Sell Top Quality AR...........unable to define what is not top quality...............

[Chris Ryser]

One of the most used and trashed themes on OptiBoard is that "Ionly use top quality AR................

but nobody has been able to set an out in the field performance standard for this so called top quality.

OptiBoard Thread On AR Again......some excerts from another thread

My conclusion? It's better to offer a moderate quality to those who will, than to take financial risk and satisfaction risk on those that won't.

In my father's practice did 80.23% AR in 2009 and it is only Crizal Forte or Avance. So I am not sure it is a price thing.

The W**Marts around here do that -- and they do very well.

My thoughts on A/R has always been: Use the very best or none at all. It's not worth the headache.

As a side note, I say cheap a/r is worse than no a/r.

Why give someone a crap product when they'll complain, they'll tell their friends and family and probably not come back to the office. We have 3 different "levels" of AR and guess which one I use?

For-Life is on the Money. If you think you can only sell by discounting rethink how you are help your Patients or move to a discount business plan.
Our Office does nearly 80% A/R regularly. Avance all the way. We do a lot of Crizal sun as well.

yet in the North American market it's only around 30%. So riddle me this.. Who is responsible? The patient or the salesperson?

So now, what is not first quality, and from whom, and why is it not, when did you have the last expirience, and on and on.

[uncut]

One of the most used and trashed themes on OptiBoard is that "Ionly use top quality AR................

but nobody has been able to set an out in the field performance standard for this so called top quality.




So now, what is not first quality, and from whom, and why is it not, when did you have the last expirience, and on and on.

Without even touching the eyewear......a poor AR coating will have a shiny, even brilliant reflex color, will have different reflex colors OD to OS, will have different reflex colors front and back of lens(apparent from the two reflections noted from either side)

A poor AR coating will not clean easily, and show signs of non- uniformity by showing a different reflex color at different positions on the lens on either side. A poor quality coating will show shattering at thin lens edges under normal frame pressures and will not even tolerate slight amounts of heat, even near the lens.

Chris,....I won't name names of companies that have produced schlock ARs, or have had/still have poor batch control, but ultimately it is the front line ECPs that bear the brunt of the complaints with poor coatings, hence the reputation references in the threads.

[For-Life]

Again Chris, you have told us so many times about the demand for AR Stripper.

Those of us who sell the top quality AR, do not have demand for that product.

Would you agree that alone shows the difference?

[DanLiv]

I won't name names of companies that have produced schlock ARs, or have had/still have poor batch control, but ultimately it is the front line ECPs that bear the brunt of the complaints with poor coatings, hence the reputation references in the threads.

Agreed. hydro, oleo, anti-static and all that are great, but my main measure of AR is durability. Any crazing on a proper-thickness lens is unacceptable on a premium AR, scouring marks from repeated cleaning are unacceptable, any rippling or separation from the substrate is unacceptable. All cheap ARs suffer from these problems, and if customers are sufficiently educated in the failings of basic ARs vs premium but still choose basic, there is room for them even in a quality optical. But I'm with others in that even when you explain it all and the customer claims to understand and agree, they will stil be unhappy when the problems inevitably arise and cause you headaches. The best premium ARs suffer almost none of these problems, and are really the best value if the customer is into AR at all.

I use the Crizal family for my premium and have extremely few issues, even after years. I have no complaints about Crizal durability. I also use lab house ARs and Essilor non-premium ARs, and they are guaranteed to be significantly scratched, hazy, or crazed after even 1-2 years. I see them come back often. I stress very significantly the disadvantages of these ARs, and all the customers (that come back, at least) with damaged lenses seem to understand and agree with me to try Crizal next time, and then they are never dissatisfied.

premium ARs mean I can send my cutomer on their way and confidently know I will not see them back for AR performance issues aside from common scratching. Non-premium ARs make me nervous every time they leave the dispensary, because it's a 50/50 whether they will have problems. Only in few cases is this potential headache worth even offering to a customer, the rest of the time I agree the best or nothing (at least as far as AR is concerned).

[Chris Ryser]

Again Chris, you have told us so many times about the demand for AR Stripper.

Those of us who sell the top quality AR, do not have demand for that product.

Would you agree that alone shows the difference?

The argument you just posted is the same as comes up every time this theme comes up, and I have never answered and reacted to it.

However I am now ready to make a substantial $ bet with you that your favorite best producer of top of the top quality AR coatings is also the largest single user of my AR stripper and has been buying the product by the case in 1 liter bottles, (that can treat hundreds of pairs of lenses per bottle) for several different locations in Canada on a regular basis for many years.
I can also make a second bet for another high $ amount for another product of mine used on top of the top quality AR coatings by your favorite manufacturers.

I finally got it off my chest after having been picked on by For-Life with the same subject or reasoning for many years.

[Chris Ryser]

Agreed. hydro, oleo, anti-static and all that are great, but my main measure of AR is durability. Any crazing on a proper-thickness lens is unacceptable on a premium AR, scouring marks from repeated cleaning are unacceptable, any rippling or separation from the substrate is unacceptable. All cheap ARs suffer from these problems,...................................

...............and so will your premium AR.

AR coatings are made with SIO2 (Silicone Dioxide = Glass) as the main ingredient, applied on a plastic lens surface, which is flexing with the temperature. The lens flexis, the AR coating does not and you will have crazing and delamination on the premium as well as the not premium lens, as you call it.

[For-Life]

The argument you just posted is the same as comes up every time this theme comes up, and I have never answered and reacted to it.

However I am now ready to make a substantial $ bet with you that your favorite best producer of top of the top quality AR coatings is also the largest single user of my AR stripper and has been buying the product by the case in 1 liter bottles, (that can treat hundreds of pairs of lenses per bottle) for several different locations in Canada on a regular basis for many years.
I can also make a second bet for another high $ amount for another product of mine used on top of the top quality AR coatings by your favorite manufacturers.

I finally got it off my chest after having been picked on by For-Life with the same subject or reasoning for many years.

Doesn't Essilor own most labs in Canada? Don't those labs deal with many different AR types, including the poor ones? Of course it is a big user of the product. From the Essilor labs I deal with, they sell Shamir, Seiko, Sola, Pentax, and many independent brands. Even within that, Essilor sells its branded coatings RF99 and RFNP on many products, and it is a pretty crappy product.

You accuse me of picking on you for many years, but for years you have essentially called me and many posters liars.

You have basically told us that our products craze, when they don't, and that we sell a much lower percent than what we say. I am sorry, but we are only defending ourselves. If you do not like us defending ourselves, then quit calling us liars.

[Chris Ryser]

Doesn't Essilor own most labs in Canada? Don't those labs deal with many different AR types, including the poor ones? Of course it is a big user of the product. From the Essilor labs I deal with, they sell Shamir, Seiko, Sola, Pentax, and many independent brands. Even within that, Essilor sells its branded coatings RF99 and RFNP on many products, and it is a pretty crappy product.

You accuse me of picking on you for many years, but for years you have essentially called me and many posters liars.

You have basically told us that our products craze, when they don't, and that we sell a much lower percent than what we say. I am sorry, but we are only defending ourselves. If you do not like us defending ourselves, then quit calling us liars.

The theme of this thread is basically the question how does a retailer define poor quality in AR coatings, and most responses have been pretty fair and to the point.

I have not mentioned any company on purpose as I did not want to be accused of bad mouthing one or the other or influence any response.

Furthermore did I not call anybody a liar, unless stating that one is doing over 3 times the business while the national average is that much less, is becoming one.

[eyechick1969]

Amen for Life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[EyeManFla]

I made the remark years ago while touring Milroy that it looked like they did all the Crizal lenses the same way....put them in didderent packaging...and charges us different prices.........

The the rep at Optogenics said I could get Crizal faster through them...because they didn't do the whole process.....but I'd still get the warranty.........

[SeaU2020]

My "top quality a/r" is the one that has a 2 year warranty. I don't go into specifics about about the warranty length to the patient, I go into specifics about how to clean the glasses. I don't like the towlettes or even the sprays for that matter. I reccommend the kichen sink, cool to lukewarm water and the soap we wash our pots and pans with.It gets all the facial oils off really well! Then dry with any clean cloth, no paper.

[eyechick1969]

Yup. seaU2020 & if you're using the good stuff & cleaning properly then no problem!!!!!!!!!

[Diane]

I may not know all of the chemicals in the coatings, but I've dispensed eyewear for a whole lot of years, and I KNOW the premium coatings of today are FAR superior to the ones from years past. They perform better, they clean better, they don't craze, crack, peel, whatever like the old standard coatings. It's not just in the coating itself, but the process in doing it.

I have believed in AR for a very long time. Personally, a number of years ago, I was at work and hurt my eye, and needed to remove my contact lenses. Fortunately, I had just ordered some uncut PAL lenses and they had come in. Normally, I would cut them and send them straight out for AR (that was the old way). I cut them, mounted them and wore them home. WOW, the difference for me made me a believer in AR for sure. All I had been wearing was AR lenses, and while I was able to see and drive home, it wasn't near as good. I could hardly wait to get the AR on them. The key to the standard AR coatings is proper care. Even so, they are much more fragile. A patient can see better with it, but the newer AR is much better.

Diane

[eyechick1969]

One of the most used and trashed themes on OptiBoard is that "Ionly use top quality AR................

but nobody has been able to set an out in the field performance standard for this so called top quality.




So now, what is not first quality, and from whom, and why is it not, when did you have the last expirience, and on and on.

For definition of quality AR, read the above posts. It's coatings that have proven the test of time by not scratching pathetically, not wearing off, not crazing, easily kept clean.....

[Chris Ryser]

I may not know all of the chemicals in the coatings, but I've dispensed eyewear for a whole lot of years, and I KNOW the premium coatings of today are FAR superior to the ones from years past. They perform better, they clean better, they don't craze, crack, peel, whatever like the old standard coatings. It's not just in the coating itself, but the process in doing it.

Diane........a very nice description of PREMIUM Ar coatings. You have stated that they a far better to the ones from the years past .......which is a fact. There was a time the coatings would not adhere too well to the plastic surface compared to glass lenses where the SIO2 layer had a natural adherence.

This problem was solved with new intermediate coatings that would provide a good adherance for both materials, the plastic surface on one side and the SIO2 on the other.

What now for the other side...................what are non premium AR coatings, and how do we define them ?. Have most of the coating labs around this continent that are not in the million dollar AR advertising club, been lacking to progress in their working process ? What do you call the non PREMIUM coatings and who makes them ? Who produces the cheap AR coatings that the major corporations 100% owned "FramesDirect" sells on-line. Are they premium or what are they called?

[eyechick1969]

It's more like problematic vs. non-problematic

Where do problematic come from? I dunno, china maybe
Who makes problematic? again, I dunno

I stay the heck away from problematic, therefore I am clueless about their origin, etc. Gosh, my best guide is if you can get it for 9.99 or less/pair, then run like heck!