The Scandal Of Marketing Purebred Dogs

[moosmum]

Sorry Steve, You misunderstood me.

I don't want to join your group.

I don't want to join the "other" group.

I do want to preserve and develop our pure breeds to their fullest potential.

I do want to foster the human/dog relationship indiscriminately. To keep people aware and appreciative of that potential, understand and live with it comfortably.

I hope then that fewer people will be making mistakes so we are more worthy of the gift.

If thats incompatible with your philosophy I'm sorry,because I think you would have a lot to contribute.

To me, its about the future of all dogs in our modern society,not my alliance with or the agenda of any group.

:)

O.K. You're right please accept my apology - I must have misunderstood. So go slower.

When you say

quote

I am saying they don't address the main, negative perceptions already out there,and that I firmly believe they are a direct result of those rules. That only changing those rules will remove those perceptions.

When you say things like this what do you mean? What perceptions, what rules ?

Thank you Steve, Accepted.

I have it all in my head, but it is complicated.

I will have to try and go slower, but I'm afraid its going to take longer than I hoped. I need to think carefully and remember it is likely confusing..

It does require change but NOT one harmful to pedigree dogs or breeders IMO.

If my theory were put to the test, it wouldn't have to change how you do anything.

I think it would change how you express the things you do - and how the things you do are expressed.

It should remove a lot of barriers for you in your marketing and increase interest in your "product" with out a need to organize promotion groups or funding, or increase the role of the registries.

I think it would result in a shift of perceptions on both sides, so that the average person is happy to listen, and the average breeder is ABLE to stand up and take pride.

Does anyone follow what I said about how your constitution defines you? :laugh:

I haven't forgotten your questions Steve.

Edited July 20, 2013 by moosmum

[moosmum]

From a marketing perspective - some people who are not nutritionists are concerned about the lack of nutrients in McDonalds but that hasnt impacted too much on their ability to sell their product.

Sure, but to whom? Is one customer as good as any other? Do those people think they are buying good produce from McDonalds? Are you the junk food of dog breeding or the gourmet kitchen?

:laugh: :laugh: I think it can be the gourmet kitchen. MacDonalds or gourmet side by side...We won't always choose gourmet,but we know very well what the better choice is even with out the marketing and hype.

Edited July 20, 2013 by moosmum

[sandgrubber]

I don't claim to be an expert, but I have taken a few graduate level business and marketing courses.

Marketing is usually done in conjunction with research on what people want in a product, and product development to match what is produced to what the market demands.

Some insight on media and dog popularity might come from looking at trends, by breed, of pedigree registrations. The following chart came from the most recent ANKC registration statistics. I just picked a few breeds that either had been getting press in recent years, or had spectacular trends (declines in GSD, Rotti, and rough collie). I think you can see the news affecting trends. Eg, ASBT sees rising popularity, then dampens with all the ugliness about bull breeds and BSL; pug, bulldog, and Cavvies, rising popularity somewhat dampened after PDE and related reporting (bulldog barely affected); Labrador, hit #1 around 2000 and has stayed there. Portuguese water dog saw an Obama effect, and the effect of demand for non-shedding, non-allergenic coats.

My gut feeling is that you can't successfully market products that buck underlying social trends. People have smaller families, life in smaller spaces, spend more time indoors, and are less in tune with nature. They want convenient dogs: playful, small, responsive, and cute;. Guardian dog, herding dog, dogs that bark a lot or have high demands for exercise are out. Labbies, despite being medium large and shedding a lot, remain popular due to the free advertizement from guide dogs, toilet paper adds, and Marley and me (also the fact that they are playful and make wonderful companions, but that's my personal prejudice).

I've barely scratched the surface on this. Looking at ALL registrations to see what breeds have risen and which fallen would be useful. But it's more work than I want to put in.

But, in general, I think preoccupation with breed standards (especially high maintenance features such as extreme coat), inattention to temperament, and under-appreciation with the 'cute' factor have caused pedigree breeds to loose ground to designer dogs. Bad design means many designer dogs end up in pounds, but that's another story. It's not clear that the 'health' focus of PDE will be effective in the long run.

BLOODY SYSTEM WON't let me upload the .jpg I spent a good hour creating. Not sure what's wrong. I'll try to add a graph later.

Edited July 20, 2013 by sandgrubber

[Steve]

Corvus - I could have used any example but I think you are a pretty smart cookie and know that. Marketing is about promoting the positive things about a product which you feel would be most important to your target market .Its about exposing the product and making those who were un aware of it, how they can get it,what the positive things are about owning it and living with it . When Don Burke struck out about 15 years ago and told everyone about the positive aspects of buying and owning a first cross dog he didnt take any time to discuss the possible negative consequences. To the wider audience and about what we do and what we produce we don't need to either - though up close when the potential puppy buyer is in the process of talking with the breeder is the time to educate the potential buyer on the needs of the dog and the possible health problems etc

People who have purchased cross bred dogs are in the main great dog owners and yes potentially one customer is as good as any other and the breeder's screening process and information shared are in place to lower the risk of someone buying one of their puppies who they believe are better suited to another dog or another breed. Customers who purchase a dog via ads such as gumtree are not potentially lesser customers because they saw the dog advertised somewhere other than dogz.

If you go back to the McDonald's example if I want to talk about the effort I have to go to in order to eat at a gourmet restaurant, the planning, reservations, parking, time, expense, the possibility that one now and then is dodgy and gets busted by the health department , recycles their wine, over cooks their food ,has E coli in their salads etc there is little difference.

I want to tell everyone what a great thing it is to own a purebred dog and what the advantages are just as there are dodgy restaurateurs there are dodgy breeders but when Three Chef Hats a fine dining place in Sydney market themselves they talk about the awards they have won, their great customer feed back and don't rattle on and get caught up with how some others don't do it right.

Now we could talk about how it got to a point where we stopped promoting ourselves and our dogs and what may be wrong with some breeders,some methodology and even some breeds - different topic which would be great to chat about - but the fact is the people who used to promote purebred dogs, have stopped promoting purebred dogs, the people who used to feel proud of what they do have allowed the marketing of people who want to talk about the perceived negative things about us and our dogs to have the field and we have gone home and hidden under the bed.

We need more purebred breeders, more people who get it , who are passionate about how the decisions they make and the goals they work to can change the quality of life and impact for generations but in order to bring new people in we need to promote what we do and all of the wonderful things it brings to our lives, people who want to breed dogs and increase the gene pools and the level of marketing for their breed and purebred dogs in general not simply those who see it as a quick way to make a buck.

When I say we need more breeders I hear "No thank you, I dont want more people breeding MY breed, I dont want MY breed to become more popular look what happened to ....... But thats not what Im talking about we need to help people who might want to breed purebred dogs to understand that its about much much more than money , speak with them, educate them and screen them, help them and the rest of the world see what a wonderful opportunity it is to be a purebred breeder.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Steve

[mita]

We need more purebred breeders, more people who get it , who are passionate about how the decisions they make and the goals they work to can change the quality of life and impact for generations but in order to bring new people in we need to promote what we do and all of the wonderful things it brings to our lives, people who want to breed dogs and increase the gene pools and the level of marketing for their breed and purebred dogs in general not simply those who see it as a quick way to make a buck.

When I say we need more breeders I hear "No thank you, I dont want more people breeding MY breed, I dont want MY breed to become more popular look what happened to ....... But thats not what Im talking about we need to help people who might want to breed purebred dogs to understand that its about much much more than money , speak with them, educate them and screen them, help them and the rest of the world see what a wonderful opportunity it is to be a purebred breeder.

Very nicely said.

Your emphasis is more on public relations and education.... rather than marketing. And I think you're spot on... in that the whole point of purebred breeding is that it's not commercial. And marketing is designed to fit the commercial world.

In fact, the evidence appears to be that it's the very non-commercial nature of purebred dog breeding, that allows the best of that world to show thro'. For the dogs themselves in terms of welfare, for the pet -buying public in terms of likely better socialised companion dogs & breeder support, and for the the breeders themselves who become involved in a highly professional & passionate hobby alongside like-minded people. All that determines the goals of breeding purebreds, not commercial interests.

Disclaimer.... by saying p/breeding is not commercial (at its best), I'm not saying that the breeders shouldn't practise good business skills in what they do.

Edited July 21, 2013 by mita

[moosmum]

I am looking for supportive information and having dificulties finding it,but I have seen it,its there if you know where to look.

1st,

There is a theory advanced by

Hendrick Gommer, A biological theory of law:natural law theory revisited.

He postulates that an organization is an entity that obeys natural law.The constitution rules behaviour of the organization/organism.Negative instruction imposes limits and stricture that will impact on adaptive ability, vitality and its ability to multiply or grow.

This is an analogy I have used often and it it does seem to hold up to scrutiny.look him up if you can't follow.Its very interesting,and realy quite simple when you have an understanding of biological law.

Then you have the psychology of organisations.This is set in place by your constitution.

I have been looking for a piece I have read,origins unknown. The subject was writing constitutions. It explained simply and concisely how a constitution affects the mentality of its constituents. It listed some rules of writing a sound and stable constitution.

Two of those rules were:

1)DO NOT use negative commands or instruction. ie: A member shall not.... unless there is no alternative,in which case the reasons for the negative should be spelled out.

Rules well written should negate the need for negative instruction in most cases. I think they called it a introducing "double negative" due to the unplanned negative effects in organizational psychology.

2) DO NOT use superfluous instruction.

The piece went on to give demonstration of how disregarding these 2 rules corrupt and change the message by reinforcing priorities or giving them false values.Introducing outside influences that can destabilize the organization.I can not remember where I saw this, but the information is there for anyone who has better access to it than I have.

It ties in very nicely with Hendrik Gommers theory.

IMO both these mistakes were made with the K.Cs central, common constitution and the effects are being demonstrated in the problems faced by ANKC breeders. I don't have to tell you which rules,you can see for your selves if you care to look at your constitution with an open mind, but will give an easier (for you to look at) example.

Your rules state that breeders will always breed for the purpose of bettering the breeds.

Later, this was amended to include: a breeder shall not breed primarily for profit.

This was superfluous instruction if the goal is betterment of the breed. It introduced judgment on profit. Making a profit can be seen as negative, and can be seen to undermine your goals. It has introduced an influence irrelevent to your charter. The subject "profit" will now have a negative affect on your charter.It was a negative instruction.

It will affect how you market, how you perceive fellow members.

Part of the problem is that negative instruction tells you that a certain area is NOT to be looked at or considered.

A breeder DOES NOT consider profit in their planning.

Breaking those 2 rules has demonstrable effect that can be explained.

I doubt this rule would have ever been seen as needed, but for previous,similar mistakes made in the writing of the constitution which had already introduced instability.

If you look at your organization as an organism, those previous mistakes served to reduce the ability to multiply (or gain new blood) with an instruction to not move out side of your charter,but instead made it self contained,which is unsustainable.An organism must interact with its environment.

Out of time again.

Edited July 21, 2013 by moosmum

[Steve]

Yes my focus is on PR and education and part of that is marketing what we do and the dogs we breed to a wider audience not primarily for a financial gain but for a primary gain for the breeds and the future of the purebred dog and the people who breed them.

Except if we dont have any puppies to sell and our demand far out weighs our supply who is going to be motivated to market purebred dogs in general? If I have 6 puppies and they are all sold before they are born or very soon after , I only have a litter every year or so and I dont need to advertise or tell everyone how great I am and my dogs are in order to continue what I do and find homes for my puppies - and if I do someone is likely to take a swipe at me - who is going to do the job?

[mita]

Yes my focus is on PR and education and part of that is marketing what we do and the dogs we breed to a wider audience not primarily for a financial gain but for a primary gain for the breeds and the future of the purebred dog and the people who breed them.

Except if we dont have any puppies to sell and our demand far out weighs our supply who is going to be motivated to market purebred dogs in general? If I have 6 puppies and they are all sold before they are born or very soon after , I only have a litter every year or so and I dont need to advertise or tell everyone how great I am and my dogs are in order to continue what I do and find homes for my puppies - and if I do someone is likely to take a swipe at me - who is going to do the job?

Just my thoughts, Steve. But I think the demand in the p/b breeding world will always tend to outweigh supply. For the very reason that it's a niche world where the major goals are not connected with making commercial gains. It's not based on 'number of units' produced.... but on quality in breeding & raising dogs according to standards and being in communication with others, via showing & breed activities.

Those goals need to be spelled out, via public relations & education.... with the rider that a purebred dog can be worth waiting for.

For all those good reasons.

Be assured that the pet-buying public.... who's done their research.... welcome registered breeders who are proud to describe the high standards they work for, with their dogs. Setting out what they do... & why.

I've found that registered breeders websites... & their notices on places like Dogzonline, are increasingly spelling out what they believe & what they do. When these breeders are telling the unvarnished truth, they deserve bouquets not swipes. :)

I'm forever sending pet owners to read some of them, so they can see the special features of what is a niche 'market'. And always will be.

Edited July 21, 2013 by mita

[Steve]

I am looking for supportive information and having dificulties finding it,but I have seen it,its there if you know where to look.

1st,

There is a theory advanced by

Hendrick Gommer, A biological theory of law:natural law theory revisited.

He postulates that an organisation is an entity that obeys natural law.

This is an analogy I have used often and it it does seem to hold up to scrutiny.look him up if you can't follow.Its very interesting,and realy quite simple when you have an understanding of biological law.

Then you have the psychology of organisations.This is set in place by your constitution.

I have been looking for a piece I have read,origins unknown. The subject was writing constitutions. It explained simply and concisely how a constitution affects the mentality of its constituents. It listed some rules of writing a sound and stable constitution.

Two of those rules were:

1)DO NOT use negative commands or instruction. ie: A member shall not.... unless there is no alternative,in which case the reasons for the negative should be spelled out.

Rules well written should negate the need for negative instruction in most cases. I think they called it a introducing "double negative" due to the unplanned negative effects in organizational psychology.

2) DO NOT use superfluous instruction.

The piece went on to give demonstration of how disregarding these 2 rules corrupt and change the message by reinforcing priorities or giving them false values.Introducing outside influences that can destabilize the organization.I can not remember where I saw this, but the information is there for anyone who has better access to it than I have.

It ties in very nicely with Hendrik Gommers theory.

IMO both these mistakes were made with the K.Cs central, common constitution and the effects are being demonstrated in the problems faced by ANKC breeders. I don't have to tell you which rules,you can see for your selves if you care to look at your constitution with an open mind, but will give an easier (for you to look at) example.

Your rules state that breeders will always breed for the purpose of bettering the breeds.

Later, this was amended to include: a breeder shall not breed primarily for profit.

This was superfluous instruction if the goal is betterment of the breed. It introduced judgment on profit. Making a profit can be seen as negative, and can be seen to undermine your goals. It has introduced an influence irrelevent to your charter. The subject "profit" will now have a negative affect on your charter.It was a negative instruction.

It will affect how you market, how you perceive fellow members.

Part of the problem is that negative instruction tells you that a certain area is NOT to be looked at or considered.

A breeder DOES NOT consider profit in their planning.

Breaking those 2 rules has demonstrable effect that can be explained.

I doubt this rule would have ever been seen as needed, but for previous,similar mistakes made in the writing of the constitution which had already introduced instability.

If you look at your organization as an organism, those previous mistakes served to reduce the ability to multiply (or gain new blood) with an instruction to not move out side of your charter,but instead made it self contained,which is unsustainable.An organism must interact with its environment.

Out of time again.

Except your example ignores the fact that the phrase includes the word primarily. If a breeder is breeding for the purpose of bettering the breed then their primary focus has to be on nothing else as their first priority in their breeding program - nothing within that constitution puts greater importance on anything else. If the primary focus for ANKC breeders has to be what is best for the breeds then how can it be possible for them to have making a profit as a primary focus?

Like it or not this is the defining difference between a purebred breeder and any other - no matter what they have to consider future generations and not just the one litter they are producing today. There is a definite need to consider how someone interprets and defines what is better for the breed and I think many have it wrong but its still about that higher goal and always will be.

