What is a Parti Yorkie

[GreenwoodBiewer]

Interesting question about the amount of money charged for the Parti.. I'm not sure why that has anything to do with why there should or should not BE Parti yorkies but I understand that some maybe upset that the Parti SEEMS to be comanding more $$ than a traditional yorkie.

Actually.. If I wanted to buy an exceptional quality Yorkie.. I believe I would also be paying top dollar.. a female that was of amazing lines, with full registration, I'm sure I would pay much more than I have ever charged for any of my tri colored dogs. I do not sell any of my yorkies for breeding, but for Pet only.. my carriers I sell for exactly the same price I sell my yorkies..and I neuter all my males before they leave my home.

I'm not sure what the rules are on putting prices on the forum.. but I would be more than happy to put an example of my prices on here.. they are very very similar for my yorkies as for my tri colors.. they are all just as adorable (in my opinion)

There is also something called supply and demand.. I just had a little tri girl on my site.. I put her on and had people actually fighting over her.. the price was a bit higher than I would place on a smaller yorkie but I could have placed 5 of her without question.. WHY?? because she was cute.. people WANTED her.. We should not have to justify getting more money for our beautiful, well bred, stunning, lovley little dogs. Now.. of course, some people ask exceptionally high prices.. and people pay it!! WELL.. more power to them! Go ahead, ask it for your traditionally colored yorkies! I'm sorry if people don't pay it, you shouldn't knock others just because you don't get as much money for your dogs as they got for theirs???

I just had a litter of pups that was an "oops".. they were larger than standard, had a "terrier" nose, loving, wonderful "family" dogs but not something I would have bred for.. they were priced accordingly.. well under $1,000. Now.. I'm sorry.. but this argument to me just doesn't hold water..

Exceptional quality dogs, that are in demand, comand a higher price.. if people are happy with paying what is asked.. WHATEVER is asked.. then, that is their prerogative! I know my dogs are worth every single cent that someone pays for them and then some.

Diana

[AlicetheYorkie]

I just read through most of this thread because I have a "parti Yorkie" and I have a quick question (that hopefully won't start a debate lol) - what's the difference between a parti and a biewer? Is it a biewer only if is it comes from a certain lineage? (that's what I've assumed so far from other threads on the topic but I'm not clear on it). Although I respect this debate I will say I'm only asking out of curiosity, I don't care if my beautifull dog is 100% Yorkie or not. Other than being mostly white, she looks and acts like a Yorkie to me lol and both of the parents were obviously Yorkies so that's what I'll consider her regardless (just like my beagle has about 25% of "something" else in there, but I still call her a Beagle). I'm not showing or anything so it doesn't matter to me as long as they're healthy Just wondering

[chachi]

Yep I have seen that supply and demand argument before. It is cashing in on rare pure and simple same as teacup breeders or designer dog breeders

[bchgirl]

Originally Posted by AlicetheYorkie

I just read through most of this thread because I have a "parti Yorkie" and I have a quick question (that hopefully won't start a debate lol) - what's the difference between a parti and a biewer? Is it a biewer only if is it comes from a certain lineage? (that's what I've assumed so far from other threads on the topic but I'm not clear on it). Although I respect this debate I will say I'm only asking out of curiosity, I don't care if my beautifull dog is 100% Yorkie or not. Other than being mostly white, she looks and acts like a Yorkie to me lol and both of the parents were obviously Yorkies so that's what I'll consider her regardless (just like my beagle has about 25% of "something" else in there, but I still call her a Beagle). I'm not showing or anything so it doesn't matter to me as long as they're healthy Just wondering

Yes biewers are a specific line and a dog's pedigree on both sides will trace back to Mr. Biewer's foundation pair.

