Just going through some data on the stallionregister.com site, and it again occurs to me just how tough the game is. Example: Looking at the top 5 first year stallions:
TAPIT, LION HEART, CANDY RIDE, MEDAGLIA D'ORO, SPEIGHTSTOWN
If you bought a TAPIT, who's yearlings averaged $50,677, out of 53 runners... a total of 6 horses thus far have earned over the average price.
If you bought a LION HEART, who's yearlings averaged $78,811, out of 80 runners... a total of 4 horses thus far have earned over the average price.
If you bought a CANDY RIDE, who's yearlings averaged $38,413, out of 42 runners... a total of 9 horses thus far have earned over the average price.
If you bought a MEDAGLIA D'ORO, who's yearlings averaged $125,600, out of 55 runners... a total of 3 horses thus far have earned over the average price.
If you bought a SPEIGHTSTOWN, who's yearlings averaged $165,436, out of 40 runners... a total of 1 horse thus far have earned over the average price.
That's only the runners in the crop. And that's only this year... they will continue to accumulate winnings (and expenses) as time goes on. Ouch.
The toughest game
Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn
Ouch indeed. But it's a good illustration of the upside down model in breeding TBs. Everyone wants the offspring of the new stallions--so their sales prices are inflated, often beyond the realm of common sense.
If you want to see something really depressing, try making the same list but with 1st crop stallions who had hefty stud fees but didn't make the Top Five.
If you want to see something really depressing, try making the same list but with 1st crop stallions who had hefty stud fees but didn't make the Top Five.
I dont see how you can even look at those numbers when their initial 2 year olds are only a few months into their racing careers. Check out the numbers on this first crop at the end of their 4 year old year, you might have a better idea of their value. I dont think anyone bought yearlings from these first year horses thinking they would have their money back by December of their 2 year old year.
Like I said, they will continue to earn, and cost. It is of course too early to judge any crop. I am talking about the game, not the stallions ability/potential. I found it interesting that so few earn back purchase price year one. I am sure many more do, year two. Although, looking at the average earnings per runner for an established stallion isn't a rosy picture either. A simple reflection on how difficult the game really is, is all.
It only illustrates the dichotomy - and the Wide Divide, between two separate, distinct industries - Breed to Sell, and Breed to Race. To further complicate matters, sometimes you can't even give a broodmare away. Perhaps it's another symptom of our "instant" society - Need Racehorse Now, Go Buy Yearling. Don't bother with all the trouble of getting a mare, selecting a suitable mating, breed, raise, etc.
But I sometimes think that those medians and averages are manipulated. Sometimes, I believe, the stallion's connections might be playing a shell game to manipulate just ONE buyer into paying an exorbitant price for one offspring. This inflates all the numbers. These are statistics I do not trust, because I do not have faith that the underlying data are actually ALL true.
But I sometimes think that those medians and averages are manipulated. Sometimes, I believe, the stallion's connections might be playing a shell game to manipulate just ONE buyer into paying an exorbitant price for one offspring. This inflates all the numbers. These are statistics I do not trust, because I do not have faith that the underlying data are actually ALL true.
So Run for the Roses, as fast as you can.....
LB wrote:Ouch indeed. But it's a good illustration of the upside down model in breeding TBs. Everyone wants the offspring of the new stallions--so their sales prices are inflated, often beyond the realm of common sense.
If you want to see something really depressing, try making the same list but with 1st crop stallions who had hefty stud fees but didn't make the Top Five.
Yeah, I'd love to see the numbers for Smarty Jones.
-
st. louis kid
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 8:56 pm
The main moral of the story is: only a sucker would buy a yearling from an uproven first year sire. It is like a real estate investor saying I am not going to buy this property in Beverly Hills, I am going to spend more and buy property in the desert, because it might wind up being pretty good someday.
People in racing that are succesful stick to the following business plan for the most part. Breed to proven stallions that can produce runners or buy offspring from such. Avoid unplaced broodmares. Pedigree can help but is not the only factor by a longshot. Do your homework on confirmation and vetting. Get proven trainers and people to break your horses, but have a sharp pencil, most expensive does not mean the best. Look for value at the sales, don't get in bidding wars.
People in racing that are succesful stick to the following business plan for the most part. Breed to proven stallions that can produce runners or buy offspring from such. Avoid unplaced broodmares. Pedigree can help but is not the only factor by a longshot. Do your homework on confirmation and vetting. Get proven trainers and people to break your horses, but have a sharp pencil, most expensive does not mean the best. Look for value at the sales, don't get in bidding wars.
st. louis kid wrote:The main moral of the story is: only a sucker would buy a yearling from an uproven first year sire.
I would say only a dreamer would buy a yearling by a first year stallion. To call someone a sucker implies that they're being taken, that they don't understand the risks of an enterprise they're involved in. I think most TB yearling buyers are very well informed, and their decisions about which stallions to support are carefully considered. But they also love gambling on the thrill of the unknown.
We bred, kept, and raced a first year Street Cry. It was a great mating for the mare and we thought the stallion had a lot of potential. Does that make me a sucker--I didn't buy the filly, but I did pay the stud fee--or someone who got to the horse while he was still affordable? We'll be doing the same thing with another first year sire this year.
-
st. louis kid
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 8:56 pm
Ok LB, maybe I should say a gambler, not a sucker. I think I meant it in terms of treating racing as a profit center, dreams are of course big in this game. The allure of a first year sire is they have never produced a bad racehorse, dreams seem to come easier sometimes this way. You are to be commended for your choice of Street Cry, it was a good business decision. Truth is though that 9 out of 10 new sires fail, that is a gamble I can not accept, especially when on the flip side I can find proven sires that offer much more value. I saw a season to Gulch for sale for $12,500 a few weeks ago, that is a much better deal to me than any of this years first year stallions.
The whole buisiness is about dreams, and buyers aswell as breeders are paying lots of money to fullfill their dreams.
For 30 yrs ago I was in warmblood breeding and also in that buisiness model there were people involved in studs,paying damn lot of money for two or three individuals from the offspring of their studs, putting the results wide in ad,s.
Leaving out their involment in the by spoken studs off course.
And everyone knows that the road for thought off international showjumpers s a verylong road to go, and much much longer than tb,s
For 30 yrs ago I was in warmblood breeding and also in that buisiness model there were people involved in studs,paying damn lot of money for two or three individuals from the offspring of their studs, putting the results wide in ad,s.
Leaving out their involment in the by spoken studs off course.
And everyone knows that the road for thought off international showjumpers s a verylong road to go, and much much longer than tb,s