# Optical Forums > General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum >  PD responsibilities

## nawsman

Please forgive me if this is not the right forum for my questions,

Who is responsible for obtaining a PD.

We are tell our customers it's the Dispensing OPticians responsibility to provide the PD, Not the Dr. because it is not part of the exam.

We have a numerious Customers whom just get their Prescriptions and then use them to order online. Which brings me back to my question, Who is responsible

----------


## Barry Santini

Soon, all Rxs will have a PD mandated.

B

----------


## Judy Canty

Whoever wants to put themselves in that position. Not me.

----------


## optilady1

We tell them the person who sells them their glasses is responsible.

----------


## Wes

> Soon, all Rxs will have a PD mandated.
> 
> B


Maybe, maybe not, depends on whether the ODs and OMDs can convince the legislatures of the truth or not.  That being, that pd is nowhere near enough to make glasses.  PD.  Mono PD.  OC height.  Then take into account actual fitting measurements due to crooked noses, and uneven eyes.  A PD represented as only one number is a recipe for disaster in many cases.  Who to believe?  The entire body of Doctors, or the internet eyewear provider?  Probably whoever pays the legislators in question the most money.  That's how laws get made folks!

----------


## Barry Santini

Wes:
What you describe is only necessary for excellent eyewear.
PDs alone are sufficient for adequate eyewear.
B

----------


## Barry Santini

People:
It was only *after* the introduction of progessives that mono PDs became the norm. Is it really so awful that online eyewear might only rise to a standard in optical fitting that was taken as gold only 30+ years ago?

----------


## Judy Canty

If ever there was a time for all three "O's" to work together, this is it. 

I tried to start the conversation in VA and was met with massive indifference, even though both the Opticians Assoc of VA and the VA Optometric Assoc were meeting within a few miles of each other last fall. Sad, really.

----------


## Wes

> Wes:
> What you describe is only necessary for excellent eyewear.
> PDs alone are sufficient for adequate eyewear.
> B


Symmetry equals beauty.  http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...-symmetry.html 
Googling those words lead to a plethora of articles.  
Most of the patients I see are not beautiful, nor are they symmetrical.  Very often, I see variances of 2-3 mm in horizontal pd measurements, and further variances due to broken/misaligned noses, and vertical differences in the 1-2 mm range.  These variances in higher powers and especially in progressives, lead to glasses being made with binocular measurements (and with zero oc ht measurements) that are not adequate in most ECP's opinions.
How's this for a sales promotion?  Firmoo: Only the exquisitely beautiful can successfully wear our glasses!

----------


## Barry Santini

The O's fight, for the most part, over the Rx and control.
Let the damn Rx be free!
If all the O's loosen their death grip on control, maybe...just maybe...we'll finally see the path allowing us to reconcile this and the related issues.
B

----------


## Johns

go to my profile page...I'm giving out FREE pd's!

----------


## optical24/7

> Please forgive me if this is not the right forum for my questions,
> 
> Who is responsible for obtaining a PD.
> 
> We are tell our customers it's the Dispensing OPticians responsibility to provide the PD, Not the Dr. because it is not part of the exam.
> 
> We have a numerious Customers whom just get their Prescriptions and then use them to order online. Which brings me back to my question, Who is responsible


If you have numerous patients going to the net, you're hemorrhaging patients to other B&M's. The net is just another low cost outlet. You need to look at your products, service and pricing and figure out why they are not purchasing from you.

----------


## Craig

> If you have numerous patients going to the net, you're hemorrhaging patients to other B&M's. The net is just another low cost outlet. You need to look at your products, service and pricing and figure out why they are not purchasing from you.


Finally, the truth is told!  We have had 3 requests for PD's in the past few years and we will sell the information for $40.00 or they can get the info somewhere else.
My stores just asked 3 patients to not come back to us as they only get eye exams and never buy glasses from us; they just like our exams but not our glasses, so we told then they had to schedule exams in the off season as we are too limited in our dr. days and need to save them for buying customers.  After 5 years of no buying and sucking the optical life out of us to verify the glasses he buys elsewhere is not going to work.
They will go elsewhere and we will all be fine.

----------


## AustinEyewear

> We tell them the person who sells them their glasses is responsible.


  TOTALLY AGREE!




> Maybe, maybe not, depends on whether the ODs and OMDs can convince the legislatures of the truth or not.  That being, that pd is nowhere near enough to make glasses.  PD.  Mono PD.  OC height.  Then take into account actual fitting measurements due to crooked noses, and uneven eyes.  A PD represented as only one number is a recipe for disaster in many cases.  Who to believe?  The entire body of Doctors, or the internet eyewear provider?  Probably whoever pays the legislators in question the most money.  That's how laws get made folks!


  ABSOLUTELY!  We take over 10 measurements to build a pair of glasses, pd is only one of them!  The opticians job is to get an accurate PD, not the docs




> Finally, the truth is told!  We have had 3 requests for PD's in the past few years and we will sell the information for $40.00 or they can get the info somewhere else.
> My stores just asked 3 patients to not come back to us as they only get eye exams and never buy glasses from us; they just like our exams but not our glasses, so we told then they had to schedule exams in the off season as we are too limited in our dr. days and need to save them for buying customers.  After 5 years of no buying and sucking the optical life out of us to verify the glasses he buys elsewhere is not going to work.
> They will go elsewhere and we will all be fine.


  Bravo!  My hero!




> The O's fight, for the most part, over the Rx and control.
> Let the damn Rx be free!
> If all the O's loosen their death grip on control, maybe...just maybe...we'll finally see the path allowing us to reconcile this and the related issues.
> B


Who is this O, Barry?  Please stop the blanket accusations and name names. Its upsetting to get categorized into this web of misinformation.  BTW - can't you just take the darn PD?  Why do you want the O to do it for you?

----------


## finefocus

> go to my profile page...I'm giving out FREE pd's!


I'd like to stock some of the 62's, and a few 30/29's please.

----------


## Laurie

It doesn't make sense to me to legally require a PD on an Rx...Most doctors do not measure PD's prior to the refraction part of the exam, they simply dial the opening until they can see the patients eyes in the middle.


And, opticians do not measure PD's until we sit down at the dispensing table to do the final selection of frames and take the appropriate measurements.

How would such a law be enforced?  Force the docs to take PD's (will they keep a pupilometer in the room)?  And, the patient does not see the optician until they purchase eyewear, so the optician would essentially be out of the equation, as we do not 'write prescriptions'.

It seems reasonable to me that who ever is making the eyewear sale is responsible for measuring the PD.  If the patient wants to be a 'do-it-yourself-er' then so be it.  I would not be inclined to do it for them, no matter how much bullying occurs via these conversations and online petitions.

Craig,  you've got the right idea.  Your business model gives me fond memories of the old Lugene Optician days.  Excellence in optics is a blast, and it does not always have to mean extra-expensive...it is a mindset.

: )

Laurie

----------


## regional_manager

I had someone call the other day for their pd, after I gave it to them she asked if 1.50 lens was good enough for her prescription, and whether or not I recommend anti glare coating......

----------


## Judy Canty

> I had someone call the other day for their pd, after I gave it to them she asked if 1.50 lens was good enough for her prescription, and whether or not I recommend anti glare coating......


And you told her??????

----------


## Golfnorth

> I had someone call the other day for their pd, after I gave it to them she asked if 1.50 lens was good enough for her prescription, and whether or not I recommend anti glare coating......


Regional Manager are you mental?

----------


## Plausible

> Regional Manager are you mental?


A, Yeah!!! We all are, mental that is. I mean we are all in optical related fields right?!?!?

----------


## Wes

> A, Yeah!!! We all are, mental that is. I mean we are all in optical related fields right?!?!?


Not me,

I'm glad I'm a helicopter...

----------


## nawsman

Our prices are competitive for this area, but most of our patients are on state assistance which will not pay for Frames and lenses. We offer a discount but still they think its to much...they still think they should get everything for free.

----------


## optical24/7

> Our prices are competitive for this area, but most of our patients are on state assistance which will not pay for Frames and lenses. We offer a discount but still they think its to much...they still think they should get everything for free.


There's the problem. Low cost eyewear is a saturated market with giant players that make it tough to compete against. I know it's not your call, but I'd relocate if most of my base was on assistance.

----------


## RIMLESS

Are PD's becoming nothing more than a pants size for the eyes???

----------


## Fezz

> Are PD's becoming nothing more than a pants size for the eyes???


I look at it as more like the IQ of those buying eyewear online!

----------


## EyeCare Rich

> I look at it as more like the IQ of those buying eyewear online!


HaHaHaHa,  That is a really good one Fezz.
Lots of good information coming out of this post.  I really appreciate Craig's views.  I as well have only had about 3 people ask for their pd's, which I charge for the measurement, and ask them to return to verify measurement was produced correctly.  One of these patients came back about a month after ordering online, and ordered a pair of Zeiss Individual Progressives after experiencing the Online eyewear.  Think I won them back in the end with the service.  My patients tend to understand what it is that they are buying and receiving, the product as well as the service.

----------


## Johns

> I'd like to stock some of the 62's, and a few 30/29's please.


Those must be popular, as they are all backordered!  We've got a bunch of 75's that not many have used, and there's not much difference if you want to try those.

----------


## Craig

I just wanted to post #1000.

I still feel the same and no bells went off!

----------


## finefocus

We don't do 75's, as the pertinent customer tends to be primitive and hard to manage; we give them a coupon for the local SFSE.

----------


## Fezz

> i just wanted to post #1000.
> 
> I still feel the same and no bells went off!



_***bells***bells***bells***bells***_

----------


## drk

Anything other than "future vision" to inform that opinion, Mr. Santini? :)

----------


## drk

If people want to do-it-themselves, by all means.  It's a pretty free country in that regard right now, even though it's mostly illegal.

If people want legal, professional care, even better.

Don't mess around with Mr. Inbetween.

----------


## Barry Santini

> Anything other than "future vision" to inform that opinion, Mr. Santini? :)


I tend to think, in keeping consistent with the FCLCA, that eyeglass Rxs will no doubt be required to Include a PD to allow free and unencumbered redemption by consumers...particularly when EMR/EHR become the norm for transmitting eyewear "health" info.

----------


## himmeroo

Back in the day.I did some wholesale work for an OD and everything was 4 in,4 below.Of course all the work was Flat tops.Never had a remake from him.

----------


## finefocus

Yesterday I did a job in a 42-24 frame, followed by a 62-15. Patient PD's were within 2mm of each other.
One size certainly does not fit all.

----------


## APBOD

> I tend to think, in keeping consistent with the FCLCA, that eyeglass Rxs will no doubt be required to Include a PD to allow free and unencumbered redemption by consumers...particularly when EMR/EHR become the norm for transmitting eyewear "health" info.


Noone's encumbering anyone.  As long as they have a valid Rx, they can get glasses...from anywhere. 

Does Home Depot come out and dig the holes for the people that buy shovels?

You wanna buy online? Take your own damned PD.

----------


## Barry Santini

Look, I'll be amongst the first to admit if  i should change my view, but I think our industry is not well served by defending territoriality on matters if PD. it's not about logic- it's about recognizing the negative emotional response that consumers, consumer advicates and the press will fan and leverage to make us look like we are unfairly denying the public free choice for eyewear, lower-cost or not. A simple binocular pd is really not so much trouble to include is ir?
I'd hate to see the press squewer us on such a minor point, and get us mired in minutiae rather than helping the public to see the real, intrinsic balue of our expertise and services.
B

----------


## AustinEyewear

Its not about territory. Its about common sense.  The pd us used to build the glasses.  The pd is not used for contacts.  It is not used for anything, unless someone wants glasses.  And the pd is just 1/10 of what should be provided to build proper glasses.  Its about educating the press that the pd is worthless and has nothing to do with an Rx until all other parameters are selected, the lens, the frame, ect.....   Should the pt decide they want glasses, then an expert optician can provide accurate measurements at that time.  I don't see a reason to clog up exam rooms so people can get pds, nor do I see a reason to mislead the public that if they have a Rx and a PD they are good to go.  Its just simply not true.

