Sea The Stars - Retirement Announced

Quote:
Originally Posted by clivex
Or maybe he..ahem... prefers watching them breed to race ....

:blink: A truly bizarre thing to say, even from you.
Click to expand...

You never know....theres a market for everything
 
Let us assume that STS's owner wants to get his money back in 5 years, with anything earned after that as pure profit.

With really good fertility, he might be able to manage 100 live foals a year.

For the first 2 years, I think he could command an 80k live foal fee (even if his first batch of 2-y-os don't win too many black type events, agents will still give him the benefit of the doubt for one crop, as he's not likely to be a source of "made" 2-y-o types).

Third year, 60k, then 2 years at 50k, as potential investors start to lose their bottle.

That comes to (2 * 8 million) + (1 * 6 million) + (2 * 5 million), which comes to 32 million pounds. And that's on an average fee roughly equal to that of the established top-class sire, Pivotal.

So, figures of 80 or 100 million are just fanciful hype.
 
Simon, I mean he has no duplications in the first 5 generations of his pedigree.

When researching my post, I was trying to think of a stallion with an outcross pedigree who had been a real success, and all I could come up with was Bold Ruler, and then I discovered that he's 5X5 Sundridge.
 
Bar the Bull said:
150 covers a year. €80k a pop. Works out at €12 bar a year.

Average fertile life for a stallion? 12 years. €144million. Discount the cashflows gives around €110m.

So £100m sounds about right.
Click to expand...

Yes, between 60-100 million in the hope the horse stays as 80k through out his career....which is more unlikely than likely.
 
You cannot discount earnings in 5 years. And don't forget that the fee could also go up. I know that's unlikely but you would have to factor it in.

I know that he is not with Coolmore, but in 2007 had an average of 150 covers for their 24 stallions.
 
Venusian said:
So, figures of 80 or 100 million are just fanciful hype.
Click to expand...

I suppose the question might be better put as - how much would it take to get the horse off the Tsuis. If they were to sell him outright, I think 60-100million is within range.

This is what fascinates me about flat racing - not just the sport but the business behind it.
 
Last edited:
Not necessarily done on coverings alone - mare will have to actually be in foal at a certain date or might even have to produce a live foal (unlikely in STS's case).
 
Last edited:
Bar the Bull said:
You cannot discount earnings in 5 years. And don't forget that the fee could also go up. I know that's unlikely but you would have to factor it in.

I know that he is not with Coolmore, but in 2007 had an average of 150 covers for their 24 stallions.
Click to expand...

BTB, stallion owners have to be able to get their investment back in 4 to 5 years - don't forget that 85% disappoint, and that includes regally-bred classic winners as well as 'ordinary' G1 winners. Think Fusaichi Pegasus. Anyone who based their valuation on a projected 10 or 15 year income stream would end up in the poorhouse. And I don't think they'll be shuttling him, either.
 
I agree with you on 150 a year being too big. I was thinking of a shuttling stallion, which he is unikely to be.

So 90 live foals a year would probably give £60m.

However, I know that you should value an asset on all cash flows. I was discounting them by the reinvestment rate, which may have been a bit low given the high risk.

So I will let you get down to £50m. Anybody who buys him for £35m would be in serious danger of making money.
 
clivex said:
Saying it wasnt an option indicated that there was simply no choice regardless of owners desire. There is no choice if the sole reason to own horses is to maximise breeding fees and i would suggest, need the cash.

But anyway, thats picking holes maybe...i know what you mean now SL
Click to expand...

If he were mine, I'd like to think he'd be skipping the States and staying in training as a four year old. But he ain't, and he ain't gonna, and he never was gonna!
 
What she means Clivex - is that if he were hers, hed currently be having a couple of weeks off, and will be brought back and taught to jump for a tilt at the Triumph ;)
 
Dismissing Nick Mordin as an idiot is idiotic in itself, it's like calling Andrew Beyer an idiot. I disagree with him on every level with his opinions on Sea The Stars and he's massively missing the point but he's no idiot.
 
Headstrong said:
Speed ratings are largely irrelevant for such a horse.
Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more, speed ratings are relevant at every level and even more so at the top end. Secretariat's performance in the Belmont is still considered to this day by American handicappers to be the best equine performance of all time because of the time he ran.
 
Look, the handicapper has said and many others interested in speed ratings have also said that they can only rate him on what he has actually done - which is with a horse like STS who only does 'just enough' dependent on the horses behind him. Could they, did they, push him hard enough to force him to give his all?

His figures are superb, and 140 is obviously excellent; but the point I am making and which should be obvious is that BECAUSE he is a horse who only ever does just enough, we shall never know what he was capable of. So trying to light on a final rating for him can only - imo and in that of the handicapper - be an indication, not a definitive figure.

Rip may have 'pushed him' in the sense he broke the record at Sandown but no-one who watched the race can honestly claim that STS was 'all out' - he could have pulled out even more had he had to. He was never in any danger of being beaten at the business end of any of his races this year, and HE KNEW IT, so people can crab him on speed figures all they like, but it's meaningless in terms of what he might have done, had he been forced to go to the bottom of the well. He never was, and we shall never know his optimum 'speed figure'
 
Venusian said:
Simon, I mean he has no duplications in the first 5 generations of his pedigree.

When researching my post, I was trying to think of a stallion with an outcross pedigree who had been a real success, and all I could come up with was Bold Ruler, and then I discovered that he's 5X5 Sundridge.
Click to expand...

he might have an outcross pedigree, but does not represent an outcross to the mares, in fact offers loads of -at this stage at least- quite fascinating inbreeding lines. so would not worry about his pedigree one bit.
both his parents are inbreed from 5 on, so you only have to dig and persuade yourself it matters ;)
 
Gamla Stan said:
Dismissing Nick Mordin as an idiot is idiotic in itself, it's like calling Andrew Beyer an idiot. I disagree with him on every level with his opinions on Sea The Stars and he's massively missing the point but he's no idiot.
Click to expand...

Only if you apply the literal meaning of the word.

To all other intents and purposes, he is a bit of an eejit. I'm an ever bigger eejit. I bought his book but, in mitigation, it was not because I was a fan, it was because I was trying to read as much as I could at that time about alternative approaches to speed handicapping. I even read the book through three or four times despite concluding halfway through the first reading that the guy is a charlatan.
 
I can't have Mordin at all; he doesn't help himself as he has a hangup whereby he feels he has to be contrary just for the sake of it. It's not clever, but he seems to think he is the dog's bollocks.
 
His profiles are hilarious. I love the way he says that a horse has a record of 113221131 in races between December and March on left handed undulating tracks with no more than 30 days between runs when ridden by a right-handed jockey with no more than three syllables in his name.
 
Back
Top