JEFF SMITH → JASON · SEPTEMBER 2026
This briefing is intended to bring you up to speed before our conversation over the weekend. It will help us prepare for our meeting with the Thoroughbred Breeders’ Association on Friday 18 September, focused on the Bloodstock Intelligence Platform (BIP).
01 / THE PEOPLE
The TBA represents British Thoroughbred breeders. We are meeting high-profile, well-respected leaders in British racing and breeding: its Chief Executive and Chairman, alongside recognised veterinary and bloodstock specialists. They bring the authority, relationships and expertise to assess BIP’s practical value to breeders.
Meeting attendees: our Teams invitation. Background: TBA people · Trustees · Executive team.
“We’d be interested in learning more about your prototype.”
Victoria confirmed that the TBA has spent several years studying Thoroughbred genealogy and exploring mating compatibility to support breeders and the robustness of the breed.
From Victoria’s email to me · private correspondenceI have spent 18 months working in British horseracing. In April 2026, the Vice Chairman of the International Stud Book Committee approached me privately with this opportunity.
He holds a high-profile, respected position in the sector and must balance his responsibilities to his organisation with supporting industry growth and championing what we are building.
ISBC leadership ↗02 / WHY NOW
British horseracing is a longstanding national institution whose future depends on a sustainable supply of horses. The shrinking foal crop makes supporting breeders a priority for the whole sport.
Fewer foals and a contracting broodmare population put future racing supply, breeding expertise and investment at risk. At its AGM on 1 September 2026, the TBA called for practical, evidence-led action to rebuild breeder confidence and stabilise production.
Our opportunity is to make that evidence usable before a mating decision: help breeders define the horse they want, compare suitable bloodlines, manage cost and understand relatedness. BIP could support more informed investment alongside the industry’s wider economic and breeding measures.
TBA AGM report · 1 September 2026 ↗At the AGM, Philip made stabilising the declining British foal crop a central priority. Once breeding stock, expertise and investment are lost, they are difficult to recover.
He called for practical measures backed by evidence, with genetic diversity, traceability and welfare among the TBA’s research priorities.
Read the TBA AGM reportPhilip’s article asks whether richer data could reveal overlooked relationships between biomechanics, female families, genetic traits and soundness or durability.
That is a research opportunity for BIP with suitable data and further development. The prototype already gives breeders a structured way to compare choices.
Read Philip’s AI articleBIP could help the TBA put its research to work at the point a breeder makes a mating decision.
Victoria has confirmed ongoing genealogical studies and work on mating compatibility. With the right pedigree and scientific data, BIP could bring relatedness, inbreeding and the breeder’s chosen objectives into one comparison, helping them select pairings better aligned with the outcomes they want. It would support judgement; it would not guarantee conception, soundness or racing success.
03 / FRIDAY’S FOCUS
We have built a prototype that meets the need for practical breeding decision support: from a breeder’s ambition to a personalised shortlist and a mating plan.
Practical use requires properly licensed pedigree, performance and relevant scientific data from registry operators, racing authorities or research partners. The prototype demonstrates the workflow using illustrative records and scores; breeding and genetics specialists must validate the matching method before breeders rely on it.
Breeders set the priorities. The weighted matching framework compares pairings against their objectives, budget and preferred traits, with clear reasons and pedigree checks.
Objectives, costs, bloodlines and relatedness considered together before a covering decision. Clear reasons to discuss with bloodstock and veterinary advisers.
A potential licensed member product that could support breeder confidence and more informed choices within the wider response to the declining foal crop.
Briefs, weighted priorities, mare-specific comparisons, pedigree checks and mating plans. The current records and matching scores are illustrative.
A pedigree inbreeding coefficient measures expected shared ancestry. It is not a conception rate, or a prediction of a foal’s health or racing success.
BIP is an overlay. It requires licensed pedigree, performance and scientific data, with breeding and genetics specialists reviewing the matching approach.
Potential sources include Equine Register, Weatherbys, racing authorities and scientific partners, subject to their rights and coverage. No access or partnership is implied.
Suitable genomic, biomechanical and longitudinal health data could support investigation of the questions Philip raises. This requires further analytical development and independent validation.
That is an extension to build and validate, not a discovery claim about the prototype.
04 / WHO WE COULD SELL TO
The TBA is our first conversation. The wider opportunity includes breeding organisations, data and technology partners, and global studbook operators serving breeders.
A map of the principal roles and potential commercial connections. These are distinct organisations, not a single corporate hierarchy.
British Horseracing Authority. Governs and regulates British racing, with responsibilities for its development and welfare.
BIP connection: possible industry sponsorship, introductions and alignment with racing’s priorities.
Thoroughbred Breeders’ Association. Represents breeders, supports research and advocates for sustainable British breeding.
BIP connection: potential licence for members, distribution partner and specialist input.
Operates racing and training facilities and owns The National Stud. Reinvests in the sport.
BIP connection: potential breeding, education and demonstration use through The National Stud.
UK CENTRAL EQUINE DATABASE ARRANGEMENT
Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs. The Central Equine Database is operated on its behalf.
Runs the Central Equine Database and provides digital identity, traceability and registry services.
Central horse passport and identity records. Separate from each studbook’s full operational and pedigree system.
Operates the General Stud Book and issues Thoroughbred passports.
Breed societies and authorised passport issuing organisations maintain their own records.
Solid arrows show existing CED service responsibilities and passport-data flows. Global registries operate within their own jurisdictions. Commercial connections described here are possibilities to explore.
Roles and evolution: BHA · industry directory · Jockey Club history · Equine Register · Defra’s registry directory. Commercial assessments are ours. Named organisations have not agreed to buy, partner or provide data.
Breeding decision support over appropriately licensed pedigree, performance and scientific data.
Explore horses, dogs, cats, falcons and cattle.
A studbook, breeders’ association or professional breeding business offers BIP to its users.
The TBA, Weatherbys or Equine Register could be approached about an agreed member, white-label or integrated offer.
Define objectives, compare pairings, examine relatedness and prepare a mating plan.
Partner interest, permissible data use and the recommendation method need to be established. The TBA can be a direct licensee or a partner; its role depends on the commercial agreement. Existing Weatherbys correspondence must be resolved before treating that route as available.
05 / THE WIDER OPPORTUNITY
ARM provides the registry product. BIP provides breeding decision support. The wider opportunity is to license these capabilities across horse registries and adapt the relevant functions for dogs, cats, falcons and cattle.
Tools for high-value animal markets.
Registry management and breeding intelligence.
Objective-led mating decisions for owners and breeders.
Explore BIP ↗FALCONRY / PROPOSED NEXT APPLICATIONPairing, relatedness and evidence for specialist breeding programmes.
Explore the falcon opportunity ↓The reusable approach: define an objective, prioritise traits, compare pairings, explain the evidence. Each species needs its own data and scientific validation.
The commercial opportunity is to license useful products around authoritative animal records, with species-specific data and validation where breeding intelligence is involved.
GLOBAL SPECIES MARKETS
Five species views: where the organisations are, what they register and how we could sell to them. Each separates ARM’s registry role from the breeding intelligence opportunity.
| Country / studbook | 2023 | 2024 | Commercial options |
|---|
Reported totals: 85,770 (2023) and 80,259 (2024). NR = not reported, not zero. *Saudi Arabia’s 2024 return is incomplete. Combined jurisdictions follow the source. Southern Africa is reported as a region. Mauritius has no row in this report. Germany and Turkey are marked as existing opportunities; other entries show activity, not purchasing intent.
ISBC source library ↗Saker falcons are highly valued in Gulf falconry. The wider market also includes Gyrfalcons, Peregrines and hybrids. For Product Works, the opportunity is to help legitimate captive-breeding programmes make better use of pedigree, performance and scientific evidence.
When breeding stock is valuable and breeding cycles take time, understanding lineage, relatedness and recorded outcomes becomes commercially important. My hypothesis is that professional farms and breeding organisations could pay for a tool that makes those decisions clearer and more defensible.
Product Works would license the software, with data access and specialist services agreed separately. ARM could also support bird identity and pedigree records after configuration.
Use the shared Product Works licensing model ↓
Potential direct buyers include established Gulf farms and international breeders supplying them. ADNEC names KH Falcons, Alsarami Falcon and AD Falcon among the UAE participants. A first conversation should establish their data, decision problems and budget.
Clubs could offer a distribution route. Abu Dhabi Falcon Hospital is a potential clinical and data conversation, subject to interest and rights. These are research targets, not relationships or endorsements.
Falcon specialists must define and validate the pairing model. Pure species and hybrids need accurate identification; conservation breeding needs separate objectives and controls.
Verified captive-bred origin, identity, DNA evidence, welfare and applicable CITES documentation would be core requirements. The CMS Saker Global Action Plan (2014) provides conservation context and calls for connected records and stakeholder information exchange.
Decision for us: when to validate demand for Falcon Intelligence alongside the current BIP opportunity.
ONE STRATEGY / ALL PRODUCTS AND SPECIES
We license the product to an organisation, price the scope and service it needs, and retain ownership. The same assessment applies to ARM, BIP and Falcon Breeding Intelligence across horses, dogs, cats, falcons and cattle.
Need, budget, decision access and a credible route to purchase.
Six weighted criteria, including scale, complexity and service.
Annual licence plus implementation, with data and usage costed explicitly.
Complete all six ratings.
Paper v5, section 14: rating ÷ 5 × weight. The score guides the scope; it does not establish what a buyer will pay. AI can organise evidence, with ratings confirmed by us.
| Scope score | Edition | Base annual licence | Implementation |
|---|
For BIP: the paper’s software range is £40k–£300k+ annually, with £50k–£500k+ implementation; the add-on intelligence module is £40k–£150k annually. For Falcon Intelligence: use the same scoring and quote method, with a price to establish through buyer evidence and delivery cost. These are not automatically ARM edition prices.
Base product + modules + scale + support + risk + third-party consumption.
Discovery, configuration, data migration, integrations, testing, training and cutover.
Paper allowances start at 25,000 annual equivalents. Agreed transactions, users and AI analyses matter alongside registrations. Enhanced support adds 15–25%; critical 24/7 adds 30–50%.
Use shared or federation licensing: £5k–£20k per member as a starting hypothesis, with an aggregate platform target of £75k–£150k annually. Dedicated deployments normally start at £25k.
Change the assumptions for any product. These are discussion inputs, not prices accepted by customers.
Illustrative workload. Product scope and record type must be agreed.
Revenue before costs and tax; excludes data licences and consumption. Cost per unit is a comparison measure, not a breeder registration fee. Changing product preserves these illustrative inputs.
Minimum recurring price: £250,000
Direct annual customer cost ÷ (1 − target gross margin). The default £75k and 70% reproduce the paper’s example, not our measured costs.
Paper v5, section 6.3: normal pursuit threshold 60/100. Confirm lawful data access and buying authority regardless of score.
Shared commercial framework adapted from my consolidated strategy and pricing paper v5, 18 August 2026, sections 6.3 and 13–17. Prices remain working assumptions, subject to customer value, affordability, cost and margin. Hosting, white-label distribution and an outright sale are separate commercial choices.
06 / QUESTIONS FOR JASON COLOMBO
Friday is about understanding the TBA’s priorities and demonstrating BIP’s relevance. Between us, the bigger discussion is how we build a repeatable licensing business.
Horse studbooks, kennel clubs, cat registries, falcon breeders or cattle organisations? I want us to weigh buyer access, urgency, budgets, product fit, data readiness and the cost of winning and serving a customer. Rationale to be applied in conversation.
Do we begin with the three studbook opportunities, approach selected registries directly, or explore an Equine Register distribution or integration partnership? What needs to be complete before we sell, and how do we sequence this alongside Friday’s BIP conversation and the backstory we need to discuss?
How do we balance an annual platform licence, implementation, modules and volume? Would smaller registries be better served through a shared or federation licence? I want your challenge on these working prices, our delivery costs and the evidence needed to support a quote.
Who should pay: the organisation, the breeder, or both? How do we retain ownership of the product, secure the necessary data rights and create a repeatable offer? When should we validate Falcon Intelligence alongside the equine product?
Should we offer hosted subscriptions, customer-deployed licences, white-label distribution or consider an outright product sale? Which approach best balances recurring income, delivery responsibility, funding needs and retained ownership?
| Model | What we sell | What it means for us |
|---|---|---|
| Hosted subscription | Access to software we operate, with agreed service and usage limits. | Recurring revenue; we carry hosting, support and service obligations. |
| Customer-deployed licence | A right to use the product in the customer’s environment, with implementation and support separately agreed. | We retain product ownership. Subscription or perpetual licence terms need deciding. |
| White-label / OEM | A partner distributes the product under its brand. | Platform minimum, deployment fees or revenue share; defined rights and commitments. |
| Outright sale | Ownership of the product, defined IP or company. | A separate valuation and negotiation, including what rights and future income we give up. |
Options for our discussion, drawing on paper v5, sections 13 and 17. No route is selected. Hosting is a delivery choice; ownership and licence rights are separate commercial decisions.
I intend to market, license and sell this portfolio through the new company, using Product Works as the proposed umbrella brand. The earlier outreach went from Apex emails, which has blurred the positioning.
I have built a CRM solution to manage the entire contact process. I will share it with you as we shape the approach to market.
Following my work in British horseracing, Weatherbys approached us to replace its legacy infrastructure and rebuild the General Stud Book, which I understood accounted for approximately 70% of that estate.
The engagement did not proceed. My understanding is that, following an internal promotion and subsequent dismissal, Weatherbys decided to deliver the programme internally. This is my account of the history; we need to discuss the details and outstanding data/IP correspondence privately.
Weatherbys’ General Stud Book is the Thoroughbred “mother stud book”, first published in 1791; the business dates to 1770. My advocate, also European and African Stud Book Committee Co-Chairman, has seen my value in his business and provided the three studbook leads.
I would like your advice on market priorities, pricing and the commercial model, and to discuss how you would like to be involved.
Jeff