----------


## Sledzinator

I am going to have to agree with Barry on this one. I think acting so territorial over the PD just proves how concerned we are about losing business to the online retailers. I vote to let them have it. I look forward to inspecting and failing work done by online retailers. Although in the office I work for it hasn't affected us.

----------


## Barry Santini

Austin eyewear: I think the public is good to go with an Rx and a PD for eyewear...adequate eyewear of varying total quality abd satisfaction. In keeping with a free market, if the public trys and discards online Rx eyewear, the free market has made that decision. If not, or in between, again, let the narket decide.
I personally won't listen to a 128kps mp3. Should I rightfully insist that others shouldn't either, because I see it as inferior?
It is about degree. The implication jas benn unspoken that 'glasses r glasses'. The buying public who've been treated to better gets yet another venue to find out...on their own, by themselves.
I for one, welcome it.
Btw: i meant no distespect to you in a previous post about Rx control. It's just that stories are legion about grey areas of abuse and outright ignoring of the FTC Rx release rule. The Rx handoff to staff, rather than patients, is but one.
B

----------


## Judy Canty

> Noone's encumbering anyone. As long as they have a valid Rx, they can get glasses...from anywhere. 
> 
> Does Home Depot come out and dig the holes for the people that buy shovels?
> 
> You wanna buy online? Take your own damned PD.


+1  =)

----------


## AustinEyewear

> Austin eyewear: I think the public is good to go with an Rx and a PD for eyewear...adequate eyewear of varying total quality abd satisfaction. In keeping with a free market, if the public trys and discards online Rx eyewear, the free market has made that decision. If not, or in between, again, let the narket decide.
> I personally won't listen to a 128kps mp3. Should I rightfully insist that others shouldn't either, because I see it as inferior?
> It is about degree. The implication jas benn unspoken that 'glasses r glasses'. The buying public who've been treated to better gets yet another venue to find out...on their own, by themselves.
> B



Who knows what the percentage is, but for example sake lets say that 40% of pts that go thru the exam room in a day are SV only  (ages 12-43), a 31 year spread, and remainder are going to need something else.  43-85, a 42 year spread. That means your distribution is roughly 40% that are SV and lets say 50% want glasses.  That is 20% of the pts who come thru an exam room that can use the PD as an approximation for getting glasses that get them somewhat in the area of decent acuity, or 75% of potential acuity, OC height and other things will likely be off. You are catering to 20% of the population by offering the PD at this time, and they still will not get the best vision possible.  It does no good for the remainder, not does it educate them as they move forward in time and become presbyopes.  Its a disservice to them all the way around, at every age.

Listening to poor digital sampling is one thing, putting up with a fraction of your potential visual acuity is another. 

BTW - I know you didn't mean anyone in particular. I was just "messin with ya."  I know your passionate about the subject. You're a respected person in the community, so people are going to listen to you, so my mission is to provide perspective when ever you bring up the subject, because I'd hate to see legions of opticians who look up to you end up distrusting every O on the planet.  Yes, there are probably a few bad ones, but most I know are pretty good.  Even drk!

----------


## 4554lake

> Look, I'll be amongst the first to admit if  i should change my view, but I think our industry is not well served by defending territoriality on matters if PD. it's not about logic- it's about recognizing the negative emotional response that consumers, consumer advicates and the press will fan and leverage to make us look like we are unfairly denying the public free choice for eyewear, lower-cost or not. A simple binocular pd is really not so much trouble to include is ir?
> I'd hate to see the press squewer us on such a minor point, and get us mired in minutiae rather than helping the public to see the real, intrinsic balue of our expertise and services.
> B


Big deal...Who cares about the negative emotional response?....It will have zero effect on our business....Unless made law,PD release is not the industry standard....It is currently,and always has been the responsibility of the eyeglass provider to determine it....


If people wish to be their own "optician"...they can either try to do the measurement on their own,or find someone who will measure and release it.....I charge $40 for it......


Perhaps you dont mind providing measurements and after sales service to people for free,so they can buy online......But I wont.....


Why should I do the competition's work for them?

----------


## Barry Santini

I'm very glad that you, drk and others are here/there, keeping me in *check*.
Drk knows I'm inherently attracted to "shiny" things.
Austineyewear: you make very good points. But I think it's incumbent on us to recognize power of media and social media to fan the flames of emotinsl responses. My measure is that, even after exposure ro our points and arguements, the public remains emotionally skeptical. I'd rather concede and get padt the emontional point, and open up the dialogue for rhe real, intrinsic value of what we do.
B

----------


## Barry Santini

> I am going to have to agree with Barry on this one. I think acting so territorial over the PD just proves how concerned we are about losing business to the online retailers. I vote to let them have it. I look forward to inspecting and failing work done by online retailers. Although in the office I work feor it hasn't affected us.


I don't know about 'failing' but I think lack of satisfaction is a far better net with which to catch the unhappy fish.

----------


## AustinEyewear

> But I think it's incumbent on us to recognize power of media and social media to fan the flames of emotinsl responses. My measure is that, even after exposure ro our points and arguements, the public remains emotionally skeptical. 
> B


I don't really hear anyone being skeptical. I would be skeptical of the "media".  Any stories you read could easily be a hidden advertisement funded by online retailers.  Its done all the time.

