| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
LB
Eclipse Champion
Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 2286
Location: Kentucky
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:45 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Rachel Alexandra wrote: | I think the sales company has a right to protect the buyer. ..It should not be their responsibility to sell unwanted horses.
|
An auction company's sole reason for being is to sell unwanted horses. If everyone wanted to keep their stock, sales companies would have no reason to exist. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sysonby
Grade I Winner
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 1695
Location: California
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The only thing a sales company should do is to bring buyers and sellers together. The market determines the value of the horse.
_________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sysonby/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
madelyn
Moderator
Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 8975
Location: Louisville, KY
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rachel Alexandra wrote: | | I think the sales company has a right to protect the buyer........ |
I think this is a misconception. The sales company is just an auction house. The sale company is paid by the seller. The buyer has the option to hire a knowledgeable buyer's agent to protect his interests. The buyer has the right, and access, to examine the animal prior to purchase. And the buyer has the RIGHT to just not bid.
The sales company will, I think, generally step in with efforts to protect the SELLER much more quickly than to protect a buyer. Note how they actually chased after that chap at F-T Saratoga last week.
http://www.bloodhorse.com:80/horse-racing/articles/52081/saratoga-strange-fillys-buyer-flees?&utm_source=WeekInReviewNewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20090819
In my opinion, the sales companies seem to try to give the IMPRESSION that they work for the buyer - hence the repositories. It is interesting to note that the sales companies now require "full disclosure" on a horse offered - ie: prior surgeries, physical deformities. Yet those disclosures, once they have been recorded in the repository, are not announced at the time of sale. So the buyer, if he or she is seriously interested, should hire a vet to head to the repository to find out about the hip number. I recall a pal who picked up a filly on a whim - she was wonderfully bred, looked nice in the ring, and was going for pennies. When he went back to see her after the sale, she had a TUMOR growing on her udder. Since he was most interested in her broodmare prospects, although she was a yearling at the time, he tried to cancel the sale. No way. I think the sales company pointed out that the tumor had been in the vet report in the repository, so he had access to prior knowledge about it before the filly went through the ring. He took her home and had the tumor removed. Unfortunately, her udder went with it and the thought of her broodmare prospects evaporated. So no, I would say that the sales companies do NOT protect the buyer.
_________________
So Run for the Roses, as fast as you can..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Georgerz
Grade II Winner
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 1494
Location: Kent, Washington
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| But if even the udder got removed, couldn't the mare still get pregnant, and the resulting foal placed with a nurse mare? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
madelyn
Moderator
Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 8975
Location: Louisville, KY
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose that would be a possibility - if you throw enough money at something I guess it might work out. However, the filly wasn't THAT good enough quality to warrant all that.
_________________
So Run for the Roses, as fast as you can..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
clh
Grade I Winner
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 1578
Location: Ohio
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Did the entire udder get removed? One of our mares only has one working teat and has no problem nursing a foal with the one that works - she's a freaking milk cow.
Unfortunately it is a buyer beware market - as it is with anything that is purchased. IF I was buying I too would be very careful about what I was purchasing before I bought a horse at auction, regardless of the amount I was willing to spend.
_________________
"We are the people our parents warned us about" - Jimmy Buffett
"My occupational hazard is that my occupation is just not around" - Jimmy Buffett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rachel Alexandra
2yo Maiden
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 78
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LB wrote: | | Rachel Alexandra wrote: | I think the sales company has a right to protect the buyer. ..It should not be their responsibility to sell unwanted horses.
|
An auction company's sole reason for being is to sell unwanted horses. If everyone wanted to keep their stock, sales companies would have no reason to exist. |
Keeneland and Fasig are trying not to sell "unwanted" horses. The horses you speak of are wanted by someone. "Unwanted" horses are no longer desirable to anyone. Understand?
If you ever attended a sale, especially the Nov. Sale at Keeneland, usually by the end of the sale, old, worn out mares that have no business being there are dragged through the ring to only to dragged back out because she couldn't even fetch a $1000. These are the mares the auctions are trying to discourage sellers from bringing and they have every right to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rachel Alexandra
2yo Maiden
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 78
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| madelyn wrote: | | Rachel Alexandra wrote: | | I think the sales company has a right to protect the buyer........ |
I think this is a misconception. The sales company is just an auction house. The sale company is paid by the seller. The buyer has the option to hire a knowledgeable buyer's agent to protect his interests. The buyer has the right, and access, to examine the animal prior to purchase. And the buyer has the RIGHT to just not bid.
The sales company will, I think, generally step in with efforts to protect the SELLER much more quickly than to protect a buyer. Note how they actually chased after that chap at F-T Saratoga last week.
http://www.bloodhorse.com:80/horse-racing/articles/52081/saratoga-strange-fillys-buyer-flees?&utm_source=WeekInReviewNewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20090819
In my opinion, the sales companies seem to try to give the IMPRESSION that they work for the buyer - hence the repositories. It is interesting to note that the sales companies now require "full disclosure" on a horse offered - ie: prior surgeries, physical deformities. Yet those disclosures, once they have been recorded in the repository, are not announced at the time of sale. So the buyer, if he or she is seriously interested, should hire a vet to head to the repository to find out about the hip number. I recall a pal who picked up a filly on a whim - she was wonderfully bred, looked nice in the ring, and was going for pennies. When he went back to see her after the sale, she had a TUMOR growing on her udder. Since he was most interested in her broodmare prospects, although she was a yearling at the time, he tried to cancel the sale. No way. I think the sales company pointed out that the tumor had been in the vet report in the repository, so he had access to prior knowledge about it before the filly went through the ring. He took her home and had the tumor removed. Unfortunately, her udder went with it and the thought of her broodmare prospects evaporated. So no, I would say that the sales companies do NOT protect the buyer. |
Yes, the sales company does protect the buyer. They provide as much information as possible from the seller and it is up to the buyer to do the research or hire someone to do the research, hence the reason for sales agents.
It is not the fault of the sales company if a seller does not disclose information about a horse. The big sales companies frown on any of that, but they can't control it all. They do their best to protect the buyer in some cases. A buyer can turn back a horse if a known problem is not disclosed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrgators
Starters Handicap
Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 688
Location: Lockhart, Texas
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Getting back to the old broodmare aspect of the conversation.....I am a very lucky guy who purchased privately an older and barren daughter of Storm Cat. I purchased her in August of her 18 year old year. Barren, and she had aborted the year before. I took a gamble and most thought I was crazy. She is now 20, this past January 25th I had a beautiful filly out of her. She's a helluva producer, and I'm excited.
I didn't breed her this year, and plan on doing it next year. I have a problem....what do you do with a 21 year old mare? I can keep breeding her, but I'm one of those small mom and pop places that can't afford to feed her until she's 35 years old!
Do I want to see her at a killer auction? Heck No!! But I don't know what to do when she get's older. She is in good health, and will have no problem getting in foal next year hopefully. But selling her to someone who would want her and take a gamble on her isn't a bad idea for me either.
Hopefully, my situation will be that I can keep her for the rest of her life, but folks do need options.
I have seen some horses given to people and no, they didn't end up at the killers, but the way the ended up looking, they may have been better off!
Theo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ASB
Starters Handicap
Joined: 23 Sep 2006
Posts: 558
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In my opinion, if you buy an older mare, you buy under the assumption you do keep her till her dying day.
If you managed to get a few foals out of her, the proceeds (if any) from those foals should go to help support the mare when pensioned.
Does circumstance happen that prevents someone from fulfilling their personal obligations? Sure. In my opinion, if at that point, you can't secure a great home for the remainder of her days thru someone else, then euthanizing may be the kindest option. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrgators
Starters Handicap
Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 688
Location: Lockhart, Texas
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with you!
I hope that more and more people will be able to do it.
We call her "granny-maw" and hopefully she stay with us for a long time to come.
Like I said in an earlier post, she's quite healthy, and easy to get along with, and will be around for quite some time I pray.
Theo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sock Monkey
Allowance Winner
Joined: 25 Sep 2007
Posts: 353
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rachel Alexandra wrote: |
If you ever attended a sale, especially the Nov. Sale at Keeneland, usually by the end of the sale, old, worn out mares that have no business being there are dragged through the ring to only to dragged back out because she couldn't even fetch a $1000. These are the mares the auctions are trying to discourage sellers from bringing and they have every right to. |
This is not a good description of KEE Nov. and it begs the question: Have YOU been to that sale?
KEE is not an inexpensive sale for the consignor. If you have a horse that you feel no one will want, you're not going to bother running her through KEE.
Second, why can't the buyer make the decision as to what s/he wants to purchase? If you think the mare is too old, don't raise your hand. Simple as that.
If we're going to use the logic that the sales companies have a duty to protect the buyer, then should they also stop the bidding once it reaches fair market value to protect the buyer from paying too much? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
clh
Grade I Winner
Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 1578
Location: Ohio
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sock Monkey wrote: |
If we're going to use the logic that the sales companies have a duty to protect the buyer, then should they also stop the bidding once it reaches fair market value to protect the buyer from paying too much? |
Oooooh and let's make them not let the seller's make too much money too  Oh wait - that would happen if the buyer's couldn't spend too much wouldn't it 
Back to the mares age - I have one mare that hubby knows will be here FOREVER for sure .....
_________________
"We are the people our parents warned us about" - Jimmy Buffett
"My occupational hazard is that my occupation is just not around" - Jimmy Buffett |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LB
Eclipse Champion
Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 2286
Location: Kentucky
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rachel Alexandra wrote: |
Keeneland and Fasig are trying not to sell "unwanted" horses. The horses you speak of are wanted by someone. "Unwanted" horses are no longer desirable to anyone. Understand? |
I do understand. I just don't happen to agree.
| Rachel Alexandra wrote: |
If you ever attended a sale, especially the Nov. Sale at Keeneland, usually by the end of the sale, old, worn out mares that have no business being there are dragged through the ring to only to dragged back out because she couldn't even fetch a $1000. These are the mares the auctions are trying to discourage sellers from bringing and they have every right to. |
If you spend a little more time on this BB, I think you might be surprised to discover how many of us have been to a sale or two (or a hundred).
Like Sock Monkey, I think your description of the Keeneland November sale is so off-base as to be unrecognizable. I looked up some stats from last year's sale--which took place in the toughest market the TB industry has seen in nearly a decade. In Book 8 of KeeNov, 724 horses were catalogued. Of those 36 brought no bid--though even then they were hardly dragged into and out of the ring. Some were old, some were young. Some were weanlings. In most cases, age was not the determining factor in which ones the buyers wanted and which ones they didn't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
madelyn
Moderator
Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 8975
Location: Louisville, KY
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rachel Alexandra wrote: | | ........If you ever attended a sale, especially the Nov. Sale at Keeneland, usually by the end of the sale, old, worn out mares that have no business being there are dragged through the ring to only to dragged back out because she couldn't even fetch a $1000. These are the mares the auctions are trying to discourage sellers from bringing and they have every right to. |
Poppycock. It COSTS $1,000 to put a horse in the catalog, and through the ring at Keeneland. Plus prep, consignor, sales commission if the horse goes above a certain price. What sort of fool would pay about $2500 out of pocket to put a mare through Keeneland and not expect to get at least $3,000? You could as easily try to place her, along with a tax deductible donation of about half that, with one of the TB retirement places. That said, I have picked up just AMAZING bargains at Keeneland. I am quite HAPPY that sellers brought those bargain mares for me to pick up. I say leave the status quo as it is.
BTW NOTHING going through the ring at Keeneland looks the least bit tired or worn out.
_________________
So Run for the Roses, as fast as you can..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.11 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
