the younger, affluent racetrack patrons there into becoming horse owners. A big, big loss for California.
I imagine the 150 or so yearlings that don't make the new cut for Barretts will be sold in either the NorCal sale in September, the Arizona sale in November, or the Janaury Barretts mixed sale.
The good news is that the selection committee will be comprised of two Barretts execs (Jerry McMahon and Bill Baker) and one CTBA exec (young Doug Burge). Thus, the CTBA board will no longer decide on which yearlings are accepted. This move should help keep CTBA favoritism to a minimum. The other good news is that the physical inspection process will begin in June rather than April, giving more development time for those smaller individuals.
I think this resolution will help most breeders. I also think the two sales could have coexisted, and thrived, if the Del Mar sale had been run by professionals for the last decade or so. But due to its own self serving decisions, the CTBA board created a sales environment so hostile to buyers and sellers alike that it dug its own grave. In the end, the CTBA surrendered the most desirable venue in Del Mar, thereby ending much hope of attracting the younger, affluent racetrack patrons there into becoming horse owners. A big, big loss for California.
-
Inish Glora
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 6:00 pm
- Location: USA
I worked this year's Del Mar sale and it was a hassle, to say the least. Not only were the temporary stalls scary (the sales topper got his legs stuck for a few minutes, and luckily was ok), but the bathing area had a rather disturbing set-up and the walk was terrifying for them. The walk to the sales ring is always "fun" and gets your adrenalin pumping, but it was dark and it was a long walk for those babies. There were shadows that made them spook and there were numerous dangerous areas where, if they had gotten loose could have been a major disaster. There was a little ring in the back for buyers to get one last look at the horses, but it was cramped and there was a generator that scared the horses out of their wits. There wasn't really anywhere else for the buyers to get one last look at the horses, since they had us stand behind plants in the saddling area for the races, and the stalls were so far from the sales ring, there wasn't any frantic buyers looking for one more buy.
Barretts is a wonderful facility, I think the "merging" will be excellent.
Barretts is a wonderful facility, I think the "merging" will be excellent.
Inish Glora wrote: ...Not only were the temporary stalls scary (the sales topper got his legs stuck for a few minutes, and luckily was ok), but the bathing area had a rather disturbing set-up and the walk was terrifying for them....
Good grief! Did they x-ray the horse? Bet they didn't disclose that in the sales ring
Missteps like this are rarely announced at sale time, unless veterinarian work has been performed. The temporary stalls Inish Glora referred to weren't fit for young TB's. Made of canvas, they were small and far too short for any TB. Ponies, maybe. Any teenager could have done a better job at ordering portable stalls than CTBA sales. Ditto on the lighting.
Probably trying to do things on the cheap instead of doing them right. Sounds about typical for state bureaucrats, except when their own cronies are involved.
"A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher...You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse." C. S. Lewis
Oh I think nepotism and cronyism are a national pastime for state governments. I don't know if it has made news anywhere outside our little town (hush that up, you fool!) but we recently had a debacle in the election for state senator.
Dana Seum Stephenson, who looks like an unmade bed and presents like Eeyore, won a Louisville district by around 1,000 votes. She is the daughter of a Senator. The money machine was behind her. One tiny detail they overlooked, she did not meet the residency requirement because for FIVE of the past SIX years she resided in INDIANA, not Kentucky. That's so she could get a Master's Degree from an Indiana University and pay in-state fees. She owned her home in Indiana, had an Indiana driver's license, and her mailing address was in Indiana. She paid taxes in Indiana.
The opponent challenged DSS's right to the seat and WON IN COURT!!!!!! But "Daddy's" pals just went right on like an express train and confirmed DSS in her senate seat. This is not about parties, this is just about dirty, crooked cronies practicing dirty, crooked nepotism.
The "people" (who really have no say whatsoever) are calling foul and demanding a special election... naturally with a new candidate to replace DSS. The senate is completely ignoring them, as usual.
Dana Seum Stephenson, who looks like an unmade bed and presents like Eeyore, won a Louisville district by around 1,000 votes. She is the daughter of a Senator. The money machine was behind her. One tiny detail they overlooked, she did not meet the residency requirement because for FIVE of the past SIX years she resided in INDIANA, not Kentucky. That's so she could get a Master's Degree from an Indiana University and pay in-state fees. She owned her home in Indiana, had an Indiana driver's license, and her mailing address was in Indiana. She paid taxes in Indiana.
The opponent challenged DSS's right to the seat and WON IN COURT!!!!!! But "Daddy's" pals just went right on like an express train and confirmed DSS in her senate seat. This is not about parties, this is just about dirty, crooked cronies practicing dirty, crooked nepotism.
The "people" (who really have no say whatsoever) are calling foul and demanding a special election... naturally with a new candidate to replace DSS. The senate is completely ignoring them, as usual.
Michael wrote:Mahubah,
I didn't know you are from California!
Nah, just plenty of experience with the same kind of brainless wonders in Florida...and you should hear my mom grouching about some of the idiot decisions made by the local politicians in my hometown of Murfreesboro, TN. The breed is everywhere, it seems.
"A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher...You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse." C. S. Lewis
DRF Rebuttal to Michael Power's letter to the editor
Letters to the editor
By DRF READERS
(DRF) - California chair gets defense from colleague ( Michael Power )
In the Jan. 2 letter to the Racing Form "CHRB in need of changes top to bottom," the writer attacked the California Horse Racing Board's chairman, John Harris, and myself for numerous ills facing California racing. In rebuttal to that one-sided and vindictive point of view, several points need be made.
In service on boards such as the state's horse racing board (for little compensation) and the California Thoroughbred Breeders' Association (with no compensation), Mr. Harris and I devote substantial amounts of our time and energy because we have the genuine desire to better our industry. We deal with the real issues that face our industry and attempt to find solutions to significant problems. We realize that in so doing we will not always be able to solve fully the malaise in which the horse business finds itself. We also realize that we will receive little or no thanks for our efforts and, on the contrary, will probably take shots from armchair quarterbacks.
In creating the racing board, the California legislature mandated that the board be comprised of persons who have a vested interest in the horse racing business. Horse racing law specifically states that horsemen are in the best position to oversee regulation of racing.
Neither the letter-writer nor the referenced article in the San Diego Union Tribune was able to point to a clear instance where Mr. Harris or any other board member acted in the face of a direct conflict of interest. The racing board receives legal counsel from the California Attorney General's office, which, if a board member fails to discern a conflict, is present to so advise.
The letter blamed me for the demise of the 50-year-old Del Mar yearling sale. It would be convenient if I were the scapegoat. Unfortunately, things change in the marketplace. Where there was once a market for yearlings in the summer in California, the market has moved on to the Keeneland fall and Barretts October sales. The breeders' association board realizes that the Del Mar sale cannot be successfully presented in its present format and is in the process of reacting to our changing marketplace.
Both my family and Mr. Harris have invested millions of dollars in raising and running racehorses in California. I consider it an honor to be termed a friend of John Harris. There is no one in California racing more passionate about the betterment of our business. My operation has bred mares at his farm, and we have always paid the going fees. At no time has my business or I ever asked for or received any favors or otherwise from him.
The writer of the Jan. 2 letter in question, Michael Power, is not a licensed owner of racehorses in California. He is not a member of the breeders' association. He does not serve on any regulatory board overseeing this industry. He is obsessed with making personal attacks on Mr. Harris, myself, and other members of voluntary boards such as the CTBA. I leave it to the readers to decide whether or not his opinions should be given any credence.
Daniel Q. Schiffer
The Hat Ranch, Temecula, Calif.
By DRF READERS
(DRF) - California chair gets defense from colleague ( Michael Power )
In the Jan. 2 letter to the Racing Form "CHRB in need of changes top to bottom," the writer attacked the California Horse Racing Board's chairman, John Harris, and myself for numerous ills facing California racing. In rebuttal to that one-sided and vindictive point of view, several points need be made.
In service on boards such as the state's horse racing board (for little compensation) and the California Thoroughbred Breeders' Association (with no compensation), Mr. Harris and I devote substantial amounts of our time and energy because we have the genuine desire to better our industry. We deal with the real issues that face our industry and attempt to find solutions to significant problems. We realize that in so doing we will not always be able to solve fully the malaise in which the horse business finds itself. We also realize that we will receive little or no thanks for our efforts and, on the contrary, will probably take shots from armchair quarterbacks.
In creating the racing board, the California legislature mandated that the board be comprised of persons who have a vested interest in the horse racing business. Horse racing law specifically states that horsemen are in the best position to oversee regulation of racing.
Neither the letter-writer nor the referenced article in the San Diego Union Tribune was able to point to a clear instance where Mr. Harris or any other board member acted in the face of a direct conflict of interest. The racing board receives legal counsel from the California Attorney General's office, which, if a board member fails to discern a conflict, is present to so advise.
The letter blamed me for the demise of the 50-year-old Del Mar yearling sale. It would be convenient if I were the scapegoat. Unfortunately, things change in the marketplace. Where there was once a market for yearlings in the summer in California, the market has moved on to the Keeneland fall and Barretts October sales. The breeders' association board realizes that the Del Mar sale cannot be successfully presented in its present format and is in the process of reacting to our changing marketplace.
Both my family and Mr. Harris have invested millions of dollars in raising and running racehorses in California. I consider it an honor to be termed a friend of John Harris. There is no one in California racing more passionate about the betterment of our business. My operation has bred mares at his farm, and we have always paid the going fees. At no time has my business or I ever asked for or received any favors or otherwise from him.
The writer of the Jan. 2 letter in question, Michael Power, is not a licensed owner of racehorses in California. He is not a member of the breeders' association. He does not serve on any regulatory board overseeing this industry. He is obsessed with making personal attacks on Mr. Harris, myself, and other members of voluntary boards such as the CTBA. I leave it to the readers to decide whether or not his opinions should be given any credence.
Daniel Q. Schiffer
The Hat Ranch, Temecula, Calif.