
This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Prager on 12 December 2009 - 23:12
second: Is there a pedigree on this dog?
Value of the dog is NOT or should NOT be determined by titles.
Value of the dog can not be determined without seeing the pedigree and the thorough knowledge of the dogs on the pedigree and the dog itself. Titiles will help but not much. I often breed police dogs or dogs for police type progeny and can not care less for titles. Titles have orientation value, but they are not panacea. Value of the dog is in the dog itself and quality of the dogs on the pedigree, pedigree which nobody has seen. Not in it's titles. I have seen very many dogs with titles and I would not breed to them if you pay me. That includes many Bundessiegers or highly rated show dogs. Usually because the hips are mediocre at best in their pedigrees because they are bred for performance within first 4 to 5 years max . Also longevity is often poor. However this dog's pedigree has OFA good to excellent. What about if the dogs on the pedigree are S&R dogs and police dogs and hearding dogs.?!
Someone says arrogantly; "...who cares about OFA?" OFA is rating of hips which is superior to SV since the "a" Normal means only none dysplastic. Where OFA grades these "a" normal non dysplastic dogs as "excellent" , "good" and "fair" and OFA is done at 2 years where SV is done earlier. Thus SV is inferior system to OFA.
Someone said also that the pups from titled parents are worth more. That is true. But quality of a dog is more important than the profit they bring if it is based only on how many titles are there in the pedigre! I know many breeders who produce excellent dogs and they are not titled. And I say it with respect even so these people are my competition.
The truth is that this dog is most likely not the dog to start breeding program with. However, who knows for sure?
PhoenixRising
needs guidance and that is quite obvious.
PragerHans
by clifford on 13 December 2009 - 01:12
i will give you 500 dollar
thanks
by gucci on 13 December 2009 - 01:12

by VonIsengard on 13 December 2009 - 03:12
by gucci on 13 December 2009 - 04:12
KCzaja: you are so right, pigment does not make the dog, This all makes me wonder if one of the lines was an American bred lines Shepherd being on one side "pet quality dogs" And I agree, she is not worth 3,000. Will be interesting if she reveals who the "Pet" dogs are out of.

by Prager on 13 December 2009 - 04:12
I basicaly agree with your last post. However keep in mind that lost of pigment is the first sign of degeneration of the line.
Prager Hans

by MaggieMae on 13 December 2009 - 04:12

by Prager on 13 December 2009 - 04:12
Prager Hans
by danbee on 13 December 2009 - 04:12
And to Clifford, the price of the dog is not based on how much it costs to raise them. Prices are based on market forces and what comparable dogs are selling for. I can buy a pink-papered, V rated, KKL1 3 yr old female for $4K. 3K for a pet is not an appropriate price. I'm also a Realtor and you remind me of the people who say "but I bought my house for $200,000 3 yrs ago & I did $40,000 in upgrades & I'll owe you a $10,000 commission so I have to sell it for at least $250K. Umm, no. In today's market your house is worth less than you paid for it 3 yrs ago. It doesn't matter how much you put into it, or how much it cost to raise the dog, it's still only worth a certain amount.

by windwalker18 on 13 December 2009 - 05:12
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top