Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalallure  This is just something I've been turning over in my head... so if it seems random, just don't mind me 
So the more I read the more that theory seems to hold as legitimate. Why is that the smaller the baby, the "better" they're considered? Or perhaps not even better, but worth a higher price tag? I'm telling myself it's just a trend (that leads to the whole teacup craze) and there isn't anything better about them... kind of like society's manipulation that the thinner you are, the more beautiful....
I would think the AKC standard of the "picture-perfect" Yorkie (4-7 lbs) would call for the higher prices  , and because it tends to be the smaller babies that have more difficulties it'd only make more sense to me that the pricing would be the other way around...
Am I just completely missing something right now?  |
The breeder's I got my furbabies from all had 2 different price range. Male and female with the females being about $200 more than their asking for the males. size had nothing to play in their price
My Yorkies are of different sizes too. Jeter is 16 months old and at his vet check up on Jan.14, he was 2 pounds 8 ounces. Axl is my bigger boy, he is 8 months old and just about 8 pounds
and my girl Yumi is also 8 months old and she is 4 pounds 10ounces. Jeter is healthy and I have never had any major health issues with any of my Yorkies so far. Jeter's vet bills cost the same as Yumi's and Axl's do.
Yorkies are prone to certain ailments regardless the size.