PDA

View Full Version : Keeneland Prices



DLee
Sep. 25, 2007, 07:55 PM
WOW...:eek: I turned on the Keeneland Sale for just a sec today, and saw rock bottom prices on a few horses... like $1100 and such! I looked up one horse's stud fee and it was $12,500... and he went for $1200 or so! One horse didn't even SELL because nobody bid on it.... is this normal? Is it hay related at all? I'm really, REALLY glad I wasn't there today with a checkbook!!

Texarkana
Sep. 25, 2007, 08:03 PM
This late in the game, yeah... that's pretty normal.

When I was prepping yearlings, the barn I worked for had a rather interesting mix of clientèle. We had a lot of expensive horses to sell, but we sure got some crap too. I had a couple RNA with a $1000 reserve. Like I probably could have run those yearlings through the New Holland sale and gotten at least $1000 for them...

By this point, you're dealing with the lessor pedigrees of horses, sellers, and buyers... for the most part, the big players have all gone home. But this is also where you get some of your best deals. :yes:

But I did hear prices were down a little bit this year. Makes sense with the way our economy has been.

Acertainsmile
Sep. 25, 2007, 08:38 PM
Always seems to be that way on the last day of the sale... If you look hard enough you sometimes can find a bargain.

miss_critic
Sep. 25, 2007, 08:43 PM
Well, I don't think that is necessarily true (that the numbers were down). It was the "2nd highest season" ever. Where the sale lacked was on the high end, because Sheikh Mohammed and Coolmore Stud weren't bidding against each other. But the average and median were up, so that is better news than you can hope for. I think that is more indicative of the market. Those high peaks from the select sales were messing up the data imo (from past years).
This article sums it up.
http://auctions.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=40975

On a related note, (if you get Bloodhorse, you'll know what I mean) I thought it would be, I don't know, funny, amusing, appropriate, if the Unbridled Song colt (sales topper)on the cover would take the name Market Correction, because the heading on the cover right over his picture is, you guessed it, Market Correction.

Texarkana
Sep. 25, 2007, 08:49 PM
Well, I don't think that is necessarily true (that the numbers were down). It was the "2nd highest season" ever. Where the sale lacked was on the high end, because Sheikh Mohammed and Coolmore Stud weren't bidding against each other. But the average and median were up, so that is better news than you can hope for. I think that is more indicative of the market. Those high peaks from the select sales were messing up the data imo (from past years).
This article sums it up.
http://auctions.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=40975

On a related note, (if you get Bloodhorse, you'll know what I mean) I thought it would be, I don't know, funny, amusing, appropriate, if the Unbridled Song colt (sales topper)on the cover would take the name Market Correction, because the heading on the cover right over his picture is, you guessed it, Market Correction.

I should specify, numbers were down from last year.... they're still very high in general.

SleepyFox
Sep. 26, 2007, 09:15 AM
WOW...:eek: I turned on the Keeneland Sale for just a sec today, and saw rock bottom prices on a few horses... like $1100 and such! I looked up one horse's stud fee and it was $12,500... and he went for $1200 or so! One horse didn't even SELL because nobody bid on it.... is this normal? Is it hay related at all? I'm really, REALLY glad I wasn't there today with a checkbook!!

Overall, this sale was quite strong. Especially considering it's gargantuan size. The thing is, when there are that many horses why buy something that doesn't have the vet report or conformation you want? There are plenty other options. Plus, there's Fasig-Tipton's KY Oct. sale, Fasig-Tipton Mid Atlantic, LA Breeder's Oct., etc. coming up right around the corner.

And, there are always horses that sell really, really low. Some of them are deals, others not so much. Economy always has some impact. Hay prices? I dunno, maybe at the very bottom?

I seriously thought about going back for the last day (was there earlier in the sale and was outbid on a few), and of course, a couple that I was interested in on paper sold really cheaply and I'm sort of kicking myself, but who knows what they looked like in person. The main reason I didn't go back was because of the staggering number of outs (most of my early picks were outs). I'm taking this as a sign that consignors feared interest would be waning by the last two days.

Again, I think this sale did pretty well. Especially in the middle market and the pinhookers were active. Prior to the sale there was a great quote from one of the sale managers basically saying "There are so many of them, I don't know how we're going to find homes for them all." I don't have the exact quote, but I remember thinking he probably regretted saying that. :) But, then again, I sort of discount the astronomical purchases - it's nice to see, but to look at the overall health of a sale, you should set aside any serious outliers, because they will skew your overall results.

Anyway, while I'm on my soapbox (the view is great from here!).... when you see a large number of horses selling for at or below advertised stud fee - which you have for a long time - it seems clear the market is saying that stud fees are too high.

Texarkana
Sep. 26, 2007, 09:36 AM
Anyway, while I'm on my soapbox (the view is great from here!).... when you see a large number of horses selling for at or below advertised stud fee - which you have for a long time - it seems clear the market is saying that stud fees are too high.

You are so right on that one. I keep wondering how long these stud fees are going to last... when your stallion is standing for $10K, but his get are only bringing $5K (or less!) on average at the sales, something is terribly askew...

miss_critic
Sep. 26, 2007, 12:05 PM
Yeah, how do you sell a Storm Cat colt for $50K? They couldn't have paid the $500K stud price could they???

Absolut Equestrian
Sep. 26, 2007, 12:10 PM
Yeah, how do you sell a Storm Cat colt for $50K? They couldn't have paid the $500K stud price could they???

I saw that one go through the ring and wondered the same thing :confused:. It was consigned for Overbrook, not a bad looking colt. Leaves one to wonder exactly what was on the radiographs :eek:

Linny
Sep. 26, 2007, 12:22 PM
Yeah, how do you sell a Storm Cat colt for $50K? They couldn't have paid the $500K stud price could they???
If Overbrook was the seller, I'm shocked that they'd let him sell that low, he was not an RNA. I'd figure that they'd keep him home rather than risk the stinging repercussions of a SC baby going so low.

tmo0hul
Sep. 26, 2007, 03:40 PM
If Overbrook was the seller, I'm shocked that they'd let him sell that low, he was not an RNA. I'd figure that they'd keep him home rather than risk the stinging repercussions of a SC baby going so low.

Why? He's 24 years old. That his prices have been strong for so long is astounding. He has nothing left to prove. If Overbrook bred him they did not pay any stud fee anyhow. My guess is that he was a radiographic mess. No need to keep a yearling that will never make it to the track.

hitchinmygetalong
Sep. 27, 2007, 06:42 AM
Anyway, while I'm on my soapbox (the view is great from here!).... when you see a large number of horses selling for at or below advertised stud fee - which you have for a long time - it seems clear the market is saying that stud fees are too high.

Or it is a sign that they are overbreeding stallions to a bunch of crap (unraced mares, in particular) and producing crap foals.

SleepyFox
Sep. 27, 2007, 11:37 AM
Or it is a sign that they are overbreeding stallions to a bunch of crap (unraced mares, in particular) and producing crap foals.

Well, that too perhaps, but stud fees are still absurdly high. :)
And, unfortunately the market would rather see an UR mare than an uplaced mare or a mare with a crappy race record. So, really, if you have a decently bred mare with questionable talent, you're better off not racing her and just sending her to the shed (to an overbooked, overpriced stallion to produce a money pit of a crappy foal :lol:). In a lot of ways, this industry really doesn't make much sense.

Ravencrest_Camp
Oct. 1, 2007, 11:20 PM
Well, that too perhaps, but stud fees are still absurdly high. :)
And, unfortunately the market would rather see an UR mare than an uplaced mare or a mare with a crappy race record. So, really, if you have a decently bred mare with questionable talent, you're better off not racing her and just sending her to the shed (to an overbooked, overpriced stallion to produce a money pit of a crappy foal :lol:). In a lot of ways, this industry really doesn't make much sense.

Well it's not really based on reason, now is it?

The gamblers aren't confined to the betting window.

abrant
Oct. 2, 2007, 04:26 PM
Not many people pay the advertised stud fee.

I booked two mares this spring. One won over $100k, the other close to and almost equaled the track record at AP. Good racemares but not all that earthshaking pedigree-wise.

One fee was half the advertised. The other was $3k less than advertised. Both stud fees were between $5-10k.

Mare owners are still losing money, I agree, but probably not as much as you think.