Printable View
The new Eyemed package for Martin Marietta had some interesting stuff in it. Under premium progressives they list Panamic, Comfort & the Natural. Under premium AR's they list Alize at a ridiculously low price. So who's bumping who?!? Is Luxottica looking to take over Essilor or is Essilor looking to take over Luxottica??
It was bad enough when they started showing up at Sam's, Costco, Dr's Vision Works, but this brought it to a head for us. We no longer offer Essilor products period! :finger:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Framebender
CAll your local Shamir rep, great product and thus far for me GREAT service.
I agree with Cinders, I love Shamir.....great lenses. Far more superior than Essilor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Framebender
I am not familiar with that particular contract but if if is like all the other Eye Med contracts :
All premium products are at your U & C less 20%. If you can't give a 20% discount off your U & C for premium products then you had better get out of managed care.
If you are saying there is a fixed fee for those items then it is a customized contract for MM and is OPTIONAL. You don't have to take it.
I think you are a bit confused or you are unfairly bashing Lux and Essilor.
Rep
I doubt very much that Essilor and/or Lux are buying one or the other. They are two organizations that have huge infrastructures and are no doubt feeding off one anothers success. It is not uncommon that the two largest companies in a given field that are not competing with one another with the products they offer are teaming up to make themselves stronger. No real huge suprises right?
Aaron
I have Oxford/Spectera (not a customized plan) and just got new glasses for which I paid the standard supplement for AR. For the low price, I was expecting some no-name AR, but was surprised and pleased that it came back with Crizal Alize. (they were definitely made in Spectera's lab, I went to an independent OD and tracked my order on Spectera's website). So if Essilor is in cahoots, they're in cahoots with many people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron
Aaron your right, from what I m hearing L.C. has put a freeze on hiring, so they are not going to go buy another company at this time. From what I was told they are trying to keep there costs for Opticians and Stylists down so a lot of stores are running under staffed. Only what I have heard!:cool:
Quote:
Originally Posted by shellrob
lol, far more superior lenses?
You may argue that Shamir is independent, and it has great lenses that equal that of Essilor's, but to say that the lenses are far more superior?
The say that Shamir is the largest suppliers of glass molds to the big corporation.Quote:
Originally Posted by For-Life
Thsi means that Shamir makes the curves for a certain lens before the purchasing corporation has even made a lens in a particular mold..
I got to see a COLTS report on different pals from my Shamir rep last Thurs. that showed the contour plots (sp?). I was pretty impressed with the data and saw the Genisis as compared against the Comfort, the Panamic, GP Wide, SolaOne and Zeiss GT.
The Genisis was almost identical to the Panamic. Maybe just the teensiest bit cleaner above the 180 line. Teensiest. The GP Wide and the Zeiss GT seemed to have the largest area of intermediate and reading. The SolaOne (which my dad wears and LOVES now, after wearing Pentax and Panamic) had alot of noise above the 180 which surprised me because we tried it out on several sola wearers and they loved it...said it had "less swim".
Call your local Shamir rep and ask for a look at that report. VERY interesting.
We sell alot of Shamir and alot of Hoya and a fair amount of Younger product as well. This was mainly just a vent for me, but I appreciate the comments and the criticism.
I understand that I have a right to pick and choose the Eyemed plans I participate in. Martin is a major player in the Denver metro area and I found it interesting that they can get Cizal Alize for a $67.00 copay. Since I know that Eyemed is trying to drive business to LensCrafters it started me wondering what they were paying for the coating as opposed to what I'm paying for the coating. Just one of those things that makes you go hmmmm.
I may be a bit confused. . .my wife calls it sometimers, but I'm still pretty sharp when it comes to money. You think I'm bashing your paycheck?? You have my apology.
.....they would exclude you totally. That's the way it was when Lenscrafters was owned by US Shoe. No one else was allowed to participate in their managed care plans period. Only when Lux purchased them did they open it up to independents. They have done the same thing with ECPA and Cole plans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Framebender
The co-pay is only a part of your payment. As you well know you get a payment for the lens in addition to the co-pay.
Your not bashing my paycheck at all. Lenscrafters is my competition too. Every frame they sell is one I don't get comission on.
Rep
And as far as Crizal Alize goes, it isn't even at the Crafters, nor do they recommend it. They have their own Scotchgard...
The copay doesn't seem out of line with Davis or many VSP plans.
Your father's very positive experience with SOLAOne, even in the face of such "evaluations," is a good example of the limitation of many optical comparisons that were not designed to assess the visual performance of the lens for the actual wearer. I discuss this a bit in several threads, including this thread, which elaborates on the results for SOLA lenses from one such evaluation that was recently published.Quote:
The SolaOne (which my dad wears and LOVES now, after wearing Pentax and Panamic) had alot of noise above the 180 which surprised me because we tried it out on several sola wearers and they loved it...said it had "less swim".
It was a $40 add-on for AR on my plan, which is why I was so surprised I got Crizal Alize...
Superior? Yes, to me it is. Of course this is only my opnion. The lenses are great and the prices are far better than Varilux.Quote:
Originally Posted by For-Life
I got to see a COLTS report on different pals from my Shamir rep last Thurs. that showed the contour plots (sp?). I was pretty impressed with the data and saw the Genisis as compared against the Comfort, the Panamic, GP Wide, SolaOne and Zeiss GT.
Naturally, everyone will base their opinions about "product superiority" on various measures and experiences. Like others in this thread, I've reached a point where I view any statement about a single product being "far superior" as coming from either marketing or a lack of information/knowledge.
Unfortunately, certain comparisons- which have little or no correlation to actual performance- have become (or remain) in vogue. Namely, contour plots and the measurement of spherical area in a progressive power lens.
Wearer test after wearer test has confirmed Essilor's stance that contour plots are not an effective tool in predicting wearer satisfaction with a particular progressive power lens design. An illustration I like to use is posted below.
According to what we are told about contour plots (and PAL designs in general), less unwanted astigmatism- and wider "channels"- are supposed to be better. Having a "cleaner" design above the 180 has been proposed as being "better" as well. Going on these assumptions, consider the two contour plots below. Both represent +1.50 ADD powers... Based on our "knowledge" of contour plots, which lens is one of the most prolific PAL designs in the history of the US market, and which one was brought out later- yet never acheived the same patient satisfaction or sales?
The SolaOne (which my dad wears and LOVES now, after wearing Pentax and Panamic) had alot of noise above the 180 which surprised me because we tried it out on several sola wearers and they loved it...said it had "less swim".
Exactly my point... Seeing the contour plots of various lenses you dispense- and comparing them to your dispensing/wearing experience- will likely result in a lot of surprises because contour plots are not indicative of the wearing experience!
Jedi,Quote:
Originally Posted by jediron1
Do a search on NY Times and you will find an article from last week detailing LC new business plan that they have announced to the shareholders. It includes a 312mil detailed concept renovation so as to "separate themselves from the discounters..." Their words not mine. It is a very interesting article.
Aaron
[QUOTE=Pete Hanlin]I got to see a COLTS report on different pals from my Shamir rep last Thurs. that showed the contour plots (sp?). I was pretty impressed with the data and saw the Genisis as compared against the Comfort, the Panamic, GP Wide, SolaOne and Zeiss GT.
Naturally, everyone will base their opinions about "product superiority" on various measures and experiences. Like others in this thread, I've reached a point where I view any statement about a single product being "far superior" as coming from either marketing or a lack of information/knowledge.
Wrong......it comes from experience in fitting lenses. I don't dislike essilor products and I do use them as well, I just have my preferences like everyone else. I use sola and hoya and all the others as well. I prefer what I prefer and it isn't a marketing thing nor is it because I lack knowledge in different progressives. It is MY OPINION and nothing more.
It is MY OPINION and nothing more.
...which is why I indicated that everyone has an opinion (and opinions vary from person to person). I dispensed tons of Sola, AO, Rodenstock, and Essilor product in my dispensary days- and had a lot of success with all of them.
So, if you like what you dispense and its working for your patients, that's obviously a winning combination! Basing opinions on the performance of a PAL on dispensing experience is one solid approach to measuring a lens' performance. Basing opinions on contour plots (in my opinion) is not.
Aaron my only point was that at L.C. they seem to be cutting corners to keep there costs down. Anotherwords they are chasing after nickles and dimes while watching the dollars flow out the doors. A doctor friend who works at L.C. told me instead of hiring help so they can make more money they feel that by not hiring they can keep there payroll down while people walk out the doors for other places. Just my 2 cents:cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron
Jedi,Quote:
Originally Posted by jediron1
You may be right but I think if you look at the article that you may see a differant reason why they have decided to hold off in hiring. The focus of the company is changing nationwide and it looks as though the profile for who they plan on hiring has also changed. But spending .3 mil plus on cosmetic renovations some does not sound like a company that is overly concerned with cost cutting as opposed to growth projection.
Aaron
Their point of view is that payroll is the number one controllable cost for any company. With that being said, they have always been sticklers if you will, about making sure you had a guide for how many man hours you should have per day based upon sales.
There is so much more money than what gets placed in our pockets that goes towards having a person on staff.
I also think that they see themselves as a "Retailer" ie.. "Retailer of the Century" more so than any type of healthcare. Their ads in the past few years reflect this change, "You'll see We're Better" and their sponsoring of makeover type shows etc... They are focusing on the Fashion aspect of the industry. None of the ads talk about their one hour service, or the technology (except their Scotchguard ARC which is promoted for fashion more than function).
There are probably extra staffing in the various areas as they continue to "merge" the companies together. People can work at LC 2 days, the SGH one, and Sears the other 2 days...
Streamlining upper management, don't need to have all the duplication in buyers/real estate/planogram/regional managers/etc...
Some of the changes will be good for them.. and some can be good for us..
Cassandra