Do you support Government action in case of VSP-Essilor Collusion. ?

[Chris Ryser]

Do you support Government action in case of VSP-Essilor Collusion. ?

Here are all the details, with supporting facts (supplied by sharstick777)

letter to the Governor of the State of Washington, the Antitrust Division Chief of the State Attorney Generals Office, the Insurance Commissioner and the Federal Trade Commission with the following subject:

Re: Insurance Code and Potential Antitrust Violations in the Eye Care Industry

and one of the most important comments on the sujects that has even made the news this week. See thread by sharpsick777

Collusion: (Wikipedia)

Collusion is an agreement, usually secretive, which occurs between two or more persons to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair advantage[citation needed]. It is an agreement among firms to divide the market, set prices, or limit production. [1] It can involve "wage fixing, kickbacks, or misrepresenting the independence of the relationship between the colluding parties."[2] All acts affected by collusion are considered void.[3]

I swear....this is the "KICK AT THE CAN" that all ECP have been waiting for.[/B] If you do not take the time "NOW" to speak your piece, then don't complain later when Essilor rolls over everyone.

The louder ECP shout to the goverment ,on this case, the more likely the goverment will take action

Contact Washington's governor...the plantiff's lawyer, your Republican/Democratic leaders. Speak up NOW.

[Chris Ryser]

Here are the addresses you can copy and paste for your convinience:


Honorable Christine Gregoire
Governor of the State of Wasington
Office of the Governor
P.O. Box 40002
Olympia, 98504-0002

Tina E. Kondo
Antitrust Division Chief
Washington State Attorney General's Office
800 5th Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98104-3188

Honorable Mike Kreidler
Insurance Commissioner
Office of the Insurance Commissioner
P.O. Box 40257
Olympia, WA 98504-0257

Stuart W/ Hirschfeld
Northwest Region
Federal Trade Commission
915 Second Ave., Room 2896
Seattle, WA 98174

and the Lawers submitting the letter and facts:

Byrnes & Keller lL.L.P.
Lawyers
38th Floor
1000 Second Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104




Olympia , WA 98504-0257

[sharpstick777]

You should also include Sentor Tom Coburn. If the name sounds familiar, his family is the Coburn in the Gerber-Coburn equipment line. Coming from an old Optical family, he has been active on these issues as well:

Senator Tom Coburn
172 Russell Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-5754
Fax: 202-224-6008

[Chris Ryser]

Quote:
Originally Posted by coupe

I am amazed! 18 comments at EOH when I complain about rude remarks about Canadians and 6 votes on Chris's poll for Nouveau Optical. This says alot about what is happening here. There is more talk...complaints...jazzing....beer talk and response to Great Glasses than there is to the opportunity to "slow down' some of VSP and Essilor expansion.

How many ECP have contacted the goverment or the lawyers? How many have spoken up in support of Nouveau Optical? How many of us have complained about VSP/ESSILOR and now that we have an opportunity to request a goverment intervention.....HAVE DONE NOTHING?

Totally unreal.



..........coupe, you are so right. OptiBoarders have complained for years that the world is not treating them right and more and more independents are disappearing. It is in fact pathetic that there is not more pep among them.

Their livelihood is and will be shrinking by means of vertical integration of the large corporations and on the other side the growth of the on-line optical outfits.

14 members have voted on the poll over a 3 day period and 5 of them have said the that they will give active support. What a shame that the use of an OptiBoard with instant communication is used just for small petty talk, but when it comes to give some moral support to a real life cause they hide in a closet.


:angry: :angry:

[Chris Ryser]

At the moment of this posting :

Only 2 have read the document, which is one sign, that the profession is in danger.

:hammer: :hammer: :hammer:

[Chris Ryser]

Voters: 19.

A record of 19 in their future intersted OptiBoarders have so far given an opinion.

[Kyle]

Would have been helpful if multiple selections were allowed.

[Chris Ryser]

31 votes at time of post.

However only 6 have read the letter and really know what it is all about.

[sharpstick777]

Could someone post a copy of the letters they are sending? It would make it easier for others to create their own. Thanks in advance.

[eyeguy123]

Chris your poll was a little ambiguous you couldn't choose both yes, I read and will actively support, so people choose one or the other.

[eyeguy123]

Could someone post a copy of the letters they are sending? It would make it easier for others to create their own. Thanks in advance.

Ditto, I ain't so good with the words thing sometimes.:shiner::cheers:

[NAH]

Following is my letter to Gov. Gregoire. I'll make adjustments to it for some of the other letters. What say you: does it look satisfactory?



I am an apprentice optician in Walla Walla, WA. I have been in the apprenticeship program for two years, and since starting, I have learned much and have come to greatly respect the eye-care industry. The technological advancements can oftentimes be overwhelming, but thanks to numerous resources, I feel I have ample access to unbiased feedback regarding any and all spectacle lens designs, materials, and the like. However, I have recently discovered that one such resource is currently in deep jeopardy of being shut down.

Nouveau Vision, the largest independently-owned laboratory in Washington, will soon lose its contract with VSP — the largest vision care provider — placing incredible financial stress on the laboratory. Almost all of the other labs in Washington are either contractually obligated to Essilor or are outright owned by that company. As such, almost every lab in Washington will be financially and legally obligated to promote Essilor’s product, even when other products would be equal to or better in addressing the eye-care needs of the patient.

For example, the office in which I work relies almost exclusively on the Shamir Office lens when providing a progressive lens designed for mid- and close-range work. This lens filled a niche which Essilor has only recently addressed with their Computer lens. The designs for the two lenses are vastly different, though, and should labs be strongly urged to push the Computer lens when the Office lens would be more appropriate, patient care will suffer.

With the growing concern nationwide regarding healthcare, I am deeply concerned that patients receive the best option for them, regardless of what brand is on the lens. However, Essilor is striving to ensure that my choices be exclusively Essilor-brand products. I am concerned that, should Essilor continue to gain control over the state’s eye-care production, they will monopolize Washington’s eye-care options.

I am a proud supporter of free trade, but the collusion between VSP and Essilor has left me worried about the future of Washington’s eye care. I strongly urge you to police these two companies’ actions before Washington’s healthcare options suffer.


Sincerely,

[Chris Ryser]

Well said............................

[NAH]

Thanks! I just got back from visiting all of the opticals in town. I left copies of the lawsuit as well as a copy of a form letter I wrote that fairly mirrors my actual letter.

[Joe K]

We need the Doctors and Opticians to back the independent labs and get something done for once. You can't keep letting the big companies controll how and where you can do business. If you have a problem with the lab your using you switch. If you have a problem with a progressive your using you switch. But if you let the 3rd party insurance companies keep restricting where you can do you work, where do you go when there is no place left to go. This is your business. I am sure you did not go to school and start working for pocket change or to have someone dictate to you how to run your office. So why are you letting them controll you now. Why are more of you not steaming about what is going on with this field. Are we all a bunch of used car salesman or is this still a professional business?( Nothing against used car salesman) If its still a professional business then we need to fix the problems with it. We need to support the lab in Wa. who is trying to fix the problem. All it takes is you writting your local state reps and congressmen. Its not very difficult to e-mail 4 or 5 letters or to make 4 or 5 phone calls. Their address and phone numbers are on the internet. Take a few miniutes and help keep this profession running right. We are all worried if we step up they will find away of closing us down. But if we don't step up they will close you down anyway.

[keithbenjamin]

Also, if you own a lab that has been terminated by VSP or subjected to unfair trade practices by either Essilor or VSP, Tim Sutich (Nouveau) is willing to share what he has learned throughout this experience and help in any way he can. He is actively trying to get other states involved in legal action.

Tim has also established a legal defense fund for anyone interested in helping monetarily. He can be contacted at 800.365.3611.

-Keith

[Chris Ryser]

Glad to hear some serious answers to a serious problem...............

[IndianaOD]

I wish you guys luck in your endeavor. I will admit though that I personally have a larger problem with Luxottica.

I haven never understood how it is not anti-trust to own the Insurance/vision plans, the retail/professional sites, and the retail product.

[YrahG]

I have seen how those who don't support the giants get treated here, unless that changes unfortunately this medium is a lost cause to try and garner support. Matter of fact Transitions and Visionweb are both supporters of this board and both have vested interests with one of the parties named in this suit, I am sure what is said here is looked over by someone.

[Chris Ryser]

I have seen how those who don't support the giants get treated here, unless that changes unfortunately this medium is a lost cause to try and garner support. Matter of fact Transitions and Visionweb are both supporters of this board and both have vested interests with one of the parties named in this suit, I am sure what is said here is looked over by someone.

Interesting comment.............................

However counting the number of active members: "Active Members: 1,447 Members 13,244", and comparing to total membership plus the fact that this is an open forum with a very high traffic rating and the fact that important posts appear just about instantly on Google it will be looked over by many more than just someone.

