More AR

[drk]

We do about 35% AR. We use a "better" AR that is moderate in price and quality. (Not that "best" stuff.)

The thought occurred to me that 65% of folks aren't getting AR. The natural thought was that I could supply a "good" AR for about 40% less and perhaps increase utilization.

Then the thought occurred to me that if you essentially "discount" for ~50% off, you have to do twice the volume to get back to where you started. In our case that would be ~75% AR.

So, if I used the plan, twice as many people MAY get AR, but I'd take a substantial risk of getting hit financially if the plan didn't work.

Enter: the package deal. Everyone gets AR included. 100%, so I'd be ahead financially, everyone would enjoy AR, and life would be good.

But...

1. I can't do package deals easily because vision care plans are a la carte in design
2. 100% AR will include kids, and other monsters that could make me rue the day that I sold a higher-maintenance lens.

My conclusion? It's better to offer a moderate quality to those who will, than to take financial risk and satisfaction risk on those that won't.

Interestingly, this thought process seems to be "item-specific". I think I could use polycarbonate on nearly everyone without the downside.

Thoughts?

[For-Life]

In my father's practice did 80.23% AR in 2009 and it is only Crizal Forte or Avance. So I am not sure it is a price thing.

The question is, what value do your consumers perceive that AR adds to the product? If they believe it is of little value, they will not pay that much for it or not get it at all. If they perceive it of greater value, then your numbers will go up.

Now, you have to figure out what you think the value of it is. If you believe that every consumer should have AR, then you have to change your approach.

I believe the following reasons are the main reasons why AR sales are so low:
- Consumer not being offered the product. This could be due to the Optician not believing the consumer can afford it or is willing to spend it. Still, does not matter. We do not know what they can afford or are willing to spend. What we can do is list the benefits of the product and then give them the opporunity to make the decision. "No" is an acceptable answer. But, you have to ask them before they say no.

- Not communicating the benefits of the product. Too many Opticians ask the consumer "do you want AR?" The consumer will most likely say no. It sounds like a tacky add on, and thus they do not get it. A lot of Opticians only show the cosmetic reasons behind getting the coating, which the consumer may not care about. There are benefits visually. Present them.

In my classes, I teach the idea of Features, Advantages, Benefits. A feature is the AR coating. The advantage is that it allows 99.6% light transmission versus 90% without the coating. Consumers do not care about the Feature or Advantage. They care about the Benefit. The benefit is that it provides much clearer vision.

Keep in mind something. What is the percentage of consumers who own a HD tv? These people care about clearer images.


- Consumer is under the idea that AR crazes, peels, scratches and is hard to clean. If you sell a lower quality coating, then you are encouraging these ideas. A consumer should not have to return to your store to get the coating replaced. If they do, the perception of the product will be poor.

[jefe]

The W**Marts around here do that -- and they do very well. But I try to offer options; some want the most basic set-ups, some want something different. It takes a little longer to do it that way, so it's not the best approach for everyone.

[Jana Lewis]

My thoughts on A/R has always been: Use the very best or none at all. It's not worth the headache.

This approach has served me well for years.

[optilady1]

Keep in mind something. What is the percentage of consumers who own a HD tv? These people care about clearer images.
.

What a completely true statement. I'm totally stealing this from you and using it with my patients. :) But it is true, and I think this is where the 'we need good salesmen' aspect of opticianry comes into play. While having all lenses automatically come with a/r is one way to increase sales, telling patients that they will recieve there clearest vision with one product verses another will more than likely increase sales. But you have to tell them they are doing a disservice by not purchasing.
As a side note, I say cheap a/r is worse than no a/r.

[NeGlassesGirl27]

My thoughts on A/R has always been: Use the very best or none at all. It's not worth the headache.

This approach has served me well for years.

BINGO! Why GIVE them options? It's like getting your oil changed. Good, better, best and guess what? You want the best, you'll have to pay for it just like in ANY industry. Why give someone a crap product when they'll complain, they'll tell their friends and family and probably not come back to the office. We have 3 different "levels" of AR and guess which one I use? I always use the highest level because that's the best quality and best "clear images" you can get. VERY rarely will someone not get AR coating..at least when I am helping them. I have found that you give patients too many options and their brain shuts down, as it should. They don't know the difference between this, this and that so us as Opticians should guide them to the BEST lenses out there. I also have done this since I've been in Optical and it works!

[blinkvelo]

For-Life is on the Money. If you think you can only sell by discounting rethink how you are help your Patients or move to a discount business plan.
You and your staff need the confidence to present what the patent needs and you will succeed with more No Glare (AR).
Keep this in mind about only offering the 'best'. 5 years ago a 32" HD TV was about $3000. You can go buy a 'Better" (more features and better picture for maybe $700. No Glare has changed in the same way. There are many quality House AR's that run on with many of the same processes as the premium. a Two tier approach is proving to capture the highest percentage of No Glare.
Ask your Reps for Consulting on No Glare sales and training. There are many free resources from the Brands and labs happy to help. Value sells at any price point. What Value do you want to offer?

[drk]

Good discussion. Thanks all.

It may well come down to what market position you're in. If you're a cheapy place, having cheap AR included can be a major plus, because you're supposedly giving them a better-than-basic lens for a low cost. Exceeds expectations.

If you're a higher-end place (as most here are), then the product has to perform flawlessly. Expectations are not that you have decent basic products, but that your product line is "better quality".

[NCspecs]

In my father's practice did 80.23% AR in 2009 and it is only Crizal Forte or Avance. So I am not sure it is a price thing.

The question is, what value do your consumers perceive that AR adds to the product? If they believe it is of little value, they will not pay that much for it or not get it at all. If they perceive it of greater value, then your numbers will go up.

Now, you have to figure out what you think the value of it is. If you believe that every consumer should have AR, then you have to change your approach.

I believe the following reasons are the main reasons why AR sales are so low:
- Consumer not being offered the product. This could be due to the Optician not believing the consumer can afford it or is willing to spend it. Still, does not matter. We do not know what they can afford or are willing to spend. What we can do is list the benefits of the product and then give them the opporunity to make the decision. "No" is an acceptable answer. But, you have to ask them before they say no.

- Not communicating the benefits of the product. Too many Opticians ask the consumer "do you want AR?" The consumer will most likely say no. It sounds like a tacky add on, and thus they do not get it. A lot of Opticians only show the cosmetic reasons behind getting the coating, which the consumer may not care about. There are benefits visually. Present them.

In my classes, I teach the idea of Features, Advantages, Benefits. A feature is the AR coating. The advantage is that it allows 99.6% light transmission versus 90% without the coating. Consumers do not care about the Feature or Advantage. They care about the Benefit. The benefit is that it provides much clearer vision.

Keep in mind something. What is the percentage of consumers who own a HD tv? These people care about clearer images.


- Consumer is under the idea that AR crazes, peels, scratches and is hard to clean. If you sell a lower quality coating, then you are encouraging these ideas. A consumer should not have to return to your store to get the coating replaced. If they do, the perception of the product will be poor.

+1

Our Office does nearly 80% A/R regularly. Avance all the way. We do a lot of Crizal sun as well.

[Happylady]

DRK, do you at least offer the best? I find that if the difference is explained that most people want the best. And if they don't at least you offered it.

[vcom]

I've seen many industry reports that show in Europe and Asia greater than 90% of eyeglasses dispensed have AR, yet in the North American market it's only around 30%. So riddle me this.. Who is responsible? The patient or the salesperson?

[opticianbart]

I've seen many industry reports that show in Europe and Asia greater than 90% of eyeglasses dispensed have AR, yet in the North American market it's only around 30%. So riddle me this.. Who is responsible? The patient or the salesperson?

in america - the patient
everywhere else - the salesperson
and that's why the difference.

Also I wanted to add my two cents on this discussion. When the patient says "Do I have to get A/R?" I've been known to tell them "No, but you don't have to brush your teeth either, but you still should!"

[Chris Ryser]

Keep this in mind about only offering the 'best'. 5 years ago a 32" HD TV was about $3000. You can go buy a 'Better" (more features and better picture for maybe $700. No Glare has changed in the same way. There are many quality House AR's that run on with many of the same processes as the premium. a Two tier approach is proving to capture the highest percentage of No Glare.

The discussion is the same every time, and is run by mostly the same people whenever it comes up on OB. without any of them ever explaining why a higher class Ar coating is better than others.

The brand mostly mentioned are the Essilor brands which still seem to enjoy just about very OB members hart.................or maybe commisssion wallet ?

There is nobody in this world who likes to be a second fiddle player and be called a such. In all these years the trade sevrets have spilled over into other areas of the business, and as "binkvelo" says others have picked up the techniques to make equivalent AR coatings.

So either OB members are backwards by always claiming the same old thing, or to stubborn to admit and realize that others have jumped on the more modern AR wagon that supplies what they call quality products.

[For-Life]

The discussion is the same every time, and is run by mostly the same people whenever it comes up on OB. without any of them ever explaining why a higher class Ar coating is better than others.

The brand mostly mentioned are the Essilor brands which still seem to enjoy just about very OB members hart.................or maybe commisssion wallet ?

There is nobody in this world who likes to be a second fiddle player and be called a such. In all these years the trade sevrets have spilled over into other areas of the business, and as "binkvelo" says others have picked up the techniques to make equivalent AR coatings.

So either OB members are backwards by always claiming the same old thing, or to stubborn to admit and realize that others have jumped on the more modern AR wagon that supplies what they call quality products.

Chris, we always explain why a higher class AR is better, and you unconsciously agree with us.

How many times have you told us the demand for your AR Stripper? We do not experience the same demand.

That says it all.

[AngeHamm]

We too are an 80%+ AR office, and nearly all of the product we sell is of the Crizal Avance, Viso XC+, Teflon Elite, Endura EZ and PureCoat range.

Our doctors write "AR recommended" on all of their RX forms. Patients come out of the exam room having already heard the optical benefits of AR lenses, and it only falls to us to close the deal and work out the specifics. By the time our patients have heard the benefits of AR lenses from their doctor and their optician (both of whom are using much of the same language) they don't mind the cost one bit. Ditto for photochromics, though at a lower percentage.

[kcount]

OK, I'll ask the dumb question. Why do you give your patient a choice of ar's? Your the professional, you should give them the product that would best suit their needs. I have one price for AR. I use three different products non of which are Crizal/Alize based. Your patient is not the expert, you are. They didn't come to you for your good looks and decor. They came to you for your expertise.

[For-Life]

With us, offering the best came down to one simple word... Reputation.

I would rather have the reputation of being more expensive than selling a product that people were not happy with. Like I said before, I find crazing in a lens unacceptable. I will take the odd one a year, but am still not happy with it.

It has worked. As others sold the other products, we got people coming to see us.

[For-Life]

Oh, and just because posters here have mentioned Essilor, it does not mean Essilor has the only good coatings. I do not think anyone is saying that. Unfortunately, because we mention a brand, we are tortured as being brainwashed by some posters. Unfortunately, some posters do not want to admit to facts sometimes, and in this case, there is a difference between the low end, mid end and high end coatings.

[Striderswife]

I'm the only Optician in a two-doctor practice, and my rate is about 80% A/R. When I order stock prism lenses, I only order them with A/R, so there's really not any choice (unless the patient/parent wants to wait a week for lenses with distracting glare--no brainer!). I don't have any way to quickly produce numbers, but for kiddos' glasses, I'm at or near 100%. This is something I'm pretty passionate about, and I educate the patient about its benefits so they feel they're making a good decision.

I offer three tiers of A/R: Viso, Viso XC, and Viso XC+ (is that just rebranded Crizal? I really don't know. Don't care, because it's a good product). For random stuff, I can get Sharpview on just about anything, but I don't advertise it. I tell people there are cheaper coatings out there, but I choose not to deal with them, because they are just that: "cheaper."

I think people appreciate the education, and they like having choices and feeling like they have control of their options. I think my last 20% is mostly sunwear (I don't do a whole lot of Crizal Sun, but I guess I could do more), and people who have been disappointed with A/R in the past. I always present the benefits, but I will not get pushy with a patient if they don't want it.

[drk]

Well, here's what I think I know.

We can offer Zeiss ET for a basic price, and our lab is particularly good at coating, so it's very good.

We have been able to offer something called Zeiss ET "Plus" which is using the lenses' original substrate, adding the stack, and adding the hydrophobic coat. We like this a lot.

With VCPs, due to the minimal difference in member cost, we go "all the way" with the Zeiss Carat Advantage.

[uncut]

@OP drk:

I have found there is nothing like bringing on a tearing episode more quickly than an edge-polished, non-CR39 index Flat-top bifocal, without an AR. I usually refit them with an AR coated, non edge-polished product for visual comfort. Therefore, almost all I dispense is AR coated, and I default to the best coatings I can get on the product. A cheap AR can hurt you because the wearer will associate the failed coating with your product and that can ruin your reputation. Besides, on the higher index lenses....clarity level, and reflex color/quality is visibly apparent, and demonstratable to your clients.

[For-Life]

I will tell you something. If you can find a coating just as durable as the ones discussed for half the price, then awesome. But make sure it is easy to clean. When the biggest complaint against AR is cleanability, then the population is telling you something.

[Happylady]

I tried the Sharpview on a pair of my husband's glasses and it was horrible. It was a pain to clean and scratched very easily. I really don't have a lot of choice of ARs, the place I work uses an Essilor lab for 95% of it's work. I have no choice in this matter. I know Essilor is not popular around here but I don't make the rules where I work.

I would love to be able to get Zeiss Purecoat or the newer Hoya AR but it's not going to happen. I have used the Zeiss Carat and the Hoya High Vision in the past and they are good but not nearly as good as Crizal Avance long term. I don't know how their newer ARs compare.

I do think the Crizal Avance is way too expensive but it is really really good. Everyone is happy with it even after a couple of years.

[kcount]

... Zeiss Purecoat or the newer Hoya AR but it's not going to happen. I have used the Zeiss Carat and the Hoya High Vision in the past and they are good but not nearly as good as Crizal Avance long term. I don't know how their newer ARs compare.

I do think the Crizal Avance is way too expensive but it is really really good. Everyone is happy with it even after a couple of years.

I tried the Purecoat. Horrible!

[kcount]

I will tell you something. If you can find a coating just as durable as the ones discussed for half the price, then awesome. But make sure it is easy to clean. When the biggest complaint against AR is cleanability, then the population is telling you something.

I agree. Thats also why I dont sell the named brand coatings anymore.