AKC HISTORY = AKC ENTERPRISES, Inc.
(part of AKC History
Series)
by Barbara J. Andrews,
1990
Learning how to stack a dog is simple compared to learning
how to play the game. Dog shows are big-business where
having the best dog is secondary to other enterprises that
generate a yearly $50 million non-profit AKC income that
breeders happily support.
See 2011 Backbone - a current look at
AKC History and what breeders
can do to help. AKC was always about quality dogs and
moneyed people. It moved from what was once a pedigree
registry and venue for breeders to exhibit their stock, to a
very closed society of well-to-do bankers and Wall Street
brokers, to a family sport open to everyone, and thence to,
well, in 1990, I’m not sure.
 Shows
started to move out of cow pastures and into civic centers in the seventies.
To an increasingly small number of participants who were around in the eighties
when things began to really change, much of what transpired was welcome growth.
Instead of running to borrow a lead from a fellow competitor, by the nineties,
we had dozens of sales booths from which to purchase supplies. And in the
new millennium, we have mobile super-stores.
When shows began to accept commercial sponsors, most of us
said “good” and we vied a bit more eagerly for cash prizes
and bags of dog food. We loved the hospitality and
free coffee, then the parties and dances provided by the dog
food companies, and if a few of us noticed that many of the
clubs were not quite as “hospitable” well, so what?
Some exhibitors began to be a little annoyed when the kennel
clubs seemed more intent on selling vendor space and keeping
us and our dogs and crates away from ringside,
i.e. “clearing the aisle” for the extra-cash customers known
as spectators. When free parking for
exhibitors (you know, the main attraction)
became a thing of the past and we began to be gouged for $20
a night with no hookups, well, we accepted that kind of
mistreatment because we love the sport!
How many remember when AKC acquiesced to journalistic
demands to provide a legal means for breeders wishing to
sell pets with no papers? (You might remember that AKC
reserved – and used – the right to issue papers to an owner
even though the breeder had sold the dog as a “pet with no
papers.) This writer pointed out that the cat
associations had long provided a space on the “blue slip”
for the breeder to mark the kitten as pet, ineligible for
progeny registration. True to its changing nature, AKC
came back with the money-making deal wherein the
breeder was required to register the pet
puppy, then transfer it to the buyer who it was hoped, would
also register the puppy. When my next column
questioned the efficiency of that policy and exposed the
clever double fees ruse to double AKC's registration revenue
it was promptly changed back to a one-time registration
charge and ultimately to the Limited Registration box.
Sometimes, letting the cat out of the bag makes the mouse go
away. I have no illusions that will work this time.
Most such attempts to line the AKC treasure chest met with
blasé’ “who cares?” response from the fancy. At one
point, we were told raising registration fees impacts the
puppy mills. Even though AKC is already taking in more
than 80% of the other business enterprises in this country,
we’re constantly told fees must go up because it needs the
money. Drafting a rule that required microchipping
because AKC was going into the microchip business was a bit
much! When the press brought the relationship to the
attention of the fancy, there was more than a little
muttering about conflict of interest. So, we were
given back the right to tattoo or otherwise identify our
dogs as a means to comply with AKC record-keeping
requirements.
When a certain company offered AKC a very simple low-cost
package with which to offer DNA services to the fancy, it
was rejected. Was AKC able to make a more lucrative
deal with its current service? Who knows? The
good thing is that we finally got DNA testing. UKC had it
long before AKC. It might appear to some thoughtful
people that the United Kennel Club was more interested in
DNA as a genetic tool than as a source of revenue.
When our fees are constantly increasing and AKC says "we
need the money" do we ever say "cut the salaries!"?
No, most people weren't around when AKC board members hardly
took any salary and staff was small and actually worked.
Now the AKC President makes as much as the President of the
U.S. and I ask you, does that make sense?
Traditionally, the fancy has accepted just about everything
AKC has done and most of it has been great. As long as
we could still go to shows, win ribbons and visit with
friends, we didn’t want to hear much about the Aussie and
other breeds being “stolen” from their own registries.
Supporters of Rare Breeds welcomed the AKC Foundation Stock
Service but ARBA wasn’t too happy about the news. When
AKC began to discreetly “partner” with other
very-much-for-profit companies, those who might have
questioned such arrangements were pacified by the relatively
small donations AKC made to certain charities, including the
AKC Museum and the newly formed AKC Health Foundation, which
is sort of like an AKC subsidiary.
When vendors paid exorbitant sums for booth space at the
Garden, only to discover right next to them, the AKC booth
busily selling the same jewelry, purses, and other goodies,
who complained? Just the vendors.
So, who will worry about what the newest AKC “Enterprise”
will mean to the sport? The Delegates weren’t pleased
to learn about it by reading it in the press. The Delegate
Body should have at least been appraised of the plan if not
consulted. Why is it so hush-hush? There are
only a few reasons for corporate secrets. A.) To scoop the
competition. (What competition? Me? You?)
B.) To conceal something that people are expected to buck up
about until it is a fait accompli. (Why would the
fancy object if in fact, it is good for the sport?) or
C.) To protect corporate plans from being jeopardized.
(By Whom?) There must be some reason that something so
monumental was kept secret.
The AKC has the right to set up a for-profit branch. A
lot of huge entities do that and as a $50 MILLION per year
enterprise that pays no taxes, AKC is a pretty hefty empire.
The fact that it controls so many people, from judges to
exhibitors to breeders and that so many other dog-related
businesses feel like they have to walk the AKC line or lose
revenue, well, it is admittedly just a little intimidating.
If a business were to find itself in outright competition
with AKC, that could be very difficult. Sort of like
judges campaigning a dog. Or being occupationally
ineligible to judge. You know, that impropriety thing…
If anyone had told the founding fathers of dogdom a century
ago that their little registry would be what it is today,
they would never have believed it.
Will setting up an auxiliary for-profit company be good for
the sport? The answer remains to be seen but if
Fortune 500 companies buying out small competitors and then
merging into mega-conglomerates is good for the country,
then we can confidently say the answer is “yes.”
Most of us don’t quite understand how Bill Gates got into
trouble while all these other companies are squeezing
consumers by eliminating competition. If AKC is going
into the website business (it already has) and the marketing
of products (it already has) and if certain services which
were formerly free to dog owners are now only available
through 900 numbers or credit cards, then when will it start
selling its own brand of dog food?
Time will tell.
reprinted courtesy of
SHOWSIGHT MAGAZINE
100 Years Of AKC by AKC Historian Louis Fallon
Backbone Gone? How long will breeders support the
sport? Submit your ideas and comments.
|
