How to Contact Bruce Bergez

[Golfnorth]

I found this on another site...some guys blog about Great Glasses.
Why don't we all drop him a note to tell him what we think of his business model?

I can honestly say that I do know for a fact that when you are in a Great Glasses location during one of their "so called $100 off sales" it backs up their labs, hence their 5-7 business day turn around turns into 7-10 days. But in most cases of single vision wearing patients without extremely high scripts or high astigmatism, they can cut your lenses into your frame within minutes. Happens daily really! This is true for nearly every location, they all have stock lenses in the store, not 1000's of them, but enough to get by.

Now as far as store hours, it is some what standard for each of their stores to have the same hours of business across the board, although some do very so calling each location would be wise. Mon - Tues 10a-5p Wed, Thurs & Fri 10a-8p. Sat 10a-4p, Sun 1p-4p.

Not sure what else to say about them really, just word of mouth from a friend who works there is all. I hear that they don't have a head office either, that each store is a franchise? Anyone know the truth on that? But my friend in one of the "hill's" stores said the only head office contact was an email address to the founder bruce.bergez@sympatico.ca

[eyemanflying]

Things will catch up with him...let nature take it's course.

[Refractingoptician.com]

post removed

[eyemanflying]

It's hard enough to get opticians to band together for a simple trade show or educational evening. If it wasn't mandatory to obtain CE credits, less than 10% would show up.

Protesting to the COO is fine, but holding back payments on licensing fees would only hurt ourselves since 100% of the College's revenue stream is derived from our fees. The College would then crumble and soon after so would our own profession and existance.

The College certainly has pi##ed away a boat load of OUR money on legal costs with this moron and it has certainly been entertaining, but all on our price of admission. A new Pres is coming shortly, but not soon enough and the timing couldn't be better.

The COO regulates opticians and the profession, but has zero say with business practices and vendor selection. And they don't have the authority to close down an illegal store. I have a better way to solve this, but can't say on this forum.

Lastly, opticians certainly don't need anymore negative press about this idiot...Revenue Canada will certainly take care of him sooner as tax evasion is a criminal offence and punishable with a prision sentence. This seems more fitting anyway.

A word of advice for Mr. Bergez: Don't let go of that soap bar.:hammer:

[Refractingoptician.com]

Protesting to the COO is fine, but holding back payments on licensing fees would only hurt ourselves since 100% of the College's revenue stream is derived from our fees. The College would then crumble and soon after so would our own profession and existance.

The COO regulates opticians and the profession, but has zero say with business practices and vendor selection. And they don't have the authority to close down an illegal store. I have a better way to solve this, but can't say on this forum.

Lastly, opticians certainly don't need anymore negative press about this idiot...Revenue Canada will certainly take care of him sooner as tax evasion is a criminal offence and punishable with a prision sentence. This seems more fitting anyway.

.:hammer:

In My Humble Opinion it would actually help the COO . A Public Awareness Campaign would get put into motion quickly . The cost of that would mean raising fees to sustain what always should have been done any how . And it might make suppliers and associations take heed and tell them we have collectively had enough .

[eyemanflying]

It's a vast group and a big mountain to climb. One thing is for certain, I am not paying anymore fee increases. It's ridiculous and outrageous already. The hefty increase that occurred years ago was suppose to be a 'temporary' one year increase to get the COO back out of the red. The rollback never came and now they have a surplus????

[Refractingoptician.com]

It's a vast group and a big mountain to climb. One thing is for certain, I am not paying anymore fee increases. It's ridiculous and outrageous already. The hefty increase that occurred years ago was suppose to be a 'temporary' one year increase to get the COO back out of the red. The rollback never came and now they have a surplus????

If they have a surplus then they should be spending it on Public Awareness advertising . Their purpose is to protect the public so how is that happening when they don't have a Public Awareness Campaign ?

[eyemanflying]

They used to have one. I remember seeing giant ads in major newspapers and I think there was one tv ad saying 'your Rx is yours, make sure you ask for it'. This was simply aimed against the OD's which in my opinion was really dumb. It only worsened the relationship between the two O's and the general public really don't give a hoot about our politics and problems. When other professions have a pi$#ing in the wind contest, nobody ever gives a damn except for the people involved.

Another misuse of college funds is those two idiot females (now only one) that would travel all over hell's half acre on our money and have the nerve to call it networking amongst other professional groups. Give me a break.

[godin33]

Question, who supplies Great Glasses with their inventory?? Frames, Lenses etc. I know for a fact that the great glasses here in our town LOVES the AO Compact (fit at 13 fit at 30, doesn't seem to matter)
I'm just wondering if we could put a bit of pressure on the companies supplying Great Glasses.

[optical maven]

When this all started I found out that Cooper supplied most of the contact lenses to Great Glasses and I stopped using them. Boycott the lenses, spectacle or CL, and let your supplier know why you are doing that. I've struck AO off my specs list. Anyone know of any others?

[Golfnorth]

When this all started I found out that Cooper supplied most of the contact lenses to Great Glasses and I stopped using them. Boycott the lenses, spectacle or CL, and let your supplier know why you are doing that. I've struck AO off my specs list. Anyone know of any others?

Great Glasses gets alot of frames from CS Optical.

Regards,
Golfnorth

[opti-refractonator]

Do you guys think that if we set up a day to picket (strike) outside his stores for a day, it would raise awareness and drive the message home?

I think thay we should set up one day every month and have friends and family (whoever is avialable) of opticians to strike outside his store.

I think that if we do this a couple of times, we would probably make the newspaper. On the day of the strikes, many customers of GG would be shocked to find out what he has been up to.

[optical maven]

I don't think the public cares. They'll ask why our colleges don't shut them down if they are not allowed to do what they are doing. The legal process is almost completed and we will see what happens after they are found guilty with no further appeals. The other interesting point is that they are in violation of the controlled acts of dispensing and prescibing. There are 13 controlled acts in the RHPA. The act does not differentiate between the importance any of these acts. That is, the controlled act of scaling teeth is no different than the controlled act of probing below the dermis or the controlled act of dispensing glasses. So if the fine is inconsequetial for Great Glasses, then this has ramifications for the whole act.

[eyemanflying]

I don't think the public cares. They'll ask why our colleges don't shut them down if they are not allowed to do what they are doing. The legal process is almost completed and we will see what happens after they are found guilty with no further appeals. The other interesting point is that they are in violation of the controlled acts of dispensing and prescibing. There are 13 controlled acts in the RHPA. The act does not differentiate between the importance any of these acts. That is, the controlled act of scaling teeth is no different than the controlled act of probing below the dermis or the controlled act of dispensing glasses. So if the fine is inconsequetial for Great Glasses, then this has ramifications for the whole act.

Exactly my point from an earlier post. Except for us pros, nobody else could give a crap. If you can stomach it, walk into a GG store and see what's on the boards, ask for a quote, see what progressive lens brands they use and promote...This will certainly let us know which companies they are utilizing. Most sales reps are skunks and ofcourse they will plead their ignorance when this all gets out and the reputable opticians and OD's cease future purchases. Stop buying from these reps and hit them where it hurts the most - their pockets! We indirectly sign their paychecks!:hammer:

[Refractingoptician.com]

..

[Refractingoptician.com]

Protesting to the COO is fine, but holding back payments on licensing fees would only hurt ourselves since 100% of the College's revenue stream is derived from our fees. The College would then crumble and soon after so would our own profession and existance.

The College certainly has pi##ed away a boat load of OUR money on legal costs with this moron and it has certainly been entertaining, but all on our price of admission. A new Pres is coming shortly, but not soon enough and the timing couldn't be better.

The COO regulates opticians and the profession, but has zero say with business practices and vendor selection. And they don't have the authority to close down an illegal store.


.:hammer:

In My Humble Opinion :

That is exactly why we should hold back the fees & why we should send our own badges back . Keep your license on the wall but start by sending the badges back . We are supposed to be self regulating . Holding back the fees & sending back the badges is the only way we have of regulating our regulator .

Because we are self regulating , if the regulator does not see the errors then we need to point it out . They won't crumble . They will listen change and adapt then fees will continue and they will return the badges .

Fees may have to be raised to cover Public awareness . But that is easy to counteract. Every second year, alternating amongst us so that it is a continuous stream of income , we do not do Continuing education . Instead that same money that we would have paid out will go to Public Awareness advertising . Yes we still pay but it is the same dollars but now redirected to a different form of Continuing Education .

They have an obligation to protect the public and they are not doing that when they knowingly and willingly let the public walk into those stores without continually informing the public of the status of those stores and the lack of licensed opticians on the floor .

The College can not claim ignorance of what is going on and ignore their duty to the public . The College may not be able to close a store down but that does not discharge their self proclaimed mission in life ... protect the public .

The court actions are only one part of what is required to discharge their duties .

In my opinion , they must be proactive on Public Awareness . Not sharing the knowledge they possess in this matter while the public is still being served by unauthorized people is simply wrong . They are contributing to it and allowing the public to go there . That is the essence of the lost profit scene. Their actions (inaction is an action in itself ) are in fact causing us to lose business and they made this direct choice against us when they fail to protect the public by every means available to them .

Public Awareness.

If a doctor knew that you had glaucoma but did nothnig about it and you lost your sight and could not work then you would have no revenue and you would sue the doctor for lost income amongst other things .

Why is this any different ?

[eyemanflying]

Good point.

[Refractingoptician.com]

''

[Refractingoptician.com]

Protecting the public is not an intermittent responsibility ,,, it is a continual daily comitment and obligation . One court case or one journalist's front page story in a newspaper doesn't end the responsibility.

[eyemanflying]

Hey , you can't just say "good point" that is only two words in response to bunches of words .

Ok, good points.;)

[eyemanflying]

Protecting the public is not an intermittent responsibility ,,, it is a continual daily comitment and obligation . One court case or one journalist's front page story in a newspaper doesn't end the responsibility.

You have two choices:

1. Build the bandwagon. There should be no problem filling it.

2. Or, run for either President or at least a spot on their member committee.

3. Or, simply attend a meeting and voice your opinion and frustration in person. This will certainly get their attention.

[godin33]

I got this information from a little birdy...........
Suppliers for Great Glasses.
What do you think? Do we confront these suppliers?........or just stop buying from them?

Stock Lenses - Centennial Optical in Toronto
Contact Lenses - Optik K & R

Labs - I'N'Vision & Holland Optical

Frames- Wei Mei Optical (designers)
CS Optical
Global Eyewear (designers)
Go Getr
Optika
On Guard (Safety)
Looky (fake designers)
Fashion Excellence
Keideiso
Eyetical
Vision Optical
Optik K & R
My Optix
Carlos
Unitech

Just to name a few

Contact Lens Solution - Alcan

Cleaning Cloths & Bottles - Lens Cleaner Depot

Printer for ADs - Design Beyond Words

Business Cards - Design Beyond Words

Website Host - Zing Media

[eyemanflying]

I would stop supporting these companies by not purchasing from them further. Then explain to the rep or owner the decision for your actions. Further explain how a group of reputable, ethical opticians and OD's are spreading the word. They will quickly rethink their position in supplying GG. The amount of business they would lose from GG is probably less than 2% compared to the loss of potentially more than hundreds of accounts.

[Refractingoptician.com]

Don't forget Eyelogic ; the edger company ; the landlords; the Ontario government; and COO . It takes all of them to make it possible . Each of them supplies something to this operation.

[eyemanflying]

A letter needs to be drafted and distributed to each and every optical store and OD in Ontario explaining the situation and listing each vendor. There may be legal ramnifications though as it is borderline defamation of character and reputatuion. This would definitely cause a disruption and raise an eyebrow.