Mike is correct.Originally Posted by MikeAurelius
Mike is correct.
Yes, I've been a member of AOA for a long time. That doesn't mean I can't disagree with some of their positions and techniques. For example they set up that gotcha test of online glasses, but did they do a parallel or better yet a double blind of glasses ordered from private o.d.s, m.d.s and dispensers? If they did, where are those numbers? I may be retiring from face to face optometry soon, but not from optometry itself. I've got a new online project to work on, and you or the AOA will be welcome to test my products for quality, accuracy, value and safety against that of any other provider or group in the world.
One final note about "all from China". A lot of good old American frame lines are going "all from China", including some of VSPs. Just because something is fabricated in China doesn't make it bad. Those comments remind me of the good old days when the line was, "if it's Japanese made, it's junk". It was when they started out, but they rapidly became known for their quality and precision and have been at the top for quite a few years. Some of the China made frames and lenses already seem pretty darned good to me.
Totally agree Doc S. I've done a ton of troubleshooting/verifying Rx for going on 41 years. The net can't be much worse than I've seen from some B&M's. PAL's 45 degrees turned, R's for L's, axis, PD, a PAL put in upside down....Granted, the last 10 years have been worse than the previous 31...
Are there more ways to screw up with an online order? Sure, absolutely. But I've had plenty of experience to see just because someone has a face to face is not a guarantee of quality.
To Dr. Claw; I know you feel like some of us here are anti-Optometry or anti-ECP industry. I can't speak for anyone but me, but I'll tell you I am a realist. You, nor any group, or agency, or association will get rid of internet sales of eyeglasses. It ain't gonna happen! So, just like every other change I've seen in this industry ( Soft CL's, IOL's, Radial K, the advent of 1 hour opticals, cheap chain opticals, Lasik, ect.) all of which by the way were going to "shut us" (little guys) down. I'll learn to deal with it.
I'll also tell you this: Internet glasses are not going to put ANY of us out of business. If you go out of business it sure won't be because of internet glasses. I've wrote this so many times here over the years that my fingers hurt, but I'll say it again... Eyewear sales will NEVER surpass, in percentages of sales, CL's over the net which is at best estimates 14-16%. And how long did it take 1-800 or whom ever to get to that 14-16%? A friggin' long time! About 30 years.
If you're worried about harm to your patients, educate them! One by one. But keep in mind, you do not have control of them, their pocketbook nor where they wish to continue care! You're not going to end competition whether it be B&M or internet or space aliens that bring their own phoropters down to Earth. The internet is here and not going away, deal with it.
Not saying you have to agree. I disagree with them on things. I am just asking because AOA members have access to the letter that Dr. Loomis sent, and you should read it.
You are right - it would be good to do a similar study and include budget chains, middle-chains, and independent OD's, but do yo honestly think the results would be similar? Roughly 25% of the frames ordered online aren't even delivered, which in itself is virtually impossible with a B&M. Add to that the fact that you need a prescription to purchase at a B&M but not online, and that the vast majority of B&M's don't operate under the conditions that their first (and only) step in troubleshooting is "send it back and we'll try again or you get a refund (often reported to be 50% refund only, if anything)".
Also the Chinese products (and mindsets) and the Japanese are not the same, especially when it comes to quality. They are as different as night and day in many cases. We don't entrust our care to the slim possibility that the Chinese products will follow the same path that the Japanese ones did. If they do, then in 20 years we can discuss what IS and not what could possibly be. That's not to say that China produces NO quality products. Not all of their drywall was toxic and corrosive. Not all of their pet food was fatal. Not all of their fast food beef was spoiled. The issue regarding safety is that we have no way of distinguishing one from the other, or controlling which retailers or factories are being used. And if you want to talk finance and economics, what message does it send out if we say that it's better to save a few bucks here and lose more manufacturing jobs? Not getting into all that since that's another issue and not one I feel particularly strong about, but your side of the aisle seems to want it both ways - save the patient money by sending them to the evil corporations who consolidate power and inhibit competition and send all our jobs overseas... This needs to at least needs to be thought out and have its inconsistencies resolved.
Sorry if I don't bow down to the almighty internet. There are lots of things you can't buy or sell on the internet. There is only so much "education" that some people can take, and the problem is that the people most resistant to it are typically the ones who need it the most.
I am not worried about losing business to online or even budget opticals any more than Ruth's Chris worries about losing people to McDonald's. The issue isn't my financial losses or inability to compete, but rather the proposed PD mandate and the DIY healthcare mentality it facilitates, as well as the bad actors that take advantage of the gullible budget shoppers. We should ALL be concerned when any entity consolidates too much power, especially in foreign interests. My philosophy is that I believe in a government big enough to keep me from being bullied without becoming a bully itself. Telling doctors they must do extra work because some business needs that product of our work to successfully compete against us is absurd.
[QUOTE=optical24/7;516020] I'll also tell you this: Internet glasses are not going to put ANY of us out of business. If you go out of business it sure won't be because of internet glasses. I've wrote this so many times here over the years that my fingers hurt, but I'll say it again... Eyewear sales will NEVER surpass, in percentages of sales, CL's over the net which is at best estimates 14-16%. And how long did it take 1-800 or whom ever to get to that 14-16%? A friggin' long time! About 30 years.
Chris Ryser........please read the above and repeat.
Partially correct. There is overhead, but it will never approach the sum totals of B&M's who would do a comparable number of orders.
If you compare an online company doing 1000 orders/month vs 10 B&M's doing 100 orders/month each, the online company could be a guy and his wife working out of their home, but let's assume in the interest of fairness that they must rent space and hire employees. Storage requirements aren't that high - it's not a showroom. Can store over 100 frames in 1 cubic ft of space, so 3000 can fit on a shelf 6 feet long stacked 5 feet high. How many man hours does it take to process 1000? I may be way off, but I would guess about 10 minutes/pr running 2 machines, so 166 man hours or less than 1 month at 40 hours/week, so you need one person theoretically, and he could probably do the paperwork while waiting. In China this would cost you about $500 in labor per month. What do you get for $500 in an American B&M? A week for one optician at about $10/hr once you figure in payroll taxes, etc. Hardly enough to cover 10 B&M's for a month.
If you want to compare A/C, equipment costs, etc., don't bother. They are all ridiculously cheaper in China.
“If you're a sailor, best not know how to swim. Swimming only prolongs the inevitable—if the sea wants you and your time has come.”
James Clavell
“Healey’s First Law Of Holes: When in one, stop digging.”
Denis Healy
So your implication is that we can also get, say, cocaine on the internet? It IS the internet, after all, and internet = future and future = unstoppable, so internet = unstoppable? Stop romanticizing the internet. There is PUH-LENTY of stuff that you cannot obtain from the internet.
"The only constant is change".
Heraclitus
My point is that our industry has gone through changes many times. We learn to adapt to those changes, or we don't. You can talk about the philosophy of why people shouldn't be able to get net glasses. Believe it or not, I agree! But, it's an argument of futility. If the gov'ment makes you take a PD, charge for it. Educate your patients that "need it the most", go home and sleep well knowing that you've done what you could to help each and every one of them avoid seeking mis-care. This PD issue is really almost a non-issue since it won't be long before there's an app that measures better than any of us can. Providing it or not will not stop folks from purchasing net glasses. Heck, I wish I could get a gov'ment mandate that said I had to provide a PD. What an easy peasy way to give myself a raise (as in higher fees charged!)
Since I'm enjoying quoting people today, I'll leave you with one of the most wise quotes ever made....
"You've got to know when to hold em,
Know when to fold 'em.
Know when to walk away,
And know when to run."
Kenny Rogers
My impression is that we will not be allowed to charge fees, at least under insurance, but I have been toying with the idea of adding a "$25 Warby Parker fee" in writing at the bottom, also considering a "Chuck Schumer" or "FTC Compliance" fee instead.
OK, I'll settle for mostly correct.
In order to purchase glasses and/or contact lenses, one is required to first see an eye doctor in the US.
This is a given.
There is ALWAYS a fee for this.
Why?
Often it is the doctor's time, and the cost of keeping a b&m business open from day to day cited as top costs required to recoup.
Why would PD's be any different? (At least till they are generated my computer cameras and algorithms instead)
I'd like to note that Japan/US/Europe's biggest market for manufacturing equipment is China.
I don't believe they pay any less than we do for equipment, as they still have to pay for the install tech/engineer to do the initial install and calibration.
The biggest difference IMO is QA, warranty, and delivery time.
Who says they are in China? Why make that assumption at all?
Your numbers are "close" for surfacing (grinding/polishing) but leave out time required for order entry, layout/blocking, generating, surface inspection, edging layout/blocking, edging, coating, assembly, and final inspection.
You've also left out the financing cost of over $250K in machinery.
Actually, you can, if you know how to navigate the dark 'net.
[QUOTE=Golfnorth;516023]
At 23 to 24 Millions pair of glasses sold on the web this year, and a forecast of 27 Millions or next year would be another increase of about 10%. It seems to increase faster from one year to the next.
