No surprise there that The WSJ is supporting the status quo of an entrenched and powerful industry.
No surprise there that The WSJ is supporting the status quo of an entrenched and powerful industry.
Optical Cross: n. crucifixion apparatus used by the New Jersey State Board.
"It is not knowing, but the love of learning, that characterizes the scientific [person]." -Charles Sanders Peirce
"A concept is a brick. It can be used to build a courthouse of reason. Or it can be thrown through the window. -Gilles Deleuze
The Pros and Cons of Buying Glasses Online .....................
Here is the article: No commentsOriginally Posted by Quince
The Pros and Cons of Buying Glasses Online
Sites selling prescription eyewear offer convenience and lower prices, but doctors warn they’re not ideal for everyone.
By
DANA WECHSLER LINDEN
Oct. 20, 2015 10:29 a.m. ET
Have you thought about buying your next pair of prescription glasses online? The lure of low prices, huge selection, and convenience is compelling.
That said, eye doctors have some concerns. It turns out that buying glasses on the internet can be a boon for some people , but not all.
I actually think it was a pretty honest and unbiased view of the industry. Did you actually read it or just decide that because of what CNN told you|?
I don't deem the WSJ as a reliable source of information period.
The Wall Street Journal is owned by News Corp. News Corp. is owned by Rupert Murdoch. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...owns/71089066/ If reality contradicts any of those many business interests you can bet that they wont be printed in that august newspaper of note.
Optical Cross: n. crucifixion apparatus used by the New Jersey State Board.
"It is not knowing, but the love of learning, that characterizes the scientific [person]." -Charles Sanders Peirce
"A concept is a brick. It can be used to build a courthouse of reason. Or it can be thrown through the window. -Gilles Deleuze
So you didn't read the article, okay thanks.
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourcei...=wsj%20glasses
3rd option after any ads.
Don't know why the direct link didn't work.
I think it was well written in a sense of covering basic concerns the general public should have.
Have I told you today how much I hate poly?
I really don't think this is true. Target and Lenscrafters use the same outside labs and the quality difference is night and day. Also, even if the customer submits a correct pd and the lab makes a correct pd, these online shops are just guessing at where to put the set height/OC.
Anecdotally, my experience with online specs matches the results of the article mentioned.
Anecdotally, my experience with online specs ..........................
Please change the Anecdotally to the present.
an·ec·dot·al
(ăn′ĭk-dōt′l)adj.1. also an·ec·dot·ic (-dŏt′ĭk) or an·ec·dot·i·cal (-ĭ-kəl) Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes.
2. Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/anecdotally
Based on casual observations or indications ..........................
Thank you....................for correcting me.
what are the up to date percentages?
Last edited by tx11; 09-19-2016 at 01:42 PM.
please specify
Has the AOA performed a 2015 or 2016 study on online ordered glasses? Have the Rx and safety issues been resolved? what are the new percentages?
www.aoa.org/.../let-the-buyer-beware-a-closer-look-at-ordering-eyeglasses-online
Aug 7, 2014 - An AOA study published in 2011 with the Optical Laboratories
That is the last one I could find
Right. Don't try to compete with the ciarlatani. Also see "pig wrestling".
Last edited by Robert Martellaro; 09-20-2016 at 05:07 PM.
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. - Richard P. Feynman
Experience is the hardest teacher. She gives the test before the lesson.
Before deciding on going to school for opticianry and becoming an apprentice, I had a point where I was uninsured for eyewear - or at least knew so little about my coverage that I might as well have been - and went to both EyeBuyDirect and Zenni for glasses. I bought three pairs off Zenni, one pair off EBD, nice and cheap. "Nice" is being used lightly. I'd thought I'd gotten a real good deal, until all four frames were too big for my itty bitty face... well, one ended up fitting alright, so I wore those. Noticed my vision wasn't perfect with them, but thought little of it, and hey, it was better than the other three.
Fast forward a year, I'm in school learning about power readings and I decide to pop in my lovely Zenni glasses... OFF! The power was off, the cylinders were off -- and when I say cylinders, I should mention that I only was prescribed cylinder power in one eye, and yet had it in both lenses. OC heights were of course way off too, but I couldn't try them on ahead of time, so of course they were.
Anyway, whenever patients come in and either mention buying additional pairs online or ask the questions that make it obvious they're planning on it (PDs, seg heights (useless!)), I have the benefit of citing my firsthand experience in why they should think twice. But you also have to look at it from the patient's perspective; we're the competitors. Of course we're going to tell them not to go online. And maybe in the moment, they'll agree, but two weeks later that price and convenience will be talking a lot louder than whatever wisdom we can share.
So, what I like to do is mention that if they see a set of frames they like online, buy 'em. But let us do the lenses. This works two-fold - one, it shows that I care more about their well-being optically re: lenses than selling them what they perceive as "expensive" frames, and two, often enough it lets them know about a service we provide that they frankly didn't even consider was an option. "Oh, you guys do that?" I hear that all the time. Yeah, bring your outside frames. If they're suitably built (and there's the catch, of course) then we'll make you some lenses that actually work.
Doesn't work for everyone, but it's a way of working with the issue somewhat rather than pushing vainly against it.
And as a bonus, if it turns out their cheapo online frame isn't quality enough for us to be comfortable working with, we have it in our hands, can show the patient the issues, and they may buy one of our frames anyway. It's happened. Even had someone donate her expensive online frame to our Lion's Club box when I told her the brand was on our "do not send to lab" list and buy a similar looking one off our wall instead. Gotta do what you can, y'know? Show your quality, show you care, show instead of just telling. Easier said than done, but patients (the smart ones anyway) will notice. Zenni can air TV ads all they want, but word of mouth is where it counts.
(As a confession: I still have those frames and I still wear them. Often patients go, "Ooh, I like those, did you get them here??" and I have to smack myself for wearing them to work. Starts the conversation on online quality, at least.)
Your confession just killed your nicely posted arguments.
Obviously you are not fully convinced of your own ideas.
Sorry, should have clarified - I have since replaced theirs with my own lenses, it's only the frame I still have. The point still stands that if the frames are suitable quality (which in this case they are), the lenses should be left to those who will do things correctly.
Otherwise, yes, you're right, if I was still wearing that original set as-is it would be "do as I say not as I do". Patients like examples. I strive to be a good one when I can.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks