You are currently viewing our desktop site, do you want to visit our Mobile web app instead?
 Registered users can save articles to their personal articles list. Login here or sign up here

Pets: An investment case

Global trend towards humanisation of furry friends.

About two years ago, there was a picnic at Emmarentia Dam in Johannesburg.

While everyone was exchanging pleasantries, and playing on the grass, a couple – let’s call them Nick and Jen – came walking towards the party with a stroller. The group fell silent.

“When did Nick and Jen have a BABY?!” someone asked the host.

The host – as well as everyone else – seemed to be in the dark about this exciting development.

It turned out the “baby” was the couple’s elderly dog, who had trouble walking, but who was – according to his vet – perfectly fine otherwise.

And this is not an isolated incident. The “humanisation” of pets – a global trend where people’s furry friends are increasingly being treated as if they were humans – has gone hand in hand with improvements in buying power. While cats and dogs used to sleep outside, many pets are now living inside the house, become part of the family and may even share a bed with their owners. As part of this process, owners are spending more money on medicine and vets.

One practical example of the trend comes in the form of Berkshire Hathaway’s subsidiary NetJets, that allows pets on their private charters. In a recent interview with Sky News, Europe chief executive Mario Pacifico revealed that around 2 300 of the roughly 80 000 passengers it chartered last year, were pets.

Pet ownership also seems to be on the rise locally. According to Insight Survey, South African households had roughly 9.2 million dogs in total in 2016, placing the country in the ninth position globally.

Could there be an investment case hidden away here somewhere?

Gerrit Smit, fund manager of Stonehage Fleming’s Global Best Ideas Equity Fund, invested in Zoetis, a global manufacturer of drugs and vaccinations for pets and farm animals about a year ago. Zoetis, which was previously spun off from Pfizer, is the fund’s third-largest holding, at 5.5%.

While Smit is a bottom-up investor, which means he doesn’t invest based on macro trends, but picks companies based on fundamentals, he says healthcare is a solid industry from a sustainable organic growth perspective – one of the four pillars of his investment strategy.

Yet, he is fairly sceptical about the prospects for traditional human medicine as an investment for three reasons. The first is patent issues – as global patents expire, generic drugs come to market, competition intensifies and margins drop. Moreover, governments tend to be the largest clients worldwide and their concentrated buying power puts even more pressure on prices. Finally, legal risks are significant – ultimately human life is involved.

With animal drugs, most of these arguments disappear, Smit says.

At the same time, population growth and increases in wealth fuel organic growth with regard to human as well as animal drugs. But as wealth grows, people in the emerging world consume more dairy and meat leading to large-scale livestock farming, which in turn fuels improved growth for animal drugs, he adds.

He also points to the humanisation of pets, an “absolutely phenomenal” development. While people are living longer and have “companion animals” for a lengthier period, younger individuals are also taking longer to settle and start a family, and opt for a pet instead.

At the same time, many international celebrities have been spotted with a pet – almost as a type of fashion accessory.

Smit says the humanisation of pets is becoming an everyday phenomenon – it is not a fad that is expected to vanish. Apart from the basic pillars used to inform investment decisions, there needs to be a conviction that there will be a sustainable demand for a firm’s products and services and the valuation needs to be attractive, as was the case with Zoetis.

Get access to Moneyweb's financial intelligence and support quality journalism for only
R63/month or R630/year.
Sign up here, cancel at any time.



To comment, you must be registered and logged in.


Don't have an account?
Sign up for FREE

This trend is ridiculous – the efforts should rather go towards saving the planet,food security, water sustainability, the environment, education and social upliftment. Are we humans now so removed from reality that we have to compensate by instantly gratifying our most basic humane instincts on pets? What a sorry state of affairs – a pet tax towards environmental protection is possibly a good idea. If you can afford a pet ( and it’s a very expensive hobby, believe me) then you can afford the tax. Those that can’t afford to look after pets shouldnt have them anyway. Just my opinion

Amen Mactheknife. When last did you walk down your street? Dogs barking everywhere, some people often have at least 4, and it is a massive racket. I like the fact that having a pet as a child stops people breeding, but unfortunately only the people that cannot afford pets are then still on a rampant breeding spree. All in all, welcome the hourglass society with open arms. Looking forward to Animal and Human rights movements converging.

Our pets have taken over the household 😉 Our two Yorkies now sleep with us at night on top of the bed. Please help!

(…already too late to ‘save’ the planet…human population growth has been out of control for a long time. What we human nature do to other humans, are sometimes worse than that of animals.)

Talking of tax, there should be a tax (in increments) as the number of one’s children increase….instead of Govt paying child grants, helping the over-population problem along.

Yorkshire terriers…..cannot train them fearless characters

You can do all those things without acting like a snob towards people who own pets. Nothing stops you from spending less on whatever you spend your money and pursuing your planet saving ideals.

Pets is simply another way to bring the beauty and marvel of God’s creation into your home.

W.r.t. the third argument advanced by Smit, there is a flaw in the logic.
“Finally, legal risks are significant – ultimately human life is involved.

With animal drugs, most of these arguments disappear, Smit says.”

With the humanization of pets, I see lawsuits coming for vets’ negligence and the psychological trauma caused to the humans because of the loss of a “loved one”. Then the new area of specialization will be the veterinary expert witness.

How about taxing people who have more than 2 kids? This is way better for the environment than having low-cost pets

The most ridiculous genocidal comments here.

But Why don’t you just save the planet and go jump of a bridge.. then everything will be better.

The financial world is so skew that people can not afford to have children in many countries, not opt for a pet but are forced!

Only in evil socialist countries like Sweden and Norway support to young families helped turn the corner.

All the symptoms from a messed up society and some exploiting it..

Our two Vizsla’s (Hungarian Pointers) cost a fortune, but does not have the ‘dog smell’ – don’t bark (except when I arrive at home to greet me) and sleep on proper beds and enjoy what the two kids they replaced in our lives used to have.

Best thing I’d ever done

Load All 10 Comments
End of comments.





Follow us:

Search Articles:Advanced Search
Click a Company: