The Scandal Of Marketing Purebred Dogs

[KJJ]

I have been reading this topic with interest, I am one of those who had previously not considered buying a purebred dog from a registered breeder - the reasons for that ranged from a negative experience of purebred dogs when growing up (knowing and in one case owning german shepherds and dobermans with truly awful aggressive temperaments, the shepherds with the terrible posture and hips that were all too common back in the seventies and eighties that were still considered fine to breed with), a perception that all registered breeders were interested in was conformation at the expense of health and temperament, added to that was hearing from people about not being able to inquire about price without causing offence or even people who wanted to get into showing being shut out and told that they had to 'earn' a show worthy dog.

Now however, after deciding to keep an open mind, I do feel that there are many breeders who do care passionately about their breed and not just about showing, they are concerned about all aspects of the animal, it's still not necessarily easy for an outsider to figure out the difference between a 'good' breeder and a 'bad' breeder though.

[~Anne~]

Shapeshifter - almost every example you gave in your post illustrates what I said.

I typed a long and detailed response, giving examples, and it disappeared .

I can't be bothered retyping it so ill do a very short version.

Perception = messages.

You are a consumer. You buy products not because you know everything but because of marketing messages that create a perception. It's not your free will. It's the will of marketing making you think a certain way about a product. Making you think you need it, want it, desire it.

At the moment, which is what the blog has pointed out, there is a huge difference in the marketing of cross bred dogs compared to purebred dogs.

Perceptions can be changed and are regularly changed through marketing and promotion.

We need to change perceptions and promote and market purebred dogs so that people don't think they're riddles with health problems, so that people don't think they are over valued, so people aren't put off by questions.

[WreckitWhippet]

We can't meet the demand now, so what's the point of convincing more people to look at buying from registered breeders, it's only going to end in disappointment for the vast majority who won't wait for one.

[~Anne~]

I'm not advocating marketing to sell, but to alter perceptions. The perception of purebreds is very poor. They're considered unhealthy, hard to obtain, and not worth the money.

Sure, the upside is that with increased positive perception they will be in more demand but if people are more positive about purebreds then more people will become involved with them.

Even having to wait for some thing can increase positive perceptions. Think of unique cars. You can order one now and you don't expect to take delivery for up to a year. It doesn't stop people ordering them though nor does this damage perceptions.

[WreckitWhippet]

I agree that there needs to be increased marketing regarding the health and predictability of pedigree dogs, but I suspect with that will come an increased demand, which again the ethical registered breeder cannot meet.

Increase the demand and the registered puppy farmers step in and attempt to fill it. They are already there cashing in, it's a catch 22.

I know lots of breeders that would rather their breed stayed "unpopular" to a certain degree, as it's not in the breeds best interests to have the void filled by the unscrupulous.

[RuralPug]

I agree that there needs to be increased marketing regarding the health and predictability of pedigree dogs, but I suspect with that will come an increased demand, which again the ethical registered breeder cannot meet.

Increase the demand and the registered puppy farmers step in and attempt to fill it. They are already there cashing in, it's a catch 22.

I know lots of breeders that would rather their breed stayed "unpopular" to a certain degree, as it's not in the breeds best interests to have the void filled by the unscrupulous.

Yes yes yes!!!

Education FIRST, marketing second. Breeds have been RUINED (yes, I'm shouting!!) in this country and others by becoming too popular and it is left to a handful of ethical breeders to try and keep the breed sound.

[moosmum]

I agree that good marketing will bring more interest in pedigree dogs,and increase numbers of pedigree breeders as well,but what realy affects the success of any marketing strategy is people experience.The best marketing strategy is useless if experience won't back it up.

Not all breeders are equal. In order to get THAT message across,it has to be accepted that this applies to all breeders,not just pedigree breeders.

I grew up in a home that values quality,anything worth doing is worth doing right etc.So pedigree dogs were the only real choice IF you have specific criteria to be met. We thought about breeding briefly,but decided we were happiest to just keep one to 3 dogs simply for our own needs and enjoyment. We left the breeding and showing to the experts. That worked well for many years. We bought and were given good dogs by breeders who knew our dogs and what we gave to them/made of them.

What changed was a decline in the quality of the dogs.It came to head when we had a a particularly problematic dog whos issues I won't go into here. More research was needed.

You know what? I was horrified. The breed club I called several times told me 1st the qualities I wanted wouldn't be found. These qualties were were breed traits. I called community and services that had been known to use this breed and had given rave reviews only to find they would not touch them with a 10 foot pole any more due to health issues 1st,behavioural second.

I still didn't give up....This was a breed that had served me well until recently. There HAD to be breeders still breeding for what made the breed.Back to the breed club,new spokes person.I had been offered a BYB,pure bred,3rd generation bred specificaly for the job, so asked what benefits a pedigree would offer that this dog could not. The answer I got was a tirade detailing how much this fellow had spent on vet fees.I got the byb and she was every thing I wanted,living long past the average life span with no veterinary intervention ever needed until old age and arthritis.

I'm happy to go on a list to wait for a good dog. I'm happy to research. Within reason.I have a purpose for my dog and if it takes me 2 years find a breeder who can match my needs before I apply to get on that list,then hope for the best I will need to match my needs else where.

Marketing has to backed up with results, good experience and professionalism.

I haven't given up on my breed,I know lots is being done to bring them back. I worship those who work to that end But research alone is no help to me yet. It could take me years to find a breeder who values or even recognizes the same temperament type as I do,has dogs proven in living conditions to have those qualities. The health issues are harder,with many very common issues unable to be tested for yet.

I've come to think there is a flaw in the basic K.C rulings that influences the culture into ever decreasing parameters. Take GSDs. Working lines/show lines/white/long coat short coat etc. Each time the breed is further separated,the gene pools decrease. I don't think its about pedigree dogs Vs mongrels.Its about modern society and expectations, History and purpose of breed.Planning and fore thought.

I think its a mistake to promote pedigree 1st,for its own sake.Instead promote good husbandry practices,history and purpose that can have meaning to the uninitiated.Its not the pedigree that makes a registered dog better a better choice,its the history it reveals to be built on or rejected.planning and forethought.Pedigree will never be seen as the single thing that defines a good dog in the eyes of average Joe.

IMHO a change in attitude there would increase interest in pedigree dogs as a logical choice, but also improve the quality of breeders. I think its not pedigrees that make a good dog so its not pedigrees that should be pushed. Its practices.Planning,history, purpose and quality.Those are things that every one who owns a pet should be concerned with

Edited July 6, 2013 by moosmum

[RuralPug]

Fantastic post moosmum!!!

[~Anne~]

I think its a mistake to promote pedigree 1st,for its own sake.Instead promote good husbandry practices,history and purpose that can have meaning to the uninitiated.Its not the pedigree that makes a registered dog better a better choice,its the history it reveals to be built on or rejected.planning and forethought.Pedigree will never be seen as the single thing that defines a good dog in the eyes of average Joe.

I hate to repeat myself but that is marketing the purebred dog! The message is that there are good husbandry practices and a rich purposeful history.

Marketing and promotion is messages. Messages are to alter perceptions.

The messages are determined after research and information gathering. If that is what the message should be to increase the positive perception of purebred dogs then your work is half done.

Marketing is messages.

[~Anne~]

I agree that there needs to be increased marketing regarding the health and predictability of pedigree dogs, but I suspect with that will come an increased demand, which again the ethical registered breeder cannot meet.

Increase the demand and the registered puppy farmers step in and attempt to fill it. They are already there cashing in, it's a catch 22.

I know lots of breeders that would rather their breed stayed "unpopular" to a certain degree, as it's not in the breeds best interests to have the void filled by the unscrupulous.

Yes, I see your point.

I can also understand the thinking behind keeping breeds 'unpopular' but the harsh reality is that the purebred dog is the loser with that thinking.

[~Anne~]

Tbh, I think people see the word marketing and think sales.

Selling is sales. Marketing and sales are to sell. Marketing and promotion is to alter perceptions. Not sell.

Instead of the word marketing, lets use the word promotion. Perhaps that will help those reading get a better idea.

Moosmum, I agree about the need for an increase or sustaining quality of breeders. This should be done by state breed clubs but I rarely see an active club in this regard. In fact, most are disappointingly low on informative and educated materials and resources and their committees are largely unskilled. Pick up a newsletter from most clubs and you'll see they're killing trees for no purpose. Their websites are just as appalling. The focus is too social and informal.

Edited July 6, 2013 by ~Anne~

[OutOfSightHound]

Tbh, I think people see the word marketing and think sales.

