The SV-Stud Business 2003-2007 - Page 1

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Jantie on 01 April 2008 - 12:04

The amount of registered pups in the SV-breeding book has dropped in merely 15 years from 34.685 pups in the year 1993, to approximately 16.816 pups in 2007. A scary development indeed. The battle for stud fees increases. Now as before, the studding business is being controlled by only a few males and their owners, those that always occupy the first positions and have made a name for themselves in the Siegershow. Apparently people seem to want to breed solely to the very best, it needs to be "Vorzüglich Auslese" (VA), at least not much less.

So the cake is being shared by only a few “Ausleser”. Does the breed benefit from this? Should we not spread the genes? Should not the vast bloodbasis be used to the fullest? According to SV-informations, in 2007 we had 1.259 different studs at our disposal. Sadly enough most of them will only be used once. Their stud fees might only bring their owners a mere 400 Euro. For this amount, one will not get the services of the top-males listed in my latest study. You will need a thousand Euros for their services, unless you belong to the club. But that is another story altogether.

But do go ahead and see for yourselves. After reading my notes, you may enlighten me or slaughter me:

http://www.bloggen.be/hd/archief.php?ID=128

Links to the accompanying spreadsheets in Excel-format:

http://jantie.demeyere.googlepages.com/WichtigsteDeckrueden2003-2007.xls

http://jantie.demeyere.googlepages.com/WeitereRden2006-2007Gesamtbersicht.xls

I wish you all a healthy GSD!

Jantie

 


ladywolf45169

by ladywolf45169 on 01 April 2008 - 14:04

Jantie,

I find all this very interesting...could you possible PM me so we can discuss this further?

Thak you,

Christine


Dog1

by Dog1 on 01 April 2008 - 16:04

Jantie,

 

When are you going to get a clue and post something that's close to reality and not some twisted logic?


by D.H. on 01 April 2008 - 17:04

How much can anyone possibly believe someone who cannot even get the basic facts correct?

In 1993 there were 27.648 GSD pups registered in Germany. The VDH (German Kennel Club) has not even published numbers for 2007 yet.

The 'studding' is only 'controlled' by the choices the bitches owners make, nothing else.

More hot air, as usual. No one needs to slaughter you, you already lead a very pityful life dominated by a very unhealthy obsession. And because of that, any grain of good that you may actually uncover somewhere will never get noticed. Good luck influencing the masses in their popular choices.

 

BTW, in case anyone is interested, breedings to foreign owned bitches (meaning litters will be whelped outside of Germany) are as high as ever. For some of the top males it is sometimes nearly impossible to find a single litter in Germany at a given time. So the majority of these 'concentrated' VA breedings are spread throughout the world.


by Jantie on 01 April 2008 - 18:04

Third try! Sorry, these things don’t seem to be too compatible.

And it’s very frustrating, in the preview, everything seems ok.

 

DENIAL! DENIAL! Now we won’t even bother to get into that! Breeders and dealers will of course always doubt facts.

 

OK! Let me continue to offer facts.

 

1986: 24.546

1987: 25.754

1988: 25.503

1989: 25.189

1990: 29.605

1991: 29.756

1992: 32.131

1993: 34.681

1994: 33.340

1995: 34.278

1996: 32.808

1997: 29.563

by D.H. on 01 April 2008 - 21:04

Here are the actual numbers from 2006 to 1997

 

and for the years 2002 to 1992

 

If anyone would like to view the actual source, which is the official website of the German National Kennel Club (VDH), and which lists official data for the last 10 years, click here:
http://www.vdh.de/alles_fuer_medien/welpenstatistik_list.php?suche=Deutscher+Sch%E4ferhund&sort=&go=Go%21

 

See Jantie, you keep getting your numbers and supposed facts mixed up because you do not know where and how to even begin to look. That is very basis for any study, experiment, claim, trend, statistics, you name it.

 

Go ahead, keep making a fool of yourself. You picked the perfect day for it too. Merely shouting louder whenever your so called facts are proven to be bogus yet again is not going make anyone hear you any better. But thanks for the joke.


by Jantie on 02 April 2008 - 09:04

Get off my back D.H. Your name spells DENIAL!

You will try and tell everyone Hip Dysplasia is NOT an issue within the GSD-breed, and it’s clear why.

You are a broker and need to sell the crap that breeders can’t and won’t keep.

Was there not an issue here on Pedigreedatabase?

The end of my reply got swept away. Here it is.

1993: 34.681, 1994: 33.340, 1995: 34.278, 1996: 32.808, 1997: 29.563, 1998: 28.147, 1999: 24.445, 2000: 22.228, 2001: 21.781, 2002: 22.466.

