Okay first off. Repeat after me: The number of red or green marks DO NOT dictate how wonderful or ugly your dog might turn out to be.
 
The only importance I see of red or green marks to a regular pet owner, is maybe a show off point. As in "my dog came from so and so (insert name and preferred color of mark here)."
 
To a breeder, or more to a point a puppymiller or BYB, of course, it's an excuse to charge more.
 
To an honest breeder who breeds to improve the breed, it could be a stepping stone. He could use it to further his own lines, studying those champions or producers, breeding more champions, improving upon his or her dogs.
 
Again though. More red or green DOES NOT equal beauty. You could breed the two best-est most-est beautiful-est dogs in the world and you could get one hell of an ugly S.O.B. (quite literally). What it does though is somewhat assure you of the quality of the line that you get. Maybe not in looks, but in temperament, health, longevity.

 
Galing talaga ng mga moderators!! hehehehhe
tama po yun!!

Green marks are given to dogs who belong to the Registry of Merit. To attain such, a bitch must have produced at least three champions, or a dog must have sired at least 5 champions.

red and green marks show the achievements made by the dogs ancestors.. however, it does not mean that if your dog has a lot of these marks it would also look good like their ancestors.. it really depends.. i have seen a lot of dogs with 20+ marks that does not represent the standard breed.. like what tallytals said, some breeders use this as an excuse to charge more.. ( more like an impressive resume)    its all part of the marketing strategy my friend

Quote from Phantom on Jan 27^th, 2008, 9:04pm:

 
Because most other kennel clubs don't color their pedigrees. Usually it's all just black.

Quote from slimhaneous on Jan 24^th, 2008, 8:55pm:

 

 

 
Mr. Frogoso (slimhaneous), even the term red marks/green marks are "commercial" terms used by many,  
as part of their "SALES TALK!" sad to say.  
The champions behind a dog's pedigree are NOT the basis  for the value of the dog.  
It is not the end all or be all of a standard-conforming dog, true to the breed.  
 
Thank you tallytals our moderator for your input.  
 
What is important is to look at the dog FIRST, then pedigree second.  
A nice dog will most likely have a good pedigree behind.  
And poor quality puppies may have pet lines behind it.
This is NOT ALWAYS the case which is what makes breeding exciting  
as it is not always 100% accurately predictable.
LUCK and GOOD KARMA is major in every breeder's quest for that beautiful  
standard-conforming, breed-suitable puppy worthy of the title (honestly campaigned for the championship)
But to be "lucky" means you also have to invest in a nice puppy with  
a reliable pedigree behind which you can work on  
(outcross, line-bred, in-bred are types of breedings
done to combine lines in the hope of producing a nice puppy).
 
But what exactly is a "good pedigree?"
IT IS NOT MERELY COUNTING THE RED MARKS!
THE MORE RED MARKS, THE MERRIER??? NOT AT ALL!
It is referring to those champion dogs (which are now so fancyfully called RED MARKS!)  
- studying what and how they look like, how they move,  
their dominantly positive traits that make them famous showdogs  
and what they consistently produce  
to give you a true picture of what your dog may have to contribute  
in its progeny in the future should you so breed it.
This is where dominance, type and substance comes into the picture.
 
If you come across breeders selling puppies for "the number of redmarks"  
it has, please examine the pedigree.  
I have noticed that some would practice the father to daughter  
or far worse, brother to sister IN-BREEDING,  
with the objective of doubling up on the "red marks" of the Sire or Dam  
so it appears again on the Dam side . . .  
ergo . . . the very famous "___ no. of RED MARKS!!!" so to speak. . . .  
Read on the advantages and disadvantages of very tight IN-BREEDINGS.  
I doubt if any knowledgeable breeder would risk such, unless the breeder knows his own lines from several generations back.
 
So please, let us stop counting the red marks.  
It does not do us, the breeders and moreso, the dogs JUSTICE!  
There is more to it than the color of the ink you refer it to.  
And it is not in the quantity of those so-called "red marks" . . .  
I BEG TO DISAGREE.
 

 

The problem lies with most of the buyers today. They tend to look at the papers rather than the dog. It has become quite a fad really! Frankly, a good breeder has more difficulty in finding new owners for his dogs than puppy millers. Because he concentrates his effort on convincing the buyer to look at the puppy, not the pedigree. Whereas, a commercial breeder simply makes a good sales pitch! Many buyers find serious breeders' explanation annoying. Little do they know that it is for their own good if they try to listen and learn.
 
To newcomers and buyers I suggest that you take a careful study of the breed then exert time and effort in looking at the dog being offered. Pictures sometimes decieve the viewer. Other dogs, just like some people are not photogenic and may not appear as nicely as they should be. With so much technology available today, it is possible to make a very good presentation of an otherwise inferior representation of a breed.