I was laughed at right here on OptiBoard when I warned about all this coming already 10 years ago.
Optical websites have sprung up by the double over the last 6 years, since I have kept track of them on my website.
I never said they would, but we will find out in another little while, as the increase is racing on.
Eyewear sales will NEVER surpass, in percentages of sales
I am working hard to increase my own business into other industrial fields with some modest success, having one of my products is now being used in about 80% of all automotive brands worldwide and also by one of the world's largest aerospace and weapons manufacturers among others.
It can never hurt to look for a solution to sell your products in another way than we used to be. Optical retailers could sell their products at a similar pricing than the ones on the web do, plus "service a la carte".
Last edited by Chris Ryser; 11-01-2015 at 01:11 PM.
Yes, I believe that in 10 or 20 years the only independent B&M opticians and optometrists who survive will be those who have long established service based fee structures, anyone who does anything for free will be gone with the wind and into employment positions elsewhere or in the same field. It has worked for me in contacts. I always have had fitting and refitting fees, and for the last 2 years have matched my material charges to 800 contact prices. Saves me a lot of time when I hand them their Rx and tell them, BTW our lens pricing is the same as 800 contacts, and we will have them for you to pick up in 2 week days max. Those who prefer shipping to their door can stick with 800 contacts. I still have my service fees. I'm gradually instituting service fees for all the internet spectacle stuff, for the same exact reason. After all, I want my successor to succeed too.
Another BTW, I'm old enough to remember the Japanese entry into our frame market. It was pathetic. But it didn't take them more than about 10 years to go from the basement to the top floor and drive almost all the American frame makers out of business. China may clean up their act faster than Japan did. They are right now doubling their baby production.
The issue is if the PD is considered part of the refraction for the purposes of the unlikely law changes or in the minds of insurance, then we cannot charge for it. For example, EyeMed lists the refraction as "$0".
If it's not, what if the patient refuses to pay for a PD? Can we then withhold it? What if they have no interest at all in obtaining the PD?
This puts us in the position where we either agree to do them for free or we refuse to see patients who don't have any reason or desire to pay for the PD.
Welcome to government mandates, people.
Well many of them ARE in China, so I am not assuming anything. We could also put them in Manhattan at the top of an expensive building, but we are talking what our realistic competition is. Also, why would it be $250k in machinery to run 2 sets of in-house labs?
But you can't do it in such volume (not even close). Yes, there will ALWAYS be a way to get a pair of eyeglasses online. I am not naive. The difference is if they make up 5% of sales or 0.05%.
It's one thing for high-dollar contracts to outsource for equipment that they themselves will use and need to be top-notch, and you CAN get great stuff from China, but that's not the norm. Sending cheap medical devices to the patient with zero regulation is a different story.
Right now, a moderately priced LOH generator, well maintained, runs about $75K. You could get Gerber/Coburn genny's for about $50K used and well maintained. Edgers, though, damned expensive for a good integrated model with tracer and layout blocker.. You will use up $250K real fast. And if you put in an A/R lab, triple that. Then you have all the disposables, plus pay a licensing fee for the software for free-form progressives, unless you want to run it old-school and use front-only cast progressives.
You would be surprised. The Chinese have pretty much demolished the precision optics market in the US and Europe in the last 10 years. If they can make high quality precision optics, they can also make high quality ophthalmic eyewear. Especially when they have no in-country restrictions on copyright/patent infringement. They will get a machine from out of country, tear it apart, analyzed it, and have an exact copy at 1/4 the price ready in 6 months for use in China only.
Look at their automobiles. They take European and US cars, and make them there for sale in China for about half the price elsewhere in the world, and they are daggone good cars.
source?
I am unaware of any Chinese precision optics manufactures that have really caused a huge impact on the precision optical industry.
All the top precision optical manufactures are still US based/owned companies.
If we are talking about premade components that are around 1/2 wave in accuracy, then maybe, but lower than that, the US is still the place to have it made.
I would like to add, does anyone envision how, under the reasoning I provided above, that we can viably charge for PD? If we charge for PD, then every person being refracted MUST pay for the PD (which personally I don't see happening), but if it can be paid for, then it MUST be paid for, therefore increasing the cost of health care and offsetting any of this illusory "advantage" to having the PD provided by mandate. My current rate is $50 for the PD (done as a deterrent, not as a revenue generator). I would probably drop it to $25 in the unlikely scenario that we are not prohibited to charge for it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks