Pharmacist vows to ‘carry on fighting’ Boots 100-hour bid

It is a very difficult situation. We bought a pharmacy for a substantial sum in 2004 and took on large loans which are still being serviced only for the vendor to open a 100 hour pharmacy a few doors away and decimate the business. Half a mile away it happened to us again when one of the local GPs younger brother opened a 100 hour pharmacy across the road from us. There is just no point to investing in a pharmacy business with so much personal risk whilst this practice is allowed to continue. Some of these 100 hour contractors have no idea of a proper business case and what it takes to break even. Especially when they do not value their own time. I guess as usual 40 hour contractors will understand my frustration whilst 100 hour contractors will not. I have said before there are two sides to every coin but surely the whole point of improving access to services is in areas not already being served by numerous pharmacies.

Why should any pharmacy have the sole right to any area. Its protectionism pure and simple .If Mr Shooter provides an excellent service the proposed 100hr pharmacy will fail. If not it may succeed. Either way tax payer patients get the best possible access and care.
It funny that contractors want a broad base of suppliers to maximise their profits and efficiency but wish to deny choice and competition to their patients.

Like I said there would be polarised opinions. Until you've taken out a huge loan, put your home up for security, worked 80- 90 hours a week and not slept with the stress of bank repayments etc. only to see absolutely everything you have saved and worked for put at risk, you will not realise the "effect" of that competition. If you have the tax payer's interest at heart then you also need to account for every new pharmacy that opens and reaches certain prescription thresholds costs the NHS an extra c.£40K (rough guess) a year in establishment and practice payments alone. An extra 2000 100 hour pharmacies by my maths equals an extra £80 million pounds per year. Normal business rules CANNOT be applied when there is a global sum involved. I do not know Mr Shooter but everyone knows the power of Boots as a consumer brand so no matter how good his service, his business would be decimated. He has my sympathy.

Mr Barry Shooter

MBE, BPharm, MHM, MRPharmS

Senior Clinical Teacher (Part Time)
Areas of Expertise

Community Pharmacy Management and Practice.
Biography

Barry Shooter holds an undergraduate degree in Pharmacy, a Masters in Health Management from City University and is a qualified school teacher. He is Managing Director of Barry Shooter Pharmacies, a group of community pharmacies originally based in Suffolk and Essex. However, he sold the Essex pharmacies in 2006.

At the School, he teaches practical pharmacy management in the MPharm programme.

Barry was a UK delegate of the Alliance UniChem European Pharmacists’ Forum.

Barry Shooter Pharmacies is an Investor in People and was fourth in the "Sunday Times list of Small & Medium Best Companies to Work For in 2004.”

Barry was awarded an MBE for services to pharmacy in the 2008 New Year's Honours list.

Quite frankly, I cant make out this story. I mean, is Mr Shooter hoping to take on Boots? How can you stop a 100-hours application?

The fact is this "loop hole" to some and "opportunity" to others is a way of life at the moment. The market thus offers threats to existing contractors and opportunities to prospective contractors. What this would tell me, is that as long as the 100 hour contract is exists then why would anyone pay premium goodwill prices, unless obviously the contract is in a surgery. Therefore, I feel sorry for contractors who purchased pharmacies pre-100 hour scenerio and now face life paying off huge loans. However, for those that purchased pharmacies in the post-100 hour legislation, they only have themselves to blame for taking considerable risk, should they face 100-hour contract competition.

As for Mr Shooter, I have absolutely no sympathy. He probably made his money during the good old days. As for Boots, they are only doing what they feel is right for their strategy, not for the interests of Mr Shooter.

Thanks for all the details although not sure of the relevance. Sounds like a decent person who has achieved a lot and is a very hard working and committed individual. The Sunday Times article rings a bell now you mention it. Even more reason to have my sympathy.

I suppose that is business at the end of the day :-)

We have had these arguments all too often. Are we kids or are we professionals? In every proffession there is competition. Why not embrace the competition and ensure that the service and the level of patient care is at the centre rather than cry over spilt milk. I understand some contractors will say we spent 400k or whatever but if you was to do the same with a restaurant and someone came along and opened one close by would you then cry about it or would you make sure your prices and service are at the best level. I feel pharmacists are so used to an easy ride that now the going is getting difficult we are looking for shoulders to cry. Man Up!!!

It's "Sam" again. Hiding behind a nom de plume as there is no Sam Morein on either the pharmacist or technician registers. He/she may even be a "dispensing" doctor. Unless "Sam" reveals his or her true identity we must presume that he/she is just making mischief.
Why the reluctance to reveal your true identity, Sam?

I can't agree more

We're not in the restaurant business. We are a profession providing a contracted service by the NHS. Unfortunately these kind of comparisons devalue an already undermined and under respected role as front line health care providers! Mind you, you are probably not alone in your opinion judging by the number of 100 hour pharmacies popping up in clusters. We have the Jewellery Quarter in Birmingham, then came the Balti Triangle and now we have the Pharmacy Cluster!

your right we are not in the restaurant business but that was an example. The 100hr threat does not devalue us as healthcare providers, if anything we should maintain the service and patient orientated care that we provide on a daily basis. Finally you talk about pharmacy clusters...we have 15 100hr pharmacies within a 1 mile radius of my pharmacy and our items have gone up 15% since last year. This is due to the hard work of myself and my team that more and more patients are coming back to us as a result of bad service at these 100 hour pharmacies.

You are doing well under the circumstances but your quote of 15 100 hour pharmacies in a 1 mile radius just backs up my argument. Which area in the UK could possibly need access to 15 100 hour pharmacies within a mile radius. That is just crazy!! Anyway, good luck to you. Good discussion, just what this forum is all about and nothing personal. We have a similar number of 100 hour pharmacies close to us. If one gains, the others lose, simple maths. What a shame community pharmacy has become so cut throat. It is precisely why we see so many petty arguments over collecting patient prescriptions and other similar situations. At a time pharmacists are fighting for fairer funding, better remuneration, improved services, the Department of Health are rubbing their hands. They must be asking if things are so bad why are so many people opening pharmacies left, right and centre. The real answer is people do not value their time properly and this is where things like the useless cost of enquiry will fall down every time by failing to portray the true costs of operating a professionally run pharmacy business.

Things went wrong when a situation of over supply of pharmacists was allowed to develop and get out of control due to selfish interests. It initially benefited contractors who employ pharmacists to run their businesses and opened yet more stores and buy out competition at extortionate prices. The increasing prescription volumes being dispensed in pharmacies is not matched to need for pharmacists but was instead matched to more dispensers and checking technicians. The situation we have now is such that these excess pharmacists need employment and if the contractors cannot provide the employment required there is little room to manoeuvre with the prohibitive goodwill prices only affordable by the big corporates. It has been a win win for contractors for a long time with the pharmacist workforce studies wrongly predicting the market requirement. The situation is a fall out from a prolonged market domination, manipulation and self centeredness of contractors wanting to keep an ever increasing shareholder return at the expense of the Pharmacists who become increasingly devalued due to over supply. If opening a 100hrs pharmacy reduces the unemployment of pharmacists as a whole and the patients are better served with choice what is wrong with that? The current state of flux will eventually settle and the real service in pharmacy will start emerging in ernest and every locality will be served out of necesity for employment and undoubtedly service will improve out of necesity to survive. The scare mongering needs to be removed from the equation and the real issues addressed. Unfortunately, as with the introduction of any new laws, some people will always get caught out but one only hope not to be the one that get short changed. Even life is a gamble and is dependent on factors beyond individual control. Stop micro-managing situation and pharmacy will eventually emerge as a much stronger profession not so dependent on crumbs and handouts that is increasingly not enough to go round.

fair and thought out comment. I did say there are two sides to the argument.

Mr Shooter told C+D there was a danger Aldeburgh would not be able to support two pharmacies, and he said the result of a successful Boots application and new pharmacy could mean the closure of both. "We only dispense 4,800 prescriptions a month, so having a 100-hour pharmacy nearby would not be viable – for my business or the new pharmacy."

Well, for a university senior teacher, to say the above is ludicrous. How can he say that the neither his business nor the prospective boots business will evenutally be unviable leading to the possible closure of both. Surely, fundamental market dynamics will play out, and ultimately the stronger of the two businesses will win, either by virtue of superior service or by way of funding transient losses through deep pockets. To say both may close is at best naive and at worst frankly nonsense.

It is precisely for these arguments, Mr Shooter makes, I have no sympathy. Why should anyone have sympathy.

any one would put up a fight for survival when they smell/see danger. this happens in every area of our lives, business included. tell me Rajive' would you smell smoke, or see a fire outbreak in your backyard/kitchen and sit around with folded arms for it to consume you. i guess NO. all Mr Shooter is doing is fighting for his survival. wait till it gets to your doorstep, and walk across the road or whatever to congratulate your competitor. Boots are greedy, that's all they are and as the saying goes 'birds of the same feather....' i sympathise with Mr Shooter.

I guess time will show whether the equilibrium will come. Thing is a total stranger would wonder about all the fuss with 100 hours contracts as it would give the appearance that pharmacy is awash with money !!

Once 100 hour entities came then yes owning a pharmacy became risky.
Guess what ? It was ALWAYS risky just like any business.

Could any of us care less if a new newsagent opened in the vicinity of another ?
Yet when it affects you personally, somehow it's a different matter.

When I qualified you could open without restriction closer to a surgery without proving a need. A health centre pharmacy opening up would take in many cases, 90 % of the existing trade from someone else nearby.

An old school pharmacist told me someone did this to him, but it took THIRTY YEARS to close him down.

Pharmacy is not ordinary commerce and you can't compare apples with oranges in the argument.

The landscape is changing. You will have to give good service but it will be no guarantee. The Government of the day will still have mechanisms to take anything from us they wish so big groups will feel the pinch if most of the independents are gone in the future.

Mr Shooter will fight for his business like anyone else.
He has thankfully had a fair crack at the whip - some newer owner pharmacists won't (and may crash into insolvency) so my sympathy is muted.
Rajive is right not to offer sympathy on that score and can't expect any if it happens to him

Adina, your points are irrelevant. So what if Boots is greedy, I don't see your point. Sure, Barry can fight for survival, that's what the market participant reaction would naturally be. My point is, Mr Shooter should accept that anyone can open up a 100-hour pharmacy next to his, for whatever reason they employ.

My issue with Mr Shooter is that he is using nonsense reasoning to foster support from the public. Let the public decide who will survive. This will be ultimately be driven by superior service and employing "out of the box" strategies. This is ultimately is GOOD for the consumer.

For too long, contractors have had an almost monopolistic business. The 100-hour contract has its floors, but it also has its benefits which primarily revolve around the consumer.

"Rajive is right not to offer sympathy on that score and can't expect any if it happens to him" -
Thats correct Chris. I offer no sympathy and I wouldnt expect any in return.

I have a 100-hour pharmacy open up circa 100 yards from my pharmacy two years ago. I didnt go running to the C&D and start contacting my local paper for sympathy. I would never use emotional blackmail (which is exactly what Mr Shooter is doing) to retain business.

Infact I did the following:

Invested heavily in advertising
Lobbied my local GP's to work closer with them (I now run smoking cessation clinics from many of my local surgeries)
Ran Loss Leading Campaigns
Increased Access

Conclusion: My business is thriving more than ever. The 100-hour chappy, who incidentally I feel sympathy for, seems to be in financial problems.

The moral of the story is that a 100-hour competitor will only destroy you, if you allow him/her to do so. This is the exercise of free market dynamics. It ultimately benefits the consumer, and in doing so enhances the image of the profession.