# Co-Owning?



## Rush (Dec 13, 2010)

I'm not entirely sure if this is the right section or not, but... I've been looking for a Shepherd for awhile, I have lots of experience training/working dogs, but the time has never been right to get a new Shepherd. It is now (yay ) 

I came across the option to Co-own, and I was just curious to know more about it. Some Breeders I've looked into do co-owning, is it something, if I'm approved that's worth doing? As a Breeder, what's your opinion on it? From my understanding, it's taking a puppy that the breeder wants rights too, and basically fostering/raising/training/titling the puppy for the breeder.... Or something of that nature. 

Any good/bad experiences with it? 
Do you know of any breeders to look into who do it? 

Thanks!


----------



## Whiteshepherds (Aug 21, 2010)

Different breeders do it for different reasons. You really have to talk to the specific breeder to know what they expect from a co-own.


----------



## CaliBoy (Jun 22, 2010)

Rush:

Speaking for myself and how crazy I am about my attachments to my dogs, I could never have a dog like that. My GSD is mine. He's all mine, and no one else can have him or co-own him, and no one else can tell me what he gets to do or not do. To me, it would be like co-owning a baby. I would suggest if you want to own one, that you own it completely and all the way.


----------



## LaRen616 (Mar 4, 2010)

CaliBoy said:


> Rush:
> 
> Speaking for myself and how crazy I am about my attachments to my dogs, I could never have a dog like that. My GSD is mine. He's all mine, and no one else can have him or co-own him, and no one else can tell me what he gets to do or not do. To me, it would be like co-owning a baby. I would suggest if you want to own one, that you own it completely and all the way.


I completely agree with this.


----------



## Rerun (Feb 27, 2006)

Outside of breeding rights, why on earth would anyone take a puppy and put all that work into it only to have someone else retain partial ownership? Is the other person at least paying a significant portion of the care and training costs, since you are doing all the work?

I can imagine some might think they'll get pick of the litter and get the "best" puppy (one that might not have been sold otherwise), but in reality there are SO many nice dogs out there, you can find just as nice a pup that you can own outright.

I've heard of co-ownerships done for breeding dogs, and I've seen foster programs where the breeder holds back females and places them with owners but retains the right to breed the dog once a year and whelp/raise the pups at their facility.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Not a breeder, but like anything else it will depend on having the right partner. I know when a horse is co-owned, costs are split. I would assume the same for dogs?


----------



## Xeph (Jun 19, 2005)

> I know when a horse is co-owned, costs are split. I would assume the same for dogs?


In my experience...nope.

The person in possession of the dog is responsible for all care of the dog with no monetary assistance from the co-owners unless otherwise agreed upon.


----------



## Rush (Dec 13, 2010)

Is it a myth with co-owning, in exchange for all the work/original breeder retaining rights you ultimately get the pup for free? 

This is why I'm so up in the air with this. I do not want to put all this work into a dog, and then have the breeder tell me what to do with it. (On top of paying a hefty price for it)

But at the same time, I think it's a fair trade off if in exchange for the price of the dog, you work/title it, and the breeder keeps breeding rights. 
Knowing me, I'll spoil any dog I have rotten regardless, and despite what paper says I'll always consider it to be "my" dog.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I've seen it in a few scenarios....

* The dog was purchased by two people, already an accomplished/titled dog, purchase for breeding. Maybe each person could not afford the dog on their own, so they pool and "share" the dog, each doing litters with their own kennel or splitting the kennel names on the litters.

* Someone wants to try their hand at training, handling, and/or competing with a dog, may not be ready to fully commit to owning the dog (like say a teenager working with a breeder as a mentor), and it's easier for paperwork/entries to have the trainer/handler listed as an owner so you don't always have to go back to the breeder/original owner to sign everything.

* A breeder is selling a dog with "strings attached", as in, they will not transfer full ownership until the new owner has "proven" something, like a show CH, some sort of title, etc. If the dog is a good prospect for something, and the breeder wants to ensure that the owner will follow through, the dog might be co-owned first.



I personally have not and will not do it. I assume full responsibility for my dogs' costs and will not buy a dog I cannot afford on my own. Also I want full control over MY dogs and do not buy dogs unless they are registered in full to me only (sometimes I list my husband as a co-owner, sometimes not). I've seen it go bad enough times to not consider it for myself. I've seen friends become enemies slandering each others' names. Not worth it, IMO. I do not automatically write off breeders that co-own, I just don't enter into that sort of relationship myself.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Rush said:


> Is it a myth with co-owning, in exchange for all the work/original breeder retaining rights you ultimately get the pup for free?
> 
> This is why I'm so up in the air with this. I do not want to put all this work into a dog, and then have the breeder tell me what to do with it. (On top of paying a hefty price for it)


It totally depends on the arrangement with the breeder.

If you don't want strings attached, then don't do it. Save up to buy the dog you want and own it in full.


----------



## Rerun (Feb 27, 2006)

Rush said:


> Is it a myth with co-owning, in exchange for all the work/original breeder retaining rights you ultimately get the pup for free?
> 
> This is why I'm so up in the air with this. I do not want to put all this work into a dog, and then have the breeder tell me what to do with it. (On top of paying a hefty price for it)
> 
> ...


I really don't see how it's a fair trade off. The purchase price is the cheapest part of owning the dog. It's a drop in the bucket compared to what you'll pay to raise, train, and title the dog. Not to mention, the breeder would have to really know and trust you to have the experience to do that in the first place, otherwise there's no benefit in it for them.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

Are there any breeders here who have co-owned a dog? What were the stipulations? Would you sell a dog and keep co-ownership? What would be your stipulations?


----------



## Rush (Dec 13, 2010)

Rerun said:


> I really don't see how it's a fair trade off. The purchase price is the cheapest part of owning the dog. It's a drop in the bucket compared to what you'll pay to raise, train, and title the dog. Not to mention, the breeder would have to really know and trust you to have the experience to do that in the first place, otherwise there's no benefit in it for them.


I've also seen some people argue about the purchase price being the hardest thing to come up with. I've had one or two friends choose co-owning because they couldn't afford to buy the dog themselves, but that didn't stop them from giving it life long care/feeding ect... Sometimes I suppose it's just the "large upfront sums" that trip people up? Or at least, that's one angle to it anyhow.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

But a lot of breeders co-own because the dog is going to be titled or bred, and those things cost a lot more money than the purchase price of the dog.


----------



## Konotashi (Jan 11, 2010)

I would never co-own. Ozzy is MY baby. Mine. Anyone tries to change that, they'll risk having their eyeballs clawed out of their sockets. I can't fathom someone telling me what I could or couldn't do with him. I couldn't share ownership of what I view as my furry child.


----------



## Andaka (Jun 29, 2003)

I co-own my Schipperke with his breeder. She "gave" me the dog, and I pay all of his bills. Since she knows more about his bloodlines and what would and would not be a good choice for breeding partners than I do, she gets to decide when he is bred and to what dogs. She also gets to "raise" a puppy from her breeding without actually having to raise it, as she already has 2 males and didn't need a 3rd one at the house. We have been friends a long time, and will continue to be friends even if the puppy doesn't work out.


----------



## Kelly's Buddy (Nov 15, 2010)

I know a few people doing this. It allows them to get a chip into the game by sharing the initial cost. It works if you know someone well enough, but I've seen the worse come out in people when money's on the line.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

I don't think co-owning is the way to go for most people. Where it can be valuable is if someone wants to break into showing, titling, and mainly breeding with the help of someone to share the costs and serve as a mentor. 

I've done it 3 times.. well, I guess when Isis goes home today that will count as #4... for breeding purposes. The agreements varied somewhat based on the situation, but in all cases it was set up to where the co-owner got the pup for free or at a significantly reduced cost and from there was responsible for all care of the dog, and had certain health testing and training/titling requirements to meet in a specified timeframe (the costs of some of which were split between us). Later if the dog was bred, litters would be split in an agreed upon manner. What that manner was also varied from situation to situation.

In one case, the dog didn't pass OFA hips, so was spayed and signed over to the co-owner in full and is her dog. In the other case, the dog passed health testing and got her BH, but the owner was unable to find the time to put into training in order to title the dog further, so didn't meet the title requirements within the specified timeframe. By the contract we could have repossessed the dog if we'd wanted to as the co-owner didn't live up to her end of the bargain, but of course we didn't. No excuse to pull a dog from a very good home. So again the dog was spayed and signed over to the co-owner in full and is her dog with no hard feelings. Stuff happens.

In the case that did work out for breeding, Eris, the co-owner initially wanted to become a breeder but with a lot of help and mentoring to get started. The agreement was written that we would split litters... one for her, one for us, one for her, one for us... with whoever was the breeder of record for that particular litter being responsible for the costs of that litter, and having ownership of all of the pups and thus getting all of the proceeds. Somewhere during the years between puppyhood and becoming a broodbitch, the co-owner realized she didn't want to really be a breeder in that sense after all so things were unofficially amended to be 50/50 on each litter. We split the costs, split the work, and split the pups/proceeds. We're now entering into a similar co-own agreement with the same person, though terms will probably be slightly different, for puppy Isis.

From the breeder's perspective, the advantages are clear. Being able to retain guaranteed access to dogs for breeding (provided the dog turns out breedworthy of course), without having to keep all those dogs themselves and find the time to train and title them all. There are risks of course if the co-owner doesn't follow through, but that's where being selective in who is chosen as a co-owner comes into play. 

From the buyer/co-owner perspective, I really don't see any benefits to most co-owns unless as in our cases the person wants to breed in some fashion, with help and mentorship from someone they know and can trust to have only the best interests of the dog and breeding decisions regarding the dog in mind, and also having someone to share costs, work, and responsibility with.

Our co-own attempts have worked out reasonably well. Even though a couple failed, they did so amicably. No hard feelings or drama or any of the horror stories I've heard of with other co-owns going south. And the one that did work out worked out very well for everyone. But they are certainly not something to enter into lightly without a lot of thought and discussion and making sure it is really best for both parties, and the dog.

Having lived and learned, I'd never co-own again with someone I didn't already know very well and know I could work with in this capacity, who wasn't an experienced handler with a proven track record so I could be assured the dog would be getting trained and titled, or who didn't live locally so I could get to know the dog well myself (in the case of Eris and Isis the co-owner trains in our club).


----------



## Kelly's Buddy (Nov 15, 2010)

Excellent post. Thanks for expanding on this. While it is not something I'd be inclined to do, it would be helpful for others who might be.


----------



## JKlatsky (Apr 21, 2007)

I don't have a problem with Co-owning a dog. I figure if you trust your breeder enough to get the puppy, and the breeder trusts you enough to give the puppy then you can usually work out some kind of agreement. Personally I would consider a Co-own because it might allow me to get a puppy out of my normal price point. I'm interested in training and titling anyway, so those requirement wouldn't be too taxing. I know over the life of the dog it's a drop in the bucket...but $1500 goes a long way that first year...

Many good level trainers are given pups by different breeding kennels as a co-own situation. The advantage to the breeder being that the dog gets worked in a nationally recognized level which is good PR for the kennel, and the competitor gets a quality pup with no strings attached. Pup doesn't work out...goes back to the kennel. 

Another advantage I've seen to entering into a co-own is when the buyer wants a particular pup (usually in the interest of future breeding/competition) and that pup is also one that the breeder would be interested in retaining for the program. So maybe the breeder, who is reluctant to lose control and rights to the puppy, enters into a co-own, so they can retain some rights but allows the buyer to actually take the pup. 

The only additional benefit I've seen is that (like it or not) breeders seem to be more invested in helping people with dogs that they Co-own. I'm not saying that they wouldn't help their other puppy buyers...but because they are usually more interested in the outcome of a puppy intended for their breeding program they're more likely to form a closer relationship with those people.


----------



## robinhuerta (Apr 21, 2007)

We also have several co-own dogs. These are the same people that "share" our visions and passion.
We have never "taken" a dog from a co-owner..(it is THEIR dog)...we retain the right to show, train & possibly use it for a breeding or stud service when matured and /or titled....
Future costs regarding showing, titling and breeding...are usually covered 50/50...
This easy system works for us & all parties involved. 
Robin


----------



## Rush (Dec 13, 2010)

I know my interest in co-owning would definitely be because I want to Breed/Train, but would require (or prefer) a lot of mentoring/close guidance. I'm supposed to go for a Training Apprenticeship in the Spring, but I'd still like to get my feet wet before then, with a dog that's worth it. And it's not like I don't have tons of free time now. My life is... pretty much going to the dogs


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

I have co-owned multiple dogs with different people under extremely different terms. There is no one co-ownership agreement at all, they tend to all be pretty individual. Some people split costs, some don't. Some split litters, some don't. Some get free stud fees, some don't. Co-ownership is usually essentially a breeding agreement. Make sure you read the contract carefully, ask questions if you are unsure and get other experienced people to go over it for you and ask for suggestions. Never sign a contract you don't agree with. If possible, ask to talk to others who have co-owned with the person. Never get into a co-ownership with someone you don't know well, don't know the reputation of or who has a poor reputation. Never get into an agreement which has no benefit for you, as the "real owner" of the dog (such as agreements that you pay for the dog, all expenses, stud fees then whelp 5 litters and turn all the puppies over to the co-owner - what I like to call "The Puppy Pyramid Scheme"). And for sure, always have a contract! 

Co-owning a male dog, as long as you are comfortable with the agreement is quite not as big of a deal as a female. With a male dog, if you have a falling out with the co-owner, you can still breed your male and register his puppies with AKC using only your signature. With females, it's much more complicated because all of the owners are required to sign off on AKC litter registrations. A friend of mine had a co-ownership go very wrong when after she made a 4 day round trip at Thanksgiving to breed her dog, paid a hefty stud fee for the male of the co-owner's choice, paid for health testing, paid all of the litter expenses the co-owner refused to give her full ownership (on puppies she had never seen or had anything to do with, aside from choosing the sire). When she picked up her dog, co-ownership was sprung on her without a contract and without having been mentioned previously. She so badly wanted to bring this puppy home, after weeks of visiting and waiting until they were ready that she agreed to the co-ownership. I'd say that is a fairly common scenario.


----------



## jressler (Dec 1, 2010)

CaliBoy said:


> Rush:
> To me, it would be like co-owning a baby. I would suggest if you want to own one, that you own it completely and all the way.


Most people do "co-own" their baby, hence family courts and custody battles during divorce.

That being said, I would not feel comfortable co-owning a dog unless I was good friends with the breeder or there was some distinct advantage for me in the arrangement (and even still I'd have to know the breeder at least on a working level).


----------



## CaliBoy (Jun 22, 2010)

Actually, I used a poor choice of words, because a baby is not owned or co-owned. A baby is her or her own person with rights to complete self-determination at that point when they no longer have dependency on adults.

A dog, however, can be co-owned, falls under the legal category of property, and is never considered in law as possessing personhood like a human. But at least now I am understanding why people would find the co-owning option as viable for them.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I have co-owned dogs. It is done for a variety of purposes. It all depends on what are the stipulations of the co-own contract. Hopefully, most contingencies are covered and all obligations are spelled out. Co-ownership can mean many things... so the wording of the contract will tell you what it "means" in each case.

Here is an article about co-ownership...
http://www.lawfordogs.com/assets/PDFs/lmc%20coownership.pdf

A recent issue of the AKC Gazette had a good article on co-owning. It talks about what the AKC considers it to be and the importance of the contents of the contract.


----------



## FG167 (Sep 22, 2010)

I was very interested in conformation labs and potentially breeding for a long time and it is EXTREMELY common in that case to co-own. In fact, I would say that it's more the norm than to not co-own. But the only reasons I've ever seen to co-own all had to do with breeding.


----------



## Ronda (Aug 23, 2010)

I co-owned once before and it worked out nicely. 

I had researched several breeders and found a fabulous one who was very helpful since this was my first miniature poodle. Told me to come on up and look at her dogs and if she didn't have what was right for me, at least I'd know what to look for at another breeders. 

Came up, passed her interview, bought a pup and was hooked. Met all of her show stock and decided I just had to try conformation showing. My male was a bit on the fine boned, bitchy side so while I could show him, I would really have to pick the right judges to show him underneath to finish him. All through this the breeder was helping and advising. 

She had held back 2 pups from the litter after my puppy and while she liked both of these for future show/breeding prospects she didn't really need littermates. 

She called me up and offered me the male on a co-ownership. I got Dylan for free, paid all daily living expenses, we split the health testing, I got to show a really nice puppy and got to take advantage of all her show people contacts/knowledge, and she retained breeding rights. Which was fine with me, I wasn't anywhere knowledgeable enough to know how to pair him up with the right lines.

We did prelim xrays on him and her best guess that if we were really lucky he might squeek by with a good but most likely his hips were going to be fair. According to my breeder, with a fair rating, there would still be people willing to breed to Dylan but that she herself wasn't comfortable with it and would prefer him neutered either before or after I finished him. I of course had no problem with it and retired him that week. 

About 4 yrs later, my sis-in-law was looking for a dog for my nephew who was non-shedding, about 20lbs, obedient, house-trained, got along with other dogs/animals, etc. I called up my breeder and made sure she was ok with me offering Dylan to my nephew. My nephew really needed a dog of his own to love and I knew that even though I loved Dylan, that my nephew would love him even more. My breeder trusted me and was totally fine with it and honestly, my nephew and Dylan were made for each other. He was a shy 9 yr old having trouble in school and they did 4H together, obedience, went to "fun shows" and entered costume contests and were the best thing for each other (and they lived 10 minutes away so I could still see and groom Dylan all the time)

I found co-ownership to be a totally stress free and enjoyable experience. I got a lovely dog, learned about showing, met some great people and had a mentor to help me through it all. We made decisions together and at no time did I ever feel like he wasn't my baby. She was clear that he was MY dog, she just wanted him to show and be health tested and if that was all great, then she wanted the OPTION to breed to him. She told me up front that he may never even be needed as she was keeping his sister but that she would like to know that she at least had the option.

Find a great breeder, be up front and clear on what the terms are, and then get it in writing! 

Oh yeah, and those x rays that showed slightly shallow sockets? Dylan is turning 9 this year and has never had a problem, still moves like the show dog he was (he had a fantastic side gait, all the sporting/working dog judges we showed under LOVED his movement), and when I had him at my work when I was grooming him, I had the vet re x-ray him to see if we had any arthritis or changes in the hips, his hips actually looked better! Maybe we should have waited and re x rayed him at 2 because his hips at 6 looked a lot better than his hips at a 1 yr old.  Oh well, turns out he was born a show dog but makes a fantastic best friend for a boy.

Ronda


----------



## horsegirl (Aug 11, 2010)

I co-own both of my dogs with my breeder, they are both MY dogs. At first it afforded me a chance to have a very well bred show dog without having to save forever to purchase full ownership. It gives me the opportunity to have a wealth of knowledge at a phone call. My breeder has become a mentor and friend, she would never think "taking" my pets away from me. I just got a puppy bitch from her (which we co-own) if all turns out , she gets titled, turns out to have the temperament we hope she will, passes all health tests ect.. I may have my foundation bitch. I would never even think of showing , breeding without liz's knowledge and years of experience.


----------



## Smithie86 (Jan 9, 2001)

Ronda,

That sounds like the perfect co-ownership.

I have seen ones that do not work. Most due to verbal. 

If you do a co-ownership, get it all in writing and ensure all enforcement is there. It does not matter that you might be good friends now; if something comes up or someone changes their mind.....

Same thing for sending away for training, both trainer and owner. I know of a trainer that did an excellent job for an owner, literally turning around a GSD that was emotionally abused, no training and socialization, etc. Trained and titled the dog for nearly nothing, but did ask for basic expenses. Once dog was titled (did well)and relaly bonded with the trainer, owner changed their what they would pay for (which was hardly anything at all) and was not nice.


----------



## CainGSD (Nov 15, 2003)

I have done co ownerships in the past with a different breed that worked okay. We always had everything in writing. This arrangement allowed me to own a dog that would have been way out of my initial price range. It allowed the breeder to grow out a pup that they were interested in possibly having for their breeding program. Two of these arrangements resulted in litters being bred, raised and profits being divided after costs were deducted. One of the dogs did not pass hip certification and was spayed and immediately signed over to me and lived with me until her passing at 13 1/2 yrs. All of these girls stayed with me for their entire lives.

I agree that these arrangements work best when both sides understand the obligations on both sides. I think it also works much more smoothly when both people share the same basic philosophy of what the minimums are for breeding a dog. 

Co ownerships are not for everyone but for me they have allowed me to form friendships and gain infinite knowledge on GSDs. Like someone else mentioned I now have a mentor and someone who is a phone call away to share training thoughts, my mentor has someone who loves her dog unconditionally and is willing to contribute time and hard work to allow her to develop.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

> I think it also works much more smoothly when both people share the same basic philosophy of what the minimums are for breeding a dog.


Now that I think about it, the co-ownerships I've observed that have worked well were between two experienced people that had a fairly deep knowledge of the dogs/lines and the same breeding philosophy and goals for their dogs.

The ones I've observed that haven't worked were often when there was a large difference in the experience and/or commitment of each party involved.


----------

