3 ms·
That sounds bad for the customer, but how does that play out for the owners? Does this sort of behavior end up working out better for them financially? If so, d
by vecter 3y ago
That sounds bad for the customer, but how does that play out for the owners? Does this sort of behavior end up working out better for them financially? If so, despite how bad it sounds, it does seem like they end up with more efficient economics (assuming it's sustainable). If not, then surely the PE firms will suffer too right?
- gtop3 3y agoSome thoughts on how this would playout: * Reduced staff costs. * Reduced potential peak. If you're at capacity during peak it might be worth the extra staff costs to capture the revenue. * Reduced staffing flexibility. Things like vacations, parental leave, etc become tighter. * Reduced customer satisfaction. I've stopped going to places when they lose my favorite staff member, and places a lot less consequential than a vet. This might translate to loss customers in the mid term, but you might not notice until their next vet visit in ~12 months. This might translate to bad yelp reviews. * Presumably most of those vets let go are going to continue to be vets. It's a high skill job that pays well and people get into it for passion. That means your competition just gained access to a resource. Or maybe those vets become your new competition.
- agentgumshoe 3y agoIf you read the article, it spends a lot of time speaking to how the equity firms separate themselves from downsides.