All these online "doctors" are really just about slinging boner pills and weed. The things that a lot of people are too nervous to go and ask for in person. And yes, I know people who use DoD for the blue doctor. The "consultation" isn't much more than them writing "stressed at work" and getting a script.

There's a medical centre in Bondi Junction that bulk bills and will see you within 15 minutes. As someone prone to sinus infections whenever I need antibiotics I go there (my regular real doctor is a couple of days wait for an appointment). They don't even take your blood pressure, which seems like the most basic of preventative health. But it's quick and I can pretty much steer the doctor to writing the script in a few minutes. It's McMedicine and I believe these online guys are in the same boat. The business model is find someone with a pulse who is authorised to write scripts and funnel the punters through as quick as Medicare/PBS will allow. It's very commoditised, as you'd expect once you remove the personal relationship between patient and GP etc.

Lets keep in mind, relation to Vitura's business, its not important that the Doctors are good / bad / indifferent. It only matters if its easy for the patient to get the prescription they want / need and that the prescription is one of Vitura's distributed products. Of course, we'd all feel a bit better if this whole thing didn't feel so transactional, but in the grand scheme of Vitura's success, that's not a big deal. The acquisition of Doctors on Demand (DoD) is simply a play for more volume. Having glanced at the Google reviews, it seems that DoD's brand reputation isn't exactly glowing. So the real question boils down to whether spending $25 million for 120 doctors (who conduct over 750 consultations a day) and the number of Vitura prescriptions they churn out, and how long it'll take to recoup that investment. My gut reaction is agreeing its probably too much, but i dont want to jump the gun, especially at this low valuation, I'll just wait for it to play out.

Not sure I would tar all Telehealth services with that brush, though there certainly are a bunch of shonky outfits, for sure.

A number of operations provide well run and much needed services for remote communities and additional after hours back up for state health services.

I was trying to find any financial statements for Doctors on demand but couldn’t.

Minimum billing structure would be charging item number 91890 MBS for a less than 6 min phone consult. This may have a slight increase in regional areas but pays at $18.95. If they push into the greater than 6 min mark it goes up slightly. For instance if video is used and the appointment is 6-20 min then the payment goes to $41.40. So business’ like this aim for 7 min appointments with video. These would have a 50% loading on weekends and after 8pm-6pm.

Taking your 750 consults a day at the lowest amount of 18.95 that’s a little over 14k a day and revenue of 5.18 million a year. I could inflate this price dramatically if I wanted to make assumptions such as number of video calls, different lengths of time for consults, payment of doctors, growth. But at minimum they are paying 25million for 5million of revenue. But the added ability of using their script side of the business helps.

Doctor remuneration according to their website is negotiated and either an hourly rate or a percentage of revenue brought in depending on how much you work for them.

i can’t find what their margin is but I assume it would be pretty ordinary. I’m not sure you would be taking a profit but I feel that with the scripts this could actually be a good buy in the end.

Hi @Metis

DoD have their fee structure on their website here. I don't think they use bulk billing. This is definitely a for profit operation. As I said above it's about selling certain types of pharmaceuticals rather than the provision of healthcare. At least everything about it smells that way to me: It's hard to imagine Pfizer etc being allowed to buy a GP business. Maybe I'm wrong! Being in the medical field you would probably know more about it than me. It feels like a business that at some point the regulator will stomp on in some way.

https://www.doctorsondemand.com.au/faqs/appointments/how-much-will-it-cost-and-how-do-i-pay/

Doctor remuneration according to their website is negotiated and either an hourly rate or a percentage of revenue brought in depending on how much you work for them.

I would be interested in what incentives doctors working for DoD are offered for selling VIT products. Maybe the regulator won't really care about overprescribing until/if cannabis products make it onto the PBS.

And this is how it will all get regulated out of existence. (From today's AFR).

https://www.afr.com/technology/start-up-to-sell-unapproved-replica-ozempic-upending-market-20231212-p5er1b

Online weight loss brands Juniper and Pilot will soon begin selling replica Ozempic, defying health warnings from its manufacturer and medical regulators, as Australians face a year with the weight loss drug in vanishingly short supply.

The two brands, which are run by the $560 million Woolworths-backed telehealth start-up Eucalyptus, will have a version of the drug made at two Australian compounding pharmacies in a move that could upend the local market.

...

Eucalyptus’ plan involves having registered chemists make its alternative as a pharmacy compound that does not have to meet the same regulatory standards as mass manufactured drugs.

Under the plan, the substitute would need to be prescribed by one of Eucalyptus’ doctors or nurses. It would then be shipped directly from one of the company’s partner pharmacies to a patient, who would know it was not brand-name Ozempic.

...

A spokeswoman for the TGA, which regulates medicines in Australia, said it agreed with the concerns of its US equivalent, the FDA, which has warned that salt-based forms of semaglutide have not been shown to work or to be safe.

“In these circumstances, the TGA has not evaluated the quality, safety or efficacy of the product,” the spokeswoman said of compounded medicine.

...

Eucalyptus has recently rebranded to emphasise healthcare but has attracted controversy with disclosures by its chief executive about misleading investors and ads that spruik erectile dysfunction pills to men who are impotent because of cocaine use.

Hi @UlladullaDave thanks for the clarification. I wrongly assumed that no one would actually pay for a service like this so assumed bulk billing.

There are pretty strict regulations around pharmaceutical companies and direct kickbacks. The short of it is that it’s not allowed. But there can be a bit of grey. It’s definitely not the nineties anymore with huge junkets. So if there is an incentive scheme for the doctors in this instance I think it wouldn’t last long.

I was initially attracted by some of the posts here to see if there was some potential growth in the future and a re-rate could be possible. But I think even if this was the case it all seems rather messy with the pharma/doctor greyness. I think I’ll prefer to spend my time elsewhere and let this one through to the keeper.