In theory it actually sounds like a very good idea.

If all pups cost the same people would be more likely to put their efforts into finding the 'best' breeders.

Not sure if it would work in practise tho - would it be enforceable? What would the implications be?

A sad sad thought... Maybe some just dont understand the expense of breeding with the aim to improve the breed - through adding new lines ect.
and to be fair why should them that do it all in an irresponsible way be able to ask the same as them that do things to the highest possible standard.

Sorry if this has been answered before.

If rescues charged the max £200 (which I have no problem with at all) and people were aware they could get one from a breeder cheaper. Would rescues miss out on potential homes?

I don't actually think people go to rescues because it is cheaper. (Often in the paper there are pups you can get cheaply)

ohh thats a point - Rescues charge to recoup some of what they have spent out, people do NOT see this as wrong..why is it any different for breeders who are not breeding for money, who have spent out hundreds/thousands.

- you answered your own question

Some.....

and btw....no-one (from what I have seen) seems to see making a profit as wrong - just that the wrong people are making it.

I didnt really.. The rescue I work with ask for a donation of £150, neauter is less than that - and if thats the only cost being spent out their making about half as that as a profit - but just like breeders. They will sometimes have dogs/litters that require hardly any money spent out, and some that require a fair bit.

Yes the wrong people are making and still would be if this was put into place, all that would happen is that a decent breeder will no longer make that little bit they sometimes gained.

So they have neuter/staff costs/any other vets bills (worming/fleas/microchip)/food/kennel maintenance....but no - I do not see it as profit...it all goes back into the dogs and the centre.

And I have already explained the difference in profit margins with the suggestion you made...it is the difference between being able to live off the dogs and them not being a viable livelihood. You do not agree - fair enough.

and the money made from puppies go back into the dogs to. Health testing the pup/pups kept back from the litter, having the littler vacc ect.
The rescue I speak of does not have staff, just a load of volunteers.
Food is paid for by the fosters. we have never taken a penny for any of the fosters we have in, or have transported.

Just trying to point out sometimes rescues and breeders will make a loss on a dog rehomed/on a litter - just like they will sometimes gain a wee profit. To me their is NO difference.

Nope - don't have an issue with either. But nor does anyone else that I have seen