[Woogie Man]

Originally Posted by Pinehaven

It seems to me that the "true" yorkie fanciers that you've referred to and the same people you say have done the most research, have basically disregarded the views of early YT breeders and authorities, as well as, disregarded the historical writings of the late 1800 and early - mid 1900's. These "true" yorkie fanciers have chosen to ignore all the writings that the Maltese was used somewhere in the make up of the YT (Maltese being one of numerous breeds of dogs who have or carry the piebald gene). I suppose these "true" yorkie fanciers can try to rewrite history to suit their current views but I don't think the recessive genes in our dogs will magically disappear just to appease them.

Here's a view from the 1800's. From a book by Rawdon Lee, copyright 1894.

"There are some other rough-haired toy terriers, which are, however, of little account, because they have never been bred to any particular type. Occasionally wee things very like what a miniature Skye terrier would be are seen; and, again, some smart little dogs with cut ears, evidently a cross between a Yorkshire terrier and some other variety of small dog, are not at all uncommon, and were quite numerous before the dog show era commenced. Since then the general public will not look at anything other than what is considered to be of blue blood. At one of the early London shows separate classes were provided for Scotch terriers under 71b. weight and white in colour, fawns with the same limit, and blues likewise, each of the three attracting a fair entry, most of which were, however, what we should now call "cross-bred" broken-haired toy terriers."

Here's the link... The Terriers. A History And Description Of The Modern Dogs Of Great Britain And Ireland | by Rawdon B. Lee

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Perhaps parti breeders will choose to disregard the above quote? Aside from historical references, the Yorkshire terrier standard has never allowed for anything other than a blue and tan dog.

So how could white appear in the Yorkshire? A likely hypothesis to me is that some of these "cross-bred broken-haired toy terriers" made it into the stud books as Yorkshires, due to outward appearance (carriers, possibly?). From then on, voila!, you have a Yorkshire Terrier according to pedigree. If that happened, it still doesn't trump the fact that the Yorkshire Terrier has always been a blue and tan dog, period. I can also think of more deliberate ways to get these dogs registered as Yorkshires and any breeder also knows that.

While there were no 'pedigreed' dogs before the advent of stud books, there were 'pure bred' dogs. It's very easy to see how dogs other than pure bred could have been assigned a breed class and a pedigreed line begun even if that dog was not 'pure bred'.....'pure bred' meaning, in other words, a dog that will breed true to the standard. Of course, then, as now, a breeder should not have continued a line that didn't meet the breed standard. Early breeders understood this and I'm not sure why there would be confusion now on such a basic idea of breeding pure bred dogs.

To put it a most basic way, here's a quote from Wikipedia. Now I know that Wiki is not the most authoritative source, but it does provide good basic info. And that's what is being talked about here....basic pure bred dog breeding in its simplest terms. Anyway, here's the quote....

"In the world of animal breeding, to "breed true" means that specimens of an animal breed will breed true-to-type when mated like-to-like; that is, that the progeny of any two individuals in the same breed will show consistent, replicable and predictable characteristics. A puppy from two purebred dogs of the same breed, for example, will exhibit the traits of its parents, and not the traits of all breeds in the subject breed's ancestry."

From this link.... Purebred - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[AlicetheYorkie]

Originally Posted by bchgirl

Yes biewers are a specific line and a dog's pedigree on both sides will trace back to Mr. Biewer's foundation pair.

Thank you

[GreenwoodBiewer]

Sorry you've seen it before but that doesn't mean it isn't the way it works. People pay more for nice looking puppies than they do for ones that aren't so nice looking, Smaller yorkies people buy before larger yorkies, (in my experience) Tri colored they buy before traditionals.. plain and simple. If people LIKE the look of these tri colored yorkies...and they choose to pay more for them when given the choice, why is that a "fault".

Same with the "size".. in a litter of lets say "traditional" colored pups.. I have three girls.. two that wil be 6 lbs and 1 that will be 4. I put them all at the same price..

The FIRST one that sells..of course, will be the 4 lb (don't know why but always is.. remember, I only sell for pets so no one breeds ).. say I have to keep the others for a few weeks so I lower the price.. meanwhile.. I'm getting calls over and over for more 4-5 lbs dogs.. that is supply and demand! Did I create it? Am I to blame for it? Should I be penalized for it? No.. I just wish that either people liked the 6 lb dogs more or I had more 4-5 lb puppies to place because I could place them into wonderful homes right away. So, I start out asking a bit more for the smaller one because I know that she will sell, so maybe the price will be the deciding factor to sway a person to get one of the other puppies.

The same goes for the Partis. They are the first to leave.. is that my fault, did I creat this or am I to blame?? no.. it's just the way it is. Now, if that happened to you, and you were comfortable charging a specific amount for a puppy and people were very happy to pay it, as a matter of fact, you had alot of people who were happy to pay it.. would you turn it down and charge less???? Now really... what sense would that make?

If people were not comfortable paying a specific amount for a dog.. they wouldn't pay it.. I know I wouldn't. Please, we don't have some magical power over people.. they are not fools being lead by the nose. We have beautiful, lovely puppies that people want to have.. if they wanted the traditional yorkies as badly, or a beagle or a non spotted dalmation.. they would pay what was asked for it also..until the price was to a point that they no longer saw the value in it.

I am not calling these dogs rare.. nor do I call my smaller yorkies tea cups.. I do not need to use marketing gimmicks to place my puppies.. please try grasping at another straw.

Diana

[Breezeaway]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

Here's a view from the 1800's. From a book by Rawdon Lee, copyright 1894.

"There are some other rough-haired toy terriers, which are, however, of little account, because they have never been bred to any particular type. Occasionally wee things very like what a miniature Skye terrier would be are seen; and, again, some smart little dogs with cut ears, evidently a cross between a Yorkshire terrier and some other variety of small dog, are not at all uncommon, and were quite numerous before the dog show era commenced. Since then the general public will not look at anything other than what is considered to be of blue blood. At one of the early London shows separate classes were provided for Scotch terriers under 71b. weight and white in colour, fawns with the same limit, and blues likewise, each of the three attracting a fair entry, most of which were, however, what we should now call "cross-bred" broken-haired toy terriers."

Here's the link... The Terriers. A History And Description Of The Modern Dogs Of Great Britain And Ireland | by Rawdon B. Lee

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Perhaps parti breeders will choose to disregard the above quote? Aside from historical references, the Yorkshire terrier standard has never allowed for anything other than a blue and tan dog.

So how could white appear in the Yorkshire? A likely hypothesis to me is that some of these "cross-bred broken-haired toy terriers" made it into the stud books as Yorkshires, due to outward appearance (carriers, possibly?). From then on, voila!, you have a Yorkshire Terrier according to pedigree. If that happened, it still doesn't trump the fact that the Yorkshire Terrier has always been a blue and tan dog, period. I can also think of more deliberate ways to get these dogs registered as Yorkshires and any breeder also knows that.

While there were no 'pedigreed' dogs before the advent of stud books, there were 'pure bred' dogs. It's very easy to see how dogs other than pure bred could have been assigned a breed class and a pedigreed line begun even if that dog was not 'pure bred'.....'pure bred' meaning, in other words, a dog that will breed true to the standard. Of course, then, as now, a breeder should not have continued a line that didn't meet the breed standard. Early breeders understood this and I'm not sure why there would be confusion now on such a basic idea of breeding pure bred dogs.

To put it a most basic way, here's a quote from Wikipedia. Now I know that Wiki is not the most authoritative source, but it does provide good basic info. And that's what is being talked about here....basic pure bred dog breeding in its simplest terms. Anyway, here's the quote....

"In the world of animal breeding, to "breed true" means that specimens of an animal breed will breed true-to-type when mated like-to-like; that is, that the progeny of any two individuals in the same breed will show consistent, replicable and predictable characteristics. A puppy from two purebred dogs of the same breed, for example, will exhibit the traits of its parents, and not the traits of all breeds in the subject breed's ancestry."

