Who employs your doctor? Increasingly, a private equity firm

Post by rcme » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 4:05 AM UTC

darth_avocado wrote: post #247

rcme wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like a vet would be about as expensive as opening a restaurant, maybe 1-3x as much. That doesn't seem like the most capital intensive thing ever.

It is more expensive to open a clinic than a restaurant, with the costs being anywhere from $500k-$1M. The main difference between the two is that the vet clinic has higher running costs aka salaries in the early years before the practice takes off. For restaurants, it’s relatively lower (staff salaries and produce) if the demand is lower.

Post by bagacrap » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 4:31 AM UTC

bp0017 wrote: post #256

jmoak3 wrote: post #153

PE can be replaced with "Some guys". PE bought your hospital? More like, "some guys" bought your hospital. Ask why "some guys" bought it instead of using their money in the market, or why your hospital sold in the first place. As anyone who's company has been purchased by private equity knows, it's probably because your hospital wasn't doing so hot to begin with and "some guys" were willing to gamble that they could…

See, what I fundamentally disagree with is the notion that hospitals should be "good business." Why are "some guys" allowed to try to make a profit here at the expense of patient care? Healthcare (or government) should not be run like a business, and instead be provided as a service using the taxes we already pay for, much like how roads are built. The health of the public is our most vital infrastructure, and public…

Post by bagacrap » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 4:36 AM UTC

j-bos wrote: post #175

Having recently spent too much time at too many medical offices, I've been able to ask doctors about how thier businesses work. So far only one has said they own their practice, and he's of the opinion most doctors cannot pull off ownership becuase they exit med school bound by debt, and never end up with enough capital to hang their own shingle, much less to buy an existing practice when competing with PE. Of course…

Post by midoridensha » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 4:40 AM UTC

hotpotamus wrote: post #168

renewiltord wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you believe this, you should find it pretty easy to indemnify me for the hospital I am starting where I will operate and practice medicine. Be aware that I have no degree in medicine and have majored in Mathematics. Since the free market is a true religion, there must be no regulation preventing this. My hospital is able to compete on pure outcomes. Of course, I don't actually think you believe this bit about the…

As long as you call it "alternative" medicine, you should actually have a lot of latitude to do so. If you get to the point where you actually kill someone after cutting them open and rooting around, or poisoning them too much, then you might run into some regulation. But if you can avoid that, I suspect you'll be fine.

Post by civilized » Mon, Jul 17, 2023, 4:45 AM UTC

alephnerd wrote: post #205

YPCrumble wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like most answers to “who is at the losing end of any transaction” is pension funds, which are guaranteed by the government. So by your theory PE firms are sucking in taxpayer money by fleecing pension funds run by financiers who aren’t smart enough to get into PE. Basically until pension funds aren’t bailed out by the government this will continue.

I'm adjacent to the space and I'd disagree with this statement: "fleecing pension funds run by financiers who aren’t smart enough to get into PE." Institutional Investment Funds (pensions, endowments, sovereign funds, etc) need returns well beyond inflation to ensure long term stability. To do this, they will mix and match various different investment vehicles to minimize risk. This means a fund will have a varying p…