# Medibank Private



## Julia (16 April 2006)

The government is going to sell Medibank Private.

As a public company its aim should be to obtain the greatest possible results for shareholders.

As a health insurance agency its aim should be to provide the best available care to members at the lowest possible premiums.

In order to achieve the first aim above, won't it be necessary to raise premiums even more than is presently occurring?

Related question:

Do you have private health insurance?

If yes, is it because you don't have confidence in the public system?
What other reasons?

If no, is it because you feel it is too expensive, you won't need it, or you would prefer to just pay for whatever you need if a hospital stay is needed.

I'm thinking of giving up my private cover:  have never had a claim, premiums are going up exponentially, and if I need surgery or whatever in the future I will just pay for it at the time.
Would appreciate others' opinions.

Julia


----------



## ctp6360 (16 April 2006)

I always figure the two things I don't want to be cheap on is FOOD and HEALTH, who gives a **** whatever they cost I will pay.


----------



## aobed (17 April 2006)

Hi Julia,

This topic is quite timely as I have also been working through the value of private health insurance.  

As a single who is in their 20's I haven't made a claim (other than for prescription glasses).  I have talked to individuals who have had private health insurance only to find that they are not covered (or only partially covered) for the times they have had to call upon private health insurance.  

Due to my conservative nature I would rather have every option available to me (i.e. private versus public) should I be in the unfornate circumstance that I require the benefits of health insurance.  

I will be very interested to hear the direction you choose to take Julia.  For me, the only benefit I can see is if I get married and my partner and I decide to have kids.  In that case perhaps retaining my health cover may make it easier for my partner in gaining the appropriate coverage.  This is of no consequence for my direct health however.

One can never predict when one will get sick, however it would be interesting to see a study that compares health costs versus health insurance costs for various age groups.


----------



## anon (17 April 2006)

Julia said -

The government is going to sell Medibank Private.

"As a public company its aim should be to obtain the greatest possible results for shareholders."

Yes. It might be a good company to invest in. 


"As a health insurance agency its aim should be to provide the best available care to members at the lowest 
possible premiums.
In order to achieve the first aim above, won't it be necessary to raise premiums even more than is presently 
occurring?"


As a public company, Medibank Private will have to compete with a pile of other health insurance companies.
This (in theory) should result in provision of better cover at cheaper prices.


Related question:

"Do you have private health insurance?"

Yes we do. Wouldn't be without it.


"If yes, is it because you don't have confidence in the public system?"

Absolutely right. Have you heard of Dr Patel and what happened in Bundaberg (Qld) public hospital? 
Several people died, many people disfigured as a result of this doctor's surgical skills and plain lack of care 
and hygiene. The problem was that top state health beaurocrats strongly defended this guy. Police are now 
looking for him in the States but he is probably hiding out in his native India.

And that wasn't the only public hospital that suffered major problems. Doctors quit en-masse at a hospital in 
the Sunshine Coast area. Our spin and grin premier had to hire a private group of doctors at $2,500 per 
doctor per day to keep that hospital running.


I myself had a near death experience at a public hospital about two and a half years back. It also involved 
overseas trained doctors, this time from Middle East. 



"What other reasons?"

It depends on what sort of health problems you are having. In my case I found that it is utterly essential to 
have your own doctor.


"If no, is it because you feel it is too expensive, you won't need it, or you would prefer to just pay for whatever 
you need if a hospital stay is needed."

Money doesn't rate when your health is concerned. Since you can't take it with you - you may as well spend it 
on yourself.


"I'm thinking of giving up my private cover: have never had a claim, premiums are going up exponentially, and 
if I need surgery or whatever in the future I will just pay for it at the time."

Our household/contents insurance has gone up faster than Medicare Private costs.


"Would appreciate others' opinions."

Me too.


anon


----------



## Prospector (17 April 2006)

HI Julia
I have always had private health insurance and it would be the last thing I would give up.

While the public health system is adequate, I dont think that it treats people with the same sense of urgency that the individual person has when they have a personal health issue to deal with.  And if I am worried about a health related matter I want attention and treatment as soon as possible.

Even as recently as two years ago I had a problem which in the public health system, I would have been put on a 12 month waiting list.  But I didnt want to wait that long to resolve it as there was a possibility of malignancy.  The Public Health system, because it was not yet proven malignancy, would say I have to wait, even though the only way of confirming malignancy was to have the surgery!  

With private health it was over and done with in a month and a borderline malignancy was the result! But the surgery was the only treatment I needed. The best hospital, private room, great surgeon etc etc...

My Aunt has never had private health insurance and has always invested in shares - her rationale being that she could sell her shares and pay for treatment in a public hospital.  Well, she developed cancer and had to sell a large portion of her portfolio.  She was treated in a public hospital, hated it, hated the Doctor.  She has now ensured her son and daughter now have private health insurance!


----------



## Julia (17 April 2006)

Prospector said:
			
		

> HI Julia
> I have always had private health insurance and it would be the last thing I would give up.
> 
> While the public health system is adequate, I dont think that it treats people with the same sense of urgency that the individual person has when they have a personal health issue to deal with.  And if I am worried about a health related matter I want attention and treatment as soon as possible.
> ...




Hi Prospector

Glad to know things turned out so well in your case.

Your aunt's story is less reassuring.  If she sold some of her shares, presumably it was to pay outright for private care.  Why then was she treated in a public hospital without her choice of doctor?  I've always imagined that if you're prepared to pay you can have the hospital and doctor of your choice.

Re the dreaded Dr Patel:  I'm in regional Qld also and there were fairly similar medical disasters at our local hospital.  My worst nightmare would be to be dependent on the public system.  A friend of mine had a chest X-ray which showed an abnormality.  She had no private cover.  The waiting list for follow-up investigation/treatment was almost 12 months.  Despite then having radical surgery and follow up chemo and radiation she died a few months later.

The Queensland public health system is a long way from being fixed despite the spin from the Premier's PR machine.

Julia


----------



## Prospector (17 April 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Hi Prospector
> If she sold some of her shares, presumably it was to pay outright for private care.  Why then was she treated in a public hospital without her choice of doctor?  I've always imagined that if you're prepared to pay you can have the hospital and doctor of your choice.
> 
> .
> ...




Hi again Julia

Lucky you living in Qld.  My son had the pleasure of being the first child operated on in the brand new Noosa Hospital a few years ago - the day after we had arrived for our Christmas Holiday! Almost as good as our accommodation, and it was free  

When my Aunt found out how much she had to pay for going to a full private hospital, she decided she would do 'private' in a public hospital (does that make sense?)  But this meant that she could only have a Doctor who had a surgical list for that Public Hospital. The surgery she needed was quite extensive and she needed High Dependency care for a few days, so this obviously racked up the $$$$ if she went to a full private hospital!   So she thought by going the middle of the road she could save some money.  But it turned out that by not going full Public, she received the same patient care as other Public patients (which she said was dreadful - eg she was not given a bed bath, or assisted to the bathroom for 3 days while hooked up to various drips and drains) but also had to pay for it too! 

With one major exception are actually a very healthy family but even so we have required some assistance on enough occasions to feel that we have certainly received the benefits of health Insurance, but maybe it is the luck of the draw too!  I can certianly understand how some people have contributed for ever and never needed its cover.  But you know Murphy's law too, dont you!


----------



## happytrader (17 April 2006)

Hi Prospector and Julia

I guess there are public hospitals and public hospitals. I also live in Regional QLD and have had the benefit and experience of working in both sectors. In my particular region both public and private patients share the same specialists and often the same nurses. Yes the public system is sadly lacking with long waits in emergency  and often cancelled surgical procedures common (after all in an emergency its all hands on deck so to speak) However, public patients very rarely complain about the staff and the standard of care up here. If you require emergency care, the public hospital is where you will find yourself anyway. And just as well too, if you end up in ICU - state of the art equipment and highly trained and dedicated staff too. The other thing about a public hospital is, you have resident doctors on the premises 24/7. Not usually so in a private hospital.

Private cover is a must when time is vital, ongoing pain management, chronic conditions, or a private room is a preference. 

Prospector

Thats sad about your aunts experience in a high dependency unit. Sponge baths are the routine, so I don't know what happened there. Not good.

Cheers
Happytrader


----------



## carmo (7 December 2006)

Does the Government have the right to sell Medibank Private? I wonder if bonsia has done his homework here, 3 million members, thats a lot of voters.


----------



## ROE (28 March 2014)

carmo said:


> Does the Government have the right to sell Medibank Private? I wonder if bonsia has done his homework here, 3 million members, thats a lot of voters.




I can smell a Class Action if Member get nothing

http://www.smh.com.au/national/publ...unt-to-theft-says-founder-20140328-35nat.html


----------



## drsmith (28 March 2014)

If dividend flow is any guide, it's established that MP is owned by the government and not its members.



> Medibank Private has paid the federal government more than $1 billion in dividends and taxes in the past three years and will pay another special dividend of $300 million in 2012-13.
> 
> Managing director George Savvides confirmed during Senate estimates hearings yesterday the government-owned healthcare provider was planning to make the new payment – the second special payment in three years.




http://www.afr.com/p/national/medibank_to_pay_govt_dividend_t7RFnu4VCKf0M8KQHtBlaI

Fund members may get a discount in the float and a priority allocation but that will be it at best.


----------



## CanOz (28 March 2014)

ROE said:


> I can smell a Class Action if Member get nothing
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/national/publ...unt-to-theft-says-founder-20140328-35nat.html




Why should 'members' get something. This is insurance isn't it? You all want a debt free government (or do you), but yet you don't want higher taxes or sell any assets...

