Catalogue Mistakes

Talk about upcoming sales or auction results.

Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, madelyn

User avatar
Gallop58
Maiden Special Weight
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:37 am
Location: Ontario

Catalogue Mistakes

Postby Gallop58 » Thu Nov 09, 2006 1:54 pm

A mare I have entered in a mixed sale shows a dead foal in 2005 in the catalogue, where in fact she was not bred. I approved the proof from my consignor that said "2005-not bred", and was surprised to see the catalogue mistake. The problem is that I am expecting to get stud fee or less for her as it is, and now I think this minor "typo" will keep some of the already expected few buyers from taking a look at her.

Clearly they will announce it at sale time and the consignor will advise of the correction when people ask.
Is there any sort of "industry norm" for dealing with this? Say allowing withdrawls with no penalties, or reducing the sales fees (if the mistake is with the sales office) or reducing the consignor fees, if it's their fault. etc.
Or are they just going to tell me, tough luck, don't worry it's minor and shouldn't affect her value. (Which I would agree with if she were "valuable", but she has a less than stellar produce record in most eyes already...)

Hoping for a little advice before calling up my consignor...

Gallop58

casallc
Restricted Stakes Winner
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 2:43 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Postby casallc » Sun Nov 12, 2006 1:04 pm

"Dead foal" and "Not bred" both carry about the same weight with me. I don't see a big deal. You most likely are not going to get anything other than an announcement. Read your consignment form it will have the conditions. That is what is binding.

User avatar
freshman
Allowance Winner
Posts: 466
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 6:55 pm
Location: NORTH CAROLINA

Postby freshman » Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:26 pm

The inaccuracy is surely concerning but for what it is worth, I'm not sure that 'dead foal' is necessarily worse at all than 'not bred."

My first assumption at 'dead foal' is just that, that the foal died due to some typical illness that has nothing to do with the mare at all. "Not bred' sometimes makes me wonder why not, was she not considered worth it, etc...

Just sharing my reactions, obviously you probably want to have it announced as a correction, at least, and corrected online in the catalougue if possible for the sake of accuracy and disclosure. Best of luck!

User avatar
madelyn
Moderator
Posts: 10067
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 1:53 pm
Location: Louisville, KY

Postby madelyn » Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:03 am

I was at Keeneland a couple of days ago and there was a perfect example of this very thing. A mare named Touriga (Hip #3433) showed 2006 aborted in the catalog. The auctioneer announced the error in the catalog, worked around explaining not bred in 2005, etc. etc. while the board first flashed, red, "Not Pregnant" and then finally the auctioneer had to make the point that in fact the mare IS pregnant, etc. I think it hurt the mare. Aborted is certainly a worse mistake than dead foal. Dead foal could be anything, and is not the mare's fault. Anyhow, Touriga brought $25K in foal to Stormy Atlantic ($20K stud fee) so after sales prep, etc. (consigned by the $$$ folks at Hill 'n Dale) the seller was probably at evens or upside down. That was at odds with an otherwise pretty flush day and I think the shuffling around and the catalog correction announcement were detrimental.

There was a real shocker near the end of the sale, a fairly ordinary 3 year old colt by Silver Deputy. #3378, Spring at Last, was listed as a racing prospect. He'd just had a recent maiden win at Aqueduct that was shown on the monitor, and brought an astronomical $675,000.

Heading back out there today.. there is nothing quite so mesmerizing, for me, as a horse sale.
So Run for the Roses, as fast as you can.....

User avatar
Toccet02
Leading Sire
Posts: 3649
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 11:00 am
Location: New York City

Postby Toccet02 » Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:36 am

madelyn wrote:
There was a real shocker near the end of the sale, a fairly ordinary 3 year old colt by Silver Deputy. #3378, Spring at Last, was listed as a racing prospect. He'd just had a recent maiden win at Aqueduct that was shown on the monitor, and brought an astronomical $675,000.

Heading back out there today.. there is nothing quite so mesmerizing, for me, as a horse sale.


I saw that race....he caught my eye. Something about him. Interesting he sold so well.
I have a pretty good success record with horses that caught my eye before they got famous....unfortunately I have no idea what it is that I'm responding to. :wink:
All shouting does is make you lose your voice.
----Arrested Development

imnumberjuan
Allowance Winner
Posts: 352
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm

Postby imnumberjuan » Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:10 pm

Toccet ... ah the shoulda woulda couldas... :lol:
Gotta keep on Keepin on - Joe Dirt