Zayat- A little background

[Equibrit]

[QUOTE=gumtree;8174121]
The UCC is not law, law of the land. It is “suggested law” so as to give guidance for individual states to adapt in full and or modify to fit its jurisdiction.

The page you linked to doesn’t give the following disclaimer but does on other pages. Which I copied and pasted below.

“Our collection aims to show each section of the U.C.C. in the version which is most widely adopted by states. That means we will not always display the most current revision if that revision has not achieved widespread adoption among American legislatures”

The UCC is used in cases where there is no “clear” definition in a state’s “statutes”. When a “dispute” and or civil suit is filed.

So, what you have linked to doesn’t apply in this case. Keeneland’s conditions of sale does under KY statute as it says,

In accordance with KRS 330.210 and 355.2-328(4) and other applicable laws, the right to bid in this sale is reserved for all Sellers, including their disclosed and undisclosed Agents, unless otherwise announced at time of sale.

If I were to hold my own “auction” of my horses at my farm and did not “spell out” the conditions of sale as Keeneland and other sales companies do. And a bidder took “exception” to me bidding on my own horses than I suppose the UCC’s idea of “auction law” would kick in. And or PA statues. A lot of states may follow the UCC on this topic. But not where major TB sales auctions are held.

Feel free to research under Kentucky law showing where I am wrong on this. But I am pretty sure Keeneland and Fasig Tipton have paid a lot of money to make sure their Condition of Sale will withstand a legal challenge. I would be surprise if some disgruntled buyer hasn’t already tried.[/QUOTE]

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=33288

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=13&div=2&chpt=23&sctn=28&subsctn=0

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=com&group=02001-03000&file=2301-2328

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/UCC/2/3/2--328

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0600-0699/0672/Sections/0672.328.html

[skydy]

Wasn’t J. Jackson responsible for making the fuss which resulted in the change of Kentucky regulations re TB auctions per the TOBA?

Especially the disclosure by an agent to both parties that is (now) required if an agent is representing both buyer and seller…

I would guess that Jacksons attorneys would have found an applicable law if one had been in place, rather than had the TOBA get behind a legislative change.

Hoping for AP to win. He’s a beauty!
Zayat’s business dealings? There are owners with infinitely more dubious behavior than he has shown.

The more publicity the TC races receive (the press covering the Hollywood show business types that are attending) the more the press will dig and the more dirt they will find. Imagine the field day they’d have if (Darley’s) Sheikh Mohammed had a horse that was looking to win the TC.

[ASB_Stars]

Ironically, that statute is supposed to apply to any equine transactions in KY. I do believe that most of the ASB trainers laugh their asses off at that one, sadly. I can think of a handful who comply. No idea how it affects other breed trainers.

[gumtree]

[QUOTE=Equibrit;8175660]
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=33288

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=13&div=2&chpt=23&sctn=28&subsctn=0

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=com&group=02001-03000&file=2301-2328

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/UCC/2/3/2--328

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0600-0699/0672/Sections/0672.328.html[/QUOTE]

I am not trying to be obstinate but I don’t see what you have linked to refutes what I have been saying. At least not the way I read the following. Which can be found in each of the links and basically says the same thing.

If the auctioneer knowingly receives a bid on the seller’s behalf or the seller makes or procures such a bid, and notice has NOT been given that liberty for such bidding is reserved, the buyer may at his or her option avoid the sale or take the goods at the price of the last good faith bid prior to the completion of the sale. This subsection shall not apply to any bid at a forced sale.

Keeneland’s conditions of sale that is announced at the beginning of each sales session states very clearly, “gives notice” that “the right to bid in this sale IS reserved for all Sellers, including their disclosed and undisclosed Agents”. Buyers are instructed to read and understand THEIR conditions of sale.

[gumtree]

[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8175394]
The used to be held at Red Mile- the Tattersalls Sales. The pavilion was torn down to build dorms for students.

I agree with you completely about the issues with the professionals in all types of horse businesses.

I was one of those who knew exactly where I was going with the numbers, but, there are times when if you just slow down, and wait, the bidding slows down, too, and the numbers come back to you a little better. If you knee jerk every time a bid spotter points at you- you are screwed.[/QUOTE]

Such a shame that historic sales pavilion with its unique architecture was torn down and not moved and “re-purposed”

[caffeinated]

I didn’t know where to put this one… apparently zayat will have AP surrounded by Monster Girls before the Belmont. Icky.

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/triple-crown/monster-of-a-deal-pharoah-connections-secure-landmark-marketing-deal/

[SnicklefritzG]

[QUOTE=caffeinated;8176494]
I didn’t know where to put this one… apparently zayat will have AP surrounded by Monster Girls before the Belmont. Icky.

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/triple-crown/monster-of-a-deal-pharoah-connections-secure-landmark-marketing-deal/[/QUOTE]

icky yeah, but I’m still rooting for the horse. He deserves a TC win. He can’t help who his owners are or what they do.

[caffeinated]

[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;8176525]
icky yeah, but I’m still rooting for the horse. He deserves a TC win. He can’t help who his owners are or what they do.[/QUOTE]

totally agreed, it just bugged me. It might be “good” for the sport, I don’t know. He’s just such a nice horse. He probably doesn’t care about being surrounded by scantily clad cheerleader types either way, it just seems so cheap to me.

[ravenclaw]

[QUOTE=caffeinated;8176542]
It might be “good” for the sport, I don’t know. He’s just such a nice horse. He probably doesn’t care about being surrounded by scantily clad cheerleader types either way, it just seems so cheap to me. :/[/QUOTE]

I don’t like it either. Unfortunately, the world is all about marketing and “brands” and “platforms.” It doesn’t make me feel any different about AP but I have lost a little respect for Zayat. Doesn’t he have enough money already? :lol:

[SportArab]

[QUOTE=ravenclaw;8176616]
I don’t like it either. Unfortunately, the world is all about marketing and “brands” and “platforms.” It doesn’t make me feel any different about AP but I have lost a little respect for Zayat. Doesn’t he have enough money already? :lol:[/QUOTE]

Apparently not. He did afterall, have to use bankruptsy to restructure his farm’s debt at one point.

[SnicklefritzG]

This just makes the Penny Tweedy’s of the world look even classier. I met her at the KY horse park years ago and thought she was such a nice lady and go gracious to all the people wanting to get her autograph.

[ASB_Stars]

[QUOTE=gumtree;8176330]
Such a shame that historic sales pavilion with its unique architecture was torn down and not moved and “re-purposed”[/QUOTE]

I am so sorry that it is gone, but it was one ugly ass building, with all of the annexes running off of it. But, I have so many memories from there. Last time I was in Lexington, the engineering stakes were all around it, just prior to demolition. I took some pix of it, and shed a tear or two. End of an era, really.

[ASB_Stars]

[QUOTE=SportArab;8176624]
Apparently not. He did afterall, have to use bankruptsy to restructure his farm’s debt at one point.[/QUOTE]

I remember Fifth Third Bank took it in the ear.

[gumtree]

[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8176962]
I remember Fifth Third Bank took it in the ear.[/QUOTE]

As did a number of people on the horse end of things that we owed what to them was a lot of money but “chump change” out of the $40+ million he included them in.
A few years later he can afford to buy, breed and pay bills on 200+ horses?

We had a jerk do that to us when the crap hit the fan with the financial collapse 2007-2010. We almost lost our farm, had to fire-sale our best horses and some other things. We were advised to declare bankruptcy but didn’t. We were slow pay, but we were not no pay. Had to let go of key employees and do the work of 3. We survived just barely. But are no wear near were we were. Then I found out the guy has horses in training with some friends, bought mares, and breeding to very expensive stallions. The jerk walked away from the horses he had here so the “bleeding” didn’t stop with his checks. Two others did the same thing on a smaller scale. We were hardly the only ones. Not just in the horse business side of things. But “horse people” were the first to get screwed. Who needs a horse when the crap hits the fan?

Some people in this tread keep saying it’s about the horse not the connections. Well that’s true to a certain extent. But the title of this tread is not “A-P a little back ground”. So why people have to keep saying that is beyond me.

[gumtree]

[QUOTE=SnicklefritzG;8176663]
This just makes the Penny Tweedy’s of the world look even classier. I met her at the KY horse park years ago and thought she was such a nice lady and go gracious to all the people wanting to get her autograph.[/QUOTE]

“Miss Penny” hasn’t gone by “Tweedy” in a very long time since her divorce. She goes by her maiden name, Chenery.

I have known her pretty much my whole life. A nicer person is hard to come by. I have not seen her for a number of years but I am sure when I do we will pick up where we “left off” like it was yesterday.

[Equibrit]

[QUOTE=gumtree;8176313]
I am not trying to be obstinate but I don’t see what you have linked to refutes what I have been saying. At least not the way I read the following. Which can be found in each of the links and basically says the same thing.

If the auctioneer knowingly receives a bid on the seller’s behalf or the seller makes or procures such a bid, and notice has NOT been given that liberty for such bidding is reserved, the buyer may at his or her option avoid the sale or take the goods at the price of the last good faith bid prior to the completion of the sale. This subsection shall not apply to any bid at a forced sale.

Keeneland’s conditions of sale that is announced at the beginning of each sales session states very clearly, “gives notice” that “the right to bid in this sale IS reserved for all Sellers, including their disclosed and undisclosed Agents”. Buyers are instructed to read and understand THEIR conditions of sale.[/QUOTE]

But you said;

[QUOTE=gumtree;8176313]I am sorry this is NOT correct. The auctioneer does not have to announce that the horse in the ring is selling with a “reserve”. At least not in this country and or the states I have bought and or sold horses. Some sellers will have the auctioneer announce the horse sells without reserve.

The auctioneers for Tattersalls in England will “announce” during the auction process of a horse in the ring when the bidding has reached or gone over the reserve, “the horse is on the market”.[/QUOTE]

Conditions of sale are an announcement.

[SportArab]

[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8176962]
I remember Fifth Third Bank took it in the ear.[/QUOTE]

The report I read said the debts were paid, but he was allowed to take more time doing it.

[gumtree]

[QUOTE=Equibrit;8177312]
But you said;

Conditions of sale are an announcement.[/QUOTE]

LOL, now I see what you are talking about. Fair enough, but if you read what I wrote, "The auctioneer does not have to announce that THE HORSE IN THE RING is selling with a “reserve” or the seller has the right to bid. To me this is clear but I can see how it is not to those who have little to no TB auction experience.

There are announcements pertaining to a particular horse that is IN THE RING, the selling horse, i.e. cribber, ridgling, barren, not in foal etc. or any number of things that do not appear on the horse’s catalog page at the time of printing. They never announce the horse is selling with a reserve nor remind bidders that the seller can bid on their horse. Rarely if ever do they announce the horse in the ring is selling without reserve. Certain complete dispersal’s say in the catalog and is announced that all of the horse sell without reserve.

But they do not announce the Conditions of Sale for each horse that is in the ring. Conditions of sale and only certain parts are announced once, at the beginning of the sale.

I hope that is clear. My wife tells me all the time, what is clear to me is not always clear to her.

[SportArab]

Perhaps a better source for background…

For background on the bankruptcy, etc.

http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/7893631/zayat-gets-away-all

[Tiger_Paws]

[QUOTE=LaurieB;8173651]
The bidding process isn’t dishonest, it just works by a set of rules that you may not be familiar with. The vast majority of bidders understand exactly how it works. And for those that don’t, the auction companies strongly caution potential bidders to acquaint themselves with the system before getting involved for the first time.

Almost all horses go through the ring with a reserve, which only makes sense. Suppose I have a yearling to sell and suppose I decide that the horse is worth $100,000 to me. That’s the price below which I would rather keep the yearling and race it myself than sell it to someone else. The potential buyers aren’t the only ones who get to determine a horse’s value. It’s only fair that I, as seller, also get to have a say. If the buyers don’t agree with my valuation, there’s nothing forcing them to bid and the horse will simply go unsold.

If the auctioneer were to ask for an opening bid of $100,000 (on my mythical yearling) no one would raise their hand. The only horses whose first bid is six figures go on to sell in the seven figure range. So the auctioneer will ask for something lower (ie “what are you will to pay?”) “Will you give me fifty?” No takers. “Twenty-five?” No takers. “Who will give me ten?” And someone does and the auction begins.

It would be silly for an auctioneer to decline to accept lower, legitimate bids. The bidding below 100k isn’t a sham. It’s people bidding what they would like to pay for the horse. They are making honest bids and hoping that the other bidders will drop out before they reach their limit. In most cases, the reserve is pre-set and the sellers aren’t bidding at all.

As for “the true value of the horse” anyone on COTH will tell you that that price is whatever someone is willing to pay for the horse on the day. Sometimes the final bid is made by a buyer and it’s a sale; sometimes it’s made by the house and the horse is an RNA.[/QUOTE]

Not to derail this thread further, but with all due respect I think the various people on this thread who are part of the industry are missing the point.

All commercial transactions, be they for the purchase of a horse or anything else should as a matter law be open and transparent. What has been described on this thread is anything but. What has been described is no more than a con game.

If the point of a sale or auction is to come to a meeting of the minds as to what the sale price should be, why not state that up front? Why not say, the owner of this horse will not accept less than $X, and then let the buyer decide if he or she is willing to pay that amount?

When you have false bids the problem is not that the buyer pays more than they are willing to pay, that can’t happen unless there is a gun to his head. The problem occurs because he pays more than he had to pay.

A number of posters have stated that only the uninitiated get fooled. Laws are put into place not to protect seasoned buyers, they get put into place to protect the naive and uniformed from being duped. In common law the standard of reasonableness is used. Would a reasonable person know that the bidding was rigged?

Caveat emptor or buyer beware, speaks to the horses being sold, not the process. Using it in the way previous posters have would give any con man a free pass just by invoking it.