Another promotion for onliners. UGH
The real issue here is that not a single one of our trade associations has taken issue with these reports. Why are they not representing our professions to the general public when programs like this are being aired with increasing frequency? What are they afraid of and who are they protecting?
This question was answered decades ago. What's more shocking is that anyone of us would still ask it in any seriousness today.Originally Posted by Judy Canty
I want to know how they think comparing Dior to Zenni is appropriate. BMW drivers don't shop for Yugos.
But what really gets me is that the important part of eyewear is the lenses, and this wasn't even discussed. Who cares how you see, as long as it only cost $7.
And the fact that the optometry office was made to look bad because they didn't replace a pair that was stepped on. Whose fault is carelessness? But I guess if you view eyewear as disposable it doesn't matter.
Idiocy.
Trade associations are comprised of members. Members should be out there spreading the word. Are you a member? Are you spreading the word?
I just went to the ABC News website, clicked on World News with Diane Sawyer and sent a complaint. We can take a public stand or we can come here and complain. It's a choice. If our associations are not going to use this opportunity, then we must do it as individuals. Tired of waiting for someone else to do the work. If you have the time to come here and complain, you have the time to go to their website as well.
Yeah, hope springs eternal and all that....
That's what I'm talking about!
I think we should use these media opportunities to welcome fittings, service, etc., for eyewear purchased anywhere....for a fee. The sooner we unbundle our services, the faster we will grow and help establish the proper relationship between unbundled eyewear a la carte, and packed/bundled eyewear with inclusive service fees.
who wants a car without a warranty...unless they can do it themselves?
Same for eyewear.
B
I just posted a comment on the ABC News blog where this story is contained. So far, there are 3 comments.
http://abcnews.go.com/Site/page?id=3...Diane%20Sawyer
How much easier can we make it?
Who wants a car that is manufactured off shore, is not guaranteed to run, as is perhaps too small to even drive?
Now, take it a step further and ask, "What new mechanic would want to work on that car? Actually, while typing this, I just answered my own question...a car dealership WOULD invite that person in for service, so they could sell them a real car.
Ok...it took 50 years, but I'm starting to get it. (I don't like it...but I get it.)
It's the mindless media. Today the news is "cheap glasses are great". Tomorrow the news will be "cheap glasses are a rip off".
Dog bite man/man bites dog sorta thing. They're there for the sensationalism.
There is a complete and total lacking of thoroughness associated with today's press (maybe laziness is more accurate). It used to be editors pushed back until a story was complete. 30 years ago, an editor would have said, go interview an optician and get their side of the story. It today's world, media outlets like ABC have cut back on staff but with today's short news cycles, they need to gin out more stories. And shorter stories too. This is the result.
Amen.
And, Johns, I agree: get the patient in, perform the service and let them realize how much value lies in what we do. Just be sure to remind the patient that we are not responsible for breakage
Andrew
"One must remember that at the end of the road, there is a path" --- Fortune Cookie
Here's the complaint I sent to them:
I wish the segment on online eyeglasses had addressed the other side of that story: that when tested in 2011, 44% of them failed to meet safety standards for correct prescription or impact resistance.
For reference, the article published by the American Optometric Association: http://newsfromaoa.org/2011/11/09/ha...pecifications/
Who else sent something?
But why not also protest Essilor taking over all the labs and manufacturers?
1. Because the public doesn't care about it.
2. Because ECP's keep using their products and funding their acquisitions.
Maybe OptiBoarders should start a collection box to be used as encuragement .........
...................good statement
When will we all admit that politicians of all levels can be bought to vote for one side or another. Maybe OptiBoarders should start a collection box to be used as encuragement for lawmakers, or donate them a pair of nice expensive glasses in exchange for political favours.
Would anyone know how our big corporations are handling it ?
For #1, that exact same reason can be used as the reason why consumers won't shop at a brick and mortar optical store.
For #2, well, if you are going to go after on-liners in the fashion noted above, the exact same thing can easily be done about Essilor. Write to your congresscritter, write to the Attorney General and the FTC. Ask for an anti-trust investigation. And remember, Essilor owns one of the biggest onliners out there.
Not every thread necessitates an anti-Essilor rant. Not that they don't have their fingers in every pie, but this feature was about online eyewear.
not only one..............................they own 2 of the largest .................
not only one..............................they own 2 of the largest
Exactly, Chris.
I'm not ranting about Essilor, per-se, Judy. Just pointing out the obvious. Because, in the end, it *IS* about Essilor too.
Just complained on the abc web site. twits....
I just sent a message through the link.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks