PDA

View Full Version : Would you owe a commission?



florida foxhunter
May. 16, 2009, 01:55 PM
I originally posted a question, from a conversation with a friend who was upset with her trainer. As often happens, things got blown out of whack and I have since learned additional information. The friend had ridden with this trainer for quite awhile and considered a close friend .........and I guess it's really hard to mix business and friendship. Feelings were hurt, and I threw a post out there.....and whew it's taken a life of it's own!!
As often happens, there are always two sides of a story.....so the moral of this story is......trainers and clients should communicate better..not only before a deal, but if a problem arises after it as well!

alliekat
May. 16, 2009, 02:00 PM
I would say no. Since she found the horse, made the arrangements. How far away was the horse? $450.00 in my opinion seems compensation enough.
You didn't say, but did the trainer negotiate the sale price?
If she did I can see where there could be a grey area.
This is why it is always smart to get everything in writing/contracts before hand.
Especially with a so-called friend!!!

Doberpei
May. 16, 2009, 02:10 PM
Sounds like an ugly situation, but since the trainer originally said she wasn't originally going to ask for one (which makes me think that she KNOWS she isn't really entitled to one), then I would say NO. Unless, of course, the trainer's standard contract lists a day rate for horse shopping, plus a fee upon the purchase of any horse viewed with the trainer's assistance (which to me sounds like double dipping), in which case, your friend was ignorant of the trainer's standard operating procedure, and might find herself having to pay a commission.

However, I do think that it's the seller's responsibility to pay a commission (if the trainer had nothing to do with finding the horse, but merely looked with your friend, and said "Yes, it's suitable" I would think it would be a token, rather than a large commission if the trainer had done the search, and said, let's try this one, then it should be a standard commission.

It's a problem when work and friendship cross a line.

Years ago, a friend of mine who owned a barn met a guy, liked a horse he had to sell, and said she would try it at her barn, and see if any of her clients might be interested. A bunch of kids tried the horse, and after a month, I bought him. I found out later that the guy never gave my friend a commission, and he didn't even pay for a month's board. So I did pay the board for the horse for the month, and a small commission. I still have the horse and the friend.

Your friend paid a fee for the trainer's time since the trainer wasn't going to be making money teaching lessons. That seems fair.

Madeline
May. 16, 2009, 02:12 PM
Golly. I thought that the $450 was pretty bold. Especially for a "friend." Who bought lunch?

Mel0309
May. 16, 2009, 02:27 PM
I would think you would not have to pay a commision if what was agreed on was a day fee. However if your friend does choose to pay a commision then I would subtract the $450 out of that. These things really should be discussed beforehand.

Beenthere
May. 16, 2009, 02:39 PM
Absolutely not. This is just getting crazy with so called "trainers" needing to make so much money for nothing. She paid her a day rate to see the horse that the client found herself and that her client bought on her own. There is NO commission due. She should pay a reasonable hourly rate and a lesson rate which she clearly did. Tell the trainer what a jerk they are and I would find a new trainer.

In this economy people are getting desperate

enjoytheride
May. 16, 2009, 02:51 PM
$450 bucks is a ton of money for someone else to do all the leg work and the driving so you can go "yep, buy it"

I'd say this person is her friend only as long as she forks out the money so she is no friend at all. She does not owe her ex trainer any money and she should not pay. I would not expect this trainer to be trustworthy with anyone else either.

2hsmommy
May. 16, 2009, 03:17 PM
So the trainer is irked that she is not getting the board/training fees out of the horse she assumed she would get?

Oh well.
Trainer was paid for the day trip, which is all that she's owed.

Carol Ames
May. 16, 2009, 03:24 PM
no:no:

Jaegermonster
May. 16, 2009, 03:37 PM
Sounds like an ugly situation, but since the trainer originally said she wasn't originally going to ask for one (which makes me think that she KNOWS she isn't really entitled to one), then I would say NO. Unless, of course, the trainer's standard contract lists a day rate for horse shopping, plus a fee upon the purchase of any horse viewed with the trainer's assistance (which to me sounds like double dipping), in which case, your friend was ignorant of the trainer's standard operating procedure, and might find herself having to pay a commission.

However, I do think that it's the seller's responsibility to pay a commission (if the trainer had nothing to do with finding the horse, but merely looked with your friend, and said "Yes, it's suitable" I would think it would be a token, rather than a large commission if the trainer had done the search, and said, let's try this one, then it should be a standard commission.

It's a problem when work and friendship cross a line.

Years ago, a friend of mine who owned a barn met a guy, liked a horse he had to sell, and said she would try it at her barn, and see if any of her clients might be interested. A bunch of kids tried the horse, and after a month, I bought him. I found out later that the guy never gave my friend a commission, and he didn't even pay for a month's board. So I did pay the board for the horse for the month, and a small commission. I still have the horse and the friend.

Your friend paid a fee for the trainer's time since the trainer wasn't going to be making money teaching lessons. That seems fair.

I don't think anyone owes a commission. especially not the seller, for crying out loud. The seller had no business relationship with the trainer. Why the hell should the seller pay them?
If the trainer had done all the work to find horses, etc then sure she should get a commission. As it is she was paid for the work she did.

I sold a horse about 6 months ago. I have a trainer. I ran several ads in the Chronicle, on various websites, etc. I paid the trainer a few times to show the horse, sent the horse there for training for a month. Trainer didn't bring me any buyers or show the horse to anyone. (not anything bad about the trainer, the horse was just a hard sell and the market now didn't help either) I sold the horse on my own, the trainer was not involved at all and never once did she say one peep about a commission. IMHO that would have been very penny wise and pound foolish because I would then not be training with her any longer.
The commission is to compensate the trainer for the legwork, phone calls, time they spent etc that they did and ads they ran to get the horse sold. No workie no money.

llsc
May. 16, 2009, 03:43 PM
It sounds to me like the trainer is being vindictive since they had a falling out. The trainer agreed no commission on the horse and now wants one because she's mad at the student. Shame on her. That is extremely unprofessional and your friend should be happy to be rid of her.

feather river
May. 16, 2009, 03:43 PM
best advice to your friend is that she does not legally owe any commission. There was no written or verbal agreement for such if the horse was purchased with the trainer's "help". A key factor is the trainer did charge her a day fee at the time and your friend paid that. That was the deal at the moment of the transaction.

The trainer is now trying to use "trainer power leverage" on your friend to have her feel bad or whatever--she won't like me anymore-who knows what--to get extra money out of your friend now that she is no longer a customer.

Further if she does pay even something more she is rewarding the trainer's bad behavior and that will just encourage the trainer to do this again to someone else.

Don't pay.

gottagrey
May. 16, 2009, 05:54 PM
No - and since there was no contract the trainer is SOL. Does the trainer know what the horse was purchased for? If not, I think I'd tell the trainer sure, I'll pay commission in lieu of the day rate I paid, horse was $2500 at 10% commission - um Suzy trainer looks like you owe me $200. Thank you very much :lol:

Tell friend not to pay..

Long Spot
May. 16, 2009, 05:58 PM
Um, yeah, have to say a big "NO" to this. If person found the horse all on her own, trainer/friend did no leg work and made no calls and had nothing to do with the purchase, now she's just being a pill.

Sounds like she made some money by having the horse in training already, AND got a nice fat $450 for swinging by to look at the horse pre-sale. To me, it sounds like she might have really liked the horse and is maybe a tad angry that the horse was taken out of her full program and went home with the owner.

Nope, I'd suggest she either ignore the letter outright and just move on, or if she needs closure, call the trainer/friend and calmly explain that she doesn't owe her a dime and she's sorry the relationship had to end this way, but thanks for (insert whatever she thinks she can thank her for at this point).

MagicRoseFarm
May. 16, 2009, 06:34 PM
This trainer CHOSE to bill a day fee herself. She did not tell this person that IF she was involved at all with a purchase , she expected a commission, and she admits that. She was paid for services rendered once, and once is enough.

As a breeder I am so sick of the double dipping, i could vomit.

Jessi P
May. 16, 2009, 06:40 PM
Yeah....double dipping is killing the integrity of horse sales. I say she owes the trainer nothing - she already got $450 out of her.

PonyPenny
May. 16, 2009, 06:49 PM
Has a very similar situation happen to me when I recently bought my daughter a horse. Unfortunately it resulted in the trainer saying either pay up the commission or leave. We left. This was after twelve years with this said trainer. Usually when you don't pay, things get ugly, so be prepared with a back up plan in case you are asked to leave.

RockinHorse
May. 16, 2009, 07:46 PM
Now they've had a bit of estrangement, and she got a bill with a note from the trainer saying she had not asked for a commission originally trying to help her be able to buy the horse, but now that she's taken the horse home, the trainer said she "hoped she would come forth with ta he commission owed".


No, trainer does not get to retroactively charge a commission if that was not the original agreement. Now, if they had signed an agreement that the trainer would waive the commision in lieu of the buyers agreement to stay in training with the trainer for x amount of time, that would be a different story.

Sounds to me like your friend is well rid of this trainer.

klmck63
May. 16, 2009, 11:50 PM
The commission is to compensate the trainer for the legwork, phone calls, time they spent etc that they did and ads they ran to get the horse sold. No workie no money.
:yes:

If the trainer had found the horse, set up the trial and helped facilitate the purchase then yes, a commission would be owed but that doesn't seem to be the case.

