Over 20 posts letting Friedman have it have been deleted so far from the Ragozin board for his attack on me about Graph Racing-- there could have been others we missed, since they are taking them down as soon as they see them. Florida Jim (Jerry Jr., Jim humor) is the first to post taking Friedman's side. Jim: The one sided nature of the first round is the reason Friedman posted again, backpedaling as fast as he can.


Numbers correspond with Friedman's:

1- I said the results were in line with the average results for both partnerships and other racing endeavors, meaning all ownership of horses. I don't have current figures, but as of a couple of years ago I believe annual purses in this country were about $1 billion, while expenses were about $2.5 billion. That doesn't include cost of the horses-- so the average ownership of a horse results in a loss of 100% of the investment, plus expenses.
With that in mind, go back and look at the results of the 5 year study on this site, which includes profit and loss figures. Friedman conveniently neglected to respond to that part of my post, and my request to publish similar records for the Ragozin operation. The size of the sample in our study is about 15 times that of the Graph Racing Venture Friedman attacks. If you add the results thus far to those of the 5 year study you will not significantly affect the study. And yes, I recognize that doesn't help those that invested, which is why I haven't sent a bill.

2- Here Friedman is trying to spin fast enough to get the egg off his face. He accused me of ripping off clients-- in fact, I haven't taken a dime in compensation to date.

3- This one is good for a laugh. Friedman originally said "the investers (sic) pay ($20,000) for the right of being lured in". The implication is that each investor is being charged that, when in fact (even aside from Friedman rounding the amount off to make it bigger), it was a flat, one time, 3% charge on the entire partnership, designed to reimburse Roger for part of what he laid out in legal fees. It works out to about $670 per person.

Aside from the issue of misrepresentation, look at how that 3% stacks up with what Ragozin tried to charge me, which caused me to walk:

Rising Graph: One time fee of 3% of capitalization for a 3 year partnership. Investors get data, management, and administration.

Ragozin: 10% of capitalization PER YEAR, just for data-- I was to supply my own expertise, and work.

Both deals had other aspects that could be worth differing amounts with different result scenarios, but you would be hard pressed to find one where Ragozin wouldn't be getting many times what I would.

And, of course, Ragozin wasn't being reimbursed for laying out money.

4- Here Friedman admits he got it wrong, then goes on to imply that I'm in a conflict of interest situation-- advising one client to buy what I'm advising another to sell. I'm not, and Len, you are an ass, and transparent. You were being clever, for legal reasons, in phrasing that as a question, rather than as a statement.

5- Anyone who has been a member of a multiple ownership enterprise can look at our compensation and post here as to how it stacks up with other ventures. Again, I don't know of any others in my position who are compensated ONLY based on results, and I am able to do what I do because of my record-- let's see the records of any other ventures.

And, I haven't even charged Graph Racing.

6- Jeff Langbert and I were the investors in Friedman's ill-fated venture that preceded the Heard Stable, which preceded Tresvant. Yes, it was a small venture-- in fact,about the same number of horses (although with a much smaller capitalization) as Graph Racing to date. It tanked.

Much more importantly for those judging credibility, Friedman has backed completely off his account of the end of the Heard stable, and his claims that Dennis made decisions that cast me and Thoro-Graph in a bad light. It was an outright lie-- the truth was exactly the opposite, and exactly as I presented it.

7- Friedman clearly thinks you are all idiots, but (with one exeption) I don't, so I'm not going to spend much time on this point, except to say again that Friedman's post itself shows the importance of having to respond to critical analysis. This time he had to, and was forced to backpedal at warp speed.

I can't make this point strongly enough: This crap is going on in the field daily, and has been for almost 20 years. They have field agents, we don't, and that's where most (and until recently all) of the business takes place.

This is why I get my message out here-- it's my only forum. And it's why Friedman has the "high road" policy.

8- Here Friedman has found a fancy way of pretending to dispute my account while pleading nolo contendre. Anyone who wants to make their own decision as to who is characterizing things correctly and who is not can get a copy of the offering by contacting Roger Neubauer at 1-409-718-6957, or roger@graphracing.com.

9- You gotta love this one. Friedman not only initiates the whole thing with his attack, but lies outright, and accuses me of ripping off clients. Then he says he will continue no longer, "no matter how provoked".

Since some have raised the issue-- my attorney, who is a good one, tells me that what Friedman has done is not actionable, for the same reason as on the previous occasion. It would be impossible to prove damages, especially since the attack has produced at least one inquiry about investing.



TGJB