Emily King crowdfunding?

This is so frustrating for so many people.
From my point of view, i came from a non-horsey family and worked and volunteered to gain experience and get lessons. I payed for all of my own lessons and kit from being 17. I could never afford my own so I worked and worked until I was offered a ride. I've now been competing Ernie for 4 years and I am so grateful to his owners for the opportunities they have given me and I have achieved my dream of eventing and qualifying for badminton grassroots. I am now starting to save for my own 4 year old as Ernie is now 15 and also BE100 is his limit. However, i won't buy until I've saved the money. Perhaps I could just crowfund instead?! It baffles me really
 
As a rider, I just find the whole thing frustrating. I currently ride at 3* level and for the past few years every penny I have earned has gone on this dream of getting to 4* (I'm not a professional rider), I have in the past had a few sponsors but nothing more than free products or % off items. When Jonty Evans crowdfunded for Art I was at Blenheim competing one or two horses before him on the xc and the outpouring of the spectators towards Jonty and 'their' horse was genuinely heart warming and I can tell you that he was touched by the help he received. EK on the other hand I feel is not a good representation of young up and coming event riders, it's sad really that someone in her fortunate position chose to do this as I for one would not welcome hundreds of owners into the lorry park and stable area.
 
Just seen a post from her on FB thanking everybody and saying that the target has been made up by two investors. There are still people replying to her saying that they want to buy a share. What is the matter with people?
 
ester said:
Why on earth is an eventer having a rest at this point in the year the season has barely started :p
Click to expand...

Because she has probably realised, or been advised, that the horse needs to fade into oblivion and the whole shady episode needs to be forgotten. My bet is the horse has a 'niggle' and isn't seen for a good while. Remember today's news is tomorrow's chip paper.
 
AdorableAlice said:
Because she has probably realised, or been advised, that the horse needs to fade into oblivion and the whole shady episode needs to be forgotten. My bet is the horse has a 'niggle' and isn't seen for a good while. Remember today's news is tomorrow's chip paper.
Click to expand...
For 40k worth of horse I hope for the crowds sake he’s been vetted before the transaction completes.
 
Last edited:
lannerch said:
For 40k worth of horse I hope for the crowds sake he’s been vetted before the transaction completes.
Click to expand...

Of course he will be vetted and there will be nothing wrong, but she has got a lot of criticism, her actions may be unlawful and/or fraudulent. The easiest way forward for her and her connections is to dumb everything down and let the dust settle.
 
Bojingles said:
Slight diversion, but this reminds me of a request made by an acquaintance. She was marrying a farmer who lived on a large inherited farm and a beautiful 17c farmhouse. On their wedding invitations they said the normal bla about your attendance being gift enough but then added a PS that if anyone really insisted on buying them a gift, they'd appreciate money to do up their house. Getting by on little more than minimum wage, I skipped the cash gift and the wedding.
Click to expand...

I don’t see any parallel at all .
I much much prefer to give a cash gift for a wedding in these days where few couples are setting up a home straight from their parents home people don’t have the same need for stuff .
Much better to give some money that they can send on something they want .
 
Archangel said:
It is amazing how easy it is to get people to part with their money. The owner of the horse must be laughing all the way to the bank. £2k to fund a vet bill is one thing but £26k is quite another - surely EK has just received a £26k untaxed bonus or is it because everybody donating actually is a shareholder in the horse - don't shareholders have rights?
Click to expand...

I would think they are considered as gifts for the purpose tax and mosr but not all will be under the limit for a tax free gift , the people who gave money are not share holders they have given money to buy a horse ... given -they have no share in the horse .
It’s unbelievable that people are still giving money and it’s appalling that EK has not put anything on the page to stop people and it even worse that you can stop a just giving page for thirty days that’s mad .
 
Quote from Just Giving page

I need help with...
Crowdfunding
Managing your Crowdfunding Page / Can I close my Crowdfunding page early?

We understand that in some cases funds are needed urgently. If you need us to close your page early in order to get the funds sooner, just drop us an email and we'll arrange this for you. Please note that it typically takes 6-10 working days for the funds to reach your chosen account once your page has closed.

