Will Less Stud Income Help Keep Horses Racing

[GenuineRisk]

If you have a horse breeding say, 100 mares, at $10,000 each, that's a million dollars per year. How many horses earn that in a year?

Figure the Derby winner or BCC winner can get $30,000 to $50,000, and that's three to five million for the year. He'd pretty much have to win the Dubai World Cup or the BCC every year to approach that.

If racing was serious about keeping horses on the track, they'd limit the number of mares each stallion could breed (they already do to some extent, by requiring it be natural cover, so it's not impossible), but that's not likely.

Or require them to be five or six before they can breed. Again, na gan hapen.

On the bright side, two of the last ten Derby winners were geldings.

[GenuineRisk]

Cannon said it better than I. Some of the not-quite-at-the-very-tops will stay around longer, but I doubt many will do it past 4.

Still think it'll be rare to see the Derby winner back at 4 if he's a colt.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

If you have a horse breeding say, 100 mares, at $10,000 each, that's a million dollars per year. How many horses earn that in a year?

Figure the Derby winner or BCC winner can get $30,000 to $50,000, and that's three to five million for the year. He'd pretty much have to win the Dubai World Cup or the BCC every year to approach that.

If racing was serious about keeping horses on the track, they'd limit the number of mares each stallion could breed (they already do to some extent, by requiring it be natural cover, so it's not impossible), but that's not likely.

Or require them to be five or six before they can breed. Again, na gan hapen.

On the bright side, two of the last ten Derby winners were geldings.

But what you dont know (but you will now) is that of those 100 mares there are a whole lot who arent paying that fee. Most bigtime stallions are syndicated. I would guess most are 50 shares now though some are still 40 and others are 60. Each share holder gets a breeding season for his share and for lesser stallions 2 breeding seasons for years 2 and 3. Those people arent paying. A certain number of clients will want to do a foal share which a few years ago was unheard of for a high profile, first year stallion but times are changing. Some people connected to the horse like the trainer get a comp breeding right. Virtually all stallions are stands and nurses so you dont get paid for a year and nor at all if the mare aborts or the foal is born dead (or in bad shape or is crooked because they are often reported as dead)

The restrictions would fly in the face of the realities of the stallion business and would serve to further punish owners of sucessful horses. We need to do what we can to get and keep owners, not restrict their ability to make a windfall profit which will not only help them recover losses but keep them in the game.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

But what you dont know (but you will now) is that of those 100 mares there are a whole lot who arent paying that fee. Most bigtime stallions are syndicated. I would guess most are 50 shares now though some are still 40 and others are 60. Each share holder gets a breeding season for his share and for lesser stallions 2 breeding seasons for years 2 and 3. Those people arent paying. A certain number of clients will want to do a foal share which a few years ago was unheard of for a high profile, first year stallion but times are changing. Some people connected to the horse like the trainer get a comp breeding right. Virtually all stallions are stands and nurses so you dont get paid for a year and nor at all if the mare aborts or the foal is born dead (or in bad shape or is crooked because they are often reported as dead)

The restrictions would fly in the face of the realities of the stallion business and would serve to further punish owners of sucessful horses. We need to do what we can to get and keep owners, not restrict their ability to make a windfall profit which will not only help them recover losses but keep them in the game.

It's a valid counterargument, and it also serves to highlight a big issue with horse racing, which is that it's not possible to make a profit racing; money has to be through getting the home run horse who can succeed at stud. Racing wants big horses on the track to attract fans but the owners need big horses they can retire to stud. And most of them will fail at stud, but you won't know that until it's far too late to bring them back to the races.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

It's a valid counterargument, and it also serves to highlight a big issue with horse racing, which is that it's not possible to make a profit racing; money has to be through getting the home run horse who can succeed at stud. Racing wants big horses on the track to attract fans but the owners need big horses they can retire to stud. And most of them will fail at stud, but you won't know that until it's far too late to bring them back to the races.

There is money to be made like Gill was doing it..Slot tracks with high purse levels for horrendous horses. If you had 20 geldings like my pig you would be fine.. Racing horrible laimos threated with legal rugs that allows them to not feel shiiiit seems to be the NEW race market..Why I have NO clue

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Racing horrible laimos threated with legal rugs that allows them to not feel shiiiit seems to be the NEW race market..Why I have NO clue

Err... can someone translate for me, please? My Freddymoese is a bit rusty and since I'm pregnant I can't drink, which usually helps with the translation.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Err... can someone translate for me, please? My Freddymoese is a bit rusty and since I'm pregnant I can't drink, which usually helps with the translation.

Drugs not rugs...Drinking is fine when you are with child..Trust me

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Drugs not rugs...Drinking is fine when you are with child..Trust me

Oohhhhhh! Thank you. I was trying to figure out how carpeting was a factor and then wondered if you were making a statement about synthetic tracks.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

There is money to be made like Gill was doing it..Slot tracks with high purse levels for horrendous horses. If you had 20 geldings like my pig you would be fine.. Racing horrible laimos threated with legal rugs that allows them to not feel shiiiit seems to be the NEW race market..Why I have NO clue

Gill was not making money

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Gill was not making money

Challenge...with the red flag...Your math is suspect

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Challenge...with the red flag...Your math is suspect

Here let me explain without delving into the the numbers which overwhelmingly prove my point. If he was making money, he wouldnt have given up so easily.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

It's a valid counterargument, and it also serves to highlight a big issue with horse racing, which is that it's not possible to make a profit racing; money has to be through getting the home run horse who can succeed at stud. Racing wants big horses on the track to attract fans but the owners need big horses they can retire to stud. And most of them will fail at stud, but you won't know that until it's far too late to bring them back to the races.

It has never been possible to make a profit racing. Most long term owners are looking to lose less, not make more. There are other occasions where you can make a windfall though. Having a live three year old at this time of the year can be sold for big bucks. A graded stakes winning filly still has value. But it is just too volitile of an investment with too much luck needed to be considered a profitable venture. At least doing it without committing crimes.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It has never been possible to make a profit racing. Most long term owners are looking to lose less, not make more. There are other occasions where you can make a windfall though. Having a live three year old at this time of the year can be sold for big bucks. A graded stakes winning filly still has value. But it is just too volitile of an investment with too much luck needed to be considered a profitable venture. At least doing it without committing crimes.

Midwest TB's and Ness are expanding their operations after great success?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Midwest TB's and Ness are expanding their operations after great success?

See the last sentence?

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

See the last sentence?

Crimes of passion are sexy... He is 32 and killing it.. He is now expanding into better stock.. he will win graded stakes shortly and IF people dom't catch up they will be training ponys for bday partys soon.. Criminal or not he is earning without risk

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It has never been possible to make a profit racing. Most long term owners are looking to lose less, not make more. There are other occasions where you can make a windfall though. Having a live three year old at this time of the year can be sold for big bucks. A graded stakes winning filly still has value. But it is just too volitile of an investment with too much luck needed to be considered a profitable venture. At least doing it without committing crimes.

If that's the case, then, why worry about whether new owners to the game are going to make money or not, and do what you can to keep the stars on the track? On the one hand, you say, we need to attract new owners and keep them so they need to be able to attempt to make as much money as they can breeding. On the other hand, you say it's never been possible to make money racing no matter what (I think you're right, by the way).

Depending on breeding to keep racing afloat results, I think, in inflated sales prices because the horses are being sold as breeding prospects from the start.

Poor horse racing- depending on wealthy dynasties, then breeding syndicates, and now slots. It's really the ultimate charity case, isn't it?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

If that's the case, then, why worry about whether new owners to the game are going to make money or not, and do what you can to keep the stars on the track? On the one hand, you say, we need to attract new owners and keep them so they need to be able to attempt to make as much money as they can breeding. On the other hand, you say it's never been possible to make money racing no matter what (I think you're right, by the way).

Depending on breeding to keep racing afloat results, I think, in inflated sales prices because the horses are being sold as breeding prospects from the start.

Poor horse racing- depending on wealthy dynasties, then breeding syndicates, and now slots. It's really the ultimate charity case, isn't it?

If you had the money would you buy a racehorse?