For my horse commission was paid to two people, the friend and brother in law of my coach who suggested one of the horses he was catch riding as a possible horse for me who we had previously ruled out as being too green and my coach who came with me tried the horse before me, gave me a lesson while I tried the horse and made sure the sale went smoothly. (Aka made sure our offer was accepted over another one of the same price).

dwblover
May. 16, 2009, 11:59 PM
I vote NO commission!!!

Addison
May. 17, 2009, 08:11 AM
No commission should be paid.

A trainer should not charge a day fee if they expect a commission. A commission is supposed to cover the time and expertise expended by the trainer on behalf of the client's horse search. He/she cannot have it both ways.

Her letter requesting a commission is very unprofessional.

Coreene
May. 17, 2009, 09:54 AM
Another example illustrating the trainer-client relationship is first and foremost a professional one and not a true friendship. Yes, there are rare exceptions, but before you say "oh, not true, my trainer is my friend," would they be your friend if you switched barns? Trainers are someone you are in a professional relationship with. And I think your friend's "friend" the trainer sounds exceptionally unprofessional.

Mara
May. 17, 2009, 10:50 AM
No commission should be paid.

A trainer should not charge a day fee if they expect a commission. A commission is supposed to cover the time and expertise expended by the trainer on behalf of the client's horse search. He/she cannot have it both ways.

Her letter requesting a commission is very unprofessional.

Agreed. $450 is a pretty nice chunk for a day trip fee, as well. Who did the driving and in whose vehicle? ;)

Unfortunately, a few trainers view the commission thing as a "given", regardless of whether or not the trainer does any work. The student/boarder is in their barn, hence they think they deserve a commission. That isn't the way it's supposed to work.

Horselove
May. 17, 2009, 11:48 AM
First of all I am not a trainer, but I am a horse owner. I am therefore not voicing an opinion from the "trainer" side.........however, I am a business woman.......so here goes.
I am going against the grain of the thread. My guess is that although the individual "found" one horse on her own, the trainer in all probablity spent countless hourse of her professional time looking at, talking to owners, even going to see horses that didn't pan out for one reason or another?? The end commission is not just for the one horse that is purchased but it is compensation for the total time a trainer spends trying to help a client find a horse.
The $450 for the day is probably the cost for lost wages for the trainer for that day as she spent the entire day with her "friend". Whether or not the $450 is exorbinant probably again depends on how long the day was..........
At the end of the day, how much is one's professional time worth?? I personally value the time my trainer spends ensuring that when we purchase a horse it is not just a horse........but the right one.

Coreene
May. 17, 2009, 12:12 PM
Except that the OP's friend found a horse online and paid the trainer what she asked for. She was not, according to the original post, on a long quest for a horse. The trainer quoted a day fee which was paid, and the trainer said she did not want a commission. To ask for one after the fact is a big illustration, to me at least, that she is trying to screw her client.

Dune
May. 17, 2009, 12:12 PM
Uh no. You either get a "day fee" OR a commission, not both, sorry charlie. :no: I had a trainer once that I also came to view as a "friend". I found a horse I was interested in, did all the preliminaries and asked him to fly up to see/ride the horse to see what he thought. If he liked her, I'd buy. I expected to pay his expenses and a bonus. When we spoke, he said up front, he'd expect his expenses paid and a commission if I bought the horse. Well, it surprised me a little bit because I was planning to pay him a fee whether or not I purchased the horse (in addition to expenses). The very fact that he wanted a commission on a horse I found kinda rubbed me the wrong way....so I passed on the whole deal. Again, with my plan, he would've made more $$ whether or not I purchased the horse.....but hey, at least, though, he was up front and I could make my choice ahead of time. That was fine with me. :yes: This trainer coming back retroactively is BS. :mad:

bambam
May. 17, 2009, 01:23 PM
My guess is that although the individual "found" one horse on her own, the trainer in all probablity spent countless hourse of her professional time looking at, talking to owners, even going to see horses that didn't pan out for one reason or another?? The end commission is not just for the one horse that is purchased but it is compensation for the total time a trainer spends trying to help a client find a horse.
The $450 for the day is probably the cost for lost wages for the trainer for that day as she spent the entire day with her "friend". Whether or not the $450 is exorbinant probably again depends on how long the day was..........
At the end of the day, how much is one's professional time worth?? I personally value the time my trainer spends ensuring that when we purchase a horse it is not just a horse........but the right one.
If that were indeed the background (i.e. trainer spent time finding horses but none of them worked out and she bought the horse she found), trainer would still not be entitled to a commission- working on commission is a risky undertaking- you might get nothing or you might get a fat chunk of change for a half hour's work or you might get something in between- that is the way the commission ball bounces. You think a real estate agent is going to get a commission when the buyer finds a house on their own and buys it without them just because the agent spent time looking for and showing places that the buyer did not like enough to buy? Nope- that is the nature of the commission and trainers are no different. This whole "I touched the transaction at some point and therefore am entitled to a commission regardless of the nature of my actual involvement" approach of some trainers is a total anathema to me and contrary to every single business model except some portions of the horse world and it just boggles the mind.
Regardless, you get a day fee or a commision- not both

Oakstable
May. 17, 2009, 01:33 PM
I'm a breeder, not a trainer. If a trainer sends a client my way, what's the commission?

I'm assuming trainers are always looking for appropriate horses for students.

What about the rider of the horse? She may not find the buyers but she needs to show the horse under saddle.

TIA

PonyPenny
May. 17, 2009, 02:29 PM
Bambam,

You summed it up exactly the way it should be. Why is the horse world so different than the real world when it comes to commissions. I still believe there should be one commission paid by the seller that is split between the parties involved. It should all be in writing up front, so there are no surprises.

Jaegermonster
May. 17, 2009, 03:53 PM
I'm a breeder, not a trainer. If a trainer sends a client my way, what's the commission?

I'm assuming trainers are always looking for appropriate horses for students.

What about the rider of the horse? She may not find the buyers but she needs to show the horse under saddle.

TIA

IMO if a trainer sends you a client the client needs to pay the trainer, not you. The client has a business relationship with the trainer and they need to agree on commissions or whatever.
The rider of the horse was or should have been compensated in whatever way was agreed upon for whatever they did by whomever hired them. Period.

For example, if I send my horse to my trainers to be shown and sold, then I would expect to either pay a set price to whomever to show the horse, or the trainer can agree with the rider to pay an agreed upon percentage of the commission, which option I'm sure would depend on the value fo the horse.
Either way, it should be agreed upon, preferably in writing, prior to looking at horses or whatever else who is paying what to whom.

Coppers mom
May. 17, 2009, 05:32 PM
Ok, I have a question:

I had a trainer call about a horse I had listed on the internet, and then asked if I'd be willing to give her a commission for bringing out her client. I said no, because in my mind, she hadn't done anything but look on the internet, and I had just put the horse out there for anyone, not just the trainer. She never ended up coming to see the horse, maybe because of me saying no, and maybe because the horse was sold within three days of placing the ad.

So should I have really paid her a commission? I don't understand why a seller should be blindsided with some random trainer's fee. I mean, it's not like no one would ever buy the horse without this single trainer finding it. I can understand if I had called around and said "Hey, I have this horse", but is it fair to ask a completely unfamiliar seller for a commission?

TIA!

Calhoun
May. 17, 2009, 05:41 PM
If it happened as the OP stated, I wouldn't even acknowledge the trainer's bill. Let the trainer spend her money trying to collect.

VCT
May. 17, 2009, 06:02 PM
No, client does not owe a commission. When I had clients who were looking on their own for horses and then wanted me to go see them I charged a fee for my time spent going to see the horse(s), which was agreed upon beforehand. Then if they decide to buy the horse with my input great. But that is it. They already paid me for my time and they will be paying for lessons, coaching, etc in the future on said horse. Fair is fair.

Now if I had a client who did not want to look on their own at all... I would charge a go-see fee for the ones we went to look at, and I would charge a commission on a final sale due to all the legwork I would have done before presenting horses to them who they may be interested in. All the weeding out, phone calls, video watching etc. This was all agreed upon beforehand. If they liked the first horse or two we looked at and ended up buying one and I didn't put much time in, I'd waive the commission part. As I said before, they now own this horse, probably keeping it at my barn, and will be taking lessons, going to shows, etc.

Being that I don't charge ridiculous fees or commissions I never had anyone have a problem with that. I certainly never charged $450 for a day to go view one horse. That in itself is a bit ridiculous in my opinion. Especially if the client was driving, etc.

I dunno, it just doesn't need to be so complicated. I expect to be paid fairly for my time but I don't expect to be paid for nothing nor to be paid some ridiculously exorbitant fee.

RockinHorse
May. 17, 2009, 06:55 PM
Now if I had a client who did not want to look on their own at all... I would charge a go-see fee for the ones we went to look at, and I would charge a commission on a final sale due to all the legwork I would have done before presenting horses to them who they may be interested in.

I don't get this " go-see fee" in addition to the commision at all :confused:.