All figures are based on SV-Genetics!! Not on figures from the VDH!!

I’m talking SV always! Not the later altered figures.

I have sent my figures to the notorious University Professors, if something is wrong in my statistics, they for sure, will recognize my faults.

P.S.: My life is a pretty happy one, thank you! I’m just writing the letters I need to write, before my end comes, soon enough. No need for you, D.H., to send me any greeting cards lecturing me.

As I said, get off my back, and let people make up their own minds.

This is a place where everyone can speak his mind.

Instead, read the story of Venja vom Haus Musica (I know you read German). Just another story of how one had to deal with a very sick GSD-puppy, already at the age of 10 weeks. Carmen’s story is linked to my website: www.bloggen.be/hd

People


by D.H. on 03 April 2008 - 04:04

If anything my name spells D.enial H.alted! You just proved my point here once again. Thank you. By using your beloved genetics CD your forget the simple fact that dogs from all over the world get a-stamped and thus find their way into that particular database. American line GSD for example have long had a very different breeding history and most certainly not the same breeding criteria as the SV GSD. Dogs from so many other countries also get a-stamped and also become part of the SV genetics database, regardless of what the breeding rules of that country are, and many have virtually none.   When you look at your genetics database numbers of 2007 five years from now, those numbers will have drastically changed. Because dogs from all over the world will add up and change the currently 16thousand something dogs to an easy 20thousand or 25thousand and more, because more people outside of Germany a-stamp now than ever before. Shows that you simply do not get the scope of the data that you are looking at and using as a source.   The VDH supercedes the SV. Without the VDH, the SV would not, could not exist. The VDH numbers are the only official numbers that count. They represent the SV studbook, which you made a mention of in your last mass eMailing. Another misinformation. The SV stud book of registered breedings and their resulting puppy registrations is not by far the same as an internal SV Genetics Database for a-stamps. The VDH published puppy stats are though. Shows that you lack the very basic understanding of how the clubs operate and what data is relevant and when.   Because you lack the very basic understanding of the sources you are using, your theories will always remain flawed.   Give us something breeders can actually use! So what is your solution for all these bitches owners again that want to use the males of their own and very personal choice? Ahhhh, I forget. You never actually HAVE a solution that comes with all your garbled... stuff. But you are in good company here. This pedigreedatabase is the mecca of misinformation. 

by Speaknow on 03 April 2008 - 06:04

Ouch! DH – but true enough. Jantie, it’s hardly surprising that VA champs get much of the studwork! But insofar similar to most present-day show-line dogs they’re predominantly of the Wienerau type and of the same genetic blend (as going back 5 to 8 generations readily shows), if not generally resemble each other as well, does it really matter that much? Genetic diversity is crucial, but currently we seem to be merely, or largely, re-combining the same genetic stew in hope of producing a dog marginally more felicitous than what already exists. I’d appreciate you views thereon, DH.

by Jantie on 03 April 2008 - 08:04

(Jantie singing: “It’s all about the money, dudumdudumm…”) One must wonder what’s in it for you DH? You are very good at fooling people. You’re entitled to your opinion, so I won’t even bother to get into that, it does not interest me how you make your calculations. Mine are based solely on SV-material, so one cannot get any closer.

 

Now it made me think of the cyclists in the Tour de France. For multiple years, they just doped away. Journalists challenging this Holy Tour Institution and asking tough questions, were haunted. They were accused of lying, didn’t have proof, didn’t know what they were talking about, were chased from the press conference, threatened with law suits.

You might have followed the debacle last year, after the revelations made in former Telekom soigneur Jef d'Hont's book?

 

A tearful Erik Zabel appeared at the T-Mobile press conference along with former teammate Rolf Aldag to confess to using the banned blood booster EPO while riding for the Team Telekom in the 1990s.

Aldag confessed to a longer history of doping. He started with EPO before the 1995 Tour de France, and he said that continued with it.

Following the confession by colleague Andreas Schmid, Doctor Lothar Heinrich has admitted his involvement in doping riders of the former Telekom squad. The German had been working as a sports doctor in the team's current incarnation, T-Mobile, up until May 3, when he was suspende from service by T-Mobile Team Manager Bob Stapleton

Later, a Tour de France winner Bjarne Riis admitted that he took EPO, human growth hormone, and cortisone when he won the Tour de France title in 1996. In those days, however, he said it was part of the game, and that he didn't have a choice.

Following a confession last month by 1997 Tour winner Bjarne Riis that he used the banned blood booster EPO (erythropoietin) during his career, Germany's former Paris-Nice winner Jorg Jaksche alleged last week that he was encouraged to dope by the managers of his former teams.

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next »




  •  


    Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top