Scratch coating scam??

[tracey0808]

It is a matter of warranty and it isn't. If a client has to repeatedly come back that is a problem.

My thought exactly!

[Chris Ryser]

Hard coats can be made as hard as you want, but a fine line has to be drawn if they gave to flex with the lens that shrinks and expands with heat and cold.

Tintable hard coats are very soft and scatch easy. So, if you do alot of tinted poly you might see more scratched ones.

Furthermore there is nothing that will not scratch.........you are actually only selling an increased scratch resistance and should be aware of this fact.

[shellrob]

Tracy, it probably is not a scam just an uneducated or unknowledgable optician you dealt with. A lot of those opticians don't know a lick about what they're selling , they are just thrown into the mix and told what to sell. I would just go back and get your new lenses and take all this information with you the next time you purchase glasses.

[Judy Canty]

Actually, choose my provider b/c of close location to my work, they accepted my crummy state insurance, and if I'm honest... I liked the look of their building/store front.

I have gone back and they will replace the lenses. My worry is that if the lab to which they send my Rx is deceitful about their 'coatings', then I will continue to have this same problem even after my one year warranty has ended.

If the lab they are using is scaming them, why would they continue to use them? Everything scratches, including glass lenses. Anti-reflective coatings especially the inexpensive ones are prone to scratching. However the newer most expensive coatings are less likely to scratch and more likely to be covered by a manufacturers warranty. Like anything else in this world, you get what you pay for.

[GOS_Queen]

If you truly feel you have been scammed, you might want to take the matter up with your state's attorney general consumer affairs division.

[Aarlan]

I agree with Chip (Lord have mercy). Scratch resistance is really not a matter of a good coating. Everything scratches. It is a matter of warranty. It should have been sold to you that way, but what the heck, if you can get a new pair of lenses at no charge, what's the beef?

A warrantee does not a good a/r make. The warrantee should be used as a safety net, not a planned replacement. There are some A/Rs that last significantly longer than others, even though they may have similar warrantees. My guess is this person just was sold a subpar coating. If she gets it replaced (under warrantee), and it scratches in a few days/weeks again, where did the warrantee get her? It is just a waste of time and an incovenience for the patient, and may lead her to not purchase the A/R again.

AA

[Chris Ryser]

............................and may lead her to not purchase the A/R again.
AA

Could be one reason why AR strippers are a very popular item these days.

[For-Life]

Could be one reason why AR strippers are a very popular item these days.

yep, see how many places sell the junk AR.

[fjpod]

A warrantee does not a good a/r make.

AA

I never said or implied it did.

[Jim G]

I'll definitely find out if this issue could be crazing. I realize there is no 'scratch proof' coating or lens, but since scratching of this extent has never happened to me before, and I've worn glasses most of my life, I'm certain something is up. Of course the 'something' could simply be crappy quality AR lens, that apparently I've been lucky enough to have avoided until now.

Thanks for the input.

The quality of AR coatings does vary based upon a multitude of reasons but they are just getting better and better. I'd just look at this one as s**t happens and go back for a replacement.

[Aarlan]

I never said or implied it did.

No, but you said if they make her whole by replacing them, "what's her beef". My problem with that is if they sold her junk, and replace it with junk she is still no better off than when she started. She has a bad pair of glasses that they probably won't help her with again (most warrantees only cover one replacement), she's out the money and the all her time and aggravation.
Technically all A/Rs scratch, but the type we use at our office (and some others available) are virtually bulletproof. I abuse my glasses and the coating is absolutely amazing. I stand behind the A/R we use (in terms of scratch resistance) more confidently than most of the non A/R lenses with their scratchcoats
I think we both can agree that next time she should skip the discount places, and the cheap stuff her insurance covers and spend a small amount more to get a pair that will last her a number of years (rather than weeks).

AA

[mhorwitz]

B I N G O :idea:

I have found many people think it is okay to breathe on the lenses to fog them up ... or they use an eyewear cleaner but don't rinse the lenses first.

Rinse the lenses FIRST, even if you use an eyewear cleaner. You need to get the dust/grit OFF the lens surface before you apply the cleaner.

I believe the AR coat is inferior quality. I agree that one should wash lenses with water. But this is really a poor excuse that optical professionals give to customers for inferior products. I personally have a Crizal Ar coating. I often do the breathe thing and then wipe with regular soft facial tissue. I've had the glasses for over two years and I have NO scratches AT ALL on my lenses. Essilor has a superior product.

[mirage2k2]

Technically all A/Rs scratch, but the type we use at our office (and some others available) are virtually bulletproof.

what coatings are they?

[Chris Ryser]

I've had the glasses for over two years and I have NO scratches AT ALL on my lenses. Essilor has a superior product.

and

Technically all A/Rs scratch, but the type we use at our office (and some others available) are virtually bulletproof.

I am getting so tired of hearing and reading the same thing over and over again.
I frankly am starting to believe that some people out there must be on the payroll of Essilor for singing glory to that company.

I looks like nobody seems to know and understand what an AR coating actually is and of what it consist's.

But everybody is singing the ode to Essilor in a full choir.

[Aarlan]

I frankly am starting to believe that some people out there must be on the payroll of Essilor for singing glory to that company.

I looks like nobody seems to know and understand what an AR coating actually is and of what it consist's.

But everybody is singing the ode to Essilor in a full choir.

Relax...
First of all I'm not speaking of Essilor product

Second of all, all the theory and claims that all A/Rs operate on the same principle are nice, but in the real world where we dispense every day and have to put up with the patient disatisfaction when we dispense a less expensive (read cheaper) A/R, WE TEND TO USE WHAT WORKS. my patients don't want to hear that all A/Rs are the same and that they must be an idiot since their lenses scratched. We use one of the brand names that you so despise (not essilor!!) AND WE HAVE NO PROBLEMS...NONE.
I have experimented with multiple smaller labs and their 'in house' coatings but for whatever reason (and I don't care what it is) they didn't last as long. Period.
Now if you would like me to try a specific A/R manufacturer that is not one of the big guys I would be happy to try a lens.. It must be surfaced and coated in their facility... I will put one of their lenses in my glasses and compare it to a lens from the facility where I purchase my lenses and after a few months I will compare them. And they had better stand behind their quality as much as the lab we currently use.
I'll wait for your suggestion.
AA

[Chris Ryser]

.......I will put one of their lenses in my glasses and compare it to a lens from the facility where I purchase my lenses and after a few months I will compare them. And they had better stand behind their quality as much as the lab we currently use.
I'll wait for your suggestion.
AA

That sounds fair................

I am NOT an AR coater, however I do sell supplies to AR coaters and have some idea of what it is all about.

It just irks me that most post's in this forum concerning AR coatings and or progressive lenses are promoting one companies products and belittle just about anything else on the market.

It also bugs me that not one of the non large corporation owned and independent AR coating labs, who for sure are watching these threads does not stand up in their own defense of being able to produce good quality AR coatings.

The latest invention of one of the large corporations, the slick coat that repels dust on AR coated lenses was actually invented by myself in 1990............which is more than 15 years ago...............and has been advertised and sold by my company forever since then, and has been used by many coating labs on every continent.

So what the corporations are doing is re-hashing ideas and products that have been on the market for a long time, while declaring them the latest technology. So where is the novelty of their innovations ?

[spartus]

That sounds fair................

I am NOT an AR coater, however I do sell supplies to AR coaters and have some idea of what it is all about.

It just irks me that most post's in this forum concerning AR coatings and or progressive lenses are promoting one companies products and belittle just about anything else on the market.

It also bugs me that not one of the non large corporation owned and independent AR coating labs, who for sure are watching these threads does not stand up in their own defense of being able to produce good quality AR coatings.

The latest invention of one of the large corporations, the slick coat that repels dust on AR coated lenses was actually invented by myself in 1990............which is more than 15 years ago...............and has been advertised and sold by my company forever since then, and has been used by many coating labs on every continent.

So what the corporations are doing is re-hashing ideas and products that have been on the market for a long time, while declaring them the latest technology. So where is the novelty of their innovations ?

It doesn't need to be novel, it just needs to work. What's with the perpetual axe-grinding, Chris--did these companies take your invention and neglect to pay you?

[rsandr]

and

[/i]
I frankly am starting to believe that some people out there must be on the payroll of Essilor for singing glory to that company.

But everybody is singing the ode to Essilor in a full choir.

Its not really Essilor's fault but the fault of the other suppliers.
They (Essilor) do an extremely good job of puttting details of their products out in the marketplace.
Ask optical outlets the name and properties of Essilor coatings and product ranges. Then compare this with other suppliers.

[QDO1]

Essilor have also consistantly partnered a consistantly good coating with a consistantly good lens offering, at a relativley reasonable price. It is the two together that make the bell ring so loud

As a foot note, it is not possible to buy a essilor coating on a zeiss product (or other similar combinations) in the UK. So if we have a bias in the UK, it is certainly the quality of the whole package (lens and coating) that we consider here in the UK

[shellrob]

I could really care less on who manfucturers what as long as the product is good and they will stand behind it if it's not. Honestly I could do without Essilor too, cause they're becomming as bad as Luxottica.