<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.vetsurgeon.org/utility/feedstylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Practice ownership</title><link>https://www.vetsurgeon.org/f/non-clinical-questions/2697/practice-ownership</link><description> Does anyone have any idea how many practices are now owned by our cousins across the pond? 
 Is it a GOOD thing? </description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Community 10</generator><item><title>Re: Practice ownership</title><link>https://www.vetsurgeon.org/thread/5804?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 14:36:30 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">146601cc-3922-4be7-9974-7e1d4e45a66b:b50565c6-d05e-4968-b6a2-c1f86c7a558a</guid><dc:creator>Don Rutherford</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Agreed.&amp;nbsp; Practices increasingly grouping together leads to increasing layers of administrators, possibly shareholders, all leading to pressure for higher charges for animal owners.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Solution?&amp;nbsp; Return to smaller practices in friendly competition, giving a much more personal service??&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>Re: Practice ownership</title><link>https://www.vetsurgeon.org/thread/5738?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:20:55 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">146601cc-3922-4be7-9974-7e1d4e45a66b:e191d8d7-d0a2-4589-9230-eac154b85464</guid><dc:creator>Hannah Wynne Richards</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;No idea how many practices involved. I presume you mean that some corporates are foreign -owned. I am absolutely convinced that corporate practice was a massive mistake&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Wynne&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>