What do opticians hope to achieve by having a working OD in the optical store?

[design786]

I dont think its reasonable to expect opticians to give OD's working there a piece of the action,if they have no overhead and are getting all of their fees...and havent bought in...

I have to sort of agree with the OP. The optometrist is bringing in business for the optician - by referring patients to the optician - so, I imagine the optometrist should be compensated for that, even if the compensation is low.

I have a couple of associates, and they receive a base pay + 21% of anything they sell or service. So if associate A sells a pair of 300 dollar glasses, they receive 21% of that amount. Without that associate, I would not be able to sell the $300 glasses to a patient and thus would not be making any profit on those glasses.

[kws6000]

But I bet the base pay isnt 100% of the exam fees....

[Johns]

I have a couple of associates, and they receive a base pay + 21% of anything they sell or service. So if associate A sells a pair of 300 dollar glasses, they receive 21% of that amount. Without that associate, I would not be able to sell the $300 glasses to a patient and thus would not be making any profit on those glasses.

It wouldn't fly in my place. I can't think of a more unethical arrangement. Do the doctors in Canada also get kickbacks from the pharmacies, if the pharmacy is located in the hospital?

[LandLord]

Gochi has obviously never been in the optical business. The optometrist DOES get compensated for bringing in patients. Free rent, free equipment, free staff. These things have a substantial monetary value.

Having an optometrists license doesn't bring patients to an office. Marketing does that. Optometrists are not marketing experts.

[uncut]

IMO, everyone....gochi stands for GOCHINA, and the lack of comprehension, the odd questions, and posts that are illogical, is the spawn of someone in a foreign country, with a slight grasp of the english language, and faint understanding of the laws, rules, and regulations of the optical industry as a whole, in North America.

[gochi]

see below

[gochi]

Gochi has obviously never been in the optical business. The optometrist DOES get compensated for bringing in patients. Free rent, free equipment, free staff. These things have a substantial monetary value.

Having an optometrists license doesn't bring patients to an office. Marketing does that. Optometrists are not marketing experts.

If that is the case, would you still hire an OD who sends all his patients who want to buy glasses and contacts to the optical next door?

By the way, optometrists are themselves a marketing entity. They can essentially give out free eye exams, unlike the optician.

[Johns]

By the way, optometrists are themselves a marketing entity. They can essentially give out free eye exams, unlike the optician.

Ah yes! Now the onion has been peeled away to reveal absolutely true marketing genius!:bbg:


I've always wondered why some ODs seemed to be more successful than some opticians...and now, the secret is revealed!

What a great way to start the day!

Thanks!:cheers:

[ManitobaOD]

The benefit to the patient would be receiving quicker and better care by both professions.

The benefit to the optician would be the opportunity to offer full eye exams to their patient base as part of the existing services the optician already provides, while building a stronger practice.

The benefit to the optometrist would be the opportunity to establish a patient base outside of their primary practice, while provide more services to the patients. For new graduates from Waterloo, this would be a golden opportunity to get the feet wet, establish a patient base and work down some of that debt they incurred while in school.



In the end both the optician and optometrist would see a dramatic increase in revenue in sales and examination fees. To the patient they would, on average, still pay the same amount for their vision care needs, albeit with improved service and communications among the three parties involved.

[HarryChiling]

I have to sort of agree with the OP. The optometrist is bringing in business for the optician - by referring patients to the optician - so, I imagine the optometrist should be compensated for that, even if the compensation is low.

I have a couple of associates, and they receive a base pay + 21% of anything they sell or service. So if associate A sells a pair of 300 dollar glasses, they receive 21% of that amount. Without that associate, I would not be able to sell the $300 glasses to a patient and thus would not be making any profit on those glasses.

Lot's of models that work in this industry, that seems like a good one. If an optometrist is truly marketing himself and bringing in business then I personally would love to share any rewards but if they have no skin in the game (invested in the practice) I would need a way to track those being brought in by the OD compared to exiisting or optical generated consumers.

Also how to deal with scenarios where the OD brings in the patient but the optical services bring in family and referrals, conside this vice versa as well the optical brings in the patient and the OD wows them so the family and referrels pour in.

If I was an OD personally I would search for opticians in town without a doctor and work out relationships with him/her to work in their offices for exams and a piece of the action, it sounds like a great opportunity for both if it can be ironed out.

[uncut]

see below

I actually like what you first said:

"The optician is not a professional, while to optometrist and pharmacologist is"

Dude.....lay off the mushrooms!

Or did your handler in the boiler room not like your post?

[design786]

What is unethical about my arrangement? When I first graduated, my senior doc compensated me as I compensate my associates now. We as optometrists are primary eye care providers, and as such should be compensated well, even if the government refuses to fully comprehend the importance of the services the OD is capable of performing.

