Anyone want to offer their thoughts on this? http://nypost.com/2015/06/24/warby-p...er-schoolkids/
Anyone want to offer their thoughts on this? http://nypost.com/2015/06/24/warby-p...er-schoolkids/
Always kids and puppies. Puppies will be next.
...and kids today definitely know their Jack Kerouac characters...
I personally think this is a waste of money by New York. These disadvantaged kids are supposedly already covered for vision by their insurance (most likely medicaid) plans. Why not use the benefit they are already paying an insurance company for? They could have very easily worked with the NY Optometric Association to provide eyewear in mobile clinics or bussed the children to a local partnering OD. Help build and promote small businesses, and still served the patients in need.
"Some believe in destiny, and some believe in fate. But I believe that happiness is something we create."-Something More by Sugarland
Details in the article are very sketchy. Who is doing the exams? Who is dispensing? Are they Rxing from a screening or a comprehensive exam? Under Obamacare, every child is entitled to a vision exam and glasses.
Just showmanship, marketing, and hooey.
WP becomes the New York new Santa
Thousands of city schoolkids will be getting a hipster essential — Warby Parker eyeglasses — under a new program Mayor de Blasio announced Wednesday in East Harlem.The 130 community schools will now offer no-cost eye exams and free specs to students who need them, a number the city puts at about 20,000 over the next four years.
The exams will cost taxpayers $10 million. But Warby Parker is picking up the tab for the frames and prescription
How nice for all of them and WP becomes the New York new Santa
These kind of actions tend to create a cynical respons, at least with me. Of course it is great for the kids and their parents, they don't care where the glasses com from. I just get an itchy feeling when companies disguise marketing as charity.
How can there be negative charity work?
They already do this with buy a pair donate a pair; they just teamed up with kids to donate frames that cost them a few dollars and the same for lenses.Sounds like a winner for all to me.I do enjoy folks making this anything but good.
We do the same thing with a local home for teens with kids who are wards of the state and have eyeglass coverage; I do not want a young lady who already in this situation getting crap glasses.They come in to my store and get to pick from our bargain section anything they want! That is what makes them feel special and if these kids can go to WP as opposed to having glasses made in a prison.
Please don't try and make this a bad thing for anyone but the negative folks of OB.I thought about what we do and how this group thread is trying to make charity work a bad thing!
How much charity work does everyone critical of WP actually do themselves?
Lets take a charity thread and share our own give-back to the communities we live in to give us ideas on how to better the place we live.
Lots.
Difference? I don't hire a company to do my charity work.
BABOLAT always sponsors tennis clinics for the yunguns.....babolat signs,banners, products,clothing ect everywhere
very wise marketing ploy,
brainwash them when they are young-heck i LOVE my babolat rackets(i own about fifteen of them)
forgot to ad...that i always get them strung w/babolat barbwire string too!
masterful marketing wp!!
If the math is right, the exams will avg $500 each. $10,000,000 divided by 20,000 = $500. Something does not sound right...
yeah......if you believe everything you read.....I've got a Bridge in Brooklyn that's for sale.
What is the issue with seeing their participation here as primarily genuine?Originally Posted by Dirk
Probably as genuine as their interest in helping people see better.
There is a difference between impact and intent.
The impact is great, providing kids with cool eyewear. No one would be against that. The intent is a calculated expansionist move by a corporation to create a new group of dependent consumers, while hurting their competitors. What about those small optical businesses who could have provided cheap or insurance eyewear for these children? How long do you think you will last when WP or any other chain becomes your neighbour and starts to give away free eyewear? Why doesn`t WP selflessly work together with other optical businesses to help these children? WP wants to kill of the competition, create loyal followers and gain the moral high ground. I have no problem with smart business strategies but they use charity as a weapon, as so many before them in human history. I call that unethical.
Real charity is only possible between individual people and when you don`t want something in return except the nice feeling you get from helping someone less fortunate.
How much charity work do you personally do a week and how much money do you also contribute? I put forth many hours per week and mucho dollars per year; we live a charitable life and would never say anything with an impact can be a bad thing! How can you actually say what you saying when you have never seen the NYC schools?
These kids come from the lowest starting point in the US financially and academically yet you think this is brainwashing them to be loyal soldiers?
I look forward to your resume on charity work; I will be glad to provide mine.
When large or rich, or both, corporations get involved .....................
Charity of any kind is a human quality that expects no return of any kind for the giving, of whatever that has been given to the needy.
The highest level of charity giving is done by someone who does it on a anonymous basis for their own satisfaction, without the ringing of all the church bells.
When large or rich, or both, corporations get involved into public charities with the use of all the drums, trumpets and whistles available. they always expect a publicity return for the Dollars invested.
WP has already been successful with the give away of frames, and will continue doing so in order to keep the charitable reputation,when a willing purchaser will make them an offer, that will even put the charitable donations back into their coffers.
Why do you make it about yourself? I wasn`t talking about you, so you should not be offended. I don`t care how much money you contribute to charity and how much recognition you want for that. I will certainly not get involved in a '' mine is bigger than yours" contest.
I was criticizing the marketing policy of a large corporation. I have already said that the impact is great but that I don`t trust the intent. If you do not agree with me then try to convince me that their actions are genuine.
This thread isn`t about you or me, Craig. So don`t make it personal.
Thank you Dirk for getting it.
I have no trouble with charity. I applaud everyone's efforts in helping our communities. If there was no eye coverage for these kids, then I would see why the city needed to strike a deal. I am not sure if they plan on using a mobile testing system to go to the schools, but I have found for many of the folks who are on public assistance, that transportation is a huge issue. Not only having the ability, its the parents having/wanting to take the time to get their children there.
As a provider who works with a large percentage of folks on aid, it really is frustrating to hear that we some must put out a product that is inferior to Warby Parker. I am not sure if you have worked with their frames or not, but many opticians have found them to be brittle. I can provide the same quality, if not better frame, and lenses within the medicaid guidelines. Sure, they won't be as great as a frame that wholesales in the 3 digit and higher brackets, but it is economical and of good value.
New York's risk based system means that not all orders will need to be manufactured though the prison system. Certainly most ACA plans won't. They can be done by the provider or through the typical insurance labs. Why not give the smaller independent office a chance to provide these services? As Dirk stated, this to me is a ploy for WP to come in and flex their muscle, get lots of information about many patients and their families to market towards, and basically grabbing a market while stomping on their competition.
I loved working with the Gift of Sight (now OneSight) program when I was with Lux. However, even I saw through the charitable aspect for the tax benefits, and the marketing of goodwill towards the company the program was. That doesn't mean it wasn't a worthwhile endeavor, however at the the time the focus was on developing countries, and urban US areas before it was mandated that all children have vision benefits.
Personally, I would be a bigger supporter of an effort to help the parents of these children. If the parents could actually operate at their maximum potential because they weren't struggling to read.. imagine how much easier it would be for them to better themselves. They might be able to read that child a story. They could get promotions, or complete the applications for a better job. It could be just as impactful as it would be for the children.
"Some believe in destiny, and some believe in fate. But I believe that happiness is something we create."-Something More by Sugarland
Corrective Lenses Statistics .............
I found this interesting very high ranking site (Alexa in the USA 50,463)by accident and it should be seen by a lot more people, specially on OptiBoard :
Statistic Verification Source: National Eye Institute, Glasses Crafter Research Date: October 9th, 2014 A corrective lens is a lens worn in front of the eye, mainly used to treat myopia, hyperopia, astigmatism, and presbyopia. Glasses or "spectacles" are worn on the face a short distance in front of the eye. Contact lenses are worn directly on the surface of the eye. Intraocular lenses are surgically implanted most commonly after cataract removal, but recently for purely refractive purposes. Myopia (near-sightedness) requires a divergent lens, whereas hyperopia (far-sightedness) requires convergent lens. Corrective lenses are typically prescribed by an ophthalmologist or an optometrist.
Corrective Lens Use Statistics Total percentage of Americans that use some form of corrective lens 75% Total amount of Americans that use some form of corrective lens 225 million Percent who wear glasses 64 % Percent who wear contact lenses 11 % Contact Lens Statistics Number of people globally who ear contact lenses 125 million Number of Americans who wear contact lenses 38 million Annual worldwide revenue from contact lens sales $6.1 billion US annual revenue from contact lens sales $2.1 billion Average age of contact lens wearers 31 years Percent of wearers who are female 67 % Eye Vision Statistics Percent of Americans who are near-sighted 30 % Percent of Americans who are far-sighted 60 % Number of Americans age 40 and older who have cataracts 22 million Estimate annual treatment costs for cataracts $6.8 billion Eye Glasses and Contact Lens Industry Statistics Number of eye glasses and contact lens stores in the U.S. 7,608 Number of people employed by the corrective lens store industry 73,261 Estimate worldwide annual revenue from contact lens sales in 2015 $15 billion
statistics on glasses wearing ? how many people wear glasses in the us ? how many people wear contact
source: --------> http://www.statisticbrain.com/correc...ses-statistics
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks