# Dendrobatid prices and smuggling



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

I know that this can be somewhat of a sore topic for some, but it might be a useful thought exercise for discussion.

Why are dendrobatids, in general, so expensive? I can regularly see frogs offered for several hundred dollars. Even the commonly bred species (leucs, tincs, auratus) are by no means cheap in the grand scheme of things. The frog hobby seems to be most equatable to the reef hobby, but in some ways it's different. For example, the commonly bred fish (i.e., clownfish) are pretty cheap (being able to get them for $10). This, of course, is not a perfect comparison because clownfish can produce hundreds of eggs at a time compared to dart frogs, but even so, it's not unheard of to get 100-200 froglets out of a pair of frogs over the course of a year.

I know they're a specialist group of frogs, but let's face it, the vast majority of them are not really that difficult to keep and breed (raising offspring can be challenging for some, to be sure, but I would say that generally is a minority). The hardest part about keeping frogs, in my experience, is keeping up with fruit fly cultures.

I bring this up because I was chatting with a non-frogger friend of mine about smuggling issues with these frogs, and she had some logic that was pretty hard to refute. That smuggling only persists if the smuggled animals are cheaper or better quality than what is otherwise available. Having seen photos of the seized frogs before, I feel like smuggled frogs probably are not better quality (unless you consider not available, e.g., mysteriosus, better quality), so it seems to me that it likely persists because they can offer the frogs cheaper than what is legally available.

I have no idea (and would love to know if anyone has insight) as to what smugglers ask for frogs, but I feel like it wouldn't be the $200 or $300 for the frogs we see available legally. And I know that the price of importing legally is substantially cheaper than what we see offered for sale (after all, importers need to turn profit). As we know, even captive breeding doesn't necessarily affect imports (auratus being the most commonly imported frog and probably most commonly bred). Presumably, the status quo with breeding has the same effect on smuggling. So why is there such a mark up on these frogs?

And I know that some species/morphs are rare and there is high demand for them (I remember seeing Vanzos for $200-300 when they first came in) and then it dropped. I also know that some organizations like UE are likely justified in their pricing because of the extra costs associated with their business, but I feel like for a lot of frogs that are fairly common, the prices of them are grossly inflated. Especially with some of the species/morphs that seem relatively common.

To be clear, I do not intend for this to turn into a finger-pointing match at whose gouging whom, but just a discussion on pricing. I wonder if, due to the expensive price of dendrobatids, in general, the hobby is in part at fault for the continued problems with smuggling. Smuggling ultimately is an economic venture. People do it to make money. We preach to buy from known outfits like UE or buy captive bred animals, but I wonder how much of that really helps against smuggling. It's still seemingly a common problem, both here and abroad. And if we're serious about smuggling, it seems to me that the best way to limit it is to cut the economic incentive for it.

I'm just curious as to the rationale behind the pricing we see in these animals. I'm not a herpetoculturalist or a longtime breeder. I am coming from a conservation/research side of things. I did a quick mental calculation in my head, and if necessary, I feel like I could successfully keep a frog for maybe $30 a year with even minimal investment (such as in a rubbermaid tub). And making that frog a pair would not substantially increase the maintenance cost. Much of the expensive cost, other than the frog itself, is in setting up tanks, which is probably more for aesthetics than anything (generally). So it's not like these are really premium items in that regard. My general impressions are "well, I bought them for this much, so I'll sell them for this much" but that is based in my own personal experiences.

Anyway, I thought there were some good questions in me and my friend's conversation, so I'd love to hear others' thoughts on the matter.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio (Feb 22, 2009)

One big issue is those cheap reef species are being raised in mass, that is not happening with dart frogs. Many of them are also being cultured in Asia and very cheap prices. Again, not happening with darts. When someone starts producing 10 K tincs a year of every variety, prices will drop, fast. Until then it's mostly up towards hobbyists and the few commercial producers to supply the trade.


----------



## jdooley195 (Oct 19, 2009)

I would think that if frogs became cheaper, then a lot of people wouldn't consider breeding/raising their frogs on a large enough scale. In turn, creating an eventual scarcity of the frogs rising the price back up for CB or creating an even larger market for smugglers again. Also, for _some people_ caring properly for the frogs wouldn't seem as important if it only cost 10-20 bucks to replace a tinc (for example).

But I tend to charge just a bit under what I paid for them, simply because I don't feel I've earned the 'full-price breeder' stripes yet.

Good topic! Curious to read what else comes in...


----------



## JJuchems (Feb 16, 2004)

Blue_Pumilio said:


> One big issue is those cheap reef species are being raised in mass, that is not happening with dart frogs. Many of them are also being cultured in Asia and very cheap prices. Again, not happening with darts. When someone starts producing 10 K tincs a year of every variety, prices will drop, fast. Until then it's mostly up towards hobbyists and the few commercial producers to supply the trade.


This is true for many species in aquaria hobby, and other herp related species. Farming has kept prices down. Asian imported farmed discus fish really dropped the prices for morphs.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio (Feb 22, 2009)

Very good example with discus. Which....I must also bring up something I find interesting with discus. They happen to breed both selectively bred morphs and wild morphs/locales, in harmony. 



JJuchems said:


> This is true for many species in aquaria hobby, and other herp related species. Farming has kept prices down. Asian imported farmed discus fish really dropped the prices for morphs.


----------



## pdfCrazy (Feb 28, 2012)

Although I'm sure there will be many assertions to the contrary, I think what attracts alot of people to darts is that there is a higher value to them. Otherwise you'd see us all keeping barking treefrogs and pacman frogs, which are very interesting in their own rite, but....carry a much lower dollar value. Personally, I like the fact that my frogs offspring can help to offset what I've spent on the adults and the setups as well as continuing expenses such as ff culturing, plants, lighting, etc. If CB offspring sold for significantly less, that wouldn't be possible.


----------



## pdfCrazy (Feb 28, 2012)

And yes, excellent comparison with discus. I used to breed discus. I still have a dozen or so Discus boosk laying around here I need to Ebay or something.


----------



## A&MGecko (Sep 17, 2010)

The answer is always 1, supply and demands. The price is not going down because the animals are easy to breed and are cheap to produce, if the markets is in demand for more of what is produced the price will go up, vice versa the price will go down. Lets be honest, no one in the right set of mind will sell frogs for 10 box each when they can get 100 box for it. And even if you get all breeders to agree to sell them for 10 box each (which will never happen) you still have to offer enough for what the market demands or you will go to the point of when the 10 $ each frogs are not available anymore the price for the import will be even greater then what normally is because they will be the only source to get them. 
I do agree that, like Discus example, if big farms are created at origin or even elsewhere to produce enough for the market demands at competitive price, wc or smuggling will have no reason to exist. Must produce enough to meet market demands at the same price it will be for wc or smuggled frogs or people will still buy wc/smuggled if their price is better then farmed animals.
Alberto


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Most darts you need to figure 4-6 months of investment in time before they are ready to sell. 2 months individually rearing tads then at least 2 months rearing froglets. For most, $20 seems to be the bare minimum as a wholesale price. If it drops below that, it isn't "worth" breeding them. A lot of people are moving to obligates to cut out the tad rearing time and investment.


----------



## A&MGecko (Sep 17, 2010)

JeremyHuff said:


> Most darts you need to figure 4-6 months of investment in time before they are ready to sell. 2 months individually rearing tads then at least 2 months rearing froglets. For most, $20 seems to be the bare minimum as a wholesale price. If it drops below that, it isn't "worth" breeding them. A lot of people are moving to obligates to cut out the tad rearing time and investment.


That is me 100% for the exception that I didn't even start with non egg feeders after researching the whole project before I started building tanks and buying frogs. Except for feeding time and making some new flies culture my time is 100% invested in enjoy watching my animals be. I must say I just love it and after breeding geckos for over 15 years I never enjoyed my animals as much as I am now.
Alberto


----------



## easternversant (Sep 4, 2012)

I think in part we don't see a large drop in price because there aren't any large companies mass-producing these frogs. If Cordilleran Inc produced 1,000 young auratus every year, I believe there would be a drop in price. Partially this would be due to decreased costs if one company, as opposed to many hobbyists, produce these frogs and partially due to flooding the market.

