Trainers - what do you pay BO?

More specifically, 20+ stall show barn to be leased by one trainer who will run program out of said barn (and will fill the barn). No lesson horses, all client owned.

Barn would have full-time staff paid for by BO. All care, property maintenance, mowing, utilities, etc covered by BO. Trainer is simply responsible for training rides and lessons.

What is a reasonable cut or lease fee for the trainer to pay BO?

You mean as a percentage of trainers income or a flat fee? Or combination of both?

Cost of ownership (taxes, depreciation, maintenance, etc) plus a reasonable profit (15-20%?).

G.

Is the board for the training horses being paid to the trainer or the BO?

Board paid to BO

Either a flat fee or % of lessons/training rides. Would love real world numbers!

Numbers depend on specifics but have seen trainers wet leasing stalls ( board paid to BO) pay 10-20 percent of lesson fees and other services performed at the facility. It depends. Remember board is a break even at best.

Depends on how the BO wants to structure the transaction. Will clients pay BO for board and trainer for “training” … or will clients pay board+training fee straight to the trainer? I own a 18 stall facility that I lease to my trainer. All horses are either the trainer’s or his clients and pay the trainer. I have horses at the facility and pay the trainer his going rate. The trainer pays me to lease the facility (so all transactions are “arm’s length transactions”). I calculated the lease rate to cover my out of pocket ownership expenses including a reserve for repairs/maintenance with a goal of being cash flow neutral over time. Trainer is responsible for running the facility, and pays all the day to day operating expenses of running the business — barn help, hay, feed, shavings, regular grounds maintenance (mowing, picking manure from pastures, etc). This works for us – we have had a long term relationship – but other BO’s may want to structure differently. And of course we “cover” each other through our respective liability policies.

This is what I was thinking. Board paid straight to BO, trainer can either pay a flat fee or a percentage (trainer’s choice) which would work out to about 15% or $1K/month to BO.

might want to talk with an attorney but to me this Trainer sounds pretty like an employee

There is a line between independent contractor and employee just make sure you are on the correct side of the line

2 Likes

I am not an attorney but I would think that the trainer is an independent contractor as it sounds like she sets her fees, she sets her schedule. I could see her being an employee if the BO set the price of training, price of lessons and set the trainers schedule. It sounds like the trainer is bringing in the clients not the BO bringing in the clients and having the trainer teach/train the clients. The BO is not supplying tools (lesson horses, tack) for the trainer to use with the students.

If the trainer is paying the BO to run her business on site, then I don’t see how the trainer can be considered an employee.

It would work that lesson fees are paid to BO, and BO pays the trainer an hourly rate just like any other hourly employee. I’ve seen this arrangement, though it is certainly much more rare.

In a more “regular” arrangement, I think a typical rate is 15-25% of trainer’s income is paid to BO. A flat fee certainly has the potential to benefit the trainer far more than the BO, or make a trainer annoyed and extra broke on a low-income month. I think a percentage of actual income earned is most fair.

I just miss understood, so the Trainer is leasing the facility Wet from the owner who by contract pays for all expenses? and question becomes how much should the Trainer be paying for the lease per stall?

Usually not enough and normally not paid on time and might disappear at night

Unless there is an escrow funded amount of money setting to back up this agreement there are many avenues for it to descend into hell … my boarders. strike that, my clients have not paid me … OP you might check your state Livery Laws as to who has first title to the stock in the event Trainer defaults.

Yes, I understood that the arrangement described by the OP was that the trainer would pay the BO for the privilege of running a training program out of the site, and that the students would pay the trainer directly.

I suppose part of the equation is whether the BO wants the security of a flat fee, and is OK on missing out on possible increases in trainer income.

Also I would think strategically it matters if trainer is arriving with a full roster of clients and basically going to be fully employed from day one, or if trainer is going to be building the business. Will the trainer be able to fill all 20+ stalls on Day One? Or will trainer take a few months to get the place full? That matters because if trainer has jurisdiction over the whole barn but only arrives with 10 horses, the BO is going to lose income on the empty stalls until they get filled.

I think it is the rare (but fortunate!) trainer who could fill 20+ stalls on Day One, and be fully occupied at maximum revenue from Day One as well.

Also what happens if clients leave and there are empty stalls for a month or two?

If trainer is building the business over several months it would make sense to go with a percentage perhaps up to a maximum amount per month? And would this include just training and lessons on site, or would the BO expect a cut of day fees for shows, or other incidental income such as selling a project horse, or commission from sales or purchase for clients? What would you do if the trainer wanted to host onsite clinics (with self or visiting clinician) or run an onsite schooling show?

In other words the contract should specify what categories of income the percentage fee applies to. I personally think it should just be lessons and training fees incurred at that barn and using the premises, and not the total monthly income if that includes show day fees, horse sales, commissions, etc.

Also if the trainer has a personal horse, do they pay the full board?

When I worked out of a very large barn, we paid %10 of our lesson/training income to the barn, BUT, the barn looked after all billing, and we got a cut of the board for every horse we brought to the barn.

If the trainer is responsible for bringing in boarders then it may be easier for the barn to make its money off the board, and let the trainer make their money off training and each look after their own billing.

There is not much money to be made off of boarding so that would make it a very lopsided arrangement.
The barn owner would be doing all of the work and have all the expense and for that make almost nothing, while the trainer uses the facility for nothing and makes all their training money.

2 Likes

It it were me (and actually has been once or twice ;)) I’d treat the whole matter as a theater owner would an impresario who wishes to put on a production. They rent the inside of the theater for the event and do all the work to put on the performance, print the ads, collect the gate, pay the performers, sell the popcorn, etc. The owner might get a fixed sum or might get a percentage. In neither case does the owner become an employer of the impresario or anyone they employ. It is a purely contractual relationship for a specific purpose for a limited time.

The owner may supervise aspects of the production to protect their property interests. This does not make them an employer of anybody. They might agree to provide certain additional services, including “rental” of employees. That, too, does not turn them into an employer.

The contract to do this should be carefully drawn to ensure that no lines get crossed, or even blurred. Sloppy drafting, or sloppy administration, can result in negative consequences for both parties. But clear, professional dealings are not going to be a problem.

G.