Um… No. They are not the same thing at all.
[QUOTE=lrp1106;7294515]
Um… No. They are not the same thing at all.[/QUOTE]
Which is why I said it KIND OF REMINDS ME OF…
I don’t think it’s the same thing either. It’s A BIT SIMILAR in the ways that I described.
[QUOTE=ynl063w;7294512]
I totally get what you are saying, but this kind of reminds me of those who ask how a woman can complain about being raped when she was wearing a miniskirt and eyeliner and hanging out where she shouldn’t have been.
Just because you trust that others will do the right thing doesn’t mean you deserve to get f@#ked when you don’t want to.
Just because you have money doesn’t automatically mean you know with whom you can trust to spend it. And just because you have a ton of money and choose to spend it in horses doesn’t mean you know everything about how disgusting the horse industry can be. Don’t blame the victim here, because if they become the ones to blame, the small pool of wealthy owners that are available today will quickly run dry and then where will our sport be?[/QUOTE]
Would you be comfortable buying a house but wiring the purchase money to the real estate broker rather than the seller, and just taking your broker’s word on what they were taking off the top for their commission? Many of these horses cost more than most people’s houses, yet that is exactly what seems to be standard practice in this industry, and it amazes me that people are comfortable with it.
I’m not letting the crooks off the hook here. If this is true, I hope Jane Clark pulls her horses too and Ben never gets a ride again. But there is something about the horse world that induces people to make financial choices they wouldn’t make in any other context.
If the allegations are true, shame on Maher.
Although I feel bad for the owners (and likewise the seller), why wouldn’t they want to be more involved with a high $ equestrian transaction? At a minimum, once a deal has been brokered, what’s the issue with having buyer and seller connect for the final transfer of funds? At that point it would be very obvious if there is something shady going on.
[QUOTE=vxf111;7294386]
If this is true… talk about biting the hand that feeds you![/QUOTE]
Talk about eating their whole hands and chewing on the bones… :eek:
I wonder how they found out…
Jilly Cooper - you paying attention to this?
[QUOTE=alibi_18;7294600]
Talk about eating their whole hands and chewing on the bones… :eek:
I wonder how they found out…[/QUOTE]
Good question. How would one find that out if not from the previous owner? Gossip?
I have no dog in this fight and my guess is that he probably did bite the hand that fed him. BUT…
How many times have we heard of deals where 6 or 7 trainers get a commission on a sale of a horse?
Way back when, I was looking for a horse (with my own trainer looking for me) and a local trainer approached me and said that so and so had a horse I might be interested in. I went and looked at the horse (with my trainer), kind of liked it and asked about the price. I was told by the trainer that had the horse that the price was X but I also owed local trainer 10 percent for just telling me about it. (This is when trainers were getting just 10 percent.). So I was going to have to pay basically two commissions. I didn’t like the horse that much. Deal was dead on arrival with that news.
Also, a few years ago I was at a barn where some new clients arrived from several states away. 6 months after their arrival, they bought a new horse with the new/current trainers. 3 weeks later, old trainer calls new one and asks for a 10 percent commission on the deal because if old trainer had not sent them to new trainer, then deal wouldn’t have happened. Wow!
How many people do you think we’re involved in this transaction of a big money horse? I bet everyone had their hands out on this deal and got paid.
Yes, bad for the industry but they all expect it. Why? Does it happen in other commission based deals?
ynl063w-you should edit your post, the inappropriate rape comment could not have been further from making a point.
BM wins so his riding career won’t be in jeopardy. Jane won’t take her horses away not with WEG on the horizon and the wins he’s racking up. He is rumored to be romantically involved with a US GP rider and I wonder if the scandal is something that guy doesn’t want in his life. But horse people rarely care about looking bad so probably not.
and it does happen on all levels. one way it happens is this: trainer and client come look at horses, client picks one to buy. seller (trainer/sales barn/agent) sells horse to trainer for say $75k, trainer sells it to client for $100k AND gets a commission on top of it. everyone but the client knows, it’s that blatant.
i only buy when i speak directly to the seller and know what the seller is selling for and pay seller directly. i assume i’m getting screwed on the price even when i negotiate down but dealing directly makes me feel like i’m minimizing the damage.
Very disappointing if true. I don’t understand why people cheat people who trust them and who play a good part in their career success by providing them with horses that they would not otherwise have to ride.
People do respect talented riders and I’m sure, feel that they have a close relationship with them as a trusted friend.
When you see a rider take a horse around a grand prix course well, and sympathetically, what owner wouldn’t be impressed. People who have the talent to get horses to go so well for them,and do it kindly, SEEM so nice and good.
Yes, it is a great deal of money to risk on a handshake, but when you trust someone with your horses and have known them for years I can see how trust can override your business sense. Very few people expect their longtime friends to cheat them…
It is a terribly disappointing situation and it seems that it won’t be difficult to prove, if it is true.
Two thoughts. One, whoever said this happens mostly with imports? BS. It’s been a staple of business within the horse industry FOREVER over here, over there and everywhere with everything from Gaited horses to Crossrails to GP stars. I even got dinged once on a <3k local Western horse- and never again did that happen to me.
Second thought is you can demand to personally meet the other side of the transaction, write the check or wire the funds only to them personally and demand their signature on the bill of sale. And you should do those things and pay YOUR agent and only your agent with a separate check.
But how does this happen when the Top Rank Partnership consisting of 6 equal partners, 4 associate partners and a trainer/agent sells a horse to Fun Times Farm LLC represented in all transactions by a law firm? These days it can be more complicated then Jane buying Blaze from Charlie.
[QUOTE=Lord Helpus;7294150]
There are laws in Ky and California which specifically prohibit non disclosure of all funds spent and received during sales of horses. These laws werre initiated and sponosred by the racing industry, but they also apply to the sport horse world.
Sadly such laws have only been enacted in very few states; so sleezy horse dealers do business elsewhere.
I have noticed everyone saying “IF it is true”. Show of hands of people who have no doubt that the allegations are true?
Then there is the collateral damage is to the sport itself. It has lost benefactors who loved show jumping and were willing to buy top level horses and pay for their upkeep. I feel so bad for them… They had the best of intentions and only now have they discovered that they had been getting screwed all along.
I wonder if there is a rule in the FEI charter which can ban anyone found guilty of a felony which involves the sport of Show Jumping?[/QUOTE]
Many great points, and Lord Helpus, I believe that you are an attorney with some experience in the field. The fact remains that we have laws specific to equine transactions in some states, but laws of agency surely exist in all states (and, I presume in most country as well.) The way the system is set up, those laws cannot be brought to bear unless someone files a suit. So often when issues like these are brought up on this board, there is a chorus proclaiming the victim “chalk it up to experience” or “If you like the trainer and your horse is happy etc,… let it go, beside, you don’t want to get the reputation as that type…” That is exactly how trainers are granted carte blanche to continue to pad commissions and other bills. When someone does sue it’s a big story because it is relatively rare to take legal action though I bet I could take a poll here and in a day find 100 people who feel that they were at some pint ripped off by an equestrian pro.
As to the harm to the sport, every time a big money benefactor finds fault with the sport or is harmed by those in the sport, it is harmful. The sport needs sponsors and wealthy patrons to buy horses and support trainers. Every one that leaves is a loss.
[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;7294626]
Good question. How would one find that out if not from the previous owner? Gossip?[/QUOTE]
In the updated article on the Chronicle home page it states “The battle over sale prices began when Vigolo was sold back quickly to them for less than the price paid. The Phillipses’ suspicions were aroused and they began investigating past transactions.”
I guess from they started asking after that happened.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this isn’t all further complicated by lack of record keeping to avoid tax payments. At a certain point the sale of a horse is taxable for businesses above a certain turnover in the UK. It’s not uncommon for the bill of sale to say one thing while an extra cash payment is made to top it off.
Add that to the suing, counter-suing exchange rate, gizillions of commissions, and he said they said… it’s gonna be a long one.:eek:
This isn’t the first time BM has been involved in a scandal. But this one on top of the last one makes me say “HMMMMM…” when it comes to rooting him on this year at WEF (but I love Cella, so if this doesn’t lose him the ride on her, I’ll probably still cheer for them).
BM has replied to the allegations. The article is on the Chronicle site somewhere. Says (in short) that the Phillipses owe/owed him money.
Blah blah blah.
“BM wins so his riding career won’t be in jeopardy. Jane won’t take her horses away not with WEG on the horizon and the wins he’s racking up.”
(FWIW Leslie Burr Howard is also winning with her horses.)
Who knows what the actual truth is…about this or any deals gone bad.
There could be blame to share from all invoved… the truth could be in bits and pieces on both sides like a treasure map with assumptions, miscommunications, agendas, revenge, who knows what… as the subjective and self interest roads and bridges drawn all over the map from both sides… to “win”
This is the type of thing that makes news, and with the stakes of course, but these partnerships, deals and sales… gone wrong happen all the time.
People act deplorably when it comes to money and loosing clients or business partners or backers…and sadly some people will do anything to divert attention from their own wrong doings and issues and problems by slingling mud like a loose cannon and lying on others to create scape goats.
It will be interesting to find out the truth.
The sad part is that this was a proftiable partnership for all involved and sadly people are never satisfied with success and wealth and gratitude and loyalty are so underappreciated these days.
Was anyone else confused by his counter-claims?
To me it read that his response is that they owed him money from past services.
So…why not submit an invoice for payment?
Why pocket $$ secretly?
Seems like if they really did owe him money, there was an above-board way to handle it. If anything, his response is more incriminating, rather than helpful to his case.
Duplicate post, sorry.
[QUOTE=Jumper221;7294535]
Would you be comfortable buying a house but wiring the purchase money to the real estate broker rather than the seller, and just taking your broker’s word on what they were taking off the top for their commission? Many of these horses cost more than most people’s houses, yet that is exactly what seems to be standard practice in this industry, and it amazes me that people are comfortable with it.
I’m not letting the crooks off the hook here. If this is true, I hope Jane Clark pulls her horses too and Ben never gets a ride again. But there is something about the horse world that induces people to make financial choices they wouldn’t make in any other context.[/QUOTE]
No, I would not be comfortable doing any of the things you describe. That isn’t my point. My point is that being naive is not a crime, and no one should ever be condemned for being taken advantage of under any circumstances, ever. Just because I might know when to start feeling as though things aren’t quite right and have the ability to pull back and ask questions doesn’t mean that everyone on the planet should know to do that. In my mind there is no reason to ever blame in any way the person who is taken advantage of in any given situation, whether that person is rich or poor, learning disabled or genius, or whatever. The person who is taking advantage of someone is the one who is wrong. Always.
