Posts Tagged ‘aaron and marie jones’

Random notes while waiting for the ice to melt …

The devastating snow and ice storm that hit Kentucky earlier this week has created serious economic hardships on Thoroughbred farms, many of which are without electricity and have suffered major damage, just as the foaling season is hitting full swing and the breeding season about to begin. Let’s hope organizations like the American Horse Council, the NTRA, Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association, the Kentucky Thoroughbred Association and the Kentucky Equine Education Project are in contact with government officials to seek relief, now that Gov. Steve Beshear has asked the Obama administration to declare a federal emergency.

Horse farms are already under extreme economic pressure because of the plunge in bloodstock prices, and this latest problem is only making things worse for them. It’s at times like these that these alphabet soup organizations can actually do some good.

DID FRANK STRONACH’S ONE-VOTE MARGIN over IEAH Stables in the Eclipse Awards outstanding owner category come by virtue of several racing secretaries who work for him? I have a great deal of respect for Stronach’s racing and breeding operation, which has produced solid numbers for many years now, but I just can’t fathom how 2008 was an Eclipse Award-winning year for him.  Ahmed Zayat’s stable earned slightly more money but only ranked sixth in the number of first-place votes. IEAH had a far superior year in terms of Grade 1 winners. George Strawbridge’s Augustin Stable had a better year when the number of starters was taken into consideration, as did the racing stables associated with Sheikh Mohammed. Here is the year-end ownership standings by money.

Apart from the National Turf Writers Association, which has historically published how its members vote, there is no disclosure from Daily Racing Form or the National Thoroughbred Racing Association about who votes – never mind who each individual votes for. But the NTRA should insist that racing secretaries or any other voters who work for racetracks owned by Stronach’s Magna Entertainment not be allowed to vote in categories where there is a potential conflict of interest. That would include the leading owner and leading breeder categories. The awards are too important to permit any conflicts of interest or suspicions of impropriety.

In the owner and breeder categories (the latter of which was for years determined by a committee vote), there seems to be little imagination or thought put in by voters, who more often than not look at which owner and breeder is at the top of the money list that is supplied with the ballot. If the people who vote for Academy Awards were that lazy, then “Paul Blart: Mall Cop” would win the Oscar for best picture this year.

Opportunity (the number of starters) should play a role in voting for outstanding achievement by an owner or breeder. Twice in the last eight years, a breeder who produced two individual champions in the same year from a small band of broodmares (Virginia Kraft Payson, with Farda Amiga and Vindication in 2002, and Aaron and Marie Jones, with Speightstown and Ashado in 2004) did not even get enough votes to be among the three finalists! That’s insulting to the thousands of Thoroughbred breeders who either can’t afford to or don’t choose to maintain massive numbers of broodmares.  (Click here to see what I wrote about this issue a few years ago at Bloodhorse.)

The NTRA needs to address this, either by eliminating the vote and simply giving the awards for leading owner and breeder to whoever wins the most money, or by changing the system of selecting the outstanding individuals in these two categories. I don’t think enough voters understand the importance of this category or what “outstanding” means when it comes to owning or breeding Thoroughbreds.

SPEAKING OF THE NTRA, what is its future? The organization is a shell of its former self, when it had widespread industry support and a mission to improve the economics of racing and breeding through increased pari-mutuel handle, marketing and greater exposure on television. Following its split from the Breeders’ Cup, the NTRA has lost much of its economic clout and influence, as it no longer has the annual championships to promote to the general public or to race sponsors that were tied in to group purchasing (i.e., John Deere, NetJets, Dodge), which only a few years ago produced upwards of $100 million a year in sales. Following the NTRA-Breeders’ Cup “divorce,” group purchasing through NTRA Advantage has dropped significantly.

Today, the NTRA seems to be playing more defense than offense, reacting to crises (i.e., the death of Eight Belles in the Kentucky Derby, Congressional inquiries, totalizator problems) but not really having the resources to go on the offensive in any areas, including marketing and promotion.

Complicating matters (and this isn’t new) is the ongoing struggle to maintain membership in the NTRA. Churchill Downs Inc., which is tabbed to pay approximately $400,000 in dues for its various tracks in 2009, hasn’t recommitted to membership. A source says Churchill might considering paying $200,000 in dues.  An NTRA official told the Paulick Report he hopes Churchill executives see value in the NTRA’s legislative activities, the “Racing to the Kentucky Derby” television series on ESPN, NTRA Advantage purchasing, the National Handicapping Championship, and the Safety and Integrity Alliance. The interesting thing about the latter, I’ve been told by sources, is that Churchill Downs CEO Bob Evans is the one who insisted the NTRA do something about the safety issues that led to the creation of the Safety and Integrity Alliance.

Magna apparently hasn’t committed to renewing its NTRA membership, either. If the NTRA loses the two largest track ownership companies, it will be further weakened, perhaps terminally.

CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS ARE A CHALLENGE in the current economic climate, whether it’s the PGA Tour, NASCAR or horse racing. But it was, nevertheless, a surprise to see Bessemer Trust drop its sponsorship with the Breeders’ Cup. I would think the wealth management firm formerly chaired by Ogden Mills (Dinny) Phipps and now run by his cousin, Stuart Janney Jr., is encountering the same economic challenges that many financial institutions are (though Bessemer’s investment strategy is believed to be conservative).  

Janney responded to an email with the following comments: “I would say our reasons for dropping out are as follows. First, we have been a sponsor for some time, which means many of our clients have been entertained at a Breeders’ Cup event and having them back again is possibly less appealing than providing a different venue. Second, the two-day format works better for others than it does for us. Third, we have never been able to really derive full value from the TV ads as our target audience is very narrowly focused. Fourth, as we look at other sponsorships and ways to thank our clients or meet prospects, it helps in tighter times to have this money available. We believe our involvement with the Breeders’ Cup has been beneficial to Bessemer and the staff at the Breeders’ Cup has been a pleasure to work with.”

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world.

Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary.