{"id":191875,"date":"2023-01-27T10:48:58","date_gmt":"2023-01-27T08:48:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fendaf.ee\/uncategorized-et-en\/toidu-hind\/"},"modified":"2026-11-03T17:52:25","modified_gmt":"2026-11-03T15:52:25","slug":"dog-food-prices-explained","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fendaf.ee\/en\/products\/dog-food-prices-explained\/","title":{"rendered":"Dog food prices: what are we really paying for?"},"content":{"rendered":"

A bag of dog food costs \u20ac100. Is that expensive or inexpensive? The more useful question is what that hundred euros actually pays for. Better ingredients, manufacturing, transport, the work of several intermediaries, packaging, or simply a familiar brand name?<\/p>\n

This article grew out of a price comparison Irene and I made several years ago. At that time, some manufacturers increased their prices by 30\u201340%. We had raised prices less at FendaF, but we could not absorb growing purchase and transport costs indefinitely either. Those were observations from a particular period, not statistics about the entire market in 2026. The question remains relevant: how is the price formed, and how can we compare it fairly?<\/p>\n

From the producer to your dog’s bowl<\/h2>\n

Production costs cover much more than meat, fish, vegetables or grain. Recipe development, sourcing and checking ingredients, production, energy, labour, packaging, quality control and storage all cost money. Transport, distribution, retail, taxes and intermediaries are added along the way.<\/p>\n

Each business in that chain must cover its operating costs. An importer, wholesaler or shop does not simply add a profit percentage: there are warehouses, employees, delivery costs, returns and services to pay for. A shorter supply chain can therefore provide a price advantage.<\/p>\n

Buying directly from the manufacturer has always been an important part of FendaF’s business model. It does not automatically prove that food sold without intermediaries is better, but it makes part of the cost structure easier to understand.<\/p>\n

VAT: identical prices before tax can mean different shelf prices<\/h2>\n

In 2026, ordinary dog food in Estonia is subject to the standard VAT rate of 24%. Many prepared animal feeds in Germany are eligible for the reduced 7% VAT rate. This is one reason why comparing the displayed prices of shops in different countries can be misleading. Purchasing terms, sales volume, transport, competition and the sales channel also matter.<\/p>\n

Imagine a bag costing \u20ac100 in Estonia, including 24% VAT. Its price excluding VAT is \u20ac100 \u00f7 1.24 = \u20ac80.65. With exactly the same pre-tax price and 7% VAT, the final price would be approximately \u20ac86.29. The difference is \u20ac13.71. That calculation isolates the effect of tax; it does not tell us what the actual selling price in Germany should be.<\/p>\n

Cross-border e-commerce within the EU has its own VAT rules. Depending on the circumstances, a foreign webshop may not even charge its home country’s rate on a sale to an Estonian customer.<\/p>\n

Markup, margin and discount are not the same thing<\/h2>\n

Even when we can calculate percentages, it is easy to confuse them. If a retailer buys an item for \u20ac40 and sells it for \u20ac50, both prices excluding VAT, the markup on cost is 25% (\u20ac10 \u00f7 \u20ac40). The gross margin as a percentage of the sale price is 20% (\u20ac10 \u00f7 \u20ac50). Neither figure is net profit. Other operating expenses still have to be paid from that \u20ac10.<\/p>\n

Now consider Black Friday. After a 60% discount, only 40% of the original shelf price remains. Merely to recover the cost of the item, the original price must have been at least 2.5 times its cost, a markup of at least 150%. To retain a 20% markup on cost even after that discount, the original price must have been three times the cost.<\/p>\n

That is why spectacular discount percentages are not necessarily realistic for a business operating with modest markups.<\/p>\n

Price per kilogram is only the first comparison<\/h2>\n

In the past, people often compared 18 kg bags; today many brands offer 12 kg and smaller packs. A 12 kg bag priced at \u20ac80 costs \u20ac6.67 per kilogram. At that same unit price, 18 kg would cost \u20ac120. To compare like with like, multiply the 12 kg price by 1.5, rather than adding a third.<\/p>\n

But price per kilogram is not the same as cost per day. One food may contain more energy, so the dog needs less of it. If a dog eats 250 g a day from an \u20ac80, 12 kg bag, the bag lasts 48 days and costs about \u20ac1.67 per day. If the daily ration is 350 g, the bag lasts approximately 34 days and costs around \u20ac2.33 per day.<\/p>\n

These are illustrations, not feeding recommendations. The actual ration must match the individual dog’s energy requirements.<\/p>\n

The comparison should also include whether the food is complete, its ingredients and nutritional analysis, the manufacturer’s quality controls, the suitability of the ration to the dog’s body condition, and how well the dog tolerates it. Normal stools, a healthy weight and comfortable digestion are useful observations, although they cannot by themselves prove a recipe’s complete nutritional quality.<\/p>\n

Does cheap always mean poor quality and expensive always mean good?<\/h2>\n

It is hard for me to accept a promise that exceptionally expensive ingredients, transparent sourcing and rigorous testing can all be delivered for an extraordinarily low price. But there is no universal price-per-kilogram threshold below which a food becomes ‘sawdust’. Price also reflects pack size, recipe, manufacturing scale and distribution.<\/p>\n

The opposite assumption is equally weak: a high price does not automatically make a food good.<\/p>\n

At FendaF we have always emphasised the origin of ingredients and the food’s composition. A useful thought experiment is the ‘plain white bag test’. If we hide the brand and price, do the ingredients, nutritional data, manufacturer’s explanations and the needs of this particular dog still make the food look like a sensible choice?<\/p>\n

‘Human-grade’ is a popular marketing expression, but those words alone are no substitute for verifiable information about ingredients, safety and the requirements for complete pet food.<\/p>\n

FendaF’s practical price comparison<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

For each of two foods, note the bag price, bag weight, the quantity your dog actually eats each day and the ingredients. Calculate the price per kilogram, then the daily cost: bag price \u00f7 (bag weight in grams \u00f7 daily portion in grams). Check energy density and whether the portion suits your dog. If one product costs more, ask which demonstrable benefit makes that difference worthwhile for your dog. Do not change food on price alone when a dog has a medical condition or needs a prescribed diet.<\/p>\n

In conclusion<\/h2>\n

I know how difficult it can feel to pay a large sum for a bag of food at once. That is why I encourage people to look beyond the shelf price and ask how many days it will last. Sometimes the cheaper bag costs more per day; sometimes the more expensive one offers little besides impressive packaging.<\/p>\n

A fair comparison starts with VAT and unit prices, but ultimately comes back to the dog’s needs and the actual value of the food. As a business, we prefer to explain how our prices are formed instead of choosing products solely by looking at what competitors charge. We want to be able to answer one simple question: what does your dog actually get in the bowl for that money, and how does it support their health?<\/p>\n

Sources<\/h2>\n