From this link.... Purebred - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wouldn't rely on Wikipedia too much. People can post anything they like.


Used often for crossbreeding was the canis Melitei, now called the Maltese. Each cross was used to impart beautiful coats to other toys, much as the Bull Terrier in later times was used to impart strong heads to other terriers. In fact, the double-coated Skye Terrier was once called the Skye Maltese Terrier.The earliest known Maltese on record in the United States was born in 1873. He was entered at Westminster in 1879 and was also the first colored Maltese shown here. Entered as a "Maltese Skye Terrier," he was described as being white with black ears.

[Woogie Man]

Originally Posted by Breezeaway

I wouldn't rely on Wikipedia too much. People can post anything they like.


Used often for crossbreeding was the canis Melitei, now called the Maltese. Each cross was used to impart beautiful coats to other toys, much as the Bull Terrier in later times was used to impart strong heads to other terriers. In fact, the double-coated Skye Terrier was once called the Skye Maltese Terrier.The earliest known Maltese on record in the United States was born in 1873. He was entered at Westminster in 1879 and was also the first colored Maltese shown here. Entered as a "Maltese Skye Terrier," he was described as being white with black ears.

i deliberately used Wiki as a source...as in even Wiki knows that. Would you like me to spam this thread with links on pure bred dog breeding 101?

The rest of your post means nothing. A pure bred dog is one that will breed pure to the breed standard. That's it. Simple concept, huh? The Yorkshire Terrier standard is, and always has been, that of a blue and tan dog. Any argument otherwise is only meant to confuse those that don't know better. The same could be said for any breed that has those deliberately breeding outside the standard.

Reminds me of the old saying..."If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bulls**t.

[yorkietalkjilly]

Originally Posted by 111lily222

I agree. They're very pretty dogs. If I had a dalmation with NO spots I'd still love it because it's MY dog and I'm not getting it as a show dog.

My question is IF the price of a dog is supposed to reflect the amount of time, money in vetting, grooming, health testing, quality(i.e standard) why are parti yorkies continously sold for a higher price than yorkshire terrier? Certainly it is not because it takes more time/money/testing to raise a parti...? Should a dalmation with no spots cost more than one that meets the standard with all the variables the same with both dogs (same health testing, same time and money into vetting)?

I don't think anyone on here is trying to turn it into YTCA talk as some stated. There are some members on here very interested in working hard to preserve the breed standard and keeping color faults out. Both sides are very passionate about what they believe or what is stated as standard.

Just some food for thought.

It seems people are always willing to pay more money for something unusual and considered more rare than "normal". Non-breed-standard fanciers always seem to clamor for something different once it appears and will pay what the market demands. That is one way new breeds and size standard changes seem to start - the need many people seem to have for something different or unusual. As a fancier of the standard Yorkshire Terrier, personally speaking, I hope it stays just as it is.

[111lily222]

Originally Posted by GreenwoodBiewer

Interesting question about the amount of money charged for the Parti.. I'm not sure why that has anything to do with why there should or should not BE Parti yorkies but I understand that some maybe upset that the Parti SEEMS to be comanding more $$ than a traditional yorkie.

Actually.. If I wanted to buy an exceptional quality Yorkie.. I believe I would also be paying top dollar.. a female that was of amazing lines, with full registration, I'm sure I would pay much more than I have ever charged for any of my tri colored dogs. I do not sell any of my yorkies for breeding, but for Pet only.. my carriers I sell for exactly the same price I sell my yorkies..and I neuter all my males before they leave my home.

