On-line surpasses brick-and-mortar

[rbaker]

Amazon shares rose 20 percent, giving the retailer a larger market capitalization than bricks-and-mortar behemoth Walmart. How long will it take for whatchamacallit.com to beat out whoopiedo eyewear boutique in the mall?

I know there will be room for the niche players to make a few bucks but there are major change in the supply chain in the works. For example, I wonder how long the manufacturers will continue to deal with the "small potatoes" buyer. (We sell in quantities of thousands and you want six measly pieces? Sorry.)

The next five years will be very interesting.

[9520g]

When this happens exam and service fees will go up dramatically. It will be the only way to make money.

[Slim]

More creative ways will come about to keep RX's in house.

[rbaker]

More creative ways will come about to keep RX's in house.

This will possibly be the next issue facing the FTC in the matter of "Concerning Ophthalmic Practice Rules" 16 CFR Part 456 issued in April 1997 (Spectacle Prescription Release Rule.) I strongly suspect that one of the big on-line suspects (or a coalition of them) will lobby to have the mandatory release of PD's included in the Spectacle Prescription Release Rule and also push for more stringent enforcement and penalties for failure to comply.

[Barry Santini]

More creative ways will come about to keep RX's in house.

Going forward thriving business cannot just keep their in-house Rxs.

They'll have to get many people from outside to come in because they want to.

B

[Chris Ryser]

How long will it take for whatchamacallit.com to beat out whoopiedo eyewear boutique

Amazon shares rose 20 percent, giving the retailer a larger market capitalization than bricks-and-mortar behemoth Walmart. How long will it take for whatchamacallit.com to beat out whoopiedo eyewear boutique in the mall?


The next five years will be very interesting.

Sadly enough opticians today have become order takers and receivers, forward the order to their lab who does the job from A to Z. Then they will call the consumer who ordered it to come pick and it up and pay the full retail price as they did forever.

However in previous times, and not prehistoric, the optician would order the frame if not in stock and the uncut lenses, then work these lenses into the frame, tint the lenses and if needed make them UV protective.

However the hype of AR coatings has infected everybody, or almost. To see a little clearer with AR, and possibly the best of them they have to have a lab do the job, so they can make an extra hundred Dollars.

Now that everybody in the optical talks mostly AR (see OptiBoard posts) the traditional retailers are stuck to outsource their jobs.

Labs in general have now taken over the production of and for the retail business.

Their owners, whoever it is can now jump right into the retail sector by means of the internet which is faster than you can blink your eyes.

Maybe it will not be 5 years to develop, maybe we can cut it in half.

[MikeAurelius]

This will possibly be the next issue facing the FTC in the matter of "Concerning Ophthalmic Practice Rules" 16 CFR Part 456 issued in April 1997 (Spectacle Prescription Release Rule.) I strongly suspect that one of the big on-line suspects (or a coalition of them) will lobby to have the mandatory release of PD's included in the Spectacle Prescription Release Rule and also push for more stringent enforcement and penalties for failure to comply.

I've been saying this for at least the past 5 years.

[rbaker]

Here is the text of the existing regulation.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
PART 456--OPHTHALMIC PRACTICE RULES--

Sec. 456.2 Separation of examination and dispensing.

It is an unfair act or practice for an ophthalmologist or optometrist to:

(a) Fail to provide to the patient one copy of the patient's prescription immediately after the eye examination is completed.

Provided: An ophthalmologist or optometrist may refuse to give the patient a copy of the patient's prescription until the patient has paid for the eye examination, but only if that ophthalmologist or optometrist would have required immediate payment from that patient had the examination revealed that no ophthalmic goods were required;

(b) Condition the availability of an eye examination to any person on a requirement that the patient agree to purchase any ophthalmic goods from the ophthalmologist or optometrist;

(c) Charge the patient any fee in addition to the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's examination fee as a condition to releasing the prescription to the patient. Provided: An ophthalmologist or optometrist may charge an additional fee for verifying ophthalmic goods dispensed by another seller when the additional fee is imposed at the time the verification is performed; or

(d) Place on the prescription, or require the patient to sign, or deliver to the patient a form or notice waiving or disclaiming the liability or responsibility of the ophthalmologist or optometrist for the accuracy of the eye examination or the accuracy of the ophthalmic goods and services dispensed by another seller.

Revised as of January 1, 1999]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 16CFR456.2]
[Page 453]