If you have a Readers Digest in your waiting room, you should go get it.
There's an article in there about saving money. Their recommendations? Never buy your eyewear ANYWHERE but online (39dollarglasses.com is mentioned). If your eye doctor won't give you your measurements, find another doctor that will.
Update: Ory found the link:
http://www.rd.com/advice-and-know-ho...e102078-3.html
Begin ranting here:
Last edited by allanon; 10-21-2008 at 12:34 PM.
It's not right, but it was bound to happen. Write, call, email RD and tell them of their mistake, maybe threaten to boycott the magazine would help.
I tell people who are only interested in the bottom line to go to wherever they collect old glasses.
Sift through the box.
Look through & try on each pair
When you find one that you feel you see better through, take it!
If someone asks what you are doing, tell 'em you can't afford new eyewear.
Makes as much sense, I guess!
Barry
Actually had a patient or two rummage through our VOSH donation basket in the office. One was an elderly lady who did not really have money issues...just looking to hit the jackpot. Now we only keep two or three pairs of glasses in there. Maybe we should get a "lock-box".Originally Posted by Barry Santini
I'm telling you...it's the 99 cent store mentality that the American public has latched on to. They think everyone (except themselves, of course)should work for nothing and that everything is imported from China for 50 cents.
99 cent store mentality that the American ..................
I have been projecting this for 1 year and 3 month, but no discussions on the subject have ever come up.
The economy is still in a downturn and when it reaches bottom it will stay there for quite a while.
The 99 cents mentality will take waves and increase as more people loose their jobs and loose money on stock markets which affects their old age savings in a negative way.
You can not change this 99 cents mentality, as there are more of them out there by now and they are on the increase.
Therefore this has become a one way street. It is you that has to change your way of thinking and ask the question "how can we adapt" to the new condition of the retail market, because if you don't the on line outfits will sell all the glasses and you make $ 5.00 to take a PD.
Oh groan. We have the large print version sitting right there waiting for them. Maybe someone already read it since I did get asked for a PD on Monday which I never give. And to think that all these years I have been a loyal RD reader. Do they seriously not know anything about prescription eyewear? Maybe this was written by someone who has never worn glasses so hasn't a clue. I am not overly concerned about anyone ordering their glasses on line. No self-respecting woman would do that without trying on a frame or many frames, seeing the color, feeling the frame on their face, etc. Men? Maybe, but go ahead, you get what you pay for.
"Having a clue", has never been a prerequisite to being a journalist. Many RD writers are not journalists, but free-lance writers looking for their next tank of gas.
Ophthalmic Optician, Society to Advance Opticianry
I went back and scanned through the intire article. Two things came to mind: They kicked a bunch of potential advetisers. Why did they not advocate having your drug RXs on line?
Think of the services online spectacle companies eliminate:
They simply strip away all professional services and greatly reduce commercial services to create a "do-it-yourself" experience, not unlike purchasing OTC readers.
- Brick and mortar and the requisite accessibility, atmosphere, liability, etc.
- Fashion consulting
- Biometrics
- Rx interpretation and ophthalmic lens design
- (Interactive) patient education
- Patient/client advocacy (professionalism) and compliance with state standards designed to protect consumers
- Fitting of ocular prostheses
- Follow-up care
You get what you pay for.
N.B. How many optical professionals still believe they "sell products"?
Suggest to the magazine readers that they no longer need to subscribe to Readers Digest. They should read the free on line version only.
Why should the readers pay for the magazine experience? The reason is simple. There is a value to the professional services provided by the optical retailer as there is a value to a hard copy of a magazine.
Interestingly enough the print version doesn't mention anything about eyewear. I still removed it from the office and I think we will start to scrap all copies of consumer reports if they continue with their hit pieces on eyewear. I will also suggest it to my PCP on my next check up to eliminate the magazine from their racks especially since they do a hit piece on drugs that they prescribe as well.
But they will still make advertising money.
Our industry has to adapt to the future way of doing business. But asking a patient if they wear their glasses high on their nose to come up with a seg height is not the answer. I can only imagine what their remakes are like. :)
Someone has to come up with a better idea.
The print version DOES mention eyewear. I don't have the copy here at work (it's home) but I think the section regarding eyewear is in its own highlighted box. Ugh.
hip chic
Here's my angry reply:
To whom it may concern:
I must say I was outraged when I saw your article on saving money. You had suggested that those who wish to save money should never buy glasses anywhere but online. As a dispensing optician working for a small eyecare business, I find this highly inflammatory. How can you expect opthalmologists, optometrists, and opticians to stay employed when people spend "39.95 online" for their glasses? A great percentage of our practice's income comes from eyewear sales. You claim to be in favor of a economic growth (a claim made in other articles), but it is clear that you support low prices over the employment and livelihood of doctors and their staff. How is this supporting the economy? Plus, customer service is lacking online or at "chain" eye offices, and the patient's lens needs are not met to the standards of the small practice. We've had patients come in with glasses from Lenscrafters that were horribly substandard--these people had incorrect prescriptions or measurements, poorly done coatings, and progressive lenses (no-line bifocals) that made them dizzy. I wonder why you didn't suggest that people who want to save money on glasses rummage through the bins where old glasses are collected for charity, then find the pair that they see the farthest out of, even if they can only see objects five feet away.
In short, this article was highly derogatory and detrimental to the small eycare business.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Katherine Whitney, Dispensing Optician
Yeah, also check out Lady's Home Journal. Same type of article in about healthcare savings tips. Caught that juicy tidbit at the vets office!!
Look, I dislike LC like the rest of us, but I did work there for a while and I don't agree that they produce incorrect eyewear. In fact, LC educates the folks doing the final inspection more than the monkeys at big labs. In 6 months at LC (granted working with a great lab manager-but I was in sales), I must say I NEVER 'double checked' lenses and found them to be outside tolerance. They were consistantly, however, not dead-on. The lenses I get from my big lab for my private practice have about 1-2% return rate due to Rx issues.
I don't think RD cares if you're out a job. I think the argument to be made clear to all who recommend online specs is to educate them on how it is IMPOSSIBLE to take seg measurements even if you get your PD. Also, the frame cannot be tried on, so a proper fit is virtually unheard of. THOSE are the reasons we need to voice.
The most recent issue?
ABOC
We should see if the author of this article wants to put his or her money where there mouth is. if its so important and such a good idea to get eyecare cheap, i know this office in mexico that will do lasik for them at 100.00 an eye. i might even offer to pay for it.
They did.
I think some are confused between a consumer reports article about chain stores. This is not about LC or Sam's or anything about quality eyewear. It's a 150 word article saying you should always buy eyewear online published in the Nov issue of Reader's Digest.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks