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

[gochi]

Curious about this, since OD's can start up there own practice or work for an OMD, thus practicing mostly medical optometry, what would entice an OD to work primarily in a Optical?

[rbaker]

[QUOTE=gochi;360575]What do opticians hope to achieve by having a working OD in the optical store?
QUOTE]

Increased sales. You need a hired gun to churn out those Rx's.

Curious about this, since OD's can start up there own practice or work for an OMD, thus practicing mostly medical optometry, what would entice an OD to work primarily in a Optical?

In todays eyecare marketplace most OD's can't start a practice that will offer them a good living so its far easier for them to either work for a chain store or carpet bag.

[Johns]

Curious about this, since OD's can start up there own practice or work for an OMD, thus practicing mostly medical optometry, what would entice an OD to work primarily in a Optical?

$$...

[uncut]

Perhaps it is the quest of reliable, error-free, expedient, editorial-free prescriptions at a reasonable price,....... for the clients of the dispensary?

[gochi]

So the general consensus seems to be more revenue for the optical store.

But doesn't that revenue go to the OD? I mean, wouldn't an OD bring in more patients (for which he/she benefits from)?

I'd imagine it would be better for the optical to hire additional staff rather than an OD who would probably cost near the six figure range.

2 opticians, 1 tech, 2 sales people IMO would be better than just 1 optician and 1 OD, if you're talking about the dollar.

[DanLiv]

Increased sales. You need a hired gun to churn out those Rx's.

Yes, this is the only reason for an optical to hire an OD.

If someone shops your optical and likes the stuff but doesn't have an Rx, and you don't provide exams, they have to go somewhere else to get one. The moment they leave your optical they are fair game for the OD they see and any other optical that catches their eye along the way. If someone shops you and likes your stuff but needs an Rx, and you have a mercenary OD in the back ready to do the exam and hand the patient right back to you, you dramatically increase capture. And even patient satisfaction because of the convenience for them.

Most ODs have their own associated opticals and are in the business of providing eyewear for their patients, or at least delivering them right into the waiting arms of an associated retail optical. If you don't offer exams you are in the business of relying upon failed captures from other businesses rather than creating a complete customer.

It doesn't have to cost the optical much, either. Let the OD set up his own exam operation at his expense and keep all exam profits. The optical drives patients in for exams, the OD drives patients back to the optical after the exam. No reason I know of that private opticals and ODs can't set up and follow the retail partnership model, which I think is good for both.

[gochi]

Yes, this is the only reason for an optical to hire an OD.

If someone shops your optical and likes the stuff but doesn't have an Rx, and you don't provide exams, they have to go somewhere else to get one. The moment they leave your optical they are fair game for the OD they see and any other optical that catches their eye along the way. If someone shops you and likes your stuff but needs an Rx, and you have a mercenary OD in the back ready to do the exam and hand the patient right back to you, you dramatically increase capture. And even patient satisfaction because of the convenience for them.

Most ODs have their own associated opticals and are in the business of providing eyewear for their patients, or at least delivering them right into the waiting arms of an associated retail optical. If you don't offer exams you are in the business of relying upon failed captures from other businesses rather than creating a complete customer.

It doesn't have to cost the optical much, either. Let the OD set up his own exam operation at his expense and keep all exam profits. The optical drives patients in for exams, the OD drives patients back to the optical after the exam. No reason I know of that private opticals and ODs can't set up and follow the retail partnership model, which I think is good for both.

Why would the OD, essentially, help grown another optical/office, when he/she can grow there own?

I'd have to say, if an OD is working for an optical, he should get more of the share, than just exam profits, as he/she is growing the optical.

[rbaker]

Why would the OD, essentially, help grown another optical/office, when he/she can grow there own?

As Yogi Berra would say: "If they could, they would" however many OD's are not entrepreneurs and lack the balls to go into business for themselves. In fact, in todays economy and uncertain medical and business climate Ill bet that it would be next to impossible to capitalize a new optometric practice.

[Johns]

Why would the OD, essentially, help grown another optical/office, when he/she can grow there own?

I'd have to say, if an OD is working for an optical, he should get more of the share, than just exam profits, as he/she is growing the optical.

The OD (in my case)


has NO investment in equipment
has NO rent
has No payroll expense
has No utilities to pay
has NO advertising expense
has NO equipment maintenance expense
has No inventory
has No start-up costs

Now, please tell me why they would deserve any of the profits from the dispensary? It's ironic how many ODs believe that they are the reason for the success of the dispensary, when in fact, often when they leave, the patients don't even realize that there is someone different examining them. It's not unusual for patients to know the name of the practice, but have no clue as to the name of the doctor.

Growing the optical? I don't think so...

[rbaker]

The OD (in my case)


has NO investment in equipment
has NO rent
has No payroll expense
has No utilities to pay
has NO advertising expense
has NO equipment maintenance expense
has No inventory
has No start-up costs

Now, please tell me why they would deserve any of the profits from the dispensary? It's ironic how many ODs believe that they are the reason for the success of the dispensary, when in fact, often when they leave, the patients don't even realize that there is someone different examining them. It's not unusual for patients to know the name of the practice, but have no clue as to the name of the doctor.

Growing the optical? I don't think so...

Right on. There are also certain tax advantages particularly in the case of the customer who pays cash. Not to make any insinuations but a $50.00 cash payment in the hand is worth $200.00 in the insurance bush. How much is $100.00 under the table worth in todays economy?

[gochi]

The OD (in my case)


has NO investment in equipment
has NO rent
has No payroll expense
has No utilities to pay
has NO advertising expense
has NO equipment maintenance expense
has No inventory
has No start-up costs

The optician would have those expenses, anyways, regardless of the OD being there, so to say the OD shouldn't be paid anything more than just his/her exam fees, because of expenses the optician is responsible for, is moot.

Now, please tell me why they would deserve any of the profits from the dispensary? It's ironic how many ODs believe that they are the reason for the success of the dispensary, when in fact, often when they leave, the patients don't even realize that there is someone different examining them. It's not unusual for patients to know the name of the practice, but have no clue as to the name of the doctor.

The idea is, customers without prescriptions can obtain prescriptions which allows them to buy the correct glasses from YOUR optical. Without the prescription, the customer cannot buy glasses, thus you loose business. Since the OD is legally allowed to write the prescription, and that prescription helps your business, then logically, the OD should get a share of profits collected from dispensary, by the optical. Perhaps those patients who bought glasses from your optical may come back next year, which again is more $.

[Oedema]

The optician would have those expenses, anyways, regardless of the OD being there, so to say the OD shouldn't be paid anything more than just his/her exam fees, because of expenses the optician is responsible for, is moot.



The idea is, customers without prescriptions can obtain prescriptions which allows them to buy the correct glasses from YOUR optical. Without the prescription, the customer cannot buy glasses, thus you loose business. Since the OD is legally allowed to write the prescription, and that prescription helps your business, then logically, the OD should get a share of profits collected from dispensary, by the optical. Perhaps those patients who bought glasses from your optical may come back next year, which again is more $.

Why are you trying to rationalize any of this? I already told you, optometry as a profession sucks, move on.

[Johns]

The optician would have those expenses, anyways, regardless of the OD being there, so to say the OD shouldn't be paid anything more than just his/her exam fees, because of expenses the optician is responsible for, is moot.

Huh?

Why in the world would an optician have the expense of a lane, if there were no ODs on the premises?:hammer:
Why in the world would an optician have the expense of advertising an OD if there were no OD?:hammer:
Why in the world would an optician hire extra staff and install EMR software if there were no OD?:hammer:
Why in the world would an optician have the extra expense of more space (more rent) if there were no OD.:hammer:

One of my offices has no OD, and it is a 10X20 space, and the overhead (w/out the OD) is extremely low. Why in the world would you think that an optician would have all the expenses that ODs bring, if they had no OD?:hammer:

" Since the OD is legally allowed to write the prescription, and that prescription helps your business, then logically, the OD should get a share of profits collected from dispensary, by the optical. Perhaps those patients who bought glasses from your optical may come back next year, which again is more $. "

News flash: ODs do not have a monopoly on the Rx writing business. Many of our patients are referred to us by MDs, IN SPITE of us have an OD on the premises. Plus, another large percentage of our scripts come from ODs that have dispensaries, but don't have qualified opticians running them.

An OD on premises is a convenience to the patient, to be sure, but to rate them anything more than a convenience would be a stretch. I'm not bashing ODs, but if they had as much value to a practice as you seem to think, they would be able to demand the spoils you think they deserve, and so far, that hasn't been the case. In fact, I've had ODs approach me that have offered me a cut of THEIR profits, because they know that there are many more like them out there, black bags in hand, looking for a turn-key location to ply their trade.

[gochi]

Why are you trying to rationalize any of this? I already told you, optometry as a profession sucks, move on.

Why does it suck? Its not the OD's fault that there are OMDS and OPTICIANS.

[LandLord]

If an OD wants to be my 50/50 business partner then he will have to put up 50% of the capital costs. If not, he is simply an associate and should be happy using my basic equipment and getting free rent.

[Johns]

Why does it suck? Its not the OD's fault that there are OMDS and OPTICIANS.

I don't think it sucks. I think it's a very honorable profession. I do, however, think that many ODs try to take the easy way out, but then want all the benefits as if they went the extra mile.

[Bill West]

I don't think it sucks. I think it's a very honorable profession. I do, however, think that many ODs try to take the easy way out, but then want all the benefits as if they went the extra mile.

AMEN, Brother

[gochi]

I don't think it sucks. I think it's a very honorable profession. I do, however, think that many ODs try to take the easy way out, but then want all the benefits as if they went the extra mile.

I agree, but this is true of most people:bbg:

But, I do think you are drastically devaluing the qualifications and services of the OD, and how both of these collectively, can mature an optical quite nicely.

[gochi]

Huh?

Why in the world would an optician have the expense of a lane, if there were no ODs on the premises?:hammer:
Why in the world would an optician have the expense of advertising an OD if there were no OD?:hammer:
Why in the world would an optician hire extra staff and install EMR software if there were no OD?:hammer:
Why in the world would an optician have the extra expense of more space (more rent) if there were no OD.:hammer:

One of my offices has no OD, and it is a 10X20 space, and the overhead (w/out the OD) is extremely low. Why in the world would you think that an optician would have all the expenses that ODs bring, if they had no OD?:hammer:

News flash: ODs do not have a monopoly on the Rx writing business. Many of our patients are referred to us by MDs, IN SPITE of us have an OD on the premises. Plus, another large percentage of our scripts come from ODs that have dispensaries, but don't have qualified opticians running them.

An OD on premises is a convenience to the patient, to be sure, but to rate them anything more than a convenience would be a stretch. I'm not bashing ODs, but if they had as much value to a practice as you seem to think, they would be able to demand the spoils you think they deserve, and so far, that hasn't been the case. In fact, I've had ODs approach me that have offered me a cut of THEIR profits, because they know that there are many more like them out there, black bags in hand, looking for a turn-key location to ply their trade.

What I meant was, if an optical HAS room for an OD, then its at no large cost to them, besides the equipment, which can be negotiated I suppose with the OD. Not many opticians would go out of there way to make room for the OD, unless they would benefit extremely well by having the OD in office.

Not sure why MDs would refer patients, which then become CUSTOMERs, to an optical, when a health professional such as an OD or an OMD should be doing the job. Thats quite absurd. Seems like the MDs/OMDs have something against the OD's?

[gochi]

Why would an OD want only 50% share of profits, when he can generate the equivalent of 100% of profits the optical collects without him? This is a legit question, I have on idea where you came up with 50/50.

50/50 would work if there were two ODs working together.

[Johns]

Not sure why MDs would refer patients, which then become CUSTOMERs, to an optical, when a health professional such as an OD or an OMD should be doing the job.

It's a very difficult concept to comprehend, and I'm not at all surprised at your inability to grasp it. The type of "other eyecare related field" worker you are may have some bearing on this.

[Johns]

Why would an OD want only 50% share of profits, when he can generate the equivalent of 100% of profits the optical collects without him? This is a legit question, I have on idea where you came up with 50/50.

50/50 would work if there were two ODs working together.

I believe that the 50% was based on how much capital was put up front. When no capital (as is usually the case) is put up, then the OD (in my office) gets the fee for the service they have provided.

[gochi]

It's a very difficult concept to comprehend, and I'm not at all surprised at your inability to grasp it. The type of "other eyecare related field" worker you are may have some bearing on this.

Yes, illogical concepts are difficult to understand. When patients are treated as customers, something is VERY wrong. But, I suppose opticians CHOOSE not to care, because they are primary eye care providers.

[LandLord]

When patients are treated as customers, something is VERY wrong. But, I suppose opticians CHOOSE not to care, because they are primary eye care providers.

you sound a bit naive. If more patients were treated as customers, eyecare would be greatly improved!!!!!!!

[kws6000]

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...