Adult Amatures & Brand Ambassadors (or sponsors)?

[LittleFox]

Looks like @Belmont is right.

This is the response I got from the USEF.

In response to your email, the Federation does not recommend that amateurs participate in ambassadorship programs as they often mirror the Federation’s rules on sponsorships. The relevant rules have been copied below.

Chapter 13, GR1306.2
2. Remuneration. Remuneration is defined as compensation or payment in any form such as cash, goods, sponsorships, discounts or services; reimbursement of any expenses; trade or in-kind exchange of goods or services such as board or training.

Chapter 13, GR1306.4d and l
4. Professional based on one’s own activities. Unless expressly permitted above, a person is a professional if after his 18th birthday he does any of the following:
d. Accepts remuneration AND uses his name, photograph or other form of personal association as a horseperson in connection with any advertisement or product/service for sale, including but not limited to apparel, equipment or property.
l. Accepts remuneration for such use AND uses commercial logoed items while on competition grounds unless expressly permitted by applicable division rules

The barn that an amateur rides at can be sponsored, however, the amateurs must be very cognizant of not receiving any of the products or services that come with the barn’s sponsorship. For example, if the barn is sponsored by a feed company, the amateur’s horse cannot receive the sponsored/discounted/gifted feed, and they must pay for their own feed. The same applies to any tack, equipment, apparel, etc, type of sponsorship. We normally recommend that amateurs not be a part of farms that are regularly sponsored because these types of arrangements make it hard to separate the sponsored horses/riders versus the amateur-owned, non-sponsored horses/riders.

I can totally relate to your frustration @mvp (Also, to answer your previous question I ride/lesson at the barn - not train or pay others to train the horses). It’s clear that this other ammy rider I mentioned before is obviously breaking the rules. Soooo… there’s that. Not a whole lot to do about it but at least I know I’ll be above board. Bummed out though, I had an opportunity for a lovely little sponsorship from a company I LOVE.

I don’t know if I necessarily agree with the ammy’s not being allowed to be sponsored (read: helped with inherently expensive horse needs) - anyone able to explain the reasoning behind that? Maybe I’m missing something. I reckon it probably would just descend into total sponsorship chaos. Alas, rules are rules!

At any rate, I hope this response from the USEF helps clarify things for anyone else wondering about the issue!

[ladyj79]

Because a sponsored ammie would clearly be being paid (in money or goods) to represent their sponsor? Which would make them a professional.

I suppose an ammie could hock a product/business without receiving any money or goods, but that wouldn’t be a sponsorship.

[mvp]

@Jess NHF

Looks like @Belmont is right.

This is the response I got from the USEF.

I can totally relate to your frustration @mvp (Also, to answer your previous question I ride/lesson at the barn - not train or pay others to train the horses). It’s clear that this other ammy rider I mentioned before is obviously breaking the rules. Soooo… there’s that. Not a whole lot to do about it but at least I know I’ll be above board. Bummed out though, I had an opportunity for a lovely little sponsorship from a company I LOVE.

I don’t know if I necessarily agree with the ammy’s not being allowed to be sponsored (read: helped with inherently expensive horse needs) - anyone able to explain the reasoning behind that? Maybe I’m missing something. I reckon it probably would just descend into total sponsorship chaos. Alas, rules are rules!

At any rate, I hope this response from the USEF helps clarify things for anyone else wondering about the issue!

A. I’m not frustrated by your post. I just couldn’t tell what you meant by “my barn” and “the farm” being sponsored.

B. IMO, any “frustration” about strict ammy rules that comes from the sheer cost of it all is misplaced. It’s not that one ought to get help because it’s needed to pay for this money-pit of a hobby of ours. What is a legitimate source of frustration, IMO, is that the USEF’s ammy rules are baroque and yet still fail create a level playing field. It’s quite possible to do better.

C. My understanding of the reasoning and history of the ammy rule is that it was created as horse training and showing really became bigger business after WWII. The amateurs taught by pros wanted a place to show where they wouldn’t have to compete with the superior riders teaching them. It was good for the paying-in ammies and, therefore, good for the professional horse trainers to have a place for the clients to pay and play. Although the governing body of American Horse Showing needs to please the hobbyists who ultimately finance the whole industry, you would also (legitimately) see the USEF as a trade organization designed to protect the interest of the professional groups within it. IMO, those amount to the top trainers and horse show managers. It’s worthwhile keeping in mind the “whose interests matter most?” question.

In any case, the complex and kludgy ammy rules come from a history of people finding “work around” cheats like the paid “nanny” or “bookkeeper” who rides 10 sales horses a day “for free.” Every time someone finds a way to cheat, the AHSA (and now USEF) plugged that hole with a new clause in the rule.

Because we don’t regulate horse training in this country, you can’t sort ammies and pros by any measure of a professional’s skill. There are worse-riding/training pros out there and superior-riding/training ammies out there. There are bad-riding (would be) ammies out there who can teach little kid beginner lessons really, really well.

In addition, no one wants to do anything like reveal their sources of income, as you might if you decided that you might rule that we sort ammies and pros by percentage of income made via skilled horse training.