So there we are.
 
Her eventing Facebook page seems to have disappeared. Along with the horse and the funds it seems :P Couldn't handle the criticism perhaps?

*Off to go crowd fund my outstanding vet fees* - orrr not, because I will earn and pay for my non essential luxuries myself...
 
Northern said:
Her eventing Facebook page seems to have disappeared. Along with the horse and the funds it seems :P Couldn't handle the criticism perhaps?
.
Click to expand...

No it hasn't. Emily and her mother are busy at Tatts this weekend, along with all the other top event riders who are sponsored in some way, shape or form to ride horses for a living, and work hard at it.

I have no opinion one way or the other about her crowdfunding for Hobby. I wouldn't make a donation, but then I wouldn't have done it for Jonty either (he is at Tatts too by the way, courtesy of his own sponsors and hard work).
 
Rowreach said:
No it hasn't. Emily and her mother are busy at Tatts this weekend, along with all the other top event riders who are sponsored in some way, shape or form to ride horses for a living, and work hard at it.

I have no opinion one way or the other about her crowdfunding for Hobby. I wouldn't make a donation, but then I wouldn't have done it for Jonty either (he is at Tatts too by the way, courtesy of his own sponsors and hard work).
Click to expand...

Obviously they are out doing their thing, that is not what I meant... but the eventing page she announced the crowd funding update on is gone, one which had attracted much the same comments you can read in this thread. There are plenty of hard working Eventers out there who have less than the Kings who haven't resorted to internet begging. Each to their own...
 
I don't think there is much similarity between Jonty and Emily. Jonty made Art - produced him from nowhere and clearly had an amazing partnership with him. Emily has ridden Hobby for 1 month and has added no value at all. Art was being sold from underneath Jonty whereas Emily was just making a choice to relocate. Jonty was sinking huge amounts of his own money into this but was never going to be able to afford Art. Emily clearly had plenty of other options including the private investment that is in the end what secured the horse. It seems begging off the public meant she could avoid having to share the massive increase in the price tag when she sells him on. Jonty pledged he would never sell Art on but would give him a home for life. Jonty made no promises to anyone in return for their donation - everyone knew it was a straightforward gift to help him keep Art. Emily has made promises she can't keep. And finally Emily failed to let people know that private investment secured the horse days ago allowing people to believe she still needed help to buy him when in fact people were contributing to the 'running costs' that she has already said are covered by sponsorship. So this is essentially just putting cash directly into her own pocket that she does not need.

I was very happy to help Jonty and am loving his success at Tatts but Emily was just choosing the easiest, quickest. lowest risk, highest return option for herself. And was dishonest along the way.
 
I’m still not sure that Art was being sold from under Jonty? He’s a lovely guy and I don’t doubt his honesty in any way (he did his fund raising FAR more professionally than EK!) but it would have been interesting to hear the previous owners thoughts on what she was going f to do - had she had an offer she couldn’t refuse? Not that we will ever know that of course, and it isn’t our business etc etc
 
Ambers Echo said:
I don't think there is much similarity between Jonty and Emily. Jonty made Art - produced him from nowhere and clearly had an amazing partnership with him. Emily has ridden Hobby for 1 month and has added no value at all. Art was being sold from underneath Jonty whereas Emily was just making a choice to relocate. Jonty was sinking huge amounts of his own money into this but was never going to be able to afford Art. Emily clearly had plenty of other options including the private investment that is in the end what secured the horse. It seems begging off the public meant she could avoid having to share the massive increase in the price tag when she sells him on. Jonty pledged he would never sell Art on but would give him a home for life. Jonty made no promises to anyone in return for their donation - everyone knew it was a straightforward gift to help him keep Art. Emily has made promises she can't keep. And finally Emily failed to let people know that private investment secured the horse days ago allowing people to believe she still needed help to buy him when in fact people were contributing to the 'running costs' that she has already said are covered by sponsorship. So this is essentially just putting cash directly into her own pocket that she does not need.

I was very happy to help Jonty and am loving his success at Tatts but Emily was just choosing the easiest, quickest. lowest risk, highest return option for herself. And was dishonest along the way.
Click to expand...

