Which Are The Most Affordable Vet Clinics?

Irate Monk on 06/08/2017 - 18:25
Last edited 07/08/2017 - 09:06 by 1 other user
Have you been to a fairly priced Vet Clinic?

I guess the Wellness check-up routines would be pretty standard across various Vet clinics.
So, that could be used for comparison.

E.g:- AdelaideVet (earlier Adelaide Animal Hospitals) charge $77 per Wellness consultation.

(I feel this is overpriced. A bit unjustified just for the vet to take a look at the pet's eyes, ears, weight, teeth and listen to >it's heart and make a few observations. Usually lasts under 15 minutes)

Which are the Vet Clinics giving better value?
Any favourites with OZBargainers?

Thanks for all comments in advance.

Home & Garden

Comments

  • try2bhelpful on 06/08/2017 - 18:44

    I would love to give you my Melbourne cat vet, but it is hard enough to get in as it is.

  • airal3rt on 06/08/2017 - 18:45

    A bit unjustified

    Goods and services aren't priced relative to the cost of producing/providing them, they are priced according to how much they are able to extract from the customer/client. People love their pets and are willing to spend on them, so the price is high.

  • Randxyz123 on 06/08/2017 - 20:09
    +1

    Mine is $72.

    $77 sounds alright as well. How much do you expect to pay ?

    Vets actually make very little.

    • fantombloo on 06/08/2017 - 22:35
      -1

      Vets actually make very little.

      I know a few and their lifestyles suggest that they are amongst the highest earners I know.

      fantombloo on 06/08/2017 - 22:35 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
      • jjjaar on 07/08/2017 - 08:11

        *their lifestyles suggest their credit card bills are high in debt.

        Debt and wealth can look the same to others

        • fantombloo on 07/08/2017 - 12:06

          Yeah, I don't think million-dollar-plus house renovations and strings of international family holidays can be put on credit cards.

        • SydStrand on 07/08/2017 - 17:17
          +2

          @thevofa: is it possible that they invested well, inherited, or have other sources of income? Because the starting salary for a vet is lower than a teacher's, despite studying for longer, and being on the hook for more tuition. Honestly, I'd love to make as much as people think I do.

        • fantombloo on 07/08/2017 - 17:40

          @Strand0410: I'm sure there is a great variety of vets with different incomes just like there is amongst medical professionals for human care. All I'm saying is that "I know a few and their lifestyles suggest that they are amongst the highest earners I know." They work in affluent areas where people spend bucket-loads on their emotional investments or they are specialists who charge bucket-loads for various less-than-common procedures. I know one specialist who can pull in over $20K in a day - sure not every day, and yes they do have expenses - but definitely not in line with the first assertion that "Vets actually make very little."

          An aside: I don't understand how vets save animals throughout the day but pay to have them tortured and killed for unessential foods and fashions and car seats. If you care to fill me in on that I'd really appreciate it! (Sincere request, no sarcasm intended)

        • SydStrand on 07/08/2017 - 18:01
          +1

          @thevofa:

          I know one specialist who can pull in over $20K in a day - sure not every day, and yes they do have expenses - but definitely not in line with the first assertion that "Vets actually make very little."

          They are by far the exception, not the rule. The average working vet, even working exclusively with companion animals in an inner-city clinic, makes about $48K annually. The most lucrative specialisation is racing, but it employs very few and usually takes decades of work to reach that pay grade.

          An aside: I don't understand how vets save animals throughout the day but pay to have them tortured and killed for unessential foods and fashions and car seats. If you care to fill me in on that I'd really appreciate it! (Sincere request, no sarcasm intended)

          Make up your own mind from the information available. Plenty of vets are vegetarian or vegan, don't wear fur, etc., because they don't want to contribute to those industries, so fair enough. There are also vets who work in agriculture, who accept that animal consumption is just part of life, and their work ensures those animals don't suffer unnecessarily, are healthy enough for slaughter, export, etc. Just like in real life, there are a range of opinions, and no one has a monopoly on being right. Also remember that Australia is a large farming country so even if you don't personally eat meat, you are still ultimately a beneficiary of the agriculture industry.

        • fantombloo on 07/08/2017 - 18:42
          -3

          @Strand0410: Thanks for responding. What is your position on killing and torturing for nonessential reasons if I may ask?

          and no one has a monopoly on being right.

          I don't think that's right. The same would have been said of any number of exploitative situations that we are now largely decided on. Example: the USA warred on the issue only a century and a half ago with respect to owning other humans. Also extra difficult in this situation since those that are being tortured and killed, those who should have final say, are not being listened to.

          Also remember that Australia is a large farming country so even if you don't personally eat meat, you are still ultimately a beneficiary of the agriculture industry.

          That's like saying we are all beneficiaries of largely exterminating Australia's First Nations, therefore it somehow now becomes moot what we might continue to do or see in those actions. That is nonsensical.

        • SydStrand on 07/08/2017 - 19:26
          +1

          @thevofa:

          That's like saying we are all beneficiaries of largely exterminating Australia's First Nations

          We are, I'm sorry.

          therefore it somehow now becomes moot what we might continue to do or see in those actions. That is nonsensical.

          Hm, no. Contemporary Americans unquestionably benefited from the initial inexhaustible labour provided by slavery, just as Israelis now benefit from The Holocaust through the creation of a modern Jewish state. Does mean they were right or 'worth it,' but we've all benefited from our ancestors paying the bill.

          What is your position on killing and torturing for nonessential reasons if I may ask?

          Don't be self-righteous. I don't work with large animals, nor do I eat red meats, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Agriculture is a huge contributor to our economy, and it feeds millions of people, many of whom would not be able to access affordable and disease-free protein if our farmers didn't supply it. Spend some time among subsistence farmers, and you'll shed a lot of preconceptions about what's right and wrong.

        • fantombloo on 07/08/2017 - 22:56
          -2

          @Strand0410:

          That's like saying we are all beneficiaries of largely exterminating Australia's First Nations

          We are, I'm sorry.

          You interrupted my sentence - I did not disagree anout being a beneficiary, but added

          therefore it somehow now becomes moot what we might continue to do or see in those actions. That is nonsensical.

          I have no doubt that I benefit from animal exploitation. I also benefit from unjust wars, starving labourers in developing countries, etc. But this does not somehow give me license to just forget about these matters and continue in them. I may be fully opposed to a position yet am dragged into it by greater society. I hate war yet I know my money goes towards it on threat of violence (imprisonment, etc.) if I don't pay, even while I might protest against it. But there are some things I can boycott immediately and at no cost or threat of violence - most direct animal exploitation is one of these.

          Don't be self-righteous

          I've made no such claim. I've not even presented my own value judgements based on any form of ethics, so I don't know where you get that. In fact all I've done is invite you - I think rather politely - to answer a question, which of course you can refuse. But since we're here now I will ask a few more things should you chose to answer them.

          1. You say you don't eat red meats. Why? "White meats" are arguably the cruelest in their treatment of animals. No other source of food kills more warm blooded sentient beings per calorie than chicken flesh, followed by chicken's eggs. Aquatic animals are the most numerously killed "food" animals in the world at about a trillion per year. Why would you chose such an option?

          2. Around the world at large more protein from feed crops is fed to animals than is ever recovered from their flesh. In Australia those same animals you eat - chickens, pigs, etc. - are all fed cropped plants and reduce the protein available to humans by factors from 3:1 to 15:1 depending on whom you ask. Why would you suggest that people would not be able to access affordable and disease-free protein without animals when those same animals are being fed that same affordable and disease-free protein?

          3. You talk about subsistence farmers. We are on ozbargain where advertisements for KFC and McDonalds and luv-a-duck are the norm. Talking about subsistence farming in the context we find ourselves is no less a diversion than talking about the proverbial desert island or native tribes in the Arctic. What do subsistence farmers have to do with you or me or this forum?

        • SydStrand on 08/08/2017 - 15:23
          +1

          @thevofa:

          I've made no such claim. I've not even presented my own value judgements based on any form of ethics, so I don't know where you get that.

          You absolutely are. I said that no one has a monopoly on being right and you couldn't even agree to that. Even though people are entitled to their own opinions, you immediately jump in to criticise those opinions. You brought in loaded language like 'torture.' In other words, the only opinion that's morally right, is yours. Frankly, it was a mistake to even attempt to honestly answer your question, when you're so transparently pushing an agenda.

          I could go on about FCRs, food insecurity, nociception, etc., but I have a feeling you aren't really interested in being corrected, and I'm frankly tired. You made a misleading comment about vet earnings that I was compelled to correct, so let's leave it there.

        • Moderatorhamza23 on 08/08/2017 - 15:45

          @Strand0410:

          Yes @thevoda @Strand0410 let's leave it there, this discussion has gone well off topic.

          Thanks

  • SydStrand on 06/08/2017 - 20:31
    +4

    I feel this is overpriced. A bit unjustified just for the vet to take a look at the pet's eyes, ears, weight, teeth and listen to >it's heart and make a few observations. Usually lasts under 15 minutes

    We actually have the lowest new graduate salary relative to HECS debt in Australia. It's not like that $77 goes straight in the vet's pocket, it helps cover the cost of the clinic's operation, which is not cheap. Only reason your healthcare is more 'affordable' is because it's subsidised by Medicare, PBS, etc. Without it, a GP visit would cost about what it does for uninsured Americans, which is hundreds of dollars. $77 is a fairly standard rate, no one ever said having pets was cheap.

    • Randxyz123 on 07/08/2017 - 09:26

      This exactly. Pets aren't cheap. From what I can tell my local vet works pretty bloody hard. They are open 8 - 7, 5 nights a week so those who work full time have options. They are open on Saturday mornings.

      For pet care I save money by buying food and wormer tablets when they're on sale. Vet care is something that can't really be done on the cheap.

      If you are struggling to pay, vets tend to love animals and aren't going to let them suffer so usually a payment plan is available for big treatments.

  • follow on 06/08/2017 - 20:54

    Swan Veterinary Hospital WA

  • nocure on 06/08/2017 - 21:14

    Just book for their yearly vaccination and the "wellness checkup" is included for $75 (QLD)

  • altomic on 06/08/2017 - 22:13

    sounds like you know everything about it and could do it yourself.

    why spend the money on paying someone who went to veterinary school for five or six years of study?

    perhaps they have a centre where you can go and get your pet checked out for free. but make sure you get there early because there are people who get there when the doors open and take all the service.

  • RyanMK on 06/08/2017 - 22:27

    I'm in Adelaide and I pay around the same range as you, so I believe what you're paying is about right.

    I agree with you from the perspective that it is expensive for a short 10 minutes consultation. But I rather think from the perspective that $70-80 for a yearly checkup is not a lot of money to spend, especially if it provides you with a peace of mind. With that being said, make sure you do your research and get a good vet.

  • Some Human on 07/08/2017 - 09:43

    Do they have an rspca there? Consultations are $65 weekdays and saturdays, $114 sundays according to the Vic website.

  • [Deactivated] on 07/08/2017 - 18:08

    If you can't afford to care for another living being than give it to someone who can.

    Don't get a pet then leave it to die.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join