The smaller the better?

[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?

[suzeb29]

I've been doing my research since I'm looking for my new furbaby and I would not want a Yorkie under 4lbs. From what I've read they are much more prone to health issues. Some people will charge INSANE amounts of money for a "TEACUP" (which doesn't exist.) And usually puppies that are bred for extremely small size are not bred for extremely good health.

Just my opinion. I'm sure their are many perfectly healthy "teenies" out there. But I don't know that I'd want to take my chances with that.

[QuickSilver]

I'm not sure if Thor counts as a Teacup anymore because he tipped the scales at 4 lbs and 1 ounce at the vet the other day. I'm so proud of him. That being said, I have yet to see a yorkie that's smaller than him in my area.

I got to know Thor before I adopted him, so his size was not an issue for me either way. That being said, here are what I see as the benefits of a very small dog:

- Permanent puppy cuteness their entire lives.
- Small poops and pee.
- You can take them anywhere.
- They are very easy to control. I can put Thor on my desk at work, and boom, he's up there until I decide to put him back on the floor.
- Food is cheaper.
- You don't have to worry that your dog could hurt someone.
- You can keep them entertained in small areas. I took Thor to a baseball field tonight and he had the time of his life running back and forth across the diamond.

Here are what I see as the cons:

- Your dog is more vulnerable to other dogs, birds of prey, and being tripped over.
- Greater anethesia risk.
- Your dog may have trouble being a dog. I struggle to find things small enough for Thor to enjoy. Most bones are too big, even flossies. He can't make a normal dog toy squeak. Even in toy dog play groups, he's the runt and gets picked on.

I'm sure I've forgotten some pros and cons, but regardless, I love Thor just the way he is.

[LilMissy]

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 standard of the "picture-perfect" (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?

Very interesting thought. When I first started looking for my Yorkie, I had picked out a litter of puppies to go and view that came from a very large Yorkie Mom and Dad. Their puppies were priced at $1450. Then I saw Missy's picture and totally fell in love with her. Her parents are both tiny, and Missy cost me $995. So the smaller pups aren't always the most expensive. Maybe my experience isn't the norm? BTW, I picked Missy because to me she was the cutest, it had nothing to do with size

[chloesMama]

Chloe (2.5 lbs) would be considered a "teacup" I don't consider her better than a bigger Yorkie ( or my other bigger doggie) or less perfect than a smaller one. I just consider her my baby I do think however that the more uneducated a buyer is ( like I was ) the more likely they are to be taken in by the talk of the perfect "teacup" baby because you really have no idea that there are no teacups They are pros and cons to having either size , but no matter the size they are all cute as can be

[PrincessDiana]

A lot of times smaller dogs are priced higher because they require extra care being so tiny. However, that is not normally the case when you come across greedy breeders (we like to call them greeders) who jack up the price because more people buy "teacups".

[naturalallure]

Originally Posted by LilMissy

Very interesting thought. When I first started looking for my Yorkie, I had picked out a litter of puppies to go and view that came from a very large Yorkie Mom and Dad. Their puppies were priced at $1450. Then I saw Missy's picture and totally fell in love with her. Her parents are both tiny, and Missy cost me $995. So the smaller pups aren't always the most expensive. Maybe my experience isn't the norm? BTW, I picked Missy because to me she was the cutest, it had nothing to do with size

Oh wow! That's actually my first time running into the case where the smaller baby costs less. So I guess it's save to assume that it happens pretty often (where the smaller babies are pricier), but not all the time.... Orrrrr maybe your baby was actually pricier than her other brothers and sisters?

[naturalallure]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

.........
Here are what I see as the cons:

- Your dog is more vulnerable to other dogs, birds of prey, and being tripped over.
.............

Kinda off topic, but when I used to have my first baby (she was extra teeny) my friend and I were outside with her and my friend's little boy and there was an owl around. It swooped down onto a lower branch and I swear my heart starting beating out of my chest. My first instinct was Mr. Owl was going to try and eat my baby. I never looked into it and brushed it off as me being the overprotective mommy. But I guess my anxiety was warranted after all.

But back on topic, do you mean food is cheaper (pro) because you end up having to by smaller amounts of food and that's less money spent or because you're feeding your baby a different kind of food?

[chachi]

Some breeders do charge more for the smaller ones but It doesnt make it right. I paid more for My Jewels because she was small. I didnt just want her because she was small she was just the one I fell in love with. She is now 6 lbs. When I got her she was 12 oz at 8 weeks. Just because they are small as pups doesnt mean they will be a small adult

[cariblonde]

My gizzie was the runt of the bunch and to be honest, I wish she was twice the size she is. She is 2.8 lbs but healthy as a horse! When I bought her I was told by the breeder she would get to 4.5-5 lbs..she just never grew anymore, I dont feel she is "better" than a 10 lb yorkie. I have to watch ever move she makes, if she goes outside I have to watch for owls and hawks, if she jumps off the couch I almost have a coronary..it is exhausting at times to be honest. But I love her no matter her weight

[yorkieisme]

My Chino is 5.6 lbs and we swear he is part cat. He jumps off of everything, including stairs leading to downstairs. I about had a heart attack this last time when he jump clear over five stairs and landed on the bottom. So even us with the normal size yorkies have to watch our babies. I just could not handle below the standard yorkie, I would be a nervous wreck everyday.

Price I believe is really up to the breeder, I have seen some normal size yorkies cost just as much as the tiny babies. But I have also seen some breeders swear their "tiny babies" will stay tiny when they already have become a certain weight (2lbs @6 weeks) when both parents are 7-10 lbs. So I would do my homework prior to buying into the tiny craze if that is the route you decide to go.

Good Luck

[manolos mom]

Lola is a 5lb Yorkie She is a HARDY yorkie. Manolo stopped growing around 6 months old and now is 3 years old, last weight was 2.9. Pablo is 7 months and weighs 2 lbs. I have to be more careful with the boys because when they get sick they can go downhill REAL fast. Lola also is such a Agility dog. Strong and Athletic. Guess what Im trying to say for me it easier taking care of Lola.

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by naturalallure

Kinda off topic, but when I used to have my first baby (she was extra teeny) my friend and I were outside with her and my friend's little boy and there was an owl around. It swooped down onto a lower branch and I swear my heart starting beating out of my chest. My first instinct was Mr. Owl was going to try and eat my baby. I never looked into it and brushed it off as me being the overprotective mommy. But I guess my anxiety was warranted after all.

But back on topic, do you mean food is cheaper (pro) because you end up having to by smaller amounts of food and that's less money spent or because you're feeding your baby a different kind of food?

Yes, unfortunately, Mr. Owl may very well have been looking to have himself yorkie snack! I think there's even an article on this site about an owl that tried to carry a yorkie off. The yorkie in that case was lucky to be a teapot, and was too heavy for the owl.

When I said food was cheaper, yes, I meant that a smaller dog eats less food. Thor eats about 1/3 a cup of dog food a day.

Teacups have the reputation of being sickly, but Thor is is in great health. If he falls off something, he bounces right up like he's made of rubber. However, he is only 2 years old, so I don't know if it will be like that when he's 12.

One thing that I find kind of funny is that he's usually following me so closely that I can't see him. If I have him off-leash, I have to turn around a couple times to see that yep, he's still there.

[adorame]

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.

[Patti]

My goal when getting a yorkie is to get one that falls within the AKC standard in everyway. I want her to be under 7 lbs, have the coat and look of a purebred yorkie.