The 2 companies mentioned as supporters with relations to the suit that does not exist, (Maybe you should read the letter to the WA Governor)
They have so far never openly interfered in the happenings here on Opti Board discussions.



And here is a sample from the top of the page at GOOGLE:

Do you support Government action in case of VSP-Essilor Collusion ...

14 posts - 5 authors - Last post: yesterday letter to the Governor of the State of Washington, the Antitrust Division Chief of the State Attorney Generals Office, the Insurance ...
www.optiboard.com/forums/showthread.php?p=316077 - Cached - Similar

[Chris Ryser]

I wish you guys luck in your endeavor. I will admit though that I personally have a larger problem with Luxottica.

I haven never understood how it is not anti-trust to own the Insurance/vision plans, the retail/professional sites, and the retail product.

Lets cook the soup first before adding new stuff to the menu. Why don't you start a new thead on that subject, as it is totally valid.

[Ocular Sinister]

Essilor and VSP colluding would be like Darth Vader colluding with Tony Soprano: unlikely, and unnecessary.

[sharpstick777]

Essilor and VSP colluding would be like Darth Vader colluding with Tony Soprano....

VSP has been losing a lot of accounts to Eyemed... lots.. Eyemed is cheaper for a company than VSP. Also, Altair frame sales have plummetted over 35% (now the Marchon move makes more sense). VSP is not as golden as it once was, they have jumped the shark so to speak, and when that happens the accountants get more control.

VSP is trying to cut their cost basis and if cozying up to vendors will reduce costs they will (that is why you are seeing more VSP branded lenses from both Essilor and Zeiss). The VSP lab in Columbus Ohio is not making money so if they can send more business to that lab helps too. I would suspect more Midwest labs lose their VSP accredidation more than anywhere else.

I suspect reduced reimbursements to labs is the next step. That could be why they are allowing in office edgers in 2010; its one more they way they can put pressure on the network labs. Reducing their lab network makes pressing the labs easier: "We have already dropped labs and yours could be next!" Of course VSP make themselves more competitive by making their plans simpler, and not gouging companies as much, but that would be too easy. An 800 lb. gorilla has to throw its weight around sometime.

[Joe K]

Take a look at the Pa Senate website and a bill #S204. Here is a link to that http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...type=B&BN=0204

[Chris Ryser]

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA


SENATE BILL No.204
Session of 2009




INTRODUCED BY PIPPY, FONTANA, BAKER, KITCHEN, D. WHITE AND BOSCOLA, FEBRUARY19, 2009



REFERRED TO BANKING AND INSURANCE, FEBRUARY 19, 2009




AN ACT

Amending the act of July 22, 1974 (P.L.589, No.205), entitled "An act relating to unfair insurance practices; prohibiting unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts and practices; and prescribing remedies and penalties," further providing for unfair acts.

The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania hereby enacts as follows:


Section 1. Section 5(a) of the act of July 22, 1974 (P.L.589, No.205), known as the Unfair Insurance Practices Act, is amended by adding a paragraph to read:


Section 5. Unfair Methods of Competition and Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices Defined.--(a) "Unfair methods of competition" and "unfair or deceptive acts or practices" in the business of insurance means:


* * *
(15) Knowingly doing any of the following:

(i) Requiring an insured to obtain ophthalmic services and products from a vision laboratory or company as a condition of obtaining the payment for the vision services.

(ii) Imposing upon an insured who is not utilizing an ophthalmic service or product from a vision laboratory or company a copayment fee or other condition not imposed upon insureds utilizing an ophthalmic service or product from the vision laboratory or company.

(iii) Hampering competition in numerous ways, including, but not limited to:
(A) Restraining providers' ability to compete in the market.

(B) Depriving an insured of the choice associated with free and open competition in the sale of ophthalmic products.

(C) Suppressing competition based upon quality and service.

(D) Reducing the quality and level of care available to an insured in the purchase of any ophthalmic product or denying or impairing the right of an insured to determine from where ophthalmic services or products are made.

(iv) Creating a preferred class of providers that is not held to uniform conditions of participation under the same employer's purchased health care contract, vision care contract or other health insurance contracts.

(v) Requiring the purchase of a minimum quantity or minimum dollar amount of a specified brand of materials in order to participate as a provider in a vision or other health care plan.

(vi) Requiring a provider to participate in a vision benefit plan as a condition of participation in a health care plan.
Section 2. This act shall take effect in 60 days.