The “brand ambassador” phenomenon is just the 21st century’s version of the riding bookkeeper. And so the USEF is writing rules in order to keep up, just as they always have. Bottom line: If you are getting something worth more than $300 per year-- money or in-kind things-- you are being compensated for something you are doing with horses. And, presumably, that makes you a professional because you are selling some skill for that backpack or saddle pad. Want to argue that you don’t ride as well as a Scott Stewart or John French and therefore shouldn’t be compared? Unfortunately, that regulation of horse training isn’t something the trade-association of the USEF wants to wade into. Rather, they let the market decided who should get paid with what. So if a saddle pad company thinks you are rider or trainer or mounted celebrity enough to market their pad and ought to be paid for that… then they decided that you were a professional.

This is the part where you can roll your eyes if you like. But the bottom line is that this is how we have decided to regulate/not regulate things.

D. There is something you can do about your cheating barnmate… if you have the balls and proof required. The sport is only as clean as the stakeholders within it strive to make it.

[SonnysMom]

This part seems like it is taking things pretty far:
“The barn that an amateur rides at can be sponsored, however, the amateurs must be very cognizant of not receiving any of the products or services that come with the barn’s sponsorship. For example, if the barn is sponsored by a feed company, the amateur’s horse cannot receive the sponsored/discounted/gifted feed, and they must pay for their own feed. The same applies to any tack, equipment, apparel, etc, type of sponsorship. We normally recommend that amateurs not be a part of farms that are regularly sponsored because these types of arrangements make it hard to separate the sponsored horses/riders versus the amateur-owned, non-sponsored horses/riders.”

What about an A/A that leases a horse from the barn that is sponsored by CWD? Can she not use the leased horse’s CWD saddle that came from the barn sponsorship? What about using the barn pads for the leased horse?
Really the barn gets say Triple Crown Feed so the Amateur can’t let horse horse eat any of the barn feed and needs to pay extra for her own TC or a different brand rather than what is covered in the full board? Sounds cumbersome and very easy to accidentally use one of the sponsored products and not realize it.

[AffirmedHope]

@SonnysMom

This part seems like it is taking things pretty far:
“The barn that an amateur rides at can be sponsored, however, the amateurs must be very cognizant of not receiving any of the products or services that come with the barn’s sponsorship. For example, if the barn is sponsored by a feed company, the amateur’s horse cannot receive the sponsored/discounted/gifted feed, and they must pay for their own feed. The same applies to any tack, equipment, apparel, etc, type of sponsorship. We normally recommend that amateurs not be a part of farms that are regularly sponsored because these types of arrangements make it hard to separate the sponsored horses/riders versus the amateur-owned, non-sponsored horses/riders.”

What about an A/A that leases a horse from the barn that is sponsored by CWD? Can she not use the leased horse’s CWD saddle that came from the barn sponsorship? What about using the barn pads for the leased horse?
Really the barn gets say Triple Crown Feed so the Amateur can’t let horse horse eat any of the barn feed and needs to pay extra for her own TC or a different brand rather than what is covered in the full board? Sounds cumbersome and very easy to accidentally use one of the sponsored products and not realize it.

That could be the response to the “I’m not sponsored it’s my family farm that is sponsored!” Loophole.

[mvp]

@SonnysMom

This part seems like it is taking things pretty far:
“The barn that an amateur rides at can be sponsored, however, the amateurs must be very cognizant of not receiving any of the products or services that come with the barn’s sponsorship. For example, if the barn is sponsored by a feed company, the amateur’s horse cannot receive the sponsored/discounted/gifted feed, and they must pay for their own feed. The same applies to any tack, equipment, apparel, etc, type of sponsorship. We normally recommend that amateurs not be a part of farms that are regularly sponsored because these types of arrangements make it hard to separate the sponsored horses/riders versus the amateur-owned, non-sponsored horses/riders.”

What about an A/A that leases a horse from the barn that is sponsored by CWD? Can she not use the leased horse’s CWD saddle that came from the barn sponsorship? What about using the barn pads for the leased horse?
Really the barn gets say Triple Crown Feed so the Amateur can’t let horse horse eat any of the barn feed and needs to pay extra for her own TC or a different brand rather than what is covered in the full board? Sounds cumbersome and very easy to accidentally use one of the sponsored products and not realize it.

I’ll say it again: Anyone who wants clean sport needs to step up to protect it. Anyone who has turned a blind eye to Shamateuring doesn’t get to do any doe-eyed hand-wringing about “accidental benefits” they incurred as an ammy at a sponsored farm. Had we collectively not allowed enough people to cheat the system by pretending to make a distinction between a family’s sponsored farm and their being an entirely non-compensated amateur, we wouldn’t be in this mess. Therefore, making this kind of hair-splitting cheating unattractive (because you know that it’s visible and that someone will expose you), is part of the solution.

The same logic applies to the same issue with drugging, the famous “feed buckets were mixed up” excuse and HOs who want a pass when their hired trainers do the drugging because, hey, they were on the golf course at the time the horse was drugged. If you want clean sport, you have to do your part in stopping the cheating buck. The USEF has proven itself to be sorta lame at the task.

[Pennywell_Bay]

If Triple Crown sponsors a barn, I’d expect the horses are eating TC, including Ammies. I don’t know where TC gives free food away to whole competition barns. That would be a whole lot of grain given for free if every ammy in a barn made it to $300 mark… I honestly can’t remember how it worked in a barn I previously boarded at…

A few year ago, a barn I boarded at while I was moving- so briefly, was sponsored by TC. Big, show barn. They hung a cute banner, had some prized donated for shows. When the USEF was written about AA status, it was similar language or “proceed with caution” but that yes, we were still AAs. That very well could have revolved around our specific situation.

Caveat: always touch base with USEF when in doubt. This story was not meant to influence one way or another, just anecdotal.