I am in the unenviable position (very unenviable!!) of being able to itemise every single cost associated with the production of my litter, having planned very carefully for it for the last 3 years. I've already established that I am not charging enough (anyone for a subsidised pup?!). However, just having received the vet bill for last weekend (took to vet as thought another pup, expected a jab of oxytocin, but she was scanned AND x-rayed ... oh how I wish one of the more experienced vets had been on duty :-( ). The bill isn't good, though probably not what I thought it could have been. Anyway, I'm now looking at the cost of pups again - I can't increase price at this stage, so I am thinking of reducing costs somewhere.

I had fully planned to microchip all my pups prior to leaving, partly to get a special registration document with a non-KC registry (basically just states pups are DNA clear by parentage - this can be seen by looking at parents health certificates, so whilst desirable it's not vitally important) ... can only get this if pup is microchipped when registering and I get a £2 reduction in the registration fee, whoopppeeeee!  I also have this belief that puppies should all be traceable back to the person responsible for producing them, be it by microchip, tattoo or some other means.

I went on a microchip course to enable me to register pups early (having the microchip numbers myself) so all documentation was ready to go with new owners (to fit in with the KC ABS ... now not applying for until they sort their criteria out, or at least sort out the criteria they're going to tell me about). So I've paid for the course, but haven't bought my equipment yet.

So, by microchipping I can save a whopping £12 on registering all 6 pups with the non-KC registry, but I figure the cost to chip 6 pups would be around £30 a pup (bearing in mind I have to buy in all equipment and have to buy 10 chips at a time).

The pup buyers haven't been told their pups will be chipped.

What would you do?  It's a completely stupid question really 'cause I know what I need to do, or not, but thoughts appreciated.

I would check the price at local vets as my local vet is charging £10 for microchipping

Double that and some!! But it still wouldn't allow me to register the pups with microchips, as I need to be able to allocate my own number to do that. I wont chip before 8 weeks when pups will go to new homes, and I need to register with the KC, and other, in my name to enable me to put endorsements on, which means starting the registration process at 6-7 weeks.

So I guess what I'm asking other people, is would you absorb the cost and think to hell with it, or would you save the cost and not chip?

Difficult situation... ummm.... can you not explain to the buyers that you have had to increase the amount by £20.... its not much when you consider well bred pups cost in the region of £700 (don't know what your breed is but just a guess) But its a big help towards the cost of you identifying your pup permanently. Or what about tattooing... £7 per pup and £20 for a litter registration???

Sorry can't be more help

Just seen your last post.... I'd use it as a (very big, very expensive) learning curve, and bite the bullet and chip. Your bank balance will obviously suffer, but at least you have that security that they are permanently identifiable.

I did wonder about just hoiking it around £20. Wont tattoo :-( I know it's probably fine and plenty do, but I figure I wont do it to myself so wont do it to my pups ... mind you, neither would I wish to microchip myself !

Edited for your last post! Yes, am thinking that might be what I need to do. I just make sure that the price for the next litter (yikes!) is truly reflective of the cost of production (so to speak) and if people don't like the price then they don't buy a pup from me. It's quite hard actually breaking a price mould - in a breed where I'm already charging more than double the cost of what can be bought locally (though without all the health tests, etc, etc) but probably 2/3rds of the price of similar quality and tested dogs further south! I guess I've been swayed by what a couple of other breeders with similar quality, testing of dogs, are charging, but not having fully worked out costs myself.

I would just tell the new owners that you have microchipped the pups and are they willing to cover the cost, and im sure most will pay.  As  they were probably thinking of getting them done when they took them to the vets for vaccinations etc anyway.

> I am in the unenviable position (very unenviable!!) of being able to itemise every single cost associated with the production of my litter, having planned very carefully for it for the last 3 years. I've already established that I am not charging enough

I'm confused by this, I don't think anyone can plan to make back all the money a litter costs them. Surely you're breeding for your own pup, or to keep your lines and if this actually costs you money then that's just the way it is. My last litter I wanted a bitch for myself, my girl had 4 pups. I kept one, gave one to a very good friend and sold two. I lost more on the litter than it would have cost to buy a pup in, but that's just the way it is :-)

When I breed from my silken I'll have to take her over to the continent. Her health tests have already cost several hundred and the trip alone, never mind stud fee, is likely to cost around £1000 - if I get one pup to keep myself I'll be happy :-)

I think it's only the puppy farmers and bybs (and I'm NOT suggesting you're either!) that expect to make a profit from pups.

So, pay the £20 each adn have them chipped I say :-)

With Tigger2 here -I'd not expect to break even or make a profit, sometimes there are large losses, sometimes not -that's breeding for you. Microchipping is something I consider as essential as registration, insurance, puppy pack and everything else, I'd never dream of selling a puppy or kitten that had not been chipped.

Oh and I forgot to say -how much you charge surely is nothing to do with what outlays there have been (then every litter would have different prices, and the next one could go down!), but everything to do with what other responsible breeders in the same breed charge. What if you have one pup born by caesarian, that pup then needed lots of vet care in the first few weeks, it turned out to be not show quality and of the wrong sex to what you wanted so you needed to sell it as a pet, surely you would not then charge several thousand for it? :)

> What if you have one pup born by caesarian, that pup then needed lots of vet care in the first few weeks,

This is what happened to me last time- One surviving pup, huge vet fees and I reckon I spent £1800 to get her. I kept her but if not she would have gone at standard pet price and so I would still have been £1200 down if I had sold her. I've never heard of anyone trying to make back the cost of the litter.

Gosh I've not even made the stud fee or anything in my last three litters and no way would I up the price to pay back, they'd be extremely expensive pups if I did anyway.  It's not even something i would think about.  I also wouldn't register with another registry either myself. 

I do feel for breeders who have taken all of the risk, only to be unable to share some of the cost. If it was me I'd happily pay the extra, but I just saw yesterday pups in our breed going for £450-500, the first time I've ever seen that happen--normally they are £700-750, even £800. These are well established breeders with decent, health-tested dogs. I can only suppose that they are reducing the price to make sure they don't get left with them! And this is a breed with a smallish number of registrations--less than 500? Very worrying.

Im a bit confused by this, Im a not a breeder and dont intend to be, but I am genuinely interested :) I didnt realise that the total costs outlaid were divided between each pup sold?  What happens if your girl doesnt have the right amount of pups to make that feasible or your girl (or a pup) needed emergency surgery for something life threatening?  Some costs surely are one-offs like equipment or courses so surely those costs are for the use of all litters? 

Have I read this wrong but your pups are not going to be KC registered either? Are you going to tell the buyers that their pups are already chipped and will they be able to change the chip into their own name?

" had fully planned to microchip all my pups prior to leaving, partly to get a special registration document with a non-KC registry (basically just states
pups are DNA clear by parentage - this can be seen by looking at parents health certificates, so whilst desirable it's not vitally important)

The pup buyers haven't been told their pups will be chipped.

I have seldom 'made' any money from any of my litters and indeed have had more litters that have cost me money than not!  If I do have a good sized litter and find I have some 'spare' money, I usually put it towards something that will benefit the dogs/puppies etc.  e.g. better quality whelping box, decent set of baby scales and puppy play pen/panels.  Any other money is banked to save for vet fees in the future.

If I read this right and you're a KC accredited breeder, surely the pups have to be chiiped before they go?

Sorry, but I think I seem to have totally confused people. I suspect, in retrospect, I should have direct messaged this one at probably just a few people instead of going public, it was done in haste and will probably be regretted for some time to come, I've also given too much information which is probably leading to the confusion. :-)

Alfieshmalfie - yes, you have read this wrong ... the pups will be dual registered, that is with the KC and the second registry, which I was actually subtly trying to refer to as the non-KC registry in order not to give my breed away but is in fact the ISDS.

No, I will certainly not be making a profit and no that was never my intention, I have been too involved with the breeding and rearing of pups to be foolhardy enough to think that possible. I will certainly not, even prior to additional vet fees, be close to recouping all my costs. But, as was said on a thread a little while back, and by experienced breeders, the aim is to at least try to get as close to covering costs as is possible.

Thanks for comments thus far, but I think I'll draw a line under this one now. Ta :-)

cocopop - If I read this right and you're a KC accredited breeder, surely the pups have to be chiiped before they go?

No I'm not, I was about to join but then the stuff about the 'hidden' criteria came up so I didn't apply, which is why I don't have to microchip!

I will come in on this now, I seem to have been right from the start ;-)

I know what Trialist has put into this litter, which began a long time ago, between sperm testing and many other things that is no-one else's business.. and the costs into just planning this litter, possibly exceed what many of us have put into some litters, but sadly, sometime we also get hit with unbudgeted (is that a word?) costs.. We tell people to put by a couple of thousand before planning a litter, then the brown stuff hits the fan, and that 2K falls way below the mark..

Anyhooo.. back to your original question.. I would chip the pups and absorb the costs

Trialist, you have come this far, never ever expecting to get here.. don't fall down at the last hurdle ;-) ;-)

Thank you Kay, you've just answered the garbled private message I've sent you!!! :-) :-) :-)

have just added an adendum to the reply :-)

My vet charges £28 for chipping, I would have them Ear tattooed with the NDTR cost £20 for the litter registration and £7 for each puppy. 

The DNA results of parents and pups are on the KC registration documents, so no need to double up.

> If I read this right and you're a KC accredited breeder, surely the pups have to be chiiped before they go?

No your breeding stock has to be identified by DNA, Chip or Tattoo.

Whats ISDS ?

Working dog equivalent of the show dog KC.

Some would consider it higher status.

International Sheep Dog Society.

Thanks .

Some would consider it higher status

We certainly would!! :-) :-)

"Alfieshmalfie - yes, you have read this wrong ... the pups will be dual registered, that is with the KC and the second registry, which I was actually subtly trying to refer to as the non-KC registry in order not to give my breed away but is in fact the ISDS."

Ahh I see :) thankyou for explaining that bit further :)

> Im a bit confused by this, Im a not a breeder and dont intend to be, but I am genuinely interested :-) I didnt realise that the total costs outlaid were divided between each pup sold?  What happens if your girl doesnt have the right amount of pups to make that feasible or your girl (or a pup) needed emergency surgery for something life threatening?  Some costs surely are one-offs like equipment or courses so surely those costs are for the use of all litters? 
>

I don't think anyone is saying that you should expect a profit, and that there won't be times when the litter costs way more than what you expect.

To be fair to Trialist she was thinking of charging well below the fee for the quality of the litter she was breeding and was warned that her price was a bit low if she even hoped to cover basic costs.

I know the average price for KC health tested pups in her breed was more than she was going to charge at least 5 years ago!

A breeder should at least hope to recoup basic outlay, as otherwise only the well off could afford to breed.  Also the costs don't stop after the pups are gone as at any time dogs may have to be taken back for re-homing, often at most inconvenient times for the breeder and often this may cost the breeder in kennelling fees, vets fees.

I had a 9 year old bitch back due to marriage break up who had initially been given to someone they knew and arrived at my house with half hours notice one evening covered in puncture wounds from a fight with this person dog over food.  I had initially no knowledge of a problem with her original home.

These are all costs absorbed by the breeder, like emergency vet care, loss of litter, or even all the money spent  for a litter that doesn't materialise (premate tests, annual health tests, travel to the stud etc etc). 

If pups are priced too cheaply then the temptation, and for some necessity would be to cut corners to save costs.  The poorly bred cheap pups in popular breeds are usually not health tested  reared on a shoestring (fed whatever is cheapest), and offloaded as soon as weaned, we have seen the posts her over an over.  Pups sold too young, poorly reared, wormy and sometimes even sickly.

Breeders often do end up subsidising the cost of rearing theri puppies, especially all the hidsen costs.

Oh and if the ISDS require chipping, then it will have to be done.  There are people that chip for a lot less than the vets, especially littters.  There was one member here that chipped and tattooed.

Just to add about the cost of tattooing:  the Tattoo register offer a deal with breeders. It costs £7 per pup + £20 to register the whole litter. Then the transfer to new owner costs £25. Somer breeders charge pup owners the extra £25, some absorb the cost (or add it on the price of a pup initially). If the breeder does all the transfers to new owners they only have to pay £18 per pup (again they can charge new owner £25 & keep £7). This ensures all the litter transfers to new owners are done and they will get a refund of the £20 registration fee back. 

Sorry it's a bit complicated to explain!