Now, I do know a lot of people with working dogs of various breeds that are not registered and don't have a paper trail to their lineage. But these are people who use their dogs for their own personal work, and don't breed them. I'm not saying that's wrong, I've done it myself and most certainly will again at some point in the future. A dog's worth is not based on it's papers. A dog can be a valuable asset to it's handler, regardless of what it's pedigree and lineage look like... but if you're breeding and selling dogs, I think you should have some proof to support what you're claiming the dog is capable of.
Is my thinking faulted? Am I biased?