# Problems are now here with Natura pet products.



## GermanSheperdlover

*I heard at my local pet store (awesome store for dog food) about issues that are surfacing with these products. Diarrhia, vomitting and lose stools, damn they were a great product until Procter and crap bought them. I bought my last bag of CN and only because it was from their last batch. I really liked feeding CN in the AM because it had very few ingredients and Orijen in the evening.*


----------



## 1605

GermanSheperdlover said:


> *I heard at my local pet store (awesome store for dog food) about issues that are surfacing with these products. Diarrhia, vomitting and lose stools, damn they were a great product until Procter and crap bought them. I bought my last bag of CN and only because it was from their last batch. I really liked feeding CN in the AM because it had very few ingredients and Orijen in the evening.*


This entire statement is so suspect, I can't even begin to list the holes:

- "I heard"... from whom? Was it people who had the problems? Did you actually speak anyone first hand? Or just "someone who works at the pet store"?

- "issues that are surfacing with these products." Are these first time users or long time users? IOW, is this a case of "before" and "after" or people who have just switched their dog to Natura?

Again, I am asking that people not post unsubstantiated rumours & innuendo but actually put up facts. We really don't need to add fuel to this particular fire.


----------



## whiteleo

Well, I think I had already posted about this in the thread about the takeover and no one responded but, the store that carried the Orijen/Acana/Evo/Innova/CN line in my hometown no longer carries any of the Natura products. Larry said he was suspect before they actually announced the takeover as dogs that were eating the Innova line were suddenly getting diarreah and sometimes vomiting, as soon as he got the buyout notice he put a sale on all the Natura products and hasn't reordered a product from them. 
So, I don't think people are blowin smoke, only that people will believe what they chose to believe.


----------



## 1605

whiteleo said:


> Well, I think I had already posted about this in the thread about the takeover and no one responded but, the store that carried the Orijen/Acana/Evo/Innova/CN line in my hometown no longer carries any of the Natura products. Larry said he was suspect before they actually announced the takeover as dogs that were eating the Innova line were suddenly getting diarreah and sometimes vomiting, as soon as he got the buyout notice he put a sale on all the Natura products and hasn't reordered a product from them.
> So, I don't think people are blowin smoke, only that people will believe what they chose to believe.


I will believe that there is a problem when there is EVIDENCE there is a problem. You talked with someone who "said he was suspect". Suspicion is not proof. And third party "suspicions" (AKA hearsay) are even less proof.

Can "Larry" point to a specific dog and say "Rover was fine on lot #12345 of Innova EVO XYZ. However, when Rover ate lot #23456 of Innova XYZ he developed diarrhea and vomiting. At that time the dog wasn't eating anything else other than Innova EVO XYZ. After he went off lot #23456 of Innova XYZ his symptoms disappeared." ??? 

For example, go to Apple's iPhone Support forum & look at the actual horror stories from people with the 3G who tried to install the latest version of the operating system (OS4). Now THAT'S proof that there's a problem.


----------



## buddy97

not saying changes have occurred or not with natura products, but there are all types of subtle changes that can be made for which there will never be any "EVIDENCE"....source changes, quality control procedures, to name a couple...and of course any manufacturer can do these things and they arent going to be announcing it to any customers. x company isnt going to suddenly announce "hey everyone, we are now sourcing one of the lowest grade turkey meals and chicken meals in the country", are they?

im just happy i dont need to feed any Natura products and am extremely happy with what i feed. i think in a couple years it will be clear, one way or another, in what direction P&G will have taken Natura. AGAIN, if they stay true to their word, all the better.


----------



## 1605

buddy97 said:


> not saying changes have occurred or not with natura products, but there are all types of subtle changes that can be made for which there will never be any "EVIDENCE"....source changes, quality control procedures, to name a couple...and of course any manufacturer can do these things and they arent going to be announcing it to any customers. x company isnt going to suddenly announce "hey everyone, we are now sourcing one of the lowest grade turkey meals and chicken meals in the country", are they?


Wow... ok. So do you make your own dog food? Or feed raw? IOW, if you BUY dog food then you have to trust that mfg, don't you?



buddy97 said:


> im just happy i dont need to feed any Natura products and am extremely happy with what i feed. i think in a couple years it will be clear, one way or another, in what direction P&G will have taken Natura. AGAIN, if they stay true to their word, all the better.


I too am happy with what I am feeding my dog. I saved the "wrapper" from the last bag of food we bought him (pre-P&G) and will be saving the others for comparison. 

I can assure you if I see a difference worth sharing, I'll do so.


----------



## GermanSheperdlover

*This is no rumor lady. I was informed by the people who run the Natural pet store in Edmonds, WA. If you don't want to believe the facts, so be it. You might wanna buy some bags of Eukanuba and Iams and check out those products. Both were decent dog foods before p & g got their hands on those products. IT ISN'T THE INGREDIENT LIST THEY ARE CHANGING, THEY ARE BUYING LOWER QUAILIY PRODUCTS. Included is there fish and fish meals.. You can also get lower grades of rice and brown rice. Some people just don't learn..*


----------



## kevin bradley

SubMariner said:


> Wow... ok. So do you make your own dog food? Or feed raw? IOW, if you BUY dog food then you have to trust that mfg, don't you?
> 
> 
> 
> I too am happy with what I am feeding my dog. I saved the "wrapper" from the last bag of food we bought him (pre-P&G) and will be saving the others for comparison.
> 
> I can assure you if I see a difference worth sharing, I'll do so.



Sub,

While I agree w/ some of what you are saying...you really ARE playing with fire by staying with anything P & G puts out. 

Anything negative we say about P & G isn't done to hurt you...its said and done to HELP you and your Dog. 

How could you think P & G has your interest at heart with whats been documented on the Animal testing they do, the foods they put out(Iams, Euk)....NOTHING they do is in the INTEREST of our Dogs.


----------



## 1605

GermanSheperdlover said:


> *This is no rumor lady. I was informed by the people who run the Natural pet store in Edmonds, WA. If you don't want to believe the facts, so be it. You might wanna buy some bags of Eukanuba and Iams and check out those products. Both were decent dog foods before p & g got their hands on those products. IT ISN'T THE INGREDIENT LIST THEY ARE CHANGING, THEY ARE BUYING LOWER QUAILIY PRODUCTS. Included is there fish and fish meals.. You can also get lower grades of rice and brown rice. Some people just don't learn..*


Ah... angry red letters. Unfortunately, it doesn't make up for the lack of actual evidence. 

To reiterate: If there is direct evidence, please post it. Otherwise it is rumour & hearsay.


----------



## kevin bradley

GermanSheperdlover said:


> *This is no rumor lady. I was informed by the people who run the Natural pet store in Edmonds, WA. If you don't want to believe the facts, so be it. You might wanna buy some bags of Eukanuba and Iams and check out those products. Both were decent dog foods before p & g got their hands on those products. IT ISN'T THE INGREDIENT LIST THEY ARE CHANGING, THEY ARE BUYING LOWER QUAILIY PRODUCTS. Included is there fish and fish meals.. You can also get lower grades of rice and brown rice. Some people just don't learn..*


German,

No, they were never good foods. I DID look up an old ingredient list on Eukanuba. It never had much meat and has always been litterred with Corn and Grain. We can debate semantics("decent") but NO, Iams and Eukanuba were always pretty crap foods compared to the TRUE premium food of today(Orijen/Acana...)...

Heck, I'd even place Taste of the Wild FAR above what Iams or Eukanuba EVER was.


----------



## buddy97

SubMariner said:


> Wow... ok. So do you make your own dog food? Or feed raw? IOW, if you BUY dog food then you have to trust that mfg, don't you?
> 
> 
> I too am happy with what I am feeding my dog. I saved the "wrapper" from the last bag of food we bought him (pre-P&G) and will be saving the others for comparison.
> 
> I can assure you if I see a difference worth sharing, I'll do so.


some of what i feed is raw, the rest kibble, and i trust that manufacturer as much as i cant trust a dog food manufacuter..i dont trust any manufacturer 100%...there are just different degrees of trust. do i trust a company that has stated that for several years they have been offering high quality dog food to dog owners when, quite simply, they have not? not much. that is a company that has not earned any trust via that behavior alone. they will have years to earn some level of trust from consumers like me. no harm.

again, if anyone is expecting all important changes to be reflected/announced on the dog food bags...they havent been paying attention for the last several years.


it is simple really. some people trust that Natura products will stay as they are, while others think changes are coming or already have.

im like the parachutist on a stormy day who says: "id rather be on the ground wishing i were floating in the sky than floating in the sky wishing i were on the ground."

why would i feed something that i do expect to go through some changes for the worse, some of those changes which will not be conveniently announced to me in time to quit feeding said product to my dog. i wouldnt, of course.

nothing wrong for those who have a high degree of trust in P&G/Natura..just a different path. luckily, Natura makes nothing so unique that i cant find an equivalent or better product elsewhere.


----------



## 1605

kevin bradley said:


> Sub,
> 
> While I agree w/ some of what you are saying...you really ARE playing with fire by staying with anything P & G puts out.
> 
> Anything negative we say about P & G isn't done to hurt you...its said and done to HELP you and your Dog.
> 
> How could you think P & G has your interest at heart with whats been documented on the Animal testing they do, the foods they put out(Iams, Euk)....NOTHING they do is in the INTEREST of our Dogs.


Let's make something clear, shall we?

P&G is a company that literally makes thousands of products. Like any big company they are interested in profit. It is not profitable for them to spend all that money to buy a successful niche company only to start re-inventing it.

They may get rid of duplicate personnel (e.g. VP of Personnel or Sales Director) but it's not profitable or logical for them to do anything else. Why? Because with this company they basically have a turn-key operation; a recognized product line with well established lines for raw materials, manufacturing, and distribution. It is in an area where they do not have a presence: premium dog dog food. That's why they bought it in the first place!

No company is out there to "care" about the end user. They started a company to make money. There is nothing wrong with being rewarded for the time, effort, & $$ you invested in making a good product. People recognize this & buy that product. 

If the Natura product that I feed my dog changes for the worse, I will stop buying it. But I will base that decision on it on fact, not supposition.


----------



## kevin bradley

SubMariner said:


> Let's make something clear, shall we?
> 
> No company is out there to "care" about the end user. They started a company to make money. There is nothing wrong with being rewarded for the time, effort, & $$ you invested in making a good product. People recognize this & buy that product.
> 
> If the Natura product that I feed my dog changes for the worse, I will stop buying it. But I will base that decision on it on fact, not supposition.




Sub,

I guess I'd like to think you could exist to make a profit --and--- give a crap about what you are doing to those using your product. Maybe I'm an "idealist" but I don't believe you have to ONLY care about making money. 

THERE ARE companies that I believe TRULY do care about their customer. P & G ain't one of em.


----------



## GermanSheperdlover

*It's no excuse to have people unknowly feeding posion to their dogs!!! P & G ain't one of em,,, thats for sure..*


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> THERE ARE companies that I believe TRULY do care about their customer. P & G ain't one of em.


ALL successful companies care about their customers but not to the extent in your fantasy world. P&G is no better nor worse than any other successful company. BTW, you are not the customer of P&G nor Natura. The stores that buy their product are their customers.


----------



## RawFedDogs

GermanSheperdlover said:


> It's no excuse to have people unknowly feeding posion to their dogs!!! P & G ain't one of em,,, thats for sure..


That post makes no sense at all. I have no clue what point you think you are making.

*ETA:* That big writing really does irritate me. Do you think we are blind or what? Do you think it gives your words more meaning or makes your statement more true? What is the purpose of it?


----------



## chowder

RawFedDogs said:


> ALL successful companies care about their customers but not to the extent in your fantasy world. P&G is no better nor worse than any other successful company.


I have to agree with Sub and RFD. 

I've got to wonder about everyone who is so up in arms about P & G. Have you researched the companies of everything you purchase to this extent or is P&G just an easy target? Are you this vocal about every business you come in contact with?

What about Toyota and their history of lying over the recalls while cars crash? Have you rid yourself of your Prius's and Camry's? What about Nike and their past history of child labor abuses? Do you refuse to purchase any Nike products or watch anything that Nike sponsers? 

What about your cereal, ketchup, milk, the clothes you wear? Have your researched Kelloggs, Heinz, General Mills? Do you buy only made in USA products to keep the jobs here so people don't get laid off? Are your clothes and shoes made in China or overseas where there are no labor laws or protection for the workers and children while the textile plants in the US are all closed down? 

Do you ever shop at Walmart, who is being sued for abusing low paid workers and ignoring labor laws, while putting Mom and Pop stores out of business all over the country?

Whether or not P & G will EVENTUALLY change EVO is something I will worry about the first moment my dogs actually start showing signs of anything wrong with one of the bags of food. It is not in the company's best interest to change things. Anyone who has worked for a major corporation will know this. 

And, I do boycott Nike and have since the 80's after doing much research on it, and I do not shop at Walmart. I drive an American car, and haven't bought new clothes that were made overseas since I can remember. And I boycott tuna....just threw that in because of the overfishing issues!


----------



## buddy97

chowder said:


> Whether or not P & G will EVENTUALLY change EVO is something I will worry about the first moment my dogs actually start showing signs of anything wrong !


thats about right.

some folks here act like the decision to drop Natura products shows some kind of disloyalty. as i stated earlier, i dont trust any of them 100%, but i do trust most of the independently owned companies to a greater degree. to anyone who wants to drop Natura and let time prove to be the real test, i say go right ahead.....there are plenty of other choices. you have nothing to lose by waiting.

btw, i still drive my toyota corolla, get 40 mpg, and will drive it to at least 250,000 miles just like all my others. i researched to the hilt what was going on. unfortunately, they acted as unacceptably slowly as just about every other manufacturer, domestic and foreign, on recall issues. i did learn one thing. a ridiculously large number of accidents, once investigated, were deemed driver error ("hey lady, if you push the gas pedal and not the brake, your car will fly through your garage")

never mind, i didnt learn anything new. America is chock full of awful drivers.


----------



## jeserf

CN changed our lives - my dog had horrible diarrhea for the first months after I adopted her - and it was the only food that made her regular. There was an instant change. I recommend it to everyone with even minor similar problems - it changed our lives in that I trusted that she would be A-OK in her tum-tum. She was clearly happier and healthier. 

I was very upset to read about the merger, partly because of ingredients but also because I try very hard in our lives (as the main shopper in the house) to buy from smaller companies and producers (i.e farmers markets, local stores vs chains). I think the quality will PROBABLY go down, but not right away. I have not heard anything from our local food store, and she still stocks it. However, for when I need to feed kibble - I always keep some around - I will not be buying CN any more. It is not worth the risk, or my money, to support a huge conglomerate when I can still buy other food from a smaller company. It's just a choice for us that I try to carry through many areas of our lives. However, unless tons of dogs are getting bad reactions to the food since the buyout, I wouldn't believe anything.


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> ALL successful companies care about their customers but not to the extent in your fantasy world. P&G is no better nor worse than any other successful company. BTW, you are not the customer of P&G nor Natura. The stores that buy their product are their customers.


Semantics, Raw. 

Bullsh.... I AM their customer. Without me, Wal Mart and Kroger and the other retailers don't exist. We can go round and round on this one...I understand what you're saying but I sure as hell AM the customer. I don't care what intermediary the product travels through first. 

Honestly, I don't get your guys' defense of these monster conglomerates. Even if they aren't the monsters portrayed by some of us, you must admit they are compromised in many ways.


----------



## kevin bradley

jeserf said:


> CN changed our lives - my dog had horrible diarrhea for the first months after I adopted her - and it was the only food that made her regular. There was an instant change. I recommend it to everyone with even minor similar problems - it changed our lives in that I trusted that she would be A-OK in her tum-tum. She was clearly happier and healthier.
> 
> I was very upset to read about the merger, partly because of ingredients but also because I try very hard in our lives (as the main shopper in the house) to buy from smaller companies and producers (i.e farmers markets, local stores vs chains). I think the quality will PROBABLY go down, but not right away. I have not heard anything from our local food store, and she still stocks it. However, for when I need to feed kibble - I always keep some around - I will not be buying CN any more. It is not worth the risk, or my money, to support a huge conglomerate when I can still buy other food from a smaller company. It's just a choice for us that I try to carry through many areas of our lives. However, unless tons of dogs are getting bad reactions to the food since the buyout, I wouldn't believe anything.


Jeserf, thats a great way to live your life. 

I wish I was better at it. I just don't do the research I should on what companies to buy from. 

It takes effort....and I'm sure its not easy.


----------



## Brodster

Throwing more rumor on the pile, but the (relatively trusted) owner of the local pet supply store I shop in says that there are 2 years of stock of Natura kibble made that will be unaffected by any P&G changes. 

Any opinions on that statement? I was amazed and dismayed to think that kibble sits on the shelf that long.


----------



## whiteleo

Don't believe it, if Natura were the company everyone thinks it is, they never would let that much stock sit around to get rancind, no way... Oh but we are talking about a new company now P&G, so it is possible, and anyone who knows anythinng about BIG business knows this takeover was in the works for at least 1 1/2 -2 yrs. And the ones on here who you think wouldn't care to give their money to a big conglomerate like P&G are probrobably stockholders like RFD.


----------



## kevin bradley

thats bunk. no way. 

no one keeps 24 months of inventory on hand. They'd go out of business.


----------



## Brodster

LOL...

I love the word "bunk". Thanks for confirming my opinion.


----------



## kevin bradley

Brod,

Ironically, I am a Supply Planner for a certain Cereal company. 

I'd get fired if I had that much inventory sitting around. 

No way. With a one year shelf life....I'm just guessing that a typical Dog Food sku can't get much higher than 10-15 wks of supply. And that would be on the high end.


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> I AM their customer. Without me, Wal Mart and Kroger and the other retailers don't exist.


You can think about however you want to. From the manufacturer's point of view, the wholesaler or retailer is the customer. They are the ones who pay their money directly to the company. You pay your money to the retailer. You are the retailer's customer.



> We can go round and round on this one...I understand what you're saying but I sure as hell AM the customer. I don't care what intermediary the product travels through first.


You are looking at it from your point of view. I'm telling you what the manufacturer sees. I worked for one of the largest corperations in the world for 18 years. I know how they think.



> Honestly, I don't get your guys' defense of these monster conglomerates. Even if they aren't the monsters portrayed by some of us, you must admit they are compromised in many ways.


I don't see they are compromised in any way. They are far superior to the smaller company in many ways.


----------



## buddy97

kevin bradley said:


> Brod,
> 
> Ironically, I am a Supply Planner for a certain Cereal company.
> 
> I'd get fired if I had that much inventory sitting around.
> 
> No way. With a one year shelf life....I'm just guessing that a typical Dog Food sku can't get much higher than 10-15 wks of supply. And that would be on the high end.


for the brief time i was feeding TOTW, i had to go to 3 stores before finding a bag that wasnt already past date, so those bags had to be sitting somewhere a long, long time before heading to the store. sadly, id bet a vast majority of customers never check the dates on the bags.

im sure a higher percentage of people active on this forum do, but the average buyer, i doubt it.


----------



## Brodster

I had problems finding bags of TOTW within the "sell by" date while I was feeding it, too. More so than any other food I've ever given my dog.


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> I don't see they are compromised in any way. They are far superior to the smaller company in many ways.



that about sums up the miles apart we are on this issue, Raw. 

you go on and on about how the P & G doesn't give a rip about me as the customer....that the REAL customer in their eyes is Kroger, Wal Mart, Petco, etc...

And yet you say they are not compromised in any way, shape, or form. 


One thing we DO agree on....they are in the business of making $MONEY$. You get zero argument from me there. Indeed, they are dedicated to it as their number ONE priority.


----------



## ziggy29

kevin bradley said:


> One thing we DO agree on....they are in the business of making $MONEY$. You get zero argument from me there. Indeed, they are dedicated to it as their number ONE priority.


In fact, as a publicly traded company, that priority is *the* fiduciary duty of the executives and the board of directors. A privately held family business may choose to leave *some* profit on the table in order to do things the way they feel good about, but any publicly traded company who was known to be doing that -- knowingly leaving some profit on the table -- would be ousted by the shareholders. That's one of the key points about the Natura sale which bummed me out. Sure, it was always about making good money, but at least with a privately held business it was possible to make a lot of money the right way instead of even *more* money the not-so-right way.

Having said that, yes -- it means that if P&G execs really *do* think they can profit most from Natura by not changing anything, that is what they will do. I hope this is what they think, but I doubt it.


----------



## 1605

kevin bradley said:


> I AM their customer. Without me, Wal Mart and Kroger and the other retailers don't exist.





RawFedDogs said:


> You can think about however you want to. From the manufacturer's point of view, the wholesaler or retailer is the customer. They are the ones who pay their money directly to the company. You pay your money to the retailer. You are the retailer's customer.





kevin bradley said:


> We can go round and round on this one...I understand what you're saying but I sure as hell AM the customer. I don't care what intermediary the product travels through first.





RawFedDogs said:


> You are looking at it from your point of view. I'm telling you what the manufacturer sees. I worked for one of the largest corperations in the world for 18 years. I know how they think.


Kevin, I understand how you feel, However, RFD is right: the wholesaler/retailer is the manufacturer's customer. Since you mentioned Walmart, let's talk about them. If you want to sell to Walmart, you meet THEIR criteria, not the end users. For example, let's say Walmart's shelves are only 10" tall. But your product has always come in 11" packages. For your product packaging to fit properly on those shelves, you have to downsize the packaging and weight of the product. If you make the deal with Walmart, they will be your single biggest customer of that product, doubling or even tripling your current output for the year. What do you think you do? 



kevin bradley said:


> Honestly, I don't get your guys' defense of these monster conglomerates. Even if they aren't the monsters portrayed by some of us, you must admit they are compromised in many ways.





RawFedDogs said:


> I don't see they are compromised in any way. They are far superior to the smaller company in many ways.


Not every large company is a "monster", just like not every small family business is "golden". Each must be taken on their own merits.


----------



## kevin bradley

SubMariner said:


> Kevin, I understand how you feel, However, RFD is right: the wholesaler/retailer is the manufacturer's customer. Since you mentioned Walmart, let's talk about them. If you want to sell to Walmart, you meet THEIR criteria, not the end users. For example, let's say Walmart's shelves are only 10" tall. But your product has always come in 11" packages. For your product packaging to fit properly on those shelves, you have to downsize the packaging and weight of the product. If you make the deal with Walmart, they will be your single biggest customer of that product, doubling or even tripling your current output for the year. What do you think you do?



Sure, there is some truth to this Sub. Certainly WM pushes Manufacturers...but ultimately WE, as the consumer, drive what Wal Mart does. If we want a 6 foot Ape Spaceman suit, IT will drive the market.


----------



## azul99

jeserf said:


> CN changed our lives - my dog had horrible diarrhea for the first months after I adopted her - and it was the only food that made her regular. There was an instant change. I recommend it to everyone with even minor similar problems - it changed our lives in that I trusted that she would be A-OK in her tum-tum. She was clearly happier and healthier.
> 
> I was very upset to read about the merger, partly because of ingredients but also because I try very hard in our lives (as the main shopper in the house) to buy from smaller companies and producers (i.e farmers markets, local stores vs chains). I think the quality will PROBABLY go down, but not right away. I have not heard anything from our local food store, and she still stocks it. However, for when I need to feed kibble - I always keep some around - I will not be buying CN any more. It is not worth the risk, or my money, to support a huge conglomerate when I can still buy other food from a smaller company. It's just a choice for us that I try to carry through many areas of our lives. However, unless tons of dogs are getting bad reactions to the food since the buyout, I wouldn't believe anything.


Jeserf, CN changed our lives too. I am in a bona fide quandary about what I will do (as silly as that may sound to a non-dog-lover).

What do you plan to buy for your dog, if you will not be buying CN any more? I'm interested in knowing because my dog was so intolerant of other kibbles I tried.


----------



## ziggy29

azul99 said:


> Jeserf, CN changed our lives too. I am in a bona fide quandary about what I will do (as silly as that may sound to a non-dog-lover).
> 
> What do you plan to buy for your dog, if you will not be buying CN any more? I'm interested in knowing because my dog was so intolerant of other kibbles I tried.


As much as I have concerns about the future of Natura, if your dog does much better on CN than anything else, I wouldn't stop feeding it. I doubt the quality will suffer THAT much, and I wouldn't sacrifice my dog's health and well being to make a social or political statement.


----------



## CorgiPaws

ziggy29 said:


> As much as I have concerns about the future of Natura, if your dog does much better on CN than anything else, I wouldn't stop feeding it. I doubt the quality will suffer THAT much, and I wouldn't sacrifice my dog's health and well being to make a social or political statement.


CN really is the best food -of it's kind- on the market, and while quality control is a concern that may or may not formulate into an actual problem, I wouldn't jump ship quite yet unless you're willing to do a home prepared diet. (raw or cooked, veggies or not, I'm not pushing anything here...) The reason being there just aren't any other halfway decent limited ingredient/ mild kibbles on the market, so making your own food would be the only route left to go, should California Natural go south. 
We are currently looking into alternatives to Natura products to offer our customers what they want-quality and reliability all rolled into one- and are meeting with Orijen reps today. I don't, however, have an alternative for California natural customers, and that disappoints me.


----------



## kevin bradley

ziggy29 said:


> As much as I have concerns about the future of Natura, if your dog does much better on CN than anything else, I wouldn't stop feeding it. I doubt the quality will suffer THAT much, and I wouldn't sacrifice my dog's health and well being to make a social or political statement.


As much as I hate to say it, I agree. 

The challenge with limited ingredient foods is that there are so few on the market that we have so few options.


----------



## 93-5G20

Lets see if I get this right.

A guy who does not buy the food currently or in the past believes that without HIM, the company does not exist. A tad bit of untethered grandiosity. Since they do not buy the food, and the company does surely still exist, they are already proven wrong.

People don't think they are buying from an independent pet shop owner. They think they are buying direct from the company. You are indeed the customer of the pet shop, and they are stocking product that they believe in. When I go to the restaurant, I am not a customer of the farmers. If the formulas change in Innova you will hear about them. The only people stoking the flames are the product Reps from Orijen, Diamond, Blue, and all the rest that want the customers from #1 to slide over their way. There is not a single other maker of food, that does not want you to think the Innova brands are OK for your animal.

In decent sized areas there are still plenty of independent pet stores. My area has 5 shops in within 5 miles. If one stops carrying Innova its just an opportunity for other stores.

People are still spewing the false urban legends of the demise of the Eukanuba and Iams brands, when we have already compared the ingredients over the years, and while the formulas did not improve much over the years, they did not deteriorate either. Since the whole dog food industry has moved forward, there products has slide down the pole some. But the destruction of the foods, is completely false.

The urban legend of the P and G animal testing continues. A faculty that P and G contracted with had some issues, and those issues were for other customers. P and G cut all future interactions with them. The AKC and a host of other outfits have defended P and G.

Someone who used California Naturals and their pet did incredibly well on it, is about to experiment on their animal just because they want to be the lead lemming running for the cliff on rumors.

Bogeyman theories about how the big evil company wants to kill your dog, persist. As if people that work for a corporation are evil. These people need to get out of the house. Kids that grew up and work for the Pet divison of Proctor and Gamble probably like animals, its not hard to do. People do like animals quite often. Let's see, a company wants to make money and by producing a high quality product, and do good business, because good business means profits. *OR* buy into paranoid delusions of grandeur and rampant fear-mongering based on "I heard from someone, that someone else said their cousins best friend' uncle said...."....hmmmmmm where is my quarter, I need to flip it, its oh so close of a call here. 

Oh and not to forget the guy who feeds RAW, who wants to speculate that if where a customer of Innova, which he wasn't, that if he were to be...hypothetically, then hypothetically he would no longer be.


