Survey reveals perceptions on boarders' willingness to pay in equine boarding, suggesting service value is crucial for rate increases.
Equine boarding facilities provide critical care for a large portion of the U.S. equine population, yet rising input costs challenge facility owners’ ability to maintain services without adjusting fees. Understanding how facility owners perceive boarders’ willingness to pay (WTP) for increased boarding costs is essential for balancing equine welfare with business sustainability. This study aimed to (1) assess equine facility owners’/managers’ perceptions of how boarders would respond to increased boarding rates, and (2) identify factors influencing those perceptions. A 26-question online survey targeting equine boarding facility owners and managers (n = 112 completed responses) was distributed via Extension channels and social media between July and August 2020. Facility owners reported average monthly board rates and answered a double-bounded dichotomous choice WTP scenario based on a hypothetical increase in care costs. Interval regression analysis was used to estimate perceived WTP, controlling for facility size, boarding type, region, income, and demographic factors. Overall, facility owners perceived that boarders would tolerate a 14.28% (P < 0.01) increase in monthly boarding rates. Full board clients were perceived to have slightly lower WTP (13.42%, P < 0.05); however, due to higher baseline costs, this translated into a greater absolute monthly increase ($69.78) compared to other board types ($34.85). Owners with higher household incomes perceived greater boarder WTP (P < 0.05), while facility size and geographic region were not significant factors. These results suggest that although equine owners may tolerate modest rate increases, larger absolute increases for full board may require additional justification through service value. Understanding owner perceptions of boarder WTP can help boarding facilities make informed pricing decisions that support both business viability and equine welfare.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thompson et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: