We dealt with Hurricane Hall last year and found them to be very accomidating. They would be the first farm I call (maybe aside from Shadwell) next time I send a mare to Ky.
It seems to me that people see a JANUARY SALE that took big losses and all of a sudden want to breed for free, or not far from it. Just like the sale, people were not forced to sell for nothing (some did so at their loss, the others held their ground), so most farms (that don't pride themselves on breeding 185 mares a year, which is why most people are in this situation right now) are happy to slightly reduce their fees and ride it out until next year. In my mind the books that will suffer the most are those at farms who over breed, Ashford and Hill n Dale. Hence the Shakespeare reduction. He bred 70 some-odd last year and now to "ensure he gets a big book of "quality" mares" they slash his price. Last I checked, I didn't go to Value Village to get quality clothes. I like Shakespeare a lot, in certain aspects, but they cheapened him beyond belief by doing what they just did.
I Wonder How the Books are Doing?
Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn
too weird to live...too rare to die
www.ascotstudfarm.com
www.ascotstudfarm.com
Ascot you're letting your youthfulness and Canadianess cloud your vision. Most of our American friends don't realize that Canada did not have a recession in 2001 and consequently Canadians under the age of 35 have never had to deal with the effects of an economic downturn. If Mr. Carney is right with the BoC's forecast for 2009, we won't have much of a recession this time around either.
Our friends south of the border are not so fortunate so perhaps you should try to be a little bit more understanding of their situation (no offense intended). They have first hand experience in dealing with this type of situation, and their desire for better deals on their breeding decisions stems from that experience as well as detailed knowledge of their local markets.
I had the misfortune of finishing my first degree in '91. Myself and most of my classmates ended up going back to school for more education because their simply weren't many decent jobs to be had. This time around is different, if we're lucky it won't be too bad, but there is a lot of data that suggests we won't be lucky.
The first rule of marketing is that it is easier to keep a customer/client than it is to earn a new one. The second rule is that it is easier to earn a new customer than win back one that feels they got a bad deal. If this is just a mild recession and the market bounces back in a year then the farms that held firm on their stud fees will profit nicely. If this is a significant structural shift in the economy like most economists believe (most of them didn't see this coming so take their opinions with a block of salt) then the farms which adjusted to the new reality first will have a big advantage over the farms that held firm. Even if the farms didn't make a conscious decision about the economy, you know what they are assuming from how they are setting their fees. Both directions are gambles but one is far riskier than the other.
Our friends south of the border are not so fortunate so perhaps you should try to be a little bit more understanding of their situation (no offense intended). They have first hand experience in dealing with this type of situation, and their desire for better deals on their breeding decisions stems from that experience as well as detailed knowledge of their local markets.
I had the misfortune of finishing my first degree in '91. Myself and most of my classmates ended up going back to school for more education because their simply weren't many decent jobs to be had. This time around is different, if we're lucky it won't be too bad, but there is a lot of data that suggests we won't be lucky.
The first rule of marketing is that it is easier to keep a customer/client than it is to earn a new one. The second rule is that it is easier to earn a new customer than win back one that feels they got a bad deal. If this is just a mild recession and the market bounces back in a year then the farms that held firm on their stud fees will profit nicely. If this is a significant structural shift in the economy like most economists believe (most of them didn't see this coming so take their opinions with a block of salt) then the farms which adjusted to the new reality first will have a big advantage over the farms that held firm. Even if the farms didn't make a conscious decision about the economy, you know what they are assuming from how they are setting their fees. Both directions are gambles but one is far riskier than the other.
Dave, I do agree with you to an extent.
I was living in Kentucky in 2000 and 2001, I was riding with a vet at the time when the first few mares started to have their foals disappear upon their 2nd checks. I left partially because of MRLS, when the job I had lined up working on expanding the roster of a medium sized stud farm also disappeared. Then 9/11 happened and I took off to Europe for a while. Things in KY were pretty stagnant I wasn't going to get hired by anyone and didn't feel like paying to live there when our dollar was at 65 cents. I just don't remember this much panic back then though, maybe I just wasn't involved enough. Things recovered well though. Maybe I am a little naive and maybe I don't believe much of what the media says these days. It is a fear driven society, people don't buy a normal middle of the road story anymore, everything is taken to the extreme.
I am all for people getting a great deal, we have always been very good to our clients and the majority of them come back because we are pretty easy to deal with. But in a way I think people are going a little overboard when they won't breed unless they get a free or virtually free season.
I look at it both ways, if a mare owner is willing leave their mare open if they can't breed for next to nothing, then pick right back up if the economy does, then why would a stallion owner not feel the same way, rather than cheapening his/her horse beyond repair. How does the stallion owner then say, you bred for $5k last year but now he's back up to $15k take it or leave it. I think that will cause more problems in the end.
I was living in Kentucky in 2000 and 2001, I was riding with a vet at the time when the first few mares started to have their foals disappear upon their 2nd checks. I left partially because of MRLS, when the job I had lined up working on expanding the roster of a medium sized stud farm also disappeared. Then 9/11 happened and I took off to Europe for a while. Things in KY were pretty stagnant I wasn't going to get hired by anyone and didn't feel like paying to live there when our dollar was at 65 cents. I just don't remember this much panic back then though, maybe I just wasn't involved enough. Things recovered well though. Maybe I am a little naive and maybe I don't believe much of what the media says these days. It is a fear driven society, people don't buy a normal middle of the road story anymore, everything is taken to the extreme.
I am all for people getting a great deal, we have always been very good to our clients and the majority of them come back because we are pretty easy to deal with. But in a way I think people are going a little overboard when they won't breed unless they get a free or virtually free season.
I look at it both ways, if a mare owner is willing leave their mare open if they can't breed for next to nothing, then pick right back up if the economy does, then why would a stallion owner not feel the same way, rather than cheapening his/her horse beyond repair. How does the stallion owner then say, you bred for $5k last year but now he's back up to $15k take it or leave it. I think that will cause more problems in the end.
The big question is when the economy will recover? If it comes back in one or two years then you are absolutely right about the stud fees. If it takes 10 years, then for the remaining lives of proven stallions the discounts are essentially permanent.
I think a lot of the disagreement is in how you are choosing to word your posts rather than in what your views are. Your posts tend to come across a little bit black and white but when it comes down to it your views are more subtle and flexible.
I think a lot of the disagreement is in how you are choosing to word your posts rather than in what your views are. Your posts tend to come across a little bit black and white but when it comes down to it your views are more subtle and flexible.
vaule
im sorry but i dont look at the economy as bouncing back in a year or two and i hope im so wrong that it looks like im blind. but with the new spending plans being proposed.......its going to be like a sugar high......get somewhat better short term ...then come crashing down again....as for stud fee's.....if you own the stallion ....you GET TO SET THE PRICE and thats the way it should be.......but as dave said about lost customers and leaving a sour taste........becareful . the free market will rule in the end ...though my country seems to be leaning towards socialism. 
....which is a JOKE. 
.....never worked long term anywheres on the planet.........if a product does not represent vaule in todays current economic times you will not do well. best to you all.
....which is a JOKE. .....never worked long term anywheres on the planet.........if a product does not represent vaule in todays current economic times you will not do well. best to you all.A great man cannot help himself," "He can see things that other men cannot see themselves, and his greatness lies in doing whatever is necessary to make his vision real
-
summerhorse
- Breeder's Cup Winner
- Posts: 2178
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:40 am
- Location: Panama City, FL
- Contact:
I don't understand the deal under Clifton Park. Are those fees or money back??
Those are cash payments to the breeders when a live foal is produced, there is no fee this year to any mare that fits the incentive program, we pay the breeder cash for a live foal. Pretty much like a reverse stud fee, based on the quality of mare that is producing the foal.
Re: vaule
reenci wrote:im sorry but i dont look at the economy as bouncing back in a year or two and i hope im so wrong that it looks like im blind. but with the new spending plans being proposed.......its going to be like a sugar high......get somewhat better short term ...then come crashing down again....as for stud fee's.....if you own the stallion ....you GET TO SET THE PRICE and thats the way it should be.......but as dave said about lost customers and leaving a sour taste........becareful . the free market will rule in the end ...though my country seems to be leaning towards socialism.
I wouldn't worry too much about the US becoming more socialist, in most politically developed countries the only difference amongst electable politicians is the rhetoric. It is like choosing between a blue Pontiac and a red Chevy. Tim Geithner will be following the exact same policies as Ben Bernanke because he went to the same schools and has the same friends and really doesn't have many options with the exception of what words he uses to describe his actions. If you look down the list of Mr. Obama's cabinet members/nominees you see they are all from the same private clubs that Mr. Bush selected from so there is little reason to believe that US federal government policy will actually change significantly, except in rhetoric.
As for the stimulus packages actually producing a 'sugar high', I think that is unlikely as well. The most likely outcome for the stimulus packages is no measurable economic impact in the short term with significant inflation in the medium to long term (which is the policy solution for people who's mortgages exceed the value of their house). The stimulus packages aren't about economics they are about politics: the people are demanding that the government do something so the government is doing something. German Chancellor Angela Merckel strongly resisted stimulus programs all through the fall because they don't work (she's and economist) but has had to yield to political reality and introduce one for Germany, which goes to my earlier point that it doesn't really matter what the political philosophy of the politician is, they go with the flow.
What is not going to change anytime soon is the cost of raising a horse. The price of feed has nearly doubled, The Chinese are using up our shavings so last winter there were none to be found and this year a bag is costing way more. Transport costs while temporarily low right now (compared to last years $4/gallon of diesel) will assuredly go back up again. Farms have all raised their daily board fees. The place where I work is hell bent to offshore every job it can and is doing so at an alarming rate. THESE THINGS WILL NOT CHANGE and they are a significant factor when considering the cost of raising a horse. Stallion fees have actually become a smaller percent of the total cost (except for those spending really big bucks on stallion fees).
Re: vaule
Dave C wrote:reenci wrote:im sorry but i dont look at the economy as bouncing back in a year or two and i hope im so wrong that it looks like im blind. but with the new spending plans being proposed.......its going to be like a sugar high......get somewhat better short term ...then come crashing down again....as for stud fee's.....if you own the stallion ....you GET TO SET THE PRICE and thats the way it should be.......but as dave said about lost customers and leaving a sour taste........becareful . the free market will rule in the end ...though my country seems to be leaning towards socialism.
I wouldn't worry too much about the US becoming more socialist, in most politically developed countries the only difference amongst electable politicians is the rhetoric. It is like choosing between a blue Pontiac and a red Chevy. Tim Geithner will be following the exact same policies as Ben Bernanke because he went to the same schools and has the same friends and really doesn't have many options with the exception of what words he uses to describe his actions. If you look down the list of Mr. Obama's cabinet members/nominees you see they are all from the same private clubs that Mr. Bush selected from so there is little reason to believe that US federal government policy will actually change significantly, except in rhetoric.
As for the stimulus packages actually producing a 'sugar high', I think that is unlikely as well. The most likely outcome for the stimulus packages is no measurable economic impact in the short term with significant inflation in the medium to long term (which is the policy solution for people who's mortgages exceed the value of their house). The stimulus packages aren't about economics they are about politics: the people are demanding that the government do something so the government is doing something. German Chancellor Angela Merckel strongly resisted stimulus programs all through the fall because they don't work (she's and economist) but has had to yield to political reality and introduce one for Germany, which goes to my earlier point that it doesn't really matter what the political philosophy of the politician is, they go with the flow.
dave national health care is a step in the direction and so is government ownership of biz and banks.....hope your right....but you know what...in the end there is not squat average joe can do about it is there ?
A great man cannot help himself," "He can see things that other men cannot see themselves, and his greatness lies in doing whatever is necessary to make his vision real
-
summerhorse
- Breeder's Cup Winner
- Posts: 2178
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:40 am
- Location: Panama City, FL
- Contact:
AscotStud wrote:I don't understand the deal under Clifton Park. Are those fees or money back??
Those are cash payments to the breeders when a live foal is produced, there is no fee this year to any mare that fits the incentive program, we pay the breeder cash for a live foal. Pretty much like a reverse stud fee, based on the quality of mare that is producing the foal.
Good deal!!
Every mighty oak was once an acorn that stood its ground.
Yes it is, we decided to try and attract the best book of running and producing mares as possible, to give his first crop and hopefully those of the future the best chance possible to be runners.
This incentive plan was though up back in July, before the bottom fell out on things. It has helped us in the end, since he should breed close to 30 maybe more, where we would probably have not recieved as much interest in a stronger market. The best part of it is that his book consists of some real hard knocking mares and running families. We have had some qualify for the stakes incentives, but most of the mares are of the $1,000 incentive variety which are solid runners that don't have blacktype. He's averaging around 4 winners and over $50k per mare out of the 15-20 that contracts have been sent out far.
Not to sound cocky, but I think he will be the leading freshman sire in Canada 3 years from now.
This incentive plan was though up back in July, before the bottom fell out on things. It has helped us in the end, since he should breed close to 30 maybe more, where we would probably have not recieved as much interest in a stronger market. The best part of it is that his book consists of some real hard knocking mares and running families. We have had some qualify for the stakes incentives, but most of the mares are of the $1,000 incentive variety which are solid runners that don't have blacktype. He's averaging around 4 winners and over $50k per mare out of the 15-20 that contracts have been sent out far.
Not to sound cocky, but I think he will be the leading freshman sire in Canada 3 years from now.
-
springboro
- Grade II Winner
- Posts: 1305
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:53 am
-
springboro
- Grade II Winner
- Posts: 1305
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:53 am
I was playing around with a KY farm's hypo breeding with a mare I saw for sale and one of their stallions. It was an awesome breeding on paper, and I smiled to myself at the possibilites. Then I got an email from the farm, telling me that it was a good breeding in this guy's opinion too. So, I asked what kind of deal they could give me on this breeding.
Not sure if it is just me, but their bargaining wasn't nearly enough. I told this guy that I had just literally given away a foal at Keeneland which had a $12,500 stud fee (not that I paid anything) and I couldn't justify paying much money in this economy for a foal who wouldn't bring back even the stud fee.
Seriously, who is paying big chunks for stud fees this year? NOT ME! I told him I'd rather not breed and leave the mares open.
Not sure if it is just me, but their bargaining wasn't nearly enough. I told this guy that I had just literally given away a foal at Keeneland which had a $12,500 stud fee (not that I paid anything) and I couldn't justify paying much money in this economy for a foal who wouldn't bring back even the stud fee.
Seriously, who is paying big chunks for stud fees this year? NOT ME! I told him I'd rather not breed and leave the mares open.