Just wondered if anybody knows whether people feeding James wellbeloved or Royal canin will be able to enter the pedigree stakes classes since both companies are owned by Pedigree?

it's not a case of feeding but if you have an exclusive contract with another company. :)

Your best bet is speak to pedigree.  I just heard this from eukanuba...

Bit dodgy this whole business of the show society being dictated to by the food manufacturers - after all the exhibitor pays the show society for their entry NOT Pedigree !. If entry to the stakes classes was free ( and any costs fully met by Pedigree) then I can see that they could dictate terms but this seems an abuse of power. I can't see most owners/breeders changing their dogs over to a different food simply to be eligible ( and I certainly would not feed mine Pedigree !) so this ruling means that some of top dogs would be banned - what kind of a 'competition' is that ?.

Yvonne

Hi
i can tell this isan't going down to well and it has come in so soon! i was talking to someone and they said whats next are the judges only alowed to feed pedigree, i really dont see the point in changing all this, and is pro plan pup of the year going to follow?

Fiona

Its not about what food you feed its whether you have an exclusive contract with another manufacturer.  Say you had an exclusive contract with Royal Canin, and then won a pedigree stakes class, its quite possible that pedigree wouldnt be able to use your picture in any advertising due to your contract with the other manufacturer.  I actually see this as perfectly reasonable :)

Trevor, from the wording in the advert along the lines of "Contact the pedigree team at any championship shows where entry fee's will be refunded" says to me that entry money also goes to pedigree, and pedigree put on and sponser the classes (if you get what I mean!) You don't have to feed pedigree to go in, you just cant "have an exclusive feeding or advertising arrangment with any other petfood manufacturer"

However if you just take out another advert, one off with another company thats ok.  Eukanuba were saying that the lieks of those with pictures on the back of our dogs last week can still enter pedigree stakes classes.

I think fairs fair, why should pedigree give prize money and prizes to those who are exclusivly tied to competition?

I personally do not agree with what Pedigree are doing and am surprised at the KC for endorsing it.  The Champion Stakes is now not an open competition, the best dogs may not be at the final.  This was always a prestigious event to qualify for, I don't think it will carry the same wow factor in the future.

As in any business, if Pedigree want show people to feed their dogs on their food, then they must convince us it is the best..........not ban the opposition!!

Is this the thin edge of the wedge, will Pet Plan not allow anyone who has signed up with another insurance company?

I think it is bad news for dog shows in general if sponsors are allowed to dictate to the KC like this.

JMHO
Sandra

I wondered as I saw in the Dog papers that a lot of well known "names" do have exclusive contracts with Royal Canin BUT ROYAL CANIN IS OWNED by Pedigree therefore will these people and their dogs be allowed to compete?
Really seems to me that Pedigree is "cutting off it's nose to spite it's face!" You can't have an open class unless it is open to all. I do agree with another poster if the classes are to become exclusive then Pedigree should pay and entry should be free, and not part of the sponsorship deal the company has with the show society. I can see why Pedigree might think it is unfair to them to have dogs winning who have feeding/advertising contracts with other companies, but they should have thought of this before making themselves a "major player" in the field of show sponsorship.

That would be intresting Polly.  I was not aware untill this thread tat royal Canin is owned by pedigree, I think it would be intresting to ask and find out the answer.  Now although I can see wher ePedigree are coming from, and think in a way it's ok for them to do so, how are they going to keep check? 

As it also mentions handler (aswell as owner) how do you keep check on that, half the time you don't know who's showing who's dog!!!!

pedigree have created work for themselves IMO, however if they want to do this then fine! :)  Who are we to argue it!  However pedigree have always sponserd all general championship shows for a long time, without their sponsorship would BOB, BOS & BPIB winner get anything?

gary22U works for Pedigree, if he's around, maybe he could answer some of the questions.

Dawn R.

Sorry just to clear up a small misconception, Royal Canin is not owned by pedigree.  Mars, the company that owns Pedigree also owns part of Royal Canin, the two companies are completely seperate.

Royal Canin and James Wellbeloved are sister companies, owned by the same people.

The issue is about sponsership, the sponsor of a class should not be able to dictate who can enter - for example the Vodaphone Derby as it was known a few years ago, can you imagine if vodaphone tried to restrict entries to people who endores their phones???  This is totally unnaceptable and societies in my opinion should refuse to schedule these stakes classes, and Mr Wilburg should be congratulated for his stance on this matter.

And what a shallow victory for the winners when the 'main' competition can't enter.

Sharon

I absolutely agree Sharon.  Andrew Brace wrote an interesting article in DW this week saying more or less the same and he is judging the finals this year, good on him.

Sandra

OK here I am fire away with your questions.

No one has said that exhibits cannot be fed on another food only that they must not be either sponsored or advertising exclusively for another company.

As pedigree fund and host the competition then why should people who have chosen to receive sponsorship from other companies in return for exclusive advertising rights benefit.

Many of the exhibits advertising for other companies are regularly fed Pedigree by choice...just watch them walking off the showground laden with it.
Ethical??? not in my eyes.
As for Top dogs not being there.....By virtue of the fact that all exhibits must be Champions to enter then they are ALL "top dogs" by definition.
Who is to say that the "top dogs" would qualify.

In response to the matter of judges feeding pedigree, pedigree do not sponsor judges or anyone else for that matter (other than everyone by way of sponsoring the whole show, keeping entry fees down) how many are sponsored by other companies???? look for yourself.

If Purina/Petplan were to do the same with the puppy/junior stakes??? then dogs fed on anything or insured by someone else could still enter ....unless ofcourse they were sponsored or advertising solely by/for another company.

Pedigree do not own Royal Canin/James Wellbeloved but both Pedigree and Royal Canin/JW are owned by Mars, but are operated as seperate companies.

How nice to have it explained  in such a  straight forward manner, it helps you understand where pedigree's coming from in making the choices they have , there are after all two sides to everything.

But these classes cost the exhibitor the same to enter as breed classes do ( £21 for Birmingham I've just checked) and we pay the SHOW SOCIETY  -  Pedigree  do NOT fund the whole cost of the classes - and until they do I think they have no business dictating terms in this way. The advertising that accrues from the dog show scene is extremely valuable to them but forcing the issue like this is just going to cause resentment - what next?  will we have to wear compulsory Pedigree T- shirts when entering their classes  :D.

Yvonne

Surely if Pedigree are confident about the quality of their product, why would they worry about dogs being sponsored by other products? If their product is as good as they say it is, Pedigree-fed dogs would naturally walk away with all the prizes. If they are concerned about dogs fed on other foods beating the Pedigree-fed dogs time and time again, maybe they should look at their product rather than "rigging" the results by banning dogs sponsored by other food companies. Sorry pedigree, it stinks!

Its not about banning dogs fed on something else its about exhibitors being sponsored many of them dont even feed the food of the company that sponsors them!!
If you think it is fair that one person or persons dog is promoted week in week out over your equally good winning dog putting it in the faces of judges week in week out then that is fine, I don't.
The whole point is to stop the compulsory wearing of t-shirts/badges/coats/hats etc not enforce it!
We are very confident about the quality of our food however very often Pedigree fed dogs do walk away with the top prize only to see it plastered all over the dog press a week later "Exclusively fed" on something else??
Thats what its all about!! if it was your company/your food and you hosted and paid for the competition tell me what would you do?
Your entry fees pay for the ground rental/tenting/judges expenses/show costs etc etc not the competition/prizes/finals etc

Yes I must admit I can very rarely afford an advert and then it is the tiniest postage stamp one in black and white, so having the same dogs with huge adverts each week must have an effect as even I know their names well and they are not my breed!

I do think pedigree hasven't got their point accross very well in the press release making people think they are only allowing peope in the competitions that endorse pedigree.

Yes Gary but the prizes are generally dog food (which lets face it you give at cost) and a bag or umberalla, which is then paraded around the next dog show to give you even more free advertising. 

I don't think your argument is realy very strong... you would gain more respect from general exhibitors if Pedigree played their game, instead of offering a best of breed bag and free food, why don't you offer to place an advert in next weeks paper, afterall that appears to be your gripe, then pedigree win from all angles - give the exhibitors what they want and you will get their support, and if it seems exhibitors want free advertising and one company in particular seem to be doing just this at the moment then, follow the band waggon and join them - instead of throwing your toys out of the pram!
Sharon

Pedigree will not Buy your loyalty, those that will switch companies at the drop of a hat or a better offer? when will it end,
No, Loyalty should be earned not bought and the point is that the current spate of advertising does nothing for dogdom or the dog show game at all only for one or two who have been "cherry picked" what do all the newcomers think of it ?no wonder the sport is losing new exhibitors,
Our sponsorship and prizes are what the vast majority want, OK if you are a big winner and have everything then I can see a point but would you enter a competition to win a car and then ask for something else when you win?
I think not...the prizes etc are all there at the start of the competition

I would not have said Gary was throwing his toys out the pram!  He did not start the discussion he has merely given a response to the issues raised by others.  It certainly seems people have misunderstand the requirements so clearly his explanations have been very informative.  I have to say it all sounds very reasonable, too, and I suppose if people are not happy they could always not enter ;)
I wonder too if some people's antipathy towards the food itself is influencing their view of how this competion is conducted which to my mind are two seperate issues.

Most exhibitors couldn't give a toss about who is financing the classes they enter. People enter the Champion Stakes because they want to pit their champion(s) against other champions. As far as we are concerned for example, whether it was the Pedigree, Purina, Dr Johns, Pets At Home, or Tesco Champions Stakes wouldn't matter at all. We enter because we want to compete against the best - not just some of the best. Under the new rules the Champion Stakes and any other categories run in the same way will become a meaningless sham. It still stinks and I think falling entries will show Pedigree that they have underestimated the intelligence of the exhibiting public and shot themselves in the foot!

They can't do that Sharon because if a breeder that is signed up to another company wins they arn't allowed to appear in a photograph advertising pedigree so the others are playing the same game only not as openly

There are two different types of advert..........One could show a winning dog of the stakes class in Pedigree framed advert, saying or insinutating that dog is fed on Pedigree, or the other could be just a picture of a dog shown winning the sponsered stakes class with a sponsers winners board behind it. 

I wouldn't think a rival company would object to the latter. Perhaps someone who is sponsered by a rival company could tell us exactly what the contract says.

believe me they do object and prevent the latter.

We must first ask the permission of exhibitor or owner before using any images.

no wonder the sport is losing new exhibitors,

Er.... Actually I find the cost of entering championship shows prohibitive! I don't breed and sell puppies to finance my showing, so the money has to come out of my own wages, which have many other calls on them such as utility bills, council tax etc... I know this is the case for many would be exhibitors. Perhaps many realise just how expensive and decide a holiday in the sun is a better option? Whereas I choose to spend my money on travelling back and forth to various shoots I'm involved with and occasionally shows. I used to show a lot more than I do now.

Others I am sure probably just get fed up of going from show to show? There are hundreds of reasons people give up showing. We all make that decision from different viewpoints.

I've never entered a Pedigree stakes class, and actually probably never will, I am more than happy competeing in breed classes. When I do attend a show though I find I am often among the last to leave apart from those running the shows. Not many people stay to the end these days. I know people have other calls on their time, but as I am so rarely at the shows, I like to make a whole day of it, and arrange things so that I can stay to the end. So for me less is more, but I wouldn't pay extra to enter any stakes class whether run by Pedigree or any other company....... perhaps I'm just not professional enough? :-D

Firstly I would like to thank Gary for so clearly and eloquently putting Pedigree's case across.

I can see this argument from both sides.  Firstly it does not really affect me so I can speak as I find.  I feed pedigree and think that their puppy weaning porridge is FAB!  My dogs also enjoy the meat pouches which Chloe won by the bag full when she was top Flatcoat in 2003.  However, I do also feed another brand - BUT I have not signed a contract so in that respect I can still compete (correct me if I am wrong Gary).  I don't do that many stakes classes not because I don't support them BUT because when you are in a big breed they are inevitably going on at the same time as the breed judging and sprinting around show grounds on a hot day is not for me!!!

From Pedigree's point of view I can see it.  If I had spent a load of cash in sponsorship then I would want to photograph the winners in an advertising campaign and would be pretty miffed if I could not due to the restrictions of the winners sponsorship.  Pedigree DO add an awful lot to the bottom line of shows - I know this as a show secretary.  Yes, we all see the goodies and the prizes but do be aware that they also provide the ring numbers, prize cards AND if I am correct sometimes contribute towards the cost of the BIS marquee.  Running shows is expensive - a sub group costs £10000 so I dread to think what a general ch show costs.

I would like to ask Gary what the situation would be if another food company - say for example Purina said "right - well we will pay for the benching and the judges lunches" - is a show allowed more than one sponsor or does pedigree have an exclusive right of sponsorship.

From the exhibitors point of view I can see it also.  However, I would ask just how many people does this really affect?  I can think of a few obvious ones but I would not think it ran into hundreds.  Most people do not sign an exclusive contract because it is too restricting. 

What does surprise me is that it is "with immediate effect" - I thought once the entries had closed that was that.  For example, if I have a bitch on 2 tickets and she got her third at the next show, she could still go in limit for the shows where the entries had closed.  How have Pedigree managed to get this "immediate effect" - that does surprise me.  Also, will the stakes now have to be called Special Champion and Special Veteran - as they now have an eliminating clause.

All these questions!  Sorry Gary!!!

Becky

Hi Becky, first of all I only work there and don't have any part in the decision making so cannot answer as far as the "immediate effect" part of your question I would assume that had something to do with the KC too.
As far as sponsorship is concerned I don't think there are any rights, it is open to bidding by anyone I would assume.
Crufts it seems has many sponsors.
You are correct in saying that you are still elligable to enter, the only ones that cannot are those that rule themselves out by virtue of the fact that they advertise exclusively for someone else or receive sponsorship from another company.
As for the name ...I don't know is the honest answer.

Gary

Thanks Gary!  I do realise that it was not you personally that made the decisions!!!  However, I wondered if you had been equipped with a set of FAQs when pestered by exhibitors like me!!

The reason I asked about the immediate effect bit was because most schedules for shows are now available and would have been printed before the ruling came out - I never really understand KC logic!  Normally when they apply a rule they do it for 6 months hence - especially if it is a class definition.  Usually the only thing they do with immediate effect is increase their fees!!!

One thing that nobody has touched on but I imagine effects you Gary is that employees can no longer take part - is that right?  To be honest that part of it does not surprise me because in many competitions whether dog related or not it states "open to all except employees or their dependants of ..."  What do those employees that are now affected by the rule change think?

Becky

Hi Becky...yes we some of us are affected by that new ruling and ofcourse those of us that show regularly, more than most. however its a case of getting your priorities right, I have to feed and house my family first, so sadly showing has to take a back seat, so yes you are correct none of us can enter but to be honest I have to agree with you, it's not before time, in the last 6 years I have never entered the Champs or veterans anyway, I suppose through a sense of common decency, something which seems to be very rare in the world of dog showing.
Oh well back to the breed only for me....only when I'm not working ofcourse as we no longer show when working or at Crufts for that matter, you see there are disadvantages too, I would dearly love to show at Crufts but sadly cant and have to leave it to someone else to handle the dogs.

Gary

Why is everyone getting worked up when Gary is the one who works for pedigree so proberbly has the most knowledge on the subject?

I have also heard other things about other companies, so I wouldn't go thinking Pedigree are the ONLY bad guys out their!  I'm not mentioning who the other company is, all I'm saying is lets not jump out at pedigree without the whole facts about everyone! :)

Pedigree also take alot more then you think! :)

I haven't entered stakes classes sponsored by anyone, but many many moons ago when Pedigree started giving away freebies for winning BOB & the CC etc it was 24 cans of PC(in the days before they did complete)My dogs could never be fed PC as it disagreed with them but I accepted the freebie & on the card that came with it I was honest re what I fed & always added our GSD welfare will be glad to accept your donation of food(which they were as at the time they did feed PC to the rescues

The only thing that bugged me was one add after a show(where my bitch won her first CC with BOB(all her CCs came with BOB) PC added her to the list of"fed on PC"as I clearly stated she wasn't & in fact couldn't even tolerate the canned food they eventually did print a little errata notice & never claimed she was fed on PC for any of her other wins(she wasn't signed up to any other company either)