I was out of toilet paper this morning

[drk]

and I happened to have a 20/20 Magazine handy. While ripping out a page or two (that looked the softest), I noted "Barry Santini" on the byline at the very last minute.

As no one was knocking on the door, I decided to read the article "Glasses for the Invisible Man, Number 2"(appropriately).

Seems like the big swipe of this article is Mr. Santini convincing us to flush our quality standards, and settle for what he calls "good enough" in filling prescriptions.

I hope none of my patients ever need to fill one with his optical.

I guess crap standards for online purchasing is to be expected.

I just never expected a respected optician to circle the drain.

[Chris Ryser]

I guess crap standards for online purchasing is to be expected.

..............................why did the world's largest optical corporation become the world's largest optical
corporation ?

Because they were smart and provided top quality products forever.

............................and as of now they are also the largest online optical seller and growing steadily, do you really think that they will compromise their quality standards to crap standards ?

Better think hard, and adjust your business to counter their rising online sales with better arguments than bad online quality.

[drk]

Dr. Doom responds ^^^

Maybe Mr. Santini has had a steak dinner with you in Montreal?

[kittyeyes]

Barry Santini lost all credibility and my respect when he presented a lecture at the Optician's Association of Massachusetts last fall. He displayed a photo of Lesley Stahl (who was part of the 60 Minutes story on Luxottica) on his power point presentation and said, "Thanks to this *****".....and so we all know what team Barry plays for.

[drk]

Uh, Lesley Stah did do a horrible job in that "exposee". It was yellow-as-a-pair-of-blueblockers journalism. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/luxotti...ses-expensive/

Now I like Barry again.

We can despise Luxottica, but the whole "they're an evil empire thing" was bankrolled by Warby Parker et al.

Now, that was before the merger. I do think we are in new territory with the merger, and I do think we are looking at monopoly, now.

[Tallboy]

There has to be some sort of endgame for Barry on this one. When I first came to optiboard no one- and I mean no one - rallied harder against "good enough" than him. He made me feel bad for ever using a stock lens and not fitting people into personalized freeform lenses whenever possible, or even thinking about using poly when trivex or 1.60 could be used.

[Chris Ryser]

Dr. Doom responds ^^^

Maybe Mr. Santini has had a steak dinner with you in Montreal?

Now I have become a doctor honoris causa ..........................well well well.

and...................no I had no steak dinner with Barry Santini, but I still appreciate him. I believe he is a fine optician and has his own opinions, if you agree with him or not.

[drk]

It's unfair to speculate what Barry's endgame is.



BTW, I wonder if Warby Parker corporate has consultant opticians on retainerf?

[Barry Santini]

It's unfair to speculate what Barry's endgame is.



BTW, I wonder if Warby Parker corporate has consultant opticians on retainerf?

Awareness.
And a possible path to surviving and thriving for opticians.

B

[Chris Ryser]

BTW, I wonder if Warby Parker corporate has consultant opticians on retainer?

and...............................

Warby Parker announced on Wednesday that it had raised $75 million in a new round of financing led byT. Rowe Price, the mutual fund company, and including Baillie Gifford, the asset manager. It also disclosed that it had added Youngme Moon, a professor at Harvard Business School Who sits on the board of Unilever, as a new director.


Link:
https://www.optiboard.com/forums/sho...sed-75-million

Having done some research on the question, I found that Youngme Moon is the author of the bestselling book, Different, and she has published and sold more than two million case studies on companies ranging from Starbucks to IKEA to Uber. She currently co-hosts a weekly podcast, link: HBS After Hours.

At HBS, Professor Moon has launched a number of strategic innovations, including the MBA FIELD curriculum and the HBX Learning Platform. She has served as Senior Associate Dean for strategy and innovation, as well as Senior Associate Dean for the MBA Program. She has received the HBS Student Association Faculty Award for teaching excellence seven times; she is also the inaugural recipient of the Hellman Faculty Fellowship, awarded for distinction in research.

source: https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/pr...spx?facId=6589


According to this above statement she would BE FULLY qualified as a consultant to Warby Parker and I bet all the tea in China that she does not come cheap.

I would guess that they have had optical consultants right from the start of the business for technical reasons but this choice is what they want now.

[Tallboy]

Barry keep writing, I will read every article.

[Barry Santini]

I feel that one must Know how and what makes “good enough” good enough to consumers in order to deliver real world value solutions that they will see and appreciate.

B

[Lab Insight]

Now I have become a doctor honoris causa ..........................well well well.

and...................no I had no steak dinner with Barry Santini, but I still appreciate him. I believe he is a fine optician and has his own opinions, if you agree with him or not.

+1.

[bta89]

I have seen patients who have hated what we would call "quality standard" type glasses for various reasons. Sometimes, the "good enough" glasses are what the patient wants or is expecting. We should not forget that there is no exact science when it comes to glasses. As long as we can make the glasses to the patients needs and they work and the patient is happy with them, that should be considered quality.

[Lab Insight]

I have seen patients who have hated what we would call "quality standard" type glasses for various reasons. Sometimes, the "good enough" glasses are what the patient wants or is expecting. We should not forget that there is no exact science when it comes to glasses. As long as we can make the glasses to the patients needs and they work and the patient is happy with them, that should be considered quality.

Good point. Quality can very subjective in its definition.

[Tallboy]

I knew you had a reason Barry, and I agree.

Know thyne enemy like you know thyne self.

[bretk0923]

I think that the two articles are a good thought experiment. Also, it may or may not give us all some small insight into the thought process of an online retailer. Good information to have, albeit maybe not something that many of us would decide to implement into our daily practices. Couldn't agree more with everyone having their own opinions, though.

I took a CE course at Cherry Optical's What's New University in March that discussed why 100% is so important, and a few facts were thrown out that really struck me. The presenter asked "What would happen if everybody operated at 99% accuracy?", and if that were the case in 2017:

- 12 newborn children would be delivered to the wrong parents
- 114,000 mismatched pairs of shoes would be shipped to customers
- 18,000 pieces of mail would be mishandled PER HOUR (!!!)
- 2.5 million books would be shipped with the wrong cover
- 20,000 drug prescriptions would be written incorrectly
- 103,206 sets of income taxes would be processed incorrectly

A little off topic, I know, but can you imagine these numbers at the 85th percentile instead of the 99th percentile? So my takeaway is that if we have the ability to provide 100% quality service and accuracy, we are doing our patients a disservice by not doing so. And that difference in ethics is what separates us as independent ECPs from big box and online retailers by a wide margin.

[Chris Ryser]

So my takeaway is that if we have the ability to provide 100% quality service and accuracy, we are doing our patients a disservice by not doing so. And that difference in ethics is what separates us as independent ECPs from big box and online retailers by a wide margin.

................good post with one exception highlighted in red.

The largest part, and growing, of online optical retailers will now will be, and is already owned by Essilor-Luxottica.

Essilor will never compromise quality, and will continue to supply also online their standard top quality products.

In order to successfully survive in the conventional market some commercial adjustments will be needed.

[Kujiradesu]

"The Invisible Man" is a continuation of a through-line in Barry's career: Where's the line? How much is good enough? These discussions are not had so you aim for 70%. Thats missing the point. You always aim for 100%, but when you encounter an issue how much can you move the needle to make the eyewear acceptable?

[Barry Santini]

If you aren’t always considering the value equation, you’re missing the point.

B

[Chris Ryser]

Sometimes, the "good enough" glasses are what the patient wants or is expecting. We should not forget that there is no exact science when it comes to glasses.

As long as we can make the glasses to the patients needs and they work and the patient is happy with them, that should be considered quality.

There is no science in making glasses, it is exactitude and proper measurements observed by people who have learned the trade, and are qualified to do so.

[bretk0923]

There most certainly are those patients who see the value equation differently than we present it at my office, and that's perfectly fine. That's the beauty of consumerism, that it involves the human element.

We present the best quality service and eyewear and are unafraid if someone does not like our prices. There are a number of patients that continue to come to our office year after year for their exams that do not purchase their glasses from us. Why do they continue to come back?

There are also a number of patients who continue to purchase glasses from us that do not have their exams at our office. Why do they come back?

Essilor and Luxottica can do whatever the hell they want, compromise on quality or not, it makes no difference. There is, and always will be, a very real demand for quality eyewear provided by doctors and opticians who are trained to provide it with quality service. Small business thrives in every sector of the retail world, what makes everyone all of a sudden think that the optical industry is any different?

[Chris Ryser]

Small business thrives in every sector of the retail world, what makes everyone all of a sudden think that the optical industry is any different?

................................you have made some good points.

There will always be a demand for good quality professional service business, however it will reduced to the good or the best of them.

I still remember, it was a few year back that I used to have my cars serviced at the small corner garage around corner from the office. suddenly it was closed, demolished and a new building put up. Same thing happened across the street to a regular gas station.

Within a few month 2 new very large gas stations with a big convenience store and a car wash, belonging to two competing gas companies, each with 4 isles at 2 pumps with space for 8 cars to buy gas.

The privately owned and or operated gas stations have just about disappeared a few years back……………..

All the large oil companies have now their own gas stations and control their market 100%.

[lensmanmd]

Essilor will never compromise quality, and will continue to supply also online their standard top quality products.

Essilor is the reason why ANSI has loosened standards over the last three decades. Essilor is the reason why we have a “zone system” for cosmetic quality. How many of you remember quarter cyls had +/- 7 degrees? What is it now? +/- 14 degrees. And what is up with acceptable cosmetic defects according to zones 1 through 3?
Essilor will never compromise? Perhaps not in their commodity products, but they have compromised wholesale/online product quality across the board. Why? Spoilage costs revenue. Wake up!

[Chris Ryser]

Essilor is the reason why ANSI has loosened standards over the last three decades. Essilor is the reason why we have a “zone system” for cosmetic quality. How many of you remember quarter cyls had +/- 7 degrees? What is it now? +/- 14 degrees. And what is up with acceptable cosmetic defects according to zones 1 through 3?

Essilor will never compromise? Perhaps not in their commodity products, but they have compromised wholesale/online product quality across the board. Why? Spoilage costs revenue. Wake up!

Essilor is used and has grown up to European Standards in the optical trade, which have always been higher than on this continent.

Just read up on the requirements to become an optometrist/optician in Europe-at:

European Council of Optometry and Optics

Guidelines for the Accreditation of European Optical Qualifications to Meet the Standards of the European Qualification in Optics.

https://www.ecoo.info/wp-content/upl...tober-2017.pdf


On the next link you can see the latest ANSI standards by the Vision Council from 2016:

https://www.thevisioncouncil.org/sit...rence%20v2.pdf

“optical zone system” for cosmetic quality

.…and to visibly check a lens for irregularities and visible defaults seems to me to be normal duties for any optician, in any lab, and can not be blamed on Essilor.

See lens quality control:
http://leadserv.u-bourgogne.fr/files...case-study.pdf