Posts Tagged ‘John Gaines’

BREEDERS’ CUP STOCK MARKET LOSSES EXCEED BUDGET DEFICIT

Wednesday, December 17th, 2008

By Ray Paulick

While the Breeders’ Cup board of directors acted swiftly to reverse last week’s suspension of the $6-million stakes supplement program for 2009, somewhat overlooked in the swirl of controversy was the organization’s loss of $11 million in the stock market this year. Breeders’ Cup president and CEO Greg Avioli said the losses were not as severe as those suffered by endowments and funds related to other industries (i.e., the Harvard and Yale endowments have lost billions), but some Thoroughbred breeders are questioning why so much of the money from foal and stallion nominations and other revenue was tied up in a volatile equities market in the first place.

The losses, first reported by the Paulick Report on Monday, have dropped Breeders’ Cup cash reserves from $40 million to less than $30 million. The board of directors originally had voted unanimously not to use those cash reserves to plug any of the projected $10-million revenue hole in the 2009 budget, a move that led to the brief suspension of the stakes supplements as well as deep cuts in the marketing and television budget. 

Avioli said the market losses, which exceeded the size of the budgeted deficit for 2009, were unrelated to the board’s original decision.However, an examination of the Breeders’ Cup 2007 annual report shows $2.7 million of unrealized and realized gains on investments were reported as revenue. Total revenue for the year was $56.5 million against expenses of $56.3 million. Without that $2.7 million capital gains reported as income, it appears the Breeders’ Cup would have had an operating deficit of $2.5 million in 2007. It’s unclear to me what becomes of the reported income, now that potential “paper gains” in the equities market have been wiped out in the tumultuous economic climate of 2008. It will also be interesting to examine the 2008 financials to see whether unrealized or realized gains in stock holdings exist or are reported as revenue.

The 2009 operating budget before last week’s cuts were announced was projected to be down $10 million, from $50 million to $40 million. Critics have complained the company should have first undergone more corporate belt tightening (which it has been doing since 2006, when Avioli replaced D.G. Van Clief Jr. as CEO) before cutting out the stakes supplements and marketing expenses. 

The supplements have been part of the Breeders’ Cup program since its inaugural year in 1984, when $10 million was put into championship purses and $10 million into other stakes. That was done to give the Breeders’ Cup broad appeal to potential nominators across the country, and the supplemental money was dispersed at both large and small racetracks. 

In his statement about the decision to use cash reserves to reinstate some portion of the stakes supplements in 2009, Breeders’ Cup board chairman said the board is “not in a position to commit to the stakes program beyond 2009.” The Breeders’ Cup board and executive team have discussed elimination of the stakes supplements in recent years, citing research that shows the money has not been a great incentive for breeders to nominate their foals. 

Farish also said in his statement that “the Board still believes, as I do personally, that it’s critical to maintain sufficient reserves to allow for the long-term viability of the Breeders’ Cup.”   Avioli said the cash reserves are viewed by the board as a catastrophic fund in the event the Breeders’ Cup is canceled because of unforeseen circumstances (equine disease outbreak, fire, earthquake or other disaster) or a multi-year financial crisis. Business interruption insurance would cover a great deal of any potential losses if the event had to be cancelled – in which case the current $25.5 million in championship purses would not have to be distributed. 

The odds against holding the event, which can be moved from one venue to another in the event of a crisis, would appear to be slim. The Kentucky Derby has been run continuously since 1875 despite two World Wars and the great flood of 1937 that covered much of Churchill Downs.

IRS Form 990 for the Breeders’ Cup shows $28.3 million in stocks and bonds holdings in 2006 with another $7.8 million in U.S. treasuries and $2.5 million in Breeders’ Cup properties (the 2007 Form 990 is not yet available). Earlier this year, the Paulick Report has been told, members of the Breeders’ Cup board and its Investment Committee were urged by at least two individuals on the larger board of members and trustees not to keep such a high percentage of the organization’s reserves in the equities market. The Investment Committee, chaired by G. Watts Humphrey Jr. (its other members are Farish, Antony Beck, Donald Dizney, Ogden Mills “Dinny” Phipps, Joseph Shields, and Satish Sanan, who recently was appointed), opted to keep a substantial part of the assets in stocks. By year’s end, the assets have fallen sharply. 

A number of breeders told the Paulick Report the money should never have been invested in the market because they view the Breeders’ Cup as a pass-through organization. “It’s our money,” one breeder said. “I didn’t pay $500 to nominate my foal so the Breeders’ Cup could buy stock in Coca-Cola. An emergency fund should be kept, but the rest of the money should go into purses.” 

Cash reserves were an important part of the program 25 years ago, one founding member of the Breeders’ Cup said, because putting together and keeping a coalition of stallion farms was not an easy task, and there was the threat that if one or two major farms pulled out it could cause the whole concept to collapse. Keeping enough reserves to fund the program for a full year was considered a strategic defense against any boycott. 

The coalition has held together, however, despite some bumps in the road along the way. The Breeders’ Cup has expanded from the $10 million championship day of seven races to a two-day event worth $25.5 million. The stakes supplement program has been reduced several times over the years from its original $10-million budget, and it now appears to be in jeopardy beyond 2009. 

Farish said in his statement the board is looking at other ways to provide benefits to nominators of the program, though gave no further specifics. One benefit would be to continue to do what the board has done in the last five days: listen to those who support the program through their stallion and foal nominations. Beyond that, the board should provide greater transparency and disclosure about financial matters, committee appointments and board activities. The production of a 2007 annual report, something that had not been done in the early years of the Breeders’ Cup, was a good first step. 

The Breeders’ Cup is designed to promote Thoroughbred racing and enhance public awareness of the entire industry. But it should always be remembered that the foundation and single biggest stakeholders remain the breeders who have financially supported the program since it was nothing more than a vision in the creative mind of the late John Gaines.   

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report  

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

POPE TO OWNERS: ‘IT’S YOUR GAME’

Thursday, August 14th, 2008
By Ray Paulick

Fred Pope just won’t give up.

For more than 16 years, since he first used advertising space in Bloodhorse magazine to publish an article entitled “Whose Game Is it?” Pope has been trying to convince Thoroughbred owners that they can control their own destiny in racing.

Pope is a Lexington, Ky., advertising agent who for many years was closely associated with Gainesway Farm and its founding owner, John Gaines. Both men loved the power of ideas and both wanted to see Thoroughbred racing grow out of a parochial, tradition-steeped existence that encouraged inertia over creativity. Gaines started the Breeders’ Cup, which he had hoped would become a vehicle to market the sport to a wide audience that currently does not participate in racing. He went to his grave disappointed that his big dream was not fulfilled, even though the Breeders’ Cup has been widely hailed as racing’s best innovation of the 20th century.
 
Pope saw the power of the event, which at the very least gave racing the championship day it never had. The Breeders’ Cup has evolved from a one-day on-track experience with a relatively large television viewing audience to a two-day event in which racing fans throughout the country can participate through simulcast betting at their local track, OTB or via account wagering. The television audience has plunged in numbers over the 25-year history of the Breeders’ Cup, even as handle has grown substantially.

The bottom line is that the Breeders’ Cup may capture the attention of most racing fans for a weekend, but it isn’t creating very many new enthusiasts for the sport.

Pope believed racing needed more than just one big weekend in the fall to help the sport grow, so he began trying to find ways to define a “major leagues” for racing. He kept going back to the fact that the racehorse owners, the people who own the “talent,” should be in control of the game. “Control” means licensing, scheduling of major races, marketing regulations, contractual agreements over distribution and revenue. It’s the kind of control defined by the most successful major league sports, including the National Football League (controlled by the team owners) or the PGA Tour (controlled by the players).

After studying various sports and how the team owners or players exert control, Pope formed the National Thoroughbred Association, which would create a major league for horse racing by, among other things, reversing what he called the upside-down revenue model currently in place for simulcasting, which now accounts for nearly 90% of wagering. The upside-down model, in brief, pays five times more to the business handling a wager (the simulcast outlet or account wagering company where a bet is made) than it pays to the track and horsemen who puts on the race on which the wager is made.

One of the first people Pope convinced that his idea would work was John Gaines, who along with Pope started convincing some of the most powerful owners in the business to get on-board. Eventually more than 100 owners signed up, each contributing $50,000 to the NTA as seed money, and the NTA was off and running in the summer of 1996. A board of directors was formed and Robert Clay was elected president of the NTA.

(Author’s note: In an article on Breeders’ Cup governance published by the Paulick Report in June, I mistakenly credited Gaines with creating the NTA. Pope deserves full credit for its creation.)
Pope brought in two people familiar with the model, Tim Smith and Hamilton Jordan, who had worked together in the Jimmy Carter White House and later on several other projects, including professional tennis, which  had been transformed into a sport controlled by the players – not the tournament sites. Smith also had worked as deputy commissioner on the PGA Tour.

In early 1997, as the NTA’s plans continued to be formulated, Jockey Club chairman Dinny Phipps got involved and called Clay and a few others to a private meeting in Palm Beach, Fla. Neither Phipps nor William S Farish, the Jockey Club’s vice chairman, supported the NTA. Farish was also the chairman of the board of publicly traded Churchill Downs and a major consignor of yearlings at Keeneland. The latter role led Farish to have ambivalent feelings about the NTA, he told Gaines privately, because “I have to sell yearlings” to many of the people who had signed up in support of the NTA or who sat on its board of directors.

Clay was almost breathless in his enthusiasm for the “all hands together” approach that Phipps proposed during the Palm Beach meeting, that called for the Jockey Club, Breeders’ Cup and Keeneland to get involved. Other groups eventually were also brought in, including racetracks, and what had been an owner-driven initiative was now, for lack of a better term, a fustercluck of industry organizations which, by their nature, could never paddle in the same direction.

Phipps effectively killed the NTA, morphing it into the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, which is now a lobbying organization in Washington, D.C. , and a trade association for the industry. The NTRA is not a league office and has not done anything to transform racing into a major league sport.

As Pope said during a talk he gave to a group of equine attorneys last year, “The NTRA looked like the NTA, sounded like the NTA, and promoted itself with the terms such as ‘Commissioner’ and ‘league office’ but without the basic elements of a Major League. It was a fake major league.

“The NTRA could not package, price, or distribute the sport. It did not have the rights from the racehorse owners, it did not have rights from the racetracks, nor did it seek to change simulcast pricing. Instead of the proven Major League sports structure, the NTRA tried to include not just all of Thoroughbred racing, but also included all of the Thoroughbred industry, as well as other horse breeds and dog racing industries.

“Instead of a real Major League structure, the NTRA presented a fantasy structure selling the premise that if everyone would close their eyes, join hands and sing Koombaya, then Thoroughbred racing would be restored The political operators had everyone drinking the NTRA Kool-aid.

“If Mr. Phipps thought stopping the major league NTA, to start another trade association, then in my opinion he is incompetent. If he did it only to stop the NTA, then he and people who helped him are guilty of something more sinister and owe the industry an apology. Although Mr. Phipps is the acknowledged head of the industry, I have never read about his vision for Thoroughbred racing. Every time someone else has put forward an idea, he has moved to stop it. To the point now, no one has offered anything new in the last ten years.”

Pope made those comments in May 2007. Since then, the industry’s prognosis has gone from bad to worse. This year alone we’ve we had the death of Eight Belles at the Kentucky Derby, the admission by trainer Rick Dutrow that Kentucky Derby winner Big Brown raced on anabolic steroids, medication positives for the trainers of the Horse of the Year, the Kentucky Derby winner and the Kentucky Oaks winner, the possible implosion of Magna Entertainment (the largest racetrack owner in the country), ongoing disputes over simulcasting and account wagering, and Congressional hearings that made the industry’s leaders look incompetent.

I think we are right next to a calamity,” Pope told the Paulick Report.

For that reason, he’s not giving up on the same basic premise that started in 1992 with the question “Whose Game Is It?”

Last month, Pope published an op-ed piece in the Thoroughbred Daily News discussing racing’s upside-down distribution model and the need for owners to get involved. That article got a lot of horse owners talking about the need for change.

I’m afraid we are seeing the total collapse of the economic model that’s in place right now,” Pope told the Paulick Report. “The objective of the NTA was to change from a simulcast buyer’s market to a seller’s market. It’s finally coming to fruition in some very bad ways, and it’s only a matter of how much damage has been done.

In the Aug. 16 issue of Bloodhorse magazine, Pope has repeated that message and has called for Congress to change one word in the Interstate Horseracing Act that will empower owners across the nation.

We have a long list of national organizations, but not a national racehorse owners association,” Pope wrote in a magazine that, coincidentally, is owned by the national Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association. Several organizations say they speak for racehorse owners; however, they are actually controlled by breeders, tracks, or trainers. It seems everyone wants to speak for racehorse owners, except racehorse owners.

Currently, the Interstate Horseracing Act gives simulcast approval to what it calls “horsemen,” which has been defined as owners and trainers. Pope wants the word “horsemen” to be changed to “racehorse owners,” mandating that the owners step and get involved in key decisions relating to simulcasting contracts.

One problem is that horse owners, to paraphrase what Robert Clay said many years ago, didn’t join the country club to cut the grass. They joined so they could play golf

Jess Jackson is one owner who believes in Pope’s idea, and that can be viewed as a blessing or as a curse. Jackson is a powerful individual whose written testimony before the Congressional hearing in June included a lengthy article written by Pope. He has access to members of Congress that many others might not have. He is respected and appreciated by some in the industry for what he has done in the area of auction reform, but there are others who may automatically get on the other side of the fence from Jackson on any given issue because they don’t like his tactics.

That shouldn’t be the case. This issue is too important. Racing is in far worse shape than it was in 1996 when Pope and more than 100 owners stepped up to make a difference, only to be shot down by Dinny Phipps and his sycophantic followers.

The idea then was to grow the business by having owners take control of the sport and create a new business model for simulcast distribution. The reality today is that the various parties are fighting over scraps. The focus needs to return to growth, and there is only way for that to occur.

Racehorse owners must support change to the status quo.

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report

Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.

 

BREEDERS’ CUP ELECTION: GAME ON!

Saturday, June 14th, 2008

It took centuries for the people of Iraq to experience the joys of voting in a democratic election. Thoroughbred breeders only had to wait 25 years.

For over two decades since its inception in 1982 as the brainchild of the late John Gaines, Breeders’ Cup Ltd. had been run under the cloak of darkness, or as Canadian breeder Frank Stronach said, as a “club.” There was an unwieldy, self-perpetuating board numbering 48 individuals and numerous committees dominated by members of the Jockey Club. For most of its 25 years, however, the Breeders’ Cup was controlled by a small executive committee headed by Will Farish, the vice chairman of the Jockey Club, and later by G. Watts Humphrey Jr., a partner in many of Farish’s breeding ventures at Lane’s End Farm and a Jockey Club insider. Meetings of the large board were seen by some board members as nothing more than a good opportunity to catch up on industry gossip, doze and rubber stamp decisions of the executive committee.

Control fell into the hands of the Jockey Club hierarchy at the outset of the Breeders’ Cup when then-powerful Claiborne Farm at first resisted the idea of nominating its stallions to the program, a move that would have prevented it from leaving the starting gate. Gaines, who was never a member of the Jockey Club and often referred sarcastically to its poo-bahs as the “self-appointed guardians of the Turf,” agreed to remove himself from any management role in order to end the acrimony with Claiborne. The farm’s president, Seth Hancock, had very close ties to the Jockey Club’s ruling family, the late Ogden Phipps and son Dinny.

A decision by Farish and Humphrey to reach into the rich coffers of the Breeders’ Cup (estimated conservatively then at $40 million) and provide financial assistance to the fledgling National Thoroughbred Racing Association through a joint operating agreement in 2001 rankled many breeders, who had built the program from scratch with annual foal nominations of $500 and annual stallion nominations equal to a horse’s stud fee. Those breeders had grave concerns over how their money was being spent. Breeders’ Cup purses were being outpaced by a growing number of international races, and under Farish’s leadership (and Breeders’ Cup executives Ted Bassett and D.G. Van Clief Jr., both Jockey Club members) the original seven race program that began in 1984 was unchanged until the addition in 1999 of the Filly & Mare Turf.

