The only entity that a VSP Premier provider benefits is VSP. If you choose to offer a wider range of lens and frame products you are penalized by VSP. This isn't about weeding out ECPs that provide a lower level of patient service, it is about weeding out ECPs who don't make VSP as much money. If you only offer patients Marchon/Altair frames and Unity lenses, then you are clearly operating with VSP's best interests in mind, not your patients'.
SHHHHHH! You're giving away all of Race's secrets.Originally Posted by cowboytelemark
only if you can't take a patient with $20-$50 more and actually SELL them on more than just what their insurance providesNot to mention, every time a patient walks in the door up the odds of billing medically.
Still waiting for you to actually debate me music-man. All blow and no-go are you....SHHHHHH! You're giving away all of Race's secrets.
Cute.only if you can't take a patient with $20-$50 more and actually SELL them on more than just what their insurance provides
Still waiting for you to actually debate me music-man. All blow and no-go are you....
See - the point you keep seeming to miss is the fact that without having to feed the bloated cow that is VSP and all it's ilk, there is no need to "sell" patients to make up for their added overhead. Nor is there any need to be forced into a tiny corner of limited products designed to do one thing alone - deliver profit to VSP - all in the hope of scraping out a meager living. Perhaps more ODs and ECPs will one day realize the perception that the need to suckle at the VSP teat, hoping for a drop or two of life sustaining profit is nothing but fear based smoke and mirrors marketing on the part of managed care, fully intended to drive dollars into VSP's coffers - at the expense of private practice, patients and employers. It's an incredible racket - and one that serves them very, very well.
One wonders if you've ever actually spent the time and effort to come out from under their thumb and do things truly independently? Judging from your posts here, you've been a VSP kid through and through from day uno.
There cannot be a "debate" when one can only see one point of view and not even observe or respect the other point of view, it can only be an argument. Many of us see your point of view, and respect that point of view race, you will never convince us though that it is as great as you seem to feel it is. Many of us have seen the other side of the fence unlike it appears you have.
I myself don't have a huge issue (as I've mentioned before) with VSP, I do profit from them, without having to "SELL", just doing what is right for the patient, but I much prefer either a private sale, or a real insurance, one that pays like cash without having to discount, or segregate certain products.
Again, just my 2 cents, what do I know, only been doing it for about 20 years.
What profit, you have to pay Marchon/VSP to bring flexon frames into your dispensary. A patient purchases said flexon frame, no charge to patient. You get frame allowance about a third + 20.00. Minus the cost of the frame. Time spent selecting the product, proper fit and adjustment, rent, operation costs, and payroll. Who are you kidding, nobody. There is no profit, a clinic can not survive on VSP. $35.00 here and $20.00 there, doesn't equate to a sustainable business. It takes 3-4 VSP eyeglass wearing patients to make up for 1 non VSP eyeglass wearing patient and I am losing on those 3-4 frames that I am giving away to those VSP patients.The more volume you do with VSP the more you lose.
A few thoughts:
As of the end of 2012, VSP had $668 million in cash and equity of over $1.1 billion. If VSP has 60 million members, this is only about $11 per member in terms of cash, so that level of cash is not unreasonable. However, VSP operates with very little risk. They are not an insurance company. They are a middleman who administers discount programs. Because they are not a real insurance company, they can brag about how much less they incur in administrative costs as compared to real insurance companies.
A significant part of VSP's business is cost plus reimbursement plans. Again, zero risk and very very easy claims processing.
"ODs for ODs" or whatever the tag line was. What a load of crap. VSP is an advocate for the employers who pay them, not the ODs. They are a glorified buying group for the benefit of the buyer. Period. End of story. Anyone who believe otherwise is a fool. Their goal is to drive provider reimbursements as low as possible. They will pass along some of the savings to their customers and pocket the rest. Why, because that is good for VSP.
Bottom line is that VSP built up their net worth as a result of the years they were tax exempt. They used this money to buy labs, frame companies, and software companies, all of whom were tax paying businesses. It is interesting when you read VSP's financial statements. Nowhere do they detail how much money they donate as part of their charitable mission. By definition, this means these charitable contributions are not significant to their operations, otherwise they would have to disclose these amounts. So much for being a non-profit with a community mission.
It just does not seem fair for a not for profit to dominate an industry. These organizations are not accountable to shareholders and have no real owners. There is nobody to hold accountable. They might as well be the government. VSP fights to not pay taxes. Think about this. How can a business or individual that has to pay $.40 to $.50 of every dollar of profit back to the government for taxes compete with a company that does not have to pay taxes? VSP got a huge head start as a not-for profit. Why can't I call myself a charity and accumulate millions in wealth before I have to pay taxes? Fortunately, the IRS put a stop to the charity scam. But the attitude says something about VSP.
Last edited by Stan Tabor; 02-12-2014 at 10:08 PM.
I am anxious to see the spin put on this by Race! probably cracking his knuckles getting ready to respond at this very moment)
you need re-read your own text. you're doing it wrong and seem to enjoy it. but then you don't seem to want to sell, so as an optician working in a dispensary which is the retail section of a practice, that's ironic.
I've been doing this quite a long time. VSP was but a child back then. The reality is you must enjoy what you call a "meager living" yet being truly independent. Nothing wrong with that. Just remember though, it's your choice not something that's been forced upon you. In the end however, it's clear you're not a business owner but rather just an employee. That goes hand in hand with the Meager living you reference. You should try the other side sometime.One wonders if you've ever actually spent the time and effort to come out from under their thumb and do things truly independently? Judging from your posts here, you've been a VSP kid through and through from day uno.
Last edited by racethe1320; 02-13-2014 at 07:09 AM.
No spin needed. Just a better understanding of insurance and how businesses function.
VSP has always been about providing affordable care to help people see better. The whole "by OD" piece referenced their closed channel that doesn't serve opticians only. It has nothing to do with a slant to make OD's rich as you imply. It's always been about the consumer. Anyone who believes otherwise is misinformed. Reimbursement wise, if a VSP Provider hasn't made more over the past few years, then they are sleeping with their head in the sand or in reality make choices that are of their own doing. In a nonprofit businesses, at the end of the fiscal year, a majority of the income should be spent to cover expenses with a reserve fund in place. If you understand how both insurance and non profits work, you'd understand. You clearly don't.
Please post a link to said documents.It is interesting when you read VSP's financial statements. Nowhere do they detail how much money they donate as part of their charitable mission. By definition, this means these charitable contributions are not significant to their operations, otherwise they would have to disclose these amounts. So much for being a non-profit with a community mission.
Not fair? Define fair. Sounds like you have a problem with our country's capitalistic market and how Philanthropic efforts function especially as to how marketing functions in the not for profit world. Is it more fair that Essilor a for-profit company dominate? Are they putting money back on providers payments? Are they funding coverage for clients employees? Are they administering plans for clients? Nope, they aren't an insurance company. However, they are one heck of a great manufacturer that thrives on marketing to generate money for a public board of investors.It just does not seem fair for a not for profit to dominate an industry. These organizations are not accountable to shareholders and have no real owners. There is nobody to hold accountable. They might as well be the government.
Because you business exists to make profits for you. Do you reinvest money for products and disbursements for others or for your own gain? Last I checked, your net worth is yours not mine. If VSP dissolves, their monies go to universities and their panel providers. Can you say the same?Why can't I call myself a charity and accumulate millions in wealth before I have to pay taxes?
Last edited by racethe1320; 02-13-2014 at 07:07 AM.
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I feel it's great because VSP Offered me a very lucrative opportunity and I've been taking it and doing quite well. I'm still looking to see what "the other side of the fence" as you call it is and what the appeal there is. If it's to make a meager living and call myself truly independant from insurance, no thanks. The meager part has no appeal to me.
To me, I'm as independent if not more so than you because I have the earnings and profits to do as I wish and I have zero complaints about how my business functions. In the end, we're all here to help patients, take care of our people and yes, to make money.
I'm confused, how is that different than most? Consignment is fine, but you're still paying for the frames.
So in your optical, which is a retail environment, and you/your people can't sell anything above and beyond what their plan covers? WOW! That's not on anyone else but you man.A patient purchases said flexon frame, no charge to patient.
Plus out of pocket overages, plus any promotional reimbursements on the products, plus with every patient that is pushed your way there's a strong chance you'll bill medically vs their VSP benefits and thus make more.....again, in the end, if you are really struggling to profit from a managed care patient, you really should drop your MC plans and even consider just shutting your doors. Maybe take up playing music or something....You get frame allowance about a third + 20.00. Minus the cost of the frame.
seriously, if you're not make a profit in your dispensary, it's time to look in the mirror. run the dang business man! My God, are you kidding me? Do you really think managed care based practices are not killing it in terms of profits? WOW! You must hang out with the wrong crowd.Time spent selecting the product, proper fit and adjustment, rent, operation costs, and payroll. Who are you kidding, nobody. There is no profit, a clinic can not survive....The more volume you do with VSP the more you lose.
Speechless......again, EyeCare Rich....the above is why I don't even try and convince anyone of anything. The problems they have aren't with VSP, they are with how they run a business.
I question your business savvy, we are talking about sustainable profits. You keep bringing up everyone's lack of up sales, as if we are children. Again you continue to miss the point people are making. If you are happy with $35.00 here $20.00 there and $5.00 for UV, good for you. I personally don't want to go into my closet only to find it filled with VSP sponsored polo shirts. When I vacation I prefer more exotic locations not a personal tour thru a VSP lab. I must be a complete idiot for wanting a little more out of life but I will stand on the dock and wave to you, as I have missed another excursion on the VSP boat.