Queen Latisha
May. 17, 2009, 07:22 PM
Go see fee, commission from seller and client...WTF??
Do people actually pay a trainer these fees?:eek:

grandprixjump
May. 17, 2009, 07:31 PM
Yea, I'm not getting the go-see fee in addition to the commission. I've only known of trainers who do one or the other - not both.

But then the Go SEE fee, or at least a set percentage of it, should we waived from the commission fee. This would be to prevent a client from going to look at 75 unsuitable horses over a 2 month period and then just buying a $500 horse that they would owe a commission of $150 on. So you charge a fee of $150 for example to look at 3 horses, the customer buys the 3rd horse for $15k the commission would be $2250 minus the $150x3 so the balance would be $1800...or if waiving 1/2 the look fee you would owe $2025 as a commission.

I know to easy an idea, and to right for the horse world to allow...

RockinHorse
May. 17, 2009, 07:36 PM
But then the Go SEE fee, or at least a set percentage of it, should we waived from the commission fee. This would be to prevent a client from going to look at 75 unsuitable horses over a 2 month period and then just buying a $500 horse that they would owe a commission of $150 on. So you charge a fee of $150 for example to look at 3 horses, the customer buys the 3rd horse for $15k the commission would be $2250 minus the $150x3 so the balance would be $1800...or if waiving 1/2 the look fee you would owe $2025 as a commission.

I know to easy an idea, and to right for the horse world to allow...

I understand the logic of this, however, the way I understood VCT's post was that he/she charges a "go-see fee" for the horses he/she has found for his/her clients in addition to the commission. This would mean that the client would pay the trainer a fee for looking at every horse the trainer thought might be a match. Once the trainer does actually make a good match, then they also get a commision.

Bogie
May. 17, 2009, 07:39 PM
I agree. The trainer has already been paid. It is indeed double dipping to ask for a day fee AND a commission.

However, this underscores the need discussing everything up front.

Personally, when I've looked at horses to buy I've always negotiated a day fee with my trainers. I didn't expect a trainer to find me a horse, I always did the research up front and the negotions. However, I wanted their opinions. That cut out any confusion.

Years ago a friend has a horse at her barn that she thought I would like. I did end up buying the horse and I did send her a commission check (a 5% referral fee). She didn't ask for it but I felt she deserved it.


This trainer CHOSE to bill a day fee herself. She did not tell this person that IF she was involved at all with a purchase , she expected a commission, and she admits that. She was paid for services rendered once, and once is enough.

As a breeder I am so sick of the double dipping, i could vomit.

VarsityHero4
May. 17, 2009, 07:42 PM
I certainly don't agree with that kind of commission policy. If the trainer had originally said she would waive commission to help the client out (how it sounds in the original post) she DEFINITELY should not get commission. Even the $450 day fee is a little ridiculous. Sounds like the client just wanted a yay or nay, not a full analysis. However when I was working with my former trainer to find a horse and said I can't pay commission AND get a new horse that will do what I need it to do I asked her if she would look at any videos or pictures of horses that I found (I wasn't even asking her to come with me). She told me if she even looked at the ad she would have to charge commission.

Needless to say, I don't ride with her anymore. I can't stand nickel & dimers!

florida foxhunter
May. 17, 2009, 07:45 PM
Thanks everyone ...your responses are basically what I expected! The buyer had been doing lessons and been a long time client/friend (over for dinner, etc).......
She had asked the trainer (via emails) opinions on other horses she'd found online......but the trainer had not spent a lot of time on this particular horse.......other than the trip up to see him.
The buyer found this horse. The trainer had reviewed photos and given opinions from time to time on other horses at no charge (out of friendship I assume) while the buyer was in pursuit of a new horse. The trainer rode up (maybe a 3 hour drive) to see this horse with her (thus the day fee) ........oked it, and my friend bought it......They took it straight to the trainer's barn for what I was led to believe was fairly expensive training for months........and when the owner brought it home ( 2 weeks earlier than expected because of possible ulcers and unreturned phone calls), the commission was mentioned.
I feel like the ensuing situation was part a communication thing, and part a friendshipthat had deteriorated and then was handled the wrong way.
I hope I"m not stirring a pot here......not trying to cause anyone problems nor bad feelings!
Just a can of worms I probably shouldn't have opened, haha..........it's not even my problem or business!

Filly85'
May. 17, 2009, 07:48 PM
Ok, I have a question:

I had a trainer call about a horse I had listed on the internet, and then asked if I'd be willing to give her a commission for bringing out her client. I said no, because in my mind, she hadn't done anything but look on the internet, and I had just put the horse out there for anyone, not just the trainer. She never ended up coming to see the horse, maybe because of me saying no, and maybe because the horse was sold within three days of placing the ad.

So should I have really paid her a commission? I don't understand why a seller should be blindsided with some random trainer's fee. I mean, it's not like no one would ever buy the horse without this single trainer finding it. I can understand if I had called around and said "Hey, I have this horse", but is it fair to ask a completely unfamiliar seller for a commission?

TIA!

You know, this should be a joke, but I don't think you're joking. I've never heard of this and it's sad if it's not a joke. Completely unfair! If a trainer ever asked me that, I'd firmly say no! It's ridiculous. I don't care who they are...

feather river
May. 17, 2009, 08:15 PM
You know, this should be a joke, but I don't think you're joking. I've never heard of this and it's sad if it's not a joke. Completely unfair! If a trainer ever asked me that, I'd firmly say no! It's ridiculous. I don't care who they are...

what's even more funny is that if the trainer asked you and you said no, you'd never sell another horse through that trainer.

wake up to how the horse biz works. your answer should have been that you have priced the horse to not include a commission which means the price would have to bump up to include the trainer's commission. then see what the trainer says.

trainer's are out there trying to earn a living by giving their best advice to their clientele.

I have already responded to the OP on this thread in that if that trainer had been paid her day fee by her client, she was owed no further money.

all of this is subject to negotiation, and best done 'before the fact'.

Alagirl
May. 17, 2009, 08:34 PM
what's even more funny is that if the trainer asked you and you said no, you'd never sell another horse through that trainer.

wake up to how the horse biz works. your answer should have been that you have priced the horse to not include a commission which means the price would have to bump up to include the trainer's commission. then see what the trainer says.

trainer's are out there trying to earn a living by giving their best advice to their clientele.

I have already responded to the OP on this thread in that if that trainer had been paid her day fee by her client, she was owed no further money.

all of this is subject to negotiation, and best done 'before the fact'.

don't you mean the trainer acts as go between and rakes in a commission from the seller and a tide sum he skims off the top from the buyer's check?

In any case, I am with those who say NO WAY. Well, as much as it goes for the buyer, it goes for the 'agent' as well: get it in writing. I'd love to see Judge Judy tell her off...;)

Jaegermonster
May. 17, 2009, 08:49 PM
trainer's are out there trying to earn a living by giving their best advice to their clientele.

.


then their clients need to be the ones paying them

Jaegermonster
May. 17, 2009, 08:54 PM
Ok, I have a question:

I had a trainer call about a horse I had listed on the internet, and then asked if I'd be willing to give her a commission for bringing out her client. I said no, because in my mind, she hadn't done anything but look on the internet, and I had just put the horse out there for anyone, not just the trainer. She never ended up coming to see the horse, maybe because of me saying no, and maybe because the horse was sold within three days of placing the ad.

So should I have really paid her a commission? I don't understand why a seller should be blindsided with some random trainer's fee. I mean, it's not like no one would ever buy the horse without this single trainer finding it. I can understand if I had called around and said "Hey, I have this horse", but is it fair to ask a completely unfamiliar seller for a commission?

TIA!


It never hurts to ask, trainers will keep pulling this kind of crap as long as people are willing to put up with it and write the checks.
That trainer doesn't work for you, whoever hired them needs to pay them.

when I sold my house, the buyer had a realtor and we had a realtor. The two realtors split the agreed upon commission, which was 6% of the sale price. No way in hell was I paying a double commission to the buyers realtor. I didn't hire him, he doesn't work for me.

Filly85'
May. 17, 2009, 08:59 PM
what's even more funny is that if the trainer asked you and you said no, you'd never sell another horse through that trainer.

wake up to how the horse biz works. your answer should have been that you have priced the horse to not include a commission which means the price would have to bump up to include the trainer's commission. then see what the trainer says.

trainer's are out there trying to earn a living by giving their best advice to their clientele.

I have already responded to the OP on this thread in that if that trainer had been paid her day fee by her client, she was owed no further money.

all of this is subject to negotiation, and best done 'before the fact'.

I don't give a crap if the trainer is trying to make a living. They should make a living honestly or get out of the business.

This practice is very common in racing, I didn't know it had drifted into the H/J world as the horses aren't normally bought and sold for millions. Although, some high profile cases have come up (...ahem...cough cough...BB and MS...those in racing will know those initials;) ) that have made the general public more aware of them.

I think this practice still goes on, but either the bloodstock agents and trainer don't do it as often or have gotten a lot more discreet about it. Some pissed some big clients off by this practice and those clients dropped the trainers. In the end, it isn't a very smart practice for the trainer to make a deal with the seller and neither of them disclose this commission to the buyer. It can come back to bite them.

Sorry, I don't want anything to do with these kinds of deals. It just makes the horse world dirty in my opinion. Of course, I am here for the love of the horse and the sport...not for the money. I think we need a COTH Black List of the trainers that do this, and don't disclose it to the buyer.

florida foxhunter
May. 17, 2009, 09:30 PM
Interesting point, Jageremeister! Had this deal been done in Florida, KY or CA (possibly now VA and others) there are administrative rules that REQUIRE a bill of sale to state comissions paid and the sales price (also, any known defects in the horse).....

A rule/law proposed by and followed by professinals hired by and Jess Jackson, himself.........the owner of Rachael Alexander.....winner of the Preakness!..just thought I'd add this to "muddy the waters", haha..........but it's true to my knowledge!

(I didn't mean to insinuate that this particular deal needed any more disclosure. During this sale there was never any comission paid...the trainer did not ask the seller or buyer for a commission at the time of the sale. This dual agency situation is not the issue......I think this thread has sort of taken on a life of it's own as often happens! I only commented about the new laws for general information for folks who didn't seem to know about it from above and below posts!)

Wanderluster
May. 18, 2009, 12:20 AM
I wonder if "go see" fees are a better way to compensate someone for their opinion. In some ways it would remove a large financial reward for finding a very expensive horse and allow a very impartial, independent opinion. It might be a minimum daily fee or per horse fee.
That system could be corrupted by under the table dealings. but I think it is overall a fair way to pay a professional for their opinion. In fact it could be billed by the horse, miles traveled, etc. The client would know the hourly/daily costs and would not feel so detached in the process.
Payments and expectations need to be spelled out from the beginning and adhered to. One good way to keep friends as clients and clients as friends. ;)

Mara
May. 18, 2009, 12:31 AM
then their clients need to be the ones paying them

That, and trainers who look for every teeny-tiny angle to squeeze a nickel from someone do the profession no favors in terms of maintaining a good reputation.

And if I found out my trainer passed on an opportunity for me to see/try a horse that looked like it might be a fit, because the seller refused to pay the trainer a fee up front, I'd be, um, irritated, to say the least. It would be clear that the cash grab was more important to the trainer than the client's interests.

GallopGirl
May. 18, 2009, 01:31 AM
Really, it depends on the agreement with the trainer. My trainer does get a commission if I go out and find the horse, never talk to her, show her a pic or a video, and then bring the horse into her barn. She gets the commission because she's my trainer. Doesn't make sense to me, but that's what's expected and is normal in the BNT world.

That said, if the trainer never mentioned a commission when the horse was brought into the barn, and she billed and took the $450, matter closed. She can't come back later and say, "since you're not boarding with me, you owe me more money"... yeah, nooooo. Doesn't work like that. Can't come back after the fact and ask for more.

bambam
May. 18, 2009, 09:20 AM
My trainer does get a commission if I go out and find the horse, never talk to her, show her a pic or a video, and then bring the horse into her barn. She gets the commission because she's my trainer. Doesn't make sense to me, but that's what's expected and is normal in the BNT world.

:eek::eek::eek:
It may be expected but that is freaking ridiculous IMO

Coppers mom
May. 18, 2009, 10:36 AM
what's even more funny is that if the trainer asked you and you said no, you'd never sell another horse through that trainer.

wake up to how the horse biz works. your answer should have been that you have priced the horse to not include a commission which means the price would have to bump up to include the trainer's commission. then see what the trainer says.

trainer's are out there trying to earn a living by giving their best advice to their clientele.

I have already responded to the OP on this thread in that if that trainer had been paid her day fee by her client, she was owed no further money.

all of this is subject to negotiation, and best done 'before the fact'.
Thanks for the absolutely charming reply. :lol:

So, can you explain why I owe the trainer a commission for looking on the internet, besides that the poor darling is out there trying to make a living? I have trainers that I call, they get a commission. But random people who call me looking for money? That seems silly.

WorthTheWait95
May. 18, 2009, 10:51 AM
:eek::eek::eek:
It may be expected but that is freaking ridiculous IMO

Sadly, it is expected in the BN barns. I used to show a lot on the AA circuit with top, top trainers and I had a lot of friends run into problems like that. I usually avoided them since my dad is a top business man (owns his own international company he built from scratch) and doesn't take crap from anyone. I'm pretty sure all my trainers were afraid of my dad (although they sure liked his money).

Anyway, my friend bought a horse while riding with a certain olympian. She didn't board with the BNR, only met him at shows since she has her own farm. She found the horse, flew to see it, rode it, vetted it and bought it without any interaction with the trainer at all. He didn't even know she had another horse until the next horse show. He noticed the new horse and told her he expected a commission on it. :eek: She said no way and he promptly 'fired' her as a client. It's ridiculous but some of these trainers can't see past the commissions, never mind that she was paying day fees and training fees on 5 horses/show, went to FLA for the full WEF circuit (plus all the KY, VA and many other BIG shows) and had bought/sold several VERY nice horses through him. Penny wise and pound foolish.

Platinum Equestrian
May. 18, 2009, 10:54 AM
NO... nothing more is owed.

These trainers have some nerve. They think they are so entitiled.

Addison
May. 18, 2009, 11:02 AM
Worth the Wait----That story is amazing. The "new horse" was not even boarded with the trainer and they expected a commission?!! I sure hope the owner found a new trainer.

Coppers Mom----I would not worry about losing business to greedy, dishonest trainers. It will only damage your reputation once you become involved in what is essentially paying off the trainer to get a horse sold.

There are plenty of decent trainers and independent buyers out there that you do not have to accept such dishonest terms. It is a matter of time before there is legislation throughout the states that protect the buyer from such abusive "business" practices.

And before someone tells me to wake up---believe me, I've been there, done that, and I will not tolerate it.

nycjumper
May. 18, 2009, 11:38 AM
These things never cease to amaze me. I recently told a trainer about a horse for sale (it didn't happen so I can share). I'm an ammie & it was done simply out of courtesy as I happen to know the owner of the horse.

Anyway, horse's price was (for argument's sake) 50.000 USD.
Trainer who I told was very interested in the horse and told me if it happened, they would add a 10% commission on the horse (so 5.000) for me and then would charge the client another 10% (trainer commission) and then a mark up for some flexibility for negotiating. So that $50.000 horse became a $65.000 horse in the blink of an eye.

Crazy no? I said thanks but no commission was required/allowed on my end and I was simply trying to help out a friend. Pro thought I was crazy ;) But it's no wonder that prices are out of whack. That's almost a 33% increase for 2 seconds of work.

Dune
May. 18, 2009, 11:39 AM
So, can you explain why I owe the trainer a commission for looking on the internet, besides that the poor darling is out there trying to make a living? I have trainers that I call, they get a commission. But random people who call me looking for money? That seems silly.


Because you don't know how much effort they've already put into looking for their client. They may've already gone to look at dozens and even vetted one or two. It may be that your horse is 1 of 10 they've lined up for the day. If they want to add the commission on top, I'm not sure why someone would have a problem with that, they're bringing the client to you and it's all done ahead of time. :confused: I understand folks that have a problem in general with the whole commission "thing" but then you don't have a problem paying someone *YOU* call....those folks didn't even have to lift a finger. I'm truly confused on your reasoning, not trying to pick a fight. :no:;)

RockinHorse
May. 18, 2009, 12:03 PM
Because you don't know how much effort they've already put into looking for their client. They may've already gone to look at dozens and even vetted one or two. It may be that your horse is 1 of 10 they've lined up for the day. If they want to add the commission on top, I'm not sure why someone would have a problem with that, they're bringing the client to you and it's all done ahead of time. :confused: I understand folks that have a problem in general with the whole commission "thing" but then you don't have a problem paying someone *YOU* call....those folks didn't even have to lift a finger. I'm truly confused on your reasoning, not trying to pick a fight. :no:;)


This is why the trainer's client should already be paying a commison to the trainer. Trainer doesn't work for the seller so should not be looking there for the commission. If the seller is using a trainer to sell the animal, then the seller should pay a commission to their trainer.

RockinHorse
May. 18, 2009, 12:06 PM
Sadly, it is expected in the BN barns. I used to show a lot on the AA circuit with top, top trainers and I had a lot of friends run into problems like that. I usually avoided them since my dad is a top business man (owns his own international company he built from scratch) and doesn't take crap from anyone. I'm pretty sure all my trainers were afraid of my dad (although they sure liked his money).

Anyway, my friend bought a horse while riding with a certain olympian. She didn't board with the BNR, only met him at shows since she has her own farm. She found the horse, flew to see it, rode it, vetted it and bought it without any interaction with the trainer at all. He didn't even know she had another horse until the next horse show. He noticed the new horse and told her he expected a commission on it. :eek: She said no way and he promptly 'fired' her as a client. It's ridiculous but some of these trainers can't see past the commissions, never mind that she was paying day fees and training fees on 5 horses/show, went to FLA for the full WEF circuit (plus all the KY, VA and many other BIG shows) and had bought/sold several VERY nice horses through him. Penny wise and pound foolish.


This is when the friend should say "Oh this horse? Can you beleive, I found him in a field for sale for $500. Now, how much is your commission?" :p

Addison
May. 18, 2009, 12:17 PM
DUNE:
Trainers are constantly talking to each other about horses they have for sale or clients they are looking for. This type of exchange of information often takes place at shows where trainers are riding, coaching, training and doing other things that they charge their clients for.

It's not like each time a client wants to buy a horse the trainer drops everything and searches until they find the right one. Their work goes on, they use their contacts and they find a horse. It is not that hard.

The scenario you describe where the trainer expects a commission from the seller and buyer is called double dipping. It is unethical. It is called "dual agency" in real estate and without proper disclosure, it presents enormous potential for conflicts of interest.

feather river
May. 18, 2009, 02:48 PM
then their clients need to be the ones paying them

either way, it becomes a part of the economic price paid for the horse. If you want to sell horses you have to be a part of the process, and not just wait for folks to come to your door.

feather river
May. 18, 2009, 03:17 PM
I don't give a crap if the trainer is trying to make a living. They should make a living honestly or get out of the business.

This practice is very common in racing, I didn't know it had drifted into the H/J world as the horses aren't normally bought and sold for millions. Although, some high profile cases have come up (...ahem...cough cough...BB and MS...those in racing will know those initials;) ) that have made the general public more aware of them.

I think this practice still goes on, but either the bloodstock agents and trainer don't do it as often or have gotten a lot more discreet about it. Some pissed some big clients off by this practice and those clients dropped the trainers. In the end, it isn't a very smart practice for the trainer to make a deal with the seller and neither of them disclose this commission to the buyer. It can come back to bite them.

Sorry, I don't want anything to do with these kinds of deals. It just makes the horse world dirty in my opinion. Of course, I am here for the love of the horse and the sport...not for the money. I think we need a COTH Black List of the trainers that do this, and don't disclose it to the buyer.

relax, there is ethical horse business being conducted by lots of us. Don't paint everybody with your "I hate horse dealers" brush.:eek:

meupatdoes
May. 18, 2009, 04:06 PM
Ok, I have a question:

I had a trainer call about a horse I had listed on the internet, and then asked if I'd be willing to give her a commission for bringing out her client. I said no, because in my mind, she hadn't done anything but look on the internet, and I had just put the horse out there for anyone, not just the trainer. She never ended up coming to see the horse, maybe because of me saying no, and maybe because the horse was sold within three days of placing the ad.

So should I have really paid her a commission? I don't understand why a seller should be blindsided with some random trainer's fee. I mean, it's not like no one would ever buy the horse without this single trainer finding it. I can understand if I had called around and said "Hey, I have this horse", but is it fair to ask a completely unfamiliar seller for a commission?

TIA!

The trainer is doing this because they want to get a commission their client doesn't know about. Rather than saying, "The sale price is $100,000, please pay me a $10,000 commission for finding this horse for you," they want the seller to charge $110,000 and quietly cut them a $10,000 check.
The interest is in NOT DISCLOSING the commission to their client.
Or, if they are REALLY unethical, they will tell the client the horse is $110,000, take $10k from the seller, and then charge the client $11,000 for 10% of $110,000.


what's even more funny is that if the trainer asked you and you said no, you'd never sell another horse through that trainer.

wake up to how the horse biz works. your answer should have been that you have priced the horse to not include a commission which means the price would have to bump up to include the trainer's commission. then see what the trainer says.

trainer's are out there trying to earn a living by giving their best advice to their clientele.

I have already responded to the OP on this thread in that if that trainer had been paid her day fee by her client, she was owed no further money.

all of this is subject to negotiation, and best done 'before the fact'.

No, the answer should have been, "I have not priced the horse to include a buyer's commission, and I will not artificially inflate the price of my horse so that you can get a secret commission the person you are supposed to, BY LAW, be acting in the best interests of does not know about.
Please arrange any commissions with your client separately.
Simply telling them that you expect x% of the sale price should do nicely, thanks.
Alternatively, we can agree on the commission you would like to receive and I will make sure to disclose that information to the person I am selling the horse to, so that I do not run the risk of legal trouble."

If there are any trainers out there reading this who DO ask people to cut them in on secret commissions, and any people playing along, please do realize that's illegal. It's a major no-no in fiduciary duty land.

Probably if you feel the need to keep it secret so bad, you shouldn't be doing it.

Filly85'
May. 18, 2009, 08:54 PM
relax, there is ethical horse business being conducted by lots of us. Don't paint everybody with your "I hate horse dealers" brush.:eek:

How did you come to that conclusion from my post? Haha. Hyperbole anyone? lol.

Um, your posts in this thread kind of tell the story. And I don't have a problem with horse dealers if they conduct business ethically. If a trainer charges day fees or a commission and arranges it with the buyer, well, that is normal and to be expected. If the seller raises the price of a horse because the trainer wants a commission and neither tell the buyer, it is very unethical and I don't want any part of it. See meupatdoes post above for more information.

Alter perhaps?

meupatdoes
May. 18, 2009, 09:00 PM
Um, your posts in this thread kind of tell the story. And I don't have a problem with horse dealers if they conduct business ethically.

Alter perhaps?

Oh, no worries.

I'm suuuuuure Feather River tells her clients, "By the way, you know I arranged for the sale price you're paying to be higher so that I could quietly make money off the back side, right?"

That way her clients always know how much their horses really cost and how much of it she feels she deserves as commission.
;)

florida foxhunter
May. 18, 2009, 11:06 PM
Hey everyone, are you aware that a new "rule" (law) has been instituted in FL, and I believe also in CA and KY and I know they were working on one for VA.....that states all Bill of Sales have to state the COMMISSIONS paid and to whom, as well as the name of the buyer, seller and sales price. It also requires any "known" health defects to be disclosed or it is fraud!!
This was intended to stop the "double dipping" of trainers (commission from buyer and seller for instance).......an "undisclosed dual agency"......
The law was proposed by none other than the owner of Rachael Alexander, Jess Jackson........that's why I drink Kendall Jackson wine, haha!!

feather river
May. 18, 2009, 11:16 PM
Oh, no worries.

I'm suuuuuure Feather River tells her clients, "By the way, you know I arranged for the sale price you're paying to be higher so that I could quietly make money off the back side, right?"

That way her clients always know how much their horses really cost and how much of it she feels she deserves as commission.
;)

you girls are living in fantasy land--writing your own stuff are you?

I think my posts have been reasonable and in the middle of the road. I am trying to help someone learn how to sell their horses and to deal openly and honestly with buyers and trainers who might approach them.

And for your info, I am an ammy rider and a breeder--have been both for over 30 years. I don't sell others horses or train anyone else's horses. Plenty of my own, thank you. But I do have to deal with the full spectrum of buyers--from idiot buyers to know-it-all buyers. And I have sold through trainers, know quite a few, and know how their business works. Again, I will say they fall in the same kind of a spectrum as the buyers--from the extreme of very honest to somewhere in the middle to the you-don't -want-to-get-involved-with-that-person trainer.

Some of you have been having guys paying your bills way too long and you need to go out and have to earn a living. You find your way.

Filly85'
May. 18, 2009, 11:27 PM
you girls are living in fantasy land--writing your own stuff are you?

I think my posts have been reasonable and in the middle of the road. I am trying to help someone learn how to sell their horses and to deal openly and honestly with buyers and trainers who might approach them.

And for your info, I am an ammy rider and a breeder--have been both for over 30 years. I don't sell others horses or train anyone else's horses. Plenty of my own, thank you. But I do have to deal with the full spectrum of buyers--from idiot buyers to know-it-all buyers. And I have sold through trainers, know quite a few, and know how their business works. Again, I will say they fall in the same kind of a spectrum as the buyers--from the extreme of very honest to somewhere in the middle to the you-don't -want-to-get-involved-with-that-person trainer.

Some of you have been having guys paying your bills way too long and you need to go out and have to earn a living. You find your way.

Well, I guess that you were living in a fantasy world when you said that "I hated all horse traders". It works both ways.

I'm pretty sure that I was basing what I said directly off of what you said. Specifically about the part where I needed to wake up and learn how the horse business works in a direct response to the unethical behavior of the trainer contacting the seller in hopes of receiving a commission.

meupatdoes
May. 18, 2009, 11:33 PM
Some of you have been having guys paying your bills way too long and you need to go out and have to earn a living. You find your way.

I am able to pay all of my own bills without the assistence of anyone besides myself, and without having to pay trainers commissions on the backside.

Amazing.

But true.

feather river
May. 18, 2009, 11:35 PM
I'm pretty sure that I was basing what I said directly off of what you said. Specifically about the part where I needed to wake up and learn how the horse business works in a direct response to the unethical behavior that the other poster was talking about.

Definitely an alter.

I stand by my posts. I think I am fair. I generally read what I wrote before posting.

So I don't need cranky people telling me that what I wrote meant this, that or the other thing. Show up on time and pay attention.

Coppers mom
May. 18, 2009, 11:45 PM
I think my posts have been reasonable and in the middle of the road. I am trying to help someone learn how to sell their horses and to deal openly and honestly with buyers and trainers who might approach them.

I'm not going to get into it, but I certainly don't need you to teach me how to sell my horses! :lol: Absolutely hilarious :lol:

And could you please explain how I'd be dealing openly and honestly when, technically, I'm helping the trainer weasle another commission out of the buyer? If I raise the price, that's all that's happening. I'm not paying, the buyer is. Suuuper honest.

And I forget who asked, but I'd give a commission to a trainer I've contacted because I've asked for their help. Some random person looking on equine or dreamhorse? Not so much.

meupatdoes
May. 18, 2009, 11:51 PM
your answer should have been that you have priced the horse to not include a commission which means the price would have to bump up to include the trainer's commission. then see what the trainer says.


So explain to you how you did NOT mean that the seller should raise the price of the horse and then quietly cut the trainer a commission on the backside that the buyer doesn't know about.
(That is "OPENLY" and "HONESTLY"??)

Because I'm kind of confused as to how that could mean anything else.

It is really annoying when people act like people reading the PLAIN MEANING of what they wrote is everyone else's failure of reading comprehension.

Between that and explaining to everyone how we have guys paying our bills you are coming across like a real peach.

feather river
May. 19, 2009, 02:02 AM
o.k. if everybody is in their seat, this is how I do it. If I have a horse priced with no commission figured in--in other words, I am my bottom price just trying to move the horse--and a trainer calls on the horse and inquires, etc., what I say is that I have the horse priced to the buyer, without a commission included. However, if their commission rate is reasonable, say 10%, and if they have been spending a lot of time looking for a horse that their poor client [who can't really ride but wants a GP level horse, etc.] can sit on and will accept then I tell them that I will explain the commission thing to their client and add the 10% on with everybody being on board with that.

Now if you are pricing some spendy horse at 50K, and you aren't figuring on paying any trainer a commission, you aren't going to sell it anyway. So you better figure 45K is as good as 50K, particularly in this economy.

There is no fixed pricing on anybody's horse. Everyone has their own bottom line that has nothing to do with any kind of a horse Kelley Blue Book. And everyone that is looking for a horse has a budget, whatever the number is and they have a picture in their mind of what it is they want and how much they think they should spend.

But I do not live in a spendy area, so when I go to the Big City and see folks driving those Land Rovers around that sticker for $100K, I just think it is a dressed up Ford made in England no less and who would spend that much for a Ford?

feather river
May. 19, 2009, 02:08 AM
I'm not going to get into it, but I certainly don't need you to teach me how to sell my horses! :lol: Absolutely hilarious :lol:

And could you please explain how I'd be dealing openly and honestly when, technically, I'm helping the trainer weasle another commission out of the buyer? If I raise the price, that's all that's happening. I'm not paying, the buyer is. Suuuper honest.

And I forget who asked, but I'd give a commission to a trainer I've contacted because I've asked for their help. Some random person looking on equine or dreamhorse? Not so much.

Of course the buyer is paying the trainer--it is in the price. That is the way life is for anything you buy that has a commissioned saleperson involved. Who do you think is funding the commission?

And obviously many of you need to give more complete Bills of Sale. Mine disclose if any agent is involved and the commission being paid--the buyer is informed.:eek:

feather river
May. 19, 2009, 04:43 AM
So, can you explain why I owe the trainer a commission for looking on the internet, besides that the poor darling is out there trying to make a living? I have trainers that I call, they get a commission. But random people who call me looking for money? That seems silly.

You guys just like arguing. Part of how a trainer makes a living is buying and selling for customers and making a commission. If you don't like that, then don't ask your trainer to either help you select the horse for you or help you sell the horse that you no longer want. Do it all on your own, and only board with a boarding stable and take lessons from a trainer who is fine with that.

And the answer for you seems to be to just deal with the trainers that you call. Tell anyone trainer who might call you that they are not on your approved list--then hang up. [What is this "random people who call looking for money" all about. If you didn't call 'Sally, the trainer', then she becomes some random person looking for money????

Addison
May. 19, 2009, 08:25 AM
Featherriver......The commission arrangement, in the horse world, is between a client and their trainer and should have nothing to do with the seller. The commission should be calculated based on the price paid for the horse and not included in the asking price.

RockinHorse
May. 19, 2009, 10:20 AM
. However, if their commission rate is reasonable, say 10%, and if they have been spending a lot of time looking for a horse that their poor client [who can't really ride but wants a GP level horse, etc.] can sit on and will accept then I tell them that I will explain the commission thing to their client and add the 10% on with everybody being on board with that.



Why are YOU explaining the the trainer's commission to the trainer's clients?:confused:

RockinHorse
May. 19, 2009, 10:25 AM
Of course the buyer is paying the trainer--it is in the price. That is the way life is for anything you buy that has a commissioned saleperson involved. Who do you think is funding the commission?



But the client is paying the commsion to the trainer on what they beleive is the horse's price not what is the horse's price plus another 10% on top.

If I as a seller have a horse for sale for 10,000 then the trainer (who is not my trainer) should go to their client and represent the price of the horse as 10K plus 10% so total cost to client of 11,000. Your way looks like the trainer is going to the client and saying horse is 11K plus 10 % so total cost to client 12,100. Trainer just got a 21% commission instead of the 10% they were advertising to their client.

meupatdoes
May. 19, 2009, 10:57 AM
Why are YOU explaining the the trainer's commission to the trainer's clients?:confused:

Exactly my question.

If the buyer's trainer wants a commission, I don't understand why in feather river's world they can't be expected to tell their client, "Feather River's horse costs $x. My commission for finding the horse for you, based on our totally separate trainer/customer relationship, is $y."

If everything really is being disclosed to the customer, I don't understand when a seller would need to price the horse at x + y and then pay out to the buyer's trainer. The seller can just charge their x, and the trainer goes to the client for their y. End of story.

I don't begrudge anyone earning a commission, even exorbitant ones, as long as everyone knows about it. If a trainer wants a commission for helping their client find a horse, they can go right ahead. They can charge their client a 250% commission for all I care, as long as they arrange it separately with their client and don't expect me to help them cover it up.

VCT
May. 19, 2009, 11:40 AM
I don't get this " go-see fee" in addition to the commision at all :confused:.

Well it is probably because I don't charge anywhere close to what some people are mentioning on this thread. If a horse was local I'd only charge $30 to go see it. 2-3 hours drive away $100. Plus, I don't ask for as much percentage of commission (2.5%).

However, the reasoning behind it is that the commission covers all the time involved in the horse search that happens before and after going to see the horse(s).

So if someone bought the 2nd or 3rd 10K horse we went to see, and they were all about 2-3 hours away... at the end of it all they would have paid me about $450 - $550. ($200 - $300 for looking at 2-3 further away horses + $250 for commission).

I'm just looking to be compensated for my time, not fleece my clients.

Edited to add:
Now if client does all the searching, phone calling, video watching, etc etc etc. then I only charge for going to see the horse(s)... not any commission.

WorthTheWait95
May. 19, 2009, 12:12 PM
But the client is paying the commsion to the trainer on what they beleive is the horse's price not what is the horse's price plus another 10% on top.

If I as a seller have a horse for sale for 10,000 then the trainer (who is not my trainer) should go to their client and represent the price of the horse as 10K plus 10% so total cost to client of 11,000. Your way looks like the trainer is going to the client and saying horse is 11K plus 10 % so total cost to client 12,100. Trainer just got a 21% commission instead of the 10% they were advertising to their client.

There was a MAJOR barn blow up around where I live over this exact situation recently. It resulted in a mass exodus of all the trainers clients. She was double dipping on six figure imports and the clients were not happy (rightfully so) I was glad to see them actually DO something about it though and not just shrug it off like many do.

Dune
May. 19, 2009, 01:03 PM
This is why the trainer's client should already be paying a commison to the trainer. Trainer doesn't work for the seller so should not be looking there for the commission. If the seller is using a trainer to sell the animal, then the seller should pay a commission to their trainer.

I get that, but that was not the scenario presented that I was responding to...everything in context, RH. :winkgrin:


DUNE:


The scenario you describe where the trainer expects a commission from the seller and buyer is called double dipping. It is unethical. It is called "dual agency" in real estate and without proper disclosure, it presents enormous potential for conflicts of interest.

Whoa, there nelly! You have me confused with someone else on this thread. NOwhere did I condone double dipping. NO way, NO how. :no:




And I forget who asked, but I'd give a commission to a trainer I've contacted because I've asked for their help. Some random person looking on equine or dreamhorse? Not so much.

Ok, that's the answer I was looking for. You are looking at it much differently than I was, while it still seems like you're doing all or most of the work, I can see now why you feel like you'd owe them a commission. Thanks for explaining. :cool:

Coppers mom
May. 19, 2009, 01:30 PM
FeatherRiver- What you're talking about is unethical, plain and simple. No one needs to "get with it" but you.

If the trainer isn't working for me, as in, I've contacted them and said "Hullo I have this horse", then I don't owe them a dime. They're doing foot work for their client (not me), so the client is the one that pays them. I'm not going to factor in an extra whatever percent and screw the client over so that some dishonest trainer can get an extra grand. My reputation is worth more than that.

And sorry, if you call for a horse on the internet, and I've never heard of you in all the circles I travel in (Hunter, Jumper, Dressage, and Eventing), then you ARE some random person! :lol:

Addison
May. 19, 2009, 02:31 PM
DUNE I understood Coppersmom to be saying that she should not have to pay a buyer's trainer a commission when the trainer is already getting one from her client. Coppersmom said if she called a trainer (to get them to find a buyer) than she would pay a commission.

The double dipping comes when the trainer calls Coppersmom and says I may have a buyer if you will pay me a commission. (and said trainer will presumably get another commission from her client).

feather river
May. 19, 2009, 02:36 PM
But the client is paying the commsion to the trainer on what they beleive is the horse's price not what is the horse's price plus another 10% on top.

If I as a seller have a horse for sale for 10,000 then the trainer (who is not my trainer) should go to their client and represent the price of the horse as 10K plus 10% so total cost to client of 11,000. Your way looks like the trainer is going to the client and saying horse is 11K plus 10 % so total cost to client 12,100. Trainer just got a 21% commission instead of the 10% they were advertising to their client.

I never said that. the price would be $11,000. There is only one commission and it is disclosed on the Bill of Sale. :eek:

feather river
May. 19, 2009, 02:44 PM
FeatherRiver- What you're talking about is unethical, plain and simple. No one needs to "get with it" but you.

If the trainer isn't working for me, as in, I've contacted them and said "Hullo I have this horse", then I don't owe them a dime. They're doing foot work for their client (not me), so the client is the one that pays them. I'm not going to factor in an extra whatever percent and screw the client over so that some dishonest trainer can get an extra grand. My reputation is worth more than that.

And sorry, if you call for a horse on the internet, and I've never heard of you in all the circles I travel in (Hunter, Jumper, Dressage, and Eventing), then you ARE some random person! :lol:

Even if they are paying the trainer direct, it still is part of the cost of the horse. And no I am not unethical. I disclose everything in my Bill of Sale.

Further I doubt you know everybody in HJD&E. Give the rest of us a break will you?:(

This just proves the point that "what you heard is not what I said". You are running your own filters on this stuff and coming up with bad conclusions.

Coppers mom
May. 19, 2009, 03:13 PM
I fail to see how letting the buyer know you're helping the trainer double dip (i.e., screwing them out of more money) is any more ethical than not telling. I don't know any buyer who'd happily pay double, and since you admittedly don't sell any horses, I'm just going to chaulk this whole thing up to you being personally ok with paying double commission on a horse that you yourself bought.

meupatdoes
May. 19, 2009, 03:43 PM
I fail to see how letting the buyer know you're helping the trainer double dip (i.e., screwing them out of more money) is any more ethical than not telling. I don't know any buyer who'd happily pay double, and since you admittedly don't sell any horses, I'm just going to chaulk this whole thing up to you being personally ok with paying double commission on a horse that you yourself bought.

It is perfectly ethical IF IT IS DISCLOSED.
The client can choose whether s/he likes the deal.
Trainers can price out their services at whatever charge they would like, and if the client agrees to pay it knowing full well how much money is going toward the horse, and how much money is going toward the service, that's fine.

Double dipping if the client knows about it is no problem -the client knows what is being charged and can make their own decision. Most clients would go elsewhere, but that's their decision. For the ones who don't mind, that's their decision too.

Conversely, SINGLE dipping is ILLEGAL if the client doesn't know about it.
Let's say I am selling a horse, and I call up a trainer in the area to see if they have any customers for it.
Trainer says, "Yeah, I think I have someone!"
The trainer and I arrange that I will pay them a 10% sale commission if they get my horse sold.
Trainer then goes to their customer and says, "I think I found a horse for you."
Trainer and customer show up, try the horse, love it, buy it, and I write the trainer a 10% check.

This is a violation of the trainer's fiduciary duty TO THEIR BUYING CUSTOMER, because they have not disclosed their interest in the deal. Again, if they disclose it, it is A-OK, but if they don't disclose it, it is NOT OK.

You can not represent both sides (get the horse sold for the seller and find a horse for a client) all at once without disclosing your commissions to both sides. The buying party needs to know, in this situation, what the trainer stands to gain from representing this horse to them.

Disclosure, however, makes everything ok because then everyone knows what is going on and can make their own decision if it is worth it to them or not.

On the other hand, if the seller has their selling trainer, and the buyer has their buying trainer, the seller can pay their trainer a selling commission and the buyer can pay their trainer a finding commission and everyone is in the clear. No agent is representing both sides of the deal.

If the seller or buyer is paying both commissions, that needs to be disclosed, because again we have one trainer representing both sides of the deal.

In the end, if anyone feels that the deal will fall through if they disclose what they are up to, they are probably screwing the client. If you know your client will not be on board with what you are doing, so you are keeping everything quiet, you are violating your fiduciary duty to represent their best interests.

Conversely if you are acting ethically and reasonably, whatever you disclose will probably be just fine with your client, so disclose away, seal the deal, and everyone can make their money, get/sell a nice horse, and go home happy.

feather river
May. 19, 2009, 06:30 PM
I fail to see how letting the buyer know you're helping the trainer double dip (i.e., screwing them out of more money) is any more ethical than not telling. I don't know any buyer who'd happily pay double, and since you admittedly don't sell any horses, I'm just going to chaulk this whole thing up to you being personally ok with paying double commission on a horse that you yourself bought.

Wherever did I say anything about letting a trainer double dip? And when did I say I don't sell any horses? What I said was that I am an ammy rider and a breeder. Have been riding my own and breeding/selling my own horses for 30 years, honey. I admitted I do not buy or sell for clients. The potential new owner and the trainer representing the person and I discuss the cost of the horse I am selling openly and honestly. It is all documented in my Bill of Sale.

Do you just make up your own stuff? Or do you just like to start fights?

Maybe you need to get out more. Or adjust the drip meds.:eek::eek::eek:

Coppers mom
May. 19, 2009, 07:08 PM
Oh Feather River, you are just such a doll, aren't you? :lol:

TSWJB
May. 19, 2009, 07:22 PM
Has a very similar situation happen to me when I recently bought my daughter a horse. Unfortunately it resulted in the trainer saying either pay up the commission or leave. We left. This was after twelve years with this said trainer. Usually when you don't pay, things get ugly, so be prepared with a back up plan in case you are asked to leave.
I never understand why trainers do this? i know someone who had the same thing happen to them. they found the horse since the trainer could not find one. they brought trainer to look at it to see if he wanted to work with it. trainer said yes. they would have paid alot in showing and training fees. the person said this is what i have to spend, negotiate your commision with the sellers. so if you need 5k commission. negotiate it out of my pot of say 50k. then offer 45k. trainer said no and if you dont pay the commission you can not bother moving horse in my barn. so they didnt move in and ended up doing better elsewhere.
why are trainers so hungry for the commission that they will dump really good clients and loose all that monthly money. is there really that many good clients out there to be so hard balled about the commission?

Coreene
May. 19, 2009, 07:41 PM
Further I doubt you know everybody in HJD&E. Give the rest of us a break will you?
What Coppers Mom said is "And sorry, if you call for a horse on the internet, and I've never heard of you in all the circles I travel in (Hunter, Jumper, Dressage, and Eventing), then you ARE some random person!"

NOT that she knew "everybody in HJD&E."

florida foxhunter
May. 19, 2009, 11:40 PM
Whew, looks like I opened a can of worms, then it took off from there.

I just want to make clear that here in Florida there is a new LAW that says "undisclosed dual agency" (ie....trainer getting paid a comission from the seller and then asking the buyer for another without her knowing the seller paid anything too) is FRAUD.......punishable with fines and possble jail time now.

Florida, KY and CA (and possibly other states) have instituted these new rules..........it started with TB's but effects EVERY horse sale over $10,000!!

Mara
May. 19, 2009, 11:50 PM
I never understand why trainers do this? i know someone who had the same thing happen to them. they found the horse since the trainer could not find one. they brought trainer to look at it to see if he wanted to work with it. trainer said yes. they would have paid alot in showing and training fees. the person said this is what i have to spend, negotiate your commision with the sellers. so if you need 5k commission. negotiate it out of my pot of say 50k. then offer 45k. trainer said no and if you dont pay the commission you can not bother moving horse in my barn. so they didnt move in and ended up doing better elsewhere.
why are trainers so hungry for the commission that they will dump really good clients and loose all that monthly money. is there really that many good clients out there to be so hard balled about the commission?

I find this puzzling as well - cutting off your nose to spite your face. Not only does the trainer lose the commission, but also the client's cash. And the client most assuredly is not out there spreading good words about their former trainer. Maybe a BNT can afford to do this; the vast majority cannot.

meupatdoes
May. 20, 2009, 12:56 AM
(ie....trainer getting paid a comission from the seller and then asking the buyer for another without her knowing the seller paid anything too)

Just to be clear, that is NOT dual agency.

Dual agency is when an agent (ie, the trainer) represents both sides (ie, both the seller and the buyer) in a transaction.

It doesn't matter if the trainer is getting a second commission from the buyer.

If the trainer is advising his client to buy a horse that he is getting paid by the seller to get sold, that is dual agency even if only the seller is paying commission.

