Cocktails, canapés and million-pound horses set scene for Royal Ascot
Over 7.5 million pounds ($10.2 million) changed hands as bidders vied to secure one of 28 thoroughbred horses, 18 of which are due to compete this week for a chance to win a portion of Royal Ascot's 10 million pound prize pot.
The Goffs London Sale, now in its 11th year, is an exclusive auction held in the grounds of Kensington Palace where anyone, providing they have a minimum 150,000 pound credit clearance, can bid for front-row access to one of the world's most prestigious sporting events.
"You could be standing in the grounds of Kensington Palace at six o'clock and by two o'clock the next day, you could be at the parade ring alongside the British Royal Family with your own runner and your own colours," Henry Beeby, chief executive at the 160-year-old Goffs auction house, told Reuters.
Top lot Ghostwriter, who holds an entry for the Group 2 Hardwicke Stakes at Royal Ascot on Saturday, went for 2 million pounds to football agent Kia Joorabchian of Amo Racing while the second most expensive horse, Woodshauna, sold for 625,000 pounds to John Stewart of Resolute Racing - two of the biggest buyers in the sport.
Joorabchian, who is known to be a big spender after dropping over 24 million pounds at a single sale last year, said his son had picked out the horse and that it had a good chance in the Hardwicke Stakes, a prestigious Group 2 race held at Royal Ascot.
Danish entrepreneur and hotelier John Christensen said he bought Super Soldier for 390,000 pounds so his friends would have something to cheer on at the races on Tuesday.
Last year's sale turned over almost 8.5 million pounds ($11.54 million) though Beeby conceded that was an exceptional year. Most years the London sale raises 3–6 million pounds, he said.
Horses bought at the sale have some history of success at Ascot, though this is by no means guaranteed. The last time a graduate of the London ring won at Royal Ascot was in 2021 when Oxted won the Group 1 King's Stand Stakes while others, like Givemethebeatboys, sold in 2023, have been well-placed.
The most expensive horse ever sold there was the French mare, Sparkling Plenty, who had won a Group 1 in Chantilly just days before. She was sold outside the ring in 2024 for 5 million pounds, beating the previous top price of 1.3 million pounds.
The sale acts as an unofficial curtain raiser for Royal Ascot where trainers and top horses from around the world will compete over five days in races worth up to a million pounds.
Highlights include the marathon two-and-a-half-mile Gold Cup on Thursday as well as numerous top-grade races featuring some of the world's best racehorses.
Horseracing may contribute 4.1 billion pounds to the British economy annually, but it's often a game of risk and chance. While jackpots, - like the 9,000-euro ($10,402) colt, Kodi Bear, who returned 500,000 euro when sold again around 9 months later - do happen, for most buyers, owning a racehorse is a luxury.
And it can go badly wrong. An American-bred horse, St James Square, was sold for $2.4 million in 2018 and never finished better than sixth in five starts.
"We're dealing in luxury items, nobody needs to have a racehorse," Beeby said.
Like all commodity markets, thoroughbred sales are not immune to global trade headwinds and tariffs.
And like many trading houses, Goffs is navigating trade tensions with the United States – Goffs' trade with the United States was around 10 million euro worth of horses last year --and the fallout from Brexit, which ended a tripartite agreement on the free trade of horses between Britain, France and Ireland.
"We are indelibly linked to the worldwide economy but by the same token, this is an extraordinarily resilient global business," he said. "We could do without [tariffs], we're hoping they're a distraction rather than a barrier."
($1 = 0.8652 euros)
($1 = 0.7366 pounds)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
4 minutes ago
- The Independent
Would a new property tax be electoral disaster for Labour?
For many months, ministers have been curiously coy about whether they would introduce a ' wealth tax '. It was previously flatly denied and was not mentioned in the manifesto. Yet more recently, from Sir Keir Starmer down, there's been a refusal to comment. Now, perhaps, we know why: a conscious leak from the Treasury suggests Rachel Reeves is contemplating reforms to stamp duty and council tax that would amount to a new property tax. Apparently, the chancellor has briefed cabinet colleagues about the project and they are gauging public reaction. If implemented, it would be a politically brave move. What does the chancellor want? There are few details, but Reeves's idea seems to be to levy a new tax on homes worth more than £500,000 with, most likely, some adjustments to council tax and stamp duty at all levels of the property market. This new levy would replace stamp duty on owner-occupied primary residential homes (second and rental homes being treated differently already). A further annual local property tax would be added, based on an updated estimation of relative property values; this would replace council tax. When does she want it? A new national property levy could replace stamp duty in this parliament. A wholesale reform of local government finance, including a transition from council tax to local property tax and a valuation of every single home, would take years. Reportedly, that would be for Labour's hoped-for second term. Why is it being considered? Reeves is desperate for new sources of tax revenue that won't violate the manifesto commitment not to raise rates of income tax, employee national insurance and VAT. That doesn't leave much, even with income tax and NI thresholds frozen. Some researchers estimate the 'black hole' in the government's budget could yawn to about £40bn a year by the end of this parliament – way more than the current level and beyond what fiscal rules and the markets would tolerate. Is a property tax a good idea in any case? Yes, in the sense that the British approach to taxing wealth is completely irrational. Unlike any other asset – rental properties, shares, artworks, businesses – the value of a main home is untaxed, nor are any capital gains derived from moving up the property chain. That badly distorts against investment in productive capital and in favour of consumption, and thus blunts productivity growth and living standards. The resulting concentration of wealth as it cascades down the generations with minimal inheritance tax is driving a steadily more unequal society. Would a new property tax be a wealth tax? Yes, but it might be presented as a fairer and more rational version of the wealth taxes we already have: council tax, stamp duty, capital gains tax and inheritance tax. But it would suffer from the same drawbacks as council tax (and, to a lesser extent, stamp duty) in that it is almost completely unrelated to ability to pay. Someone lucky enough to live in what is now a very valuable home, but who has a small income in retirement, couldn't afford an annual tax bill and would have to borrow against or sell their home (although the tax could be deferred until death and deducted from the estate at probate, making it effectively a hike in inheritance tax). It would also favour the wealthy few whose money is tied up in several properties or businesses because they would only be liable on the first property as a main home; a 'proper' and efficient wealth tax would treat all kinds of assets neutrally. A more sensible approach to local government finance might be a local income tax – a policy idea adopted in Scotland by the SNP government in 2007 but later abandoned – and a more sensitive way of transferring money from richer areas to poorer ones. At the moment, council tax rates vary considerably between different areas, and about a fifth of local government funding comes from the Treasury out of central taxation. How much might it be? Anyone's guess, but most likely unrelated to wages or other income. The centre-right think tank Onward, which last year came up with the original paper that inspired the Treasury, suggested that owners, rather than the residents, of a property worth up to £500,000 would pay various tiered rates of national and local property tax dependent on the value of their home. They would pay a minimum of £800 a year directly to their local authority, but who knows what living in a £2m townhouse would set you back. How would it play politically? Disastrously. Any such reform necessarily creates winners, who are electorally ungrateful, and losers, who are highly resentful. The last time such a change was attempted was when the 'rates' were abolished in the late 1980s to make way for the flat rate per-person poll tax, triggering a riot, mass non-payment, and ultimately contributing to the fall of Margaret Thatcher. Vast accidental disparities in individual liabilities rendered the poll tax impractical and indefensible; it took some years and much cost to the Treasury to move from the poll tax to the current council tax regime with its various reliefs and exemptions. Memories of that painful episode mean no government has dared to touch property taxation besides fiddling around the thresholds. By making the plan part of the next Labour manifesto, but without much detail about who would pay and how much they'd pay, paranoia about the new tax would run rampant. Inheritance tax, which very few estates actually pay, is almost universally hated, and so would be a new 'Labour wealth tax'. It would be regarded as a 'tax on aspiration'. Whisper it, but some of the 'working people' that Labour has solemnly pledged to protect own their own homes, and it is their sole source of wealth. Some imagine they will one day have a £1m house; they may already do if they live in London. Even with her proven record of poor political judgement, it is hard to understand what Reeves is playing at. At best; she is being pushed around – again – by Treasury civil servants who care nothing about politics; at worst, she's become a little too crazed about fiscal rectitude.
The Independent
4 minutes ago
- The Independent
Celtic boss Brendan Rodgers avoids commenting on Jamie Vardy rumours
The Scottish Premiership champions face a deadline of 11 pm on Tuesday to make up to two amendments to their European squad, just hours before they host Kairat Almaty in the first leg on Wednesday. Despite his previous desire for new attacking options, Rodgers indicated he is prepared to proceed with his current roster. "That's what I am feeling at this moment in time," Rodgers stated. "The players that we have will be the players that I trust that can do the job. If we can get some players in before then, that would be amazing but the focus has been very much on what is here at this moment."
The Sun
5 minutes ago
- The Sun
Ronnie O'Sullivan launches desperate appeal for missing dog as snooker star shares Instagram posts
RONNIE O'SULLIVAN has launched an appeal for his missing dog. The snooker star took to social media to announce his Boston Terrier is missing. 3 3 3 He has asked for help in searching for his pet dog Stanley. O'Sullivan shared a photo of the missing pup along with contact details. He also called on residents of Woodford, where he lives, and the surrounding areas to keep a lookout for Stanley. O'Sullivan and wife Laila Rouass love their dogs and got a new one earlier this year, which the seven-time world champion said "restored my faith in life". He said: "We had a dog, now we have got dogs. Just added it. "They are the best thing. They have restored my faith in life. They give you so much love. "I just like spending all day at home with him. I'd rather spend all day with him rather than any other person on the planet. "He wags his tail, is happy to see you. He's the best." O'Sullivan and Rouass even reunited with a dog walk after one of their many splits. The Rocket has previously said he would put his dogs first ahead of playing in a tournament. He said: "If I had to pull out of any tournament to make sure he's all right, I would. "It changed me a lot. He is just an amazing little thing."