[Johns]

What is unethical about my arrangement? When I first graduated, my senior doc compensated me as I compensate my associates now. We as optometrists are primary eye care providers, and as such should be compensated well, even if the government refuses to fully comprehend the importance of the services the OD is capable of performing.

If you are referring to being compensated for the amount the dispensary sells, as opposed to purely on the optometric services being rendered, then yes, I think it's unethical.

I can't get past the irony of the many ODs that refuse to be termed "retailers", but they sure want a cut of the retail profits. Too funny!:bbg:

[Geirskogul]

If the OD takes the patient out and helps them pick out frames etc etc then they deserve a part of the glasses profit. Many ODs do everything or at least help quite a bit in choosing/fitting frames and lenses.

If the OD sits in a room all day an cranks out refractions and health checks, then they get exam fees and nothing more.

One of the situations (the second one) is an absolute. Any other situation is case-by-case, and we cannot judge how the business is run. After all, it is THEIR business, not yours :)

[gochi]

^

What if the OD were to refer all his patients who needed glasses to the optical next door? Would you then give the OD a piece of sales from optical?

[Johns]

^

What if the OD were to refer all his patients who needed glasses to the optical next door? Would you then give the OD a piece of sales from optical?

What if a cow were to climb up on top of your roof, and fall down your chimney? There's more a chance of that happening than having an OD at my place referring somewhere else.

[gochi]

Answer the question, Johns.

[uncut]

Answer the question, Johns.

You forgot to say "Pretty, Please!" Where are your manners?

[Fezz]

"What do opticians hope to achieve by having a working OD in the optical store?"


Somebody else to get the coffee in the morning?

[Johns]

Answer the question, Johns.

I did!

There's more a chance of that happening than having an OD at my place referring somewhere else.

It would not happen, so why discuss it? That's like saying..."What if the waiter(OD) were to refer all the diners (patients) who were hungry (needed glasses) to the restaurant (optical) next door?

A relationship like that wouldn't exist, or at least for not very long.

[kcount]

Interesting thread guys. I suddenly remember why I dont have an OD in my office.

To Gochi: If a Ophthalmologist or Optometrist reffers a patient to me to provide eyewear, is it your belief that I should give th referring doctor a percentage of the profit for said refferal?

KC

[gochi]

I did!


It would not happen, so why discuss it? That's like saying..."What if the waiter(OD) were to refer all the diners (patients) who were hungry (needed glasses) to the restaurant (optical) next door?

A relationship like that wouldn't exist, or at least for not very long.

lol, that was my point. A "real" OD would not be willing to work in an optical if % of revenue generated, from his/her patients, from eye ware is not transferred to him/her. That is basically the reason there is a war between the two professions.

Opticians refuse to compensate ODs for their services.

[gochi]

No, although I highly doubt why an OMD/OD would be referring to an optician in the first place (unless the OD/OMD does not dispense).

However, if the OMD/OD were to refer a patient to your optical for eye ware, then the only way to share profits generated by the referral is to refer a patient back to him/her.

My scenario is completely different, where the OD is working for the Optical/Optician.

[kcount]

lol, that was my point. A "real" OD would not be willing to work in an optical if % of revenue generated, from his/her patients, from eye ware is not transferred to him/her. That is basically the reason there is a war between the two professions.

Opticians refuse to compensate ODs for their services.

But, if the Doctor is hired on a 1099 than they would receive a flat rate for their services. Whether that flat rate was a day rate or perdium the OD has contracted to perform exams in the location. Thus, the OD is not entitled to a % of revenue regardless of their part in the practice. The OD is not a firm member nor a partner in the practice thus they have no "skin in the game". Further more it is illegal to remunerate a doctor for referrals or for prescribing specific products in the US.

[kcount]

No, although I highly doubt why an OMD/OD would be referring to an optician in the first place (unless the OD/OMD does not dispense).

However, if the OMD/OD were to refer a patient to your optical for eye ware, then the only way to share profits generated by the referral is to refer a patient back to him/her.

My scenario is completely different, where the OD is working for the Optical/Optician.

Where OD's do dispense in their practice is a matter of course. MD's often do not have dispensaries. Obviously this may be different in your area. But, the classical relationship of MD to optician does exist as is today a viable business model as can be attest to those of us that live it. As Johns has stated, many of his customers come to his practice not for their exams but for their materials. I have many patients who see an OD and come to me for their eyewear as they see a value add in my services.

I believe you are simply naive in your attitude that an OD should be paid a % of profits for their exams. I know of no chain or independent optician that would even entertain the concept of shared profits for a hired OD.

Rule number one in business, Profits go to Owners.