Now Ive also seen all of the stuff you cite as it was part of the research we did when we were putting together the MDBA policies etc and I agree it may have been worded a different way based on that psychology but I believe the negative aspects of a breeder potentially making a profit is fueled by anti puppy farm propaganda. My major criticism of the ANKC and various state CCs is that they have changed their rules to suit what they thought would make them look better rather than what was based on science or the long term best for their members and their dogs and breeds etc.

They have determined that changing those words and some of their regs would make them appear to be doing everything animal welfare said they should and in fact they use it as part of how they market themselves - which is partly why I dont think we should leave it up to them or not yell a lot at them and let them know how their changes impact on the future.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Steve

[Steve]

Yes my focus is on PR and education and part of that is marketing what we do and the dogs we breed to a wider audience not primarily for a financial gain but for a primary gain for the breeds and the future of the purebred dog and the people who breed them.

Except if we dont have any puppies to sell and our demand far out weighs our supply who is going to be motivated to market purebred dogs in general? If I have 6 puppies and they are all sold before they are born or very soon after , I only have a litter every year or so and I dont need to advertise or tell everyone how great I am and my dogs are in order to continue what I do and find homes for my puppies - and if I do someone is likely to take a swipe at me - who is going to do the job?

Just my thoughts, Steve. But I think the demand in the p/b breeding world will always tend to outweigh supply. For the very reason that it's a niche world where the major goals are not connected with making commercial gains. It's not based on 'number of units' produced.... but on quality in breeding & raising dogs according to standards and being in communication with others, via showing & breed activities.

Those goals need to be spelled out, via public relations & education.... with the rider that a purebred dog can be worth waiting for.

For all those good reasons.

Be assured that the pet-buying public.... who's done their research.... welcome registered breeders who are proud to describe the high standards they work for, with their dogs. Setting out what they do... & why.

I've found that registered breeders websites... & their notices on places like Dogzonline, are increasingly spelling out what they believe & what they do. When these breeders are telling the unvarnished truth, they deserve bouquets not swipes. :)

I'm forever sending pet owners to read some of them, so they can see the special features of what is a niche 'market'. And always will be.

Yep I agree

[Steve]

Id also like to say that the fact that we cant have a discussion about how we should market ourselves and our dogs and collectively join together to discuss the great things about us and what we do and how to market that more effectively without having to also get caught up with the negative perceptions and defending what is supposedly wrong with it all speaks volumes.

How can breeders ensure they produce a better product isn't the same as how they should market the product they are currently producing.

[corvus]

Corvus - I could have used any example but I think you are a pretty smart cookie and know that. Marketing is about promoting the positive things about a product which you feel would be most important to your target market .

No, I was just trying to make a point and didn't manage to. When I bought my two pedigree dogs it was all about seeking quality. Same as it is when my partner finds new places to eat out. Same as it is when we decide what car to buy, what brand of computer or phone we want, who to get in when we need a plumber and so on and so on. We often look for the highest quality we can afford, and we learn about quality through looking at the materials used, the attention paid to design and manufacture, and whether the company understands what we value so that they make an effort to provide it. We look at reviews, because no one knows how good something is like the people with direct experience. They can tell us what problems they have had and we may learn of risks we need to consider before we make a commitment to buy. This is why we don't go to McDonalds very often! I say things to my partner like "I want to try that new McDonalds Crunchie McFlurry, but I'm sure they will have managed to screw it up. They screw nearly everything up." Their marketing is successful in that I want one, but in the long run it's not enough because I have been disappointed so many times. We're only talking about something that costs a few dollars and will be consumed in a matter of minutes, but still I won't commit to buy one.

Getting back to the breeding practices, I think this is an integral component of quality. You can market all you like and very well, but if there is a sense that there is a quality issue you will lose people just like McDonalds does, especially given we are talking about a large investment in money and time. I know a few people who have bought from registered breeders specifically because they believed they were investing in quality. They believed they were taking the safe option and were burned when their dog ended up with some kind of health problem or temperament problem. It doesn't really matter whether the problem was a fault of breeding practices or the new owner's management practices or if it was a freak accident or whatever. Because the owners had justified their decision with the conviction they would get a better quality dog, they are left more sour if something goes wrong than they would if they had made their decision based on something else. Dashed expectations are a really unpleasant experience. They tell everyone they know and anyone who will listen. I'm just saying this because I'm on the outside looking in. I don't need to argue the point or have people listen. If you don't want to market purebred dogs as being of superior quality then you may as well ignore me. But I don't know what else is so great about them that I should buy one over any other dog from anywhere else.

[~Anne~]

Corvus, you are looking at marketing in a narrow focus. I don't eat McDonald's either however as a marketing example they are world leaders. More people eat that crap across the world than any other fast food. Why? Because of their very clever marketing campaigns, originally primarily targeted at children and now weighed to teens and children. They are also now heading into the busy white collar worker.

Marketing and promotion is messages. It is communicating messages.

I work creating strategies to combat negative perceptions about a service. The service has a lot of positive points and it is only these positive points I focus on. I research and survey to find what people think and then I create objectives and targets. I create the messages that will alter negative perceptions.

As an example - someone earlier mentioned that that breeders won't just sell their pups to anyone. The negative of that is that it can make the purchasing process difficult however I would be creating messages about the positive. The positive is that the breeder cares about these puppies. They've been lovingly reared. They've been a part of a family. Love, blood, sweat and tears have gone into the planning, mating, rearing of these cute little puppies. The message: purebred breeders care enough to choose the perfect new family.

Edited July 21, 2013 by ~Anne~

[moosmum]

We need more purebred breeders, more people who get it , who are passionate about how the decisions they make and the goals they work to can change the quality of life and impact for generations but in order to bring new people in we need to promote what we do and all of the wonderful things it brings to our lives, people who want to breed dogs and increase the gene pools and the level of marketing for their breed and purebred dogs in general not simply those who see it as a quick way to make a buck.

When I say we need more breeders I hear "No thank you, I dont want more people breeding MY breed, I dont want MY breed to become more popular look what happened to ....... But thats not what Im talking about we need to help people who might want to breed purebred dogs to understand that its about much much more than money , speak with them, educate them and screen them, help them and the rest of the world see what a wonderful opportunity it is to be a purebred breeder.

Very nicely said.

Your emphasis is more on public relations and education.... rather than marketing. And I think you're spot on... in that the whole point of purebred breeding is that it's not commercial. And marketing is designed to fit the commercial world.

In fact, the evidence appears to be that it's the very non-commercial nature of purebred dog breeding, that allows the best of that world to show thro'. For the dogs themselves in terms of welfare, for the pet -buying public in terms of likely better socialised companion dogs & breeder support, and for the the breeders themselves who become involved in a highly professional & passionate hobby alongside like-minded people. All that determines the goals of breeding purebreds, not commercial interests.

Disclaimer.... by saying p/breeding is not commercial (at its best), I'm not saying that the breeders shouldn't practise good business skills in what they do.

I agree with this view.

[corvus]

Corvus, you are looking at marketing in a narrow focus.

I'm looking at purebred dogs and what's good about them. Why do people buy them? I know why I bought them. The reasons were small in number, but big in importance. You can call that narrow if you like.

[moosmum]

I am looking for supportive information and having dificulties finding it,but I have seen it,its there if you know where to look.

1st,

There is a theory advanced by

Hendrick Gommer, A biological theory of law:natural law theory revisited.

He postulates that an organisation is an entity that obeys natural law.

This is an analogy I have used often and it it does seem to hold up to scrutiny.look him up if you can't follow.Its very interesting,and realy quite simple when you have an understanding of biological law.

Then you have the psychology of organisations.This is set in place by your constitution.

I have been looking for a piece I have read,origins unknown. The subject was writing constitutions. It explained simply and concisely how a constitution affects the mentality of its constituents. It listed some rules of writing a sound and stable constitution.

Two of those rules were:

1)DO NOT use negative commands or instruction. ie: A member shall not.... unless there is no alternative,in which case the reasons for the negative should be spelled out.

Rules well written should negate the need for negative instruction in most cases. I think they called it a introducing "double negative" due to the unplanned negative effects in organizational psychology.

2) DO NOT use superfluous instruction.

The piece went on to give demonstration of how disregarding these 2 rules corrupt and change the message by reinforcing priorities or giving them false values.Introducing outside influences that can destabilize the organization.I can not remember where I saw this, but the information is there for anyone who has better access to it than I have.

It ties in very nicely with Hendrik Gommers theory.

IMO both these mistakes were made with the K.Cs central, common constitution and the effects are being demonstrated in the problems faced by ANKC breeders. I don't have to tell you which rules,you can see for your selves if you care to look at your constitution with an open mind, but will give an easier (for you to look at) example.

Your rules state that breeders will always breed for the purpose of bettering the breeds.

Later, this was amended to include: a breeder shall not breed primarily for profit.

This was superfluous instruction if the goal is betterment of the breed. It introduced judgment on profit. Making a profit can be seen as negative, and can be seen to undermine your goals. It has introduced an influence irrelevent to your charter. The subject "profit" will now have a negative affect on your charter.It was a negative instruction.

It will affect how you market, how you perceive fellow members.

Part of the problem is that negative instruction tells you that a certain area is NOT to be looked at or considered.

A breeder DOES NOT consider profit in their planning.

Breaking those 2 rules has demonstrable effect that can be explained.

I doubt this rule would have ever been seen as needed, but for previous,similar mistakes made in the writing of the constitution which had already introduced instability.

If you look at your organization as an organism, those previous mistakes served to reduce the ability to multiply (or gain new blood) with an instruction to not move out side of your charter,but instead made it self contained,which is unsustainable.An organism must interact with its environment.

Out of time again.

Except your example ignores the fact that the phrase includes the word primarily. If a breeder is breeding for the purpose of bettering the breed then their primary focus has to be on nothing else as their first priority in their breeding program - nothing within that constitution puts greater importance on anything else. If the primary focus for ANKC breeders has to be what is best for the breeds then how can it be possible for them to have making a profit as a primary focus?

Like it or not this is the defining difference between a purebred breeder and any other - no matter what they have to consider future generations and not just the one litter they are producing today. There is a definite need to consider how someone interprets and defines what is better for the breed and I think many have it wrong but its still about that higher goal and always will be.

Yes. I agree. I said it was superfluous for the same reason.

What I did not have time to add is that while profit is not the primary motivation for a pedigree breeder, If the registering body is viewed as an organism, profit IS a source of energy and vitality. The organization may be vital enough to do with out that source,or it may not.

I have modified post 126 as I'd run out of time when it was posted

Edited July 21, 2013 by moosmum

[~Anne~]

Yes, you personally chose purebreds due to reasons that were important to you. Currently there is no marketing or promotion being undertaken though so your perception is what it is for reasons that only you know which you've said. None of which are due to any promotion or marketing. When creating a strategy we would look at the positive reason about why you(and thousands of others) chose purebred over crossbreed. We would highlight these positives.

You personally don't go to McDonald's for your own personal reasons and perceptions, however massive numbers of people do. More than any other fast food chain. That's because of marketing and promotion.

Edited July 21, 2013 by ~Anne~

[corvus]

Yes. I think we are at two different places, here. I don't think I am alone in my reasons for buying purebred dogs. I often ask people why they get the dogs they do and their reasons are much the same as mine. I was trying to get at why people buy purebred dogs currently and building from there, but I'm being told that it's not important. So if it's not, what is? Specifically, I mean? What is good about purebred dogs apart from quality?

[~Anne~]

Ok sorry, yes I think we are on the same page but different chapters.

Why they (the public and purebred dog owners) prefer the purebred is most definitely important. Even why they don't is important. When developing a strategy that is precisely what would be looked at. The research in to why and why not. From that research a picture would be built of the perceptions and we would develop our objectives or what we want the perceptions to be from this.

The point I was trying to inadequately make throughout this thread, after the concept was raised, is that we don't need perfection. Sure, we need to be working towards being as good as we can but to market and promote, and to return the purebred dog to the highs of where it should be, we need to start promoting.

[Steve]

Yes. I think we are at two different places, here. I don't think I am alone in my reasons for buying purebred dogs. I often ask people why they get the dogs they do and their reasons are much the same as mine. I was trying to get at why people buy purebred dogs currently and building from there, but I'm being told that it's not important. So if it's not, what is? Specifically, I mean? What is good about purebred dogs apart from quality?

In order to go further with this tell me what you mean by quality?