I'm not sure what the rules are on putting prices on the forum.. but I would be more than happy to put an example of my prices on here.. they are very very similar for my yorkies as for my tri colors.. they are all just as adorable (in my opinion)

There is also something called supply and demand.. I just had a little tri girl on my site.. I put her on and had people actually fighting over her.. the price was a bit higher than I would place on a smaller yorkie but I could have placed 5 of her without question.. WHY?? because she was cute.. people WANTED her.. We should not have to justify getting more money for our beautiful, well bred, stunning, lovley little dogs. Now.. of course, some people ask exceptionally high prices.. and people pay it!! WELL.. more power to them! Go ahead, ask it for your traditionally colored yorkies! I'm sorry if people don't pay it, you shouldn't knock others just because you don't get as much money for your dogs as they got for theirs???

I just had a litter of pups that was an "oops".. they were larger than standard, had a "terrier" nose, loving, wonderful "family" dogs but not something I would have bred for.. they were priced accordingly.. well under $1,000. Now.. I'm sorry.. but this argument to me just doesn't hold water..

Exceptional quality dogs, that are in demand, comand a higher price.. if people are happy with paying what is asked.. WHATEVER is asked.. then, that is their prerogative! I know my dogs are worth every single cent that someone pays for them and then some.

Diana

Supply and demand....thanks for being so honest I've also heard that term in business settings.

No one asked you to justify pricing. I stated in one of my posts if they're of comparable quality meaning both from exceptional lines/health or both from less than exceptional lines/health generally and I'm not saying all of the time, why do parti's go for more money. It was a simple question while we were on the subject of "what is a parti?" Not whether or not there should/should not be partis.

Unfortunately, supply and demand will be the way things work for a lot of things. Speaks volumes.

[chachi]

Originally Posted by GreenwoodBiewer

Interesting question about the amount of money charged for the Parti.. I'm not sure why that has anything to do with why there should or should not BE Parti yorkies but I understand that some maybe upset that the Parti SEEMS to be comanding more $$ than a traditional yorkie.

Actually.. If I wanted to buy an exceptional quality Yorkie.. I believe I would also be paying top dollar.. a female that was of amazing lines, with full registration, I'm sure I would pay much more than I have ever charged for any of my tri colored dogs. I do not sell any of my yorkies for breeding, but for Pet only.. my carriers I sell for exactly the same price I sell my yorkies..and I neuter all my males before they leave my home.

I'm not sure what the rules are on putting prices on the forum.. but I would be more than happy to put an example of my prices on here.. they are very very similar for my yorkies as for my tri colors.. they are all just as adorable (in my opinion)

There is also something called supply and demand.. I just had a little tri girl on my site.. I put her on and had people actually fighting over her.. the price was a bit higher than I would place on a smaller yorkie but I could have placed 5 of her without question.. WHY?? because she was cute.. people WANTED her.. We should not have to justify getting more money for our beautiful, well bred, stunning, lovley little dogs. Now.. of course, some people ask exceptionally high prices.. and people pay it!! WELL.. more power to them! Go ahead, ask it for your traditionally colored yorkies! I'm sorry if people don't pay it, you shouldn't knock others just because you don't get as much money for your dogs as they got for theirs???

I just had a litter of pups that was an "oops".. they were larger than standard, had a "terrier" nose, loving, wonderful "family" dogs but not something I would have bred for.. they were priced accordingly.. well under $1,000. Now.. I'm sorry.. but this argument to me just doesn't hold water..

Exceptional quality dogs, that are in demand, comand a higher price.. if people are happy with paying what is asked.. WHATEVER is asked.. then, that is their prerogative! I know my dogs are worth every single cent that someone pays for them and then some.

Diana

Well we will just have to agree to disagree. When I see someone selling a golden parti for $6000 I know they are cashing in on rare. Yes there is some fool that will pay it but it doesnt take away from the motivation of the breeder. I dont believe breeders should be breeding to supply the market anyway. I think they should be breeding to better the breed.

[111lily222]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

i deliberately used Wiki as a source...as in even Wiki knows that. Would you like me to spam this thread with links on pure bred dog breeding 101?

The rest of your post means nothing. A pure bred dog is one that will breed pure to the breed standard. That's it. Simple concept, huh? The Yorkshire Terrier standard is, and always has been, that of a blue and tan dog. Any argument otherwise is only meant to confuse those that don't know better. The same could be said for any breed that has those deliberately breeding outside the standard.

Reminds me of the old saying..."If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bulls**t.

LOL! good post!

[Bellasmom30]

Originally Posted by yorkietalkjilly

It seems people are always willing to pay more money for something unusual and considered more rare than "normal". Non-breed-standard fanciers always seem to clamor for something different once it appears and will pay what the market demands. That is one way new breeds and size standard changes seem to start - the need many people seem to have for something different or unusual. As a fancier of the standard Yorkshire Terrier, personally speaking, I hope it stays just as it is.

Totally agree! Not saying Parti's aren't good looking dogs, cause they are. There is just something about the traditional blue/tan that I am attracted to. I've admired and loved looking at a Yorkie since I was a child! I hadn't even heard of the Parti until joining this site.

[chachi]

[quote=chachi;3488090]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

Here's a view from the 1800's. From a book by Rawdon Lee, copyright 1894.

"There are some other rough-haired toy terriers, which are, however, of little account, because they have never been bred to any particular type. Occasionally wee things very like what a miniature Skye terrier would be are seen; and, again, some smart little dogs with cut ears, evidently a cross between a Yorkshire terrier and some other variety of small dog, are not at all uncommon, and were quite numerous before the dog show era commenced. Since then the general public will not look at anything other than what is considered to be of blue blood. At one of the early London shows separate classes were provided for Scotch terriers under 71b. weight and white in colour, fawns with the same limit, and blues likewise, each of the three attracting a fair entry, most of which were, however, what we should now call "cross-bred" broken-haired toy terriers."

Here's the link... The Terriers. A History And Description Of The Modern Dogs Of Great Britain And Ireland | by Rawdon B. Lee

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Perhaps parti breeders will choose to disregard the above quote? Aside from historical references, the Yorkshire terrier standard has never allowed for anything other than a blue and tan dog.

So how could white appear in the Yorkshire? A likely hypothesis to me is that some of these "cross-bred broken-haired toy terriers" made it into the stud books as Yorkshires, due to outward appearance (carriers, possibly?). From then on, voila!, you have a Yorkshire Terrier according to pedigree. If that happened, it still doesn't trump the fact that the Yorkshire Terrier has always been a blue and tan dog, period. I can also think of more deliberate ways to get these dogs registered as Yorkshires and any breeder also knows that.

While there were no 'pedigreed' dogs before the advent of stud books, there were 'pure bred' dogs. It's very easy to see how dogs other than pure bred could have been assigned a breed class and a pedigreed line begun even if that dog was not 'pure bred'.....'pure bred' meaning, in other words, a dog that will breed true to the standard. Of course, then, as now, a breeder should not have continued a line that didn't meet the breed standard. Early breeders understood this and I'm not sure why there would be confusion now on such a basic idea of breeding pure bred dogs.

To put it a most basic way, here's a quote from Wikipedia. Now I know that Wiki is not the most authoritative source, but it does provide good basic info. And that's what is being talked about here....basic pure bred dog breeding in its simplest terms. Anyway, here's the quote....

[B]"In the world of animal breeding, to "breed true" means that specimens of an animal breed will breed true-to-type when mated like-to-like; that is, that the progeny of any two individuals in the same breed will show consistent, replicable and predictable characteristics. A puppy from two purebred dogs of the same breed, for example, will exhibit the traits of its parents, and not the traits of all breeds in the subject breed's ancestry."


Well we will just have to agree to disagree. When I see someone selling a golden parti for $6000 I know they are cashing in on rare. Yes there is some fool that will pay it but it doesnt take away from the motivation of the breeder. I dont believe breeders should be breeding to supply the market anyway. I think they should be breeding to better the breed.

I haved quoted the wrong person I meant to quote Greenwood biewer