How very very lost your assumptions are. Still - you never cease to entertain. Feel free to keep it coming! :)
In the end, you need money to survive as a business. Thankfully, our double digit growth over the past years has allowed us to remain viable. Interesting as well to note that VSP reimbursements over the same past years has continued to shrink - even while seeing a greater volume of their patients. We simply prefer to work smarter, not harder. It works. You really need to put down the stein of VSP Kool-Aid some time, take a breath, and explore the rest of the world of ophthalmic practice. It's far bigger, and better than you care to think - and it is quite possible to excel greatly without your precious managed care masters dragging you around by the nape of your neck.
Again, you must think managed care based practices can't make big profits. Oh well.
If you're not making more on VSP today than you were 3yrs ago, you're doing it wrong. Sorry, that's a fact.
Never said it wasn't. However working harder isn't what we're doing. It's not really any more difficult to open multiple locations than it is to run just one. Good mgt. of them is the key.it is quite possible to excel greatly without your precious managed care masters dragging you around by the nape of your neck.
What the heck are you even talking about? This is just gibberish.only if you can't take a patient with $20-$50 more and actually SELL them on more than just what their insurance provides
[QUOTE=racethe1320;478810]I think I have a very good understanding of the insurance business. VSP is not an insurance company. Insurance by its very definition involves assuming another party's risk of loss.No spin needed. Just a better understanding of insurance and how businesses function.
You are misinterpreting what I said. Also, I do not see in your formula where non-profits should be using income to buy up what were previously tax paying "for profit" entities like software and frame companies.VSP has always been about providing affordable care to help people see better. The whole "by OD" piece referenced their closed channel that doesn't serve opticians only. It has nothing to do with a slant to make OD's rich as you imply. It's always been about the consumer. Anyone who believes otherwise is misinformed. Reimbursement wise, if a VSP Provider hasn't made more over the past few years, then they are sleeping with their head in the sand or in reality make choices that are of their own doing. In a nonprofit businesses, at the end of the fiscal year, a majority of the income should be spent to cover expenses with a reserve fund in place. If you understand how both insurance and non profits work, you'd understand. You clearly don't.
I have hard copies and faxes obtained from sources I would rather not disclose. Everything I quote can be found deep in the filing cabinets of various government agencies that gather such information. It is all available to the public. You will need to do your own homework.Please post a link to said documents.
Fair is the guy I am competing with operating under the same provisions of the tax code as me.Not fair? Define fair. Sounds like you have a problem with our country's capitalistic market and how Philanthropic efforts function especially as to how marketing functions in the not for profit world. Is it more fair that Essilor a for-profit company dominate? Are they putting money back on providers payments? Are they funding coverage for clients employees? Are they administering plans for clients? Nope, they aren't an insurance company. However, they are one heck of a great manufacturer that thrives on marketing to generate money for a public board of investors.
VSP will not dissolve any time soon. It is like an ATM that distributes thousand dollar bills for its senior management and board of directors. As Stan will disclose soon, there are millions and millions of dollars left in this ATM. Bring bags. Big bags. And when Stan "dissolves", some of Stan's money will go to pay state and federal inheritance taxes. And keep in mind, Stan paid taxes on every dollar Stan earned (except of course the interest on Stan's tax exempt zero coupon civil war railroad bonds).Because your business exists to make profits for you. Do you reinvest money for products and disbursements for others or for your own gain? Last I checked, your net worth is yours not mine. If VSP dissolves, their monies go to universities and their panel providers. Can you say the same?
Stan is not trying to insult your or belittle your intelligence as you have done to Stan. No worries. Stan has thick skin. When Stan is feeling belittled, he starts referring to himself in the third person. It’s just Stan being Stan.
Last edited by Stan Tabor; 02-13-2014 at 08:09 PM.
So when an employee who has perfect vision needs care, or a medical device, or Lasik, etc. and by nature VSP use the premiums collected and investments and reserves in their coffers covers said needs and costs how is that not assuming said employees risk? Hmmm.... in the Vision Insurance just like Dental is considered a wellness benefit designed to reduce costs for routine, preventive care. Yes, the premiums and investments made with them cover the risks of the total lives it's offered to. Thus why if you were to look at the books, during times of high utilization such as prior to the 2008 or even shortly after it started, both vision plans and dental plans took a hit on the benefits side of their businesses. People were racing to use their monies before they lost their job/coverage.
Then feel free to clarify what you meant by stating "by OD's for OD's"You are misinterpreting what I said.
Where is the rule that says a non-profit can't use the profits to re-invest into the business? In fact, that IS what non-profits do. Churches sell DVD's, humanitarian groups sell products, the Salvation Army runs retail stores, and yes companies like VSP create and run business that in turn create a more reliable income by said offering products that are valuable to consumers, rather than relying solely on grants and gifts, etc.Also, I do not see in your formula where non-profits should be using income to buy up what were previously tax paying "for profit" entities like software and frame companies.
Still don't believe me....ever hear of The Cleveland Clinic? Talk about buying up all kinds of entities to Grow their business. No one does it better IMO.
Nonprofit organizations exist to serve their underlying purpose. VSP, has always touted helping millions of people see better and and all of their inner workings are geared toward this goal. From taking over Healthy Families in CA, to running their mobile clinics, to funding the ACA pediatric benefits, to supporting university programs to re-investing into products that in turn provide added reimbursements such as the ones I've mentioned here on the board.
I almost could have guessedI have hard copies and faxes obtained from sources I would rather not disclose.
Then you should have no problem posting your links, sources or helping us "do our homework". Believe me, my home work is done. How about you help all the others here instead. I don't need itEverything I quote can be found deep in the filing cabinets of various government agencies that gather such information. It is all available to the public. You will need to do your own homework.
They aren't competing with you. They are supporting you and other practices. If you choose not to participate then that's about as fair and it can get. You get to choose.Fair is the guy I am competing with operating under the same provisions of the tax code as me.
you mean VSP Pays it's employees? How dare they! Someone call the cops on the Red Cross and VSP...they actually pay their employees!!! Let's not forget all those others horrible "ATM's that also distribute thousand dollar bills for its senior management" such as PBS, the YMCA, March of Dimes, etc....VSP will not dissolve any time soon. It is like an ATM that distributes thousand dollar bills for its senior management and board of directors.
Insurance....reserves....requirement....hmmm.....such a deep understanding of insurance you haveAs Stan will disclose soon, there are millions and millions of dollars left in this ATM.
As he should since he doesn't meet the requirements of not.Stan paid taxes on every dollar Stan earned
If calling Stan out when he's wrong equates to belittling him, then that's a new found definition of that word. Pro Tip; buy Stan a new dictionary.Stan is not trying to insult your or belittle your intelligence as you have done to Stan.
Last edited by racethe1320; 02-13-2014 at 10:23 PM.
I am not referring to reserve requirements to meet insurance obligations (more on this later). According to its 2012 financial statements (the one where charitable contributions are too immaterial to be listed) if VSP closed its doors, they would still owe their board and executive management $24 million in deferred compensation. That is an ATM with lots of thousand dollar bills. So much for that "not for profit" charter they are working under. If you are an OD, you don't want to practice optometry. You want to get on the board of VSP.Insurance....reserves....requirement....hmmm.....such a deep understanding of insurance you have
If I recall correctly, when VSP argued they were a "social welfare organization" before the Supreme Court, they included in their list of charity work the value of the discounted services provided by ODs!
Post the document Stan then we can discuss in front of everyone. Until then, you can pull it out your ar$e and I could do the same. No thanks. Besides, if they shut their doors, there's a listing of who gets paid what when. Will await you to come through with the document.
Race- All I have is a hard copy of the information. Re-typed from Footnote 12 to VSP's 12/31/12 audited financial statements:
"Deferred Compensation
The Company sponsors a deferred compensation program for certain employees and board members. The Board of Directors establishes the eligibility requirements and the employer-funded contribution amounts. The participants may elect certain investment options which determine the employees' deferred compensation return. The liability for deferred compensation at December 31, 2012 and 2011 was $24,326 and $20,310, respectively, and is included in accrued liabilities."
The amounts above are in thousands. In other words, $24,326,000.
Race, I have a question- how do you get elected to the board of VSP? Does their board elect new members to fill vacancies? Do ODs or members get to vote? I honestly do not know.
From several years ago: Ken Starr defending VSP:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAyS_GGO5jA
Last edited by Stan Tabor; 02-14-2014 at 11:32 AM.
Would LOVE to see precisely where VSP falls in this chart!
http://data.huffingtonpost.com/paypals
This type of thing is not acceptable on OptiBoard and will not be tolerated.
OptiBoard Administrator
----
OptiBoard has been proudly serving the Eyecare Community since 1995.
You do realize what deferred compensation programs refer to right? Think retirement, 401k and pension plans for their employees, which they do offer/sponsor, thus why it's listed as part of their accrued liabilities.
WOW! conspiracy theories really do abound here. Entertaining for sure!
They actually pay their top executives far less than what you might think compared to the companies listed in your link. Regardless, they are running a $4B+ international company thus in one respect I hope it's a nice penny. I also bet per revenue dollar, they are paid less than some doctors I know reap based on the revenue amounts they report.
Last edited by racethe1320; 02-14-2014 at 10:29 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks