So lately, I’ve been hearing a lot of ads on the radio for something called Hannah The Pet Society. The ad claims, that for a low monthly fee, they will cover ALL costs of your pet. Veterinary care (preventative and otherwise), grooming, boarding, behavioral training and even food and litter. This seemed a bit weird to me so I looked up their website.
It didn’t provide any pricing information I could find, but good god the FAQ is huge. It’ll make your eyes go cross. I only skimmed through parts but it seems like, legally, they own the pet and are only leasing it out to you for the duration of its life or the contract. I wish they’d provide pricing info though, cause I’m curious as to how much it would cost. I found a mention of $80 a month for a dog in the FAQ but no other info.
Has anyone else ever heard of this business plan? They seem to be fairly new and only in the Portland/Vancouver area. I’m not entirely sure what I think of this to be honest. It seems so weird, but also kind of interesting. It seems like they work with local shelters and do appear to take great care in making sure the pet and the family are a good match.
I just came back from there. And I watched Portlandia in Portland. It sounds like weird stuff, but then these people would probably seem like earth hating fascists compared to the people in SF who wanted to make pets “companion animals” and people “pet guardians.”
$80 bucks a dog seems obscenely cheap. That’s probably a chihuahua as bigger dogs can eat tons.
No I assumed that. If $80 = food, grooming, heartworm, annual vet, and emergencies for when Poopsie gets problems from the congenital heart defect, then it could be cheap. I’ll bet the legalize is full of asterisks and conditionals and so on.
Also, the cynic in me makes me think they only take intact purebreds, and it will be a pimping service or something.
Well the FAQ states they only lease out shelter pets and that all animals they ‘match’ to families are spayed and neutered. I don’t know. It DOES seem like a good deal, but the fact that they don’t mention ANY pricing on their site seems a bit suspicious.
I don’t know about costs in Portland, but around here $900 a year would cover all standard costs plus a healthy profit for a cat or most (non-huge) dogs. Especially if you figure that they may be getting donations and/or volume discounts, depending on how they’ve set things up.
I would bet, however, that somewhere in all that fine print is language giving them the option on treatment for anything beyond basics. Wouldn’t want to blow your wad on chemo or major surgery.
It does seem very odd to me, but could be a really valid way of resolving the disposable pet problem. Give people a pet, charge them for it, take it back when they get tired of it. What’s not to like?
It’s probably geared towards a certain demographic, for whom convenience almost always trumps cost.
My concern is what happens if there is a medical emergency. Does the company get to decide what level of intervention to take to save the pets life. I would imagine the most cost effective amount of care would almost always be to do as little as possible and replace the pet if it dies.
Sounds very cruel to the poor animals. They bond with some humans, the humans get tired and trade them for a new model, they bond with the new family, the family moves and sends them back, they get sent to a third family…and very reasonably refuse to bond.
I know nothing of this company, but the concept seems logical. If the organization attracts enough paying customers, they would be buying food and supplies in bulk and would likely be able to negotiate greatly reduced veterinary fees with the promise of high volume. It makes sense that, at the right scale, they could provide pet needs at substantially less than it would cost an individual.
I have 3 dogs. I probably spend $1000 on food and maybe $600 year at the vet each year (well visits, shots, preventative care). That’s $1600 dollars per year. At $80/month/dog, I would be paying the pet care company $2880 per year. Not a bad profit margin. Of course, if one of my dogs needs emergency or extensive vet care, the profit shrinks or vanishes. The business model depends on the risk (extra vet expenses) being less than the reward (combined premiums). It sounds like an insurance policy with a food rider!
I saw a children’s book last year (can’t remember the title or author) in which a boy desperately wants a dog for his birthday.
His parents don’t want a dog. In the past, the boy wanted an expensive toy that he played with a few times and then forgot about. So the parents went to a pet leasing place and leased a dog for a weekend, figuring their son would get bored with him/her. Then they returned the dog on Monday, telling the kid, “Oh, he ran away. Maybe we shouldn’t have a dog in this house.” Yeah, real nice folks. So the kid goes looking for the dog. I didn’t finish the book.
Avoid Hannah The Pet Society like the plague. When you sign up with them, you can only do business with them:
[ul]
[li]Their veterinarians (regular healthcare, emergencies, tests, etc.)[/li][li]Their food[/li][li]Their training[/li][li]Their boarding[/li][li]Their litter[/li][li]Their rules[/li][li]Etc.[/li][/ul]
Hannah is not operating in the long-term best interests of the animals. They are interested in making money.
Is this worse than euthanasia? You’d have a valid argument if every pet that wasn’t “leased” was adopted by a stable, loving family (hint: they ain’t).
I understand somewhere you can lease Guinea Pigs. That makes a lot of sense since they like to be kept in pairs, what do you do when one dies and you want to phase them out? Lease a companion, then when the other one dies turn in the leased one.
This particular organization does seem a little questionable, but frankly I find the idea brilliant and would sign up quite quickly if there was an ethical provider.
Take a look at the IMHO thread on people who have given up dogs. What you’ll see is that the major issues are behavior problems, economic strain, choosing a poorly matched breed, and housing issues. This service can’t do much about the last item, but they do address the first three quite thoroughly. It seems like they really do (and they have an economic motivation to) make sure that the pets are well matched so that they will stay a part of the family for a long long time, and to provide the supports to keep that going. Furthermore, I like what they have to say about making it possible for the elderly to have pets without worrying about what happens with the pets later, and I can see how it’s completely possible that they really do place their older pets quite easily- when families don’t have to worry about mounting health costs, they can be much more open to taking in an older pet.
I’d want to see more transparency and a guarantee that animals hosted by the service will never be euthanized without cause or returned to a shelter. I know a lot of people object to not sourcing 100% from shelters, but frankly if a handful of purebred leases from reputable breeders subsidizes dozens of shelter leases, maybe it is worth it, as long as it is transparent.
Anyway, if there was a good provider, I’d seriously consider it. To have a predictable monthly fee, and to forgo all those trips to PetCo, are gold. Of course, it isn’t the right choice for everyone. I’m lean a bit towards the “barn cat” perspective, and while I love any kitties I happen to have, I’m not going to throw a fit that their health plan doesn’t cover $6,000 heart surgery.
Yeah, real nice folks. So the kid goes looking for the dog. I didn’t finish the book.