----------



## whiteleo

I certainly don't understand a single word you are spewing..................................


----------



## buddy97

93-5G20 said:


> The only people stoking the flames are the product Reps from Orijen, Diamond, Blue, and all the rest that want the customers from #1 to slide over their way.
> 
> ...and while the formulas did not improve much over the years, they did not deteriorate either.
> 
> Someone who used California Naturals and their pet did incredibly well on it, is about to experiment on their animal just because they want to be the lead lemming running for the cliff on rumors.
> 
> .


note: im adding this for all those who want to get bogged down in semantics about the word "customer". the word customer in my post is being used to represent anyone who would be buying a given manufacturers dog food from any source whatsoever.....

lets see if i got this right. there are Orijen, Diamond, and Blue reps now posting here? didnt know that. thanks for that heads up. just point them out so we will all know who is posting with complete bias. thanks.

as to iams/eukanuba, P&G stated when they acquired them they were going to now sell premium dog foods at fair prices. you admit they didnt really improve a decidedly non premium, garbage dog food. additionally, they are priced at a level of foods that virtually everyone (save a few iams/eukanuba apologists) can agree are better products....so, promise not kept. either that or they actually believed those products as constituted were of premium quality. there is a question, then, of what they think people will accept as being premium dog food. would they ever bring Natura products down to the level of Iams? highly doubtful. would they slowly and methodically lower the quality of the current Natura lineup? IMO, yes they will over time. so they can have a few years to prove they wont...nothing to really lose for most of us.

anyone who wants to step away from Natura products and let P&G prove they will be true to their word ARE IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM LEMMINGS. some of you post as though there should be an obligation to trust P&G when, imo the obligation is on them to prove they will do as they say. 

you got one thing right, P&G will be absolutely fine without all the customers who have chosen to do what i am doing, which is give them time to prove themselves while feeding other products. if someone has a dog who only does well on a Natura product, they should think a little harder about what they are going to do...if they want to dump Natura perhaps it will be a good time for them to start feeding a homemade diet.

most folks i know who are dropping Natura have given it reasonable deliberation and are willing to give P&G a chance to prove they will keep their promises...and in the meantime look to some other products. that doesnt sound hysterical at all. only thing i consider hysterical in the current climate is total blind loyalty to any one company.

yes, a few people have posted hysterical ramblings, but you try to paint everyone who is dropping Natura as being unreasonable and hysterical. that is simply a mischaracterization. many of us are simply being deliberate and demanding that a company without a history of excellence in the industry prove themselves to be true to their word.

it almost seems as some of you are a little too defensive about people wanting to move away from Natura for the time being and it comes off as being very pro P&G even if that is not your intention.

please, no one feel pressured into feeding Natura products if you think the burden is on P&G to prove they will be true to their word. they will continue to rake in boatloads of cash without us. they will be fine.


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> would they ever bring Natura products down to the level of Iams? highly doubtful. would they slowly and methodically lower the quality of the current Natura lineup? IMO, yes they will over time. so they can have a few years to prove they wont...nothing to really lose for most of us.


According to this line of thinking, Ford Motor Company is lowering the quality of their Lincolns down to approximately the same as regular Ford automobiles. Now thats just silly, isn't it? :smile:



> some of you post as though there should be an obligation to trust P&G when, imo the obligation is on them to prove they will do as they say.


It's silly to run just because the reps from the other dog food companies say the quality is going to go down without one tiny bit of evidence. Should I sell my Lincoln because a Cadilac salesman says Lincoln's quality is going to be the same as a Ford's.?



> if someone has a dog who only does well on a Natura product, they should think a little harder about what they are going to do...if they want to dump Natura perhaps it will be a good time for them to start feeding a homemade diet.


Based on what? Internet rumor?



> most folks i know who are dropping Natura have given it reasonable deliberation and are willing to give P&G a chance to prove they will keep their promises...and in the meantime look to some other products. that doesnt sound hysterical at all.


Does to me. If you have given it reasonable deliberation, you will wait and see. Running because of hysterical rumor is hysterical in and of itself.



> only thing i consider hysterical in the current climate is total blind loyalty to any one company.


People who buy any given product do so for some reason. In this case, the reason hasn't changed. It's only rumored to have changed. Baseless rumors. Not a one of them has any logical basis.



> it almost seems as some of you are a little too defensive about people wanting to move away from Natura for the time being and it comes off as being very pro P&G even if that is not your intention.


Whats wrong with being pro P&G? Its a very good company that produces very good products. Are all P&G products top of the line? Heck no. They are what they are. Some are middle of the road products and middle of the road prices.



> they will continue to rake in boatloads of cash without us. they will be fine.


*B I G* boatloads. :biggrin:


----------



## buddy97

i have not listened to or seen one, not a sigle one, of any other companies reps say a word to me or convince me in any way to drop natura products because there quality will go down.

to say one needs evidence to drop a dog food from my dogs rotation is silliness....my opinion about what i think is going to happen is good enough. i lose NOTHING by waiting to see if P&G keeps their word. i dont see it as running away. i see it as stepping aside and waiting. if they do as they say, then i can add that food back into my rotation. if they dont, then i will not be surprised and ill be on my merry way.

i dont see why waiting means i must continue feeding their products. there are plenty of other choices out there. why cant one wait and feed something else at the same time?

maybe some folks bought Natura products because Natura was an independendtly owned dog food manufacturer and that appeals to them for whatever reason. to now say nothing has changed is simply not true. no matter how both sides spin it, they are not an independently owned dog food manufacturer. so, if a company being independently owned is the "reason" someone was drawn to Natura products, then that has changed...there is no rumor about it. it is fact.

lets see, im going to quit feeding natura products. i have an opinion that a huge conglomerate buyout will result in changes for the worse that wont necessarily be conveniently announced on the bags. i have other foods i already feed i am pleased with. ill keep an eye on Natura products to see what happens over time. if they prove true to their word, ill look into feeding them again...sorry, but there is nothing hysterical about that line of thinking.

one thing that would have given P&G some credibility in this area is if they had priced Iams/Eukanuba commensurate with their quality. they never did. its a case of offering a low grade product product at more than low grade prices. so, not only will i be "hysterically" standing by waiting to see what they do with the product itself, i will at thge same time be "hysterically" watching to see if they think the market will bear higher prices on Natura products.

geez...i wonder what people will think of me when i see a bag of EVO in their cart and i go running for the doors screaming "the humanity of it all."


----------



## ziggy29

RawFedDogs said:


> According to this line of thinking, Ford Motor Company is lowering the quality of their Lincolns down to approximately the same as regular Ford automobiles. Now thats just silly, isn't it? :smile:


I think that's a straw man. I don't think anyone is suggesting that EVO will ever be as low-quality as Iams or Euk. If one kibble was a '9' on a 10 scale in terms of quality and the rest of a manufacturer's line is a '3', it doesn't mean the '9' will drop to a '3'. It could drop to a 6, 7 or 8, for example -- still considerably better than many others but not necessarily as good as before. And that drop -- albeit from an outstanding product to a merely above-average product -- would still be disappointing.

I'll simply stand by what I've said before -- I *hope* P&G executives believe the most profit from Natura will come by changing nothing. If they believe that, then nothing will happen. And I'll also state another thing I've said before -- I hope I'm wrong about what I think will happen down the road. I don't always enjoy being right.


----------



## RawFedDogs

ziggy29 said:


> And that drop -- albeit from an outstanding product to a merely above-average product -- would still be disappointing.


But you have absolutely nothing to suggest that that is going to happen other than paranoia. Everything published says its not going to happen.



> I'll simply stand by what I've said before -- I *hope* P&G executives believe the most profit from Natura will come by changing nothing. If they believe that, then nothing will happen. And I'll also state another thing I've said before -- I hope I'm wrong about what I think will happen down the road. I don't always enjoy being right.


P&G executives don't get thier seven and eight figure salaries by being stupid.


----------



## ziggy29

RawFedDogs said:


> But you have absolutely nothing to suggest that that is going to happen other than paranoia. Everything published says its not going to happen.


Consumers don't have to prove anything to the company whose product they are using or considering; the company needs to convince the consumer. That's the magic of capitalism. And to dismiss it as nothing but "paranoia" is rather patronizing and insulting. Then again, we know you have a conflict of interest on this matter. (I do at least give you credit for disclosing it.)

In a market economy, the people who *have* the money need to be convinced by those who *want* the money that they should hand it over. Not the other way around. And I don't think good businesses are going to add or retain customers by calling those with misgivings about doing business with them as "paranoid." Not a good way to increase market share. 



RawFedDogs said:


> P&G executives don't get thier seven and eight figure salaries by being stupid.


No, they get it by delivering a few good quarters to shareholders. (And given the structure of publicly-traded companies, that's how it should be -- performance for shareholders. I own a fair bit of stock myself.) Most of them will be gone 10-20 years down the road, so they have to look mostly on what maximizes profits in the next few quarters, not what's best long-term for the business. I haven't really seen what I considered a lot of "long term" thinking past the next few quarters of earnings reports. At best, executives don't destroy the long term for the short term, but the usual emphasis is on this quarter and this fiscal year.


----------



## CorgiPaws

93-5G20 said:


> The only people stoking the flames are the product Reps from Orijen, Diamond, Blue, and all the rest that want the customers from #1 to slide over their way.


Funny. I met with two different reps this week, both of which came into my facility, where the shelves are clearly still stocked with California Natural- one of our best selling foods to date due to the lack of real competition for those who buy it. (Evo and Innova sales have dropped considerably, enough so that we are more than likely no longer going to stock the shelves with them any longer) 
Of those reps, one being with Champion, and one being with Nature's Variety, NEITHER of them uttered a single word about the merger or Natura at all. In fact, the ONLY people who have said a dang thing about it at my daycare are the CUSTOMERS. That's it. Evo was one of our top sellers, I've never discouraged someone from buying it, (kidding me?! profit margin is great on Evo...) as it IS still a great food, and it isn't my place to step in and tell my customers what to feed and what not to feed, we are primarily a daycare. 


My point is, don't place the blame where it doesn't necessarily belong. Was the merger disappointing? Yes, in a few ways. Will the quality go down? Who the heck really knows.. there are so many things that CAN happen. I honestly think they'll cut costs anywher they can without having to actually change the bag. That's all most consumers pay attention to anyway: the bag. I'd hate to see ingredients outsourced... but who knows. The fact of the matter is: it pissed some people off, for whatever their reasons may be. If YOU find those reasons extreme, then that's fine, no one needs our approval. 

Regaurdless of if you're one who wants to jump ship because of "evil" P & G, or you're one who firmly believes nothing will hinder the quality of these products, it's still annoying to see claims that things have changes, with absolutely no real evidence or anything to support it. Rumors and misinformation aren't productive no matter how you look at it, or what your opinion on the matter is.


----------



## buddy97

93-5G20 said:


> The only people stoking the flames are the product Reps from Orijen, Diamond, Blue, and all the rest that want the customers from #1 to slide over their way
> 
> .......Bogeyman theories about how the big evil company wants to kill your dog, persist..


hysteria? paranoia? i think i found it.

i, too, talk with reps from other companies all the time. NEVER has the buyout been mentioned or brought up unless i brought up the subject, and even then no rep has taken that opportunity to give Natura a kick.

i must have missed all the "bogeyman theories" about big evil companies having a specific agenda of killing our dogs.


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> P&G executives don't get thier seven and eight figure salaries by being stupid.


this always gets mentioned as though it would somehow prevent a mass marketing of the food to reach more customers (ie big box pet store shoppers). this would easily allow them to make the products of a bit lesser quality....lose a few knowledgeable customers, but gain exponentially more average petsmart/petco customers who arent disecting the ingredient list or asking the company where they now source their turkey meal.....spend less on ingredients, sell much more product...sounds like something some smart executives at a large company might be interested in considering.

.....after all, this would serve their shareholders far better than leaving Natura products in only the independent shops....you see, P&G executives didnt get thier seven and eight figure salaries by being stupid.

oops i forgot. they have declared they are going to keep Natura products in the smaller independent shops...for now.

.........and i am never going to eat another piece of chocolate cake.....for now.


ah, but we all have the luxury of waiting to see the truth unfold in our own chosen way.


----------



## ziggy29

buddy97 said:


> i must have missed all the "bogeyman theories" about big evil companies having a specific agenda of killing our dogs.


Yep, talk about the mother of all strawmen. Concerns about future cost-cutting measures or reducing quality (I tend to agree with Linsey that they are unlikely to go so far as to need to change the bag or do anything *visible* to the consumer and any watchdogs out there, at least as long as the scrutiny is high) are a far cry from screaming that P&G (or any other large publicly-traded corporate behemoth) wants to kill our pets. Of course they don't. I don't think ANY pet food manufacturer has ever wanted to kill pets. It tends to be bad for business, y'know?

It's a good thing that none of the dedicated defenders of P&G here are (presumably) in their Marketing or Customer Relations department. As I mentioned before, insulting current and potential customers (or even former customers you'd like to win back) who have concerns about the future of your products isn't a good way to gain their business. A customer's perception is their reality whether you like it or not. 

One unfortunate thing I will say in partial defense of Natura/P&G here is that it's inevitable that given how many dogs are fed day after day, month after month, eventually one will get sick while being fed a Natura product and some people will come to a knee-jerk conclusion that it's "bad P&G food" even if the food had nothing to do with it. I have no reason to believe anything has changed yet. I still have some Evo that I'm feeding which I bought after the merger was announced (but before it was final) -- and I have no concerns about its quality. My concerns are about the future, and I hope those concerns will be for naught. But calling me paranoid is no way to get me to reconsider my patronage of Natura products.


----------



## jiml

my opinion about what i think is going to happen is good enough.>>>>

of course it is. right or wrong its still your choice. I agree w sub P&G purchased Natura to get into the high end dog food business. It would not make sense to try and redefine that business. My only concern might be that if they try to over expand that breakdowns in quality control w suppliers become more likely


----------



## Doc

Old Tater, Lucy and Mutt can't rade any names on da food bag nor any of dem engreedeants much less wot feeled it come out of. Day jest stick dair nos in da bowl and ifn day lik it, day ate it. Ifn it make dem puke, day don't ate it no more.

Old Tater ain't had no chickin bikit from da Bojangles since da last one make him explode! He knowd better now - same wid bag food. All 3 of dem wood eat raw chickin all day ifn I wood gib it to dem. Dat preecher down da way saz hisn chickin coop is missin some birds. Now I jest wunder who been sneekin down dair ...


----------



## magicre

> P&G executives don't get thier seven and eight figure salaries by being stupid.


um. all due respect, but yeah they do. can we say wall street, BP, banks, car manufacturers? seven and eight figure salaries is not equivalent to intelligence....nor are credentials.

i would think the biggest concern would be outsourcing, less scrutiny, same price...

does anyone really believe that P & G cares about dogs? they care about the bottom line. they are a business and have millions to spend on marketing and advertising.....and they do THAT very well.


----------



## Doc

They not change a single thing in the product, but they may change suppliers which may effect quality. Just like Purina, they buy from different sources and have a very inconsistent product.

It's the little details that count. How long a product is stored, what temperature is stored, how long it is stored, over temperature, etc., etc. We'll just have to wait and see. Heck, I even found inconsistency in Orijen - color, smell, etc.


----------



## RawFedDogs

magicre said:


> um. all due respect, but yeah they do. can we say wall street, BP, banks, car manufacturers? seven and eight figure salaries is not equivalent to intelligence....nor are credentials.


If that were the case, everyone could be making 7 & 8 figure salaries and that's just not happening. Does anyone in your family make an 8 figure salary? No one in my family nor anyone I am aquainted with does. Wonder why? 

And oh yes, I sorry, I forgot. All big companies, banks, Wall Street firms, car manufacturers and any ther company with more than a couple hundred million is sales got that way because of their evil ways. Making their money off the backs of their poor workers. I guess the highly paid executives are just smarter than the workers, huh?



> i would think the biggest concern would be outsourcing, less scrutiny, same price...


I don't know what that is a concern. They say they are not going to change anything. What more do you want them to do?



> does anyone really believe that P & G cares about dogs? they care about the bottom line. they are a business and have millions to spend on marketing and advertising.....and they do THAT very well.


Does anyone think Natura cared about dogs? They cared about the bottom line and making their company large enough that they could sell it for big bucks and retire. Guess they did it right. :smile:


----------



## SaltyDog

magicre said:


> does anyone really believe that P & G cares about dogs? they care about the bottom line. they are a business and have millions to spend on marketing and advertising.....and they do THAT very well.



So Natura was not interested in making money? Weren't they a business? Now they have millions to spend on marketing.

I get it....it was a small boutique company that made you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Now it's a small boutique company that just went global. Clearly Natura made big bucks if P&G were even interested in purchasing it.


----------



## jiml

does anyone really believe that P & G cares about dogs?>>>>

Many P&G executives are people (with a good salary) with a wife kids and im sure the family pet. Some Im sure love their family dog like it was a member of the family others think of it as the lowly animal - Not unlike the typical neighborhood. Im not one to demonize large corporations nor do I give them 100% trust.


----------



## whiteleo

I think you'll just have to wait, but when you see Natura products in Target and Petsmart/Petco, you can bet they have lowered the quality or outsourced most/all of their manufacturing. And then we won't have this conversation anymore, just a smug look on the faces of the ones here who already knew it was gonna happen.


----------



## RawFedDogs

whiteleo said:


> I think you'll just have to wait, but when you see Natura products in Target and Petsmart/Petco, you can bet they have lowered the quality or outsourced most/all of their manufacturing.


I don't think Natura would meat the requirements for Target, Petsmart or Petco. Their price is much too high. Their customers shop for low prices.



> And then we won't have this conversation anymore, just a smug look on the faces of the ones here who already knew it was gonna happen.


Don't hold your breath until you see it in those stores. How long will it take you to admit you are wrong? :smile: 6 months? 1 year? 2 years? 5 years? At some point you will have to admit it. :biggrin:


----------



## whiteleo

When it doesn't happen within a year I'll admit I was wrong!:biggrin:


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> I don't think Natura would meat the requirements for Target, Petsmart or Petco. Their price is much too high. Their customers shop for low prices.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't hold your breath until you see it in those stores. How long will it take you to admit you are wrong? :smile: 6 months? 1 year? 2 years? 5 years? At some point you will have to admit it. :biggrin:


Raw, 

You say you have indepth knowledge of how big business works. You made this clear to me recently. 

Surely you are aware of the P&G relationship with their friends in Bentonville...suffice to say it goes beyond the conventional Supplier-Retailer relationship. 

You really think we will NEVER see at least Cal Natural or Healthwise pop up in Wal Mart? For pete's sake, someone was having this conversation 10 years ago about Iams. NEVER. You'd NEVER see IAMS in Wal Mart.


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> Does anyone think Natura cared about dogs? They cared about the bottom line and making their company large enough that they could sell it for big bucks and retire. Guess they did it right. :smile:



you don't know this to be true. Its a cynical viewpoint. You may be right...you may not be. You don't have a direct feed into the hearts of the Natura family.


----------



## whiteleo

I say Target before Walmart as people who shop at Walmart really are looking for a bargain. ( I don't shop there for personal reasons) and they sell Ol'Roy like crazy, but Target its higher end and they sell all the P&G products already, Pukeanuba, Iams.......


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> Surely you are aware of the P&G relationship with their friends in Bentonville...suffice to say it goes beyond the conventional Supplier-Retailer relationship.


Hehe, OHHH YESSSS!!!! My company sold to Walmart. Walmart, because of their volume, is a very very special customer to anyone who sells to them. They get just about anything they ask for. They are very tough negotiators and not at all easy to sell to. 



> You really think we will NEVER see at least Cal Natural or Healthwise pop up in Wal Mart?


Thats exactly correct. Walmart doesn't sell top of the line anything. The products we sold them were the very cheapest we made. No or very few bells and whistles on our products sold by Walmart. They had no desire to even look at the top quality stuff.



> For pete's sake, someone was having this conversation 10 years ago about Iams. NEVER. You'd NEVER see IAMS in Wal Mart.


Is it there now? I never go through their dog food section but I don't think it is. I could be wrong.


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> you don't know this to be true. Its a cynical viewpoint. You may be right...you may not be. You don't have a direct feed into the hearts of the Natura family.


All I see is what they did. You don't do something like that on a whim. You plan for it for years. Most companies of any size have at least a 5 year plan. Many have 10, 20, and 25 year plans.


----------



## RawFedDogs

whiteleo said:


> they sell Ol'Roy like crazy,


Ol' Roy is the #1 selling dog food in the world.



> but Target its higher end and they sell all the P&G products already, Pukeanuba, Iams.......


But the people that buy Eukanuba and Iams are not the same people who buy Natura products. They are not the target customers. Hehe, I'm talking about a different "target" in my sentence. :smile:


----------



## dobesgalore

RawFedDogs said:


> Hehe, OHHH YESSSS!!!! My company sold to Walmart. Walmart, because of their volume, is a very very special customer to anyone who sells to them. They get just about anything they ask for. They are very tough negotiators and not at all easy to sell to.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats exactly correct. Walmart doesn't sell top of the line anything. The products we sold them were the very cheapest we made. No or very few bells and whistles on our products sold by Walmart. They had no desire to even look at the top quality stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> Is it there now? I never go through their dog food section but I don't think it is. I could be wrong.


Yes, Walmart now carries Iams. It fits right in with all the other low quality foods they sell.


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> Is it there now? I never go through their dog food section but I don't think it is. I could be wrong.



Come on Raw, if we're gonna have this debate...you better get into WalMart....Iams has a huge display...a bunch of different lines. Heck, they even have some type of test tubes where they show how great their food is. 

Seriously, Iams is well entrenched in Wal Mart...at least up here in the midwest. 

NOTE-I'm not saying that I'm CERTAIN we'll see Natura in Wal Mart. I'm just saying that you should be JUST as UNCERTAIN that we won't.


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> NOTE-I'm not saying that I'm CERTAIN we'll see Natura in Wal Mart. I'm just saying that you should be JUST as UNCERTAIN that we won't.


I'm pretty sure that we won't. Natura doesn't fit Walmart's sales strategy.


----------



## magicre

RawFedDogs said:


> If that were the case, everyone could be making 7 & 8 figure salaries and that's just not happening. Does anyone in your family make an 8 figure salary? No one in my family nor anyone I am aquainted with does. Wonder why?
> 
> And oh yes, I sorry, I forgot. All big companies, banks, Wall Street firms, car manufacturers and any ther company with more than a couple hundred million is sales got that way because of their evil ways. Making their money off the backs of their poor workers. I guess the highly paid executives are just smarter than the workers, huh?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know what that is a concern. They say they are not going to change anything. What more do you want them to do?
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone think Natura cared about dogs? They cared about the bottom line and making their company large enough that they could sell it for big bucks and retire. Guess they did it right. :smile:


agreed. ethics and a conscience doesn't get you very far toward the 8 figure salary....

but i do know people who make that kind of money....and i know why they make that kind of money....and i think you and i are saying the same thing. but you might have said it better.

i think that P & G just bought themselves one hell of a email list...as we internet folk say.....

it was a smart move on their part...considering how few people read the news and less people care...else they would be on these forums...engaged in lively debate.


----------



## littleboodog

RawFedDogs said:


> Ol' Roy is the #1 selling dog food in the world.



Ol' Roy is made by Mars, who bought Nutro in 2007 or 2008. Which is why Nutro isn't for sale there. There is no need for it to be. Mars is happy, Walmart is happy. 

What I heard from a Purina rep last winter is Euk is on the block because it doesn't fit anywhere. Now with Nutura, P&G has a lot of new product to fill shelves with.


----------



## littleboodog

magicre said:


> it was a smart move on their part...considering how few people read the news and less people care...else they would be on these forums...engaged in lively debate.




There are two smart moves to grow business--make your own or buy someone else's. How better to become a player in the upsale market than to buy your way in. Now P&G has Iams for the bottom feeders and Natura for the elite. 

My guess is once the PetSmart/Petco customer is familiar with the Natura line, P&G will gently dumb down the product.


----------



## 1605

littleboodog said:


> There are two smart moves to grow business--make your own or buy someone else's. How better to become a player in the upsale market than to buy your way in. Now P&G has Iams for the bottom feeders and Natura for the elite.
> 
> My guess is once the PetSmart/Petco customer is familiar with the Natura line, P&G will gently dumb down the product.


They already have the Petsmart/Petco customers with another product line. "Dumb[ing] down the [Natura] product" will LOSE them the high-end customers they just bought with Natura. 

So instead of having a share of BOTH markets, they will LOSE the Natura one. 

How is that logical?


----------



## magicre

littleboodog said:


> There are two smart moves to grow business--make your own or buy someone else's. How better to become a player in the upsale market than to buy your way in. Now P&G has Iams for the bottom feeders and Natura for the elite.
> 
> My guess is once the PetSmart/Petco customer is familiar with the Natura line, P&G will gently dumb down the product.


that's what i'm thinking....

with their resources, they can reach a wider base by 'educating' the masses on what to feed their dogs because people are too stupid to figure it out themselves and should leave that to experts...and many people do..

from 1860 when 'just add water' began....through the depression when companies figured out how to have a pet and feed it with dog food....and not waste precious human food....

through the veterinary 'special' foods for sick or compromised dogs....

the one commonality is these companies convinced massive amounts of people that a dog's digestive system was simply too complex for a mere human to feed it and maintain and sustain.....

p & g will spend the money it has and will conduct 'studies' and increase their bottom line because most people still think that you can take a diet pill and lose weight.

barnum and bailey were right.....there's a sucker born every minute....and a corporation quite willing and greedy and unethical enough to take advantage of it.


----------



## CorgiPaws

RawFedDogs said:


> But the people that buy Eukanuba and Iams are not the same people who buy Natura products. They are not the target customers. Hehe, I'm talking about a different "target" in my sentence. :smile:


You're right, right now they aren't. But let's look at a couple things for a minute...
*-*Those why buy Iams are generally people that are not necessarily looking for the cheapest food, (have you looked at those prices lately? They are actually MUCH more comparable in price than they are in quality.) but rather honestly believe (see below) that they are buying the best thing possible. 
*-*The marketing material out there for Iams is pretty convincing, if you're not one to dig and find out more for yourself. Do you honestly not expect to see Natura products advertised JUST as aggressively in the near future?
*-*Iams is in fact sold in Wal Mart, which has started carrying Newman's Own Organics, as well as multiple grain-free treats and higher end chews... Perhaps they are changing modes when it comes to the premium food craze going on... that's what people want.


----------



## SaltyDog

Keep in mind that the biggest boutique brand is Wellness.....and now Natura has the money to go after the biggest boutique.

It is my opininon that you will see the Natura line such as Healthwise, Innova and Cali Natural in the big box pet stores (Petco, PetSmart, etc.) and that Evo will stay in the private pet stores. The only places that actually sell an abundance of Core is online boutiques and private stores anyways.

I don't see any Natura products making it into Targets and Wal-Marts.

I also look for other private owned/manufacturing companies such as Champion and Natures Variety to follow suit with what Natura has done. With the global scale and governmental ways our country is heading, these small companies will not be able to sustain business against these giants. It is also my opinion that the co-packer brands will stand just fine, as they do not have the overhead that a company like Natura or Champion has.

I think it's to early to tell what will happen with the formulas and the sourcing of ingredients.

Everybody is already sliting Naturas throat, yet how many of you currently buy TOTW, or Blue Buff, or Canidae and so and so forth. These are all co-packed brands which you have no idea what is actually making it into the pot! At least Natura is still in control of the manufacturing.

Just my $.02


----------



## buddy97

SubMariner said:


> They already have the Petsmart/Petco customers with another product line. "Dumb[ing] down the [Natura] product" will LOSE them the high-end customers they just bought with Natura.
> 
> So instead of having a share of BOTH markets, they will LOSE the Natura one.
> 
> How is that logical?


simple, the new Natura buying customers at the big box stores would obliterate, in sheer volume, the number of customers who now buy in small independent shops. unless one believes they are more concerned with acquiescing to the current Natura buyer in lieu of exponentially growing the Natura customer base. yes, yes, they have resources to grow it and keep the products in the independent shops.........they also have the resources to mass market it, move it into the big box pet stores and really show their shareholders something about growth and profit.


losing some of the current natura buyers and adding tons more by placing natura products in petsmart/petco and positioning them as the most premium foods to be had at the big box stores is a huge net gain in customers for them.....and if the mass of your customer base is the average petco/petsmart shopper, they can easily degrade the product a bit to make it even cheaper to produce and still have their place in the big box pet stores. lets be honest, that customer base is not going to be on top of what is on the ingredient label the way the current Natura customer is.

why wouldnt they want the "budget conscious" customers (a poor value that iams/euk is) as well as the less educated consumer who has always wanted to feed Natura products...has heard about them....but never had easy access to them.

of course, my opinion is that Natura products will go down in quality over time, but i am even more certain that Natura products, within 2-3 years, will be sold in Petco/Petsmart. in and of itself, there would be nothing wrong with that.....but placing them there means a different customer base with a different level of understanding of the dog food industry...an opportunity to degrade the products with little scrutiny from said customer base, and still have them be among the better foods there.

IMHO, of course.


----------



## jeserf

azul99 said:


> Jeserf, CN changed our lives too. I am in a bona fide quandary about what I will do (as silly as that may sound to a non-dog-lover).
> 
> What do you plan to buy for your dog, if you will not be buying CN any more? I'm interested in knowing because my dog was so intolerant of other kibbles I tried.


I already switched about a year ago to Primal because of a health issue (and it's been incredible). Sometimes I give her CN if I'm out of primal, or other people are caring for her. 

I'd keep your dog on CN until I noticed a difference in stool. If a problem pops up, then address it. I've looked in to Before Grain because it's by Merrick, who I see as a very involved American company. I respect that, and like that they seem to genuinely care about what is in their food. Regular Merrick is also good good but has a lot of ingredients and would be hard to pinpoint the issue if tummy probs popped up. 

Stick to CN though until you cannot, IMO.


----------



## littleboodog

Derek, I think you're right on the money. The more facings a brand has in a store, the more times the customer sees the name. The cost of producing a bottom to top product line/s is peanuts compared to the income made on volume.


----------



## kevin bradley

SaltyDog said:


> Everybody is already sliting Naturas throat, yet how many of you currently buy TOTW, or Blue Buff, or Canidae and so and so forth. These are all co-packed brands which you have no idea what is actually making it into the pot! At least Natura is still in control of the manufacturing.
> 
> Just my $.02




Quick synopsis of why I DON'T buy any of those brands. 

Anyone questioning Champion should understand that they don't sell canned wet food. I can't say for certain, but I believe they lack the manufacturing capability for it....the fact that they won't simply farm it out to Diamond or Evanger's makes me love them even more.


----------



## kevin bradley

this whole theme of "Natura will NEVER go into Wal Mart because it would detract completely from what it was built on, its core customers, etc..." it makes me laugh. 

Who would ever think we'd see Calloway Golf Clubs in Target? Burts Bees was kind of a boutique beauty product for years, was it not?....Sony is another story. For years, Sony was a pretty high level store product...Sony is now sold everywhere. Anyone who watched the recent CNBC Wal Mart Biography(there have been a few I think) saw how Wal Mart identified a market for Organic products and is really chasing it down...I believe it's Stonyfield Organic Yogurt they have lured into their machine. 


This entire rant of "we'll never see Natura in Wal Mart" and how confident you all are makes me chuckle. 

Simply put...if the machine down in Bentonville sees profitability in this category, someone from P&G will be getting a phone call and you can close this whole discussion.


----------



## magicre

jeserf said:


> I've looked in to Before Grain because it's by Merrick, who I see as a very involved American company. I respect that, and like that they seem to genuinely care about what is in their food. Regular Merrick is also good good but has a lot of ingredients and would be hard to pinpoint the issue if tummy probs popped up.


and, yet:

FDA Warning Letter to Merrick


----------



## 1605

kevin bradley said:


> this whole theme of "Natura will NEVER go into Wal Mart because it would detract completely from what it was built on, its core customers, etc..." it makes me laugh.
> 
> Who would ever think we'd see Calloway Golf Clubs in Target? Burts Bees was kind of a boutique beauty product for years, was it not?....Sony is another story. For years, Sony was a pretty high level store product...Sony is now sold everywhere. Anyone who watched the recent CNBC Wal Mart Biography(there have been a few I think) saw how Wal Mart identified a market for Organic products and is really chasing it down...I believe it's Stonyfield Organic Yogurt they have lured into their machine.
> 
> 
> This entire rant of "we'll never see Natura in Wal Mart" and how confident you all are makes me chuckle.
> 
> Simply put...if the machine down in Bentonville sees profitability in this category, someone from P&G will be getting a phone call and you can close this whole discussion.


What you say is PARTIALLY correct. Yes, companies that were never in Walmart are now in there. However, that doesn't tell the whole story. The products from those companies are EXCLUSIVE to Walmart and are NOT the same quality as those sold/marketed elsewhere. Sony is a prime example. 

Look at a Sony DVD/Blueray sold in Walmart & it is an absolute piece of junk because that's the only way it could be mfg'd to Walmart specs/price point. That particular model WILL ONLY BE FOUND at Walmart. The higher quality units are sold elsewhere. And who was Sony competing against @ Walmart? Other cheap crap from Panasonic or Walmart "house brands" that no one has ever heard of.

I'm using this particular example because I was recently shopping for a new dvd/blueray player and saw this in action. Chief amongst my research tools was Consumer Reports, but I also used other online sources such as CNET, Wize, etc. You could easily see the difference in the quality of the product both in the ratings & in person. 

Thus Walmart never gets my $$$.


----------



## kevin bradley

And Sub, what you say is partially true. 

Certainly, the Wal Marts of the world have the power to influence their suppliers. 

However, there are many, many others where the product lines remain intact. I gave you the example of Stonyfield Organic Yogurt....Burts Bees...heck, I remember when I could only order Burts Bees. 

And you kind of MAKE my point for me. Sony's degrading line of products at Wal Mart.....NEVER existed years ago. Wal Mart PUSHED them into making an inferior product line to meet a certain price point. Thats our entire argument of fearing this entire debacle.

...and how delightful.....what a future we have to look forward to. We get to try and differentiate between Wal Mart EVO and the other EVO at Pet stores. 

Great.


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> Thats our entire argument of fearing this entire debacle.
> 
> ...and how delightful.....what a future we have to look forward to. We get to try and differentiate between Wal Mart EVO and the other EVO at Pet stores.
> 
> Great.


BUT .... where do you get this absurd notion that P&G is contemplating or even wants to market their Natura line of products through Walmart? They have products they can sell at Walmart, they don't need or want more. They have said this over and over. How many times to they have to say it before you begin to get the notion that they actually mean what they say? You will no more see Natura on the shelves as you will Dom Perignon on the wine shelves in Walmart. :smile:


----------



## whiteleo

I haven't heard one word that says they won't be in any of the big box stores, where is the propaganda for that, and I'm not talking about the initial takeover letter.


----------



## SaltyDog

There are no Wellness products or Diamond Brand products at Walmart. These companies are certainly big enough to play on these levels.


The conversation about Natura ending up in Targets and Walmarts has gotten rediculous. Has anybody on here, that feeds a Natura product had any adverse affects since the takeover?


----------



## kevin bradley

whiteleo said:


> I haven't heard one word that says they won't be in any of the big box stores, where is the propaganda for that, and I'm not talking about the initial takeover letter.


I guess what irks me about our fellow forum friends is that they have this CERTAINTY that it will *never* be on the shelves of Wal Mart. Raw even says our notions are ABSURD. This even after I've given numerous examples of premium brand items that have made their way into Wal Marts. 

Again, I'm not saying with certainty that you will see Natura at Wal Mart. But NO ONE. NO ONE is gonna get me to say with CERTAINTY that we won't see Healthwise or Cal Natural or some other custom made line on those shelves. No way you can say that. If they see a profit center, they will do anything there. 

Seriously, how in the world can you say w/ conviction that you KNOW what some monster corporate machine will/won't do?


----------



## kevin bradley

SaltyDog said:


> There are no Wellness products or Diamond Brand products at Walmart. These companies are certainly big enough to play on these levels.
> 
> 
> The conversation about Natura ending up in Targets and Walmarts has gotten rediculous. Has anybody on here, that feeds a Natura product had any adverse affects since the takeover?



In all lockerroom type banter theme....seriously, I can't wait until Healthwise or Innova ends up in a Wal Mart. A lot of you guys are gonna be eating Crow for Supper :wink::biggrin:

Don't worry, none of us will say "I told ya so." (fingers crossed behind my back as I type) :wink:


----------



## jiml

Look at a Sony DVD/Blueray sold in Walmart & it is an absolute piece of junk because that's the only way it could be mfg'd to Walmart specs/price point.>>>

a little off topic but that DVD/blue ray may be bought by a family that may never had been able to get a blue ray otherwise.


----------



## kevin bradley

jiml said:


> Look at a Sony DVD/Blueray sold in Walmart & it is an absolute piece of junk because that's the only way it could be mfg'd to Walmart specs/price point.>>>
> 
> a little off topic but that DVD/blue ray may be bought by a family that may never had been able to get a blue ray otherwise.


true and on the positive side....at least it would enable some Dogs to get better food if they don't trash the formula too badly.


----------



## whiteleo

I've been wondering lately WHY CN has been taking out FULL page ads in our sunday papers the last couple weeks?

I remember when we would see Kohls ads on our local t.v. and wonder why because we didn't have a Kohls any where around us, closest one was in CA., not long after they took over the building that was a Mervyns.

Makes me wonder!


----------



## kevin bradley

whiteleo said:


> I've been wondering lately WHY CN has been taking out FULL page ads in our sunday papers the last couple weeks?
> 
> I remember when we would see Kohls ads on our local t.v. and wonder why because we didn't have a Kohls any where around us, closest one was in CA., not long after they took over the building that was a Mervyns.
> 
> Makes me wonder!



its all part of the plan, whitelo. Kind of like that great scene in "Dark Knight" when the Joker is giving his speech about no one caring when its all "part of the plan." Well, P & G has a "plan." 

Makes you wonder. If P & G was gonna let Natura run completely on its own and just collect the modest profits every quarter, how are they coordinating full page ads probably driven by some Chicago or NY ad agency. Hmmmmm...I wouldn't have thought the Natura folks would even know how to get in touch with those agencies. hmmmmmm.....interesting. Very interesting.


----------



## chowder

SubMariner said:


> Look at a Sony DVD/Blueray sold in Walmart & it is an absolute piece of junk because that's the only way it could be mfg'd to Walmart specs/price point. That particular model WILL ONLY BE FOUND at Walmart. The higher quality units are sold elsewhere. And who was Sony competing against @ Walmart? Other cheap crap from Panasonic or Walmart "house brands" that no one has ever heard of.


Kind of makes you wonder about the meat you are buying at Walmart doesn't it? Where exactly are those cows and chickens coming from that they can sell them so darn cheap? I sure they aren't getting them from the same slaughter house that Whole Foods uses :smile: Probably not even from the same slaughter house that Natura uses :biggrin:


----------



## kevin bradley

chowder said:


> Kind of makes you wonder about the meat you are buying at Walmart doesn't it? Where exactly are those cows and chickens coming from that they can sell them so darn cheap? I sure they aren't getting them from the same slaughter house that Whole Foods uses :smile: Probably not even from the same slaughter house that Natura uses :biggrin:



Let's be clear here. Wal Mart doesn't call up their suppliers and tell them..."we want you to make cheap garbage" or "we want you to make cheap, bad meat that might not be good for our customer." 

Its more insidiously subtle. They drag them into Bentonville and tell them that one of their competitors is beating them and they need to find a way to cut costs. They are even bold enough to openly suggest foreign production facilities if it means a lower price point. Its also important to note that they don't do this once. Its a regular event and you either work to appease or die. They then beat you down for any out of stock issues your product might be having....using threats to replace you and anything else that pushes you. 

In the end, you squeeze and squeeze and squeeze your own product line until you don't even recognize what it looks like when its done. Its about as far from Quality as you can ever get.


----------



## GermanSheperdlover

kevin bradley said:


> Let's be clear here. Wal Mart doesn't call up their suppliers and tell them..."we want you to make cheap garbage" or "we want you to make cheap, bad meat that might not be good for our customer."
> 
> Its more insidiously subtle. They drag them into Bentonville and tell them that one of their competitors is beating them and they need to find a way to cut costs. They are even bold enough to openly suggest foreign production facilities if it means a lower price point. Its also important to note that they don't do this once. Its a regular event and you either work to appease or die. They then beat you down for any out of stock issues your product might be having....using threats to replace you and anything else that pushes you.
> 
> In the end, you squeeze and squeeze and squeeze your own product line until you don't even recognize what it looks like when its done. Its about as far from Quality as you can ever get.


*What Wal crap does is tell their buyers who purchase for ol crap to buy the cheapest ingredients that they can find. Then they ask, how can we produce it cheaper and in comes the low grade corn, wheat, plastic and any thing else they can get away with. And I am sure that is what they say. Now what P&G is saying , is how can we cut costs?? Duh, the first thing they well do and have already done is buy cheaper ingredients which in reality is inferior ingredients. Soon you well see the products diapear from the quaility pet stores and show up at Costco and such. AND it well be a much lower grade product. All 3 pet stores who I buy my dog food from are dropping the product.*


----------



## RawFedDogs

GermanSheperdlover said:


> Duh, the first thing they well do and have already done is buy cheaper ingredients which in reality is inferior ingredients.


Which ingredients? how much cheaper? How do you know the quality of these ingredients are less? Where do they get these cheaper ingredients? Where do you get this information?



> Soon you well see the products diapear from the quaility pet stores and show up at Costco and such. AND it well be a much lower grade product. All 3 pet stores who I buy my dog food from are dropping the product.


What is the name and city of those stores?


----------



## kevin bradley

I understand you want specifics, Raw. 


But if we are going to err on the side of needing to provide you with specific sources of "crap" suppliers and production sources for Wal Mart....

then you must do the same on the flip side...

You must show us all of the Quality Suppliers and fabulous ingredients they source from. 


If WE have to prove their negatives, you must prove their positives. In my book, all indications for Wal Mart are guilty until proven innocent. I've seen nothing to prove otherwise.


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> I understand you want specifics, Raw.


Germanshepherdlover said, _"Duh, the first thing they well do and have already done is buy cheaper ingredients which in reality is inferior ingredients."_ If he knows that happened, all I am asking is which ingredients have they changed to inferior products? I don't think that is an unreasonable question. 



> But if we are going to err on the side of needing to provide you with specific sources of "crap" suppliers and production sources for Wal Mart....


We aren't talking about Walmart here ... GSDlover said P&G is now buying inferior ingredients for their new lines of dog food. I just asked which ingredients. Again a fair question.



> then you must do the same on the flip side...
> 
> You must show us all of the Quality Suppliers and fabulous ingredients they source from.


The same ones they have always sourced from. Nothing has changed. Again, we are talking Natura, not Walmart. In case you haven't noticed, Natura products are not sold in Walmart stores. 



> If WE have to prove their negatives, you must prove their positives. In my book, all indications for Wal Mart are guilty until proven innocent. I've seen nothing to prove otherwise.


Again, my post was not about Walmart but was about Natura and their products. There are no Natura products in Walmart. Walmart isn't even part of the discussion except for some off the wall comments made by some that its the #1 goal of Natura to sell to Walmart. There is no evidence of that at all. Natura has said that they have no desire to sell to the big box stores. They will continue their previous sales stradegy. Anyone who says different is merely speculating on baseless information.

BTW: I have no problems w/ Walmart at all. It is what it is. It's the largest retailer in the world. It caters to price concious buyers who care more about price than quality. There are several reasons they sell as cheap as they do. One of those is the fact that they negotiate very good prices from their suppliers. Another is the fact that they have the most efficient distribution system in the world. Another is that the negotiate good prices for their real estate and negotiate good tax breaks from the communities they build in. None of this has anything to do with P&G buying Natura.

The reason y'all want to inject Walmart into this discussion is the Natura part of the discussion is not going your way. :smile: This is not a discussion about Walmart or it's policies and practices.


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> One of those is the fact that they negotiate very good prices from their suppliers.



_*"Negotiate"....*_I like that one, Raw. "Negotiate"....indeed is what they do. 

Kind of like the Lion in the jungle "negotiating" with the Gazelle. :smile:


----------



## steve

I own a pet food in British Columbia Canada and have not a problem with Natura since the take over. I sell about 15,000 to 18,000 dollars a month. In the past i would get some reactions, whether it would be mild like slightly loose stool to severe blast force diahrea(sp?). This trait has continued with no change in the pattern whether it be more prob's or less.
As a store owner who has been with Natura for over 14 years this has been a personal and emotional time as we have seen this group of products collectively bring up the bootstraps of the pet food industry. I also sell Acana and Orijen with confidence and i am more than ready to make the switch to them from Natura if and when they change their ingredient panels or quality of ingredients.
In the last month or two i have never seen so many reps from competing food companies out there beating the bush telling us this is happening and that is happening and that is happening but no one and i mean no one knows truly what is going on with Natura and P&G. The test will be in the feeding and as of yet there has been no definite changes that i can see and we sell a lot. One last thing' it would be far easier to sell a Canadian product in a Canadian market so it is not that we are trolls for Natura, it is just that it has been the most consistant product out there for many years with people starting to catch them just recently.
This is one of those cases where we do not throw the baby out with the bathwater so to speak.
If it does happen we are more than ready with other products that are very comparable which we did not have even 5 years ago. We are far more educated now as consumers and have more choices in our decision making than ever in the past.


----------



## steve

Sorry to the above post, it should pet food store. One last thing is i very much like Champion and i hope that i got that across ok. Just rushing as i am late for work bu felt i had to post a another opinion from someone who is in the business.

Thank you


----------



## kevin bradley

steve said:


> Sorry to the above post, it should pet food store. One last thing is i very much like Champion and i hope that i got that across ok. Just rushing as i am late for work bu felt i had to post a another opinion from someone who is in the business.
> 
> Thank you


Came across perfectly, Steve. Thanks for giving us your thoughts. 

As I said repeatedly, I err on the side of "We just don't know what will happen yet"....with a definite bias towards a negative(Natura food degrading) outcome at some point-in 1 year or 5 years I feel it is most likely coming. 

...where some other members seem to fall completely on the side of "Natura will be fine, nothing will ever change"


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> ...where some other members seem to fall completely on the side of "Natura will be fine, nothing will ever change"


I don't think anyone has said nothing will ever change. Everything changes for a variety of reasons. But when something does change, it won't necessarily be because of P&G. It may well have changed anyway. The change may very well be for the better. It may actually improve the product but for those anti big business people, no change could possibly be positive or improve the product in any way. I'm sure in time Natura would have made changes without P&G buying them.

Don't worry about change until it happens. THEN look at it and determine if its a positive change or negative.


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> I don't think anyone has said nothing will ever change. Everything changes for a variety of reasons. But when something does change, it won't necessarily be because of P&G. It may well have changed anyway. The change may very well be for the better. It may actually improve the product but for those anti big business people, no change could possibly be positive or improve the product in any way. I'm sure in time Natura would have made changes without P&G buying them.
> 
> Don't worry about change until it happens. THEN look at it and determine if its a positive change or negative.


I hope you're right, Raw. I honestly don't WISH for the food to digress...because it goes without saying that it will end up in the bellies of our beloved friends. 

I was in Wal Mart the other day and saw a number of people with Old Roy in their carts. All I can think of is some poor Dog is eating that garbage.


----------



## SaltyDog

kevin bradley said:


> I was in Wal Mart the other day and saw a number of people with Old Roy in their carts. All I can think of is some poor Dog is eating that garbage.



So then, how do you feel when you drive past McDonalds and see the Drive-Thru line wrapped around the building? Those poor kids?

Or what about all the schools feeding processed lunches to our children?


I'm not trying to stir the pot, but some people just do not and never will, care.


----------



## kevin bradley

Admittedly Salty, I'm a bit of a hypocrit as I myself will eat fast food 1-2x per week. Heck, I shop on a regular basis at Wal Mart. 

I guess I look at our Dogs as not having the ability to decide for themselves and its a responsibility thats been handed to us. I don't really care what human beings do to themselves to be brutally honest. I look at my Dogs as Angels(as I'm sure 99% of this forum does)...as gifts that I need to keep here as long as possible.


----------



## SaltyDog

kevin bradley said:


> Admittedly Salty, I'm a bit of a hypocrit as I myself will eat fast food 1-2x per week. Heck, I shop on a regular basis at Wal Mart.
> 
> I guess I look at our Dogs as not having the ability to decide for themselves and its a responsibility thats been handed to us. I don't really care what human beings do to themselves to be brutally honest. I look at my Dogs as Angels(as I'm sure 99% of this forum does)...as gifts that I need to keep here as long as possible.




I totally agree with you, but in my little "what if" sentence, I was referring to children. That line at McDonalds involves kids not being able to pick what they want to eat, because their care takers (mom and dad) have chosen for them....fast food. OR, our children are stuffed Monday thru Friday at our schools with cheap, preserved government run food that isn't anymore nutritious than most fast food.

I get totally what you are saying that the only choice dogs have is the choice we give them. (I personally feed Honest Kitchen, Evo and Orijen). Same goes for our children.

Point is....yes it is sad to see dogs have to eat Ol' Roy, Iams, Purina....etc, but it is just as sad to see children forced to eat cafeteria food and fast food forced by parents


----------



## Guest

SaltyDog said:


> ...... but it is just as sad to see children forced to eat cafeteria food and fast food forced by parents


I raised my two children on home prepared healthy meals and we ate dinner at home every night except for occasionally ordering out for pizza. For snacks my children were given healthy choices such as fruit, cheese, celery, etc. instead of the usual chips or cookies.

Now that my oldest is almost 18 and has her own car, she's rarely home for dinner anymore although she is always welcome. Instead, she lives on a consistent diet of Dunkin Donuts, Wendy's, Burger King, and Subway. Her own personal choices, not mine.

Sad, isn't it. I did my best but I know that we can bring a horse to water but we cannot force it to drink.


----------



## littleboodog

RawFedDogs said:


> Which ingredients? how much cheaper? How do you know the quality of these ingredients are less? Where do they get these cheaper ingredients? Where do you get this information?


Can't answer all the questions, but some I can. Which ingredients? Protein sources. More vegetable protein, less animal protein. Less whole ingredients, more fragmented ("we use only the part of the [fill in the blank] that we need"). Notably, rice, corn, wheat gluten. Soy protein isolate. They get these ingredients from China, and they are cheaper. They are so cheap that the cost of transporting ingredients and product components don't adversely affect the bottom line.

The information is there. Read annual reports. Read the press releases. Google China's production numbers. Every industry that uses China's labor force is identified on the internet if you look hard enough. The production volume is there. The financial results are there.


----------



## RawFedDogs

littleboodog said:


> Can't answer all the questions, but some I can. Which ingredients? Protein sources. More vegetable protein, less animal protein. Less whole ingredients, more fragmented ("we use only the part of the [fill in the blank] that we need"). Notably, rice, corn, wheat gluten. Soy protein isolate. They get these ingredients from China, and they are cheaper. QUOTE]
> 
> HUH???? I don't think we are in the same conversation. With the exception of rice, Natura doesn't use any of those ingredients as far as I know. I don't think they use any fragments. Go back and read my post and the post just before it that my post is commenting on.


----------



## GermanSheperdlover

littleboodog said:


> Can't answer all the questions, but some I can. Which ingredients? Protein sources. More vegetable protein, less animal protein. Less whole ingredients, more fragmented ("we use only the part of the [fill in the blank] that we need"). Notably, rice, corn, wheat gluten. Soy protein isolate. They get these ingredients from China, and they are cheaper. They are so cheap that the cost of transporting ingredients and product components don't adversely affect the bottom line.
> 
> The information is there. Read annual reports. Read the press releases. Google China's production numbers. Every industry that uses China's labor force is identified on the internet if you look hard enough. The production volume is there. The financial results are there.


*It always disgusts me when people mention vegtables and meat in the same sentence for dogs. No matter what you think, dogs really DO NOT need vegtables in thier diet.They certainly DO NOT need vegtable protein, NONE, zero. They need meat..I feed Orijen (AND NATURA PRODUCTS but not for long), and I believe that still does not contain enough meat and I suplement my dogs diet with raw meat or cooked chicken. China isn't the problem, it is the dog food manufactures who buy the low quaility products from China. Don't kid yourself we have a ton of lousy soy, wheat and corn right here. It's just our goverment pays farmers to not grow and or buy it then give it away free to 3rd world countries. But those ingredients should not be in dog food..*


----------



## littleboodog

RawFedDogs said:


> littleboodog said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't answer all the questions, but some I can. Which ingredients? Protein sources. More vegetable protein, less animal protein. Less whole ingredients, more fragmented ("we use only the part of the [fill in the blank] that we need"). Notably, rice, corn, wheat gluten. Soy protein isolate. They get these ingredients from China, and they are cheaper. QUOTE]
> 
> HUH???? I don't think we are in the same conversation. With the exception of rice, Natura doesn't use any of those ingredients as far as I know. I don't think they use any fragments. Go back and read my post and the post just before it that my post is commenting on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The issue was P&G's deconstructing Natura:
> "Now what P&G is saying , is how can we cut costs?? Duh, the first thing they well do and have already done is buy cheaper ingredients which in reality is inferior ingredients."
> 
> 
> You asked what and how and I responded to what and how. Natura may not use plant protein now, but that's one way to cheapen the forumula. Acquiring raw materials from China is another way. I think I am addressing your comments.
Click to expand...


----------



## RawFedDogs

littleboodog said:


> The issue was P&G's deconstructing Natura:
> "Now what P&G is saying , is how can we cut costs?? Duh, the first thing they well do and have already done is buy cheaper ingredients which in reality is inferior ingredients."


HAHA ... which P&G meeting did you attend and who else was in the meeting? :smile:



> You asked what and how and I responded to what and how. Natura may not use plant protein now, but that's one way to cheapen the forumula. Acquiring raw materials from China is another way. I think I am addressing your comments.


Having greater buying power is another way to cheapen the formula and probably the one Natura is most likely to use. I don't think you are addressing my comments at all. You have nothing to base your comments on.


----------



## steve

To me, the most frustrating part of this whole Natura P&G thing is that we know so little and to come out and say this is what they are going to do is wrong unless you know something that the rest of us do not. When they bought Iams, there wasn't much communication between consumers and to be honest our knowledge of pet food for the most part was marginal unlike now. In my opinion Iams was already crappy when they were bought. Quality pet food is like rungs on a never ending ladder with the quality getting better and better. 12 years ago it was a real short ladder with not that many rungs to climb up. Another way of saying it is "it is easy to be a 3 in a world of 2's" Speculating is just what the word means to speculate or guess. I am not happy with the fact they were bought not happy at all but that does not mean i am going to jump ship off a perfectly safe vessel. To be honest i would be more afraid of foods like totw, Nat balance and the go now line who do not make their own food and that scares the bejesus out of me.

Time will tell what is going to happen but this time we have more bullets in our belt in which to chose from if Natura's products start to decline.


----------



## kevin bradley

steve said:


> to be honest i would be more afraid of foods like totw, nat balance and the go now line who do not make their own food and that scares the bejesus out of me.




*thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you!*


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> Having greater buying power is another way to cheapen the formula and probably the one Natura is most likely to use. I don't think you are addressing my comments at all. You have nothing to base your comments on.


its ONE way they have to cheapen the formula...in the end, it is my opinion that the smart guys who make 8 figure salaries will use all the ways available to make the product more profitable. i have an equal amount of evidence that my opinion will come to fritition as you do that they will stop at using ONLY their buying power to cheapen the formula...that is to say....NONE.


----------



## buddy97

steve said:


> Time will tell what is going to happen but this time we have more bullets in our belt in which to chose from if Natura's products start to decline.


no one says you have to have your dog eat Natura while you are waiting to see what the product becomes.....though i think a couple guys on here would like to make it a crime to drop natura without a pile of written evidence FIRST.

lots of good foods to feed while on "stand by" mode.


----------



## steve

Last time i checked i did not say what to or what not to feed. You are a big person and have the right to chose what you are going to feed, however changing from probably the food with the most meat inclusion rate which is evo and is probably the closest kibble to raw because they were bought by a conglomerate doesn't work for me. And that is just for me. If i was going to change i would look at Orijen as it very close to Evo. If i used a Single grain food i would feed Cal Nat as it is one of the more simple diets out there. Would not use Karma at all as i do not need organic grain in my food. Budgeting reasons Healthwise looks like a good choice for a food. Personally i feel uncomfortable with some of the choices that are available including the Now line, TOTW, Newman's own etc... which look good at a distance do not measure up to standards of the above foods. 
Again my opinion


----------



## buddy97

steve said:


> probably the food with the most meat inclusion rate which is evo and is probably the closest kibble to raw


no kibble comes closest to raw...or rather i should say the statement implies a kibble can somehow come close to mimicking raw, which is too far from reality to be considered as valid. even the high meat inclusion foods like evo or orijen have to use mostly named meat meals to reach those meat content levels. second, there are other kibbles with equally high meat inclusion percentages...EVO didnt have some monopoly there.


----------



## steve

Orijen chicken 70 % of protein meat and dairy sources at 40% protein = 28% of the 40% being meat or dairy protein
Evo Turkey 80% of protein coming from meat and dairy sources at 42% total protein= 33.6% of the 42% being meat or dairy protein.

Trying to find one that is higher that does not have lard in it.

I think it is important to have the bags put the meat inclusion rate on the bag to decipher what is in it.

Yes i know nothing is just like raw, but i think we all know that and maybe we are just splitting hairs a little bit.


----------



## RawFedDogs

steve said:


> Orijen chicken 70 % of protein meat and dairy sources at 40% protein = 28% of the 40% being meat or dairy protein
> Evo Turkey 80% of protein coming from meat and dairy sources at 42% total protein= 33.6% of the 42% being meat or dairy protein.


Thats not exactly the way I read it. It's early in the morning here so maybe my brain is not fully awake yet. :smile:

What I read is that 70% of the protein is from meat and dairy. 70% of 40% = 28%. That would mean that 28% of the *total food is meat protein*, not 28% of the protein is meat protein. That would mean 12% of the total food is protein from plant material. 28% animal + 12% plant = 40% protein in the food. Doesn't that make more sense?



> I think it is important to have the bags put the meat inclusion rate on the bag to decipher what is in it.


I agree but you know they aren't going to do that.


----------



## steve

I was talking with one of the owners of a pet food called 1st mate which is based here in Chilliwack B.C. They have been making food since about 1989 and that was the way that he explained how he did it. It made sense to me. 
Their food is not really well known down south but it has fed well.


----------



## buddy97

steve said:


> Orijen chicken 70 % of protein meat and dairy sources at 40% protein = 28% of the 40% being meat or dairy protein
> Evo Turkey 80% of protein coming from meat and dairy sources at 42% total .


where are you reading that from?

orijen isnt saying what % of their protein level is from meat...they are stating what % of the product is meat...not the same things.

evo stating what % of the protein is from meat
orijen stating what % of the product is meat

apples and oranges.


----------



## steve

The front of the bag tells you that 70% of the protein comes from meat and dairy sources. So does evo's.


----------



## buddy97

steve said:


> The front of the bag tells you that 70% of the protein comes from meat and dairy sources. So does evo's.


im looking at the front of a bag of orijen regional red and adult.

both state on the front of the bag:

_70% animal ingredients (sources listed)
30% fruits, vegetables and botanicals
0% grains_

i see nowhere where it is saying 70% of the protein comes from meat and dairy sources...it is stating that 70% of the product is made up of those animal ingredients....two different concepts.

_likewise, EVO states 80% turkey, chicken and dairy ingredients_

neither of these are claiming what percentage of the protein in the food comes from those sources....they are claiming what percentage of the product is made up from those ingredients.


-we know the protein % in each food
-we know what % of the food is made up of animal ingredients and what % is made up from non animal ingredients
-we cannot know from that what % of the total protein is from the animal ingredients.


----------



## steve

If you call orijen's 1800 # they will tell you it is the way that i have stated. Anyways leaving today on holidays for 1 week. Will pick this up when i get back.


----------



## buddy97

steve said:


> If you call orijen's 1800 # they will tell you it is the way that i have stated. Anyways leaving today on holidays for 1 week. Will pick this up when i get back.


i had thie query months ago when discussing this on another forum. their position was that percentages on the front are percentages in relation to the total content of the bag, not percentages of protein that come from each of those sets of products.

ie the bag of orijen is comprised of 70% animal ingredients, NOT the animal ingredients make up 70% of the total protein content in the food.

im sure the animal ingredients make up a majority of the total protein content, but that is not what they are intending to display on the bag.


----------



## AddieNMel

Seems this thread has gone a little off topic. I'm still feeding Addie Innova. I have had no problems with it yet. Everything is as normal so far. I'm not too terribly concerned. I wouldnt freak out everyone. Wait for solid facts and proof that ingredients have changed, of which I have heard nothing about. 

If your pet isnt doing well on it, switch, but please dont spread rumors or go crazy with accusations etc. It doesnt help anyone. 

Thank you!


----------



## whiteleo

Well, what I find absolutely amazing is all the advertising that is going on since the takeover, could it be that they are ramping up production? (we all know what that means as far as quality) or is it because they actually lost so much business because of the takeover?


----------



## RawFedDogs

whiteleo said:


> Well, what I find absolutely amazing is all the advertising that is going on since the takeover, could it be that they are ramping up production? (we all know what that means as far as quality)


I don't understand what makes people think that if a company can produce 1,000 bags a day of quality food, that they can't produce 10,000 bags a day of food of the same quality.



> or is it because they actually lost so much business because of the takeover?


Possibly because they are trying to calm the nerves of their more hysterical customers.


----------



## whiteleo

How is that calming the nerves of their customers? This company never needed to advertise before, I think personally its because sooooo many boutique stores are no longer carrying their food.


----------



## RawFedDogs

whiteleo said:


> How is that calming the nerves of their customers? This company never needed to advertise before, I think personally its because sooooo many boutique stores are no longer carrying their food.


P&G is a company that believes in advertising. It's their way of life and they aren't very smart to sit back and say nothing with this wave of hysteria crossing over the internet. It's their way of reaching people. They can't put someone on every discussion board to answer every complaint. This way they reach their customer base to get out their story. 

Personally I don't think there are "soooooo many botique stores" that are no longer carrying their product. I don't know what else they can do to counter all the negative baseless attacks from a small group of people who have no clue about what they are talking about.


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> Personally I don't think there are "soooooo many botique stores" that are no longer carrying their product. I don't know what else they can do to counter all the negative baseless attacks from a small group of people who have no clue about what they are talking about.


dont know. in my area, there are three small independent shops that carried foods like orijen and EVO. two of the three have dropped EVO and the third talks like they will soon. Natura is still carried by Pets Supplies Plus locally, which is a chain store, but not on the scale of the Petco/Petsmart chain. so, at least locally, it hasnt been a desirable scenario for them. 

it doesnt matter to me, because i fully expect them to end up in the big box pet stores eventually. if they leave the products alone, that will be good as more people will have easy access.

i have to say, just because someone decides they will drop Natura and feed something else in no way necessitiates them being labeled as "having no clue what they are talking about."


----------



## kevin bradley

Derek, which stores are you talking about? I haven't been in any of the PSP stores lately. Kind of surprised they are dropping Natura this quick. 

Wow. I'm surprised. 

Raw,

I would only say this...in many stereotypes lies a grain of truth. If this is going on at many of the small independent chains and botique stores, don't you think there is at least some reasonable concern that this won't end well? 

I've compromised with you enough to at least say that EVO/Innova may stay ok. 

Can't you at least open yourself to the *possibility* that they won't stay as good as they once were? 

With all due respect, your posts seem to defend P & G to the point where I'm not sure you'll go against them unless corn becomes the primary ingredient.

Net/net-to many of us, Natura/P & G are GUILTY until proven innocent.

To you-Natura/P & G is INNOCENT until proven guilty.

Just a different way of seeing things I guess.


----------



## buddy97

kevin bradley said:


> Derek, which stores are you talking about? I haven't been in any of the PSP stores lately. Kind of surprised they are dropping Natura this quick.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> no, the PSP are not dropping it to my knowledge. the three stores i was talking about are smaller independent shops, two of which have already dropped it, and one who has stated its a strong possibility. i really dont think Pets Supplies Plus will drop any Natura products. the shoppers the average shoppers there more often than not are walking out of the store with SD, Iams, Pedigree, etc... by the boatloads. i think its the shoppers in the smaller independent shops who (again, imo) keep up on the goings on in the dog food industry.


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> Raw,
> 
> I would only say this...in many stereotypes lies a grain of truth. If this is going on at many of the small independent chains and botique stores, don't you think there is at least some reasonable concern that this won't end well?
> 
> Not until something concrete happens to point to that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've compromised with you enough to at least say that EVO/Innova may stay ok.
> 
> Can't you at least open yourself to the *possibility* that they won't stay as good as they once were?
> 
> 
> 
> There is always that posibility but I'm not making hysterical posts based on nothing but my fantasy that anything will deteriorate. Once I see it, I will believe it. It's far from automatic. The most reasonable guess is that things will pretty much be the same as far at the product is concerned.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Net/net-to many of us, Natura/P & G are GUILTY until proven innocent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> THAT is hysteria and a very negative outlook on life. I assume all is going to end well until I see something that indicates that it's not. So far I haven't seen that. The day that the takeover was announced there were countless posts on every dog food board on the internet about the sky is falling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To you-Natura/P & G is INNOCENT until proven guilty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, exactly.
Click to expand...


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> i have to say, just because someone decides they will drop Natura and feed something else in no way necessitiates them being labeled as "having no clue what they are talking about."


If they do it bacause of a bunch of hysterical posts from people who have no more of a clue than they do, it pretty much does. Once there is some kind of tangible evidence the product has had a negative change and/or they are having a problem with the product then there is reason to change. In the absense of either of those criteria, any change made is based solely on hysteria.


----------



## whiteleo

Or it could be just because of WHO bought the Company.


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> kevin bradley said:
> 
> 
> 
> Raw,
> THAT is hysteria and a very negative outlook on life. I assume all is going to end well until I see something that indicates that it's not. So far I haven't seen that. The day that the takeover was announced there were countless posts on every dog food board on the internet about the sky is falling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not hysterical, Raw. Really.
> 
> Signed,
> 
> Mel Gibson :smile::tongue:
Click to expand...


----------



## magicre

the probability is there that things will change....and i do believe things will change....it makes good business sense for them to widen their market....and be the purina one of the 21st century...

so far, though.....and no, i'm not privy to their plans....it seems across the boards, it's like a salem witch hunt...and i don't think anything has happened. yet. 

isn't this kind of a wait and see?

if your dogs are doing well on this bag, then you buy another bag....if they don't do well on the next bag, switch....


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> If they do it bacause of a bunch of hysterical posts from people who have no more of a clue than they do, it pretty much does. Once there is some kind of tangible evidence the product has had a negative change and/or they are having a problem with the product then there is reason to change. In the absense of either of those criteria, any change made is based solely on hysteria.


Come on, Raw. This is where you lose us. Just say for a moment that the ingredients and overall quality of the FOOD doesn't change. 

Regardless, there is some pretty damning evidence that PG and Iams haven't been the most ethical of companies with regards to animal testing. I know, you're going to say its all been fabricated by Peta but there are some of us who do believe there is truth to this stuff. 

While I certainly understand your point that we MAY have been a little quick to judge the potential degredation of EVO....I think you're being a bit unfair to say we're crazy for not wanting to contribute to PG...even if only for our own little private ethical stand against a monster conglomerate.


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> While I certainly understand your point that we MAY have been a little quick to judge the potential degredation of EVO....I think you're being a bit unfair to say we're crazy for not wanting to contribute to PG...even if only for our own little private ethical stand against a monster conglomerate.


OK, I forgot the one about large corperations are evil. If you want to use that reason, thats OK too. :smile:


----------



## kevin bradley

straight to timeout for you, Raw. :smile:


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> straight to timeout for you, Raw. :smile:


:biggrin: :tongue:


----------



## 1605

buddy97 said:


> dont know. in my area, there are three small independent shops that carried foods like orijen and EVO. two of the three have dropped EVO and the third talks like they will soon. Natura is still carried by Pets Supplies Plus locally, which is a chain store, but not on the scale of the Petco/Petsmart chain. so, at least locally, it hasnt been a desirable scenario for them.


Of the 3 local stores here in New Tampa that carry Innova, ALL of them still carry the products & haven't indicated to me that they are planning on dropping the line.


----------



## Doc

Raw, are you still buying P&G stock????? Perhaps this take over will increase dividends for the share holders ....:redface:


----------



## PUNKem733

Gotta take raw's views on PG with a huge grain of salt. After all he has a vested interest in the Co to do well.


----------



## kevin bradley

SAY it ain't [email protected] A conflict of interest with RAW?!!!!

Raw, we'll let you speak before we send you to a 2nd timeout. :smile:


----------



## RawFedDogs

Doc said:


> Raw, are you still buying P&G stock????? Perhaps this take over will increase dividends for the share holders ....:redface:


No, I haven't bought any in about 10 years but I have a VERY nice profit in the P&G stock I presently own, thank you. :biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

Nahhhh ... the dog food takeover won't matter at all in the over all P&L statement. Natura is very very small compared to most of their holdings. I would say one of the smallest.


----------



## RawFedDogs

PUNKem733 said:


> Gotta take raw's views on PG with a huge grain of salt. After all he has a vested interest in the Co to do well.


Thats a true statement, however, P&G could just close down Natura and walk away from it and take a loss on the whole thing and it woudln't make a dent in their overall financial health. Natura is such a small company.

*ETA:* Does anybody know what they paid for Natura?

*ANOTHER ETA:* P&G's pet division's sales last quarter were only $747 million compared to the total companies sales of 19.2 Billion. That is ~3.8% of P&Gs sales were ALL the pet products they sell.


----------



## cprcheetah

I know it's not dog food, but I work for a vet/boarding facility and we were boarding a couple of cats last week who were eating Innova EVO, brand new bag we opened while they were boarding, after they left I was cleaning out their townhouse and noticed something shiny in their food, and picked up a kernal and at first I thought it was a bone fragment, nope it was a piece of metal about the size of a pencil lead. We confirmed it was metal through looking at it under a microscope. Here is a picture I took of it, they had already gone home so I didn't get the bag lot # or anything, but it's enough for me to avoid their products in the future. You can see the hole in the food where the piece of metal was.










Heather


----------



## DaneMama

cprcheetah said:


> I know it's not dog food, but I work for a vet/boarding facility and we were boarding a couple of cats last week who were eating Innova EVO, brand new bag we opened while they were boarding, after they left I was cleaning out their townhouse and noticed something shiny in their food, and picked up a kernal and at first I thought it was a bone fragment, nope it was a piece of metal about the size of a pencil lead. We confirmed it was metal through looking at it under a microscope. Here is a picture I took of it, they had already gone home so I didn't get the bag lot # or anything, but it's enough for me to avoid their products in the future. You can see the hole in the food where the piece of metal was.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heather


Yikes!!!! Makes me wonder where it came from...


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> Thats a true statement, however, P&G could just close down Natura and walk away from it and take a loss on the whole thing and it woudln't make a dent in their overall financial health. Natura is such a small company.
> 
> *ETA:* Does anybody know what they paid for Natura?
> 
> *ANOTHER ETA:* P&G's pet division's sales last quarter were only $747 million compared to the total companies sales of 19.2 Billion. That is ~3.8% of P&Gs sales were ALL the pet products they sell.


Well, then why'd they even bother buying them? 

I would argue that 4% is pretty darn important to P and G. Dare them to go report earnings at 4% less than expected. See what happens. :wink:


----------



## 1605

PUNKem733 said:


> Gotta take raw's views on PG with a huge grain of salt. After all he has a vested interest in the Co to do well.


Y'know, this horse is beyond dead, so stop beating it. I think I can say with a fair amount of certainty that NO ONE on this board owns enough stock in any company to make a whit of difference in their actual income level. Or be able to have some kind of vote in the running of said company.

Unless there's a secret billionaire that would like to come out of hiding & donate to a worth cause (like the Save the SubMariner Club)? 

Geeze!


----------



## kevin bradley

SubMariner said:


> Y'know, this horse is beyond dead, so stop beating it. I think I can say with a fair amount of certainty that NO ONE on this board owns enough stock in any company to make a whit of difference in their actual income level. Or be able to have some kind of vote in the running of said company.
> 
> Unless there's a secret billionaire that would like to come out of hiding & donate to a worth cause (like the Save the SubMariner Club)?
> 
> Geeze!



possibly. But certainly, someone owning stock in a company...and how MUCH someone owns is all pretty relative...but it can certainly, how shall I say this..."Skew" their opinion a tad....

disclaimer-I'm in no way IMPLYING that Raw's opinion is biased. :biggrin:


----------



## kevin bradley

cprcheetah said:


> I know it's not dog food, but I work for a vet/boarding facility and we were boarding a couple of cats last week who were eating Innova EVO, brand new bag we opened while they were boarding, after they left I was cleaning out their townhouse and noticed something shiny in their food, and picked up a kernal and at first I thought it was a bone fragment, nope it was a piece of metal about the size of a pencil lead. We confirmed it was metal through looking at it under a microscope. Here is a picture I took of it, they had already gone home so I didn't get the bag lot # or anything, but it's enough for me to avoid their products in the future. You can see the hole in the food where the piece of metal was.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heather



metal fragments ALREADY?!! Didn't take long, P & G.:wink:


----------



## luvMyBRT

^^^Yup! I just loooove feeding my dogs metal fragments!! 

((Good thing I DON'T....)) :biggrin:


----------



## harrkim120

saraj2878 said:


> ^^^Yup! I just loooove feeding my dogs metal fragments!!
> 
> ((Good thing I DON'T....)) :biggrin:


EVO...Now with extra metal goodness! :biggrin:


----------



## magicre

i'm not anti kibble nor am i anti home cooked...we all gotta do what we all gotta do...

but, jeez....don't treat us like idiots....and this is the information highway.....

it isn't as if we can't look things up to see there is a lot of starch in that food....

wow...talk about obesity and diabetes.....buy THAT food and it's almost a guarantee.


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> Well, then why'd they even bother buying them?


I've wondered myself why they would bother with such a small company. 



> I would argue that 4% is pretty darn important to P and G. Dare them to go report earnings at 4% less than expected. See what happens. :wink:


But 4% is ALL the pet products including food, supplements, medicines, toys, etc. I'm pretty sure the 4% is before aquiring Natura also. After purchasing it, its probalby up to 4.01%. :biggrin:


----------



## magicre

RawFedDogs said:


> I've wondered myself why they would bother with such a small company.


it's an established company with a following...not everyone is panicking..

it's cheaper for them to buy natura than to start at the beginning what with branding and marketing and all that....when they can step in....change or not change and offer it to a very broad market...most of whom do not post on boards.

it's a good business move.


----------



## kevin bradley

magicre said:


> it's an established company with a following...not everyone is panicking..
> 
> it's cheaper for them to buy natura than to start at the beginning what with branding and marketing and all that....when they can step in....change or not change and offer it to a very broad market...most of whom do not post on boards.
> 
> it's a good business move.



So what you are saying is that its sometimes easier to BUY market share than to establish it organically? :wink:


----------



## magicre

kevin bradley said:


> So what you are saying is that its sometimes easier to BUY market share than to establish it organically? :wink:


sometimes. not always.

in this case, it was a good move.


----------



## 93-5G20

AddieNMel said:


> Seems this thread has gone a little off topic. I'm still feeding Addie Innova. I have had no problems with it yet. Everything is as normal so far. I'm not too terribly concerned. I wouldn't freak out everyone. Wait for solid facts and proof that ingredients have changed, of which I have heard nothing about.
> 
> If your pet isn't doing well on it, switch, but please don't spread rumors or go crazy with accusations etc. It doesn't help anyone.
> 
> Thank you!


There is an entire network of small boutique pet shops which will notice if the ingredients change. The guaranteed analysis is guaranteed for a reason too.

There is not advantage manufacturing or economic for PG to change anything. They will get cost benefits from greater buying power, with size you can demand higher quality too. It costs nothing at all to not change the mix, and only has downside if they do. 

The only changes that Innova side will do will be new formulas, but that becomes an issue with shelf space. It is quite possible that no changes will ever be made to the product lines, and they will simply manufacturing them, the end.

Some RAW feeders are quite vocal on Natura because to them its a easy opportunity to hit against all dry kibble, for sport. Not to mention the various product sales reps who part of the job description is posting on boards like this.

Disclosure: I am currently feeding Diamond's Artimis and Chicken Soup puppy formulas. Will be switching to adult formula soon, hence me looking at this board.


----------



## buddy97

93-5G20 said:


> There is not advantage manufacturing or economic for PG to change anything. They will get cost benefits from greater buying power, with size you can demand higher quality too. It costs nothing at all to not change the mix, and only has downside if they do.
> .


**sigh**

again, because they get cost benefits from greater buying power doesnt preclude them from doing other things to cut costs and increase profit margins. maybe they will only use their greating buying power and leave it at that....im not counting on that. 

im also not hysterically proclaiming it as fact that they will employ cost cutting measures that will affect the formulas negatively....

.....i am stating it as my strong opinion, just as the defenders of P&G think they will be happy with the results they get from their greater buying power alone.

changing the mix does not have only downside for them. if they calculate the customers gained, for example, by moving the food into big box pet store chains with a lower cost via a less quality formula AS WELL AS greater purchasing power.....then those smart, six figure income making employees may see that as the smartest long range strategy.

will they lose some loyal Natura customers with such a move? sure they will. will they make up for that with an increase of the more casual dog food buyer? id say yes, by a great margin......my opinion is that this strategy would fit right in with their ability to advertise in a way that Natura never had.

i just dont buy this theory that because they can increase profit margin with their greater purchasing power that they will be satisfied from the bottom line created by that alone.

but hey, im willing to wait and see while i give more of my money to other dog food manufacturers and (more importantly) my local grocers meat department.


----------



## GermanSheperdlover

They well not change the ingredient list or at least not until they get a good deal of people buying it from Costco, Petco and Petsmart. But I would bet a ton that they have already begun buying* lower quality** ingredients* from the same suppliers who supply Eukanuba and lams.

I did hear today about another dog having diarrhea from the new shipments of Innova. Keep in mind I feed California Natural and well until I notice something. But I am looking for something simple like C.N. and it could be First Mate.

On a different note I just opened a new big bag of the Herring formula and I could not find the best used by date. I went and looked on a smaller older bag and I could not find it on that bag. Can anyone tell me where it is or did I rip it off when I opened the bag?? Kinda of odd.


----------



## CorgiPaws

GermanSheperdlover said:


> . But I am looking for something simple like C.N. and it could be First Mate.


Potatoes, much?


----------



## harrkim120

CorgiPaws said:


> Potatoes, much?


Wow...yeah. Every one has potatoes as the first ingredent.


----------



## GermanSheperdlover

10 bucks says you two are raw feeders. LOL, you two people remind me of *CLAY* because it never ends!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## GermanSheperdlover

harrkim120 said:


> Wow...yeah. Every one has potatoes as the first ingredent.


YEAH I know exactly what is in the ingredient list and I surely don't need your help !! You people just love to start arguments don't you??? Odd I have better things to do.


----------



## magicre

GermanSheperdlover said:


> 10 bucks says you two are raw feeders. LOL, you two people remind me of *CLAY* because it never ends!!!!!!!!!!!


and ten bucks says that potatoes are a starchy starch...white potatoes are in the high glycemic index, which in humans AND dogs, causes an insulin spike...

and i am both raw AND home cooked feeder.

you know?

the real shame is that people here are so busy defending what they feed, they don't take the time to know the ingredients of what they are feeding and that goes from raw to home cooked to kibble feeders...

before one can have a debate on what is best....know thy ingredients...and that goes for white rice, white potatoes...actually any potatoes...for both humans and dogs...

i don't get it.....i don't see the arguing...i see a lively exchange of ideas...i see disagreement and debate...

what i don't see, german shepherd lover, is information...all i see from you is condemnation....

how about you get off the offensive bench, hit me with some information and knowledge, and let's have a debate, instead of the 'tude vibe i'm getting.


----------



## kevin bradley

the point I would make in all of these disputes is how amazed I am when I just sit back and read all the posts. 

I'm 39 years old. 

Every day that goes by, I realize how LITTLE I know about ANYTHING. Literally how UNCERTAIN I am about so many things in life. How very LITTLE I know about anything. I mean, outside of how to say...wash my hair in the morning, or drive to work(and I'm sure there are those who would tell me I could be more efficient/effective at both).....

...and yet there are so many people(and some out on this forum) who are SO CERTAIN they know about this and that.

I guess I wish I was as certain about just a few things in life.


----------



## magicre

kevin bradley said:


> the point I would make in all of these disputes is how amazed I am when I just sit back and read all the posts.
> 
> I'm 39 years old.
> 
> Every day that goes by, I realize how LITTLE I know about ANYTHING. Literally how UNCERTAIN I am about so many things in life. How very LITTLE I know about anything. I mean, outside of how to say...wash my hair in the morning, or drive to work(and I'm sure there are those who would tell me I could be more efficient/effective at both).....
> 
> ...and yet there are so many people(and some out on this forum) who are SO CERTAIN they know about this and that.
> 
> I guess I wish I was as certain about just a few things in life.


ya know, kevin?

here's what i'm certain of.....i will, one day, die.

beyond that, i am fairly certain about a few things....

one thing i am pretty certain is that if a food ingredient looks nothing like its natural state, something is wrong with it.

when i eat a lamb chop, it looks like one.

when my dogs ate lamb, it was a cute little triangular nugget..

putting the ingredients aside for any dog food....i am very certain that my dog is not human; and, therefore has different nutrient requirements than i do...

but i am truly certain that if my dog's food looks like a triangle, it's pretty far from its natural state so i have to wonder how it got to looking that way.

when i cook for my dogs, my food doesn't look that way.

it took me five years of researching ingredients and now i am pretty certain that my husband and i have a balanced nutritional base...

in my two years of researching dog food, after i stopped thinking of my dogs as stuffies with heartbeats....i now realise and AM POSITIVELY certain that processed food, no matter how wonderful the ingredients are....is crap.

for both humans and dogs...

for me, i am so positive that processed food is the cause of obesity....twinkies, kibble, marie callender, and the list goes on and on....

i am VERY positive that starchy carbs need to be held accountable for obesity and the rise in diabetes.

i have studied nutrition for a number of years.....for humans....i am just starting out for dogs....only two years...

but i am CERTAIN, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that processing for days and days cannot cannot cannot be good for anyone...


----------



## kevin bradley

magicre said:


> ya know, kevin?
> here's what i'm certain of.....i will, one day, die.



despite all my "uncertainty," I think we are aligned on this one :wink:

And, RE, you will be happy to know that JUST last night, I bought Organic Spinach and Raspberry Vinag. dressing(low fat) to have w/ chicken breasts tonight. 

No, I didn't raise the chickens or slaughter them myself.....

but its a start


----------



## magicre

kevin bradley said:


> despite all my "uncertainty," I think we are aligned on this one :wink:


see? we, as humans, can always find common ground and certainty 

you're a good guy, kevin.....you really are.


----------



## kevin bradley

magicre said:


> see? we, as humans, can always find common ground and certainty
> 
> you're a good guy, kevin.....you really are.



thanks Re. most days I'm pretty uncertain about THAT more than anything:wink:


----------



## harrkim120

GermanSheperdlover said:


> YEAH I know exactly what is in the ingredient list and I surely don't need your help !! You people just love to start arguments don't you??? Odd I have better things to do.


If you have better things to do then why not do that instead of spewing your uneducated statements??? 

For your information, I am both. My Boston and Husky eat raw...and guess what...I too have a GSD that eats kibble.....WOW amazing, huh?  

I sure as hell know that my GSD should not be eating a bag of potatoes, and I'm allowed to give my two cents.


----------



## DaneMama

GermanSheperdlover said:


> YEAH I know exactly what is in the ingredient list and I surely don't need your help !! You people just love to start arguments don't you??? Odd I have better things to do.


Odd, this isn't the first time you've said that but you keep coming back...and I do remember most of what you post up. If my memory is correct I think it is you who actually gets heated first, without provocation. Respect, dignity and tact are all very good traits to employ in a community such as this.


----------



## harrkim120

harrkim120 said:


> I sure as hell know that my GSD should not be eating a bag of potatoes, and I'm allowed to give my two cents.


I'm letting my temper get a hold of me...I mean I've never seen anything that's indicated that giving my dog that much potato is biologically correct or good for them. Plus I feel that it would not be worth the price seeing as though potatoes are extremely cheap. You could replicate this food at home for a margin of the cost.


----------



## kevin bradley

did GShep really say Dogs should eat a bunch of potato's? I haven't read through all the posts.


----------



## CorgiPaws

kevin bradley said:


> did GShep really say Dogs should eat a bunch of potato's? I haven't read through all the posts.


Here's the low down, Kev.

Gshep said they were maybe gonna put their dogs on some.. I don't even remember what it's called, but first ingredients in all formulas was potato. 

I responded with a simple "potato, much?" 

Which apparently ment that I was attacking them. Not sure how. Maybe I potato bombed their desktop and didn't realize it? Who knows...

So then, he came at me and Harrkim120 (who also simply pointed out the potato content, and nothing more) saying that we were just like Clay (who, mind you, was not even a raw feeder) and "bet" that we were big bad raw feeders. Erhhh... why yes, yes I am a raw feeder, and apparently that means that my distaste for starchy carbs in a canine diet holds no water. Totally logical.

Then Gshep stormed off, having "better things to do" than sit and argue with us, but really there was no arguing... well.. unless someone potato bombed his desktop, which, like I said... I know nothing about. 



And that's all that happened. :tongue:


----------



## jdatwood

CorgiPaws said:


> So then, he


Get it right... it appears that GSDLover is a SHE named Jess :wink:


----------



## magicre

kevin bradley said:


> thanks Re. most days I'm pretty uncertain about THAT more than anything:wink:


we move through this world...uncertain days ahead....we are never sure of anything....we only have the illusion that we're in control....

one thing is for sure...and you can take this one to the bank, kevin....you love your dog...that alone....makes you a good guy.

secondly...and i am certain about this...you're listening.....puts you leagues ahead...

whether you continue to feed kibble or home cook or go raw....you are listening and you will make an informed decision.

i can, however, pretty much guarantee....

that you won't walk away from here without having gained something...

and chicken breasts with salad and dressing? -- awesome for you.....

as you're eating it...look at what your dog is eating...and tell me which is more appetising...:wink:


----------



## magicre

danemama08 said:


> Odd, this isn't the first time you've said that but you keep coming back...and I do remember most of what you post up. If my memory is correct I think it is you who actually gets heated first, without provocation. Respect, dignity and tact are all very good traits to employ in a community such as this.


so i'm guessing ...am i the only one who got the private message?

is it my flaming red hair? LOL


----------



## whiteleo

Aw Re, did you get a PM? lucky you!!!!!!!


----------



## buddy97

if we are talking about a certain poster, we had issues with bullying, heavy handed, childish behavior on another forum. before he (or she) left that forum, several of us got a rash of emails scolding us for being stupid, immature, etc....


----------



## harrkim120

OK...now I'm lost. What's going on?  LOL


----------



## magicre

whiteleo said:


> Aw Re, did you get a PM? lucky you!!!!!!!


the PM i received was not nasty....it was condescending, know everything about everything and more snotty than anything else.

i forgot to click the 'save sent messages'....so i don't have a copy of what i wrote back...but basically my response was not nice....

i don't get why she doesn't post on the board...PM was totally un necessary in response to my post....

i don't get it.

these are lively debates....people engage, disagree, inform, even become sanctimonious...

but, knowledge is power and the truth shall set me free....post it on the board...let everyone see it and if you're going to take something to PM about potatoes....that's just plain ludicrous..

personal messages -- that's a whole different ballgame, but this? it did not need to go private....i've got broad shoulders, i can handle snotty.


----------



## magicre

harrkim120 said:


> OK...now I'm lost. What's going on?  LOL


honest, kim, it's not important...the food she was talking about was california naturals which, as we all know, has potato as the first ingredient....

and that's what started it....i also posted back a page or two about potatoes...and that's when i got a PM, telling me she knew all about potatoes....it was snotty and didn't deserve to be in PM.....it should have been on the board as part of the debate or discussion or disagreement...after all, what are forums for?

my response to her in PM was not snotty, but wasn't so nice either....i felt it cowardly to PM me rather than post and i said so.

as a kibble feeder i would not feed kibble that had potatos as an ingredient, especially white potatos....they are very starchy and high glycemic and just empty calories....

even sweet potatoes are way too starchy, even though they are lower on the glycemic scale and doesn't produce the insulin spike that white potatoes and white rice do...

at any rate, there isn't a starch in this universe that is good for man nor beast....and can be directly related to obesity and the increase in diabetes in both dogs and humans....

all she has to do is look it up....that's what i do.


----------



## harrkim120

magicre said:


> honest, kim, it's not important...the food she was talking about was california naturals which, as we all know, has potato as the first ingredient....
> 
> and that's what started it....i also posted back a page or two about potatoes...and that's when i got a PM, telling me she knew all about potatoes....it was snotty and didn't deserve to be in PM.....it should have been on the board as part of the debate or discussion or disagreement...after all, what are forums for?
> 
> my response to her in PM was not snotty, but wasn't so nice either....i felt it cowardly to PM me rather than post and i said so.
> 
> as a kibble feeder i would not feed kibble that had potatos as an ingredient, especially white potatos....they are very starchy and high glycemic and just empty calories....
> 
> even sweet potatoes are way too starchy, even though they are lower on the glycemic scale and doesn't produce the insulin spike that white potatoes and white rice do...
> 
> at any rate, there isn't a starch in this universe that is good for man nor beast....and can be directly related to obesity and the increase in diabetes in both dogs and humans....
> 
> all she has to do is look it up....that's what i do.


Hahaha...thanks for the update. :wink:


----------



## DaneMama

magicre said:


> so i'm guessing ...am i the only one who got the private message?
> 
> is it my flaming red hair? LOL


Maybe, but certainly I didn't or any other of the mods because:

1) I see nothing out of line from anyone in this thread. Just a usual heated discussion like we get on here. No name calling or foul language.

2) It would just be dumb for anyone to send a nasty, snotty PM to a mod unless they were interested in getting a time out or kicked off for good.


----------



## m&mluvpugs

magicre said:


> honest, kim, it's not important...the food she was talking about was california naturals which, as we all know, has potato as the first ingredients...


just wanted to add... do you mean 'natural balance' is the food that has potato as the first ingredients and not california naturals? 

i'm only saying because we fed our little one California Naturals for awhile, and all their formulas have protein sources as the first ingredient.... and i know when people ask for a Limited Ingredient food, CaliNat is the one most recommended... 

:smile:


----------



## harrkim120

Actually he/she was talking about First Mate. That's the one with potatoes as the first ingredient.


----------



## m&mluvpugs

harrkim120 said:


> Actually he/she was talking about First Mate. That's the one with potatoes as the first ingredient.


oh ok... either way... just didn't want to bash California Naturals


----------



## CorgiPaws

jdatwood said:


> Get it right... it appears that GSDLover is a SHE named Jess :wink:


My bad. I got lost in the defensive rudeness, missed the gender and names. 

:biggrin:


----------



## luvMyBRT

I probably shouldn't really post this, but I can't help it....

Since GermanSheperdlover claims to be a know it all I am SURE they do realize that Sheperd in their screen name is spelled wrong and should be *shepherd*. But like I said...I am sure they already know that....


----------



## Ania's Mommy

saraj2878 said:


> I probably shouldn't really post this, but I can't help it....
> 
> Since GermanSheperdlover claims to be a know it all I am SURE they do realize that Sheperd in their screen name is spelled wrong and should be *shepherd*. But like I said...I am sure they already know that....


Holy CRAP! I never even noticed that! And I'm a German Shepurd owner! Hahaha!


----------



## harrkim120

Ania's Mommy said:


> Holy CRAP! I never even noticed that! And I'm a German Shepurd owner! Hahaha!


Oh man...I never noticed either!!! :biggrin:


----------



## DaneMama

Ok everyone...Let's put an end to this ragging, shall we?


----------



## kevin bradley

danemama08 said:


> Ok everyone...Let's put an end to this ragging, shall we?



I will tell you guys this....as someone who in his younger years would enjoy "riling" people up from time to time.

If some of these guys are indeed out to just get us all juiced up and fight w/ them, it pretty much plays right into their hands when we argue w/ them. Nothing upsets them more than when you just ignore them. 

BUT, admittedly, it is difficult to not answer them when they tell you to feed your dogs potatoes


----------



## harrkim120

danemama08 said:


> Ok everyone...Let's put an end to this ragging, shall we?


Yes Mama. :frown:

:tongue:



kevin bradley said:


> I will tell you guys this....as someone who in his younger years would enjoy "riling" people up from time to time.
> 
> If some of these guys are indeed out to just get us all juiced up and fight w/ them, it pretty much plays right into their hands when we argue w/ them. Nothing upsets them more than when you just ignore them.
> 
> BUT, admittedly, it is difficult to not answer them when they tell you to feed your dogs potatoes


:biggrin:


----------



## DaneMama

harrkim120 said:


> Yes Mama. :frown:


I R den mama!!!!! LOL :tongue:


----------



## jdatwood

danemama08 said:


> I R den mama!!!!! LOL :tongue:


U R dANE mama?! :wink:


----------



## DaneMama

jdatwood said:


> U R dANE mama?! :wink:


That too :tongue:


----------



## luvMyBRT

danemama08 said:


> Ok everyone...Let's put an end to this ragging, shall we?


Sorry....my fault....:redface:


----------



## DaneMama

saraj2878 said:


> Sorry....my fault....:redface:


No worries :wink:

Just have to keep things fair and you betcha I would be one someone if they were ragging on you!


----------



## magicre

i am going to have the last word, since i am the one who got the PM.......it wasn't rude. it was snotty and condescending. i was snotty and condescending right back. i don't care how many magazines she does food reviews on...she is wrong about potatoes...and there are some battles worth continuing because there are always lurkers who don't post and misinformation abounds enough as it is...

i may be new to raw, but i'm not new to nutrition...sorry i got california naturals wrong....

i used to feed kibble...i have a dog on home cooked and two dogs are on raw...

my last word is: potatoes bad. for both humans and dogs. bad bad bad.

natalie mama, you can slap my wrist now for continuing the ragging LOL

now i'm done.


----------



## DaneMama

magicre said:


> natalie mama, you can slap my wrist now for continuing the ragging LOL
> 
> now i'm done.


HA! Consider it e-slapped then LOL :biggrin: :tongue: :wink:


----------



## Doc

From being here longer than most of the mods, I have learned two things:

1. Raw feeders are always right in here - although they confess otherwise.
2. Moderators are always right. (maybe because they all feed raw?)

I don't necessarily agree with the above but those are the unspoken rule in this forum.

I have more or less stopped posting in here because honest dialog will never take place when people are closed minded. Read Martin Bubur's work on Dialog and Community.


----------



## magicre

Doc said:


> From being here longer than most of the mods, I have learned two things:
> 
> 1. Raw feeders are always right in here - although they confess otherwise.
> 2. Moderators are always right. (maybe because they all feed raw?)
> 
> I don't necessarily agree with the above but those are the unspoken rule in this forum.
> 
> I have more or less stopped posting in here because honest dialog will never take place when people are closed minded. Read Martin Bubur's work on Dialog and Community.


that's some heavy reading, if you're referring to 'I and Thou (Ich-Du)' and ich-du relationships.

i think, however, it is possible to start out with a closed mind.....and through the search for commonality of language, a word, a phrase, a sentence, a thought expressed and a door can crack and then open....

forums are more of a coffee klatch than an existential dialogue....


----------



## Doc

magicre said:


> that's some heavy reading, if you're referring to 'I and Thou (Ich-Du)' and ich-du relationships.
> 
> i think, however, it is possible to start out with a closed mind.....and through the search for commonality of language, a word, a phrase, a sentence, a thought expressed and a door can crack and then open....
> 
> forums are more of a coffee klatch than an existential dialogue....


Indeed.:smile:


----------



## Dana

For what it's worth, both my dogs are eating California Natural Grain Free (one on the Lamb formula and the other on the Venison) and they are doing GREAT. Do I trust/like P&G? No. That is why I'm constantly checking forums like this for any postings of real experiences of bad stuff coming out of Natura. I'm feeding this food because one of my dogs seems to have issues with chicken and lamb. And she's got a sensitive stomach. I've been trying everything (not that there are many options when you avoid chicken) and she is finally doing well on this food. Of course! I was really hoping she'd do well on Orijen, but it was too rich for her stomach and it had lamb in it....that's when I began to realize lamb caused issues.....CA Nat grain free lamb also didn't work for her, but switched to venison and she's better than she's been in a long time. Her itching is going away, poops are firm and normal, burping/gurgly tummy stopped. 

My hope is that P&G won't mess with the formulas/sourcing right off the bat. Hopefully it buys me time for another company to come out with a suitable food while my dog can get back to normal. My backup plan is to switch her to Pinnacle Trout (verified they and their suppliers don't use E on the herring meal) - haven't tried that one yet (she didn't do well on their Duck formula). Yes, Nat Balance has a venison food, too, but I don't like the ingredients (really low on meat) and don't trust Diamond either. Sigh. Honest Kitchen is coming out with a new grain free fish formula soon - will keep an eye out for that. She did fairly well on HK Keen (turkey based) but not as well as she's doing on CA Nat venison. And, I really don't know if she's ok with fish.....the Orijen was loaded with it and she sure had tummy problems on that food.

And yes, I may have to eventually go to home cooking, but right now that isn't an option.

So, I'd love to hear from others using Natura foods and what their experiences are. All I can say is "so far, so good".....and I'm keeping a wary eye out for news that Natura is going south!

Dana


----------



## magicre

Dana said:


> For what it's worth, both my dogs are eating California Natural Grain Free (one on the Lamb formula and the other on the Venison) and they are doing GREAT. Do I trust/like P&G? No. That is why I'm constantly checking forums like this for any postings of real experiences of bad stuff coming out of Natura. I'm feeding this food because one of my dogs seems to have issues with chicken and lamb. And she's got a sensitive stomach. I've been trying everything (not that there are many options when you avoid chicken) and she is finally doing well on this food. Of course! I was really hoping she'd do well on Orijen, but it was too rich for her stomach and it had lamb in it....that's when I began to realize lamb caused issues.....CA Nat grain free lamb also didn't work for her, but switched to venison and she's better than she's been in a long time. Her itching is going away, poops are firm and normal, burping/gurgly tummy stopped.
> 
> My hope is that P&G won't mess with the formulas/sourcing right off the bat. Hopefully it buys me time for another company to come out with a suitable food while my dog can get back to normal. My backup plan is to switch her to Pinnacle Trout (verified they and their suppliers don't use E on the herring meal) - haven't tried that one yet (she didn't do well on their Duck formula). Yes, Nat Balance has a venison food, too, but I don't like the ingredients (really low on meat) and don't trust Diamond either. Sigh. Honest Kitchen is coming out with a new grain free fish formula soon - will keep an eye out for that. She did fairly well on HK Keen (turkey based) but not as well as she's doing on CA Nat venison. And, I really don't know if she's ok with fish.....the Orijen was loaded with it and she sure had tummy problems on that food.
> 
> And yes, I may have to eventually go to home cooking, but right now that isn't an option.
> 
> So, I'd love to hear from others using Natura foods and what their experiences are. All I can say is "so far, so good".....and I'm keeping a wary eye out for news that Natura is going south!
> 
> Dana


personally, i think your dog is your best indication of how things are going....and if it's 'so far, so good, then you and your dog are doing fine...

i think you'll know before there is ever a complaint on a board or a press release...and since you will probably read the bag every time you buy it, you'll know even sooner...

and your dogs will react if there is a negative change...and if they don't, then you're good to go.


----------



## Dana

Oh yeah, your're right - I'll read the bag every time I buy it! But, that won't tell me if they're sourcing cheaper ingredients from China - uggghhh! True, my dog may show me by stool change or turning her nose up at her food (well, never seen her do that, she's not a picky eater, so if she does I'll definitely know there's a problem....LOL....). I do hope to get an early "heads-up" if people are seeing issues because I'll need to start switching her to a new food gradually if I have that option, plus the store where I buy it currently doesn't stock the venison grain-free formula because it's quite a bit more expensive than the lamb or chicken grain-free formulas, so they special-order it for me.....would be good to know if P&G shenanigans have started prior to ordering! :biggrin:


----------



## magicre

Dana said:


> Oh yeah, your're right - I'll read the bag every time I buy it! But, that won't tell me if they're sourcing cheaper ingredients from China - uggghhh! True, my dog may show me by stool change or turning her nose up at her food (well, never seen her do that, she's not a picky eater, so if she does I'll definitely know there's a problem....LOL....). I do hope to get an early "heads-up" if people are seeing issues because I'll need to start switching her to a new food gradually if I have that option, plus the store where I buy it currently doesn't stock the venison grain-free formula because it's quite a bit more expensive than the lamb or chicken grain-free formulas, so they special-order it for me.....would be good to know if P&G shenanigans have started prior to ordering! :biggrin:


i love the internet.....there are watch dog sites....this one is...

if there is a problem with a food....believe me, this forum and other forums like this one and the yahoo groups...they will have the info.

that's how i figured out that nutro products had a hand in shortening my dogs' lives.....they use menadione and on the internet, i got to read just what this ingredient does to the liver.....

whilst we were looking, we learned that the wonderful dick van patten and his natural balance outsource to china...but i was supposed to feel better because they inspected all ingredients....sorry, but no.

the one thing my dog isn't permitted to tell me is the not eating it part....i can't allow for a picky dog....and i truly believe picky dogs are created, not born that way.

but their excrement will tell me if there is a problem....too rich and you'll have cow pies....not enough nutrition? you'll have dull coats and crappy teeth...

you sound as if you're observant so i think you'll know if a food provides what you want....


----------



## buddy97

Dana said:


> Oh yeah, your're right - I'll read the bag every time I buy it! But, that won't tell me if they're sourcing cheaper ingredients from China - :


playing devils advocate here. everyone keeps saying "you will know about any changes". i say maybe, maybe not. one thing they are not going to announce or put on their bags is any changes in where they source their ingredients. perhaps some lower quality sources will be evident in a dog by how they respond to such changes. however, the change to lower quality sources may not manifest in any tangible way til months down the road.

likewise, any cost cutting measures that affect quality control will certainly not be evident or anounced. usually nobody will ever know about something like that until there is some type of mistake and inevitable recall.

remember i am playing devils advocate here:wink:


oh, and for anyone who wants to chime in that P&G will be plenty happy with the increased profits they can produce through their greater purchasing power alone, and will seek no cost saving measures that are detrimental to the product in any way......save your breath, er, i mean keyboard.......this theory has been proposed many times already. (as have mine):biggrin:


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> one thing they are not going to announce or put on their bags is any changes in where they source their ingredients. perhaps some lower quality sources will be evident in a dog by how they respond to such changes. however, the change to lower quality sources may not manifest in any tangible way til months down the road.


Why would Natura be any more likely to do those things that any other dog food company? Whats to stop Orijen from all of sudden, because of the economy, begin using cheaper ingredients? Frankly I think all dog food companies, including Natura is using the cheapest ingredients they can find anyway. The reason dog foods use the ingredients they do is because they are cheap.



> likewise, any cost cutting measures that affect quality control will certainly not be evident or anounced. usually nobody will ever know about something like that until there is some type of mistake and inevitable recall.


And hows that different than any other dog food company? With this economy, why would any dog food company not cut costs anywhere possible?


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> And hows that different than any other dog food company? With this economy, why would any dog food company not cut costs anywhere possible?


i dont think it is only a matter of blind faith. i personally like to keep tabs on where champion, for example, is procuring its ingredients. i can easily contrast that with where Diamond procures its ingredients.

talk about evidence...you speak as though all dog food manufactureres use the cheapest sources as though it is fact with no evidence of it whatsoever.

yes, Champion could start sourcing from the cheapest sources possible. they could also instead raise their already high prices and keep using the same sources....which they have done several times over the years.

ive stated before, i dont trust any dog food manufacturer 100%. not even close.....but i do trust some more than others.


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> talk about evidence...you speak as though all dog food manufactureres use the cheapest sources as though it is fact with no evidence of it whatsoever.


Actually, I think now I do have some evidence. Let's take chicken meal for example. Last weekend I met a guy who works now and has worked for 18 years at several different chicken processing plants. Presently he is manager of the deboning department in a particular processing plant in southern Alabama. I acted completely ignorant on the processing of chickens.

I asked him to tell me about the deboning processes and procedures and deboning machines. After about 10 minutes of him telling me this, I asked him what happens to the bones after the meat has been stripped off them.

He said that once the meat has been removed what is left is called frames. (I knew that.) Frames are the carcass of the chicken after all the meat has been removed. He told me they are put in a bin and sent to another facility where they are gound up and shipped to dog food factories and hot dog manufacturers. At this point he told me, it is called chicken meal. I asked him if there were different qualities of chicken meal? He looked at me like I was crazy! :smile: He said "no, its ground up bones."

This guy has been in the poultry business for 18 years in the production end and seemed to know what he was talking about. He said nothing that disagreed with what I have found out from other investigations I have done.

I was surprised to learn chicken meal was sent to hot dog plants. He said, look in the ingredients list of a hot dog. If it lists "chicken parts", those parts are chicken meal. Hot dogs are not known for their nutrition. :smile:


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> He told me they are put in a bin and sent to another facility where they are gound up and shipped to dog food factories and hot dog manufacturers. At this point he told me, it is called chicken meal. I asked him if there were different qualities of chicken meal? He looked at me like I was crazy! :smile: He said "no, its ground up bones."
> :


to all dog food manufacturers? no. you have no idea which ones. this could be the source for many of the giants in the industry. that is evidence of what that guys knowledge base is and what some dog food manufacturers are using.

his knowledge of chicken meal is based on where he has worked and the chicken meal produced there. interesting he would call chicken meal ground up bones, when, for example orijen usues chicken meal where the bones are removed before cooking. what are they cooking?...air?

again, that is nothing that could lead me to believe that all dog food manufacturers are using the cheapest ingredients they can get their hands on, just that some most certainly do...which isnt news to me.

i feed more raw now than i do kibble, but i most definitely maintain that the quality of products used is quite different between various manufacturers.


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> to all dog food manufacturers? no. you have no idea which ones. this could be the source for many of the giants in the industry. that is evidence of what that guys knowledge base is and what some dog food manufacturers are using.
> 
> his knowledge of chicken meal is based on where he has worked and the chicken meal produced there.


His knowledge is based on working for several processing plants and knowing what chicken meal is and EXACTLY how it's made. He didn't say, "the company I am working for now calls this chicken meal." He said it IS chicken meal.



> interesting he would call chicken meal ground up bones, when, for example orijen usues chicken meal where the bones are removed before cooking. what are they cooking?...air?


In his mind, it is bones. Thats what he sees. In actual fact there is connective tissue, fat, and meat that can't easily be removed. I have fed chihcken frames before. I fed them daily for about a year. I paid $.14/lb for them. I know what a frame is.



> again, that is nothing that could lead me to believe that all dog food manufacturers are using the cheapest ingredients they can get their hands on, just that some most certainly do...which isnt news to me.


All I am saying is that's what chicken meal is. It's ground up frames. When they create frames, they get all the meat off that they can economically get off. What's left is the frame. Meal is the cheapest product to come out of a chicken processing plant.



> i feed more raw now than i do kibble, but i most definitely maintain that the quality of products used is quite different between various manufacturers.


Yes, they intentionally make each different. Even within the same brand there are different kibbles. But they are all basically the same thing. Rendered and extruded reminants from human food processing plants mashed into little nuggets.


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> His knowledge is based on working for several processing plants and knowing what chicken meal is and EXACTLY how it's made. He didn't say, "the company I am working for now calls this chicken meal." He said it IS chicken meal.
> 
> 
> 
> In his mind, it is bones. Thats what he sees. In actual fact there is connective tissue, fat, and meat that can't easily be removed. I have fed chihcken frames before. I fed them daily for about a year. I paid $.14/lb for them. I know what a frame is.
> 
> 
> 
> *All I am saying is that's what chicken meal is. It's ground up frames.* When they create frames, they get all the meat off that they can economically get off. What's left is the frame. Meal is the cheapest product to come out of a chicken processing plant.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, they intentionally make each different. Even within the same brand there are different kibbles. But they are all basically the same thing. Rendered and extruded reminants from human food processing plants mashed into little nuggets.


ill just have to disagree. you stick to the frame being a main component of chicken meal, when one manufacturer doesnt even use that part. in fact, they go so far as to declare that their named meat meals are comprised of mostly muscle meat. you have your definition of what chicken meal is based on your knowledge base, which may not be up to date with what all manufacturers are using. 

yes his knowledge is based, and limited to, the plants he has worked at and the chicken meal they produced. if he worked at the plant that supplies the chicken meal for orijen (again, as an example) he wouldnt have even had the opportunity to think the chicken meal is "ground up bones."

*if you want to say champion foods is flat out lying about what their named meat meals are comprised of, please feel free to say so.*--oh, and ill be needing hard evidence on this, not some guy from Alabama.

i dont doubt what this plant is producing is chicken meal for someones use in pet foods (and hot dogs), but i will trust champion as to what their meat meals are comprised of before i will believe joe smith at an Alabama chicken processing plant about what champion is using.

and, AGAIN, i am under no illusion about what processed dog food is and the limitations that are inherent in producing processed foods for canines.


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> ill just have to disagree. you stick to the frame being a main component of chicken meal, when one manufacturer doesnt even use that part. in fact, they go so far as to declare that their named meat meals are comprised of mostly muscle meat. you have your definition of what chicken meal is based on your knowledge base, which may not be up to date with what all manufacturers are using.


So they have changed the definition of chicken meal? When did that happen? If they made chicken meal out of muscle meat, you couldn't afford the dog food. It would be several hundred dollars/bag. Chicken meat is the most expensive of the processing plant products. Chicken meal, is the least expensive. You never have told me why they would take their highest priced product, process it, and turn it into their cheapest product. It just makes no sense at all. 



> *if you want to say champion foods is flat out lying about what their named meat meals are comprised of, please feel free to say so.*--oh, and ill be needing hard evidence on this, not some guy from Alabama.


If champion says their chicken meal is made from muscle meat they are lying. I gave you the evidence in my previous paragraph. This "some guy from Alabama" has been making chicken meal for 18 years. I think he kinda knows whats in it.



> i dont doubt what this plant is producing is chicken meal for someones use in pet foods (and hot dogs), but i will trust champion as to what their meat meals are comprised of before i will believe joe smith at an Alabama chicken processing plant about what champion is using.


I will take the word from someone who actually makes chicken meal over the word of a marketing department of some company. Always be wary of information given to you by someone who stands to make money based on any decision you make from the information they give you. Champion will make money if they convince you chicken meal is something more than ground frames. My guy makes no money one way or the other. He's just telling me what he as been doing for 18 years. Think again and tell me whose word you trust.



> and, AGAIN, i am under no illusion about what processed dog food is and the limitations that are inherent in producing processed foods for canines.


You would think you were raised on it yourself. :biggrin:


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> I will take the word from someone who actually makes chicken meal over the word of a marketing department of some company. Always be wary of information given to you by someone who stands to make money based on any decision you make from the information they give you. Champion will make money if they convince you chicken meal is something more than ground frames. My guy makes no money one way or the other. He's just telling me what he as been doing for 18 years. Think again and tell me whose word you trust.
> 
> :


geez, if i accused a certain large conglomerate of lying, id be asked for better evidence than that.

i thought we were supposed to be talking about puppies (how little i knew then. thought i had a gsd that would be mostly black---NOPE, thats her in the avatar)


----------



## CorgiPaws

buddy97 said:


> i thought we were supposed to be talking about puppies


Sorry, I took this oh so productive thread off topic. Not allowed to talk about puppies in this thread.


----------



## DaneMama

What happened to my posts?!?!


----------



## CorgiPaws

danemama08 said:


> What happened to my posts?!?!


they are now moved to a new thread since they were off topic. The new thread makes no sense though, but it is amusing nonetheless. :tongue:


----------



## jdatwood

CorgiPaws said:


> Sorry, I took this oh so productive thread off topic. Not allowed to talk about puppies in this thread.


What??? Why can't we talk about puppies???!!???!!!!!!


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> geez, if i accused a certain large conglomerate of lying, id be asked for better evidence than that.


I have all the evidence I need. You avoided my question about making a cheap product out of an expensive product.


----------



## DaneMama

CorgiPaws said:


> they are now moved to a new thread since they were off topic. The new thread makes no sense though, but it is amusing nonetheless. :tongue:


But wasn't that the point? Since this thread has gone on and on without any conclusion? That agreeing to disagree isn't good enough? Oh well I guess


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5

kevin bradley said:


> German,
> 
> No, they were never good foods. I DID look up an old ingredient list on Eukanuba. It never had much meat and has always been litterred with Corn and Grain. We can debate semantics("decent") but NO, Iams and Eukanuba were always pretty crap foods compared to the TRUE premium food of today(Orijen/Acana...)...
> 
> Heck, I'd even place Taste of the Wild FAR above what Iams or Eukanuba EVER was.


what do you mean HECK..youd place totw above them. your snide remarks towards diamond foods really does not present any sense of class on your part


----------



## CorgiPaws

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> what do you mean HECK..youd place totw above them. your snide remarks towards diamond foods really does not present any sense of class on your part


He didn't make a "snide" remark... he is entitled to his opinion.
He places company reliability up there with ingredients, and he can do that. 
There is NO need to insult other members of this forum because their opinion is different than yours.


----------



## jdatwood

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> what do you mean HECK..youd place totw above them. your snide remarks towards diamond foods really does not present any sense of class on your part


I fully agree with his statement. Not sure why "heck" offends you so badly?!?!?! How has he shown any lack of class? 



Doc said:


> Come on now moderators, y'all need to get your by-product together! roflmao:smile:


huh??


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> I have all the evidence I need. You avoided my question about making a cheap product out of an expensive product.


i avoided your question because you failed to supply me with credible evidence to my liking. keep trying:smile:

but really, no i dont trust some guy in alabama any more than i trust what any manufacturer tells me.....geez, arent you one who trusts P&G with all their press releases...werent those just designed to keep more customers??


----------



## jdatwood

I think I'll ask my buddy to give me a tour of the Purina facility here in Denver just for educational purposes... :wink:


----------



## magicre

jdatwood said:


> I think I'll ask my buddy to give me a tour of the Purina facility here in Denver just for educational purposes... :wink:


take pics.


----------



## magicre

buddy97 said:


> geez, if i accused a certain large conglomerate of lying, id be asked for better evidence than that.
> 
> i thought we were supposed to be talking about puppies (how little i knew then. thought i had a gsd that would be mostly black---NOPE, thats her in the avatar)


OMG...too too cute!


----------



## jdatwood

magicre said:


> take pics.


Request has been submitted.. I'll see what I can do :wink:


----------



## Ania's Mommy

Oh Buddy! Kimba is such a cutie! It's funny how GSD's coloring changes so much from puppydom to adulthood.


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> i avoided your question because you failed to supply me with credible evidence to my liking. keep trying:smile:


Obvoiusly you don't understand what I am trying to tell you. Boneless meat the the most expensive product of a chicken processing plant. Let's say they get $.75/lb for it (im making this number up cause I don't know the real number). Chicken meal is the least expensive product a processing plant sells. Lets say $.25/lb for it. If you take 100lbs of $.75/lb meat ($75 worth), dehydrate it and grind it up you end up with 35lbs after dehydrating. 35lbs of chicken meal without bones that is worth 35 X $.25 = $8.75. So you start with a raw product (boneless meat) worthy $75, you process it (dehydrate and grind) and you end up with $8.75 worth of chicken meal to sell. So my question is why would you start off with something worth $75, process it until its worth $8.75?

I know these numbers are ficticious but it still shows that when you make boneless chicken meal, you begin with expensive raw materials and end up with a cheap final product. Thats why chicken meal is ground up frames and not boneless meat. The numbers just can't work out otherwise.



> but really, no i dont trust some guy in alabama any more than i trust what any manufacturer tells me.....geez, arent you one who trusts P&G with all their press releases...werent those just designed to keep more customers??


It's possible but its more likely to be press releases to explain what is going on. Everything a big business does is not sinister. If it were your job to write press releases and you knew everything was going to be the same, would you have written something different than they did?


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5

jdatwood said:


> I fully agree with his statement. Not sure why "heck" offends you so badly?!?!?! How has he shown any lack of class?
> 
> 
> 
> huh??


u agree,but dont agree?


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> It's possible but its more likely to be press releases to explain what is going on. Everything a big business does is not sinister. If it were your job to write press releases and you knew everything was going to be the same, would you have written something different than they did?


first, i would concede that their definition of muscle meat is being stretched. im under no illusion about that. its any meat they are getting off the bone that most of us wouldnt really care for. they can still avoid using all the bones of the frame. its meat and not bone nevertheless. i already understand no company is using the muscle meat we eat or fresh chickens (well, only in enough quantity so that they can put a named meat on the label to make folks feel better), and have made that argument many times before in other threads.

RE: those press releases. if they knew the long range plan would eventually vary from their stated plan somewhere down the road, those press releases wouldnt have looked any different, imo. they were designed to address the immediate fears of customers and losing as few of them as possible.

so, lets see. everything big business does is not sinister (we know who we are talking about here), but champion is flat out lying (ie being sinister) about how their chicken meal is made to avoid the loss of any customers. (ie they are using meat such that it is, not bone)

ok, then.

there may be a reason that Orijen is much more expensive than most other kibbles. i know, i know, its only because they are sinister, not due to any better ingredients than say, Iams, is using.

AGAIN (and im tired of repeating this), lest anyone think im making some kind of argument that any kibble is providing my dog with anything closely equivalent with fresh meat and the like, I AM NOT.


----------



## kevin bradley

buddy97 said:


> there may be a reason that Orijen is much more expensive than most other kibbles. i know, i know, its only because they are sinister, not due to any better ingredients than say, Iams, is using.


(I know you said this tongue in cheek, Derek) but....
I may be naive but unless someone can come up w/ something better than, "come on Kevin, they all put garbage in their food and just disguise it w/ clever workaround language in their ingredient lists".....I guess I just want more proof than this. If they were so determined to scam all of us, explain the wild caught fish in the food? Or their determination to keep any trace of Ethoxyquin out? 

Just doesn't add up.


----------



## magicre

personally, i think this great debate has hit the wall and it's reached what i call a standoff.

both sides have made excellent points and all parties can honourably call it a great debate...

just my two cents, but i'm thinking it may well be time to congratulate, shake hands and go back to petting puppies....


----------



## kevin bradley

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> what do you mean HECK..youd place totw above them. your snide remarks towards diamond foods really does not present any sense of class on your part


Oh, RC. Come on. I don't like Diamond and I'm not gonna hide it. I try to be diplomatic about it...

I think Diamond serves one purpose...they DO provide a decent alternative for those who ABSOLUTELY cannot afford some of the better options.


----------



## Doc

Is it Kum By Ya time?


----------



## kevin bradley

Doc said:


> Is it Kum By Ya time?


I love RC. He always gets angry w/ me...but I'm pretty thick skinned. I think some days he just wakes up on the wrong side :wink:


----------



## harrkim120

kevin bradley said:


> I love RC. He always gets angry w/ me...but I'm pretty thick skinned. I think some days he just wakes up on the wrong side :wink:


Hahahaha :biggrin:


----------



## magicre

Doc said:


> Is it Kum By Ya time?


gotta ghee-tarr?


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> If they were so determined to scam all of us, explain the wild caught fish in the food?


I don't know a lot about the cost of fish. The only fish I buy is farm raised salmon about once a week. I pay around $7 to $8/lb for it. When I have bought wild caught salmon, its over $10/lb. 

"Fresh Deboned Salmon" is the #1 ingredient in Orijen's 6 fish formula. Do you think that is the same salmon I buy at the grocery store for over $10/lb? I don't. It could be scraps. It could be damaged fish. It could be diseased fish. I don't know what it is but I'm sure it's not the $10+/lb stuff even if they can get it for $1 lb, they still have a lot of other ingredients to go into their food plus processing costs, company overhead, shipping costs, etc. The money is just not there.



> Or their determination to keep any trace of Ethoxyquin out?


Because so many people have stopped buying dog food containing E. I suspect in a year only the lowest grades of dog food will contain E.


----------



## kevin bradley

where is RC when I need him?

I need the "P & G Insider disclaimer statement" for all Raw's posts :wink:



you might be right Raw. I honestly don't know. I'd like to think its at least some compromise of decency. Admittedly, Wild caught Walleye or deboned Salmon as an ingredient is pretty far from the stuff you describe. 

If deboned Salmon and Walleye=leftover fish remnants from the guys on the dock...I guess I would question Champions integrity. 


But you know what? I'm in this transformational stage of my life right now....I'm so sick of the crap on TV, the advertising, from 6 pack abs in a week to Golf Club gadgets that make you play like Tiger(on the course 

I'm starting to wonder if capitalism is based more on one gigantic lie/how you can get people to PERCEIVE your product rather than the quality of the product. 

Sad. 

Rant over. sorry.


----------



## Doc

magicre said:


> gotta ghee-tarr?


I gotz one dat my pappy played and a feddle dat granny played. Poor gal didn't have no teef but she would dip snuff, spit, and sing all nite long!


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> I don't know a lot about the cost of fish. The only fish I buy is farm raised salmon about once a week. I pay around $7 to $8/lb for it. When I have bought wild caught salmon, its over $10/lb.
> 
> "Fresh Deboned Salmon" is the #1 ingredient in Orijen's 6 fish formula. Do you think that is the same salmon I buy at the grocery store for over $10/lb? .


not likely. even if it was, its just enough (and no more, im sure) so they can put it first on the ingredient label. that sure looks good on the ingredient list, but obviously the salmon meal makes up the bulk of the protein source in the food

now, if only Raw knew some guy in Alabama who made salmon meal, he could clear all of this up.:tongue:


----------



## ziggy29

magicre said:


> personally, i think this great debate has hit the wall and it's reached what i call a standoff.
> 
> both sides have made excellent points and all parties can honourably call it a great debate...
> 
> just my two cents, but i'm thinking it may well be time to congratulate, shake hands and go back to petting puppies....


Agreed.

This thread needed to be put to pasture a long time ago. I come back after 10 days in England it's still the same thread with the same argument back and forth, only with another 200 posts of it... that's some serious determination (and intransigence!)...

Can we agree to disagree, admit that no opinions are going to be swayed and put this one out of its misery? :smile:


----------



## buddy97

ziggy29 said:


> Can we agree to disagree, admit that no opinions are going to be swayed and put this one out of its misery? :smile:


so is the goal of a thread to get a consensus opinion on a topic? cant a topic be debated as long as no one is making personal attacks? if , in 10 days absence you see a thread with 200 more posts, what would you expect to see other than a plethora of intransigence.

i think this thread will die on its own accord sooner or later.


----------



## kevin bradley

buddy97 said:


> so is the goal of a thread to get a consensus opinion on a topic? cant a topic be debated as long as no one is making personal attacks? if , in 10 days absence you see a thread with 200 more posts, what would you expect to see other than a plethora of intransigence.
> 
> i think this thread will die on its own accord sooner or later.




agreed. so what we talk about stuff for awhile. 

don't look at the thread if it is so troublesome to you :redface:

same for "OH NO, this thread talked about Raw feeding." I like an open forum where people can be free to talk about stuff. 

For pete's sake, reminds me of girl I dated years ago who would complain about me wanting to discuss world issues/politics/social issues, etc... I enjoy talking about things...I think its how we all learn. I don't care if you think Old Roy is the best food on the planet. Just please have a reason and be prepared to explain it and be challenged. 

Just my thoughts.


----------



## buddy97

kevin bradley said:


> For pete's sake, reminds me of girl I dated years ago who would complain about me wanting to discuss world issues/politics/social issues, etc.


dont you know.....she wanted to talk about...........feelings:smile:


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> But you know what? I'm in this transformational stage of my life right now....I'm so sick of the crap on TV, the advertising, from 6 pack abs in a week to Golf Club gadgets that make you play like Tiger(on the course


I transformed a long time ago and it took me a month to get 6 pack abs. :smile:



> I'm starting to wonder if capitalism is based more on one gigantic lie/how you can get people to PERCEIVE your product rather than the quality of the product.


Thats what marketing departments are for. To create the perception they want you to have. That not just dog food, its everything.


----------



## ziggy29

buddy97 said:


> i think this thread will die on its own accord sooner or later.


I'd say it's already too late for "sooner".... :biggrin:


----------



## RawFedDogs

ziggy29 said:


> Can we agree to disagree, admit that no opinions are going to be swayed and put this one out of its misery? :smile:


I just don't understand why people have this uncontrolable urge to read threads they have no interest in. There are many threads on this board I don't read anymore. I stop reading them when I loose interest.


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> Thats what marketing departments are for. To create the perception they want you to have. That not just dog food, its everything.



no debate there, Raw. Clearly, thats what they try to do. 

it gets more and more pathetic to me every day I see it. From get rich quick schemes to convicts selling scham-wow's(or whatever they are called) that suck up swimming pools of water....to Chef Michels fresh meat Dog foods....I'm just sick of it. 

You know, its all our faults as consumers for buying into it. But it doesn't make their garbage right. 

Both the Drug Dealer --AND-- the User are wrong. Just because the User has a "choice" doesn't make the Dealer morally correct.

standing down.


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> dont you know.....she wanted to talk about...........feelings:smile:



NOOOOOooooooooo......... Imagine that. :smile:


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5

kevin bradley said:


> (I know you said this tongue in cheek, Derek) but....
> I may be naive but unless someone can come up w/ something better than, "come on Kevin, they all put garbage in their food and just disguise it w/ clever workaround language in their ingredient lists".....I guess I just want more proof than this. If they were so determined to scam all of us, explain the wild caught fish in the food? Or their determination to keep any trace of Ethoxyquin out?
> 
> Just doesn't add up.


ivr read that when supplies are low the will use farm raised. the inconsistency between using one or the other causes some dogs to react badly to this


kevin bradley said:


> I love RC. He always gets angry w/ me...but I'm pretty thick skinned. I think some days he just wakes up on the wrong side :wink:


i actually got angry when u never commented on my speech. especially since i mentioned u in it,and talked about orijen as well in it ha


----------



## RawFedDogs

kevin bradley said:


> no debate there, Raw. Clearly, thats what they try to do.


Now ... once you understand that, you know what you are looking at when you are looking at it. It makes you much smarter and able to make better, more informed decisions.

You can look at a commercial or read the label and say, "You know ... That just doesn't make sense." And you don't fall for it. :smile:


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5

when orijen says fresh salmon;. how do u know if its wild or farmed raise. u dont,theyre both fresh.


----------



## kevin bradley

RawFedDogs said:


> Now ... once you understand that, you know what you are looking at when you are looking at it. It makes you much smarter and able to make better, more informed decisions.
> 
> You can look at a commercial or read the label and say, "You know ... That just doesn't make sense." And you don't fall for it. :smile:



I guess what gets me most RAW is that its ALL COMMERCIALS. Its not like we're talking about a select few who try to scam us....its virtually ALL OF THEM. 

The Dog food advertising is up there w/ the WORST. Hell, I fell for the Pedigree commercials. How could a company so kind and giving make such horrible food. But they DO. They make some of the worst. 

Sadly also, there are many who don't have the time/ability or whatever to research all of this stuff. Take an older retired person who maybe doesn't have access to Dog food forums....common sense would certainly tell them to rely on what their Vet says...and things can get pretty bad from there. 

Net/net-I guess what I'm trying to say is that the greatest tool anyone can have in the 21st century is the ability to research and weed through information...having a knack for what is/is not BS.


----------



## kevin bradley

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> ivr read that when supplies are low the will use farm raised. the inconsistency between using one or the other causes some dogs to react badly to this
> 
> 
> i actually got angry when u never commented on my speech. especially since i mentioned u in it,and talked about orijen as well in it ha


RC,

I didn't even read your post. Sorry. Honestly...I try to keep up w/ most of them but missed yours. 

Let me go check it out. 

I jab at you but hopefully you know its all in fun.


----------



## ziggy29

RawFedDogs said:


> I just don't understand why people have this uncontrolable urge to read threads they have no interest in. There are many threads on this board I don't read anymore. I stop reading them when I loose interest.


Partially because I think the text in the thread topic needs to die. It was scaremongering and (I think) inaccurate and unfair at this point. I hate that it keeps moving to the top.

Having said that, I don't understand the uncontrollable urge to waste the energy and keep making the same point in a thread that's clearly beating a dead horse at this point.


----------



## CorgiPaws

ziggy29 said:


> Having said that, I don't understand the uncontrollable urge to waste the energy and keep making the same point in a thread that's clearly beating a dead horse at this point.


DITTO on this. There comes a point when to adults ought to realize they're dancing in circles. 
I tried to say that yesterday... but... it didn't work out too well.


----------



## buddy97

ziggy29 said:


> Having said that, I don't understand the uncontrollable urge to waste the energy and keep making the same point in a thread that's clearly beating a dead horse at this point.


but the people interested in beating the dead horse keep posting because they have interest in the thread.

then there are others, who have no interest in the thread, who actually waste their time coming on the thread to complain about the dead horse being beaten...now THATS a waste of time.


----------



## meggels

If I can't believe in companies like Orijen & Acana.....I don't know what to do.


----------



## 93-5G20

buddy97 said:


> changing the mix does not have only downside for them. if they calculate the customers gained, for example, by moving the food into big box pet store chains with a lower cost via a less quality formula AS WELL AS greater purchasing power.....then those smart, six figure income making employees may see that as the smartest long range strategy.
> 
> will they lose some loyal Natura customers with such a move? sure they will. will they make up for that with an increase of the more casual dog food buyer? id say yes, by a great margin......my opinion is that this strategy would fit right in with their ability to advertise in a way that Natura never had.
> 
> i just dont buy this theory that because they can increase profit margin with their greater purchasing power that they will be satisfied from the bottom line created by that alone.


A few problems with your speculation.
1. P and G says they are not going to change the formulas.
2. PG says they will honor and maintain the specialty store distribution.
3. Grinding out dog food, is not that hard, they have the manufacturing already built, they just have to keep it clean and safe. The procedures are already written. If they do nothing all they have to do is continue to make the food, and sponsor some events and such.
4. Innova was making profits doing what they are doing, its not like its not upside already.
5. Foods are a commodity, more buying power gets lower prices, and you can demand higher quality too. You can get the same quality also. If they are using meat, one chicken vs another chicken is not going to be that big a difference. Its not like chicken producers are going to screw themselves by not raising human food grade animals. Its a commodity, and you want to be ready for a price spike. If you want free range chickens...go for it.


MEANWHILE the hysteria in the title of the thread is pretty much proved false by the ongoing discussion. There is not much of a there....there.


----------



## 3feathers

buddy97 said:


> but the people interested in beating the dead horse keep posting because they have interest in the thread.
> 
> then there are others, who have no interest in the thread, who actually waste their time coming on the thread to complain about the dead horse being beaten...now THATS a waste of time.


I just had to giggle at that one! :biggrin:


----------



## buddy97

93-5G20 said:


> A few problems with your speculation.
> 1. P and G says they are not going to change the formulas.
> 2. PG says they will honor and maintain the specialty store distribution.
> 3. Grinding out dog food, is not that hard, they have the manufacturing already built, they just have to keep it clean and safe. The procedures are already written. If they do nothing all they have to do is continue to make the food, and sponsor some events and such.
> 4. Innova was making profits doing what they are doing, its not like its not upside already.
> 5. Foods are a commodity, more buying power gets lower prices, and you can demand higher quality too. You can get the same quality also. .


my problem is:

first, i dont believe P&G on points 1 and 2 (well, i believe they will keep these promises in the short run only)

the rest of the argument is based on the premise that P&G will be happy enough with the profits their greater buying power will provide and will have no interest in seeking greater profits by many other means. thats an argument i will never buy.

now THAT was a waste of time, since this same exchange has been made several times.







....happy now?


----------



## CorgiPaws

buddy97 said:


> the rest of the argument is based on the premise that P&G will be happy enough with the profits their greater buying power will provide and will have no interest in seeking greater profits by many other means. thats an argument i will never buy.
> 
> now THAT was a waste of time, since this same exchange has been made several times.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....happy now?


I don't feel strongly on either side of this BUT...

Considering those who see no reason to worry have (over and over) used the argument that P&G is not so bad because ALL companies are in it for profit and profit alone, wouldn't it makes sense then that they'd want to maximize profit by making as many cost-cutting changes as they can get away with?


----------



## buddy97

CorgiPaws said:


> Considering those who see no reason to worry have (over and over) used the argument that P&G is not so bad because ALL companies are in it for profit and profit alone, wouldn't it makes sense then that they'd want to maximize profit by making as many cost-cutting changes as they can get away with?












heck, even champion has been accused by some of those same folks of getting away with the cheapest crap they can buy


----------



## schtuffy

buddy97 said:


> now THAT was a waste of time, since this same exchange has been made several times.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....happy now?


Your gif made me giggle :biggrin:


----------



## luvMyBRT

^^^^ Me too!!! LOL. :biggrin:


----------



## RawFedDogs

CorgiPaws said:


> I don't feel strongly on either side of this BUT...
> 
> Considering those who see no reason to worry have (over and over) used the argument that P&G is not so bad because ALL companies are in it for profit and profit alone, wouldn't it makes sense then that they'd want to maximize profit by making as many cost-cutting changes as they can get away with?


No ... it would be like changing the Lincoln Continental assembly line to use Ford parts. If they did that, the product would no longer be a Continental but a Ford.


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> No ... it would be like changing the Lincoln Continental assembly line to use Ford parts. If they did that, the product would no longer be a Continental but a Ford.


but if Ford chose to keep calling it a Lincoln Continental and it was labeled a Lincoln Continenetal....well, then it would still be a Lincoln Continental no matter how much the diehard Continental fans didnt like it.


----------



## frenchies

*natura*

taste of the wild is supposed to be a top food Who DO you believe?


----------



## magicre

kevin bradley said:


> no debate there, Raw. Clearly, thats what they try to do.
> 
> it gets more and more pathetic to me every day I see it. From get rich quick schemes to convicts selling scham-wow's(or whatever they are called) that suck up swimming pools of water....to Chef Michels fresh meat Dog foods....I'm just sick of it.
> 
> You know, its all our faults as consumers for buying into it. But it doesn't make their garbage right.
> 
> Both the Drug Dealer --AND-- the User are wrong. Just because the User has a "choice" doesn't make the Dealer morally correct.
> 
> standing down.


you're asking a 'for profit' company to have ethics, too?

that's like asking a doctor if he went into medicine for the purpose of healing.

business is business, kevin....and ethics are ethics...

ask earthbound farms how ethical they were in selling produce that was irrigated with water infected by cow feces...and they didn't pull the product until they had to.

the ONLY time i have ever seen any form of ethics was when jack in the box sold hamburgers that had partially thawed and weren't cooked through and through...i've never seen a company move so fast....to correct a deadly error.

i'm sure there are more examples of ethical behaviour......but shoot...caveat emptor all the way for the consumer...

it's up to us to perform OUR due diligence...not count on a business to do it for us.

OR, worse....to actually buy into marketing, no matter how powerful, and buy the product without performing due diligence and some research.


----------



## kevin bradley

magicre said:


> you're asking a 'for profit' company to have ethics, too?
> 
> that's like asking a doctor if he went into medicine for the purpose of healing.
> 
> business is business, kevin....and ethics are ethics...
> 
> ask earthbound farms how ethical they were in selling produce that was irrigated with water infected by cow feces...and they didn't pull the product until they had to.
> 
> the ONLY time i have ever seen any form of ethics was when jack in the box sold hamburgers that had partially thawed and weren't cooked through and through...i've never seen a company move so fast....to correct a deadly error.
> 
> i'm sure there are more examples of ethical behaviour......but shoot...caveat emptor all the way for the consumer...
> 
> it's up to us to perform OUR due diligence...not count on a business to do it for us.
> 
> OR, worse....to actually buy into marketing, no matter how powerful, and buy the product without performing due diligence and some research.




I may be naive Re. But I think its possible to not scam people. 

I build cabinets on the side...for a modest profit. I DO many things that are right and ethical when I build cabinets while the end user may never know the difference....I DO. It matters to ME. 

I was listening to Sean Hannity on the way home from work yesterday. He has this "work at home" business commercial on during his show. Wild claims like "I make $10k/month working from home and my life is great now" litter the 30 second commercial. Pathetic. I then have to listen to him how he lives his life in such an honest and proper way....followed up by a commerical for Purina One. The man has more money than he could ever spend. It would be EASY for him to live an ethical and morally correct existence with his work....EASY. And yet he can't. Or won't. 

I get why the $30k BP employee who needs to feed a family cannot take a moral and ethical stand. 

But for some...they have no excuse.


----------



## magicre

kevin bradley said:


> I may be naive Re. But I think its possible to not scam people.
> 
> I build cabinets on the side...for a modest profit. I DO many things that are right and ethical when I build cabinets while the end user may never know the difference....I DO. It matters to ME.
> 
> I was listening to Sean Hannity on the way home from work yesterday. He has this "work at home" business commercial on during his show. Wild claims like "I make $10k/month working from home and my life is great now" litter the 30 second commercial. Pathetic. I then have to listen to him how he lives his life in such an honest and proper way....followed up by a commerical for Purina One. The man has more money than he could ever spend. It would be EASY for him to live an ethical and morally correct existence with his work....EASY. And yet he can't. Or won't.
> 
> I get why the $30k BP employee who needs to feed a family cannot take a moral and ethical stand.
> 
> But for some...they have no excuse.


of course there is no excuse....if wall street and the banks and the mortgage lenders had ethics, would we be in these times?

five people had dinner one night and came up with a scheme so nefarious as to have the far reaching effects it had...

bernie madoff. need i say more?

there is no excuse. i realise i come off cynical...but this is reality.

because you have a moral compass doesn't mean others do....

BP is a perfect example and yes, the 30k worker does have a choice. and they made it.

i own my own business. on the internet...i have the luxury..and it is a luxury to turn clients away...those whom i deem unworthy.

when i practised medicine, i also had ethics...but i'm just one person...

not everyone is without ethics or morals....but the bigger the corp and the larger the profits....well, in my experience....the more the consumer needs to dig.....that's all i'm saying. 

we are the consumer. we have the burden of proving the product is worthy of buying or feeding....

we cannot blame the producer because we didn't do what we were supposed to do...

in an ideal world, there would be no need for discussions like this one...

but this is neither an ideal world nor do we have a world population consisting of mahatma gandhi and mother theresa...


----------



## Doc

Will Martin Bubur please report to the front office. We need input on ethics .. a la Bubur style!


----------



## magicre

Doc said:


> Will Martin Bubur please report to the front office. We need input on ethics .. a la Bubur style!


A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for. 
Martin Buber 

For sin is just this, what man cannot by its very nature do with his whole being; it is possible to silence the conflict in the soul, but it is not possible to uproot it. 
Martin Buber 

G'd wants man to fulfill his commands as a human being and with the quality peculiar to human beings. 
Martin Buber 


The law is not thrust upon man; it rests deep within him, to waken when the call comes. 
Martin Buber 


There are three principles in a man's being and life, the principle of thought, the principle of speech, and the principle of action. The origin of all conflict between me and my fellow-men is that I do not say what I mean and I don't do what I say. 
Martin Buber


----------



## Doc

magicre said:


> A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.
> Martin Buber
> 
> For sin is just this, what man cannot by its very nature do with his whole being; it is possible to silence the conflict in the soul, but it is not possible to uproot it.
> Martin Buber
> 
> G'd wants man to fulfill his commands as a human being and with the quality peculiar to human beings.
> Martin Buber
> 
> 
> The law is not thrust upon man; it rests deep within him, to waken when the call comes.
> Martin Buber
> 
> 
> There are three principles in a man's being and life, the principle of thought, the principle of speech, and the principle of action. The origin of all conflict between me and my fellow-men is that I do not say what I mean and I don't do what I say.
> Martin Buber


That's about all I have to say about that. :biggrin:


----------



## PUNKem733

It looks like this thread should be put to sleep...now that's the ethical thing to do.


----------



## RawFedDogs

PUNKem733 said:


> It looks like this thread should be put to sleep...now that's the ethical thing to do.


It will die a natural death when people stop posting just like every other thread.


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5

herres my full opinion.

i was so excited to feed shane evo herring,then an hour after planning my switch i found out about the pand g buy outs.

i thought natura was the most ethical company.
now i beleive that even without p and g they were money slimeballs. and hypocrites. however ib elieve they had good standards/

now i bleieve the company will not only have money slimeball standards..but be crap in regards to making sure we get quailty foods.


----------



## Guest

I just wanted to mention that I received a coupon in yesterday's mail for a free 5 pound bag of any Natura product, which I intend to pass along to my aunt who is feeding her two Shelties Pedigree dry and Alpo / Ol' Roy canned. The coupon came from the big "Natura Advantage" sales pitch recently. Has anyone else got theirs yet?


----------



## MollyWoppy

Yeah, I just got mine as well. Originally it said I was getting a coupon for $7 off, but they actually sent me a coupon for a free bag. Bonus!
Getting a bag of EVO for my cat. Hope she likes it.


----------



## harrkim120

I got mine too!!! They must have messed something up though because I got duplicates. :biggrin:


----------



## Guest

I will soon be getting another coupon for another free bag.  I filled out the app with my ex-husband's name and address so when he gets it in the mail he will give it to me.


----------



## rjordan392

The original poster's statement may have jumped the gun as to quality of Natura products.
Here is my experience:
I adopted a shelter dog back in february and started feeding him Innova adult small red bites and he ate it with no problems until just last week after I purchased a 15 lb. bag ot it. He was not eating it with the same gusto as before. He ate more slowly. Then one morning, before his feeding, I noticed that he vomited. I was not suspicious at all as he will try to eat grass.

The afternoon of Aug 5th, he ate as usual and still slowly.
But today, he refused to eat his morning meal. So I took him for his walk to see if that would improve his appetite. He still would not touch it. So I prepared some fresh peas & carrots and he would not eat these either.
But in earlier meals, after I mix it in with Kibble, he would eat all of it.

Now I was beginning to think the dog was sick. So I decided to try one more thing. I cooked a few pieces of turkey bacon and he ate all of it. 
So I went to this forum and read some of the replies and I noticed that some have indicated that the dog food may have become rancid or out of date.
So I checked the bag and it had an expiration date of Sep 09 2010
and some other numbers which may be a lot number 0134 2.
The sku number is 51485 12357.

Now I am off to purchase another bag of Innova with a more later expiration date to confirm my suspicions that my bag has gone bad.


----------



## rjordan392

Update:
This afternoon, I fed my dog from a newly purchased bag of Innova. He ate all his meal without hesitation. So all seems well right now but I got to thinking about why he would not touch his morning meal. I kept some of his kibble in a ziplock bag on top of the refridgerator which is 2 feet away from the cooking range and I believe the heat from cooking, dispite having a exhaust fan running, may have spoiled it. The house is air conditioned but it may not have been enough. I am going to hold onto the old Kibble which was not exposed to heat and try to feed my dog with it and the result will give me the answer. 
I will give my report Saturday morning.


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5

how do iget a coupon?


----------



## baggie

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> how do iget a coupon?


https://www.naturaadvantage.com/


----------



## rjordan392

Update 2:

My beagle ate all of his meal from the old bag of Innova this morning.
So the conclusion is that dry food can go bad if its container is placed to close to a heat source. I threw out the ziplock bag that contained the spoiled Kibble and will keep his food in a bottom cabinet.


----------



## ubershann

My dog eats another brand and recently I noticed she's not as enthusiastic about it even though she's loved it up til now. I've been offering her another kind to give her something different and she's into it. I realized she did this before too, so I'm thinking she's just bored with the food after a while.

My point is, maybe it's a little too quick to jump to the judgment that your dog's disinterest has anything to do with Natura being bought out. It could have been that he (she?) wasn't feeling good or wasn't hungry, it could be boredom with the food. It could be a number of things. I'm not saying that I know for sure there's nothing different about the food, but since the buy-out just happened I doubt there'd be much of a change at this point, and there's absolutely nothing to suggest that there will be any change in the immediate future (besides rumors and a general hatred of large corporations).


----------



## ubershann

I'm curious about why no one is holding Natura responsible in any of this. It seems that this is a brand that many of you trusted and held in high regard. If they are responsible and in it for the animals then wouldn't it stand to reason that either 1) they went into this with an agreement that P&G would not change the formula and would not ruin the reputation they had built, or 2) Natura never really cared in the first place and was just in it for the money, making them no different than P&G. 

From what I know P&G have signed an agreement that they won't change the formula or suppliers, so I'm not sure how the dog food is supposed to suddenly be horrible just because it's under new ownership. If P&G changed it and made it lower quality people would most likely notice and switch dog foods. That would be a stupid business move because they would lose the customer base that made the company profitable, the reason P&G wanted it in the first place. 

As a premium food (for a premium price) they are not going to gain many bargain shoppers as customers. By reducing the quality of the food they'd be losing their customers, and could have a hard time replacing them since a large amount of dog owners won't pay that price for dog food. Essentially they'd be shooting themselves in the foot, and I'm pretty sure they didn't get to be such a successful company by making lousy business decisions. 

Ok, my piece has been said :smile:


----------



## buddy97

ubershann said:


> As a premium food (for a premium price) they are not going to gain many bargain shoppers as customers. By reducing the quality of the food they'd be losing their customers, and could have a hard time replacing them since a large amount of dog owners won't pay that price for dog food.:


people in Petsmart already pay close to those prices for some of the food there. if Natura products end up there (and the other bog box store), which i believe they will, they could easily make up for the loss of the more discerning dog food buyers by the gain in the casual dog food buyer who has always heard of innova but never bothered to look for it at the independent shops. i theorize that a loss of quality in the product wont affect them as much if their target market is the average big chain dog food shopper vs the current Natura customer base.


----------



## RawFedDogs

buddy97 said:


> i theorize that a loss of quality in the product wont affect them as much if their target market is the average big chain dog food shopper vs the current Natura customer base.


But thats the point ... they already have two major products for the average chain dog food shopper. Why on earth would they need to buy another one? They are after an entirely different customer base here.


----------



## rjordan392

Once again it happened.
This morning, my beagle turned away from the old bag of "Innova Red Meat Small Bites". I concur with those who say its too soon to judge quality. The problem lies elsewhere. Here are my thoughts:

1. The bag was purchased close to its expiration date.
2. The bag was exposed to high temperatures.
3. A bad lot got through quality control.
4. Does dehydrated red meat go bad faster then dehydrated vegetables?

Now I am just guessing.


----------



## magicre

> As a premium food (for a premium price) they are not going to gain many bargain shoppers as customers. By reducing the quality of the food they'd be losing their customers, and could have a hard time replacing them since a large amount of dog owners won't pay that price for dog food. Essentially they'd be shooting themselves in the foot, and I'm pretty sure they didn't get to be such a successful company by making lousy business decisions.
> 
> Ok, my piece has been said :smile:


and nicely said, at that.

natura is responsible, but really...in what way? that was said rhetorically....it just points out the obvious, as you've stated...they are in business; ergo, money is the bottom line.

that they charged more for allegedly more quality ingredients...well...i don't know and no one else does, either....

dick van patten does his tv commercials for natural balance without blinking an eye...yet, his ingredients come from china...his caveat being that every morsel is inspected...

ellen degeneres, i believe, owns halo products....does anyone really believe, deep down, these celebs are not in it to diversify their income, on the advice of their corporate attorney....to have income should their acting or comedy or value as a star go out the window?

it's what i would advise them to do....cesar millan, love him or hate him, has a whole line of leashes, collars, dog beds...dabbled in food for a while...has anyone SEEN that sanctuary he built? and it's part of the foundation...imagine the taxes HE'S not paying...

for the most part, many do not read forums such as this one...we live in a microcosm..

i was in fred meyers yesterday and saw this gently cooked product....and i will almost guarantee that people will buy it, thinking it's wonderful...and actually, the ingredient list is not too bad....at least it doesn't have sugar...

boutique stores are gaining, yes....but the majority of people are not on these forums...they won't know whether p and g changed formulas, or that natura sold out...they're not looking...

they'll be like we used to be....wandering around petco and looking for something better than purina, with some vague notion that there is something better out there.

this raw movement...sorry for bringing it up...or premium dog food movement...or home cooked movement....yes..it's growing....but not by leaps and bounds...

and on every forum i belong....the bottom line for the consumer is COST.

if i hear this once, i hear it a thousand times...i want the best for the least amount of money.

i even hear it on the raw forums....and it's not a condemnation..food is expensive...whether it be for dogs or humans....

paying 5.99 for a flank steak. ridiculous...or 4.99 per pound for a bottom round.....it's a waste product cut of meat....and ridiculous...having to pay 2.99 for chicken wings, when butchers gave them away, until someone decided it would make a great snack...gizzards for 2.99 a pound...WHAT?

so, it's a juggling act and if you think p and g doesn't know that? oh, i can see the marketing now.

you need to feed your dog the best of the best. he's your favourite bud (insert golden retriever or boston terrier catching a frisbee)...he loves you when you're down....loves you when you come home, blah blah blah...you want to feed him the very best to keep him with you forever....

feed (insert brand name kibble here)....but wait...this product was formerly owned by natura, so you KNOW that we signed a 'no change the ingredient clause and even though the former owners have just bought an island in the south pacific, we'll keep the ingredients to the same high standard they did, even though no one can prove the standard even they kept....buy this formerly natura owned product, wink wink.

the majority of the people who will buy do not visit these forums, do not twist in the wind about what to feed...because even here, i see the bottom line is cost....

we do the best we can....and those who don't, certainly won't care.


----------



## whiteleo

rjordan392, is it terribly hot where you are? Dogs sometimes just plain and simple don't need to eat all the time and will go off food if it is hot out. Although I'm a believer that the Natura line will change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## rjordan392

Yes its hot,
But I keep my house temperature at 76 degrees with 50 to 52% relative humidity. So that's is comfortable for me and the dog and the outside temperature has no relevance. The east coast has had more then its share of heat spells of 90 degree plus weather. However, What is relevant is what was the food I purchased, exposed to before I bought it? Did it sit in somebodys hot warehouse? I am not questioning at this time, the quality of the product. I just want to hear from others about the possible four points I brought up in my post.


----------



## Gia

magicre said:


> dick van patten does his tv commercials for natural balance without blinking an eye...yet, his ingredients come from china...his caveat being that every morsel is inspected...



Is this true??


----------



## ubershann

buddy97 said:


> people in Petsmart already pay close to those prices for some of the food there. if Natura products end up there (and the other bog box store), which i believe they will, they could easily make up for the loss of the more discerning dog food buyers by the gain in the casual dog food buyer who has always heard of innova but never bothered to look for it at the independent shops.


I have to admit, while reading this entire thread (yes the whole thing, there goes nearly a week of internet time :wink I really got the impression that a lot of people had a problem with the food being sold in big stores like Petco and not just independent shops. Not just for quality reasons, but because they don't like the bigger stores and like being able to say they feed a "specialty" boutique food. Maybe I'm wrong, but when reading through what everyone had to say, it sounded like there were a lot of sour grapes about not keeping it solely a "boutique" item. 

Honestly I would love to see it in stores like Petco and PetSmart. Why? Because a lot more of the "average" dog owners shop there. They will *not *do their research and they will look for (as someone else stated) the best they can get for the money. Maybe if they have the Natura options their dog will get a better food than what is currently available there. My love goes out to the dog, so I hope they have every chance to be fed a better food.

Why does that automatically mean they will lower the quality? Natura was already turning a tidy profit, P&G has the money to make larger supply purchases, giving them a bigger discount, so even if they left everything exactly the same they can still up their profits just through more buying power. If they put it in Petco they can then gain more customers. If they lower the quality so the food is no better than the other food there they will not gain customers. Why would anyone change foods and pay even $1 more for a food that offers no more benefit than their current food? When it comes to certain products such as this, people are not looking to change unless their dog is experiencing a problem.

They are going to have to earn their customers, and if they do it in a way that will lose most of their base and have a questionable outcome as to gaining new customers, then they may as well just start slashing their quarterly reports with red, no matter how cheap they go on supplies. Most Petco shoppers have never heard of Innova or the rest of them, so they haven't exactly been chomping at the bit to try them.


----------



## ubershann

magicre said:


> they'll be like we used to be....wandering around petco and looking for something better than purina, with some vague notion that there is something better out there.
> 
> and on every forum i belong....the bottom line for the consumer is COST.
> 
> if i hear this once, i hear it a thousand times...i want the best for the least amount of money.
> 
> the majority of the people who will buy do not visit these forums, do not twist in the wind about what to feed...because even here, i see the bottom line is cost....
> 
> we do the best we can....and those who don't, certainly won't care.


You're exactly right. For the most part it comes down to cost and buying the best you can with what you have to spend. I would love to feed a full raw diet but I just can't afford it. Do I think I'm killing my dog by feeding kibble? Absolutely not. 

I think the shoppers at places like Petco are looking for something that's a quality product, not as bad as the grocery store foods, but not outrageously expensive. Those are typically not the shoppers who will be doing much research into the foods. And in some smaller areas those kind of stores may be the only choice they've got. 

So I'm sure P&G is well aware of all this, but I also think they're facing an era where people are starting to become more aware of what foods are made of, what goes into them, and what kind of effects they may have. That goes for human food and animal food. Times they are a-changin'! :wink: Not too long ago it was standard practice to rub your puppy's nose in his poop when he had an accident, or leave them in the backyard all day and consider them exercised. While we're not all there yet, the dog movement is making great headway. I think P&G is also aware of that. People are starting to pay more attention and large companies are scrutinized more than ever before. If they suddenly start putting out an inferior product people will know, and their hope to gain new customers will, for the most part, be out the window.


----------



## magicre

ubershann said:


> You're exactly right. For the most part it comes down to cost and buying the best you can with what you have to spend. I would love to feed a full raw diet but I just can't afford it. Do I think I'm killing my dog by feeding kibble? Absolutely not.


and there's the other statement...all due respect.....honest, no intent to insult or offend...

weigh the cost of feeding raw and the cost of a dental or a visit to the doctor because of a colitis like condition...or the allergies and the sensitive stomachs and the allergies to meat or chicken or whatever...i've never seen so many posts about dog allergies......or osteoarthritis or any number of things brought on by kibble ingredients...

just because our dogs adapt...doesn't mean it's the right food for them...nor is it out of realm for affordability....

i like the chicken breasts, my dogs get the leg....

every supermarket has sales....and meat can go way down in price....i shop sales....

there are people i know who feed for under a dollar a day...not sure you can get much cheaper than that...

even the amount of work it takes....well...if you had a puppy, that's work...just housetraining a puppy is enough to give me a headache..but there's an end point, a light at the end of the tunnel...by 16 - 20 weeks, the puppy should start getting a clue...

feeding raw? it doesn't have to be expensive....there's a sticky on the raw section about costs....

there are co ops....there are farmers who are hurting...

there are all kinds of ways to feed raw....

and do i think you're killing your dog? i think your dog survives in spite of being fed kibble........are you doing it with intent....? no, of course not....no more than what i was doing....everything we do is with love....

but sometimes we're just plain wrong...sometimes our doctors are wrong...and we have to be the advocate for what our dogs need....

for me, the proof is in the dog...i don't know if i've extended malia's life..i know the quality of her life is better...

her teeth don't hurt...she has muscle where she didn't have it before...she's not sleeping as much and she's almost eleven...she doesn't have bad breath, her teeth are whiter than white, her fur is silky soft, she's lean....you can see the pug in my avatar....his coat IS that shiny...his teeth are prone to smush faced dogs.....and his teeth are whiter than white..he is lean...his energy is different...all because they are fed NO CARBS.

i know i put my shih tzu to sleep...and who knows if it would have gone this way had i had her teeth pulled or fed her raw from the start...

when i think about what i won't spend at the vet....it kind of makes preventative feeding of raw a whole lot easier to swallow...


----------



## ubershann

magicre said:


> weigh the cost of feeding raw and the cost of a dental or a visit to the doctor because of a colitis like condition...or the allergies and the sensitive stomachs and the allergies to meat or chicken or whatever...i've never seen so many posts about dog allergies......or osteoarthritis or any number of things brought on by kibble ingredients...


Do you know for a fact these symptoms are brought on by kibble? 



> every supermarket has sales....and meat can go way down in price....i shop sales....


Here's my issue with this, if you looked into where grocery stores got their meat, and put it under the same scrutiny as the sources for dog food meat, I highly doubt it would pass the test. Unless you are buying premium brand, range fed organic meat (hardly cheap) then you are running into the same problem as companies who put inferior meat in their food. 



> there are people i know who feed for under a dollar a day...not sure you can get much cheaper than that...


I'd like to know the background and quality of the meat they are getting 



> there are all kinds of ways to feed raw....


Yes there are farmers, there are co-ops, but let's be realistic. Not everyone has access or time to go searching farms, making weekly farm runs, try to strike deals with farmers, etc. Some weeks I barely have time to go to the grocery store. 



> and do i think you're killing your dog? i think your dog survives in spite of being fed kibble........


And this is where you're going to lose most dog owners. By going to such extremes, that they "survive in spite of being fed kibble", as if they are barely making it, unhealthy and unhappy but somehow still alive, you are basically telling people it's all or nothing. While raw may be best, I don't feel it harms most dogs to be fed kibble, as long as it is a high quality kibble that meets their nutritional needs. By telling people that they must go the full distance and feed only raw or their dog will only be "surviving" and not actually doing well, you are alienating people who are trying to do the best they can for their dogs and will likely just give up if they can't meet that high standard. 



> when i think about what i won't spend at the vet....it kind of makes preventative feeding of raw a whole lot easier to swallow...


Agreed. And that's what I tell people who balk at the high price of raw, or even the high price of the premium kibbles. But we also can't say for sure that they will have to go to the vet or that it will for sure stop any health problems from happening. 

Look at what people eat. Even those who have a healthy diet are not eating the absolute best possible all the time. That doesn't mean they are destined to be plagued by health issues and will die early. I guess the proof is in the pudding. When you have a dog (or human for that matter) who is thriving, meaning they are happy, well adjusted, healthy, energetic, great teeth, great coat, etc., then they are obviously doing more than just barely surviving.


----------



## buddy97

RawFedDogs said:


> But thats the point ... they already have two major products for the average chain dog food shopper. Why on earth would they need to buy another one? They are after an entirely different customer base here.


exactly. they are after a customer base that shops at the big box stores but arent quite interesred enough to make that extra effort to find a better dog food. bring it to them and they will buy it. the ones who dont know much of anything will continue to buy iams/euk.

what they have there isnt aimed at the buyer looking for higher end foods. even if Natura products were degraded enough to disappoint most of us, it would still be positioned/marketed as the highest quality food in Petsmart.

there are those big chain buyers who would buy Natura products, they are just not interested in driving 40 miles to get it.

why wouldnt P&G do this? they would have the lower end and the higher end of the big box stores market covered. even many Petsmart shoppers i know dont consider iams/euk as anything but subpar dog food. they get their Blue Buff there or their wellness at Petco, but Natura products would be welcomed by many.


----------



## magicre

ubershann said:


> Do you know for a fact these symptoms are brought on by kibble?
> 
> 
> 
> Here's my issue with this, if you looked into where grocery stores got their meat, and put it under the same scrutiny as the sources for dog food meat, I highly doubt it would pass the test. Unless you are buying premium brand, range fed organic meat (hardly cheap) then you are running into the same problem as companies who put inferior meat in their food.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know the background and quality of the meat they are getting
> 
> 
> 
> Yes there are farmers, there are co-ops, but let's be realistic. Not everyone has access or time to go searching farms, making weekly farm runs, try to strike deals with farmers, etc. Some weeks I barely have time to go to the grocery store.
> 
> 
> 
> And this is where you're going to lose most dog owners. By going to such extremes, that they "survive in spite of being fed kibble", as if they are barely making it, unhealthy and unhappy but somehow still alive, you are basically telling people it's all or nothing. While raw may be best, I don't feel it harms most dogs to be fed kibble, as long as it is a high quality kibble that meets their nutritional needs. By telling people that they must go the full distance and feed only raw or their dog will only be "surviving" and not actually doing well, you are alienating people who are trying to do the best they can for their dogs and will likely just give up if they can't meet that high standard.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed. And that's what I tell people who balk at the high price of raw, or even the high price of the premium kibbles. But we also can't say for sure that they will have to go to the vet or that it will for sure stop any health problems from happening.
> 
> Look at what people eat. Even those who have a healthy diet are not eating the absolute best possible all the time. That doesn't mean they are destined to be plagued by health issues and will die early. I guess the proof is in the pudding. When you have a dog (or human for that matter) who is thriving, meaning they are happy, well adjusted, healthy, energetic, great teeth, great coat, etc., then they are obviously doing more than just barely surviving.


please understand...i think people are killing themselves every time they eat potatoes...starches...starchy carbs...when they don't eat meat because someone convinced them that a good medium rare steak is bad, bad, bad.....well, it isn't....milk is. starches are. cookies. cake. bread. pie. those are bad. they ruin our arteries, our organs and teeth....

the same holds true for dogs.....what is in kibble is just as bad for them as they are for humans...sugar and salt and starchy potatoes and pea whatever they call it and beet pulp...these are there because it appeals to humans, not because it does a dog good.

there is a direct relationship between these kinds of foods and obesity and the problems that are associated with....so yes, i do know and am confident in the knowledge.

i could have said yes, i think you're killing your dog..and i would have lost you anyway and anyone else who doesn't want to research as i have.

maybe it's time for extremes and let's stop this dance about raw vs. kibble....because kibble is easy...it allows us to not explore a different option....i'm not being holier than thou either....as i watched my dog die, a light bulb went off...i had already done my due diligence with my husband, my nutrition, our nutrition..

but i didn't with my beloved dogs...and i love my dogs as much as i would love any child....they were far more worthy than what i gave them...

i read the forums and i read about people in one sentence saying how much they love their dog..and they'd love to feed raw, but it takes too much time, it costs too much....blah blah blah...

well, how much do i love my husband if i am not willing to go that extra mile and feed him accordingly to try ....just that...to try and delay the inevitable....and prevent the accompanying diseases associated with periodontal disease.

and, yes, i do know that starches and carbs and sugars and lack of exercise hurt people and they hurt dogs....and the reason i know is i have spent years now studying the human condition...and dogs are now my topic and have been for a few years....

i can sit here with the knowledge that at least three of my dogs lived less comfortable lives and maybe even shorter lives because they were fed kibble....a product with ingredients that are wholly unsuited for a dog.

i was merely responding to what you had said when you said you would feed raw were it not for the prohibitive cost....

i know you don't feel it harms dogs to be fed kibble....because of the examples of dogs being fed kibble that lived to such ripe old ages...

you'll never know because you'll convince yourself that kibble will not kill your dog, that there are kibbles that are good for your dog, which means your vet and your dog food manufacturer have done their jobs well.

and, the background and quality of the food can be from a supermarket or from a grass fed/grass finished cow....there are more of us every day...and we are growing...

people have the vague notion that they are tired of the allergies and the sensitive stomachs..and the vet bills and the solutions which always involve expensive surgeries and vet bills and more vet bills....there is something afoot...and 
mark my words....it won't matter that P and G bought natura.....because in ten years, there will be a stronger movement...and vets better start learning the real deal about salmonella and science diet....


----------



## magicre

Gia said:


> Is this true??


Dick Van Patten's Natural Balance® Pet Foods: Partners

Natural Balance Pet Foods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

when natural balance was first introduced, all of the ingredients were from the united states. read the wiki article and i forget which year it was....but NB removed the made in the usa from its foods...

they do claim to have labs that inspect all of their foods for the ingredients that would harm dogs.

but, in reality, NB's raw has sugar in it. that alone makes it unfit.

they use potatoes. that makes it unfit.

dick van patten, for all of his good intentions, is in it for the money, imho.

same goes for ellen degeneres and halo.


----------



## ubershann

magicre said:


> please understand...i think people are killing themselves every time they eat potatoes


This is another example of extremist thinking. Eating a potato is not killing a person. In fact, entire civilizations have survived on little else. I agree that humans also need meat, you won't find me arguing there. 



> maybe it's time for extremes and let's stop this dance about raw vs. kibble....because kibble is easy...it allows us to not explore a different option


The problem with extremist thinking is that you will end up turning most people away, because it becomes your viewpoint or nothing at all. I don't feed kibble just because it's easy. In fact the raw food I add to it is much easier to feed. The problem is cost. Would I love to eat the most expensive foods every day? Sure. But it's not realistic. That's where most people are coming from. And yes, most people will also look at the time involved if you expect them to hunt down deals from farms and prepare the raw food themselves. I doubt you're going to find that most pet owners are willing to put more time into the meals they prepare for their dogs than the meals they prepare for their children. Without the option of decent kibble I'd hate to think what many dogs might be fed. 



> i read the forums and i read about people in one sentence saying how much they love their dog..and they'd love to feed raw, but it takes too much time, it costs too much....blah blah blah...


Having to live within their means does not mean that these people don't truly love their dogs and want what's best for them. There's the ideal, and there's reality. And those two don't always meet. It would be great to not have a monetary limit placed on my decisions. I would love to pick and chose without a single thought to the cost. Unfortunately I have to pay rent every month and I'm pretty sure my landlords would not take the excuse "But if my dog doesn't eat a pure raw diet I'm killing her!"



> well, how much do i love my husband if i am not willing to go that extra mile and feed him accordingly to try ....just that...to try and delay the inevitable....and prevent the accompanying diseases associated with periodontal disease.


I'm going to assume that since you started taking care of him he has never had a single drop of sugar, flour, or processed food, correct?



> a product with ingredients that are wholly unsuited for a dog.


How are they "wholly" unsuitable? Every ingredient in ever brand of kibble is completely unsuitable for a dog? How exactly do you figure that? 



> you'll never know because you'll convince yourself that kibble will not kill your dog, that there are kibbles that are good for your dog, which means your vet and your dog food manufacturer have done their jobs well.


Why do you assume my vet or any dog food manufacturers had anything to do with my decision? I've never once discussed food with my vet. And the last place I go to for information about food is the company that makes it. Of course they are going to say their food is great. Don't assume that I haven't done my research and that I know nothing about nutrition, just because I have a different opinion than you. 



> and, the background and quality of the food can be from a supermarket or from a grass fed/grass finished cow


So you're telling me that the hormone and chemical-filled, over-processed meats you buy at the average grocery store are totally fine? I don't know how you can put supermarket and grass-fed meat in the same sentence, unless it's to to say one is edible and the other is not that great for you. You are totally anti-kibble, no matter what, but it's ok to feed the dogs hormones and chemicals?



> in ten years, there will be a stronger movement...and vets better start learning the real deal about salmonella and science diet....


I have no doubt that in 10 years we will be leap years beyond where we are now. Just look at how far we are from 10 years ago. Maybe in 10 years there will be raw food available that will make it affordable to the average pet owner. 

Like I've said, I don't disagree that raw is best, but I will not agree that all kibbles are just poisons for dogs. And I will certainly not tell my customers that unless they feed a fully raw diet to their dogs, they don't truly love them and are lazy, selfish owners who don't care that their dogs are suffering. For the most part, these dogs are not suffering and are healthy and happy. By telling them it's raw or nothing they will probably just pick up whatever is on sale at the grocery store, since the message is that all kibble = death.


----------



## ubershann

magicre said:


> dick van patten, for all of his good intentions, is in it for the money, imho.
> 
> same goes for ellen degeneres and halo.


I'm sure all the celebs are in it for the money, and most likely they are not the ones choosing to go into pet food. They have people who handle their investments and basically come to them with a big report that covers all of it. Starting a line of pet food was probably presented along with their overall trading report and their upcoming schedule of book signings :wink:

It's too bad that they don't use some of their money to hire an animal nutritionist to give them a real report on the ingredients. Most of the celebs probably don't even know what goes into the food that has their name on it


----------



## DaneMama

Lets not get into the debate of who loves their dogs more. Its pointless. We ALL love our dogs and only want the best for them. 

I personally don't think that people who choose to feed kibble don't love their dogs. Not even close. I was there once, and all I wanted was the best for my dogs. I don't love my dogs anymore now than I did back when I fed kibble. I feel more confident that I am providing them with the best that I can and that raw is much better for them because of the improvements I saw. Because of this I will never go back to kibble. 

A lot of raw feeders would consider what I feed my dogs to be the "Kibble and Bits" of raw because I don't get all natural, organic, free range meats all the time. I feed my dogs what I can afford, and I will NEVER feel ashamed of doing what I feel is best. I know that they are minimally processed and are fit for human consumption. The meat that goes into kibble, is highly processed and you really have no idea where its coming from or what is happening to it even if it is all natural, grass fed, organic, etc. I personally think that the processing that even the highest quality meats go through totally negates the "higher quality" label that it has. Yes, there are hormones and antibiotics in most mass produced meats, but....what really is in the food you feed your dogs? Unless you see EVERY single ingredient from its natural, raw form all the way til the end product.

I think that the meats that I feed my dogs, even their "low quality" is better than even the highest quality kibble out there. If not for just the fact that raw meats are very minimally processed compared to kibble of any kind.

I don't want to come across as pushing raw or being extreme, just adding to the debate here. This thread has gone through a lot and it would be great if we could finally have a raw vs. kibble debate that doesn't end up with anger and name calling. It might actually help a lot of people in figuring out what is best and what they feel comfortable doing. 

Let me ask everyone here, do you feel you are feeding the best that you can provide your dogs? Do you feel that kibble is the best for dogs, and why? 

I want a healthy debate....is that too much to ask for? Lets keep it clean and without hurting feelings, just plain old opinion backed debate!


----------



## whiteleo

Should we start a new thread for that?


----------



## DaneMama

Ah, c'mon!! This thread has visited most other aspects of feeding dogs??? Why not the age old debate LOL :wink:


----------



## ubershann

danemama08 said:


> Lets not get into the debate of who loves their dogs more. Its pointless. We ALL love our dogs and only want the best for them.


Exactly! Not being able to afford the best and top of the line does not mean we don't care. Would my daughter be better off in a private school that offered lots of extra classes such as art, _real_ P.E., music, debate, etc.? Of course she would! Can I afford the price tag that comes with it? Not even close. Does this mean I don't love my daughter as much as the parents of private school kids? Nope. It means I can't afford all the options they can. And even without the best option she is an incredibly smart girl who is well ahead of her years.



> I don't want to come across as pushing raw or being extreme


I don't think you're coming across as pushy or extreme in any way. I agree that fully raw is the best option, and I'm sure many other kibble feeders will agree. But feeders who push raw by claiming that kibble feeders are causing their dogs to suffer until they die prematurely are really not helping their own cause, only alienating people. No one is going to stick around to find out more about poochie nutrition if they're being insulted and told everything but raw will poison their dog. Without any options many will just give up.



> Let me ask everyone here, do you feel you are feeding the best that you can provide your dogs? Do you feel that kibble is the best for dogs, and why?


I feel I'm feeding the best I can provide. Tiki gets kibble with raw added twice a day. She's on a grain free food that is made up of meat, fruits, veggies, with no synthetic vitamins added, and her treats are corn, wheat, gluten free, also grain free except for one. I'm looking in to getting ground turkey wings at a good price so she can have more raw, but she'll still be getting kibble with it. Just can't afford the large amount of meat she would need on a daily basis. I could underfeed her, but I don't think that would be any better.

I don't think kibble is the best choice and I do feel raw would be the #1 choice, but I don't think all kibbles are necessarily bad. Just as with human food, just because it's not the absolute best choice does not mean it is automatically harming the person eating it. 

For now I am a full-time student who works 2 days a week in retail (translation: low paying job) so buying a premium priced kibble and adding some raw to it can be challenging enough at times, but I feed her the best I am able to. In fact that's part of the reason I took the job at the pet store (food store?). Without the big discount I get I don't even know if I'd be able to afford the food I get. I'd find a way, but I might not get to eat for 2 weeks out of the month :wink:


----------



## whiteleo

O.k then I'll start the debate. Dogs are carnivores and should be fed raw meat, bones and organs. This is what I feed my dogs and yes, this is the best I can do for my dogs. I was once a kibble feeder but my poor female had relentless issues with diarreah and trip after trip to the vet and nothing helped. She had to be coaxed to eat as she wasn't interested in food (if I had that much diarreah I wouldn't be either) I finally started learning more and more about raw food diets and thanks to this forum my garbage gut has no more issues with diarreah and LOVES to eat. So as it is, this is the appropriate way to feed a carnivore!


----------



## whiteleo

So for the price you pay for your kibble and the premade raw, your dog could have a nice raw diet. How much food do you think a dog eats in a day on a raw diet? A 50lb dog would get 1lb of raw a day split into 2 meals, thats almost a chicken quarter and thats all.


----------



## frenchies

*natura con't.*

After reading every single one of the posts here IMO it comes down to due diligence on the buyers part. The company(s) think of the bottom line. They just sell dogfood. The majority of people who buy dog food don't spend half the night online trying to decide if company A is lying about their ingredients or whether company B will change sources once the take over is complete. If the company gets caught in a lie, they "fix" it and move on.

The honest education of the general public is not going to come from the dog food companies. Expressing our knowledge on this website is like preaching to the choir. If we feel it is important enought then we get out and say stuff where and when it matters ... at the retailers. (Just make sure you know the facts.) The breeders of our pets have to be more proactive when it comes to educating our puppy buyers re the kinds of food available and what may be best for the baby and the family. 

I will do the very best investigations I can ( this website has been wonderful and very useful) and then will go out and look after my frenchies. I have a virtual library of books on natural health and health in general and also on the origins of the different breeds. Get as much different info. you can and then use your brain.

Hope that was kinda helpful. I going to add a ps that may piss people off a bit. If we find it really is affecting our quality of life and that of our pets to feed or not to feed a particular food or type of food, maybe we should give a little more thought to whether we can afford a pet at all. 


Eff


----------



## magicre

> This is another example of extremist thinking. Eating a potato is not killing a person. In fact, entire civilizations have survived on little else. I agree that humans also need meat, you won't find me arguing there.


this is not extremist thinking.

study the history of the potatoe. it was a food that kept people alive....it was an adaptive substance for those who were starving. people died on this diet of potatoes...ask the irish, the scots....

this was never ever meant to be part of our diet.

it was merely a temporary solution to the more extremist solution......death by hunger.



> The problem with extremist thinking is that you will end up turning most people away, because it becomes your viewpoint or nothing at all. I don't feed kibble just because it's easy. In fact the raw food I add to it is much easier to feed. The problem is cost. Would I love to eat the most expensive foods every day? Sure. But it's not realistic. That's where most people are coming from. And yes, most people will also look at the time involved if you expect them to hunt down deals from farms and prepare the raw food themselves. I doubt you're going to find that most pet owners are willing to put more time into the meals they prepare for their dogs than the meals they prepare for their children. Without the option of decent kibble I'd hate to think what many dogs might be fed.


the problem is thinking this method of feeding is any more extreme than giving a dog a piece of something that no longer looks nor has the properties of what it was before it became a slurry and a slow cooked thing in a vat.

the extreme thinking occurred in 1860 with two brothers in london who created dehydrated dog food....and it went from there.

the myth is cost, not the problem. my dogs eat what i eat. i shop sales for me. they benefit.

you probably spend more than i do.

not sure i understand why your chuck roast, bottom roast, chicken, beef ribs cost more than the ones fed to dogs....



> Having to live within their means does not mean that these people don't truly love their dogs and want what's best for them.


living within means? of course....that's practicality....if my dogs get a treat it is because i decided to 'blow' my money on something they don't normally get...but your entire premise is based on cost, which tells me you are not familiar with the cost of feeding raw....come over to the raw side of things and read some of the costs...you'll be amazed at how cheaply this can be accomplished...and, yes, on a budget...

we have one...i'm sure most do...again, i spend less on my dog's food than i did when they were kibble and home cooked fed.



> I'm going to assume that since you started taking care of him he has never had a single drop of sugar, flour, or processed food, correct?


i don't know if you've ever seen someone NOT die from subacute bacterio endocarditis...but i have.
since my health went down due to an auto immune disease and his teeth began to show signs of disease, neither one of us eat sugar, flour or processed foods, other than the few treats per year that we allow ourselves....and we do not keep it in the house.

will it help? i don't know. but it certainly can't hurt. i don't know that feeding raw will make my dogs live longer...i do know they are healthier...the proof being in the dog.

i thought they did well on kibble. i fed kibble. i was ignorant....but never did i think they could look the way they look now....and act.....there is something different and it's objective..and my vet sees it, and so do i.

i was never a processed food preparer....mac 'n cheese? i never ate it out of a box...blech..

i can feed my husband very cheaply and it's still from scratch....



> How are they "wholly" unsuitable? Every ingredient in ever brand of kibble is completely unsuitable for a dog? How exactly do you figure that?


what goes into my system is important, more important than buying clothing....

wholly unsuitable? study nutrition....i have. for many years. i admit i've only begun with dog nutrition....but it took me a year before going raw....

tell me why alfafa is necessary for a dog's nutrition just because it is something humans might benefit from....

blueberries are an antioxidant for us. liver is for them.

we are not dogs. dogs are not humans. it stands to reason they would not require the same foods. but it sure looks pretty to see those ingredients on the bag. because it makes us think our dogs are getting a well rounded, chock full of natural foods for vitamins....

problem is....the minute the food becomes processed, the nutritional value is gone...and all you have are words on a box.



> Of course they are going to say their food is great. Don't assume that I haven't done my research and that I know nothing about nutrition, just because I have a different opinion than you.


you're right and i apologise for assuming; however, i will challenge you on what you said when we first started this discussion...most of your statements concern cost.....and that is a presumption that is simply wrong.



> So you're telling me that the hormone and chemical-filled, over-processed meats you buy at the average grocery store are totally fine? I don't know how you can put supermarket and grass-fed meat in the same sentence, unless it's to to say one is edible and the other is not that great for you. You are totally anti-kibble, no matter what, but it's ok to feed the dogs hormones and chemicals?


where do you buy your food? 
i paid a dollar a pound for australian lamb shoulder steaks.....they were on sale...we ate them, my dogs ate them...

the food i buy is not the 16 dollar a pound steak. they eat bottom roasts when i can find them on sale...

i agree that ranchers fatten their cows terribly...that feedlot cattle is not the best....but the worst cow is better than the best kibble.

my food from my supermarkets is not filled with hormones and chemicals...the fda has seen to that....it has to be on the label....i read labels..do you?


and i never said that people don't love their dogs...i just find it a bit hypocritical that the love comes with a price tag.

i'm going to drop this subject now, since we are going in circles...it was a good debate...and unfortunately, you've got a notion about raw that i don't understand...especially about hormone/chemical food from grocery stores...and cost of feeding...and health benefits....

this whole discussion started out about p and g....and i'm going to return to our regularly scheduled two week long debate....i'll be glad to continue in private with you....but i believe here is not appropriate to the OP's original post.


----------



## whiteleo

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh. but I want to say one more thing! Shannon you have at your avail one of the top rated raw feeding co-ops available that most on here are jealous that they can't belong to. Because you are in Portland, and we have many on our list from the Portland area you could join up today. 
All of our meat that comes across the board is grass fed/hormone free, thinking we should be having a beef/llama database anytime soon, and you have access to files for prices to big plants that you can buy chicken, pork and such at great prices. We know chicken is hormone/antibitic free meat. 

You should really give it a try!


----------



## Doc

33 pages of this crap! somebody just shoot me ...


----------



## RawFedDogs

Doc said:


> 33 pages of this crap! somebody just shoot me ...


If you feel it's crap, why do you waste your time reading it? It isn't required that every member read every thread. :smile: You must make a concious effort to do something before you can read it. Don't make that effort. :smile:


----------



## Doc

RFD, but 33 pages? At my age you have to re-read every post each time you log in because you have forgotten what the hail the post was about!

LOL

Natura, Iams, Evo, Orijen, etc., etc. they all got problems. It is the nature of beast called dog food kibble. If it's not one thing, it's another in the kibble world. Does it stop the majority from feeding kibble to their dogs? Probably not, they just find another kibble and feed it until something happens to their dog. Then they once again change brands - it's a vicious cycle.


----------



## magicre

Doc said:


> 33 pages of this crap! somebody just shoot me ...


all you have to do is read or ignore...think about the poor dogs who have to eat this crap every day LOL

seriously, doc, just insert some of that down home humour or a little existentialist sound byte...you'll be fine.


----------



## Doc

tater likes chickn, mutt like pig, lucy ates everyting in site. Days all full of pess and vinigar. Dats wot Pa sayz. We ain't neber aid fer dawg food. Day jest ates wots on da table. An sumtime day go ahuntin fer fresh chickn and utter farm animals. Corse day fesh in da creek to. SO ifn day ates da same stuff as usins, den dair aint no need fer a bag of dawg food. Now, I aint got nos books dat sayz dat but I seen my dawgs are all happy and not sic.


----------



## 1605

*Time to turn out the lights & close the door on this thread*



magicre said:


> all you have to do is read or ignore...think about the poor dogs who have to eat this crap every day LOL


Apparently you have forgotten that this is the "Dry and Canned Dog Food" forum. 

Would it be tolerated if someone went into the RAW forum & started putting up these types of posts? I sincerely doubt it.

Perhaps the Mods need to finally close down this thread as it has degenerated into something that really isn't worthy of this website.


----------



## magicre

SubMariner said:


> Apparently you have forgotten that this is the "Dry and Canned Dog Food" forum.
> 
> Would it be tolerated if someone went into the RAW forum & started putting up these types of posts? I sincerely doubt it.
> 
> Perhaps the Mods need to finally close down this thread as it has degenerated into something that really isn't worthy of this website.


i haven't forgotten...and the discussion is just that, a discussion....it has not degenerated in to the anger fests and to everyones credit, it has stayed and strayed as an in depth discussion should.

no ones lives need change as a result of this one thread...i, for one, admire those who hold a differing point of view and respect anyone who can hold their cool whilst a differing opinion is talked about....

i'm not a mod but i would welcome any kibble and canned feeder over to the raw side to discuss food....


----------



## 1605

magicre said:


> i haven't forgotten...and the discussion is just that, a discussion....it has not degenerated in to the anger fests and to everyones credit, it has stayed and strayed as an in depth discussion should.
> 
> no ones lives need change as a result of this one thread...i, for one, admire those who hold a differing point of view and respect anyone who can hold their cool whilst a differing opinion is talked about....
> 
> i'm not a mod but i would welcome any kibble and canned feeder over to the raw side to discuss food....


That's just it... we wouldn't presume to come over to the RAW forum and start posting statements like: 




magicre said:


> and do i think you're killing your dog? i think your dog survives in spite of being fed kibble.



OR



magicre said:


> you'll never know because you'll convince yourself that kibble will not kill your dog, that there are kibbles that are good for your dog, which means your vet and your dog food manufacturer have done their jobs well.




No, we wouldn't! 

So again I would respectfully ask that the Mods either close this thread or prune out the anti-kibble rhetoric so that the discussion could be back on topic and less inflammatory.


----------



## magicre

my posts were in response to someone else bringing up the subject. 

a response, not a shot across the bow.

so if a mod wants to shut down the thread, so be it...but i was responding.

that is different than if i just came onto a subject and started blasting. i am as much entitled to my opinion as you are to yours...and i'm sure it is welcome at the raw forum.

i'll stop my input after this and move on to other subjects, but please allow me to leave you with this.

it is well known that for dogs and humans, processed foods are not in anyone's best interests, regardless of the ingredients....

perhaps i am still grieving and in mourning...but a light bulb went off for me that day i put my dog to sleep with the worst periodontal disease i'd ever seen....

and ya know how you just know something is right? that's what clicked for me in the ensuing days to come.

maybe, instead of asking the mods shut down the forum, maybe read a little and look around and see what you can see to learn about something you reject so vehemently...and then ask yourself why you reject such a notion that is only about 150 years old, instead of a notion that has been around much much longer....

i'm done now...and if your sensibilities have been offended....maybe that will be the one straw that breaks for you and you'll go looking....for all answers, instead of the one that suits the blinders you're wearing.


----------



## RawFedDogs

@SubMariner: Why do you read threads that upset you. Threads will drift in one direction or another over time. Thats to be expected. Once a thread gets boring to me, and that happens often, I stop reading that thread.

It is common for raw feeders to be told we are killing our dogs because of the way we feed them. Not only in forums but from vets, relatives, friends, neighbors, groomers, strangers, pet shop enployees, etc. I guess we have done our research, used logic, and don't let the ignorance of others bother us so much. I think you could probably make most any post you wish in the raw section without the hue and cry that is emitted in the kibble section. You would get rebuttal but not anger.

@magicre: SubMariner has a point. A few of your posts have gotten a little inflamitory considering the forum it's in. You can still express your opinions, just in a softer manner.


----------



## magicre

RFD..you're right. my grief has gotten the better of me and my manners have suffered.

my feelings are a little raw right now....so i'll just stop posting in this thread or any other dog food thread until i can get my emotions back in line.


----------



## 1605

magicre said:


> my posts were in response to someone else bringing up the subject.
> 
> a response, not a shot across the bow.
> 
> so if a mod wants to shut down the thread, so be it...but i was responding.



Responding to WHAT? The thread is about Natura being bought by P&G. Where does RAW come into that discussion?



> that is different than if i just came onto a subject and started blasting. i am as much entitled to my opinion as you are to yours...and i'm sure it is welcome at the raw forum.


That's the whole point. You won't find anyone who feeds kibble coming into the RAW forum & telling YOU that what you are doing is evil & killing your dog.



> perhaps i am still grieving and in mourning...but a light bulb went off for me that day i put my dog to sleep with the worst periodontal disease i'd ever seen....


No one doubts that you are in pain & grieving over the loss of a beloved pet & family member. However, this is going too far. 

*Stay on topic and stop taking potshots at people who disagree with you and you won't have a problem.*


----------



## 1605

RawFedDogs said:


> @SubMariner: Why do you read threads that upset you. Threads will drift in one direction or another over time. Thats to be expected. Once a thread gets boring to me, and that happens often, I stop reading that thread.


RFD, I've modded for years on other Boards. I understand that threads grow & evolve. However, when they get so far off topic that the original discussion is buried, it's time to split it into another thread & let that go its own way.



> It is common for raw feeders to be told we are killing our dogs because of the way we feed them. Not only in forums but from vets, relatives, friends, neighbors, groomers, strangers, pet shop enployees, etc. I guess we have done our research, used logic, and don't let the ignorance of others bother us so much. I think you could probably make most any post you wish in the raw section without the hue and cry that is emitted in the kibble section. You would get rebuttal but not anger.


That's the whole point. It is well known that the RAW forum is just that: an area to discuss RAW. No one comes in there & starts blasting away at how you are killing your dog by feeding it RAW. It wouldn't be tolerated! Yet it's perfectly fine to do that in THIS forum? This seems quite biased & hypocritical to me.


----------



## RawFedDogs

SubMariner said:


> No one comes in there & starts blasting away at how you are killing your dog by feeding it RAW. It wouldn't be tolerated!


You can't tell me what would and wouldn't be tolerated. I'm a very tolerant person.



> This seems quite biased & hypocritical to me.


It's not biased & hypocritical until you can show me a similar post that wasn't tolerated in the raw forum. My great tolerance is pretty consistant across the board.

The biggest thing on this board that irritates me the most is people who insist in writing is such oversized fonts. I don't know what they are trying to prove. Do they think their words carry more weight if they are in a larger font? Do they think it gives them some authority to be in a larger font?


----------



## 1605

RawFedDogs said:


> The biggest thing on this board that irritates me the most is people who insist in writing is such oversized fonts. I don't know what they are trying to prove. Do they think their words carry more weight if they are in a larger font? Do they think it gives them some authority to be in a larger font?


If you are directing this "aside" to me, my reasons are quite simple: the larger font just easier to type & read after (ahem) a certain age. :wink:


----------



## RawFedDogs

SubMariner said:


> If you are directing this "aside" to me, my reasons are quite simple: the larger font just easier to type & read after (ahem) a certain age. :wink:


HAHA!!! I knew you were gonna make me feel bad and come back with this "blind" thing. :biggrin: 
HOWEVER ... when you are answering a post, the size your font ends up on the post has nothing to do with the small font that you are typing in. You seem to be able to read the posts of others ok when in a normal size font. :smile: I haven't seen you miss an opportunity to comment. :smile:

*ETA: * My certain age is higher than your certain age, I'm certain.


----------



## magicre

SubMariner said:


> Responding to WHAT? The thread is about Natura being bought by P&G. Where does RAW come into that discussion?
> 
> That's the whole point. You won't find anyone who feeds kibble coming into the RAW forum & telling YOU that what you are doing is evil & killing your dog.
> 
> No one doubts that you are in pain & grieving over the loss of a beloved pet & family member. However, this is going too far.
> 
> *Stay on topic and stop taking potshots at people who disagree with you and you won't have a problem.*


excuse me. but go to page 30 and look at what ubershann wrote. i was responding to her. she asked me directly.

and i am told every day that i am killing my dog.

i don't take potshots....i was responding to a question.


----------



## CorgiPaws

Can you hear me now?
No?

What about now?

:biggrin:

In all seriousness, lets not get too upset over nothing. Magicre apologized, and it's over. We could argue about font for a while though... and see just how productive that is!

When I fed kibble, I was incredibly annoyed that I would post my questions and hear nothing but RAW RAW RAW back. That being said, as "annoying" as it was, it ultimately saved my dog, so just how ticked off can I be?
I think it HAS gotten much better since then, but too ALL raw feeding members of his forum: If you have no KIBBLE advice, then don't post in the kibble section. To all kibble feeding members of this forum: If you do not want to hear about raw, do not bring it up.Over 75% of the "pushing raw" complaints we get are from kibble feeders who have brought up raw, and then get mad when the raw feeders reply. :tongue: It's silly. I'm not saying that's the case here. I have no idea, and really am not interested enough to read the entire thread over.


----------



## ubershann

whiteleo said:


> So for the price you pay for your kibble and the premade raw, your dog could have a nice raw diet. How much food do you think a dog eats in a day on a raw diet? A 50lb dog would get 1lb of raw a day split into 2 meals, thats almost a chicken quarter and thats all.


The raw I feed adds between $3-$4 a week. And I get all my food at cost, so I'm not really paying high prices. From all the info I've found I'll need to feed more than just 1 pound a day (2-4% of their body weight, and up to 10% for puppies, and she's still a puppy), and unfortunately she doesn't do well on chicken, which makes the cheaper options much more limited. 

Like I've said, I agree that raw is ultimately the best diet, but until I can find a way to go fully raw and still be able to feed the rest of the family and pay rent each month, I'm going to continue feeding a high quality kibble (that she does very well on) and add whatever raw I can. Hopefully at some point I will be able to feed all raw, I would love that!


----------



## Doc

To feed raw or not to feed raw ... that is the question.


----------



## whiteleo

ubershann I guess you didn't read my post that I posted yesterday about joining the co-op?


----------



## ubershann

whiteleo said:


> ubershann I guess you didn't read my post that I posted yesterday about joining the co-op?


I saw you mentioned there's a co-op here, but I don't know which one you mean. What's it called? I can look it up


----------



## whiteleo

Go to the raw feeding thread and there is a sticky for co-ops, it is under WA/OR and is through Yahoo groups, you have to join up, answer some questions etc. and be accepted which everyone is. No fee.


----------



## kevin bradley

CorgiPaws said:


> Can you hear me now?
> No?
> 
> What about now?
> 
> :biggrin:
> 
> In all seriousness, lets not get too upset over nothing. Magicre apologized, and it's over. We could argue about font for a while though... and see just how productive that is!
> 
> When I fed kibble, I was incredibly annoyed that I would post my questions and hear nothing but RAW RAW RAW back. That being said, as "annoying" as it was, it ultimately saved my dog, so just how ticked off can I be?
> I think it HAS gotten much better since then, but too ALL raw feeding members of his forum: If you have no KIBBLE advice, then don't post in the kibble section. To all kibble feeding members of this forum: If you do not want to hear about raw, do not bring it up.Over 75% of the "pushing raw" complaints we get are from kibble feeders who have brought up raw, and then get mad when the raw feeders reply. :tongue: It's silly. I'm not saying that's the case here. I have no idea, and really am not interested enough to read the entire thread over.




yeah Linsey, I posted on this also awhile back...personally, I don't give a rip if a post turns into a Raw discussion because I enjoy learning about the entire subject. If I don't like it, computers are great...they have this nice scroll feature that allows be to breeze right through any posts I dislike  

But obviously, we've gotten to the point where its becoming not constructive and we all end up fighting about the subject.


----------

