Free form single vision: a process, or a design, or both?

[drk]

I'm trying to decide how to conceptualize and price FFSV.

On the one hand, it's a design. Essilor has theirs. Zeiss has theirs. Shamir has theirs. They're not different than a free-form PAL design. Therefore each lens should be priced according to its cost.

On the other hand, it's a process. I think (and I could be wrong) that labs can freeform any SV Rx. I don't know if that's true. And the lens design would be "house" or "generic". Would that be considered an "add-on" type of cost? Just, say, normal SV base price plus and upcharge for the higher process?

[optical24/7]

Therefore each lens should be priced according to its cost.

I think you answered your own question. Unless things have changed the last couple of years, there were cyl and prism limitations on FF’s. Also, for labs to offer FF’s, they not only need a FF generator, they also need the software to run it. I don’t know of labs that have design “ in house” abilities so they must pay for lens designs from IOT, E, Z, ect.

[ChrisBowers]

A little history (because I’m old) … Back in the seventies we had one charge if we could fill an SV Rx with stock lens and another if we had to surface. Spheres were less expensive, and cylinders increasing price on their magnitude. I don’t remember exactly when, but we “baked” lens price into design with few exceptions. Entering the era of free form design labs ran digital free form along with traditional Toric surfacing. As the digital cost for ROI started falling as the newer cost fell due to machine deprecation, we saw the opportunity to reduce head count with newer automations. From consumable and depreciation, it costs the same to produce an SV, Atoric SV or and freeform pal lens in a digital world. Lens design manufactures saw a niche by changing SV lenses into Atoric surfaces under the guise of thinner and better optics all the while earning more on click fees to the lab. Labs in turn did the same to their customers. So, the question is are optics and cosmetics worth the uptick to the customer? I can tell you that in most cases the majority of the asphericity ends up in the edger buck. I do think that there is excellent value for Wraps and extreme Rx’s. I do not think one shoe fits all in the optical world. I will learn from others as to the acuity performance.

Chris

[Uncle Fester]

I agree with Chris' assessment (and I'm old too) as we seem to have gone from empirical evidence sponsored and promoted by the big boy(s;), to 20/20 happy, first order aberration improvements and blue light harm to today's world, if you get my drift.

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but are there any independent double blind mask studies using these different processes/designs out there?

How much would one cost?

Or do we want to know???

I think Chris Ryser would approve of this post.

[wmcdonald]

drk, if you begin to price each item separately it can get confusing. Most establish a price for SV in Rx ranges, and freeform would be an additional price. You would need to consider your local market.

[drk]

That's good advice, and ultimately what made the most sense: base price for SV lens design, and then an upcharge for "digital" design.

Although there are different price levels for the digital upgrade! Can't win. But we chose a basic digital upgrade price, and a P.O.W.-friendly one for wrapped sunwear.

[Uncle Fester]

That's good advice, and ultimately what made the most sense: base price for SV lens design, and then an upcharge for "digital" design.

Although there are different price levels for the digital upgrade! Can't win. But we chose a basic digital upgrade price, and a P.O.W.-friendly one for wrapped sunwear.

Will you back this with a money back guarantee of improved vision at the time of sale?

Or does a word salad post dispensing explanation by your poor optician come into effect.

I know I found myself in this uncomfortable situation many times.

Over the decades when the "New and Improved Tide so now your whites are whiter than ever!" came about and before we consummated the sale I would tell them upfront that this should make things better but there is no refund of the up-charge if it does not. When it worked it was bliss for both of us. If it didn't we moved on.

This is also why I would get in trouble for not upgrading when there is no complaint on current comfortable acuity as I was damned if I did and damned if I didn't. But I preferred damned if I did rather than face the wrath of the back office if I had to refund quarrelsome patients.

[wmcdonald]

Too many choices will do nothing but confuse. Select the appropriate FF and price it accordingly. It will be much simpler to have a single FF upcharge.

[drk]

Yeah, I don't try to upsell existing patients TOO much. I instead hit the new patients and I don't make it much of an option. It's a pretty easy thing to get buy in.

Wm, I agree simplicity is best. We do most of our FFSV in opthalmic frames, so the typical ones work: Essilor Eyezen, Shamir Spectrum, etc. It's the Auto II and III that provide POW that gets pricier and that only applies to sunwear. I can't eat that.

Although VCPs tend to level out these FFSVs into one category, so we all suffer.

[Loki]

I think we have about 10 different options for progressives, single vision, and occupationals. And by that I mean we have about ten different options for each type. Lots of range for whatever the patient requires, and lots of different prices to fit their budget.

[DanLiv]

We do most of our FFSV in ophthalmic frames, so the typical ones work: Essilor Eyezen, Shamir Spectrum, etc. It's the Auto II and III that provide POW that gets pricier and that only applies to sunwear. I can't eat that.

I use a variety of Spectrum, Eyezen, and Auto 2 POW, my costs on those FFSV are 40-60% higher than traditional SV, I split the difference and charge a flat 50% more. In clear lenses, the Attitude POW is a whopping 115% more, but very few ever need it and the occasional one I do eat and just figure a few of those Spectrums just paid for that Attitude. Not worth hurting my or my customer's brain over.

In sunwear I'm pleased that my cost for Auto 2 AND 3 Attitude poly polarized is only 10% higher than traditional poly polarized, easily covered by my polarized fee. I use Attitude in polarized any time it's called for without having to think about it. Drk, check your polarized cost differences and see if they really are as significant as they are in clear. I find polarized is already so expensive in any case that the upgrade is very small.

[drk]

Wow. Good stuff.

So, this is a bit tangential, but you're big into polar poly most of the time for sunwear?

[DanLiv]

Yup poly polar with xperio, or KBco mirrored poly polar blanks with backside AR for every sun.