Base The Cost Of A Dog On Colour, Why?

[OSoSwift]

And yet boxer breeders drown their white ones at birth

I would suspect that that is very very rarely ever carried out in todays times.l

[Steve]

I read somewhere that there are white Mini Schnauzers overseas. I wonder if they will be sold for more $$ than the other colours once they come into Australia. Maybe breeders will charge for the extra expence of importing a breeding dog of that colour ?

We have imported a black & would never dream of charging more for a colour ,its like charging more because it.s an oodle .

Makes no sense to say charge more for a colour then go berko at pet shops for charging more because it's a DD.

In our breed we certainly do have people who charge more & QLD is the main culprit.

We have a rush on people wanting Black/Silver a colour we don't breed & yes many have brought some very poor animals due to colour at a higher price .The sad part is the breeding will not produce a quality B?S & with age have ended up dark Salt/Pepper .

But you get a handful of people who want something bad enough & will pay for it but we won't take advantage of those said people.

All pups in the litter where breed as equals & are sold as equals

.

rubbish

Each to there own Steve,you charge more (your words

)If a breeder can get more money and they are doing it all right in my opinion they should go for gold.

So me charging more is the same as aoodle getting high prices in a pet shop? You have to be kidding?

[Steve]

And yet boxer breeders drown their white ones at birth, yet they are the cause of the white forever wanting more and more bling.

Its like on the weekend I was reading the trading post on line and the weekend shopper, the amount of poodle somethings, cav something elses for sale at extremely high prices astounded me, and purebred breeders struggle sometimes to justify their prices and horse breeders trying to get $1500 for young stock is not uncommon, and yet gullible dog buyers will pay $700 for a beaglier (beagle/cav) WHAT??? doesn't make sense, the same as buying for colour doesn't make sense, but it happens in the horse world all the time.

What does it tell me, people are stupid and shallow, but breeding for colour is even worse, type, soundness, temperament should be a priority not colour.

the OP wasnt about deliberately only breeeding for colour was it? I thought it was about a breeder charging more if they could get more for specific colours.

[SwaY]

What about markings within a colour? For example, in Danes, a well marked Harli and Mantle isn't exactly 'easy' to breed - if one was a good example of the breed and had the correct markings, would it be wrong to charge more than a mismark that wouldn't really be show quality (purely because of markings)?

The prices on Harls and Mantles is already high if you ask me. $2000+

Very few Harls/mantles are refused/excused from the ring based on markings alone.

I can think of one in the last 4 years, that was based on markings alone - As stated by the judge.

Many currently being shown world wide do not have the 'perfect' markings yet are still show quality.

I think it's wrong to charge more, BUT if i wanted a perfectly marked one I would offer more to make sure I got it.

[SwaY]

I charge more for a Tri coloured beagle than I do for a tan and white. Why? Because I can and I would pay more for a tri than a tan and white any day of the week. More people want them - supply and demand. I dont breed for colour but Im not going to feel guilty for taking as much as I can get either.

If a breeder can get more money and they are doing it all right in my opinion they should go for gold.

I think it's wrong, they all cost the same to whelp and raise.

[stormie]

What about markings within a colour? For example, in Danes, a well marked Harli and Mantle isn't exactly 'easy' to breed - if one was a good example of the breed and had the correct markings, would it be wrong to charge more than a mismark that wouldn't really be show quality (purely because of markings)?

The prices on Harls and Mantles is already high if you ask me. $2000+

Very few Harls/mantles are refused/excused from the ring based on markings alone.

I can think of one in the last 4 years, that was based on markings alone - As stated by the judge.

Many currently being shown world wide do not have the 'perfect' markings yet are still show quality.

I think it's wrong to charge more, BUT if i wanted a perfectly marked one I would offer more to make sure I got it.

Yeah for sure... I totally agree the price of them is crazy high.

Mismark was the wrong choice of word - I know they're not excused from the ring, but was just referring to what you said, how many don't have the perfect marks, so was wondering whether you got one or two that DID have perfect markings and everything else was great, would that be ok?

But you pretty much answered that anyway saying you'd pay more.

[Kristin Dwyer]

I charge more for a Tri coloured beagle than I do for a tan and white. Why? Because I can and I would pay more for a tri than a tan and white any day of the week. More people want them - supply and demand. I dont breed for colour but Im not going to feel guilty for taking as much as I can get either.

If a breeder can get more money and they are doing it all right in my opinion they should go for gold.

I think it's wrong, they all cost the same to whelp and raise.

Thats about the going rate for a Great Dane, isnt that right? tell me off, if im wrong.

[Kristin Dwyer]

What's your prefix, Kristin? Didn't you get blue merles because you used your blue merle Australian Shepherd as the sire?

Yes, i did have an unplanned litter, by mistak. Not to stress both dogs are DNA tested (CEA, CL, TNS) and hip/elb done. Ozzie Has since been desexed. All the pups have now been desexed and are in amazing forever homes. Jason is doing outstanding and i couldnt be more proud of him. His is a reg Medical Assist Dog for an 8y.o boy with down syndrome.

