Pavarotti to Hartley/De Renzo

[Tesio]

Hey Roke, I don't like Chapel Royal either, but he was a very precocious 2yo who won his first 3 starts by the length of the stretch. In addition to the Gr II and Gr III wins he was second in the Champagne and third in the BC Juvenile.

He is certainly more worthy than Pavarotti.

I don't like CR, in fact I hate him, as a stallion prospect. How many of Pletcher's 2yo stars make it till the end of their 3yo season? I'm not sure, but I bet it's not a very good %.

Limehouse was certainly the exception to this theory. I can see him being successful at stud. He fought an uphill battle and was good from 2 to 4 years of age.

Back to your point, Chapel Royal accomplished a ton more than Pavarotti. Although, I wouldn't be surprised to see CR standing with Pavarotti in Ocala within the next few years. His being a son of Montbrook and all. I'm sure Coolmore could 'persuade' the same people standing Pavarotti to take him.

[Rokeby Forever]

How many of Pletcher's 2yo stars make it till the end of their 3yo season?

I'm not quite sure. Maybe we should ask Ready's Image? Or Passion?

[bdw0617]

How many of Pletcher's 2yo stars make it till the end of their 3yo season?

I'm not quite sure. Maybe we should ask Ready's Image? Or Passion?

I dont' think Ready's Image declined. I just don' tthink he was ever really any good.

early in june/july thoose 2YO stakes are really nothing more than a normal high level claimer/allowence race. the real horses don't hit the track utnil about October. it was clear as day he was peeked out in the race Majestic Warrior blew by him.


YOu won't hear from him again. he will go to stud, not because he is hurt, but because he can't compete on a grade 1/2 level anymore

[brogers]

I love Distorted Humor as a stallion (who doesn't?). But the fact that his fee was raised YET AGAIN this year to $300K is simply GREED. Smart Strike is arguably every bit as successful with his race horses yet he stands for half that figure. Why? Because Smart Strike's babies aren't real flashy and don't bring the prices other high priced stallions' offspring do. Why are service fees so entirely based on sales figures? Shouldn't a stallion's fee be based on his ability to sire race horses?

Actually his fee was raised because they only serve 115 mares and with the syndicate that they have they had already booked 65 mares before a contract was even sent out. This leaves only 50 seasons to sell on the open market and $300,000 is what supply and demand will bear. Mind you, many of the 50 that they will sell are to breed to race customers so what happens in the sales ring doesn't concern them.

The reason many people on this forum are critical is partly based on these big money-making farms' greed. They squeeze any kind of profit the breeder might be lucky enough to make. Mr brogers, I am not super critical of the stallions standing stud these days. I am, however, critical of the price structure.

We recognised that this year which is why we dropped the fees on all bar one stallion. We looked at Unbridled's Song as an example and asked our customers what they thought and looked at yearling averages and more importantly looked at the medians for fillies which is a good price point to look at when setting a stallions fee. What we saw is that if you bred a decent Unbridled's Song filly you might get $250,000 in the sales ring which meant that you weren't doing well at a $200,000 fee....so we dropped it as we wanted to deliver value back to the customer that breeds to sell.

We also looked at our breed to race customers. They have been complaining that prizemoney levels (returns) have gone the opposite direction from costs of training a horse and that the cost of production was starting to weigh in on their decisions. We dropped the fees because of this also.

Now we are in the hole on Unbridled's Song as we have literally 200+ applications to go to the stallion and we just dont want to serve any more than 120 with him. Does that constitute greed? I doubt that there is anyone else that deals with as many customers at as many levels as Taylor Made and we listened to them and while others were raising, we have lowered and as a consequence we have demand we can't meet which is going to annoy some of our customers.

Unbridled's Song gets some nice runners. He does, however, sire a very brittle horse.

He gets his foals to the racetrack at the same rate as AP Indy or Kingmambo and they start just as many times over their life as these two stallions.....why don't you call them brittle?

He gets a very nice book of mares with a CI of around 2.70. He doesn't even come close to improving this book with an AEI of 1.99, in fact he drags them down by more than 25%.

As does AP Indy and Kingmambo....

Alot of these prices are based on one thing. GREED.

No. They are based on supply and demand which is what I have been going on about. There are not enough stallions around to sate the current demand so stallion owners are raising prices (excepting us) to put a dampner on demand.

[Rokeby Forever]

I am, however, critical of the price structure.

To which Mr Brogers replied:

We recognised that this year which is why we dropped the fees on all bar one stallion.

We also looked at our breed to race customers. They have been complaining that prizemoney levels (returns) have gone the opposite direction from costs of training a horse and that the cost of production was starting to weigh in on their decisions. We dropped the fees because of this also.

But when FOS asked about Forestry's pricing for 2008 only a short time ago:

So in answer to your question, it will depend what everyone else does. If Smart Strike, Mr Greeley and Street Cry stand for $100,000 then Forestry looks overpriced, but if these all stand for $150,000+ then maybe not as the competition in the price range will serve limited books or be in difficult years to breed to.

Let's wait and see.

Wasn't Taylor Made's pricing of stallions for 2008 really a reactive response to what other farms were setting prices at as opposed to a proactive act to customer feedback? Many high profile breeding farms set prices before Taylor Made announced fees for 2008 (as you stated in the reply to FOS, "Let's wait and see"). That doesn't exactly ring chimes that internal influences had a lot to do with TM's 2008 pricing.

Now we are in the hole on Unbridled's Song as we have literally 200+ applications to go to the stallion and we just dont want to serve any more than 120 with him.

I recall you writing that when Unbridled's Song was booked to his largest book not too long ago (150 mares or so), he was having difficulty servicing that many. So, isn't the reduction of his book due to his current physical limitations and not anything else? If Unbridled's Song were a spry, energetic 9 or 10 year old stallion, wouldn't his book be at the 150 (or so) level that it was raised to not too long ago?

Does that constitute greed?

Indeed, his current reduction in book size doesn't. But what did it constitute when Taylor Made tried to have him serve as many as 150 a year not too long ago at $200,000 when his difficulties became clear?

What we saw is that if you bred a decent Unbridled's Song filly you might get $250,000 in the sales ring which meant that you weren't doing well at a $200,000 fee....so we dropped it as we wanted to deliver value back to the customer that breeds to sell.

Perhaps this is a naive question - but does a $150,000 fee offer "value" if a decent filly will bring $250,000?

[brogers]

I am, however, critical of the price structure.

To which Mr Brogers replied:

We recognised that this year which is why we dropped the fees on all bar one stallion.

We also looked at our breed to race customers. They have been complaining that prizemoney levels (returns) have gone the opposite direction from costs of training a horse and that the cost of production was starting to weigh in on their decisions. We dropped the fees because of this also.

But when FOS asked about Forestry's pricing for 2008 only a short time ago:

So in answer to your question, it will depend what everyone else does. If Smart Strike, Mr Greeley and Street Cry stand for $100,000 then Forestry looks overpriced, but if these all stand for $150,000+ then maybe not as the competition in the price range will serve limited books or be in difficult years to breed to.

Let's wait and see.

Wasn't Taylor Made's pricing of stallions for 2008 really a reactive response to what other farms were setting prices at as opposed to a proactive act to customer feedback? Many high profile breeding farms set prices before Taylor Made announced fees for 2008 (as you stated in the reply to FOS, "Let's wait and see"). That doesn't exactly ring chimes that internal influences had a lot to do with TM's 2008 pricing.

Rok

I would agree with you there if we had just waited and adjusted Forestry alone, but we dropped all bar one stallion. We did a wholesale adjustment down while just about everyone else went up. We had made a decision to decrease fees after the September Sales but waited until November because we felt that by announcing a decrease in service fee earlier might have a negative impact on the sales of weanlings and mares in foal. We were trying to do the right thing for breeders who had invested in our stallions and felt that this was the best approach. I think if we had announced it earlier we would have had a lot of upset breeders who were selling atthe November Sales.

Now we are in the hole on Unbridled's Song as we have literally 200+ applications to go to the stallion and we just dont want to serve any more than 120 with him.

I recall you writing that when Unbridled's Song was booked to his largest book not too long ago (150 mares or so), he was having difficulty servicing that many. So, isn't the reduction of his book due to his current physical limitations and not anything else? If Unbridled's Song were a spry, energetic 9 or 10 year old stallion, wouldn't his book be at the 150 (or so) level that it was raised to not too long ago?

Does that constitute greed?

Indeed, his current reduction in book size doesn't. But what did it constitute when Taylor Made tried to have him serve as many as 150 a year not too long ago at $200,000 when his difficulties became clear?

What we saw is that if you bred a decent Unbridled's Song filly you might get $250,000 in the sales ring which meant that you weren't doing well at a $200,000 fee....so we dropped it as we wanted to deliver value back to the customer that breeds to sell.

Perhaps this is a naive question - but does a $150,000 fee offer "value" if a decent filly will bring $250,000?

You are off base here Rok.

Two years ago we stood UBS at $150,000 and he served 144 mares and got 90% in foal but he didn't handle it well at all. We took him up to $200,000 last year and he served 108 and got 100 in foal and was a much happier horse to be around. You might like to see a stallion flogged to death in the breeding shed and serve 150+ mares but we don't.

We brought him back to $150,000 this year and we are going to be upsetting some breeders who want to use the horse as we dont want to serve more than 120.

[Rokeby Forever]

Two years ago we stood UBS at $150,000 and he served 144 mares and got 90% in foal but he didn't handle it well at all. We took him up to $200,000 last year and he served 108 and got 100 in foal

Fair enough...I stand corrected on the year he was elevated to $200,000.

We had made a decision to decrease fees after the September Sales but waited until November because we felt that by announcing a decrease in service fee earlier might have a negative impact on the sales of weanlings and mares in foal. We were trying to do the right thing for breeders who had invested in our stallions and felt that this was the best approach. I think if we had announced it earlier we would have had a lot of upset breeders who were selling atthe November Sales.

Is that to say that all the major farms that announced early don't care about their clients? And, here's a thought to ponder:

What about the buyers of bloodstock by/in foal to a Taylor Made stallion? Are the yearling and broodmare sales now caveat emptor because Taylor Made could decrease prices right after the sales? It seems to me that this year was a buyer's market (or, moreso than it has been lately)...does the practice of late fee announcement help shape confidence in buyers, knowing their purchases might devalue right after a sale?

[winds]

Roke has a point. If I bought a weanling several thousands of dollars over the stud fee and a few days after the sale the stud fee was reduced I'd feel like I just bought a car and drove it off the lot.

How if I want to pinhook the weanling am I going to recoup my money the following year? At that point my yearling will be worth what I paid for it as a weanling.

If I knew earlier that the stud fee was dropped I certainly wouldn't pay a higher price for it then the higher stud fee. There probably would be alot of RNA's or outs, but for the buyer it would be better.

I definitely would feel for the original breeder, but that's the chance you take when you breed to sell. I know, I'm doing that right now.

winds

[bdw0617]

Roke has a point. If I bought a weanling several thousands of dollars over the stud fee and a few days after the sale the stud fee was reduced I'd feel like I just bought a car and drove it off the lot.

How if I want to pinhook the weanling am I going to recoup my money the following year? At that point my yearling will be worth what I paid for it as a weanling.

If I knew earlier that the stud fee was dropped I certainly wouldn't pay a higher price for it then the higher stud fee. There probably would be alot of RNA's or outs, but for the buyer it would be better.

I definitely would feel for the original breeder, but that's the chance you take when you breed to sell. I know, I'm doing that right now.

winds

I agree 100% imagine the feeling right now if you are a breeder and you are looking at a Storm Cat Weanling in your barn right now... not a very good feeling I would say. you just took a 200k bath and will be lucky to break even.

[Tesio]

AP Indy has at least 50 more stakes winners than Unbridled's Song with only about 30 more starters. AP has an AEI of 3.22 with CI of 3.85. These numbers are cumulative. He lessens his mares by 16%, the best cumulative CI of stallions standing today.

Kingmambo, who appeals to a very different market, has around 15 more stakes winners than UnSong with about 45 fewer starters. Kingmambo has an AEI of 2.54 with CI of 3.03. Another who lessens mares by 16%.

That these two stallions do NOT drag their mares down by more than 25% as UnSong does.

Unbridled's Song cannot realistically be compared with AP Indy, different league and, justly, different price level.

At a fee of $150k we can compare him with Smart Strike, Awesome Again, Street Cry (limited sample size) and Mr Greeley. I would personally compare UnSong with Mr Greeley because their performance statistics are very similar. Both of these stallions are riding the coattails of sale prices. They are overhyped stallions whose babies look good in the ring but underperform on the track. AGAIN, over 50% of UnSong's progeny fail to earn over $30K on the track.

The other three stallions mentioned IMPROVE their mares dramatically. Their progeny may not sell as well, but they perform much better while coming from considerably lesser mares.

I cannot blame TM for standing UnSong for what they do; or, for that matter, Gainesway for standing Mr Greeley for $125K. Because the suckers are the buyers falling for this hype. I've seen many yearlings from these two stallions and they are very nicely put together. The question is: if the buyers start to realize they aren't getting anywhere near what they are paying for, will they stop purchasing them?

If I remember correctly, I don't think the two largest buyers purchased any UnSong babies this past September. They are certainly smarter than I, maybe they figured all this out before I did! Could this have played into the service fee reduction?

brogers: quite franly, Forestry is THE most overpriced stallion standing today. I noticed there was no response to my comments or statistics regarding him. How could his price be based on simple economics? Supply and demand. $100K service fee for a stallion with 3 Graded winners in 2007. Again, AEI of 1.87 (cumulative) with a CI of 3.05. That is a nice book of mares he's ruining! What stallion standing for $100K compares to Forestry?

Forestry gets the same type of runner as Yes It's True. The difference is Yes It's True stands for $35K and is MUCH more successful as a race horse stallion. It's not even close. Yes It's True has 5 Graded winners, and at least 12 stakes winners in 2007. His AEI is 1.74 with a CI of 1.56. $65K LESS FEE for a better stallion. What could this horse do if he got Forestry's book? With all due respect, Forestry's fee is laughable. In 2007 Forsetry's median yearling price was $140K. There is nothing to like here.

There are many farms setting service fees based on sales prices. Why can't they see the forest thru the trees? Realize if the stallion's progeny is relatively underperforming, set the fees accordingly and pass some profitability over to the breeder. Hypothetically (in no way do I know), if the farm openly told the breeders that the 'big players' won't be bidding on a specific stallion's progeny because he's underperfoming, do you think his book would fill with a fee of $100K or more? Look what happened to Storm Cat this year. I know for a fact that certain buyers didn't even want to look at his babies.

I respect all the stallion farm's managers because it is very difficult keeping all parties involved happy. There are, however, bound to be incorrectly valued stallions. TM is in no way alone in my mind, but Forestry is the MOST obvious example.

[winds]

Amen!

This all started when stallions were syndicated over 40 shares. When people started paying big money for yearlings the syndicate members started complaining. They wanted to know why the breeders were able to capitilize on their stallions, forget that they were taking a chance breeding to the stallion plus had to keep the mare for 2 years and the foal for 3 years before they were able to sell the yearling. Meanwhile the syndicate was still commanding a stud fee for the stallion to all the other mares he serviced. All of a sudden to quiet the syndicate members stud fees started getting astronomical. Then in order to make a profit the reserves started to get astronomical and the prices followed.

I don't think a stallion should be able to command a huge stud fee until he's proven as a racehorse producer.

winds

[Indychase]

Roke has a point. If I bought a weanling several thousands of dollars over the stud fee and a few days after the sale the stud fee was reduced I'd feel like I just bought a car and drove it off the lot.

How if I want to pinhook the weanling am I going to recoup my money the following year? At that point my yearling will be worth what I paid for it as a weanling.

If I knew earlier that the stud fee was dropped I certainly wouldn't pay a higher price for it then the higher stud fee. There probably would be alot of RNA's or outs, but for the buyer it would be better.

I definitely would feel for the original breeder, but that's the chance you take when you breed to sell. I know, I'm doing that right now.

winds

That can be true of anything though. What if you bought a house in '06 -- your house immediately dropped in value (at least here in California). It's market conditions at work. Don't blame the stallion managers for changing their pricing to adapt to market conditions.

[Rokeby Forever]

Don't blame the stallion managers for changing their pricing to adapt to market conditions.

Fine Indy....but we're talking a matter of days, Indy....not a year or more.

[bdw0617]

AP Indy has at least 50 more stakes winners than Unbridled's Song with only about 30 more starters. AP has an AEI of 3.22 with CI of 3.85. These numbers are cumulative. He lessens his mares by 16%, the best cumulative CI of stallions standing today.

Kingmambo, who appeals to a very different market, has around 15 more stakes winners than UnSong with about 45 fewer starters. Kingmambo has an AEI of 2.54 with CI of 3.03. Another who lessens mares by 16%.

That these two stallions do NOT drag their mares down by more than 25% as UnSong does.

Unbridled's Song cannot realistically be compared with AP Indy, different league and, justly, different price level.

At a fee of $150k we can compare him with Smart Strike, Awesome Again, Street Cry (limited sample size) and Mr Greeley. I would personally compare UnSong with Mr Greeley because their performance statistics are very similar. Both of these stallions are riding the coattails of sale prices. They are overhyped stallions whose babies look good in the ring but underperform on the track. AGAIN, over 50% of UnSong's progeny fail to earn over $30K on the track.

The other three stallions mentioned IMPROVE their mares dramatically. Their progeny may not sell as well, but they perform much better while coming from considerably lesser mares.

I cannot blame TM for standing UnSong for what they do; or, for that matter, Gainesway for standing Mr Greeley for $125K. Because the suckers are the buyers falling for this hype. I've seen many yearlings from these two stallions and they are very nicely put together. The question is: if the buyers start to realize they aren't getting anywhere near what they are paying for, will they stop purchasing them?

If I remember correctly, I don't think the two largest buyers purchased any UnSong babies this past September. They are certainly smarter than I, maybe they figured all this out before I did! Could this have played into the service fee reduction?

brogers: quite franly, Forestry is THE most overpriced stallion standing today. I noticed there was no response to my comments or statistics regarding him. How could his price be based on simple economics? Supply and demand. $100K service fee for a stallion with 3 Graded winners in 2007. Again, AEI of 1.87 (cumulative) with a CI of 3.05. That is a nice book of mares he's ruining! What stallion standing for $100K compares to Forestry?

Forestry gets the same type of runner as Yes It's True. The difference is Yes It's True stands for $35K and is MUCH more successful as a race horse stallion. It's not even close. Yes It's True has 5 Graded winners, and at least 12 stakes winners in 2007. His AEI is 1.74 with a CI of 1.56. $65K LESS FEE for a better stallion. What could this horse do if he got Forestry's book? With all due respect, Forestry's fee is laughable. In 2007 Forsetry's median yearling price was $140K. There is nothing to like here.

There are many farms setting service fees based on sales prices. Why can't they see the forest thru the trees? Realize if the stallion's progeny is relatively underperforming, set the fees accordingly and pass some profitability over to the breeder. Hypothetically (in no way do I know), if the farm openly told the breeders that the 'big players' won't be bidding on a specific stallion's progeny because he's underperfoming, do you think his book would fill with a fee of $100K or more? Look what happened to Storm Cat this year. I know for a fact that certain buyers didn't even want to look at his babies.

I respect all the stallion farm's managers because it is very difficult keeping all parties involved happy. There are, however, bound to be incorrectly valued stallions. TM is in no way alone in my mind, but Forestry is the MOST obvious example.

preach it!!!

Forestry is the perfect example of manufactuering a good stallion. come hell or high water, Taylor made was going to make forestry a top tier stallion. that IS a hell of a book he is getting.

For some reason I thought forestry was around 60k last year and I thought that was 30k too high. I almost choked when i saw his fee

[brogers]

AP Indy has at least 50 more stakes winners than Unbridled's Song with only about 30 more starters. AP has an AEI of 3.22 with CI of 3.85. These numbers are cumulative. He lessens his mares by 16%, the best cumulative CI of stallions standing today.

Kingmambo, who appeals to a very different market, has around 15 more stakes winners than UnSong with about 45 fewer starters. Kingmambo has an AEI of 2.54 with CI of 3.03. Another who lessens mares by 16%.

Both these stallions retired to stud for more than Unbridled's Song did and both have served better books more consistently than UBS. The good books of mares that UBS recieved,and the ones that have weighed heavily on the CI production he generates, are now just three year olds and younger. I think that you will see that gap close as these better crops get to the track.

I notice you didn't refute my statement that AP Indy and Kingmambo get stock just as brittle as Unbridled's Song...care to have a shot at refuting that one?

At a fee of $150k we can compare him with Smart Strike, Awesome Again, Street Cry (limited sample size) and Mr Greeley. I would personally compare UnSong with Mr Greeley because their performance statistics are very similar. Both of these stallions are riding the coattails of sale prices. They are overhyped stallions whose babies look good in the ring but underperform on the track. AGAIN, over 50% of UnSong's progeny fail to earn over $30K on the track.

The other three stallions mentioned IMPROVE their mares dramatically. Their progeny may not sell as well, but they perform much better while coming from considerably lesser mares.

Not selling well is the understatement of the year. If you are breeding to sell can you invest in Awesome Again at that level with a lifetime yearling average of $153,295?

As for them underperforming I am not sure how a stallion that has 11 stakes winners this year and had 10 last year can be called an underperformer. You tried to state this by looking at median earnings and you are right in your statement regarding median earnings as UBS's median earnings is currently $28,261. But then you like Awesome Again as a sire and his median earnings is LESS THAN Unbridled's Song at $28,191 and Smart Strike is just $36,366. Where are you headed with this point?

I cannot blame TM for standing UnSong for what they do; or, for that matter, Gainesway for standing Mr Greeley for $125K.

A couple of posts ago you said we were greedy. Now you can't blame us....so what is it....are we blamelessly greedy or blamed with greed? Make up your mind here....

If I remember correctly, I don't think the two largest buyers purchased any UnSong babies this past September. They are certainly smarter than I, maybe they figured all this out before I did! Could this have played into the service fee reduction?

Clearly I was right when I said you were a moron....

Demi O'Byrne representing Coolmore bought the HIGHEST PRICED horse at September and it was by UNBRIDLED'S SONG at $3.6m. He also bought one for $2.6m. John Ferguson representing Darley purchased a colt at the Saratoga Sale by Unbridled's Song for $1,050,000. The horse has had his best year yet in the sales ring and on the racetrack and yet we dropped his fee.

You are right when you said that the two biggest buyers are smarter than you. Maybe you should have quit at that statement.

brogers: quite franly, Forestry is THE most overpriced stallion standing today. I noticed there was no response to my comments or statistics regarding him. How could his price be based on simple economics? Supply and demand. $100K service fee for a stallion with 3 Graded winners in 2007. Again, AEI of 1.87 (cumulative) with a CI of 3.05. That is a nice book of mares he's ruining! What stallion standing for $100K compares to Forestry?

After your statement about the buyers of Unbridled's Song above I am not sure if you are for real or if you are a friend of mine that is giving me a wind up (if you are then you are doing a great job). We felt that Forestry deserved to stand for a little bit more than Elusive Quality and Gone West.

Forestry gets the same type of runner as Yes It's True. The difference is Yes It's True stands for $35K and is MUCH more successful as a race horse stallion. It's not even close. Yes It's True has 5 Graded winners, and at least 12 stakes winners in 2007. His AEI is 1.74 with a CI of 1.56. $65K LESS FEE for a better stallion. What could this horse do if he got Forestry's book? With all due respect, Forestry's fee is laughable. In 2007 Forsetry's median yearling price was $140K. There is nothing to like here.

Yes It's True is a great stud. He looks like great value to me at his fee but I would respectfully put the top 4 Forestry's in Discreet Cat, Smokey Glacken, Diplomat Lady and Forest Danger against the likes of Pruod Accolade, Actin Good, BB Best and whomever else so I dont think that the comparison flies. We would like to think that he is a little bit better than the comparables of Elusive Quality, Gone West, Pulpit and Giant's Causeway.