I am about to purchase a new horse, without selling my present horse. After three years of disciplined training with me in the saddle, my present horse has gone from a brain-fried wreck to an unflappable hunter on which people can safely learn to flat and jump. It is entirely due to my trainer's commitment to me (she was what I had and he never pressed me to get another) and expertise (I "just" carry out the instructions). To keep her fit due to my work schedule, I let him use the horse in lessons several times a week. With the new horse, I would like to lease the horse to someone at the barn so that she stays under my care and supervision. Should my trainer get a portion of the monthly lease fee? If I sold her, he would get a commission. Would appreciate your input. Thanks.
Nope. A sales commission pays for the time, hassle, and labor of getting a horse sold. A lease commission would pay for--well, I can't imagine what. It's not like the trainer would be doing any work to get the horse leased.
In theory one could pay the trainer a one-time finder's fee for finding a suitable lessee for you, but most trainers don't charge such a fee. The trainer already "wins" if you lease the horse because the lessee will be one more mounted-up rider who will probably take lessons and/or show with the trainer.
Indeed, your trainer is already getting a sweet deal by using your unflappable horse in lessons. Most owners would expect a kickback of the profits from that arrangement. But of course, it's all about what works for you and your trainer; I know that if my trainer asked to use my horse as a school horse to help me keep him in work, I'd consider that an even trade and wouldn't expect a financial kickback.
I would say no since the trainer is already benefiting from the lessons. If you hired the trainer to help you sell the horse then that is different arrangement.
If you lease make sure everything is put in writing so there is no miscommunications between all parties.
I wouldn't pay the trainer. But then again, it all seems out of whack to me. I pay people to do stuff for me with my hard earned money. So if trainer had told me I needed another horse, and I didn't want one, I wouldn't be riding with trainer anymore. And if trainer was GM maybe all I'd do is carry out his instructions (I wish) but otherwise I'm doing the work too.
Trainers are my employee, I take guidance from them in a specific subject but they don't get more. Usually I am older than they are so that helps keep the relationship in perspective.
Now, if trainer is the one who finds the lessee from outside of the barn, and you were unable to find one on your own (and tried), that's different. If the lessee was already a student of his (especially if he/she already took lessons on your horse), no.
I think that if the trainer does anything to help you secure a leasee (finds leasee, negotiates terms, evaluates the potential leasee for suitability, etc, etc) they deserve compensation. I think that if they do not participate at all they do not deserve compensation.
However, it really doesn't matter what I think. What matters is what your trainer thinks It would make sense for you to sit down and have a discussion about this before either one of you makes a move toward securing a leasee.
Auventera Two:Some women would eat their own offspring if they had some dipping sauce.
I don't charge anything when my clients lease their horses out, even if I found the leasee. Most of my clients require that the people leasing keep the horse in a training/lesson program, and I get compensated that way. My .02.