I haven't seen brought up is a (pervasive?) attitude among many folks that WC animals have a better genetic stock.

Finally, I'm not up on any of these numbers but how many smuggled animals actually make it to the US? We, as a country, seem to do a relatively good job of keeping the animals we have alive and producing CB offspring (however I'm aware that this may very well not be the case, this is a current day perception). What about the markets in other countries where the animals may not do so well or they have a very different outlook on WC vs CB?


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

A&MGecko said:


> The answer is always 1, supply and demands. The price is not going down because the animals are easy to breed and are cheap to produce, if the markets is in demand for more of what is produced the price will go up, vice versa the price will go down. Lets be honest, no one in the right set of mind will sell frogs for 10 box each when they can get 100 box for it. And even if you get all breeders to agree to sell them for 10 box each (which will never happen) you still have to offer enough for what the market demands or you will go to the point of when the 10 $ each frogs are not available anymore the price for the import will be even greater then what normally is because they will be the only source to get them.


This. It's pretty basic econ 101. If there is a demand at a given price the price will not go down. If the price is too great and there is no demand, the price will go down.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

JeremyHuff said:


> Most darts you need to figure 4-6 months of investment in time before they are ready to sell. 2 months individually rearing tads then at least 2 months rearing froglets. For most, $20 seems to be the bare minimum as a wholesale price. If it drops below that, it isn't "worth" breeding them. A lot of people are moving to obligates to cut out the tad rearing time and investment.


Generally, I would agree, but like I said, if you sit down and calculate what each frog costs, even $20 seems overpriced.

For example, if you raise 10 tadpoles and sell them at two months OOTW, how much would you actually invest into their rearing for those 4 months that they're in your care? What would the electricity cost just for those? The fruit fly supplies? The tadpole food? The rearing supplies? We can toss in even hours to take care of them. I feel like the cost for all of the equipment would be $30 or less. And then as far as care, for me, it'd probably be an hour per week. I guess it comes down to how much your time is worth, but just the raw materials really means your investment per frog is incredibly low.



pdfCrazy said:


> Although I'm sure there will be many assertions to the contrary, I think what attracts alot of people to darts is that there is a higher value to them. Otherwise you'd see us all keeping barking treefrogs and pacman frogs, which are very interesting in their own rite, but....carry a much lower dollar value. Personally, I like the fact that my frogs offspring can help to offset what I've spent on the adults and the setups as well as continuing expenses such as ff culturing, plants, lighting, etc. If CB offspring sold for significantly less, that wouldn't be possible.


I'm sure that is part of it, but I personally would think that the colors and behavior are more of an attractant. They're colorful, diurnal, often bold frogs which, really, is a rarity among frogs. I tend to think of people as simple minded (myself certainly included) and we're attracted to the bright shiny things. Neither barking tree frogs nor pacman frogs are particularly colorful or active. Red-eyed tree frogs I would say are probably more common, and I think that is probably due to their colors.

It is a good point about the commercial outfits, but I think where that comparison is muddied is when you look at the average keeper of fish versus frogs. Again, in my personal experience, fish keepers are not commonly breeders, but frog keepers commonly are. While there is not a commercial outfit pumping out frogs, I would say that the hobbyists are collectively fulfilling that role. I mean, how many auratus do you think are produced each year by hobbyists? I would think thousands. That number admittedly dwindles if you break them up into different morphs.


----------



## markpulawski (Nov 19, 2004)

I think the color first and then the diurnal part are the biggest reasons darts are so attractive to so many, no doubt seeing them hop around while you are awake makes a hobby so much more enjoyable.


----------



## zach77 (Feb 8, 2012)

markpulawski said:


> I think the color first and then the diurnal part are the biggest reasons darts are so attractive to so many, no doubt seeing them hop around while you are awake makes a hobby so much more enjoyable.


I couldn't agree more. It's the same reason I keep an Emperor angelfish and a Purple tang vs. a tank of tetras.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

MonarchzMan said:


> Generally, I would agree, but like I said, if you sit down and calculate what each frog costs, even $20 seems overpriced.


You don't happen to own your own business, do you? I ask because if you did I don't think you'd come to the same conclusions. It's a pretty basic rule of thumb that if you can't make $100+ an hour on every billable hour of work you do or service you offer, you're better to work for someone rather than for yourself. The reason is because not every hour you work (or even most probably) are billable. Plus you have to pay for the actual costs of doing business.



MonarchzMan said:


> For example, if you raise 10 tadpoles and sell them at two months OOTW, how much would you actually invest into their rearing for those 4 months that they're in your care? What would the electricity cost just for those? The fruit fly supplies? The tadpole food? The rearing supplies? We can toss in even hours to take care of them. I feel like the cost for all of the equipment would be $30 or less. And then as far as care, for me, it'd probably be an hour per week. I guess it comes down to how much your time is worth, but just the raw materials really means your investment per frog is incredibly low.


An hour per week? So that means that if you only have one froglet to sell you really should be adding together the number of weeks you raise it prior to selling it and times that number by $100. If you're raising more frogs the number goes down of course, assuming that the number of hours you work stays constant. So let's work with your ten number. Assuming ZERO actual costs to raise them, and an hour a week of time, if you spend ten weeks prior to selling them you're at $1000 in time cost. If you've got 10, you need to sell them for $100 a piece to break even just on your time. All of a sudden $30 seems CRAZY and $20 is highway robbery.

However, you're still forgetting all sorts of things. You've got many of the discreet costs, but what about the other costs of doing business? What about the time it takes to keep and maintain your sales records? Report, collect, and pay sales taxes? The time spent communicating with potential and actual buyers? What about the time spent packaging frogs for shipment? What about the time you spend going to the post office to mail them? And those are just a few I can come up with right off the bat!


----------



## Gamble (Aug 1, 2010)

markpulawski said:


> the diurnal part.


That's why I decided to keep darts over tree frogs when I got into it.


----------



## Gamble (Aug 1, 2010)

MonarchzMan said:


> as far as care, for me, it'd probably be an hour per week.


I spend alot more time than that taking care of my frogs! At minimum it's an hour per day.


----------



## Roadrunner (Mar 6, 2004)

If your only doing 20 it doesn't take that much and it doesn't supply much. If you do thousands a year you can't really vacation, you have to pay taxes, electricity, gas, website, phone, racks, tanks, tad systems, advertising, travel to shows(hotels, gas, reliable vehicle, etc. and if you can't work a full time job you need to supply your own food, insurance, electric heat, etc.etc. 

I used to have to wholesale auratus as low as $10ea. in 10 lots. If no one is buying and you have tons of them, you don't make much and you have to get rid of them as there are more tads coming out waiting for that space. Breed too many of one frog or focus too much on the present fad frogs for too long and you've allotted too much space to them and you may have to sell out quick for cheap. Which is why a lot of people are in and out in a year or 2. It's harder than you think.



MonarchzMan said:


> Generally, I would agree, but like I said, if you sit down and calculate what each frog costs, even $20 seems overpriced.
> 
> For example, if you raise 10 tadpoles and sell them at two months OOTW, how much would you actually invest into their rearing for those 4 months that they're in your care? What would the electricity cost just for those? The fruit fly supplies? The tadpole food? The rearing supplies? We can toss in even hours to take care of them. I feel like the cost for all of the equipment would be $30 or less. And then as far as care, for me, it'd probably be an hour per week. I guess it comes down to how much your time is worth, but just the raw materials really means your investment per frog is incredibly low.
> 
> ...


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

frogfarm said:


> If your only doing 20 it doesn't take that much and it doesn't supply much. If you do thousands a year you can't really vacation, you have to pay taxes, electricity, gas, website, phone, racks, tanks, tad systems, advertising, travel to shows(hotels, gas, reliable vehicle, etc. and if you can't work a full time job you need to supply your own food, insurance, electric heat, etc.etc.


Exactly. All of those are a part of doing business and need to be accounted for. Also, just for what it's worth, even if you only sell 20 you're still legally obligated to report that income for taxation. Most probably don't but legally it's required.


----------



## A&MGecko (Sep 17, 2010)

> Generally, I would agree, but like I said, if you sit down and calculate what each frog costs, even $20 seems overpriced.
> 
> For example, if you raise 10 tadpoles and sell them at two months OOTW, how much would you actually invest into their rearing for those 4 months that they're in your care? What would the electricity cost just for those? The fruit fly supplies? The tadpole food? The rearing supplies? We can toss in even hours to take care of them. I feel like the cost for all of the equipment would be $30 or less. And then as far as care, for me, it'd probably be an hour per week. I guess it comes down to how much your time is worth, but just the raw materials really means your investment per frog is incredibly low.


All this calculation is absolutely irrelevant, no one will sell them at 20$ each if the demand is high and you can sell them for 100$ each, it will never happen, supply and demands is what is all about. Is the same reason why all egg feeders are averagely more expensive, because they can't reproduce as in high number as the others and that is the same even in the wild, so animals available are always less then the demand, hence the price stay higher.
Alberto


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Lets not forget the initial investment of the breeders.


----------



## jacobi (Dec 15, 2010)

Personally, I'd rather be paying more to buy a frog from someone local, and support a local business person who worked hard to build their reputation as an honest and caring person (This is why we have a vendor feedback section!) than support some "farm" in a foreign country that may not have the USA's best interest in mind.


----------



## MonarchzMan (Oct 23, 2006)

MrBiggs said:


> You don't happen to own your own business, do you? I ask because if you did I don't think you'd come to the same conclusions. It's a pretty basic rule of thumb that if you can't make $100+ an hour on every billable hour of work you do or service you offer, you're better to work for someone rather than for yourself. The reason is because not every hour you work (or even most probably) are billable. Plus you have to pay for the actual costs of doing business.
> 
> An hour per week? So that means that if you only have one froglet to sell you really should be adding together the number of weeks you raise it prior to selling it and times that number by $100. If you're raising more frogs the number goes down of course, assuming that the number of hours you work stays constant. So let's work with your ten number. Assuming ZERO actual costs to raise them, and an hour a week of time, if you spend ten weeks prior to selling them you're at $1000 in time cost. If you've got 10, you need to sell them for $100 a piece to break even just on your time. All of a sudden $30 seems CRAZY and $20 is highway robbery.
> 
> However, you're still forgetting all sorts of things. You've got many of the discreet costs, but what about the other costs of doing business? What about the time it takes to keep and maintain your sales records? Report, collect, and pay sales taxes? The time spent communicating with potential and actual buyers? What about the time spent packaging frogs for shipment? What about the time you spend going to the post office to mail them? And those are just a few I can come up with right off the bat!


Like I said, I'm not a herpetoculturalist. I come from the conservation/research side of things. I realize that having a business (which is not everyone here, and probably a minority) has extended costs. But for Joe Hobbyist, the expense is much decreased. I'm just speaking from my own experiences and investments (and I want to point out that my 10 tad example was just that, an example, I do spend more time with my frogs)

I would ask, then, why don't we see the high prices in Pacman frogs or RETF since presumably they would have the same sort of care investment as darts? You can look at even the most undervalued of darts, and they're more expensive than Pacmans or RETFs.

I do know a lot of it is supply and demand, but I wonder how much of that is just artificial? I mean, for example, I'm not in it to make money, but for enjoyment, and if I can recoup some of the costs of having the frogs all the better. If I sold pumilio for $50 each, I would not be able to keep up with demand, they would go so quickly. I wouldn't make a lot of friends among the long time breeders, but it could be done and make money at it (after all, it's why Wal-Mart is so successful; it undercuts all of its competitors). It just seems to me that there is a lot of unspoken price setting for particular species/morphs. I mean, a new pumilio coming in seems to go for $300 or so. That new pumilio, generally, is no more difficult to raise than those $90 Bastimentos.

And who knows, if/when I get pumilio breeding, I might sell them for significantly less than what is normal. I personally view the prices as limiting the involvement in the hobby. When I first got in, I went for leucs. I would have loved to have some Colons or Escudos, but those were (and at the moment, still are) far out of my price range. I would bet that a number of people are like that. I, personally, am for inclusion rather than exclusion. But I think that is getting away from the main point. I'd still love to hear any information on smuggled frogs.


----------



## A&MGecko (Sep 17, 2010)

jacobi said:


> Personally, I'd rather be paying more to buy a frog from someone local, and support a local business person who worked hard to build their reputation as an honest and caring person (This is why we have a vendor feedback section!) than support some "farm" in a foreign country that may not have the USA's best interest in mind.


I am the same way, but this doesn't change the fact that most big business just look at to make the most money possible out of every deal, is simply the world main business practice.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

MonarchzMan said:


> Like I said, I'm not a herpetoculturalist. I come from the conservation/research side of things.


I'm not either, I've never sold a frog in my life.



MonarchzMan said:


> I realize that having a business (which is not everyone here, and probably a minority) has extended costs. But for Joe Hobbyist, the expense is much decreased.


Actually, the opposite is true. A person breeding as a part time or full time job has less cost per frog than Joe Hobbyist does because their practices and buying quantities drive down costs and time expenditures. Joe Hobbyist doesn't have that luxury so his costs are actually much higher. (This is the same concept that explains why Wal-Mart can sell a widget for much less than a Ma and Pa store can.)



MonarchzMan said:


> I'm just speaking from my own experiences and investments (and I want to point out that my 10 tad example was just that, an example, I do spend more time with my frogs)


Which is fine, but your experiences aren't being appropriately learned from because you've failed to account for the many costs you have but don't realize you have.



MonarchzMan said:


> I would ask, then, why don't we see the high prices in Pacman frogs or RETF since presumably they would have the same sort of care investment as darts? You can look at even the most undervalued of darts, and they're more expensive than Pacmans or RETFs.


Back to what I said above. Those animals are produced by larger organizations with lower per unit costs that are then passed on to the consumer in the form of lower prices.



MonarchzMan said:


> I do know a lot of it is supply and demand, but I wonder how much of that is just artificial? I mean, for example, I'm not in it to make money, but for enjoyment, and if I can recoup some of the costs of having the frogs all the better. If I sold pumilio for $50 each, I would not be able to keep up with demand, they would go so quickly. I wouldn't make a lot of friends among the long time breeders, but it could be done and make money at it (after all, it's why Wal-Mart is so successful; it undercuts all of its competitors).


All of it is supply and demand with virtually no artificial inflation. I don't believe it could be done and make money if you're calculating business expenses properly. Wal-Mart is successful for MANY more reasons than simply lower prices.



MonarchzMan said:


> It just seems to me that there is a lot of unspoken price setting for particular species/morphs. I mean, a new pumilio coming in seems to go for $300 or so. That new pumilio, generally, is no more difficult to raise than those $90 Bastimentos.


But there are fewer of them, so supply and demand takes over.


----------



## A&MGecko (Sep 17, 2010)

> I would ask, then, why don't we see the high prices in Pacman frogs or RETF since presumably they would have the same sort of care investment as darts? You can look at even the most undervalued of darts, and they're more expensive than Pacmans or RETFs.


Is because there is more demand for dart then packman and reft.



> I do know a lot of it is supply and demand, but I wonder how much of that is just artificial? I mean, for example, I'm not in it to make money, but for enjoyment, and if I can recoup some of the costs of having the frogs all the better. If I sold pumilio for $50 each, I would not be able to keep up with demand, they would go so quickly. I wouldn't make a lot of friends among the long time breeders, but it could be done and make money at it (after all, it's why Wal-Mart is so successful; it undercuts all of its competitors). It just seems to me that there is a lot of unspoken price setting for particular species/morphs. I mean, a new pumilio coming in seems to go for $300 or so. That new pumilio, generally, is no more difficult to raise than those $90 Bastimentos.
> 
> And who knows, if/when I get pumilio breeding, I might sell them for significantly less than what is normal. I personally view the prices as limiting the involvement in the hobby. When I first got in, I went for leucs. I would have loved to have some Colons or Escudos, but those were (and at the moment, still are) far out of my price range. I would bet that a number of people are like that. I, personally, am for inclusion rather than exclusion. But I think that is getting away from the main point. I'd still love to hear any information on smuggled frogs.


You looking at this at hobbits point of view, no one that is doing this for business will never consider selling a frog for 50 box when they can sell it for 90 or 100 box no matter how much it cost them to breed that frog, is just not going to happen. Some people give their surplus animals free, some people only have frogs to look at them and even if they breed they don't even bother taking the babies out, you can undercut everyone if you wish, unless you can supply the whole demand, others will still sell theirs for full price.


----------



## hypostatic (Apr 25, 2011)

A&MGecko said:


> > I would ask, then, why don't we see the high prices in Pacman frogs or RETF since presumably they would have the same sort of care investment as darts? You can look at even the most undervalued of darts, and they're more expensive than Pacmans or RETFs.
> 
> 
> Is because there is more demand for dart then packman and reft.


Also, for RETF at least, there is a much higher supply than for darts (they produce much more offspring), which also contributes to their lower price/value.

I agree with the "econ 101" view/explanation. Imagine if the demand for pumilio (one of the more expensive species) remained the same, but for some reason the animals in the hobby started breeding like crazy and producing litters of 30+ on a regular frequency (let's say it's something in the air). The price of pumilio would drop relatively quickly I'd imagine; if there's such a high supply of them consumers would not want to pay such a high price, and breeders would have to lower their price to be able to unload some of their stock.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio (Feb 22, 2009)

Both Pacmans and RETF's have good sized clutches and you can rear the offspring in mass quite easily. Not as easy for dart frogs. I think it'll be done, but it hasn't happened yet. 

Either way, some species like many of the tincs and a few others are no longer really imported in any quantity, they've largely beat out exports/imports.



MonarchzMan said:


> I would ask, then, why don't we see the high prices in Pacman frogs or RETF since presumably they would have the same sort of care investment as darts? You can look at even the most undervalued of darts, and they're more expensive than Pacmans or RETFs.


----------



## that Frog Guy (May 13, 2012)

Great posts.

It would be great if Poison Dart Frogs were 10 dollars each like clownfish. I would buy up a ton of them.

But at the same time they would be what is unfortunately called "Throw Away Animals" like green anoles.

People would loose interest as part of the hobby is keeping expensive frogs and plants. Less expensive things are well less interesting to most.

Like the Purple Tang mentioned in the previous post. Is it the best looking fish out there. No. But it has appeal to many because of its high price. If it was the price of a Yellow Tang then it would be much less sought after even though it would be much more affordable. It is looked at as more of a Holy Grail type of fish (Yes, there are many many many fish that are much more expensive than a Purple Tang but most fish in the hobby are much much cheaper).

Just my 2 Cents.


----------



## that Frog Guy (May 13, 2012)

I think that the biggest things going for Poison Dart Frogs are:

1: Beauty
2: Coolness factor

I remember going to the zoo as a young boy and being mesmerized over them for their beauty and the fact that they could kill you.

I would never even look at a Pacman, Tree, Bull Frog, etc.

Those animals are just not that exotic, interesting, and cool.

I love it when people ask me what animals I have and I tell them I have PDF.

Their eyes explode. LOL.

I get comments like:

How did you get those.
I thought those were illegal.
I am not coming over to your house.
You are so cool.


----------



## JPccusa (Mar 10, 2009)

A&MGecko said:


> The answer is always 1, supply and demands... Lets be honest, no one in the right set of mind will sell frogs for 10 box each when they can get 100 box for it...





A&MGecko said:


> All this calculation is absolutely irrelevant, no one will sell them at 20$ each if the demand is high and you can sell them for 100$ each, it will never happen, supply and demands is what is all about...


So is it supply and demand, or greed?


----------



## pdfCrazy (Feb 28, 2012)

PDF's win out obviously over other species not only because of their colors or beauty or that they are diurnal. They are ACTIVE. They are fun to watch. 99% (im pulling that figure outta nowhere) of frog species are inactive, sit and wait feeders that remain motionless for hours on end. My darts NEVER stop moving. They are calling, wrestling, mating, hunting, exploring. In fact, the level of activity I see from them, can barely be matched by ANY herp, regardless the species. Some, like Leucs and Tincs are absolute downright characters, practically with the personality of a happy go lucky dog. Theres so many reasons I find darts attractive. $ is just a small sliver of the equation, but one that plays a big part in your decision-making if its hard to come by.  But its definetly supply and Demand. Look at two of the recent UE importations. Vanzolinii and Benedicta. Both 300+ when they came in. As they've reached breeders and supply is startign to be met as more people breed them and thus better availability, price has gradually dropped. When I got my Vanzo's (aug 2012) price hovered 100-150. I'm startign to see them below 100 now. Benedicta the same. They were 225-250 just 6-8 months ago. I'm now seeign them at 150-175. And because Benedicta lay fairley large clutches for a Ranitomeya...I'd expect the price to drop rapidly. Bennies will be at 100 by late summer 2013....watch. Vanzo's will be a 65-75 dollar frog at the same time.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio (Feb 22, 2009)

I don't and never will think it is greedy to make $ doing something you enjoy. As long as it is ethical, I don't see how it is greed. That's how you make a living. 



JPccusa said:


> So is it supply and demand, or greed?


----------



## Gocubs (Apr 23, 2012)

It is greed. 

Plain and simple. People like money. As long as people keep these frogs at a constant price regardless if everyone is breeding them and there are tons available, everyone makes money. Everyone is happy. 

Someone posts a frog for $75 while the next post has the same frogs for 60. Because these frogs are 60 they must not have been reared properly right? You read it like that all yhe time. People selling the same animals having a problem with line identification or something else trying to create business gor themselves. 

Someone who breeds these animals on a large scale and tells you they are not in it for the money at all is a liar. Who doesint llike moving 5 frogs and clearing $1000 tax free...

IMO.


----------



## Pumilo (Sep 4, 2010)

What about time spent before and after the sale, educating your potential customer? I'm sure there are some that don't offer that, but to me this is a courtesy I always extend. I have spent many hours (understatement) helping anyone who asks for my help.
What about the guy that buys a group of frogs, promptly kills them, and wants his money back a month later? You are pretty sure he killed them, but he has a different opinion. You can ignore him, and hope for the best, or you can suck it up, take a loss, and maintain a good reputation.
How about space? I really don't think you believe you can rent or buy a larger house, with one or more extra rooms, for the prices you were mentioning. $30 for a bigger house? I don't think so. There are a lot of things you are not considering.

As far as getting off subject, I respectfully disagree. You put forth the questions in your original post. People are going to answer.

I'm also of the opinion that if the price dropped to $10 each, many froggers would not bother with any breeding, and just stick to keeping. If you remove the sources of captive raised frogs, then you swing the doors wide open for smugglers.


----------



## A&MGecko (Sep 17, 2010)

> So is it supply and demand, or greed?


Where I am from is called business.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

Blue_Pumilio said:


> I don't and never will think it is greedy to make $ doing something you enjoy. As long as it is ethical, I don't see how it is greed. That's how you make a living.





Gocubs said:


> It is greed.


So ALL business is based on greed? I don't agree. I own a profitable business but I don't believe myself to be greedy. Pricing something at fair market value based on the laws of supply and demand isn't greed, it's smart business practice and fair for all involved.



Gocubs said:


> Someone who breeds these animals on a large scale and tells you they are not in it for the money at all is a liar. Who doesint llike moving 5 frogs and clearing $1000 tax free...


Tax free? So you believe that everyone selling frogs is dishonest and a law breaking tax cheat? Hmm. Don't think I'd want to purchase anything from someone I thought so little of.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

Pumilo said:


> I'm also of the opinion that if the price dropped to $10 each, many froggers would not bother with any breeding, and just stick to keeping. If you remove the sources of captive raised frogs, then you swing the doors wide open for smugglers.


Absolutely agree.


----------



## Blue_Pumilio (Feb 22, 2009)

Is it also greedy to get paid when you work at a job? Just curious....both take time, knowledge, and sacrifice. I expect to get reimbursed for those things. I have bills to pay and people to feed. 



Gocubs said:


> It is greed.
> 
> Plain and simple. People like money. As long as people keep these frogs at a constant price regardless if everyone is breeding them and there are tons available, everyone makes money. Everyone is happy.
> 
> ...


----------



## srrrio (May 12, 2007)

Greed is a two way street, if we were not so bent on having the latest and greatest frog, there would be a lot less need to import at all. 

And sort of off track but figures into the expense of keeping dart frogs is vet care, from fecals to treating injuries. It always amazes me when people who have spent money on expensive frogs are hesitant to spend 75.00 on a visit to the vet when there is a problem. I am sure if the average price of a frogs was $30. , even fewer people would bother with paying a vet bill as the frogs become more or less disposable.


----------



## JPccusa (Mar 10, 2009)

Blue_Pumilio said:


> I don't and never will think it is greedy to make $ doing something you enjoy. As long as it is ethical, I don't see how it is greed. That's how you make a living.


If it is a hobby, you technically don't have to make ANY money on the frogs. You could even gift the offspring if you wanted to. 

Now if frogs are the main or supplemental source of income (a business), charging $$$$ for frogs that you could charge only $$ makes sense. In that case, capitalism would be the explanation for the excess $$ (profit), which in part is only possible if there is a demand for the high priced frogs.


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

Most of the reasons given here still apply to the "cheaper" hobbies. 
I think the biggest reason is that the dart hobby is extremely small, and a lot of keepers are motivated to breed their frogs for the money involved, and not just as a hobby. 
You also have to take into consideration that its not nice to undercut the person/business you got your frogs from.


----------



## bsr8129 (Sep 23, 2010)

I thought most of us on here were hobbyist not in it for the money, if this is true then selling frogs for 10 buxs each shouldn’t be an issue, the joy should come from raising a frog from a tadpole into juvenile and then successfully passing that frog onto someone else. The whole argument of time spent maintaining and caring for our frogs justifies charging more money just proves that you are in it for the money, the time I spend caring for my frogs = $0, because I enjoy it and it’s not a business to me. 

And let’s not forget if you charge less then the next guy then you are price undercutting.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

bsr8129 said:


> I thought most of us on here were hobbyist not in it for the money, if this is true then selling frogs for 10 buxs each shouldn’t be an issue, the joy should come from raising a frog from a tadpole into juvenile and then successfully passing that frog onto someone else. The whole argument of time spent maintaining and caring for our frogs justifies charging more money just proves that you are in it for the money, the time I spend caring for my frogs = $0, because I enjoy it and it’s not a business to me.
> 
> And let’s not forget if you charge less then the next guy then you are price undercutting.


Most of us are. That said, just because I enjoy something doesn't mean that I should be business foolish about it, does it? At the very least you can look at it from the perspective that if you treat your hobby like smart business it's more likely to be self-supporting, which is always a bonus. You don't have to be a cutthroat business person by any means, but being smart about how you price your animals is smart even for a hobbyist.


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

MrBiggs said:


> Tax free? So you believe that everyone selling frogs is dishonest and a law breaking tax cheat? Hmm. Don't think I'd want to purchase anything from someone I thought so little of.


Some tax law conversations here...for most individuals, sale of any frogs is hobby income. Not going to be reportable. You would be able to record many more expenses then you would income, especially taking into consideration a portion of utilities and rent. I would be shocked if a hobbyist couldn't come up with enough expenses to cover the income. 

I would also be shocked if someone actually reported hobby income too. Ever hear of something called use tax? So something purchased out of state should be subject to the state of residency's sales tax rate. Who here reports that? So yes, guess everyone here is a law breaking tax cheat, but probably not cause of the frogs, haha.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

mydumname said:


> Some tax law conversations here...for most individuals, sale of any frogs is hobby income. Not going to be reportable. You would be able to record many more expenses then you would income, especially taking into consideration a portion of utilities and rent. I would be shocked if a hobbyist couldn't come up with enough expenses to cover the income.


Not entirely correct. As a hobbyist you don't get to take deductions for expenses in the same way that you do for normal business. You are correct that such income would be exempt from FICA taxes but it would still be required to be reported as income. See: http://www.irs.gov/uac/Is-Your-Hobby-a-For-Profit-Endeavor?



mydumname said:


> I would also be shocked if someone actually reported hobby income too. Ever hear of something called use tax? So something purchased out of state should be subject to the state of residency's sales tax rate. Who here reports that? So yes, guess everyone here is a law breaking tax cheat, but probably not cause of the frogs, haha.


Yes, I have heard of use tax, both as a consumer and a retailer. I pay sales tax on all of my out of state purchases as required by law. You're welcome to laugh it off but I don't find it to be a laughing matter.


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

NathanB said:


> You also have to take into consideration that its not nice to undercut the person/business you got your frogs from.


So should someone pay the same price for frogs from you that are one generation further inbred then they would pay by going to the person you got yours from? 



> If it is a hobby, you technically don't have to make ANY money on the frogs. You could even gift the offspring if you wanted to.


Sure you can give anything away for free....also would be undercutting in a sense. But by selling the frogs, with all the expenses one put out in addition to time, I am sure they really aren't truly making money. Sure it may help fund future purchases, but will you really get back everything you put out, even with selling some offspring for money and not giving them away?


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

MrBiggs said:


> Wrong and wrong. As a hobbyist you don't get to take deductions for expenses. You are correct that such income would be exempt from FICA taxes but it would still be required to be reported as income. See: Is Your Hobby a For-Profit Endeavor?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I have heard of use tax, both as a consumer and a retailer. I pay sales tax on all of my out of state purchases as required by law. You're welcome to laugh it off but I don't find it to be a laughing matter.


Clip from H&R...not really looking up the law right now...."You can deduct hobby expenses up to the amount of your hobby income".

Hobby Income – Tax Articles & Tax Tips – H&R Block®

But your income is offset by expenses. It does not deduct past your income though...so it would not reduce your regular salary from your job.

I imagine most people do not report use tax. I'm not laughing off use tax, but rather saying every is the criminal. Same with anyone who drives 1 mph over the speed limit. I'm sure everyone here has done it. Call everyone a criminal then with a license.


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

Maybe you prefer rather then me saying not reportable...I should say it will be negated and offset to 0. So no taxes will end up being paid.

And I see you went and edited what you said. The entire tone of what you said is different then what it was originally now. And also appears to be on par with what I said in the paragraph above.


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

mydumname said:


> So should someone pay the same price for frogs from you that are one generation further inbred then they would pay by going to the person you got yours from?
> 
> 
> 
> Sure you can give anything away for free....also would be undercutting in a sense. But by selling the frogs, with all the expenses one put out in addition to time, I am sure they really aren't truly making money. Sure it may help fund future purchases, but will you really get back everything you put out, even with selling some offspring for money and not giving them away?


I'm not one to tell other people what to do, that's just my opinion on why frogs are so much more expensive than other similar hobbies. 
Theres also nothing wrong with people making money, thats ridiculous.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

mydumname said:


> Clip from H&R...not really looking up the law right now...."You can deduct hobby expenses up to the amount of your hobby income".
> 
> But your income is offset by expenses. It does not deduct past your income though...so it would not reduce your regular salary from your job.


What I'm saying is that those people operating the hobby with no intention of profit but with frogs that breed regularly and who sell all offspring will almost certainly make money in the eyes of the government. That money is required to be reported as income. Some people may have enough expenses or put enough back every year that it doesn't matter, but there are many others who don't spend much and would be required to report that money.



mydumname said:


> I imagine most people do not report use tax. I'm not laughing off use tax, but rather saying every is the criminal.


I'm not and I sincerely hope that others are not either. I prefer to think of people as honest versus dishonest.



mydumname said:


> Same with anyone who drives 1 mph over the speed limit. I'm sure everyone here has done it. Call everyone a criminal then with a license.


No. There is a major difference between a misdemeanor offense and a federal tax offense.


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

MrBiggs said:


> Not entirely correct. As a hobbyist you don't get to take deductions for expenses in the same way that you do for normal business. You are correct that such income would be exempt from FICA taxes but it would still be required to be reported as income. See: Is Your Hobby a For-Profit Endeavor?




I didn't say you could report a loss. Just that expenses would more than cover expenses. And by this, you would not be paying any taxes on this hobby income. 

You make 2k on hobby, but spend 3k....you have 2k in income and 2k in expenses. The extra 1 k disappears. It does not reduce your other sources of income.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

mydumname said:


> And I see you went and edited what you said. The entire tone of what you said is different then what it was originally now. And also appears to be on par with what I said in the paragraph above.


I edited for clarity and to add a link to the appropriate IRS website. I also toned it down to be less confrontational.


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

this isn;t the thunder-dome, give the tax stuff a rest. Its not important to the thread topic


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

MrBiggs said:


> No. There is a major difference between a misdemeanor offense and a federal tax offense.


Sure there is....but still technically breaking the law. 

Back to the original topic I suppose.....


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

mydumname said:


> I didn't say you could report a loss. Just that expenses would more than cover expenses. And by this, you would not be paying any taxes on this hobby income.
> 
> You make 2k on hobby, but spend 3k....you have 2k in income and 2k in expenses. The extra 1 k disappears. It does not reduce your other sources of income.


Which may be true for some, but not all. I don't spend anywhere near that a year on this hobby as a general rule. After initial startup costs, every year after that is going to have minimal expenses. Food/culture supplies, the occasional plant, maybe a new light bulb or something, etc. A few hundred dollars a year. If you're keeping species that breed a lot and have some value that amount would be EASY to exceed and that extra money is taxable.


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

NathanB said:


> this isn;t the thunder-dome, give the tax stuff a rest. Its not important to the thread topic


Removed...the response in the next post works


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

NathanB said:


> this isn;t the thunder-dome, give the tax stuff a rest. Its not important to the thread topic


Taxes are directly on topic as they are something that needs to be considered when figuring out what it *actually* costs to raise and sell frogs, which is first step in calculating how much a frog costs.


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

MrBiggs said:


> Taxes are directly on topic as they are something that needs to be considered when figuring out what it *actually* costs to raise and sell frogs, which is first step in calculating how much a frog costs.


As would rent, utilities, time, the breeder frogs, etc. 

I personally don't see why one should be expected to give frogs away for free.....I also don't see why I should gouge someone with top dollar prices. I also feel if I am breeding frogs from UE, mine should go for less then UE. For one reason, they are one generation further in. So I wouldn't expect to get top dollar if I tried for it.

There we go, no taxes and back on topic.


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

MrBiggs said:


> Taxes are directly on topic as they are something that needs to be considered when figuring out what it *actually* costs to raise and sell frogs, which is first step in calculating how much a frog costs.


No, its really not, unless you're saying that the dart hobby is taxed differently than everything else. It has nothing to do with darts are so expensive.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

NathanB said:


> No, its really not, unless you're saying that the dart hobby is taxed differently than everything else. It has nothing to do with darts are so expensive.


I have no issue dropping the tax conversation as it does seem to have run its course, however I do disagree with your opinion that taxes are not relevant.


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

mydumname said:


> As would rent, utilities, time, the breeder frogs, etc.
> 
> I personally don't see why one should be expected to give frogs away for free.....I also don't see why I should gouge someone with top dollar prices. I also feel if I am breeding frogs from UE, mine should go for less then UE. For one reason, they are one generation further in. So I wouldn't expect to get top dollar if I tried for it.


But now you are competing with UE in a very limited market, where most people put more emphasis on price than lineage. That's something I personally take into consideration when I've sold on the forum before, although that was plants and not frogs. I'm not saying everyone has/should do that, just something to think about


----------



## JJuchems (Feb 16, 2004)

Blue_Pumilio said:


> Both Pacmans and RETF's have good sized clutches and you can rear the offspring in mass quite easily. Not as easy for dart frogs. I think it'll be done, but it hasn't happened yet.
> 
> Either way, some species like many of the tincs and a few others are no longer really imported in any quantity, they've largely beat out exports/imports.


So to get off taxes, Ceratophrys are not a good example for comparison. Not only are they high prolific when bred, but the large breeders inject hormones to spurs reproduction. They are raised in solo cups and the care requirements are significantly different. This species lends it self to farming while Dendorbates require more insitu to farm.

Sorry for spelling, from my phone.


----------



## Gocubs (Apr 23, 2012)

I dont know how to qquote text but to say that no business' are greedy is laughable. I never once mentioned dishonesty so please read more carefully. If there was no greed, all frogs of the same morph would be the same pprice. Regardless of breeder. That is my point. There is no ddishonesty making a maximum profit on your pproduct. But to sasay that the prices of these animals reflects no greed IMO is rediculous. 

Why charge production rates when you can make a massive profit. And nowhere did i say that there was an issue with that. But in terms of the thread, that is the absolute deffinition of greed. The question posed asked of prices represent greed. And i am entitled to my opinion. 

And kudos to the person that files his/her frog income with the IRS. I would venture to say that those people account for a very small percentage of individuals that sell frogs on yhe forum.


----------



## Gocubs (Apr 23, 2012)

Sorry for bringing up taxes bbut it seemed like a valid point.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

Gocubs said:


> I dont know how to qquote text but to say that no business' are greedy is laughable. I never once mentioned dishonesty so please read more carefully.


You said that it was greedy, period. The insinuation that any profit motivation is inherently greedy, which is simply not true. You absolutely did mention dishonesty when you said that profit was tax free. Here's your quote:


Gocubs said:


> clearing $1000 tax free...





Gocubs said:


> If there was no greed, all frogs of the same morph would be the same price.


This is not how business works at all. Every person has different costs associated with even an 'identical' product. Additionally, just because two frogs are of the same morph doesn't mean that they actually are identical 'product', there are MANY here that would agree with that. Pricing differences does not mean greed.



Gocubs said:


> But to say that the prices of these animals reflects no greed IMO is rediculous.


No, it's not.



Gocubs said:


> Why charge production rates when you can make a massive profit. And nowhere did i say that there was an issue with that. But in terms of the thread, that is the absolute deffinition of greed.


No, it's not. I don't think that word means what you think it means.



Gocubs said:


> And kudos to the person that files his/her frog income with the IRS. I would venture to say that those people account for a very small percentage of individuals that sell frogs on yhe forum.


Again, I prefer to think of people as generally honest rather than dishonest. I suppose people have different life views though.


----------



## Chris Miller (Apr 20, 2009)

pdfCrazy said:


> Look at two of the recent UE importations. Vanzolinii and Benedicta. Both 300+ when they came in.


Not to hijack the thread, but very few UE vanzolinii came into the US and only one person currently has them (not breeding). However, all the ones that Adam/Darren/Sean brought in follow your example none the less.

The only real way to short circuit the smuggled (and legal WC) chain is for people to sell their offspring directly to those who import/receive those frogs. Those businesses have budgets and space restrictions on what they can/will dedicate to frogs. Fill up their tanks, use up their budgets and they won't have to import. Selling offspring on Dendroboard doesn't reduce the demand for the cheap smuggled frogs as people on DB are likely not the ones buying stuff from pet stores.

It means that people would have to sell the majority of their frogs at wholesale prices and stop caring about what happened to their 'babies' after they left the house. There would also have to be a concerted effort to make sure established frogs stayed established in the hobby and not lost due to whims.


----------



## Chris Miller (Apr 20, 2009)

P.S.

With respect to taxes, the topic has been covered here in as much depth as necessary - that it may be a factor when considering the cost of raising and selling frogs.

If you'd like to continue it, please take it to a new thread or find one of the existing ones.

Thanks,
Mom

P.P.S.

I still love you.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

Chris Miller said:


> P.S.
> 
> With respect to taxes, the topic has been covered here in as much depth as necessary - that it may be a factor when considering the cost of raising and selling frogs.
> 
> ...


Agreed.

P.P.P.S. Ditto?


----------



## Gocubs (Apr 23, 2012)

Ok chris, how are giant price differences between the same animals not representitive of individual greed among breeders? You work so hard to keep the genes of these animals the same, meaning they aare the same, yet others charge more for their frogs? Explain that. 

And if you do this as a full time career then good for you. The generl hobbiest on this forum does not. I would love to see a pole of the numbers of individuals that report selling frogs to the irs. 

If you believe everyone on here does, you are dense. And nowhere in my post did I say anything about dishonesty or life choices. Stop manipulating text and assuming things.


----------



## Gocubs (Apr 23, 2012)

You're entitled to your opinion as i am entitled to mine.


----------



## frogface (Feb 20, 2010)

NathanB said:


> I'm not one to tell other people what to do, that's just my opinion on why frogs are so much more expensive than other similar hobbies.
> Theres also nothing wrong with people making money, thats ridiculous.


I have a question. What other similar hobbies are cheaper than darts? I'm not familiar with many animal hobbies but it seems that lizards and snakes cost a fair bit more than frogs. Not to mention the costs of keeping up reef tanks.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

Gocubs said:


> Ok chris, how are giant price differences between the same animals not representitive of individual greed among breeders?


I didn't say greed was absent, I just said that price differences are not inherently indicative of greed. There's a very distinct difference between those two constructs. Additionally, where are you seeing 'giant' prices differences between breeders of the same species? I regularly see prices that are very close among different breeders.



Gocubs said:


> You work so hard to keep the genes of these animals the same, meaning they aare the same, yet others charge more for their frogs? Explain that.


I already did in a previous post.



Gocubs said:


> And if you do this as a full time career then good for you. The generl hobbiest on this forum does not. I would love to see a pole of the numbers of individuals that report selling frogs to the irs.


It's not. In fact, I've never even made a single dollar within this hobby. However, if I did miraculously begin making money I absolutely would report whatever I was required by law to report.



Gocubs said:


> If you believe everyone on here does, you are dense.


Of course I don't, but there's no way to determine who's honest and who isn't so I choose to give everyone the benefit of the doubt unless it is proven otherwise.



Gocubs said:


> And nowhere in my post did I say anything about dishonesty or life choices. Stop manipulating text and assuming things.


Cheating the government out of legally required taxes is dishonest. You insinuated that everyone making $1000 profit was doing so 'tax free'. Thus, you insinuated that everyone making a profit was also dishonest. This isn't text manipulation, it's very straight forward logical process.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

frogface said:


> I have a question. What other similar hobbies are cheaper than darts? I'm not familiar with many animal hobbies but it seems that lizards and snakes cost a fair bit more than frogs. Not to mention the costs of keeping up reef tanks.


Good question. To me it seems like darts are cheap compared to SO many other hobbies, whether similar or not. The initial cost may be slightly higher but the continued cost makes up for that pretty quickly.


----------



## NathanB (Jan 21, 2008)

frogface said:


> I have a question. What other similar hobbies are cheaper than darts? I'm not familiar with many animal hobbies but it seems that lizards and snakes cost a fair bit more than frogs. Not to mention the costs of keeping up reef tanks.


Any hobby can be expensive if you want it to be. Fish and other frogs where a few examples used in the OP.


----------



## JeremyHuff (Apr 22, 2008)

Gocubs said:


> Ok chris, how are giant price differences between the same animals not representitive of individual greed among breeders?


Do you have an example? And I mean within the hobby, not a 'jobbers' price. The only substantial difference I have seen is if a pair is proven vs. one that isn't.


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

Veradero go for $50-$70ish depending on who....maybe he means something like that.

Red galacs....$70-100.

For young ones, not adults.


----------



## Chris Miller (Apr 20, 2009)

Gocubs said:


> Ok chris, how are giant price differences between the same animals not representitive of individual greed among breeders? You work so hard to keep the genes of these animals the same, meaning they aare the same, yet others charge more for their frogs? Explain that.
> 
> And if you do this as a full time career then good for you. The generl hobbiest on this forum does not. I would love to see a pole of the numbers of individuals that report selling frogs to the irs.
> 
> If you believe everyone on here does, you are dense. And nowhere in my post did I say anything about dishonesty or life choices. Stop manipulating text and assuming things.


I wasn't responding to your post - so I'm not sure if you were talking to me or got me confused with Travis. Either way, I was not manipulating text and assuming things. You should be careful tossing around things that could be considered insults.

Since you asked though, I do report frog income to the state and federal government as well as collect sales tax in Illinois. This is not a full time job or a job at all.

Maybe should operationally define what you mean by greed: Getting all the money you can while you can? Choosing to sell your frogs only to other hobbyists instead of getting them in the general pet market? Something else?

Additionally there is a fine line between greed and what someone feels they can live off of if they are trying to. It's even harder to see that line when you are on the other side of it.


----------



## MrBiggs (Oct 3, 2006)

mydumname said:


> Veradero go for $50-$70ish depending on who....maybe he means something like that.


That's kind of what I'm wondering. I guess I would see a $20 different as 'giant' and would consider it to be well within the standard deviation of operating costs between breeders.


----------



## phender (Jan 9, 2009)

I don't think it is possible for an individual frogger to be greedy when selling his frogs. You can be greedy by screwing under your workers or if you are a monopoly, but how can prices of frogs represent greedy hobbiests? 

If I set a price of $150 for my mancreeks, they won't sell. The buyers set the price almost as much as the sellers do.

Think of frogs as money. If I have a basti and I want some auratus, how many auratus should I hold out for and how many is the other guy willing to give me? I'm guessing I could get 4-5 frogs. If he doesn't have any auratus but still wants my basti, then he's going to have to give me enough money for me to buy 4-5 auratus from someone else. If auratus are $30, then I am going to have to charge him $120 - $150 for the basti. That's not price gouging, that's just reality.

We as consumers put the value on things.

Oakley sunglasses cost about $5 to make and they sell for $80 - $300. I can't tell the difference between my old Oakleys and a pair of $20 sunglasses from Big 5. Are they greedy, maybe. Was I stupid because I thought Oakleys would make me somehow look "cooler", definitely.

People on the reef forum I sometimes frequent are constantly asking how much a fish/ anemone/coral is worth. The answer is always the same, "Exactly how much someone else is willing to pay for it".


----------



## carola1155 (Sep 10, 2007)

Gocubs said:


> how are giant price differences between the same animals not representitive of individual greed among breeders? You work so hard to keep the genes of these animals the same, meaning they aare the same, yet others charge more for their frogs? Explain that.


I really don't understand this argument...

If someone like Patrick Nabors or Mike Novy (im using them because they arent really on the boards here and I dont want to single out anyone that may become involved in this thread) is selling a frog that is the same age as another random hobbyist on the board... I would absolutely expect them to charge a higher price... and I would be totally willing to pay it.

Here's just a few reasons why:
Experience- These guys have been dealing with a large quantity of frogs for a long time, they have their husbandry routines down.

Dedication- see above ^ The average hobbyist (myself included) will have periods of times where I am paying more or less attention to my frogs because I have other things going on in my life. How do I know that someone didn't slack off on things like their supplementation rotation when their frogs dropped the eggs that resulted in the offspring they are trying to sell me. Which brings me to my next point..

Supplementation- Those guys go through more supplements than any average hobbyist, meaning they are much more likely to use fresh stuff. Fresh supplements can directly correlate to healthier frogs.

Reputation- If I get screwed by one of them and bring it to the boards here it can be bad business for them, if a single hobbyist screws me over there is little recourse.

I could go on here... but the fact of the matter is that the breeders have the full right to establish a market price for their products. If nobody wants to pay it, nobody will... Why this has become a heated argument like this is beyond me.


----------



## srrrio (May 12, 2007)

Chris Miller said:


> It means that people would have to sell the majority of their frogs at wholesale prices and stop caring about what happened to their 'babies' after they left the house. There would also have to be a concerted effort to make sure established frogs stayed established in the hobby and not lost due to whims.


^^^ this is a big deal. I believe this is the way to go to reduce the number of WC. I even have done so a few years ago and would like to say I will so in the future. 

However you hit the nail on "my head" caring about what happens to babies. I thought it would get easier as time and experience grow, but I am finding it is actually worse. Almost to the point where I would almost rather give them away to a hobbyist then sell them to a huge wholesaler or my local pet stores. Images come to mind of trapped toes, tiny deli cups for big tincs, tanks reused for different frogs again and again, instructions that include 5 different morphs will be fine in one tank. 

So despite my belief that this is a good way to go in reducing the amount of WC coming in, I am not there yet.


----------



## pdfCrazy (Feb 28, 2012)

I agree that greed really is not a correct term to be using in regard sales of PDF's. A better analogy in the hobby, though not perfect, would be someone seeing an importation of frogs come in, lets say 15-20 individuals....and buying all of them up SO that no-one else could have them, even though you may not have need for that many. However.....theres also a flipside, being that could be considered shrewd bussiness practice. I was workign for a large reptile breeder back about 15 years ago when Kamuran Tepedelan with Bushmaster made available adult and captive born albino red blood pythons. ALL of these were purchased at a HUGE expense most hobbyists could not even contemplate, well into six figure territory. He had to. If you control the supply, you control the price. If other breeders had also gotten their hands on adults, they could fairly rapidly be dumping offspring into the market rapidly dropping the demand and price. It was an investment, and one that had to be protected. That is not greed really, its smart bussiness.


----------



## phender (Jan 9, 2009)

Ahh, but he still didn't control the price completely. Consumers still had to determine if the snakes were worth that price. If they didn't, he would have had to bring the price down to make a sale.

Doing that with things that people actually need, like gasoline, electricity, etc.... would be considered illegal.


----------



## senditdonkey (Jan 19, 2013)

phender said:


> Ahh, but he still didn't control the price completely. Consumers still had to determine if the snakes were worth that price. If they didn't, he would have had to bring the price down to make a sale.
> 
> Doing that with things that people actually need, like gasoline, electricity, etc.... would be considered illegal.



Very naive. Its done constantly with most everything, especially things we need.....


----------



## pdfCrazy (Feb 28, 2012)

phender said:


> Ahh, but he still didn't control the price completely. Consumers still had to determine if the snakes were worth that price. If they didn't, he would have had to bring the price down to make a sale.
> 
> Doing that with things that people actually need, like gasoline, electricity, etc.... would be considered illegal.


Not really, only if the market does it in concert, together, monopolizing, is it illegal.


----------



## carola1155 (Sep 10, 2007)

senditdonkey said:


> Very naive. Its done constantly with most everything, especially things we need.....


I'm sorry, who are you? 

I'm pretty sure it was obvious he was making a generalization and he did back up his statement with examples of items that do have legislation in place to control the prices. If you want to nitpick about it go ahead, but don't just show up and call someone naive.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

MonarchzMan said:


> Why are dendrobatids, in general, so expensive? I can regularly see frogs offered for several hundred dollars.


One of the things I didn't see mentioned was status... In this as other hobbies, people award status to those who spend money for the most expensive frogs whether they are populations with novel patterns/color combinations, to the "rarer" frogs, and those considered "harder" to keep. This can be readily seen by the comments people make when someone posts pictures of rarer frogs and in some respects the wide spread utilization of the signature lines to list collections..... So there this is an additional economic driver on the price.. there is a status to breeding frogs.. there is status to having them.... 




MonarchzMan said:


> I bring this up because I was chatting with a non-frogger friend of mine about smuggling issues with these frogs, and she had some logic that was pretty hard to refute. That smuggling only persists if the smuggled animals are cheaper or better quality than what is otherwise available.


For those who want to read up a little on the driving economics behind it, see 
PLOS Biology: Rarity Value and Species Extinction: The Anthropogenic Allee Effect

(some comments here) http://meme.biology.tohoku.ac.jp/POPECOL/RP PDF/40(3)/pp.259.pdf 

http://129.175.106.17/epc/conservation/PDFs/Endangering.pdf



MonarchzMan said:


> I have no idea (and would love to know if anyone has insight) as to what smugglers ask for frogs, but I feel like it wouldn't be the $200 or $300 for the frogs we see available legally. And I know that the price of importing legally is substantially cheaper than what we see offered for sale (after all, importers need to turn profit). As we know, even captive breeding doesn't necessarily affect imports (auratus being the most commonly imported frog and probably most commonly bred). Presumably, the status quo with breeding has the same effect on smuggling. So why is there such a mark up on these frogs?


A 2003 estimate put the value of smuggled dendrobatids at $2 million a year. See Peru Exports If that figure is accurate, then there is a good chance that since the route opened up through non-signatory countries, it is much much higher. 

While not answering the question about cost paid by the smugglers this is an interesting document http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...rICYBQ&usg=AFQjCNFpCraOUixB_LYaQ45bERP2B1rhXQ 

This does give a cost estimate/frog Dendrobates.org - Smuggling 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## carola1155 (Sep 10, 2007)

that PLOS Biology link is a really interesting read, thanks for that one Ed... You finally cited something my finance brain I can understand! haha


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

carola1155 said:


> that PLOS Biology link is a really interesting read, thanks for that one Ed... You finally cited something my finance brain I can understand! haha


 
The link second from the bottom of my post should interest you then, it's a proposal including financial estimates for frog farming in Peru... 

Ed


----------



## mydumname (Dec 24, 2004)

2 million in 03. Wow.....wonder how that compares to non smuggled. I wouldn't have expected to hear multimillion a year industry.


----------



## hypostatic (Apr 25, 2011)

You know, this reminds me of a recent article that was published in national geographic. Here it is, a good read:
Asia's Wildlife Trade — National Geographic Magazine

Apparently the profits from smuggling wildlife rivals/exceeds even illegal drug trafficking according to nat geo:


> While no one knows exactly how large the illegal wildlife trade is, this much is certain: It's extraordinarily lucrative. Profit margins are the kind drug kingpins would kill for. Smugglers evade detection by hiding illegal wildlife in legal shipments, they bribe wildlife and customs officials, and they alter trade documents. Few are ever caught, and penalties are usually no more severe than a parking ticket. Wildlife trafficking may very well be the world's most profitable form of illegal trade, bar none.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

mydumname said:


> 2 million in 03. Wow.....wonder how that compares to non smuggled. I wouldn't have expected to hear multimillion a year industry.


Greg, 

Have you seen this paper yet? http://www.vincentnijman.org/files/a88_nijmanshepherd_poisonarrowfrog_biodivconserv_2.pdf 

Ed


----------



## ICS523 (Mar 10, 2012)

I know this is somewhat missing the point of the thread and it may seem a bit snobby...
I don't really see whats wrong with the price, Its not like they cost thaaat much (you can get most of the more common species like auratus, or even some Ranitomeya for around $30 to $40 dollars). On another note, the prices scare also away "hooligans" you don't want caring for living things, if darts costed $10 then there would be a lot of impulse buys (and subsequently dead frogs). I think the prices of these frogs tend to keep people from making bad choices and putting the lives of frogs in danger.


----------



## Baltimore Bryan (Sep 6, 2006)

I wouldn't say all dart frog breeders are "greedy," but there is some self interest at play for people who breed their frogs. Yes it's cool and its a labor of love, but it still takes work to feed adults, tadpoles, rear froglets, etc. each day. There is a degree of motivation/ drive/ self-interest/ ambition/ whatever you want to call it, that gives people reason to do this. 
I love rearing tadpoles and seeing froglets emerge, but I am not going to allow the frogs to breed if I'm stuck with all the offspring. I don't breed a lot of frogs because I don't want to overwork the pairs, so I don't even make enough to offset the costs, but I typically sell the offspring for what I consider fair market value (and it is because people would refuse them if it was too high...)
Why don't I just give away all my offspring or sell them for $10 each? For one, I think they are worth more than that because of the time/ effort put into raising them. But if all frogs were cheap (commonly sold at $10), I don't think there would be enough demand for them. This is a small market compared to many other hobbies like saltwater or freshwater fish. Partly because of the high status and desire that a species has when it is perceived as rare or expensive (as Ed said), and because I would just be plain out of space, I think to a degree, higher prices (and I don't really think many frogs are overpriced) help keep the demand for them higher. 
If amazonica cost $5 and they seemed so available, I would not breed mine because I would be afraid of having to keep all the offspring which I simply would not have enough time and resources to support. However, if they routinely sold for $50-60, seemed to be more "valuable" and had plenty of demand, then I would be more confident that any froglets my group produced would easily be wanted by another good hobbyist.
Bryan


----------

