Cycle 12's North Cornwall corridor article quoted Padstow's single Boots branch at £66,647 of annual dispensing revenue and described it as "roughly 5-6% of the national Boots branch average". That second claim was imprecise. Cycle 14 re-verified the Padstow number and rebuilt the anchor with a tighter comparator. The corrected figure — and the methodological lesson — is worth a standalone piece.

What PharmSee's data shows for Padstow

Querying PharmSee's location analysis for PL28 8AE at 3 miles:

• GP practices nearby: 0
• Pharmacies nearby: 1
• Single pharmacy: Boots contractor code FAG61, PL28 8AL
• Annual dispensing items: 51,665
• Annual dispensing revenue: £66,647.85

That is the entire Pharmacy First-accessible community pharmacy footprint for the town. One branch, one chain, one pharmacist rota serving roughly 4,500 year-round residents plus a summer tourist population that multiplies the catchment by several times for four months each year.

The zero-GP figure at 3 miles is notable. Padstow's nearest GP practice (Wadebridge) sits 4.5 miles away, outside the ring. Patients needing a GP are driving; patients needing a pharmacy are walking to Boots FAG61. That monopoly structure is what makes the branch interesting as a revenue anchor.

The imprecise cycle 12 anchor

Cycle 12 described £66,647 as "5-6% of the national Boots branch average". The problem with that phrasing: the NHSBSA register includes ghost branches — NHS Digital contractor codes that are technically active but record zero dispensing revenue because the underlying pharmacy closed (Lloyds 2023 estate being the largest source). Including ghost branches in the denominator drags the "national Boots average" down artificially, which makes Padstow look artificially closer to average.

Cycle 14 rebuilt the anchor using only non-zero revenue Boots branches in a well-studied catchment (Liverpool L1 1JJ, 3-mile ring, 12 Boots branches). Six of those 12 record zero revenue in the current snapshot (stale data). The remaining six average £102,970 of annual dispensing revenue.

The corrected comparison

The corrected picture: Padstow is not the outlier we implied. It sits at roughly 65% of the non-zero Liverpool Boots average — lower than any of its Cornwall corridor neighbours, but well within the normal rural range. It is the lowest on that list, but it is not 5% of average, it is 65%.

The lesson isn't that Padstow doesn't matter. It matters because it's the lowest non-zero single-site anchor PharmSee's register has surfaced so far in a town that clearly sustains its pharmacist. The lesson is that describing anchors as "X% of national average" is hazardous unless you first purge ghost branches from the denominator.

Why Padstow is low but not broken

£66,647 of dispensing revenue, at the 2026 NHS fee rate of £1.29 per item, implies roughly 51,665 items dispensed. Padstow's year-round population of ~4,500 plus second-home and seasonal residents gives a plausible population-served figure of 6,000-7,500 full-time-equivalent. 51,665 items across 7,500 population is ~6.9 items/person/year — roughly half the English average of ~14 items/person/year.

But: Padstow's residents who need prescribing are also being seen at Wadebridge GP (4.5 miles away), where they'll often pick up their scripts at a Wadebridge pharmacy on the same trip. The "low" Padstow figure is therefore not a sign that the Padstow Boots is failing — it's a sign that dispensing loyalty in a village without a GP follows the GP, not the walking-distance convenience.

Why this matters for Pharmacy First planning

A £66,647 single-site branch in a 0-GP catchment tells us two things about Pharmacy First viability:

1. The base dispensing revenue is modest — roughly 50% of the English average per-site. That means the margin cushion to fund Pharmacy First staffing and consultation-room availability is thinner.
2. The Pharmacy First capture rate is likely at the bottom of the rural band (35-45%) because the pharmacist is single-covered, the referral relationship with Wadebridge GP is geographically thin, and tourist walk-ins don't translate well to NHS-registered services.

Applying our Pharmacy First calculator to Padstow:

• Weekly referrals: 3 (low rural)
• Capture rate: 40%
• Completion rate: 90%
• Annual Pharmacy First revenue: ~£842

£842 is not trivial against a £66,647 dispensing base — it represents a ~1.3% margin line. But it won't transform site economics.

The broader register audit

A proper register audit — identifying every sub-£70,000 revenue branch in the PharmSee register — is on the cycle 15+ backlog. The first cut of that analysis will tell us whether Padstow is the low-single anchor for the entire 13,147-pharmacy register, or whether there are lower comparables in Lincolnshire, mid-Wales, or parts of the Scottish border that we haven't mapped yet.

We'll also need to separate "genuinely low single sites" from "ghost contractors still appearing in the register" — the Liverpool Boots 6/12 ghost ratio suggests the ghost problem is bigger than we initially thought, and purging ghosts before running any percentile analysis is essential.

The methodological takeaway

Single-site data points are valuable as anchors, not as percentiles. We corrected cycle 12's "5-6% of national" claim to "65% of Liverpool non-zero Boots" because the second framing is defensible and the first was not. If you see a "X% of average" claim in a pharmacy revenue article, always ask: average of what? Average including ghost branches? Average after removing them?

Padstow's Boots is a single point on a map. It anchors the low end of a 13,147-site register. That's the correct thing to say about it. Calling it "5% of average" was wrong.

Explore the tool: Pharmacy search · Location analysis · North Cornwall corridor deep-dive