Selling is sales. Marketing and sales are to sell. Marketing and promotion is to alter perceptions. Not sell.

Instead of the word marketing, lets use the word promotion. Perhaps that will help those reading get a better idea.

Moosmum, I agree about the need for an increase or sustaining quality of breeders. This should be done by state breed clubs but I rarely see an active club in this regard. In fact, most are disappointingly low on informative and educated materials and resources and their committees are largely unskilled. Pick up a newsletter from most clubs and you'll see they're killing trees for no purpose. Their websites are just as appalling. The focus is too social and informal.

I so so agree! I got pedigree dog from breeders that ticked all the right boxes and I knew that if anything happened my dogs could go back to the breeders no problems. Then I got involved in rescue to do some good and I got roasted for not getting a rescue dog . Perceptions are exactly the problem. You can't take your rescue dog back to the RSPCA and sometimes rescues won't take them back if it doesn't work out. We need to promote great breeders and good practices! Ill market that! So when are we going to get people to get on this as I still hear horrible stuff from the BBC thing about pedigree dogs

[WreckitWhippet]

I agree that there needs to be increased marketing regarding the health and predictability of pedigree dogs, but I suspect with that will come an increased demand, which again the ethical registered breeder cannot meet.

Increase the demand and the registered puppy farmers step in and attempt to fill it. They are already there cashing in, it's a catch 22.

I know lots of breeders that would rather their breed stayed "unpopular" to a certain degree, as it's not in the breeds best interests to have the void filled by the unscrupulous.

Yes, I see your point.

I can also understand the thinking behind keeping breeds 'unpopular' but the harsh reality is that the purebred dog is the loser with that thinking.

How so ? If there are enough breeders, who are breeding with the dogs best interests and the "breed" at heart. Along with that comes enough potential owners who also understand and can fulfil the breeds requirements. That to me is win, win all round. Dedicated breeders, excellent owners and happy healthy dogs.

I can think of one breed that has virtually gone down the toilet due to those cashing in on it's popularity. There has been irreparable damage done to it and the breeds reputations. You need look no further than the "blue " Stafford.

The purebred is really the looser when those with the $$ signs in their eyes begin to cash in.

Edited July 6, 2013 by WreckitWhippet

[Salukifan]

smum, I agree about the need for an increase or sustaining quality of breeders. This should be done by state breed clubs but I rarely see an active club in this regard. In fact, most are disappointingly low on informative and educated materials and resources and their committees are largely unskilled. Pick up a newsletter from most clubs and you'll see they're killing trees for no purpose. Their websites are just as appalling. The focus is too social and informal.

I thought the Whippet Club of NSW's was quite informative.

I gather quite a few breed clubs turned out to do meet and greets with the public at the big Dogs NSW Dogs On Show day :)

The breed clubs are all volunteer based and its an additional undertaking by people doing the best they can. They can always use more help.

Edited July 6, 2013 by Haredown Whippets

[WreckitWhippet]

The website of the SBT Club Of Northern NSW is a credit to them

[moosmum]

I think its a mistake to promote pedigree 1st,for its own sake.Instead promote good husbandry practices,history and purpose that can have meaning to the uninitiated.Its not the pedigree that makes a registered dog better a better choice,its the history it reveals to be built on or rejected.planning and forethought.Pedigree will never be seen as the single thing that defines a good dog in the eyes of average Joe.

I hate to repeat myself but that is marketing the purebred dog! The message is that there are good husbandry practices and a rich purposeful history.

Marketing and promotion is messages. Messages are to alter perceptions.

The messages are determined after research and information gathering. If that is what the message should be to increase the positive perception of purebred dogs then your work is half done.

Marketing is messages.

Indeed it is! So why is the word "pedigree" used to market those points ? As if a pedigree is evidence of them?

A pedigree is the most valuable tool to achieving consistent quality, yes. But too many, breeders and buyers alike, Are led to see the pedigree as what confers quality.That proof of an unbroken,undiluted line is the goal and the legacy and the future.That can only lead to disillusion.

To me,there is something terribly wrong when the man who gave me hope for my breeds future is labeled unethical and just plain wrong and irresponsible because he valued his dogs history over the records for it.History over inventory. Reliability over predictability.

I believe the constitution shapes the culture,as legislation does.Restrictions placed concentrate and narrow the view point in unexpected ways. Stated goals,well worded,should always be used instead where possible.

Goals should be the focus into the future.What a person WILL do.As with legislation,Once you start on what people can't do you have to be very very careful you aren't on a slippery slope to an enclosed space with no room to progress.

Edited July 6, 2013 by moosmum

[Ruin Maniac]

As I said, Whippet. It's not necessarily the buyers who are posing a threat to the PB dog, it's the lawmakers. As long as there's this strong perception that pedigree breeders are greedy, contemptuous, self-absorbed and cruel, then the law is going to do you no favours. We have well-meaning idiots and not-so-well-meaning animal rights advocates to thank for that.

[moosmum]

I think its a mistake to promote pedigree 1st,for its own sake.Instead promote good husbandry practices,history and purpose that can have meaning to the uninitiated.Its not the pedigree that makes a registered dog better a better choice,its the history it reveals to be built on or rejected.planning and forethought.Pedigree will never be seen as the single thing that defines a good dog in the eyes of average Joe.

I hate to repeat myself but that is marketing the purebred dog! The message is that there are good husbandry practices and a rich purposeful history.

Marketing and promotion is messages. Messages are to alter perceptions.

The messages are determined after research and information gathering. If that is what the message should be to increase the positive perception of purebred dogs then your work is half done.

Marketing is messages.

I disagree, I think that would be marketing a better attitude of understanding and responsibility to companion animals and breeding as a whole.But using the word pedigree to claim that attitude is a part of what makes pedigree a dirty word for so many.Its a false claim and experience will contradict it.

Market the attitude with out trying to claim it exclusively and pedigree breeders come out looking far more approachable,open friendly and realistic.

Accepting the message can apply to any breeder/owner,registered or not allows it to benefit all dogs. You don't need to promote "pedigree" dogs. The ideals can be promoted to lead people to a better understanding of responsible breeding. When the message is understood by breeders and buyers alike,then the benefits of a pedigree are self evident.

Breeders themselves need to be more open,flexible,friendly and Visible,as per the OP.

Edited July 7, 2013 by moosmum

[~Anne~]

I'm confused moosmum. I never mentioned 'pedigree' and I consider pedigree to be the written or known family tree of a dog. Apart from working registries, ANKC, and a few others, there is no such history kept of other dogs.

A cross breed dog does not come with any known ancestral history.

There is much value in an ancestral history. The attitude is that pure bred dogs are pure and that there is a written record of their lineage. Sorry, but the point, specifically your point, is lost on me.

Haredon and Wreckit, yes of course there are some that are doing it well and perhaps I generalised too broadly. We all know that this is not the majority however. I also understand that they are volunteers but being a volunteer doesn't mean lacking skills. It just means you do it without pay.

I don't necessarily mean it as a criticism, simply a fact. We can't expect breeders to be doing the right thing and educated if there is no-one educating them. The most logical educator, in my view, would be the breed clubs. These clubs need support from the state associations and the state associations need support from the ANKC. The ANKC does not have this aspartame of their core business or as part of their purpose at all. They should though!

[moosmum]

I'm confused moosmum. I never mentioned 'pedigree' and I consider pedigree to be the written or known family tree of a dog. Apart from working registries, ANKC, and a few others, there is no such history kept of other dogs.

A cross breed dog does not come with any known ancestral history.

There is much value in an ancestral history. The attitude is that pure bred dogs are pure and that there is a written record of their lineage. Sorry, but the point, specifically your point, is lost on me.

Sorry Anne,

I'm trying to find a way to demonstrate that a flaw in the writing of the NKCs rules and constitution can set them up for failure by creating contradictions.

Pedigree dogs need a public that finds value in them to continue, yet they don't allow a ready response to evolve for public needs.Not because they can't, but because of many breeders reluctance to accept the legitamacy of doing so.

Its more urgent to appease their peers. The public don't want to buy into that.

I'm sure the root cause supporting that culture is to be found in the NKCs rules and constitution and I don't think marketing alone will change THAT perception. Thats an inside job. I think the message has been corrupted some where along the line to take away a balance of needs.

Breeders seem to have trouble accepting the public they depend on with out demanding what the public refuses to give up.

I think I'll go away and try to find a better way to express this. :laugh:

Edited July 7, 2013 by moosmum