Avantage Syndicate & Veitch Share??

[SMD is rife 211]

I'm going to ask my former boss for 10% of the sale proceeds from his business he sold recently. I helped improve his asset by doing my job diligently for the last 10 years.

[Insider 3,947]

11 minutes ago, SMD is rife said:

I'm going to ask my former boss for 10% of the sale proceeds from his business he sold recently. I helped improve his asset by doing my job diligently for the last 10 years.

I don’t believe that the 10% is for improving the value of the asset, generally speaking. 

I believe that it’s in leu of the 10% that they won’t get from future from stake money because the horse has been moved on when it did have the ability to provide that income.

 

[Double R 260]

35 minutes ago, Insider said:

I don’t believe that the 10% is for improving the value of the asset, generally speaking. 

I believe that it’s in leu of the 10% that they won’t get from future from stake money because the horse has been moved on when it did have the ability to provide that income.

 

Hi Insider,

I think most owners are guided by their trainer, and if they advise to sell, we do as they say.  Also, I have been involved with a horse that went straight from the stable to the broodmare paddock, and the 10% was claimed.

Cheers.

Robert.

[SMD is rife 211]

50 minutes ago, Insider said:

I don’t believe that the 10% is for improving the value of the asset, generally speaking. 

I believe that it’s in leu of the 10% that they won’t get from future from stake money because the horse has been moved on when it did have the ability to provide that income.

 

Exactly. And now I'm  without a job so I've lost my income because of the sale of the busines so even more reason why I should be entitled to 10%!

[Guest 2Admin2]

It gets worse if the trainer is the agent and has an ownership share.  Isnt that how some of these big syndicates work?

[chelseacol 2,488]

49 minutes ago, Insider said:

I don’t believe that the 10% is for improving the value of the asset, generally speaking. 

I believe that it’s in leu of the 10% that they won’t get from future from stake money because the horse has been moved on when it did have the ability to provide that income.

 

If you assume this 10% commission has any logical basis at all (which is a leap for me) I think the first reason is much more valid than the second one !

If I change from Countdown to New World should Countdown charge me a one off fee for lost future revenue ?

[chevy86 2,704]

7 minutes ago, 2Admin2 said:

It gets worse if the trainer is the agent and has an ownership share.  Isnt that how some of these big syndicates work?

Must you keep reminding us about that mongrel David Phillips and National Bloodstock!

[Guest 2Admin2]

One difference is most horses are sold early and up until the sale the owner has funded everything and carried all the risk.  They are running a substantial loss at that stage.  They've been paying the trainer who then walks away with a risk free 10%.  BTW I don't have a problem if it is written into the contract at the start.

[SMD is rife 211]

9 minutes ago, chelseacol said:

If you assume this 10% commission has any logical basis at all (which is a leap for me) I think the first reason is much more valid than the second one !

If I change from Countdown to New World should Countdown charge me a one off fee for lost future revenue ?

Trolley boys get paid more at New World I hear

[chelseacol 2,488]

1 minute ago, SMD is rife said:

Trolley boys get paid more at New World I hear

Ah - you have good information to help make your next career move after the boss sold the business 

[Insider 3,947]

4 hours ago, SMD is rife said:

Exactly. And now I'm  without a job so I've lost my income because of the sale of the busines so even more reason why I should be entitled to 10%!

Totally agree. 

[Guest 2Admin2]

7 minutes ago, Insider said:

Totally agree. 

Yep that's a socialist way of thinking.  Keep sucking on that chardonnay.

[chevy86 2,704]

Patrick Hogan giving 10% of his Sales take to his staff? After all, they "polished the product", just like a trainer.

[Leggy 4,076]

30 minutes ago, chevy86 said:

Patrick Hogan giving 10% of his Sales take to his staff? After all, they "polished the product", just like a trainer.

When I was consigning yearlings to sales, we certainly gave a percentage of our 10% commission to staff and also a percentage of our own as well as client yearlings. It's called an incentive, because as you say, they "polish the product".

[Double R 260]

Does anyone know what happens, if some racing partners wish to sell/ give their shares to others to continue to race the horse, and then the new group decides to change to another trainer? Apart from being disappointed, would the trainer be entitled to the 10% of the amount paid by the other owners? Just curious.

[chevy86 2,704]

23 minutes ago, Leggy said:

, we certainly gave a percentage of our 10% commission to staff 

That's a bit different from 10% of the Sale price. It's more like the owner giving stable staff a bit on top of the trainer getting 10% when a horse wins.

[Leggy 4,076]

10 minutes ago, chevy86 said:

That's a bit different from 10% of the Sale price. It's more like the owner giving stable staff a bit on top of the trainer getting 10%.

10% of the sale price was the entire income on client horses. On our own they got 10% of the gross profit. Similar to P4P's arrangement as above with his trainers.

[Portfolio 728]

Some tight arses commenting here. I have no problem with the 10%, if anyone has issues with it, maybe keep your money in the bank.

[Guest 2Admin2]

56 minutes ago, Portfolio said:

Some tight arses commenting here. I have no problem with the 10%, if anyone has issues with it, maybe keep your money in the bank.

I don't have an issue with it if it is explicit in the training contract.  More often than not it isn't.  The owner puts all their money at risk and pays the training fees.  Which presumably the trainer is making a profit on.  Why should the owner gift 10%?

[scooby3051 10,869]

1 hour ago, Portfolio said:

Some tight arses commenting here. I have no problem with the 10%, if anyone has issues with it, maybe keep your money in the bank.

I have no problem with it whether the guy makes money out of training fees or not...he has put a ton of time and effort into increasing the value of my asset so i am only to happy to reward him as the next time we go round again he will be even more keen for the venture to work...JMO

[Guest 2Admin2]

1 minute ago, scooby3051 said:

I have no problem with it whether the guy makes money out of training fees or not...he has put a ton of time and effort into increasing the value of my asset so i am only to happy to reward him as the next time we go round again he will be even more keen for the venture to work...JMO

Really?  Your horse is one of many and they are running a business.  I guess that's why you haven't had much success.

[We're Doomed 4,855]

11 minutes ago, 2Admin2 said:

I don't have an issue with it if it is explicit in the training contract.  More often than not it isn't.  The owner puts all their money at risk and pays the training fees.  Which presumably the trainer is making a profit on.  Why should the owner gift 10%?

The trainer is doing more for the owner than just winning a race or two, he is increasing the horse's value. What if an owner trainer has a horse and it does nothing so he decides to give it to a proper trainer and the horse quickly comes out and very impressively wins a couple of $10,000 races and suddenly a $250,000 offer comes in. Under your scenario the  trainer gets $1,200 in percentages from the two wins and a month or two of training fees, whereas the owner has just earned $250,000 all through the trainer's efforts. It would seem a bit unfair not to reward him somehow. Its almost an intellectual property situation.

[We're Doomed 4,855]

12 minutes ago, 2Admin2 said:

Really?  Your horse is one of many and they are running a business.  I guess that's why you haven't had much success.

You are getting very anti these days Deputy. Sounds like you keep getting out of bed on the wrong side.

[Leggy 4,076]

13 minutes ago, hesi said:

Don't laugh, but should not NZTR have guidelines on horse ownership, the different types(leasing, syndication etc), costs and associated costs.

They are well underway Hesi. From today's stakeholders' report:

Bell Gully have acted upon drafting notes and are nearing completion of proposed amendments to the Rules of Racing
which aim to provide:
1. an effective compliance and enforcement framework for thoroughbred welfare issues; and
2. to progress the implementation of reforms along the lines of the Trainer and Owner reforms which recently came
into force into Australia, the salient features of which are:
• The establishment of standard-form joint ownership, lease and training agreements which are deemed to
apply unless the participants agree otherwise;
• Clarifying the role and responsibility of the managing owner of a jointly-owned horse;
• Establishing a formal mechanism for issuing, paying and disputing training fees; and
• Creating a mechanism for the enforcement of training fees and the resolution of disputes.
The timing of implementation will be dependent not only upon broad consultation of some fairly lengthy Rule
amendments, but also upon NZTR ensuring that the supporting documentation and IT systems and processes are in
place to ensure that compliance is not onerous.

[Guest 2Admin2]

8 minutes ago, Leggy said:

They are well underway Hesi. From today's stakeholders' report:

Bell Gully have acted upon drafting notes and are nearing completion of proposed amendments to the Rules of Racing
which aim to provide:
1. an effective compliance and enforcement framework for thoroughbred welfare issues; and
2. to progress the implementation of reforms along the lines of the Trainer and Owner reforms which recently came
into force into Australia, the salient features of which are:
• The establishment of standard-form joint ownership, lease and training agreements which are deemed to
apply unless the participants agree otherwise;
• Clarifying the role and responsibility of the managing owner of a jointly-owned horse;
• Establishing a formal mechanism for issuing, paying and disputing training fees; and
• Creating a mechanism for the enforcement of training fees and the resolution of disputes.
The timing of implementation will be dependent not only upon broad consultation of some fairly lengthy Rule
amendments, but also upon NZTR ensuring that the supporting documentation and IT systems and processes are in
place to ensure that compliance is not onerous.

About time.