Many breeders did not see or understand the merit of propping up the NTRA, an organization formed in 1998 after Dinny Phipps derailed another initiative pushed by Gaines, the owner-driven National Thoroughbred Association, morphing that into a hybrid vehicle driven by a combination of owners, breeders and racetrack executives who could never agree to do anything significant enough to help the industry.

But I digress.

Stronach was among those who began to stir the nest in 2001 making pointed comments at a public forum about both the NTRA and Breeders’ Cup and its boards of directors. By then, his Magna Entertainment owned a number of racetracks, and he threatened to pull them out of the NTRA unless he was satisfied the organizations would make some reforms in governance. Van Clief, then vice chairman of NTRA and president of the Breeders’ Cup was quoted in a Jan. 14, 2001, article at ThoroughbredTimes.com as saying that the Breeders’ Cup was reviewing its methodology for electing directors and hopeful of resolving the issue in “the next few days.”

Those “few days,” however, stretched into weeks, then months, then years. Stronach was otherwise appeased, and his tracks remained NTRA members.

In 2005, when the Breeders’ Cup board rubber-stamped a committee recommendation to increase stallion nomination fees for stallions with 50 or more foals, there was more stirring. John Sikura, owner of Hill ‘n’ Dale Farm, wrote a letter published in The Blood-Horse that was extremely critical of the move. “The focus of the Breeders’ Cup should be on cost containment and fixing their business model so that 20 years after inception, we do not have to alter an agreed revenue sharing formula to fill revenue gaps and create their profitability,” wrote Sikura, who called the change a “luxury tax” on stallions producing more than 50 foals. Sikura agreed that the Breeders’ Cup needed its purses to keep pace with competing races, then added, “At the very least, the Breeders’ Cup must pledge 100% of these additional revenues to purses and realize it is our money they are spending, not theirs.”

The Breeders’ Cup was not strapped for cash. At the time, it had accumulated over $40 million from nominations and revenue from its annual championship day of racing.

Sikura’s letter was a lightning rod for the growing discontent many breeders were feeling over the use of Breeders’ Cup funds in NTRA operations. “That letter really got people fired up,” a current Breeders’ Cup board member told me recently. “People weren’t so much upset about the decision to increase the fees, but how it was made and where the money was going.”

Many people believed the administrative budget for operating the Breeders’ Cup and NTRA had become bloated. “The overhead model was strewn with numerous employees with outrageously high salaries and no financial accountability to the breeders who funded the organization,” said one current board member.

The stallion fee increase came in the wake of a simmering dispute between the ruling members of the Breeders’ Cup/NTRA boards and a group of owners and breeders organized under the banner of the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association who were proposing a race series called the Thoroughbred Championship Tour. Among the big names pushing the TCT series was its chairman, owner-breeder Robert McNair, the owner of the National Football League’s Houston Texans. The series concept was created by Thoroughbred Daily News publisher Barry Weisbord, who a decade earlier had started the American Championship Racing Series, which gained traction on the racing landscape but ultimately failed because of industry squabbling.

TCT backers felt the Breeders’ Cup/NTRA boards were not doing enough to support their proposed series, which never got off the ground and suspended its operations in July 2005. Those backers joined the growing chorus of voices seeking reforms at the Breeders’ Cup, where the people John Gaines called the “self-appointed guardians of the Turf” finally realized that change was inevitable and necessary. The old board altered the corporate bylaws in November 2005, creating a new operating board of 13 members, who would be selected by a larger group of “members and trustees.” Those members and trustees would be elected by Breeders’ Cup foal and stallion nominators under a formula that assigns one vote for each $500 in nominations to the program. (For example, someone who owns a stallion with a stud fee of $10,000 would get 20 votes.”

Finally, 25 years after the Breeders’ Cup was created, the people who funded the program would have the chance to have a say in how it is run. The struggle for control of the Breeders’ Cup was reopened.

Game on.

Editor’s note: The original version of this article incorrectly stated that the National Thoroughbred Association was created by John Gaines. The NTA was solely created in 1993 by advertising executive Fred Pope. Gaines joined Pope in helping push the initiative three years later.

TOMORROW: Part 2. Power-seekers, politicking, deal-making, and clashing egos.

By Ray Paulick

Copyright ©2008, The Paulick Report