The Pharmacy Monopoly Racket

Or is a restricted drug eg Targin.

2 Likes

That’s probably a drug that you wouldn’t want someone to be on for life.

2 Likes

There are others that are not narcotics but are only once a month dispensing even with an Authority Script. Targin was just an example.

2 Likes

I agree. at the end of the day, it is a two-way street. Also, a good strategy is to have a carer or trusty family member accompany the patient, especially when the medical-speak is convuluted or the case complex.

2 Likes

You don’t think home brands will be positioned alongside name brands forever, do you? At some point Colesworths start to push out existing brands while pushing up prices on their own brands. Vertical integration is their aim - and once those other brands are gone we can expect the quality of the Colesworths brands to drop while the prices rise.

On the pharmacy front, I have experienced both the regular chains and the ‘cut-price’ pharmacies. It is good to deal with someone who is experienced and who knows what my medications are and how they may interact. I doubt the supermarkets will put much effort into the customer relationships that I value so much with the local pharmacy. They may also fail to stock the wide range of prescription medications that the local pharmacy has on hand - or be unprepared to order them in for collection ‘next morning’.

I suggest that the bigger concern is why taxpayer dollars are used to subsidise any private schools.

2 Likes

That some point has been here for a while. Coles has been methodically reducing many product lines to their home brand and one major brand. The prices? Hard to track with the sales and so on, but they seem no longer as comparatively cheap as they once were as they are trying and succeeding in many cases to go ‘up market’ from ‘pure economy’.

That is all but guaranteed

That does not reflect what happened in overseas markets where groceries and ‘mega stores’ put in pharmacies. If anything their higher volume resulted in greater stocks and more deliveries to them.

3 Likes

I also wonder about the quality, motivation and skill levels of those serving behind the counter, if a supermarket chain is providing pharmacy services.

What would the large corporate owners value most in the staff they employ in this area? Arguably the cost of staff in delivering pharmacy services is a much more significant expense than other areas of a supermarket. (Deli counter excepted, although you don’t require a high level University qualification to slice ham.)

It is notable there are many smaller regional towns that have two or more supermarkets, but only one chemist! Is the likely outcome of letting supermarkets into the business, many chemists will like the local butcher cease to exist, while the two local supermarkets squabble over half of the turnover each?

2 Likes

That is an unknown. An audiologist at a local Costco has a relevant PhD and spent some years as a researcher with Cochlear. She got tired of the 24x7 research thought process and just wanted to go back to clinical work without having to manage P/L. Bottom line is one can be suspicious but cannot always second guess peoples motivations for what they do or where or why they work somewhere.

I suspect many qualified pharmacy graduates are not interested in being their own bosses, many would not be successful if they tried, and many would not have the capital to start their own business yet all might be happy to work for a reliable income and deliver a good effort.

3 Likes

The trouble is the business who employs them. The Coles/Woolworths of this era are interested in, to a large degree, turnover rather than time spent of customer satisfaction. Sell more and do it faster is the reality. You as a salesperson could be excellent in your chosen career but the thrust to just push and sell by those who pay you becomes almost overwhelming. I’m not saying that some businesses don’t have a client centric view it is just they are fast becoming the outliers of the industry.

3 Likes

I venture it is not just Coles and Woolies, but big business and any business not big or growing is at risk in the modern capitalistic world. Well intentioned regulation will slow or can stop it, but how much regulation do we have that oversteps to become counter-productive or simply protects vested interests or have unforeseen consequences those in power refuse to address? A conundrum how to get it right.

On one side it is about price, cost and efficiency, all directly or indirectly yield taxable income to government. On the other side are customers who want low prices and efficiency as well as personalised service. Guess which side will usually prevail, with political donations to the right parties being the wild cards.

2 Likes

Sorry I meant any large business but I just used Coles/Woolworths as a sort of template. Even small businesses fall into the same errors at times but because they rely so heavily on retaining what they have, they tend (not all do so though) to try to be more personable, giving a better customer experience so they generate return business and loyalty. Costco try to instill a feeling of “belonging” (you are a valued member) even if the eye is on the cash at the end, so they offer “member” bargains, cheap fast food, a place to sit and eat (if not too busy), toilets, change rooms, water fountains, mostly smiling faces, “try some food” stalls, eye and hearing testing that is free as part of the membership, cheap petrol/diesel, tyre fitting service, so they feel more inclusive to their “members”.

2 Likes

Back to the original ABC observations re the perceived power and political influence of the Pharmacy Guild.

If only there was a simple solution.

In larger towns and the burbs, there is typically plenty of choice when needing a chemist (pharmacy services).

Not so in the scattered regional and rural communities where many struggle to keep convenient access to basic medical services.

The nation might decide there is a better way to deliver pharmacy services. Does one size fits all deliver the best outcome for the whole nation. (Stuff the NBN and put the whole of the nation on NBN Satellite. We put humankind on the moon with the help of extraterrestrial communications. Anything is possible? :roll_eyes:)

The provision of every day medical and dental and veterinary services face similar concerns. Perhaps too these need further deregulation. One stop at the local Woolies?

No jest! Bupa through to Ramsay appear intent on creating their own versions of integrated service delivery.

The NRMA, RACQ etc seem really keen to help look after our loved pets, and our local trades call outs. So perhaps veterinary services might alternately be a better fit with the horseless carriage clubs?

While the supposed influence of the Pharmacy Guild might need a response, it appears any solution needs to be well considered.

Is the national interest best served by reducing the cost of services delivered within larger centralised communities while providing lesser and more expensive services to those outside? It is self evident with the current parliamentary support for the NBN as now delivered.

Some would argue that in any instance it is a fair outcome given the sheer weight of numbers in the cities and just how expensive property is if you want a great harbour view, or a short drive to your preferred choice of school for the family? Even the outermost burbs with not much more than a close view of the neighbours garage, and shared cooking aromas are very expensive choices these days.

1 Like

An article regarding the results from mystery shopping at some 200 Brisbane pharmacies.

Move along folks. Nothing to see here.

1 Like

Already happening in many cases. The frustrations of shopping at Coles is driving me nuts. At least I can still get some of my preferred brands at woolies or IGA.

3 Likes

So many responses here are finding reasons that Colesworths cannot or ought not be allowed to run pharmacies and so few are concerned about the restraint of trade from government acquiescence to the artificial rule that the operator must be the owner.

Nobody has seriously suggested that service and professionalism will necessarily be better if the operator is the owner, or worse if they are not.

I do understand that the big duopoly is not renowned for their competitive and open behaviour but to continue the existing lack of competition because:

a) Colesworth might get involved and
b) if they do they might not do the right thing and
c) they could become a major force in the market and
d) if they do then there is nothing that can be done about it,

makes no sense to me.

It seems that distrust of Colesworths is precluding dealing with the existing consolidated lobby group that protects its power at every turn.

1 Like

The situation is not unique to chemists. It may simply present in different ways.

As an example, can any of us typical consumers set up as a Doctors Surgery and simply employ registered practitioners?

Licensed electrical contractors may be another like example. Even news agencies have restrictions on locality, although ownership requires no professional qualifications?

There are many exclusive enterprise opportunities where the relationship between government and an industry group are just as notable. I

When you delve deeper into many examples there will be some basis for the current standing. They may not always stand scrutiny by today’s standards.

As I perceive the situation once a professionally delivered service is provided as part of a larger enterprise, the risks of adverse outcomes to the consumer increase. I’d suggest we only need to look to the financial services industry and conflicted outcomes that arose between “acting in the consumers best interests” and the banks etc.

In some ways with Australia dodging reasonable whistle blower protections and the public interest test pendulum swinging the wrong way, the status quo may be for the moment a safer place?

Ultimately I suspect our local community would not desire Woolies in the next town stepping up to provide pharmacy services, and the chemist in our town as a consequence closing.

2 Likes

You cannot do medicine or electrical work without the appropriate certification but I don’t know of any rule that says you cannot own either practice if uncertified or that you cannot start up a new one next door to another. Nor am I aware of any competitive constraint on the locality of newsagents. If anybody has facts to the contrary please say on.

1 Like

One apparemt anomoly is Ransay Health Care who in Cairns own both the private hospital and the day surgery and they have their own Ramsay Pharmacy below the day surgery, and a search revealed that they also have pharmacies from Cairns to Melbourne.

https://www.ramsaypharmacy.com.au/Store-Finder

Ramsay Health Care is a publicily listed company and it is extremely unlikely that all, or even a majority of the shareholders are pharmacists, and the board are also very unlikely to all be pharmacists either.

Perhaps it is simply a matter of two sets of rules.

2 Likes

Not really. Ramsay do not own the pharmacy with their name on it. All Ramsay branded pharmacies are franchises. Each business is owned and run by a registered pharmacist.

Chemist Warehouse appears to operate in a similar way, And through a web of trust relationships.

On that basis is there anything stopping Coles or others supporting an independent pharmacist setting up a business in store, providing product etc?

2 Likes

NAFAIK, it seems to be just policy not to go the franchise route.

3 Likes