Originally Posted by Gaz Cooper
Looking at the accounts, if I am reading them correctly and I am sure Peter will step in and correct me but I see SAGA's income decreasing by close to $130,000 odd thousand dollars should they not be issued a vets license and if that is the case they probably could not survive,

Drug Income $123,000 bze $83,000 clear
Vetinary income $46,000 bze

All lost if they don't get a license. that's a chunk of cash.

I don't read the figures that way, Gaz. I don't know what the split of "drugs and medications" is between those that can only be administered by the vet and those that are sold over the counter, but I believe that most fall into the latter category. I accept that income for "veterinary services" would (mostly) stop, though I believe that some of those services are actually provided by persons other than the vet and would continue. But with no vet there would be no vet's remuneration, and I estimated that at around $60k of the total "personnel costs".

There are several vague areas as the information provided isn't detailed enough (not a criticism, just a statement). I estimated the net cost of employing the vet for 2009 was around $15k - the vet's remuneration less the income directly attributable to the vet. In other words, employing a vet was a small net cost to the enterprise, so dispensing with the vet actually saves money (viewed on this narrow base). But we are both working with very incomplete data, and I would like to be able to go behind those numbers.