I would've thought Darley would have cashed in on Giacomo more than that
Holy Bull
Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn
-
louis finochio
- Darley line
- Posts: 9181
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:21 am
- Location: Alhambra-Calif.
- Contact:
I think Darley realized that Giacomo wasn't going to sell a lot of seasons past that 2005 "Holy crud he sired a Derby winner!" push. Holy Bull is older and in my opinion its really hard for an older stallion to break out of the box that he's been put in by the market even when he gets the big horse. For instance, I don't see a lot of folks running to Lost Soldier with his increased fee because most people realize that Lost in the Fog was an aberration at this point in Lost Soldier's career. I think Darley made a shrewd move leaving Holy Bull's fee the same.
I don't have low self-esteem. I have low esteem for everyone else. ~ Daria
hi austique...hi louis finochio...hi Ruffian
Lost Soldier has some breeding issues (which might have played a role when determining his stud fee for 2006). As for Holy Bull...he has not been a particularly impressive sales sire...and who knows...maybe he has some issues too. I expect that if Team Holy Bull felt confident that they could bump the stud fee, while at the same time filling his book to their satisfaction (and the horse could handle the book)...it probably would have been done.
For what it's worth...Hennessy is not the best breeding stallion (fact is, despite his popularity he does not cover a very large book as compared to some of the Ashford /Coolmore stallions)...regardless, Coolmore bumped his stud fee to $60,000 for 2006 (up from $35k in 2005).
Respectfully
Lost Soldier has some breeding issues (which might have played a role when determining his stud fee for 2006). As for Holy Bull...he has not been a particularly impressive sales sire...and who knows...maybe he has some issues too. I expect that if Team Holy Bull felt confident that they could bump the stud fee, while at the same time filling his book to their satisfaction (and the horse could handle the book)...it probably would have been done.
For what it's worth...Hennessy is not the best breeding stallion (fact is, despite his popularity he does not cover a very large book as compared to some of the Ashford /Coolmore stallions)...regardless, Coolmore bumped his stud fee to $60,000 for 2006 (up from $35k in 2005).
Respectfully
FOS wrote:For what it's worth...Hennessy is not the best breeding stallion (fact is, despite his popularity he does not cover a very large book as compared to some of the Ashford /Coolmore stallions)...regardless, Coolmore bumped his stud fee to $60,000 for 2006 (up from $35k in 2005).
Hey FOS,
Hennessy seems to come up with a snappy horse from time to time but is one reason for his hike the press Henny Hughes got him? I mean he sold for something like $ 4.3 mil if memory serves with a gutsy finish in the Juvenile and just being in their shoes I'm sure they'd be thinking about pushing the 'you too can have a $4.3 mil horse to sell who runs big and runs early and $60,000 is a lovely investment my friend.'
Is that a valid reason to go that high? I guess if the book's full it's valid enough as far as they're concerned.
hello Heidilady
You ask
Certainly Henny Hughes (and his success and notoriety as a top 2-yo) added fuel to the fire for those considering a stud fee increase for 2006 for his sire Hennessy. But in my opinion that alone was not reason enough to bump him to $60,000 for 2006 (from $35k in 2005).
I expect that Hennessy's success (real and/or perceived) as a sire in various arenas (including the racetrack and the sales ring)...coupled with the limited book he covers (as compared to many Ashford/Coolmore stallions) as a result of issues which apparently affect his breeding capabilities...are probably reasons and/or justifications (or rationalizations) for his stud fee increase.
I expect that if the demand for him (in the breeding shed) remains strong (at his new-for-2006 stud fee of $60,000)...who knows, maybe his management will bump it up again if they sense that demand might stand it. On the other hand...if the demand for Hennessy diminishes (for whatever reasons) his stud fee might be reduced. Isn't that more or less the way Ashford/Coolmore seems to often do things...up down...up down...up up...down down...up down...down down...
...hmmm.
Respectfully
You ask
"Hennessy seems to come up with a snappy horse from time to time but is one reason for his hike the press Henny Hughes got him? I mean he sold for something like $ 4.3 mil if memory serves with a gutsy finish in the Juvenile and just being in their shoes I'm sure they'd be thinking about pushing the 'you too can have a $4.3 mil horse to sell who runs big and runs early and $60,000 is a lovely investment my friend.'
Is that a valid reason to go that high? I guess if the book's full it's valid enough as far as they're concerned.
Certainly Henny Hughes (and his success and notoriety as a top 2-yo) added fuel to the fire for those considering a stud fee increase for 2006 for his sire Hennessy. But in my opinion that alone was not reason enough to bump him to $60,000 for 2006 (from $35k in 2005).
I expect that Hennessy's success (real and/or perceived) as a sire in various arenas (including the racetrack and the sales ring)...coupled with the limited book he covers (as compared to many Ashford/Coolmore stallions) as a result of issues which apparently affect his breeding capabilities...are probably reasons and/or justifications (or rationalizations) for his stud fee increase.
I expect that if the demand for him (in the breeding shed) remains strong (at his new-for-2006 stud fee of $60,000)...who knows, maybe his management will bump it up again if they sense that demand might stand it. On the other hand...if the demand for Hennessy diminishes (for whatever reasons) his stud fee might be reduced. Isn't that more or less the way Ashford/Coolmore seems to often do things...up down...up down...up up...down down...up down...down down...
...hmmm.
Respectfully
- Intrinsic Worth
- Starters Handicap
- Posts: 691
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 2:27 pm