I did not write that chicken carcasses are a balanced diet.Try and read the whole post to get the whole picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by yellow dog
Printable View
I did not write that chicken carcasses are a balanced diet.Try and read the whole post to get the whole picture.Quote:
Originally Posted by yellow dog
My close friend and professor at OVC told me that the best pet food was leftover people food mixed with good quailty kibble for roughage and fiber.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
He also told me not to put too much stock in package labelling because endorsements for advertising can be bought.Quote:
Originally Posted by last5oh_302
Sure seemed like it when you write chicken carcases and my meat in the same sentence. You didn't identify what was in your meat that you are paying a $1.50 a day. I use to buy the frozen 50lb blocks of musher mix for $20.00. It contained beef,chicken,tripe, trout, liver and if the market changed horse meat. Every three months a bunch of us would put our order in and meet in Walefield Quebec for pick up. To this day a reliable source still makes the delivery to the people who are feeding raw. Now that's cheap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
I wouldn't disagree with that advice.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
I work for proctor and gamble (though not in the pet food sector) and I can definitely vouch that quality is their number one priority. If you mess up or miss a quality check your neck is on the line - its not something they take lightly.Quote:
Originally Posted by last5oh_302
Looks like P and G sold most of their pet foods to Mars last year.
Mars, Incorporated and The Procter & Gamble Company today announce that Mars has agreed to buy the IAMS®, EUKANUBA®, and NATURA® brands in major markets for US$2.9 Billion in cash. This is a significant strategic move for Mars Petcare to complement its large and growing global Petcare business.
http://www.mars.com/global/press-cen...eId=94&Id=5605
Why Procter & Gamble Is Dropping Out of Pet Foods
While pet food is becoming a higher-margin business marked by exorbitant spending by affluent animal lovers in mature markets, the kind of innovations required to command $6 per pound prices in the domain of upscale dog and cat chow do not come cheap. “It’s not a low-cost business,” says Deborah Aitken, an analyst with Bloomberg Industries. “It’s seen as quite a staple category and it’s driven by innovation and research. A lot of the innovation for human foods is also pushed across the house to the pet care food.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles...ut-of-dog-food
I don't think the CVMA seal of approval is 'bought' by anyone....they don't need to advertiseQuote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
I like that quote in the blog Rick;
You know your beat when..LOL......sad to see #3 go, means we're left with just the top two manufactures (Mars and Nestle) who can then monopolize the market. Fortunately they know their bread & butter is the low end foods, like P&G found out it's not worth the cost to try and target the small demand for the high end.Quote:
That’s why, no matter how much it revved up research to make the most attractive, high-margin meal a dog lover could serve, those sales would still mean very little to the company’s overall results.
That's right Mike, but they were actually in 4th place according to Bloomberg, just behind Colgate. Science Diet pet foods was owned by Colgate. I always thought the Science Diet line of cheap food was owned by P and G as well, but Hill's has that line now. It's tough to keep up with this stuff!Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
http://qz.com/196256/americans-seem-...o/#/h/59952,3/Quote:
The rise in fancy pet food specifically, however, is another story. On the one hand, it’s a nod to the nationwide trend towards more natural, and often expensive, foods—for evidence, look no further than the tumble of Colgate-Palmolive’s Science Diet brand dog food, which is associated with artificiality. But it’s also, more simply, a marker of a growing tendency to treat pets like proper members of the American family. “It is now considered socially acceptable to treat pets as members of the family and to express that by spending lavishly on them, especially when it comes to food,” David Lummis, senior pet-industry analyst for Packaged Facts, told the New York Times back in 2012.
Pet-Food Brand's Image Bites Back Colgate
http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1...&mg=reno64-wsjQuote:
Colgate-Palmolive Co. has a problem when it comes to pet food. Its Science Diet brand doesn't appeal to pet owners the way it once did.
People are really starting to take interest in what they feed their pets, which is great.
I'm happy that at this time anyway, I don't need to keep track of who owns the company I buy my dog food from. They're a solid company built on a solid reputation and seem to keep everything transparent about what they do. I used to feed Canidae many years ago, when it was a Ma and Pop operation. They had a clean record with no recalls, but then Diamond bought them out, and they changed the formula. I was wondering why my dog didn't like her food anymore and then discovered this, so I changed brands.
I don't know about you Rick but I am so glad that I made the switch to more of a mom and pop type business base that produces a top notch product. Even Cory Pet Foods that produces Inukshuk I have had discussions with is a family base business amd also produces a top notch food. The thing about Cory is I can pick up the phone and call them direct and speak to them if I have a concern or want to order a pallet of dog food and have it delivered to my door. They even invited me to the plant on a few occasions to go on a tour and both companies are Canadian. We should be promoting these companies more and be proud of what they have accomplished in this huge market.Quote:
Originally Posted by last5oh_302
Yes,,lol I edited my last post to add exactly that YD.Quote:
Originally Posted by yellow dog
Especially when you see lists like this:
http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-recalls/