We should always strive for perfection, and only give in when all else fails!!

----------


## APBOD

> I am going to have to agree with Barry on this one. I think acting so territorial over the PD just proves how concerned we are about losing business to the online retailers. I vote to let them have it. I look forward to inspecting and failing work done by online retailers. Although in the office I work for it hasn't affected us.


The concern isn't about losing business to online retailers. The reality is that I don't work for online retailers, nor do I pay my staff to work for online retailers.  So, for online retailers to suggest/require that I or my staff do THEIR work for them is insulting.  If they want to sell glasses, then let them do the work that is necessary to provide the "commodity" they are selling.

----------


## AustinEyewear

> The concern isn't about losing business to online retailers. The reality is that I don't work for online retailers, nor do I pay my staff to work for online retailers.  So, for online retailers to suggest/require that I or my staff do THEIR work for them is insulting.  If they want to sell glasses, then let them do the work that is necessary to provide the "commodity" they are selling.


Very true, which is what we all do for 1-800-CONCRAP now.  They burn up fax machine, ink, paper, tie up phone lines, staff, interrupt flow, ect.....

----------


## Sledzinator

> The concern isn't about losing business to online retailers. The reality is that I don't work for online retailers, nor do I pay my staff to work for online retailers. So, for online retailers to suggest/require that I or my staff do THEIR work for them is insulting. If they want to sell glasses, then let them do the work that is necessary to provide the "commodity" they are selling.


I can definitely see your point on that and I agree. I just think we should make the best of a poor situation. As we all know the online retailers are here to stay. I want to be the one with the net when they aren't satisfied with their glasses.

----------


## 4554lake

> The concern isn't about losing business to online retailers. The reality is that I don't work for online retailers, nor do I pay my staff to work for online retailers.  So, for online retailers to suggest/require that I or my staff do THEIR work for them is insulting.  If they want to sell glasses, then let them do the work that is necessary to provide the "commodity" they are selling.


Absolutely.....Ive been lurking for a long time on these forums.....I have a hard time comprehending how so many people posting ,place no value on their skills....And are so afraid to offend anybody who walks in the door....


I dont know of any other field where service providers will provide their expertise for free,so someone can make the purchase elsewhere... :Rolleyes:

----------


## uncut

> Absolutely.....Ive been lurking for a long time on these forums.....I have a hard time comprehending how so many people posting ,place no value on their skills....And are so afraid to offend anybody who walks in the door....
> 
> 
> I dont know of any other field where service providers will provide their expertise for free,so someone can make the purchase elsewhere...


Finally......a Canuck* with* backbone!

----------


## uncut

> I can definitely see your point on that and I agree. *I just think we should make the best of a poor situation. As we all know the online retailers are here to stay. I want to be the one with the net when they aren't satisfied with their glasses*.


You definitely only aspire to mediocrity, with a "roll over and die" attitude.  I* hope* you are not mentoring the next generation of optician, by example.

Onliners are only here to stay......* if                  you                       let                     them.*

----------


## Sledzinator

> You definitely only aspire to mediocrity, with a "roll over and die" attitude. I* hope* you are not mentoring the next generation of optician, by example.
> 
> Onliners are only here to stay......* if you let them.*


That right there is the reason it took me so long to join. You think I am only aspiring to mediocrity because of my OPINION on 1 subject! I am doing what I can to aspire to something greater. I live in an unliscensed state and I am working towards getting my ABO-AC and hope to one day earn my ABOM.

----------


## Wes

> That right there is the reason it took me so long to join. You think I am only aspiring to mediocrity because of my OPINION on 1 subject! I am doing what I can to aspire to something greater. I live in an unliscensed state and I am working towards getting my ABO-AC and hope to one day earn my ABOM.


Water off a duck's back.  From one ABOM to an aspiring ABOM, Stick around.

----------


## Robert Martellaro

> <snipped> consumer advicates and the press will fan and leverage to make us look like we are unfairly denying the public free choice for eyewear, lower-cost or not.


 Capitulation? No thanks. How about a better PR spokesperson?

----------


## Judy Canty

Better spokesperson??  There's a spokesperson???

----------


## Barry Santini

SV & Bif/Trif glasses were made for DECADES with a binocular PD. let's get real about how harmful the "wrong" PD actually is. When you (over) simplify it, accurate mono PD's most closely affect progressive utility in moderate to high adds. As far as the importance of unwanted prism, Rxs today are insufficiently complete or robust enough to predict problems, discomfort or harm with unwanted prism, IMHO.
I'm open to being corrected here, however.
Go.
B

----------


## Wes

> SV & Bif/Trif glasses were made for DECADES with a binocular PD. let's get real about how harmful the "wrong" PD actually is. When you (over) simplify it, accurate mono PD's most closely affect progressive utility in moderate to high adds. As far as the importance of unwanted prism, Rxs today are insufficiently complete or robust enough to predict problems, discomfort or harm with unwanted prism, IMHO.
> I'm open to being corrected here, however.
> Go.
> B


 So because we did it wrong in the past, we should continue doing it wrong in the present and future?




> I tend to think, in keeping consistent with the FCLCA, that eyeglass Rxs will no doubt be required to Include a PD to allow free and unencumbered redemption by consumers...particularly when EMR/EHR become the norm for transmitting eyewear "health" info.


Honestly, this makes no sense, especially coming from you. You KNOW that a basic PD will generally result in garbage glasses. I've read your articles and posts. You're smarter than this, and you can't play both sides of the fence with us. An eyewear rx is in no way similar to a CL rx because in the eyewear rx, the frame size, shape, dimensions, vertex, panto, wrap, and wear habits are not taken into account. Isn't this what you teach in your articles? Yes, because I've read them. You discuss freeform this and that, aspheric and atoric this and that, and then suggest that a binocular PD is good enough for anyone?  I smell a RAT!  There is FAR too much left off an eye exam to make a good pair, because the frame is unknown in the RX process. There is NO way to prescribe GLASSES from the chair. I know you know this, because you are at least as knowledgable as I, and I think more so.  Your facts are usually spot on, but... Whatever it is, you play both sides of the fence far too often for me to put much stock in your opinions.

Here's what I'm afraid of: I think you're gaming the system to rid the world of the "average " optician so that a premier optician like yourself can be more successful in the aftermath. Please tell me I'm wrong.

----------


## Wes

> Back in the day.I did some wholesale work for an OD and everything was 4 in,4 below.Of course all the work was Flat tops.Never had a remake from him.


This is a bad idea on so many levels...

----------


## Barry Santini

Wes:
I truly believe adequate Is the right term for describing a bino-pd pair of SV or Ft eyewear. Years ago, it wasn't really wrong, just adequate (but we weren't aware of that).
If you read my stuff, you know I loathe using right or wrong to describe eyewear.
In order for excellent to truly shine, there must be adequate to be compared against. Im not for adequate, but i think it is unrealistic to say all eyewear has to be excellent. Even before the advent of online, this was true, and remains so, IMHO today.

B

----------


## Barry Santini

Bino Pd eyewear, using non FF lenses , is no different whether bought online, or in a (poor) b&m.
I'm not trying to play both sides. I am firmly on one side, but realistic enough to concede the other side exists, and should remain an option for those who would desire to choose it.
That is the *best *way the public can truly come to appreciate what you and I and others here do.
It would be foolish of me to say everyone should the same home entertainment equipment that I di, because anything less is garbarge.
Whose to say? I only know that there are differences, and I believe enough in what we do to not fear that adequate will take over for excellent, simply because it's price appears initially more attractive.

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *absolutely.....ive been lurking for a long time on these forums.....i have a hard time comprehending how so many people posting ,place no value on their skills....and are so afraid to offend anybody who walks in the door....
> 
> i dont know of any other field where service providers will provide their expertise for free, so someone can make the purchase elsewhere...*





lake.................you are so right,............................. I just posted the question on "*Google -----------> "about pupillary distance"


Resulting in :                               About 178,000,000 results  (0.08 seconds) 

 ﻿
 

*About 10 years ago Google did not even know what a PD was, today this has become a common topic because on liner opticals did advertise that opticians supplied this information for free, as well as did not charge for adjustments and follow ups. 

This would actually be misleading advertising as in Canada http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/e...eng/01222.html
and in the USA  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_a...ng_regulations

Instaed of hackling on this issue for an eternity you could actually consent to charge for your services and then sue the on-liners or have the governments sue them under their current laws. You would see that the on-liners would change their advertising tactics very fast and would say  go to the opticians and have the service done against a certain fee, and part of the problem would solved very quickly.

Do not forget that many posts on OptiBoard will be available on Goggle minutes after they have been made.

----------


## optilady1

> Bino Pd eyewear, using non FF lenses , is no different whether bought online, or in a (poor) b&m.


Are you suggesting that those of us who don't use Free Form lenses are working for crummy opticals? I do agree everyone should have a mono pd, but not everyone wants or needs a free form lens to get quality glasses.

----------


## MakeOptics

I'll sell them the PD for $50 and it come with me sitting down and helping them choose the right size frame (to a degree) from their online optical of choice and picking the right materials and options.  If they want to come back in for an adjustment $30 for 1/2 hour of my time in adjusing them.  I let them know that they are only saving if they don't need these services with the glasses but if they need the services since no one is providing them they can see me.

As for the Free Form thing, I have not seen much information to either qualify or disqualify anyone from a FF lens so rather than think of it as not everyone needs it, until I can justify not giving the best vision to everyone then they all need it.  I make money and they get the best, which BTW is still the best whether they need it or not.

----------


## Barry Santini

> Originally Posted by Barry Santini
> 
> 
> Bino Pd eyewear, using non FF lenses , is no different whether bought online, or in a (poor) b&m.
> 
> 
> Are you suggesting that those of us who don't use Free Form lenses are working for crummy opticals? I do agree everyone should have a mono pd, but not everyone wants or needs a free form lens to get quality glasses.


Of course not. Simply that thete is little distinction between eyewear only when only the very basic  fitting principles are employed.

----------


## RIMLESS

> Are you suggesting that those of us who don't use Free Form lenses are working for crummy opticals? I do agree everyone should have a mono pd, but not everyone wants or needs a free form lens to get quality glasses.


I'd say that unless you are using those new Free Form silicone nosepads that I'm custom making in my Batcave then yes you are working at a crummy optical. Hahaha. :Cool:

----------


## AustinEyewear

> I'll sell them the PD for $50 and it come with me sitting down and helping them choose the right size frame (to a degree) from their online optical of choice and picking the right materials and options.  If they want to come back in for an adjustment $30 for 1/2 hour of my time in adjusing them.  I let them know that they are only saving if they don't need these services with the glasses but if they need the services since no one is providing them they can see me.
> 
> As for the Free Form thing, I have not seen much information to either qualify or disqualify anyone from a FF lens so rather than think of it as not everyone needs it, until I can justify not giving the best vision to everyone then they all need it.  I make money and they get the best, which BTW is still the best whether they need it or not.


This is a really good idea.  I've heard charging the PD discussed, but not the entire package.  Great idea!

----------


## AustinEyewear

Why do people get eye exams?  Why does a trained doctor do it?  Do is looking for diseases and complications.  Why does the doc perform refraction? Who knows, maybe something else will be picked up during refraction that is correlated with other tests prior to refraction. In the end, the doc is measuring an organs ability to function, and part of that is diagnosis is writing down the Rx.

However, Doc is not taking any other physical measurements required to build eye glasses!!!  This is the eyeglass tailors job.

----------


## APBOD

> Why do people get eye exams?  Why does a trained doctor do it?  Do is looking for diseases and complications.  Why does the doc perform refraction? Who knows, maybe something else will be picked up during refraction that is correlated with other tests prior to refraction. In the end, the doc is measuring an organs ability to function, and part of that is diagnosis is writing down the Rx.
> 
> However, Doc is not taking any other physical measurements required to build eye glasses!!!  This is the eyeglass tailors job.


+1.  Patients pay us for an eye examination, not a glasses measurement.

----------


## anthonyf1509

I just don't see how they can ever determine that it should be included with the Rx? If its not an exact number that everyone gets when measured the same, then it's subjective.
So if Doc get 30.5 OD and I believe 31.0 OD then who's right? See why it'll never be required with a refraction. 

I don't even think our Doctor knows 
how to take a PD, and on top of that he's never worn glasses nor does he plan too. He's a lunatic when it comes to that stuff and thinking about people's wallets, but he does one hell of a complete examination. People love him and since he's employed by us, all we ask is that he does the comprehensive exam and refraction, and give the patients their Rx.
If they have questions, he simply says "you should discuss that with one of the dispensing opticians."
This handoff obviously could be done differently and more $$$ if he was doing what others doctors do, but it's not always in the patients best interest and we're doing very well this way.

If they choose to get their glasses elsewhere they'll be measured by those opticians. So if they choose to go online, they can be measured by their optici...wait...oh they don't have any? Ok, well they haven't negotiated any salary with me to do their work, so I'll just tell the patient this.

Ask them why online? They'll usually reply $$ or convenience, but we carry products to meet that criteria and will certainly make them what they would have purchased online, only with our service. 
Honestly we've only had 4-5 over two years but the topic does intrigue me.

----------


## Danny S

> And you told her??????


_Hit da ROAD Jack..

'n don't come back no more, No More, NO MORE, no more,

Hit da road, Jack..._

----------


## MakeOptics

> I just don't see how they can ever determine that it should be included with the Rx? If its not an exact number that everyone gets when measured the same, then it's subjective.
> So if Doc get 30.5 OD and I believe 31.0 OD then who's right? See why it'll never be required with a refraction. 
> 
> I don't even think our Doctor knows 
> how to take a PD, and on top of that he's never worn glasses nor does he plan too. He's a lunatic when it comes to that stuff and thinking about people's wallets, but he does one hell of a complete examination. People love him and since he's employed by us, all we ask is that he does the comprehensive exam and refraction, and give the patients their Rx.
> If they have questions, he simply says "you should discuss that with one of the dispensing opticians."
> This handoff obviously could be done differently and more $$$ if he was doing what others doctors do, but it's not always in the patients best interest and we're doing very well this way.
> 
> If they choose to get their glasses elsewhere they'll be measured by those opticians. So if they choose to go online, they can be measured by their optici...wait...oh they don't have any? Ok, well they haven't negotiated any salary with me to do their work, so I'll just tell the patient this.
> ...


The PD is a simple parlor trick in the service provided, they would be much better served by me suggesting the right combination of materials, coatings, and features.  That's what really makes a good pair of lenses couple that with the right pair that fits their face and avoids having them look like Mr. Magoo, that's where the expertise comes into play.  Hell I'll give the PD away if people will let me get a picture of what they end up with when they have had no guidance, it could be used as a PSA of avoiding the real crux of what I personally do.

Hey but if the majority of opticals are full of ruler jockeys, then by all means let's fight this online PD thing.

----------


## drk

> Its not about territory. Its about common sense. The pd us used to build the glasses. The pd is not used for contacts. It is not used for anything, unless someone wants glasses. And the pd is just 1/10 of what should be provided to build proper glasses. Its about educating the press that the pd is worthless and has nothing to do with an Rx until all other parameters are selected, the lens, the frame, ect..... Should the pt decide they want glasses, then an expert optician can provide accurate measurements at that time. I don't see a reason to clog up exam rooms so people can get pds, nor do I see a reason to mislead the public that if they have a Rx and a PD they are good to go. Its just simply not true.


Bra-vo.

Listen to Austin, who gets it.

----------


## drk

Smart-phone refract, Jack
Choose the RayBan, Stan
Onliners employ, Roy
Listen to me.

Add some more plus, Gus
You don't need an Rx much
Demand your p.d., Lee.
They'll take it for free.

----------


## Fezz

> Smart-phone refract, Jack
> Choose the RayBan, Stan
> Onliners employ, Roy
> Listen to me.
> 
> Add some more plus, Gus
> You don't need an Rx much
> Demand your p.d., Lee.
> They'll take it for free.



I love you Doc, but _PLEASE_ do not quit your day job!

 :Skip: :poop: :Dance:  :Dance: :poop: :Skip:

----------


## Wes

> I love you Doc, but _PLEASE_ do not quit your day job!
> 
> :poop::poop:


Hey I liked it!  
Hmmm.  Wait. I like corny things.  Yep, all the more reason to keep your day job.

----------


## Barry Santini

> Bra-vo.
> 
> Listen to Austin, who gets it.


But...CL specs are used to "build" CLs, and we allow consumers the freedom in fulfillment here.  Why not eyewear?

B

----------


## Barry Santini

> Smart-phone refract, Jack
> Choose the RayBan, Stan
> Onliners employ, Roy
> Listen to me.
> 
> Add some more plus, Gus
> You don't need an Rx much
> Demand your p.d., Lee.
> They'll take it for free.


I LUV it!

B

----------


## Wes

> You KNOW that a basic PD will generally result in garbage glasses. 
> 
> An eyewear rx is in no way similar to a CL rx because in the eyewear rx, the frame size, shape, dimensions, vertex, panto, wrap, and wear habits are not taken into account. 
> 
> There is FAR too much left off an eye exam to make a good pair, because the frame is unknown in the RX process. There is NO way to prescribe GLASSES from the chair. I know you know this...





> But...CL specs are used to "build" CLs, and we allow consumers the freedom in fulfillment here.  Why not eyewear?
> 
> B


As already stated in the thread a PD measurement by itself is nearly meaningless.  The Dr. cannot account for a frame that he hasn't seen on the patient.  Apples and oranges.  And you know that.

----------


## optical24/7

> But...CL specs are used to "build" CLs, and we allow consumers the freedom in fulfillment here. Why not eyewear?
> 
> B



CL's are a commodity, an AV Oasys is an AV Oasys anywhere. Eyewear is custom made, bespoke. Take your -5.00 -1.75 eyeglass Rx to 10 different locations and you will have multiple variables. 



On a side note, I don't worry about netter providers anymore than I worry about the sub-standard, no knowledge, cheap B&M providers that are all around me.

----------


## Nikolay Angelov

> Is it really so awful that online eyewear might only rise to a standard in optical fitting that was taken as gold only 30+ years ago?


+1

BUT they *have to* put a big red banner on every page (like on the cigarette packages) stating:

*Our glasses are NOT made with the state of the art technology!
They might only rise to a standard in optical fitting that was taken as gold 30+ years ago!*
 :Biggrin:   :Biggrin:   :Biggrin:   :Giggle:

----------


## Barry Santini

> As already stated in the thread a PD measurement by itself is nearly meaningless. The Dr. cannot account for a frame that he hasn't seen on the patient. Apples and oranges. And you know that.



Wes:

I think the difference between our opinions is that I believe the public should have access to *adequate* eyewear, albeit at low cost. I believe you want to ensure *excellent* standards that, reasonably IMHO, cannot be enforced or even implied by measurements alone.

B

----------


## Nikolay Angelov

> I believe the public should have access to *adequate* eyewear, albeit at low cost.


I agree *if* they could make an informed decision. And choose the "adequate" option knowing of the compromises made.
But is that the case in reality and are the customers getting an accurate information on what they are getting? Lets see.

*Frames Direct:*
http://www.framesdirect.com/include/...guarantee.aspx




> Your eyewear from FramesDirect.com is made with top quality lenses and *every order goes through a 6-step process to ensure precision* before it is shipped to you. Your prescription lenses are always verified using our digital lens technology to make certain they are 100% accurate. If for any reason you receive an incorrect product, please contact our customer service department, immediately at1-800-248-9427.
> 
> FramesDirect.com has a great selection of authentic *products that are expertly crafted* and shipped conveniently to your 
> door.


*Clearly Contacts* 
http://www.clearlycontacts.ca/caboutus.html?ilid=tnav




> *A Better Way* to Buy Eyewear
> 
> Clearly Contacts has become the largest online retailer in Canada, by offering an alternative method of purchasing eyewear online, and supplying you with the *same* designer brands and *products offered in brick-and-mortar stores* for half the price. We deliver them to your home or office so you can order in your pajamas anytime of day or night.


*Zenni Optical*
http://www.zennioptical.com/about




> About Us
> 
> *Using the latest in modern materials, manufacturing* and marketing systems we bring our product direct from our factories to you.
> 
> ...
> 
> More importantly, *we feel prescription eyeglasses are a health item* necessity for most wearers, and to that end we take considerable pride in being able to bring to all a *very high quality product of great durability, safety and comfort* at truly reasonable and affordable prices..


What impression does that leave in the reader? 
Does the customer get adequate information to make an informed choice.

Does the sellers even remotely imply that the customer is getting "adequate" and not state of the art eyeglasses?

----------


## Barry Santini

There is just about NOTHING I am aware of in the US that is legislated at the *excellent* level.  Certianly nothing as custom and potentially complex as eyewear.  Without the spectre of significant harm accompanying *adequate* eyewear, I'm am not sure it is wise for our industry to suggest otherwise for a mutually-agreeable *base* standard.

Heck, we don't even license dispensing in more than 22 states.  Go figure.

B

----------


## Wes

> Wes:
> 
> I think the difference between our opinions is that I believe the public should have access to *adequate* eyewear, albeit at low cost. I believe you want to ensure *excellent* standards that, reasonably IMHO, cannot be enforced or even implied by measurements alone.
> 
> B


I'm not suggesting we ensure excellence, I'm suggesting we do NOT ensure mediocrity by mandating a pd measurement on RX's.  You suggested the FCLCA as precedent, yet most ECPs believe this is detrimental to the consumer and the ECPs in that the consumer and internet provider uses loopholes in the law to avoid exams for years, and the ECPs are bombarded with faxes and calls requesting confirmation of rx. You're using one poor law as justification for suggesting another.

----------


## optical24/7

Barry, why do you think the public can't get low cost eyewear already from B&M's? A PD law would only be beneficial to onliners, not to other B&M's.

----------


## optilady1

What makes excellent eyewear?  Does excellent have to mean designer frames, high index lenses, progressives or free form?  I'm pretty sure I can produce excellent  eyewear with basic materials.  They won't be fancy with the newest technology, but they will have been measured with care, put together with skill, and dispensed knowing they meet the needs of my patient discussed at the time of purchase.

----------


## RIMLESS

Suggested reading for you all : Selling the invisible by by Harry Beckwith.  Take home message "Don't let perfect ruin good enough"

----------


## Barry Santini

In some ways the administration of the FCLCA is unfavorable. I think that if I agree with your premise, and I can, then we'd have to outlaw any OTC. If that's not gonna happen, then the working and political climate we find ourselves in logically dictates a bino PD to be found adequate and acceptable.

I find conceding this point allows me to speak from a far more credible and less self-serving pulpit from which to tell the real of our value/quality story.

B

----------


## Barry Santini

> Barry, why do you think the public can't get low cost eyewear already from B&M's? A PD law would only be beneficial to onliners, not to other B&M's.



