I have always wondered what the deal is with private fees. Usually, big name stallions stand for private fees, it seems like, but what is the purpose of listing a fee as private versus just stating the monetary stud fee?
And, since he just had his first winner, it made me think why does Saarland stand for a private fee?
Saarland - private fee
Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn
-
kimberley mine
- Breeder's Cup Contender
- Posts: 1811
- Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 8:43 pm
Usually stallions who are standing for private treaty fees are either the very most elite or there is some reason their connections want to manage their book very, very closely. Kingmambo, Indian Charlie, Broad Brush, and Cozzene all stood for private treaty fees at one point in the last five years. For Kingmambo and Indian Charlie, it was related to physical health problems that kept them from covering large books of mares. I'm not sure why Broad Brush was private treaty. Cozzene stood this season for private treaty because he is old and the farm wanted to be careful with his book.
Saarland has big-time fertility issues. The farm, according to an email it sent out to mare owners (which is copied onto this site somewhere, if you do a search you should find it) claims to have resolved them, but that would necessitate a different contract than your brown-bread LFSN.
Saarland has big-time fertility issues. The farm, according to an email it sent out to mare owners (which is copied onto this site somewhere, if you do a search you should find it) claims to have resolved them, but that would necessitate a different contract than your brown-bread LFSN.
-
KamiBrooks
- Starters Handicap
- Posts: 575
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 12:00 am
I don't have an elite stallion in the least, but his is always 'private fee' if he is ever listed anywhere. That's because if you want to breed a dog (read should have been a saddle horse) to him, then you're going to have to buy me a new barn to do it because there are already too many saddle horses out there.
But, to a good race mare with a good pedigree (that works for him) he'd be a free date.
But, to a good race mare with a good pedigree (that works for him) he'd be a free date.
kimberley mine wrote:Usually stallions who are standing for private treaty fees are either the very most elite or there is some reason their connections want to manage their book very, very closely. Kingmambo, Indian Charlie, Broad Brush, and Cozzene all stood for private treaty fees at one point in the last five years. For Kingmambo and Indian Charlie, it was related to physical health problems that kept them from covering large books of mares. I'm not sure why Broad Brush was private treaty. Cozzene stood this season for private treaty because he is old and the farm wanted to be careful with his book.
Saarland has big-time fertility issues. The farm, according to an email it sent out to mare owners (which is copied onto this site somewhere, if you do a search you should find it) claims to have resolved them, but that would necessitate a different contract than your brown-bread LFSN.
Ok, thanks... this all makes sense!
Then can you tell me why Giant's Causeway stood for a private fee a season or two ago? I am really curious!
-
kimberley mine
- Breeder's Cup Contender
- Posts: 1811
- Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 8:43 pm
Giant's Causeway went private treaty because Coolmore misjudged the market for his services.
Two years before he went private, he stood for $200,000. The year he went private treaty, his fee was raised to $300,000. Another poster on this board, Pete, called that one well in advance, saying that fee was a direct challenge to Kingmambo (again, you can search for it). I agree. He'd had a pretty big year in the northern hemisphere, but in Australia his foals weren't running.
It didn't work. He took a beating at the sales that year, and on the track his foals weren't performing to the standard needed to compete head-to-head with Kingmambo. By "take a beating," his average yearling sales price was a little over $205,000 and median yearling sales price was right about $122,000...on a $200,000 fee. Part of that was awful results at the Down Under sales (for which his fee had been a much more modest AUS $80k or so), but part of that was foals out of good mares who just weren't selling. For example, there was one out of the dam of Harlan's Holiday who didn't even meet 3/4 of the stud fee!
Anyway, Coolmore misjudged the market so badly that there was no way they could keep GC at the $300,000 fee and breed anything more to him than their own mares. Rather than admit just how much they messed up with a $100,000 or more fee drop, he went private in 2007. He's now at $125,000 and probably should be lower.
FYI, if you're analyzing Giant's Causeway's yearling sales for this year, the ones who were conceived on the $300,000 fee, you need to take into account where half of them were sold. Most likely they either had a much lower stud fee or were bought in utero (where stud fee may not make a difference). 7 of 16 offered were sold in South Africa, where you will not find six-US$-figure yearlings on a regular basis, so for the market they seemed to sell quite well. They all seem to be the foals of mares who were bred to GC and exported to South Africa; whether they were bought open, bred to GC on southern hemisphere time, and exported or bred on northern hemisphere time and exported is unclear. The rest of the yearling sales were for aussie and kiwi yearling sales, and the results there reflected what they thought of Giant's Causeway in their market.
To KamiBrooks: I'd say that you fit in the category of managing your stallion's book carefully.
Two years before he went private, he stood for $200,000. The year he went private treaty, his fee was raised to $300,000. Another poster on this board, Pete, called that one well in advance, saying that fee was a direct challenge to Kingmambo (again, you can search for it). I agree. He'd had a pretty big year in the northern hemisphere, but in Australia his foals weren't running.
It didn't work. He took a beating at the sales that year, and on the track his foals weren't performing to the standard needed to compete head-to-head with Kingmambo. By "take a beating," his average yearling sales price was a little over $205,000 and median yearling sales price was right about $122,000...on a $200,000 fee. Part of that was awful results at the Down Under sales (for which his fee had been a much more modest AUS $80k or so), but part of that was foals out of good mares who just weren't selling. For example, there was one out of the dam of Harlan's Holiday who didn't even meet 3/4 of the stud fee!
Anyway, Coolmore misjudged the market so badly that there was no way they could keep GC at the $300,000 fee and breed anything more to him than their own mares. Rather than admit just how much they messed up with a $100,000 or more fee drop, he went private in 2007. He's now at $125,000 and probably should be lower.
FYI, if you're analyzing Giant's Causeway's yearling sales for this year, the ones who were conceived on the $300,000 fee, you need to take into account where half of them were sold. Most likely they either had a much lower stud fee or were bought in utero (where stud fee may not make a difference). 7 of 16 offered were sold in South Africa, where you will not find six-US$-figure yearlings on a regular basis, so for the market they seemed to sell quite well. They all seem to be the foals of mares who were bred to GC and exported to South Africa; whether they were bought open, bred to GC on southern hemisphere time, and exported or bred on northern hemisphere time and exported is unclear. The rest of the yearling sales were for aussie and kiwi yearling sales, and the results there reflected what they thought of Giant's Causeway in their market.
To KamiBrooks: I'd say that you fit in the category of managing your stallion's book carefully.