I confess I grinned when I saw the Iskander Racing Press Release yesterday that stated (inter alia):

"Second metro winner for Honours List ... (etc etc etc) [then] Honours List progeny have been well-received at this year’s sales, selling for up to $200,000."

The bit they FORGOT to mention was that it was Iskander himself who paid the $200k for the yearling at the Magic Millions January sale (the bay colt out of The Baggy Green on account of Baerami Tbreds [as agent]). The next highest price for an Honour's List yearling was for a colt out of Radium Springs sold at the same sale for $140k (the sire's yearling average from 23 sold $49,760.87).

But hey, what's $60k between friends?! He's certainly not the first stallion owner to run up the price of a horse (or conduct an expensive buy back) to get the necessary marketing mileage.

++++++++++++++++++

There have been some emails going back and forth over this post. I think it important for me to clarify that I am not stating that Iskander Racing conducted anything other than a legitimate sale (ie. I am not saying that the 200k yearling was a buy back. Iskander's name was always disclosed for everyone to see as the buyer on the buyer's record). What I AM saying is that if you own a stallion and you pay 200k for a yearling by him it is slightly dodgy marketing to then state "and horses by the sire have sold up to 200k". Yes, they have. BUT the general public is not to know who owns Honour's List and whether the name on a buyer's sheet is one and the same. An approach that a number of buyers may more prudently adopt when they own/market a stallion and also purchase progeny by it is one that says they thought so much of the progeny of the stallion that they paid up to $x amount to secure one themselves. That way everyone is clear.