So if there is no breed standard , no importance as to what the dogs look like.

Why not just sell them as mutts , for mut prices..instead of inflating the price of a mut, to pedigree prices.

Why do breeders do that???

Why does any breeder charge what they do?

As long as it's done properly, why should any dog be worth anymore than another?

For all kinds of reasons. The type of dog that it is for a start. Dogs that are smaller in population numbers numerically often go for higher prices than those who are easily available. Same with anything that is 'rarer' or 'unusual' in life...you usually pay more for it.

Then you have the breed it self. A litter of St. Bernard's will cost far more to raise than a litter of Jack Russell's. While good breeders don't aim to a make a profit, they certainly want the litter to (hopefully) pay for itself. So, charging £300 a pup for a St. Bernard pup isn't viable as the cost of raising such a large litter is high.

Then there is the quality of the breeding. With the more popular breeds especially, there is a BIG difference in the breeding quality of pups. A pup from a top show or working kennel is going to set you back more for obvious reasons. A pup from someone that has just bred a litter from two pets is going to be an average price, or below average depending on the breed.

I have no problem having a strong debate and maintaining good cheer.
I make a point...someone challenges my point...and I respond.
The difficulty is when I carefully answer a challenge...and someone such as yourself does not at all respond to my direct answer...but merely repeats the same old, tired point.

Ok, I take that point and I can understand a giant breed costing more to raise so the price of a pup will be higher.

But as for anything else, I don't see why one dog is valued higher than another as long as the breeding practices are correct.
The cost of raising litter of well bred labs isn't going to be more or less than a litter of well bred doodles so I don't see why the price should be any different.

If you're talking about the inflated prices of some crosses and some pedigrees which are clearly for profit, then I agree that is daft and I wouldn't buy from a breeder charging silly money.

But you can be as guilty of this as much as anyone.

You have failed to answer (although you have been asked before) why you after yrs of research and defending the practice of buying a Doddle ... you choose to buy from a breeder who does NOT health test her dogs.


It may be the same old, but that is what happens, when you skirt around a direct question..(one you say you think is important) then totally ignore

I suppose if you are breeding from championship dogs, for a particular line/trait, the stud fee will be higher.

I'm sure that if I wanted the services of the Boxer than won his group at Crufts this year, the stud fee would be higher than, let's say, a smaller kennel set-up who haven't done outstanding well in the show ring or haven't made a name for themselves.

Desirable dogs, like other desirable items, are always valued at more than less desirable things!

Also, if the breeders are health-testing for various things (hip/elbow scoring, eye tests, heart tests) then this will affect the cost of the litter, as the breeder may take this into account with their pricing.

Read my responses from the other thread on Dog Prices.
I explained my position very carefully.
If you want, take a quote, and ask a direct question on the quote.

For example, I said I did years of research on the temperament of the different breeds.
Nowhere did I state that I did extensive research on the issue of health testing.
On the contrary, I stated that I had limited knowledge in this area.
I knew not to buy from a pet store, and wanted to buy from a knowledgeable breeder.
I have stated repeatedly that I would recommend to someone else to go to a breeder who does all the necessary health tests...and if I ever get another dog, I will look into my last breeder more carefully.

The only controversial statement I have made is that I still consider it POSSIBLE that she is a very good breeder.
If her results are good, based on her old-fashioned selective methods, then this must be taken into consideration.

I cannot consider her a "great" breeder, if she is skimping on what appears to be an important tool in the breeder's arsenal.

You just can't seem to get over my considering the possbility that she might produce very good dogs on a consistent basis.