[SwaY]

What about markings within a colour? For example, in Danes, a well marked Harli and Mantle isn't exactly 'easy' to breed - if one was a good example of the breed and had the correct markings, would it be wrong to charge more than a mismark that wouldn't really be show quality (purely because of markings)?

The prices on Harls and Mantles is already high if you ask me. $2000+

Very few Harls/mantles are refused/excused from the ring based on markings alone.

I can think of one in the last 4 years, that was based on markings alone - As stated by the judge.

Many currently being shown world wide do not have the 'perfect' markings yet are still show quality.

I think it's wrong to charge more, BUT if i wanted a perfectly marked one I would offer more to make sure I got it.

Yeah for sure... I totally agree the price of them is crazy high.

Mismark was the wrong choice of word - I know they're not excused from the ring, but was just referring to what you said, how many don't have the perfect marks, so was wondering whether you got one or two that DID have perfect markings and everything else was great, would that be ok?

But you pretty much answered that anyway saying you'd pay more.

I'd pay/offer more to own a perfectly marked one, but i would not charge more (if i bred one) as they cost the same to whelp and rear. 2 different things Buyer offering more vs breeder charging more.

[Janba]

Yes, i did have an unplanned litter, by mistak. Not to stress both dogs are DNA tested (CEA, CL, TNS) and hip/elb done. Ozzie Has since been desexed. All the pups have now been desexed and are in amazing forever homes. Jason is doing outstanding and i couldnt be more proud of him. His is a reg Medical Assist Dog for an 8y.o boy with down syndrome.

I was unaware that Aussies could be tested for CL and TNS as the test were specifically developed specifically for BCs and I also wasn't aware they were found in Aussies.

[SwaY]

Thats about the going rate for a Great Dane, isnt that right? tell me off, if im wrong.

Harli/Mantle breeders charge the most, $2000-$3000 on average.

Fawn/Brindle/Blacks/Blues $1500-$2000 is the average.

Many not so ethical breeders seem to charge more then the well respected, long term ethical ones.

[Kristin Dwyer]

Thats about the going rate for a Great Dane, isnt that right? tell me off, if im wrong.

Harli/Mantle breeders charge the most, $2000-$3000 on average.

Fawn/Brindle/Blacks/Blues $1500-$2000 is the average.

Many not so ethical breeders seem to charge more then the well respected, long term ethical ones.

fare enough, i was close enough . Great dane's are lovely dogs, i just love Mantles and Black's there my fav :D

[Kristin Dwyer]

What about markings within a colour? For example, in Danes, a well marked Harli and Mantle isn't exactly 'easy' to breed - if one was a good example of the breed and had the correct markings, would it be wrong to charge more than a mismark that wouldn't really be show quality (purely because of markings)?

The prices on Harls and Mantles is already high if you ask me. $2000+

Very few Harls/mantles are refused/excused from the ring based on markings alone.

I can think of one in the last 4 years, that was based on markings alone - As stated by the judge.

Many currently being shown world wide do not have the 'perfect' markings yet are still show quality.

I think it's wrong to charge more, BUT if i wanted a perfectly marked one I would offer more to make sure I got it. :D

Yeah for sure... I totally agree the price of them is crazy high.

Mismark was the wrong choice of word - I know they're not excused from the ring, but was just referring to what you said, how many don't have the perfect marks, so was wondering whether you got one or two that DID have perfect markings and everything else was great, would that be ok?

But you pretty much answered that anyway saying you'd pay more.

I'd pay/offer more to own a perfectly marked one, but i would not charge more (if i bred one) as they cost the same to whelp and rear. 2 different things Buyer offering more vs breeder charging more.

Yeah, i understand that. Aussie's can have Hypothyroidism and Pelger-Huet Anomaly (PHA) issue's . Please tell me off, if i am wrong and open to all info etc. This is from what ive read and been told by the Vet.

Edited November 30, 2010 by Kristin Dwyer

[Gayle.]

I understand this subject has come up most likely 200x's before (im sorry!).

However, why do people base the cost of a dog to there "colour"?

I find it, there just after the cash and a money making scam. Why shound a dog cost more because its a rare colour? Isnt the same breed/type/temperament at the end of day?

Its just like when i have my first litter of Border Collies this year, i got a 2 blue merle's in the litter and i could of ripped people off for there $$$. Then why should i do that, there just as even as my other puppies in my litter. Plus i would so much rather, a sweet loving family home where they are treated like every other dog and not just more its looks or fancy colour.

Whats your view on this?

No, you bred a litter of mongrels. Border Collie X Australian Shepherds. Then advertised them for around the same price as a pedigree pup.

[Kia]

Yes, i did have an unplanned litter, by mistak. Not to stress both dogs are DNA tested (CEA, CL, TNS) and hip/elb done. Ozzie Has since been desexed. All the pups have now been desexed and are in amazing forever homes. Jason is doing outstanding and i couldnt be more proud of him. His is a reg Medical Assist Dog for an 8y.o boy with down syndrome.

Kristen you appear to be somewhat confused about the health issues that need to be tested for the breeds of dogs you have. CL hasn't exactly been proven to be in aussies, and there is no test although research is ongoing, TNS is unheard of as far as I know. The DNA testing that I do currently is CEA, HC and MDR1......other DNA testing will be introduced on as needed basis. Hips/elbow xrays are a given but what about eye screens....these are required too.

Michelle

[t-time]

Perhaps much of what is being said here is breed-based?

Just a thought as many of you here objecting to charging more for a rare colour, come from breeds where colour genetics are predictable.

I have 2 breeds where the colour genetics are unknown so if a rarer colour pops up, it really is unusual and BUYERS are prepared to go to great lengths and pay a heck of a lot more for "what's fashionable" - fellow exhibitors/breeders and pet people alike. Put simply, gold/creams and blacks are far more common and take longer to sell.

The colours in my breeds have no ill effect health-wise and the price will reflect the quality of the dog no matter the colour. But if the colour is rare, why not charge more to meet the market? You guys are SELLING dogs aren't you??

Or are you really going to sell your rare *pink diamond* for the same price as your regular diamonds because " they are all diamonds" !!!!????

[Steve]

I charge more for a Tri coloured beagle than I do for a tan and white. Why? Because I can and I would pay more for a tri than a tan and white any day of the week. More people want them - supply and demand. I dont breed for colour but Im not going to feel guilty for taking as much as I can get either.

If a breeder can get more money and they are doing it all right in my opinion they should go for gold.

I think it's wrong, they all cost the same to whelp and raise.

So because they all cost the same to whelp and raise we should be a charity and sell our puppies off at the lowest price rather than take a higher price if we can get it?

A breeder never gets the true value of what they breed and poverty isnt a sure sign of a good breeder either.

[badboyz]

Personally I don't think it anyones business what a breeder charges for any of their dogs. They can charge whatever they want - it's their privelage. No one forces a buyer to pay anything - if they want to pay $2k for a dog when they can get similar and possibly better for $1k, that is their choice - if not they are free to go elsewhere. I know of a breeder who regularly charges $4 or $5K for her dogs which are of the most common breed colour, and in my opinion, they aren't any better quality then any others in the breed. I know my and other far cheaper dogs have beaten one of their highly priced dogs in the ring - much to the disgust of the owners who believed their very expensive dog to be beyond challenge. But ultimately who cares - all parties are free to make their own choices and if they can sell their dogs for those (in my opinion) ridiculous prices, then good luck to them.

Same goes for unregistered and crossbreed breeders. While it amazes me that anyone would be stupid enough to pay, for example, $1500 for an unregistered "purebred" chihuahua from a back yard breeder, when they could purchase a fully registered and well bred one for $1000 or far less, their stupidity is not my problem. Those sorts of buyers who fail to do any research are likely not the type of people I would want to buy one of my babies anyway. So again, who cares?

Edited November 30, 2010 by badboyz

[Steve]

If I have a litter of beagles and there are one or two tan and whites Im lucky to get an ask for one. If I have tri coloureds I can have 100 plus on a waiting list.

If I lower the price on the tan and whites rather than raise the price on the tri colours - is that O.K. - or do you want me to lower the price on all of them - or do you want me to just keep them until someone comes along who is prepared to pay the higher price? They all cost the same to whelp and rear except I might have to feed and train and keep one longer so that would cost me more.

This whole package of expectations of price fixing, judgement of a breeder based on what they charge rather than what they breed, push for not taking deposits, telling me putting the price up of a more popular colour is the same as an oodle in a pet shop only demonstrates that breeders are their own worst enemy and judge and jump on people at any opportunity in the belief that their way is the only way and using it to show their superiority.

In any other area someone who gets more for their product including a stud animal of any other species is seen as successful - not us though we have to stay poor and follow on like lambs to the slaughter to prove our worthiness according to the staus quo.

[JulesP]

I understand this subject has come up most likely 200x's before (im sorry!).

However, why do people base the cost of a dog to there "colour"?

I find it, there just after the cash and a money making scam. Why shound a dog cost more because its a rare colour? Isnt the same breed/type/temperament at the end of day?

Its just like when i have my first litter of Border Collies this year, i got a 2 blue merle's in the litter and i could of ripped people off for there $$$. Then why should i do that, there just as even as my other puppies in my litter. Plus i would so much rather, a sweet loving family home where they are treated like every other dog and not just more its looks or fancy colour.

Whats your view on this?

No, you bred a litter of mongrels. Border Collie X Australian Shepherds. Then advertised them for around the same price as a pedigree pup.

This is just hilarious