Questions Regarding Futurity Structures

[gvpalominominis]

I know there was a recent topic regarding Futurities but this is more of a questions and discussion about the actual futurity itself.

We recently had our local clubs show committee meeting for the 2010 show season. We are all looking for ways to cut expenses, find new and innovated ideas for club revenues, the desire for increasing membership in general and encouraging show entries and attendance.

The first thought seemed to be, since there are numerous types of futurities was to identify the clubs objective for their futurity besides just the obvious need to increase entries. Futurity itself describes a competition or show that would be held in the future. The definition of a futurity to some, including myself, is that of a competition among breeders, sometimes restricted to certain geographic locations such as in our local club futurities.

I thought it was very well put actually on a Paso Fino site The basis behind having futurity classes in any breed is to encourage breeders to think ahead to the future of that breed and to make smart choices in how they breed their mares and stallions to carry on the best qualities of their breed. Futurities also showcase breeders stallion and/or mares progeny and their breeding programs overall.

The entrants at these futurities are nominated in different ways. Some futurities require in-utero nomination of the foal as well as each sire and dam. Some futurities allow nominations through the year of the foals birth. Both of these types of futurities not only have qualification rules but also nomination timeframe restrictions. Another type, in the case of nominations/entries being done at the time of the show itself, may only have qualification rules.

Some contended that allowing anything other than the in-utero nominations would be considered a stakes class. My contention is that anyone can enter a stakes class at any time, and these other type of futurity classes still have restrictions and qualifications.

Our clubs current futurity program is an in-utero nomination one. Our suggestion in hopes to increase the number of nominations and entries to help the club and further promote a futurity program, was to allow the weanling year nominations. This idea was together with a payout distribution plan to provide incentive to the current in-utero nominations and for the future in-utero nominations to have an added bonus in the payout only for in-utero nominated foal wins.

At least for the already paid in-utero nominations, this added benefit would highlight their early nominations and for future years provide incentive for continued in-utero nominations. They would also gain the weanling nominations which could also include a late nomination fee or higher fee to add to the pot. Some felt that this idea would not only encourage more nominations, but would inevitably increase the amount of the payouts. There may even be carryover for a mounting bonus pot until won. which could only be won by an in-utero nominated foal. In other words the plan would be to retain the in-utero nominations and gain the added nominations from the weanling year. Other restrictions could be added if desired such as must be nominated within 60 days of birth and overall no later than Dec. 31st of the nominating year.

My questions to the forum are these:

1. Would you feel that this system allowing weanling nominations is unfair?

2. Do you feel that Miniature Horses have greater risks in conception, and foaling deaths than larger equine thus viewing futurity nominations a greater risk of fee loss or wasted investment? If so, if that risk was lessened would you then spend that money to nominate more foals?

3. Would you feel that having the foal on the ground when it is nominated is no longer a gamble to show their yearling season?

4. Do you feel that this type of futurity program would be of no interest to breeders?

5. Do you show in a futurity for the competition, or is it also the potential to win money?

6. If calculation procedures for such an innovated payout plan were not an element, would this type of program entice you to nominate your foals as a breeder?

Thank you!

 

[kaykay]

Hi Joanne

IMO a true futurity only has foals nominated in utero. To me if the foal is nominated as a weanling then its not a true futurity. If you do allow both then I feel people nominating after the foal is born should pay a much larger fee then those nominating in utero.

I dont feel that miniatures having more foaling problems really impacts it at all as I know for me I only nominate mares that tend to foal without problems. Now having said that a problem can occur in any foaling but thats the chance you take with futurities

I do feel that those that do opt in should be able to put a horse back in if they forget to pay the sustaining fee but again it should be a much higher fee

I nominate in the futurity both to win money and as a selling incentive

I would not participate if they allowed foals on the ground to be nominated

 

[gvpalominominis]

Hi Joanne
IMO a true futurity only has foals nominated in utero. To me if the foal is nominated as a weanling then its not a true futurity. If you do allow both then I feel people nominating after the foal is born should pay a much larger fee then those nominating in utero.

I dont feel that miniatures having more foaling problems really impacts it at all as I know for me I only nominate mares that tend to foal without problems. Now having said that a problem can occur in any foaling but thats the chance you take with futurities

I do feel that those that do opt in should be able to put a horse back in if they forget to pay the sustaining fee but again it should be a much higher fee

I nominate in the futurity both to win money and as a selling incentive

I would not participate if they allowed foals on the ground to be nominated

Thanks KayKay. Its always nice to hear others' viewpoints. You do realize however that AMHR & ASPC does allow foals on the ground to be nominated up to March 1st of the year after conception? I called AMHR and spoke to verify with Joe.

And I agree... the weanling nominations should have a higher nominating fee if that is the futurity structure that is used.

 

[BlueStar]

I agree with KayKay. Futurity nominations should be in utero ONLY. I think breeders who are confident in what they are producing will continue to nominate. Those that do not nominate and happen to get an outstanding foal.....well maybe they will nominate next time. I think the futurity program would lose nominations if the club offered both. Alot of times once the foal arrives the owner may not think it is nice enough to gamble on the futurity. Nominating in utero gives everyone a fair chance at getting that "ONE" great foal.

Maybe a fundraiser or silent auction or ? to add more money to the pot. Give other incentives to nominate other than weanling year nominations. Would also be great to have personalized for futurity awards to go with the money.....even if the awards were deducted from the pot.

Also want to add that being in the NW...we might consider adding performance futurities since it is such a large part of our club.

 

[kaykay]

Thanks KayKay. Its always nice to hear others' viewpoints. You do realize however that AMHR & ASPC does allow foals on the ground to be nominated up to March 1st of the year after conception? I called AMHR and spoke to verify with Joe.

Good point and yes I do know that but its fairly rare to see foals born before March 1. I would venture a guess that it is probably seen more in ponies verses minis. I do know of a farm that tries to have foals born Jan/Feb but it is not very successful. Now having said that years ago I did have a foal born in Feb but not by choice LOL. Now if I had wanted a Feb foal it would have never happened

Murphys law right?

Im kinda surprised there are so few replies to this topic. But I still think there are a lot of owners that do not understand what a futurity program is. I know years ago I got so frustrated trying to figure it out so a friend called me and explained it over the phone step by step and then it made sense.

I also dont think people realize that the pots are fairly large. I can say when we bought our aspc futurity nominated colt and gelded him he made back more then his purchase price the first year we showed him.

Kay

 

[gvpalominominis]

Thanks you guys.... I was hoping I'd get more feed back on this forum too... but maybe I'll try more locally as well. At the meeting, the idea was kinda split... I wanted to get more input because I was actually surprised about the strong feelings about the in-utero nominations. Coming from a dog showing/breeding background, you nominate "litters" not the pregnancy.... and in AMHR's case (although this particular club is an AMHA club).. they do allow several months (Jan/Feb) worth of weanling nominations... AND they can even show in the weanling futurity that same year. At least with this other format, they are not showing until they are yearlings. A LOT can happen from the time a prospect foal is born until it's yearling futurity show... = ) But I can and do respect both perspectives.

For myself... I was beginning to think that was the best way to assure your mare would sluff the foal or have a still born was to nominate the mare.... There went about $250 after all the nominations were completed for several clubs.

Maybe a "Breeder's Sweepstakes" for those of us who would rather not risk the cash right now on nominating a pregnancy. I'm going to check to verify... but I believe the year they allowed late nominations... had the biggest classes ever for the club. Like 17 entries instead of 3 or 4.

As with most clubs... the ideas, work load from volunteers and meeting goers who vote on decisions for the club is a low percentage of the membership. So we're trying to engage more members to become involved, trying to increase revenues (our shows have always been our main money makers) and please do share any ideas you may have (and we are getting some good ones) for fun and innovative ways to keep ours and other's clubs alive and financially healthy. Sometimes that may mean looking outside the normal box.

I think with the payout system I’m coming up with could be exciting and created larger payouts…. In-utero nominations would definitely have the biggest payout for the added risk / gamble. = ) I'm also developing a program that will track the nominations and calculate the percentages.... I don't know if there is a program out there already or not.