The vast majority of breeders who really love the breeds they are breeding and show are not doing it for money, or making any money, despite charging for puppies. They aren’t doing it at cost, but at a huge loss.
I always wonder about this 'huge loss' thing. Honestly, I'm not convinced.
That being said, I don't have a problem with a breeder ending up in pocket at the the end: breeding a litter takes a huge amount of time, energy and angst.
Yes, possibly the best breeders use most of the money they make proving their next dog or dogs in the show ring or in field trials. I don't know about shows, but field trial entry fees aren't that huge. The costs come with the travel, and the B&B stays, and the hours of time you burn off. For the people who trial, it's a hobby and a passion. And when they breed their dogs, you know what they're capable of doing.
Between people who breed like this, and the volume breeders (who, I agree, are crap) are a whole range of people. My older dog was bred by a bloke who clearly couldn't afford to take a huge loss. He could have run to a C-section had one been needed, though. He almost certainly used any money he made to fund his hobby of working his dogs. I have no problem at all with this. He bred some bloody good little dogs, in whom he takes an ongoing interest. KC registered, true to breed type in both looks and behaviour.
I honestly think that while many people have no clue what to look for in a breeder and are taken in by businesses that churn out puppies in poor conditions, other people expect a level of martyrdom from breeders that is just not realistic. Making a profit form a litter of puppies shouldn't be the goal, it shouldn't be a necessity, but I'm pretty sure that my older dog's breeder banked a few grand at the end of eight weeks hard slog. Well, good: he gave his dogs a great life (still does, if his FB is anything to go by), ensured that some excellent canine genetics were passed along, and vetted future owners very conscientiously.