[QUOTE=Sonesta;6133192]
Heck, there was even some seller in Florida that had a warmblood brand made for herself (I think Hanoverian) and was branding these mutts as “proof” they were imported warmbloods.[/QUOTE]
there was another in a South American breed who was branding (with a purloined brand) those as if they were approved by the registry inspection;)…also in FL
Tamara
I’m lucky - my horses’ barn names of Sergio and Laila are actually their registered names, too. They are older (25 and 19) but I had zero problems identifying their bloodlines and finding their breeders to let them know where they are.
Per Urban Dictionary standards, my house pets’ names are a bit more unfortunate, especially Houdini.
[QUOTE=BeeHoney;6133949]
I’m a longtime small breeder who also rides, trains, buys and sells horses. I’m a realist. Most of my clients are not buying my young horses to glorify my breeding program. They want to buy a horse that will glorify THEIR training and showing program and their ability to find talented young prospects. Sometimes they are happy to share a little of the glory, sometimes not.
Personally, I’m pleased when a buyer appreciates the breeding of their new animal and appropriately credits my farm as the breeder of the horse and appropriately transfers papers and pedigree when the horse sells. I do not use prefixes/suffixes and I am fine with owners changing the horse’s name as long as it is done properly through the registry and not for the purpose of obfuscating the horse’s identity.
I can’t really believe that the OP was upset about a straightforward name change…I mean, seriously, I’ve watched horses that I lovingly bred, broke, and took to their first shows be mentioned in magazines as “found out in a field.” I’ve seen horses that I bred have their name/age/identity changed multiple times and no one knows anything about them when they are the new winner on the scene, and I feel funny to take any credit because I know more details about the horse (such as actual age and actual show record) that the current owner either doesn’t know or probably wouldn’t want shared.
Personally I find most prefixes/suffixes annoying. I occasionally buy a young horse and I’ve never run into this trouble, but I can tell you that I would be turned off by a seller with a sales contract that insisted on this. I mean, seriously, names are such a personal thing. To me, the IDENTITY of the horse is what is important, not the actual name. If the identity is correct, anyone can look the horse up and see that I bred it and what its pedigree is.
I 100% support a program whereby competing horses would be microchipped, either in the first year of life as part of the registration process or upon initiation into recognized showing. This is essential to our sport.
To sum up, I will say to the OP that if you really want all the glory and recognition for the horses you breed, you need to keep them, train them and show them yourself. In recent years (partly due to the crappy market) I’ve retained a few of my young horses and taken them farther with their showing than I normally do. This has been the absolute best form of advertising ever. People see me with a string of gorgeous young horses (I’m not the least bit proud of my babies :)) and they ask, “Where did you get them?” Ironically, I’m getting out of doing much breeding because recently the economics of it haven’t made sense. But, FWIW, I’ve been kicking myself for not having taken this approach in the past.[/QUOTE]
Hmmm. You can’t sell youngstock until backed… you are getting out of breeding…
and no one knows who the nice horses you’re bred are and are saying they were “found in a field” unless you keep them and show them yourself…
Sure, having it known that you were producing good/great horses, wouldn’t have helped at all in selling them at all along the way.
[QUOTE=hntrjmprpro45;6133468]
I think the buyer should have every right to change the name if they dislike it. However, they should also follow through with the proper paper work and always list the breeders information on all forms. Honestly, I don’t think the prefix/suffix holds much weight in the warmblood world. Many major breeders stand multiple stallions and/or use outside semen in their breeding programs. So knowing where it was bred won’t necessarily tell you anything about the bloodlines. Then when you throw in the fact that studs can be licensed by multiple stud books, you may not even know what book the resulting horse is registered with without looking it up. It is so different from the pony/arab/QH world that it is hard to compare them.
Bottom line, you usually have to look up the information on a horse to get to any real info anyways. It would be best to use our energy on creating a successful system of identification to track breeding information.[/QUOTE]
Prefix/Suffix has nothing to do with a stallion. It’s the breeder/s it’s attributing. It can refer to a horse they bred by stallions they owned, bought breedings to, etc out of a mare they lease/own/borrowed, etc. Has nothing to do with an individual animal.
It’s used to collectively refer to a group of horses to distinguish them as being created to attempt to reach the ideal goal of the breeder. If you don’t like the breeder’s goals then you probably won’t like m/any horses out of their program. After awhile, you will usually see patterns in what programs you like /don’t like… if you pay attention to what you like /don’t like. And… here is the other side of the coin. By putting their name on that horse… while not really vouching that it will be amazing… a breeder is saying “I produced this, and it’s good enough that I am willing to let everyone know I produced this”. It’s risky to do that. there are 3 gazillion threads on COTH about trainers/owners/etc ruining a horse. So it’s very risky to have a foal/horse carrying your name, and then someone comes along and buys it… maybe circumstances change, and they sell the horse. New owner (owner3) keeps the name, but sends it to “yahoo down the road who thinks he’s George Morris and Clinton Anderson rolled into one”. or maybe the horse ends up with a lovely person… but they shouldn’t be allowed to ride a carousel. People will attribute those to your program too. So it is a risk to put your name on it. But thems the breaks.
[QUOTE=Tamara in TN;6133985]
there was another in a South American breed who was branding (with a purloined brand) those as if they were approved by the registry inspection;)…also in FL
Tamara[/QUOTE]
An old “friend” (and I coin the term loosly) of my husband did that with her TWH’s. They weren’t eligible or couldn’t be approved so she made up multiple registries so she could say her horses were 6 way registered (or some such thing) - the address to the registries are their home address. She also created the “Horsewoman of the Century” Award and made up the criteria so only she would be eligible and nominated and could win, lol. Every once in awhile I get on their site for pure sh**s and giggles, but wholly cow people DO fall for it!
[QUOTE=okggo;6134388]
… She also created the “Horsewoman of the Century” Award and made up the criteria so only she would be eligible and nominated and could win, lol. [/QUOTE]
Hey, I think this is a great idea,:yes: and think of all the money you save actually competing (e.g., entry fees, training fees, fuel, hotel bills, wear and tear on the vehicles, dry cleaning, meals out, hiring a house sitter… etc :eek:) We could all save a bundle by simply trotting down to the local trophy shop and getting ribbons printed up that say things like, “World Champion Goobber” or “Master of Time Space and Dimension.”
Who needs to know what the competition for the title truly was? :lol::winkgrin:
When you think about it, the World Series of Baseball does not involve international teams. And there are all sorts of World titles that Quarter Horses obtain, even though they are less than 18 months old, have never been under saddle, and have never left Ohio… :lol:
Heck, now a days you don’t even need to have a ribbon made… you can Photoshop the whole thing.
You know Cartier…you may just have a valid point there! All this time, I have been doing it ALL wrong, lol. I would rather photoshop the blue ribbon and trophy on, that way I can edit my butt size while I’m at it (snort, lol).
[QUOTE=Cartier;6134660]
When you think about it, the World Series of Baseball does not involve international teams. [/QUOTE]
Well, it involves US and Canada. And I think there’s a hemisphere/timing issue with most of the other countries that have competitive baseball. And it’s hard to have competitive baseball when anyone decent gets sucked into MLB But point taken. I always found the term “World Series” a little odd myself. And it’s hard for me to accept the Blue Jays being in the American League. And I miss the Expos.
Now back to your regularly scheduled program…
[QUOTE=vxf111;6134706]
Well, it involves US and Canada. And I think there’s a hemisphere/timing issue with most of the other countries that have competitive baseball. And it’s hard to have competitive baseball when anyone decent gets sucked into MLB But point taken. I always found the term “World Series” a little odd myself. And it’s hard for me to accept the Blue Jays being in the American League. And I miss the Expos.
Now back to your regularly scheduled program…[/QUOTE]
Why wouldn’t the Blue Jays be in the American league? They are a team in North America after all.
[QUOTE=Tapperjockey;6134845]
Why wouldn’t the Blue Jays be in the American league? They are a team in North America after all.[/QUOTE]
Only because of the history of how the two leagues developed. The National League was the first of the two to expand and include Canadian teams (the Expos in the 1960s). So that was the first of the two leagues to include both countries. And now that team is in Washington so the National League is US only and the American league is not because it has the one remaining Canadian team. And the Expos were the first team to move in a long, long time that way-- and they left Montreal with no team. It just all seems ironic to me. The first Canadian team no longer really exists and the only remaning non-US team is in the other league, the American league.
[QUOTE=vxf111;6134889]
Only because of the history of how the two leagues developed. The National League was the first of the two to expand and include Canadian teams (the Expos in the 1960s). So that was the first of the two leagues to include both countries. And now that team is in Washington so the National League is US only and the American league is not because it has the one remaining Canadian team. And the Expos were the first team to move in a long, long time that way-- and they left Montreal with no team. It just all seems ironic to me. The first Canadian team no longer really exists and the only remaning non-US team is in the other league, the American league.[/QUOTE]
Oh ok. I thought you were insinuating they don’t play Baseball as well or something lol.
Where are we going now??? 
Who’s going to be the thread killer extraordinaire? Time to lay this to rest?
I’m pretty good at euthanizing threads. Let’s see if this does it.
[QUOTE=babecakes;6134984]
Where are we going now???
Who’s going to be the thread killer extraordinaire? Time to lay this to rest?[/QUOTE]
:lol: I was catching up on this thread and thinking something along these lines!
Well everyone has varying opinions on here and everyone is surely entitled to their own opinion. But Maggie I completely understand your frustration. I would be upset too. I think sometimes the problem with the world is people’s word doesn’t mean crap anymore. You used to be able to be able to do business with a person’s word and a hand shake. Unfortunately it isn’t that way anymore. Just from my brief conversation on the phone with Maggie I can tell you she is that kinda of person and she is someone I would do business with any day. And she certainly isn’t one of those crazy horse people. She is a hard working mother and business woman who has built a strong family business and I think she has every right to want to deserve credit for her hard work and she surely deserves to receive credit for her hard work. And I personally don’t think that someone should have to jump through hoops to be able to acknowledge her good breeding eye. Just my rantings and my 2 cents worth.
Late to the party, but thank you. I occasionally buy young horses. When I read posts like those of the OP, I immediately think “nut job” and run real fast, the other way.
30 years in business and she’s just learning NOW, to get things in writing?
Sorry, but just had to add that this quote is my laugh for the day! :lol:
A classic “walking dead” moment—zombie thread resurrected by greenie defender.
So what have we learned from this thread?
Well I guess if you want the buyer not to change the horses name there are a few rules that might help:
Names that need pronounciation guides are a bad choice because they are guarrenteed to be mangled by announcer. For example Tzsubawbeh (pronounced Bob) would be a bad choice,
Names that are extremely common are bad. For example there are so many ‘Wishfuls’, ‘Lost my Socks’, ‘Rhythm and Blues’ and ‘Black Tie Affairs’ that it is not unusual to have more than one at a show.
Names with alternate interpretations should be avoided for sale horse. For example:
Naming your filly Wanda if your stable name is Farms Unlimited is bad. Additionally naming a filly from Denver Equestrian Xis breeders group Sinead might also be wisely avoided.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
