The question you all need to ask yourselves is this: could I sell this horse to this person for this amount of money if the horse were still on my property, being presented by me, using my tack and equipment, being represented solely by myself with my reputation and experience in this particular discipline. For most people, the answer is no, regardless of the fact that they might have answered the phone call.
And if you have a good trainer, the first words out of your mouth on that phone call were probably “the horse is in training with Mr. Joe Bigshot, and he likes him a lot”. That right there is what you’re paying for.
[QUOTE=S A McKee;5726535]
Sorry, but just because someone tells you it’s standard procedure doesn’t make it ethical or in some states (depending on if the trainer is agent for both sides) even legal.
Trainers would love to have you pay 10% for them to smiply have someone watch a training session. I’;m always surprised that people who should know better go along with this scenario.
If you are an established client the trainer may very well want your return business and be willing to charge a reasonable fee for an evaluation or for showing it to a client that you bring to the table.
And NEVER EVER have the buyer pay the trainer. Make sure the buyer pays you the full price. Both buyer and seller settle with their trainers as separate transactions.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=CBoylen;5726747]The question you all need to ask yourselves is this: could I sell this horse to this person for this amount of money if the horse were still on my property, being presented by me, using my tack and equipment, being represented solely by myself with my reputation and experience in this particular discipline. For most people, the answer is no, regardless of the fact that they might have answered the phone call.
And if you have a good trainer, the first words out of your mouth on that phone call were probably “the horse is in training with Mr. Joe Bigshot, and he likes him a lot”. That right there is what you’re paying for.[/QUOTE]
Disagree, but also depends on price range. But yes if trainer preps horse, shows horse or has anything to physical/verbal to do with potential buyer yes commission should be paid. I have sold with and without trainers
Actually CBoylen - I disagree with you. If this Trainer is a PROFESSIONAL - the issue of Commissions is something that should have been in the Boarding and/or Training Contract. If they are NOT professional enough to do that then the horse owner has NO obligation to pay them if they have nothing to do with the transaction.
The horse trading business has been flying by the seat of it’s pants since the start of this country. Even in Business School years ago our Law Professor commented that a great deal of contract law language evolved from the Horse Trade business because it was so CORRUPT.
Unfortunately some of the corruption still exists. Get it in writing UP FRONT - no hand shakes or what usually happens or weather the call came to me or them or if I mentioned their name. A commission results from a business transaction for services or merchandise rendered. Just BEING isn’t a service. And ALWAYS have a Sales Contract that is between the Owner/Seller of the horse and the Buyer of the horse, unless you have a Sales Agency agreement in writing with the Trainer/Barn. Any commission owned should be stipulated in the contract and should be paid by Buyer or Seller to the person earning the Commission unless it is otherwise stipulated in the Agency agreement.
I agree with Ilona that there should be a contract that spells out the expectations for what the trainer agrees to do in the way of services that would command a commission. I think it needs to be above and beyond riding the horse in front of a potential client.
I’ve read that some sales barns will promise to send a weekly report on how the horse is progressing, including video.
A seller who is at a distance from the sales barn is at a serious disadvantage. Who is really riding the horse? How often?
Wow, just unbelievable. Horses business seems to have his own little world where breeders and owners are entitled to get screwed and trainers entitled to all benefits …Just doesn’t sound right.
Trainers may decide whatever they want but if there is no clear understanding, contract between the two parties right from the start , I do not believe bringing a client to see your horse while being trained automatically entitled a commission to the trainer. This is outrageous.
I can see why so many people get fed up about this horse business. I have heard so many stories of people being screwed or abused and just don’t want to be part of this anymore. Why is it like that? Is it because horses are luxury and it is assumed that if you have a horse,you are so rich money is no concern???
If this is the policy of the trainer well he better make it clear… nothing implicit.
Suzanne,
Your summary of how it works is correct.
There are trainers who make the extra effort to market and close a sale. These trainers have a first class reputation and do a beautiful job in representing the horse to buyers.
There are others who expect to be paid a commission if the horse is in training when it is sold… minimal effort above and beyond riding/training which is already paid for. Yet this commission can amount to thousands.
I’ve personally been a victim of a “sale barn” scheme that claimed to be taking my horse to shows for experience and yet he never left his stall. That was only the tip of the iceberg of a very sordid business.
A professional sales barn service is much needed in this industry. I think breeders/sellers need to have a clear understanding of what the agent will do to earn the commission, or if there are lesser alternatives for a smaller commission.
Say, the agent/trainer will ride the horse in front of a buyer and answer questions … No sales outreach, no web site, no networking with other trainers. What do you do, as a seller, with that situation, which is probably the most common?
Oakstable, in that situation, if I have paid the trainer to train/ride the horse, I’d feel no commission is required. (Communication regarding the horse’s strengths/weaknesses and progress are part of training, IMO, and are private between me and the trainer, and onyone else to whom I’ve authorized communication)
If the horse is at a sales barn, with no training costs, that is a different matter, and commission would be due – as per agreement in advance.
[QUOTE=Oakstable;5727633]
Say, the agent/trainer will ride the horse in front of a buyer and answer questions … No sales outreach, no web site, no networking with other trainers. What do you do, as a seller, with that situation, which is probably the most common?[/QUOTE]
This is why a clear agreement is so important.
Every situation is different. I would agree that if your trainer is very well known and respected, attracts a lot of attention he could required that any horse that is sold while he is riding him requires a commission. He will tell your prospective buyer how he founds the horse, his opinion could impressed sufficiently to make a sale. I understand that his reputation is at risk as if the horse is not as good as he was saying, this will go against him.
Again the trainer could decide that no commission , no comments and again I agree with that. He is just training the horse and there would be no reason why he would get a commission. If the horse has any problem after the sale the buyer can’t blame the trainer as he didn’t took his decision based on his opinion.
Anyway without an agreement there is no way the trainer can come back and ask a commission. It just has no legal basis.
The whole commission thing in buying and selling horses is not very logical or sensible.
But trainers DO have certain expectations, often dependant on where in the “food chain” they are.
If the trainer expects a commission, and you refuse to pay it, you risk the trainer badmouthing you or the horse to a prospective buyer. I know that isn’t logical either, but it happens.
Again the trainer could decide that no commission , no comments and again I agree with that. He is just training the horse and there would be no reason why he would get a commission. If the horse has any problem after the sale the buyer can’t blame the trainer as he didn’t took his decision based on his opinion.
But are you willing to take therisk that the trainer decides that no commission = negative comments?
I believe a trainer that bad mouths a client for not paying them a commission when they either didn’t have an agreement in place and/or didn’t perform any service is NOT a professional.
I agree.
But I also believe that it happens.
If a trainer is having a conversation with a client about your horse, and introduces himself/herself as the agent for the horse, with the seller’s agreement, the train has left the station IMO. You are paying the commission.
I think it behooves the industry to discuss this. Double dipping has been addressed in the State of California. Good on us for addressing that in our sales contracts.
I feel that sellers are at a disadvantage in this contractual agreement with the trainer. I/we don’t know of other options to offer in the negotiation process with the trainer. Breeders in Canada seem to be viewing what is common practice here in the US with alarm.
Maybe we as breeders/sellers need to write up our own contract in advance of putting our horse in a sales barn, which stipulates what we expect in exchange for paying a commission.
It really seems to come down to active vs. passive marketing by the agent. The latter is what drives me bonkers.
I do have an attorney who specializes in business law, and is a horse person. I’ll ask her opinion.
[QUOTE=Janet;5728113]
But are you willing to take therisk that the trainer decides that no commission = negative comments?[/QUOTE]
Well you know what? If he is so unprofessional that he would agree to a deal and then turn away to undermine your horse because of no commission, he is just NOT professional.
Integrity is as simple as that: you got it or you ain’t! And if you want to keep your business alive and kicking I don’t think this is a game to play.
Things get around pretty fast.
I have been following along as a seller I like to see what people have to say. I’ll ad in my 2 cents FWIW.
When I have a horse I am selling at my trainer’s for training and she shows the horse to a prospective buyer then I expect to pay her the usual 10%. Does not matter to ME if I found the buyer, or she did. I DO NOT want to be the person who has to ride/show horse to buyer, so I should be expected to pay for having her do it for me. What I pay her to actually train the horse is separate.
If I have a horse at home and I ask her to come and show it to a buyer, then I pay her the commission as well. (more likely I would drop horse off at her place to show a buyer)
I have had her waive her commission on several of my horses that were sold to other clients in her barn just because she wanted them to be in her barn bad enough and the horses were already at the top of the clients budget, which enabled me to lower my price to her client.
If I bring home a horse that was at her place for training and I find the buyer and show the horse myself, then trainer gets nothing. She was paid for her training and had NO PART AT ALL in the sale.
Right or wrong, this is just how I choose to handle the whole commission thing. It has worked out well for me and my trainer.
[QUOTE=CBoylen;5726747]
The question you all need to ask yourselves is this: could I sell this horse to this person for this amount of money if the horse were still on my property, being presented by me, using my tack and equipment, being represented solely by myself with my reputation and experience in this particular discipline. For most people, the answer is no, regardless of the fact that they might have answered the phone call.
And if you have a good trainer, the first words out of your mouth on that phone call were probably “the horse is in training with Mr. Joe Bigshot, and he likes him a lot”. That right there is what you’re paying for.[/QUOTE]
Yup!
I have choices available as far as which trainer/sales barns to go to. You are right, I could not sell a horse out of here anywhere close to what MIGHT happen in another location.
This is a tough economy so I am looking for a win-win situation. It has to be a partnership.
The Double agency thing has GO TO GO. Many states already prohibit it. Some require disclosure. I have it in my contracts that 10% commission will be paid BUT the recipient has to provide a SS# - so I can issue a 1099 (as my corporation is required to do that by law). I also state that we will not pay any commission to any agent who is receiving a commission from the buyer. A person can’t serve two masters!! If there is a dispute - and they have received a commission from both sides - exactly which party will they represent?