The point is that sponsorship comes in many forms. There are plenty of people who think Jonty and his owner both did rather well out of his foray into crowdfunding. There was a time when the only people who evented were the “spoilt“ ones with plenty of family money behind them. I like the fact that more people can do it nowadays, through wealthy owners and other sponsorships.

Also, it’s a bit patronising of people to think that anyone who has given a few quid to Emily is too thick to realise that they won’t really “own” part of the horse.
 
IIRC The owner had multiple offers from all over the world for Art and had turned them down so Jonty could keep the ride. But then she got pregnant and their was a firm offer on the table for Art and decided she had to sell. 500k was a lot lower than the offer she had but it was an offer just for Jonty because the owner also wanted him to have him. Jonty was always clear that he totally understood the owner's position and was in no way blaming them.
 
I dont think anyone is suggesting the donors are thick! Or that they think they own part of the horse. However they MAY believe they were paying for Emily to buy a horse not to his running costs because this is what the page said long after the horse was secured. And they may believe they can walk courses, visit stables etc as this is also what was promised. Being misled is not the same as being thick.
 
Why wouldn't well meaning but naive folk not think that they were 'owners' after responding to the following?

'“I am desperately looking to find owners/ syndicate members to enable me to keep the ride on Hobby as he really is a horse of a lifetime.”

'Emily has asked her followers on social media to contribute “anything” to allow her to keep the ride, in return for which contributors will be “part of his amazing journey”.

“If I can attract just 2,000 of you to put in £20 each we’ve got him!” she said, adding that she has a company “interested in sponsoring his running costs”, so the initial payment would be the only one.'

ETA I wondered if he'd passed the vetting, too. He wouldn't have been vetted until they were able to stump up the purchase price, would he?
 
Last edited:
The other important difference in my mind from the Jonty situation is that they are already a 4* combination, and I would like to see as many brilliant combinations at the top of a sport I love to watch as possible. And for that I was happy to chuck in a few quid, for the same reasons as I spend a few quid on the lottery every year. Sport is a wonderful thing, but this Emily situation doesn't feel like contributing to the sport in any way (though I do leave possibility in my mind that it could be... Time will tell), as it is simply buying an unproven horse, for an already very privileged rider who has so far proven nothing with this horse.
 
well I was anti the Jonty one too (and the Valegro one although I appreciate it wasn't CH etc that started it) but at least with those there was an established partnership like others have said. Asking the horsey public to fund elite sport horses does stick in my craw a bit -hope it doesn't become commonplace.
 
There are definitely donors who are now claiming to be 'syndicate members' and 'part owners'.

The two things I disliked intensely about this venture were that EK was dishonest in leaving the JG as it was for days after the horse was bought, so that some people were under the impression that she still needed the money for purchase (and still donating for this). There were even people who were donating to EK even though they needed stuff for their own horses.

The other thing is the misleading and frankly daft promise of course walks, stable visits, etc. It's given people the impression that any donors will be able to turn up; there are currently 633 donors so even if a fraction turned up at an event it would be a logistical nightmare. Had she said that there would be a monthly draw or something similar so that a small number of people would 'win' the chance to visit/walk the course or whatever then that would be OK. But I suspect there will be some very disappointed people around.
 
Northern said:
Obviously they are out doing their thing, that is not what I meant... but the eventing page she announced the crowd funding update on is gone, one which had attracted much the same comments you can read in this thread. There are plenty of hard working Eventers out there who have less than the Kings who haven't resorted to internet begging. Each to their own...
Click to expand...

The page has not disappeared.

https://www.facebook.com/emilykingo...kknI-A1i0kwhKP6McGBn-bdhtOSghoYgWhIAo&fref=nf
 
Ambers Echo said:
IIRC The owner had multiple offers from all over the world for Art and had turned them down so Jonty could keep the ride. But then she got pregnant and their was a firm offer on the table for Art and decided she had to sell. 500k was a lot lower than the offer she had but it was an offer just for Jonty because the owner also wanted him to have him. Jonty was always clear that he totally understood the owner's position and was in no way blaming them.
Click to expand...

Ah thanks that makes sense :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top