So if you don't privatize and sell off SOE's, how will you pay for the excesses of the previous socialist government?

You can't have both, get it?


----------



## CanOz (28 March 2014)

Australia should sell all the state assets, pay off the debt and write a law that makes it crime to overspend...


Look at Norway, a country with ample resources with a surplus. How was Australia allowed to get into such a debt burden?? A country so rich in resources


----------



## Julia (28 March 2014)

CanOz said:


> Why should 'members' get something. This is insurance isn't it? You all want a debt free government (or do you), but yet you don't want higher taxes or sell any assets



That's how I see it too.  As a member I'm not at all keen on the sale but only because I'll be extremely surprised if premiums don't rise at a greater rate as a result.

The Finance Minister has offered a tepid sort of not-quite-assurance that a new owner would not result in higher premiums, but refuses to provide even an extract from the evaluation report which explains such an assertion.

Are there any examples of privatisation where the customers have actually enjoyed cheaper or better services as a result?


----------



## SirRumpole (28 March 2014)

Julia said:


> Are there any examples of privatisation where the customers have actually enjoyed cheaper or better services as a result?




Very few I'd say. Which makes Hockey's heavying of State governments to sell assets disturbing also.


----------



## chiff (28 March 2014)

I was with NIB health care when they went public....all policy holders got shares according to their longevity and loyalty.
How does Norway have a massive future fund?Without any research I believe it is that they have the Statoil company,which I believe is owned by the state -and profits go to future generations.Not so in Australia.
Incidentally I am looking forward to a trip there again at the end of this year to see aged relatives.
If anyone watched the TV show Lillehammer you would have noticed the ultra-modern train that they travelled on.Thats what state money can do for you if used correctly.


----------



## CanOz (28 March 2014)

chiff said:


> I was with NIB health care when they went public....all policy holders got shares according to their longevity and loyalty.
> How does Norway have a massive future fund?Without any research I believe it is that they have the Statoil company,which I believe is owned by the state -and profits go to future generations.Not so in Australia.
> Incidentally I am looking forward to a trip there again at the end of this year to see aged relatives.
> If anyone watched the TV show Lillehammer you would have noticed the ultra-modern train that they travelled on.Thats what state money can do for you if used correctly.




Totally agree, state oil money. Its the best example of a socialist economy that i can think of. It likely wouldn't have got that without the oil and the foresight at the time to use the funds wisely. I believe they have excellent health cover as well.

They have lots of state assets to sell, a surplus...they should be right for decades....unless some greedy politician comes along...


----------



## drsmith (28 September 2014)

It's now possible to register for interest in the upcoming float of Medibank Private.

https://www.medibankprivateshareoffer.com.au/residency/

Existing Medibank Private policy holders will *secure a greater preferential *allocation of shares.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/me...072515091?nk=d2c9984bc267031e8e9eaa2925fd8a2b


----------



## Tano (28 September 2014)

I also got an email from Bell Direct regarding the float.  Does anyone subscribing to the float for a long term hold?


----------



## drsmith (28 September 2014)

Tano said:


> I also got an email from Bell Direct regarding the float.  Does anyone subscribing to the float for a long term hold?



I don't think the numbers have been published yet but private health insurance is currently strongly incentivised through the tax system by the federal government.

A long term question is the extent to which that will remain the case.


----------



## Julia (28 September 2014)

drsmith said:


> I don't think the numbers have been published yet but private health insurance is currently strongly incentivised through the tax system by the federal government.
> 
> A long term question is the extent to which that will remain the case.



Yes.  And why I'd not be making any commitment until more detail is known.  Government incentives have an understandable basis in terms of reducing pressure on the public health system, but that is completely not applicable when the company is run on a private, for-profit basis.

With all the other cost of living pressures at present, if the subsidy were to be removed I'd guess the membership would fall quite dramatically.
At this stage, just too much we don't know.


----------



## drsmith (28 September 2014)

Julia said:


> With all the other cost of living pressures at present, if the subsidy were to be removed I'd guess the membership would fall quite dramatically.
> At this stage, just too much we don't know.



The tax incentives aren't all subsidy. There's a carrot element in the private health insurance and a stick element in the Medicare levy surcharge.

If the tax incentives were removed and membership fell dramatically, there's only one other place for them to go. That in itself is a complex question for government.


----------



## Julia (28 September 2014)

drsmith said:


> The tax incentives aren't all subsidy. There's a carrot element in the private health insurance and a stick element in the Medicare levy surcharge.



Quite.  The point, however, is that no private company will have to take into account the various factors that currently influence government policy on M. Private.


----------



## SirRumpole (28 September 2014)

Premiums across the board are sure to rise after the sale. The restraint of the government owned M.B.P. was the deciding factor in keeping the premiums down.


----------

