I agree with the previous post. When we buy show prospects, and pay big money, how can 
you possibly recoup your losses from that risk if the dog/bitch doesn't pan out? 
Luckily, in the US it seems that most breeders I talk to will " guarantee " show 
quality to protect their integrity and kennel name.

However, I am seeing ALOT of exports that in no way shape or form quailfy as show. 
Could it be the money they are receiving just because they are imports? Once you have 
paid all the expenses to get to the show age, you are into that animal for 3000 or 
better. If you sell as a pet, you will lose 1000, plus expenses getting it to show 
age. I think that is part of the reason there are so many " pets " in the show ring. I 
see alot of our homebreds far better quality than some of the imports in the ring 
today. I think some overseas breeders are taking advantage of the popularity and 
prices, and running with it.

Lastly, I also think in alot of cases it pencils out cheaper to use a pro. Put the 
time, travel, hotel, meals, etc together, and then add up your pro handler fees, which 
can also be written off. I have done it both ways, and was successful both ways. If 
you have a nice dog, most judges judging the " class " dogs seem to be accurate. It's 
the BOB classes that the politics seem to be in high gear....

JMHO,



Terri Easterbrooks


Please visit our website :http://www.antiquehorsesource.com, featuring Champion bred 
Cavalier King Charles Spaniels & The Antique Horse Source.


---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!

=========================================================
"Magic Commands":
to stop receiving mail for awhile, click here and send the email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20NOMAIL
to start it up gain click here:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20MAIL

 E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance.
Search the Archives... http://apple.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ckcs-l.html

All e-mail sent through CKCS-L is Copyright 2002 by its original author.

Reply via email to