TRANSPARENCY IN HORSE SALES — Up for Debate?

Last year Kristine Kelly and I, co-founders of Equine Exchange, were invited by a popular equestrian magazine to state the case for “Transparency in Horse Sales” in a debate-style feature.

In a nutshell, “transparency” in this context means the buyer and seller in a horse transaction have the right to be informed of pertinent information known by an agent/trainer representing them, such as key facts about the horse’s behavior and health and how purchase funds will be allocated (i.e., how much the trainer(s)/agent(s) will make in “commission” and how much the seller will receive as the final “purchase price” of the horse).

To us, it’s hard to believe this debate is even necessary, but the reality is that our vision is a stark contrast to the status quo: a murky market, rife with dishonest deals. At the last, the well-known trainer who had agreed to provide the opposing view backed out. Instead of a debate, the magazine published an article about Equine Exchange. While we were delighted with the exposure, we couldn’t help but feel a bit disappointed.

You see, we’ve had countless candid conversations about these issues and we looked forward to an open discussion. We know the “tricks of the trade” and how those who participate in shady dealing try to justify it. We want everyone who buys a horse to know too, not only for their own sake, but also for every hard-working, ethical professional who suffers in this broken system.

So, here’s our short and sweet statement on transparency and what the defenders of the status quo have argued (with our rebuttals):

THE CASE FOR TRANSPARENCY:

It’s simple. Transparency is the only way to conduct an honest, ethical, professional transaction that follows the law. If you’re against lying and cheating, then you’re for transparency in horse sales.

THE CASE AGAINST TRANSPARENCY (with our Rebuttals):

Argument 1: This system of hidden commissions is just the way the industry works. It will never change.

Rebuttal: There’s resistance to change in every industry, but once discontent reaches a tipping point, change happens. The horse industry can’t continue to operate by shady business practices in the age of the internet. Awareness is spreading and owners are insisting on transparency and full disclosure.

Argument 2: Trainers have to make money any way they can in order to survive — they’re justified in taking money out of the deal as long as the buyer was able to buy within their budget and the seller was happy with how much they received for the horse.

Rebuttal: We respect how hard it is to make a living as a trainer, but deceiving customers out of money is called stealing. If a trainer is working for a client but acts in his own interest, it’s a violation of trust and the agreement with that client, as well as breaking the law. It doesn’t matter how much trainers charge for their services, commissions included — they are free to charge what the market will bear, and perhaps commissions should be higher — but all fees should be out in the open and agreed to by the clients paying them.

Under common law in the U.S., anyone who acts as an agent must act in the best interests of their client (the “principal”) and owes certain duties to the principal, including the duties of good faith and fair dealing and a duty not to conceal conflicts of interest.

Argument 3: Owners know how things work and accept the system as is.

Rebuttal: Experienced owners may be generally aware of what goes on but that doesn’t mean they “accept” this system or would willingly fall victim to it. No one likes being lied to or cheated, regardless of how much money they have. Turning a “blind eye” doesn’t mean acceptance — there just hasn’t been a readily available alternative, until now.

Argument 4: Transparency isn’t possible because trainers who refuse to participate in shady deals will be shunned by other trainers and won’t be able to sell horses.

Rebuttal: The peer pressure in this industry is very real, and we sympathize with those otherwise ethical trainers who are pressured into participating in something they know isn’t right. But change is happening. Trust sells horses. Honest trainers and sellers now have an easy way to demonstrate their integrity to their clients and the market. It will become more and more apparent which trainers engage in shady deals. Buyers and sellers are doing their research and looking to us to find trainers and sellers who do business above board. Business is moving in that direction.

Argument 5: Advocating for transparency means you’re “anti-professional” or working against trainers.

Rebuttal: This couldn’t be further from the truth. Our family and friends are professionals in the horse business. Trainers are some of our biggest supporters, and we’re doing this for them as much as for owners. Most professionals are intensely frustrated by the current unfair system because everyone loses: owners who have “been burned” are reluctant to further invest in the sport (if they don’t pick up a tennis racket and leave all together) and the entire industry suffers the loss. Trainers who do business “above board” welcome the opportunity to demonstrate to their clients and the world that they conduct transactions with integrity and professionalism.

There you go. Decide for yourself which side of the debate you fall on. If you want to bring up a point we haven’t addressed here, then please leave a comment.

Equine Exchange creates transparency in horse transactions by establishing clear relationships and communication and creating a neutral, third-party record of the information considered and agreements made in the process of evaluating and buying a horse.

Visit our site to learn more about How Commissions Stack Up, Risks in Horse Buying, and to review our library of Resources.

If you support transparency in horse sales we want to hear from you.