|
James, would not the high quality of the fish at the All Japan show just put your dollar in greater jeopardy? At least in a short-term perspective? If all the Japanese hobbyists suddenly decided to devote themselves to arowana, those highest quality koi would have to be sold at bargan basement prices to places like the US, EU and China, instead of staying in Japan.
It's a numbers game. The quality of the finished product is a function of:
- quality of the broodstock,
- quality of the culling eye,
- number of juveniles being sent through the culling station.
History and culture should provide some insight into who has the best broodstock and culling eye. However, those are debatable points so we will not go there.
But, even if we were to assume that the US and Japan breeders are equal in broodstock and culling eye, the Japanese are still culling through a LOT more fish. An inherent Japanese breeder advantage. Brady indicates that the magnitude of this advantage could be in the order of 400:1 (based on the number of farms alone).
The best koi produced in the US stay in the US while only a portion of the best fish produced in Japan are sent to the US. An inherent US breeder advantage. So, what is the magnitude of this advantage? Is it more or less than 400:1? You could make an educated guess based on the number of lower-quality koi in the field of 2000 at the All Japan show. If about five (2000 divided by 400) of the fish at the All Japan show are no better than the best koi in a major US show, then one could postulate that the odds are pretty close and a US breeder will likely produce a GC at a US show.
-steveh opk
p.s. Using this twisted logic, the odds of a US-bred koi winning the All Japan approaches zero.
|