Under The Spotlight. Let's get it right and streamlined now.
The recent spotlight on the methods and processes adopted by the South African Auctioneering profession at large may well have some overdue ramifications for the way we conduct our business in horseracing. It seems a very good time for the breeders and industry to get together and set the performance standards.
The question of the legitimacy and potentially distorting effects of buy-backs at our thoroughbred auctions and even insider type price inflation, amongst other issues, needs to be addressed. Transparency should be adopted as a non-negotiable watchword.
The reality is that the world has changed and times are tough. Honour and valor may not yet be extinct but the ages long principle of a gentlemanly handshake and trust accompanied by a celebratory drink, may sadly require a review and remodeling to the ways of the 21st century.
The media storm that has erupted around allegations of manipulative practices by certain auctioneers and the various stakeholders linked to auctions has placed the interrogation lamp firmly on the profession and on the generally supposedly sqeaky clean supporting components such as the legal profession, bankers and the servants of the Courts. In horseracing this role will be played by the Vets, the Trainers, the Bloodstock Agents and even the Vendors themselves.
Man In The Middle. Renowned Auctioneer Rael Levitt is enduring a trial by media.
The awful trial by media of Rael Levitt’s Auction Alliance group has fairly or unfairly been a damning one. It is early days yet and one hopes that sanity will prevail and a fair opportunity granted to all those involved to state their case and clear the air, if appropriate. The initial picture though is one of consumer misunderstanding, poor communication and skewed perceptions of the law and professional duties.
And let’s clean our house up, before something similar erupts where it affects us. Sectors of the racing industry have been calling for some time for bidders at our Sales to be properly identified by means of clear cut numbered paddles. Confidentiality is fully respected, but the sinister mystery bidder adds no value and we do not allow horses to be raced under the lap – so why allow phantoms to bid on and buy them?
There have been some semantic acrobatics in the press too with regards to the functionality of the ‘vendor bidder’ and ‘proxy bidder’. We accept the proxy bidder as a practical necessity if properly registered and declared, but the vendor bidder is something of a grey area. It seems that Levitt is charging that vendor bidding is ‘internationally and nationally regarded as acceptable practice. It was also regulated, transparent and advertised.’ Mmmmm… We do have reserves set, don’t we?
Ringing The Changes? Horse Auctions are big money business today.
The ever burgeoning strategic role of the Bloodstock Consultant also needs clarification. We have some of the top men in the world but no professional can wear two hats comfortably and act for and in the best interests of opposing parties in any instance. While the prospective buyer obviously needs to do his homework and appoint a professional to act in his very best interests, he needs to be fully appraised of the realities that Mr X is actively involved in the promotion of Stallion Y or Breeder Z. A measure of innocently incestuous involvement at some level is probably unavoidable in a closed community like South African racing, but conflicting interests can never be good for the medium-term credibility and image of this sector of the industry.
Then the question of the glossy catalogue. Is this a vendor’s document or a buyer’s guide? Can it really be both without blushing? The stretching of a point with regard to Black Type has been a dinner table debate all around the world for many years. There are quarters that hold the opinion that it is a bell and whistle that has been bastardized in the interests of creating a fuzzy good feeling when glancing at the page. Surely the black type should only relate to that of performers of real consequence to the pedigree? We need a think tank on this issue alone.
Consumer Protection. No laughing matter!
Fair enough, we accept that generally assets disposed of on auction are sold ‘voetstoots’ with declarations that may impact on the value or otherwise being declared upfront. While buyers obviously need to make every effort to be informed and to do their own homework upfront, reliance on the property law doctrine Caveat emptor, or buyer beware, can only be of assistance if it can be shown that the vendor, or auctioneer, had actively concealed latent defects or otherwise made material misrepresentations. Proving this is probably another story entirely.
It is an interesting debate and probably something that needs addressing sooner rather than later.And only good can come from wholesale transparency and the wiping out of any opportunity for manipulation.