EDIT:
Actually, the quote IS dual agency, because the trainer is representing both parties, but it is not the exclusive definition of dual agency.

feather river
May. 20, 2009, 01:57 AM
Whew, looks like I opened a can of worms, then it took off from there.

I just want to make clear that here in Florida there is a new LAW that says "undisclosed dual agency" (ie....trainer getting paid a comission from the seller and then asking the buyer for another without her knowing the seller paid anything too) is FRAUD.......punishable with fines and possble jail time now.

Florida, KY and CA (and possibly other states) have instituted these new rules..........it started with TB's but effects EVERY horse sale over $10,000!!

These are not new rules. First, KY law was passed in 2006. Then FL passed similar legislation in 2007. CA already prohibited dual agency for racehorses, but Jackson has pushed to sponsor a bill that would widen the law to show horses. See attached link>

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/news/story?id=4020452

This all started in 2005 in California by Jackson's big lawsuit, which is very old news now, against his blood stock agent and his trainer for their failing to disclose hidden commission arrangements and essentially price fixing horses he was purchasing.

feather river
May. 20, 2009, 02:05 AM
What Coppers Mom said is "And sorry, if you call for a horse on the internet, and I've never heard of you in all the circles I travel in (Hunter, Jumper, Dressage, and Eventing), then you ARE some random person!"

NOT that she knew "everybody in HJD&E."

Well Coreene you missed the point of my response. Let me say it differently. You have her quote above. What it says is "if she has never heard of you in all the circles she travels in"...and she includes "Hunter, Jumper, Dressage, and Eventing"..."then you ARE some random person". Well, listen up all you hunter, jumper, dressage and eventing folks in the world who this person does not know, you folks is just "Random Folks". Maybe she needs to put in her ads, "If I don't know you, don't call":yes::lol:

poltroon
May. 20, 2009, 03:13 AM
This is when the friend should say "Oh this horse? Can you beleive, I found him in a field for sale for $500. Now, how much is your commission?" :p

Best... answer... ever! :D

Coreene
May. 20, 2009, 03:15 AM
Actually, Feather, I understood exactly what both of you meant.

Addison
May. 20, 2009, 08:52 AM
Feather river-------There is no reason to be so contentious. Most people on this board post when they want help or have something constructive to say. The tone of your comments is not welcome here and undermines any real knowledge you may have to share.

feather river
May. 20, 2009, 03:10 PM
Feather river-------There is no reason to be so contentious. Most people on this board post when they want help or have something constructive to say. The tone of your comments is not welcome here and undermines any real knowledge you may have to share.

If you are going to take someone to task about their expression of their opinion on this subject, then I wish you would start by reading their early remarks on the subject post. Then read the responses by the few who appear to have an axe to grind on the matter and see how the person with original expression has tried to stay neutral.

In this particular instance, I would have hoped that you would have posted your remark addressed to the few on here who figure all trainers are out to screw their clients over. Your sting seems to be from that point of view.

Addison
May. 20, 2009, 09:46 PM
Your response is confusing to me. Are you talking in the third person?

My objections to your posts do not pertain to their content or expression of opinion but rather to your snarkiness. For example, suggesting that someone needs to adjust their meds seems just a bit excessive.

Coppers mom
May. 20, 2009, 10:31 PM
Well Coreene you missed the point of my response. Let me say it differently. You have her quote above. What it says is "if she has never heard of you in all the circles she travels in"...and she includes "Hunter, Jumper, Dressage, and Eventing"..."then you ARE some random person". Well, listen up all you hunter, jumper, dressage and eventing folks in the world who this person does not know, you folks is just "Random Folks". Maybe she needs to put in her ads, "If I don't know you, don't call":yes::lol:
Really Feather River? This is possibly the silliest thing you've posted on this whole thread. You are trying awfully hard to grasp at staws, and I'm not completely sure why.

There's just no way to misconstrue what I wrote the way you have. A random person is anyone I don't know (clearly indicated by the "If I haven't heard of you.."), just as a telemarketer is a random person. And putting in my ads that I don't want anyone to call if I don't know them? What a ridiculous thing to say. Of course I want random people to call, that's why I placed the ad in the first place.

feather river
May. 20, 2009, 11:43 PM
Your response is confusing to me. Are you talking in the third person?

My objections to your posts do not pertain to their content or expression of opinion but rather to your snarkiness. For example, suggesting that someone needs to adjust their meds seems just a bit excessive.

I cannot find the word snarkiness in the dictionary. I think perhaps you are attempting to be excessive by using such a word.

meupatdoes
May. 21, 2009, 02:33 AM
I cannot find the word snarkiness in the dictionary. I think perhaps you are attempting to be excessive by using such a word.

You had to look it up?

Addison
May. 21, 2009, 08:19 AM
Feather----you really are so "silly".

FancyFree
May. 21, 2009, 02:14 PM
In this particular instance, I would have hoped that you would have posted your remark addressed to the few on here who figure all trainers are out to screw their clients over. Your sting seems to be from that point of view.

I wouldn't say all trainers are out to screw their clients, but a lot of people have had a bad experience with the trainers and the buying and selling of horses. I had one where my trainer did ZERO to sell my horse. I had two in full training with him and suspected that he wanted to keep it that way. I always had to show the horse because he could never make it. I found a buyer, did all the work but still paid him a commission. That left such a bad taste in my mouth about him that I stopped riding with him.

I've never had to pay a "go see" fee when buying. Just the commission. I would say the OP doesn't owe anything more.

feather river
May. 21, 2009, 03:04 PM
You had to look it up?

I am attempting to be polite and respectful, and lead by example.:)

Wouldn't want to be "snarky" would we?:winkgrin:

PS/some posters seem to have an agenda and need to be dealt with deftly.

meupatdoes
May. 21, 2009, 04:22 PM
I am attempting to be polite and respectful, and lead by example.:)

Wouldn't want to be "snarky" would we?:winkgrin:

PS/some posters seem to have an agenda and need to be dealt with deftly.

Probably best not to use words you don't know.

Unless you have managed to find it in the dictionary in the meantime.

florida foxhunter
May. 21, 2009, 11:44 PM
Feather River, Yes the law directing the Department of Agriculture to make RULES to follow in horse sales was passed in the 2007 Legislative Session. The RULES that are actually the teeth in Florida were not passed until many hearings were completed in 2008. I was there.

What the laws plainly state is that UNDISCLOSED Dual Agency is not allowed. If both parties knew the agent was representing and getting paid from both sides (thus the reason it must be stated on the bill of sale).......then it would be ok......stupid IMO, but legal.

Moderator 1
May. 22, 2009, 08:42 AM
Everyone please dial it down a bit and keep focused on the main topic.

Thanks!
Mod 1

S A McKee
May. 22, 2009, 09:58 AM
One way to solve some of the problems discussed here is for the buyer to make the check payable to the seller.
Than the buyer and seller can do whatever they want with commissions.
This avoids those very unpleasant situations where the seller finds out later on that his/her $50K horse actually sold for $80K and the difference went in the trainers pocket.

feather river
May. 22, 2009, 02:26 PM
One way to solve some of the problems discussed here is for the buyer to make the check payable to the seller.
Than the buyer and seller can do whatever they want with commissions.
This avoids those very unpleasant situations where the seller finds out later on that his/her $50K horse actually sold for $80K and the difference went in the trainers pocket.

So simple isn't it. You are alsolutely right. The buyer pays the seller direct. Most horse deals are done with wire transfers, but this can be easily arranged between buyer and seller. Each pays his/her own commissions direct to their agent, or the seller is directed to pay both commissions from the negotiated sales proceeds and all is disclosed on the Bill of Sale signed by both buyer and seller.

This is not hard. And if sellers/buyers would just follow this format, you wouldn't need laws like the Florida, KY and CA laws. Of course there will be unscrupulous agents out their trying to make more than a reasonable commission, but it is our own responsibily to protect our own position, whether engaging someone to help us find an appropriate horse or to sell a horse for us. Know who you are dealing with, deal with someone you trust, require they be honest in all their dealings--not just with you but watch that they are consistent in their dealings with others as well--and have a clear understanding of your requirements and the economic costs.

Also, do not expect your trainer/agent to work for free. You wouldn't expect that of your mechanic.

florida foxhunter
May. 22, 2009, 11:21 PM
Well,,,,,,,,,,,,,,since I'm the OP of this thread, which seems to have gone elsewhere....I want to say this situation has probably ended a long time trainer/client/friendship. There was never any question to the trainer's ability, just a problem of communication ....too bad for everyone involved. I hope the "trainers: who read this realize it's not only YOUR ability with the horse that is important............it's also your communication with the owner that is equally important!!

I also want to make it clear that in my originally posted situation, there was never any question of this trainer trying to get any money under the table, unethically, or from both sides. I think the problem came when the trainer suggested a commission after the fact when she should have been more clear of what she really thought she was owed for....

Addison
May. 23, 2009, 09:21 AM
Good luck to your friend and her new horse. I think she made the right move.

alliekat
May. 23, 2009, 09:55 AM
Good luck to your friend and her new horse. I think she made the right move.

I agree 110%

Equibrit
May. 23, 2009, 10:06 AM
Trainers only get away with this type of fraud if their dumb clients let them. Bottom line is that it is dishonest - like thieving.