I, for one, WANT *any* of my clients that would be drawn to the appeal of online eyewear to do so, and fast. Once they experience it, those who dislike it will join the ranks of other, dissatisfied B&M customers and become enthusiastic and live-long clients. 

As far as facilitating online, let it:  The sooner we can institute service charges, the better....

What's the old saying: "You don't know what your missing..."?

B

----------


## Wes

Barry, if you had seen readers abused as much as I have, you'd want them outlawed too. I regularly see some cross-eyed, melon-headed hayseed "self-refracting" his distance rx with otc readers.  Guys with 76mm pds wearing +2.50 readers with 60mm pds...  I shudder when I think about these guys in their massive penismobile trucks sharing the road with me.

----------


## Barry Santini

> Barry, if you had seen readers abused as much as I have, you'd want them outlawed too. I regularly see some cross-eyed, melon-headed hayseed "self-refracting" his distance rx with otc readers. Guys with 76mm pds wearing +2.50 readers with 60mm pds... I shudder when I think about these guys in their massive penismobile trucks sharing the road with me.


No disagreement at all here, Wes. It's just that our politicians, legislative gatekeepers and the public want choice, whether proven or initimated as damaging to health, or not. Hey, cigarettes are still around, right? Even with that warning on every box.

Kinda comes with a free society. Or, opening another can of worms, where would one draw the line?

B

----------


## Fezz

Anybody see the Bears game?

----------


## gmc

> Anybody see the Bears game?


They got a steal with Brandon Marshall (even if he is nuts) for 2 third round picks.

----------


## optical24/7

I for one, want any of my clients to get their *adequate* eyewear from at minimum another B&M where at least some form of accountability exists. 

A system of eyewear delivery that has;

* No verification process

* No check and balance

* Suggests theft of service

* Uses "guesstimication" for sizing and measurements

Is NOT adequate, at least from a professional's viewpoint. ( Maybe Joe Blow Public thinks otherwise, _but that can't be my_ stance).

----------


## Java99

> Barry, if you had seen readers abused as much as I have, you'd want them outlawed too. I regularly see some cross-eyed, melon-headed hayseed "self-refracting" his distance rx with otc readers.  Guys with 76mm pds wearing +2.50 readers with 60mm pds...  I shudder when I think about these guys in their massive penismobile trucks sharing the road with me.


I see this too, and it scares the crap out of me, because those guys DO drive the same roads I do.  And they now may believe an eye exam has no value, which means they may believe accurate eyewear has no value.  And Lord help them when they need a PAL for the first time or a real RX with no induced prism, dispensing nightmare.

----------


## Barry Santini

> I for one, want any of my clients to get their *adequate* eyewear from at minimum another B&M where at least some form of accountability exists. 
> 
> A system of eyewear delivery that has;
> 
> * No verification process
> 
> * No check and balance
> 
> * Suggests theft of service
> ...



Even in NY, one of the premier/legacy licensed states, there are TONS of B&Ms that don't do the above well, or sometimes at all.

Don't see the difference vs. online.  Better, If OTCs are verified after assembly and labeling, I'd like to know. Further and finally,, let the buyer beware.  At least I didn't prevent their choice.  Even if I'm accused of facilitating online reddemption by mandating a PD on the Rx, what does that say about the *(more?) medical device, a CL, classed as a drug?

Re: Measurements:  Studies I've seen re: "guesstimations" from uploaded photos via intellient algorhythms appear to produce PD values within the same subset as values taken by varying praticioners using varying instruments. Seems *adequate* to me for most SV.
B

----------


## optical24/7

> Re: Measurements: Studies I've seen re: "guesstimations" from uploaded photos via intellient algorhythms appear to produce PD values within the same subset as values taken by varying praticioners using varying instruments. Seems *adequate* to me for most SV.
> B


Then you agree, there's no need to put a PD on an RX.  :Biggrin:

----------


## Judy Canty

Pehaps I'm just being naive, but the final CL fitting is much different from a spectacle rx.  

The prescriber is only required to release a CL rx after the final fitting is determined, which should bring the patient back into the practice at least once. Buying them online, which I believe is inherently dangerous, will not change the prescribed parameters. The expectation is that they have been properly fitted and evaluated before the final order is written and handed to the patient.  The expectation is that the specific parameters will be reproduced and the patient will be able to see.  It's the follow-up care that suffers and is where the danger lies.
However, a spectacle rx is just the beginning of the process.  There is no guarantee that will work properly until it is fitted and fabricated. You can hand out PD's all day long, but in the end, there is no guarantee that the patient will see properly.  We've all been down that road many times.  Pt picks up new glasses and frowns...not a good sign.
So, I guess my point is why would anyone want to involve themselves in the fitting process and then relinquish control over the final product for ANY amount of money?

----------


## Nikolay Angelov

> Then you agree, there's no need to put a PD on an RX.


What do you care if there is a PD on the RX?

Relax and if you don't need it, don't use it ... it's just 2 numbers on a peace of paper  :Smile: .

----------


## drk

Let's see, Barry. Three levels:
1. Vision correcting devices that are regulated to be deemed safe and effective by professionals and regulators (i.e.: regulated market)
2. Vision correcting devices that are barely regulated to be deemed barely acceptable by professionals and regulators
3. Vision correcting devices that are completely unregulated, and the acceptability is up to the end user (i.e.: completely free market.)

We all agree that level one exists, and level three exists, and always did on the black market and in the third world.

You're saying we need level two, because we can cut out some expense by bare-bone-sing the professional input, regulation and oversight, and that this will save consumers money, and that it's a good thing. Right?

You're saying that practicing vision care and manufacture and supply of vision correcting devices is over-regulated and you think we need freer markets.  Right?

Does this apply to Pharmacy?  Surgery?  Cosmetology?  Engineering?  Law?  Do you care to draw a distinction between your profession and these others?

----------


## Johns

> Then you agree, there's no need to put a PD on an RX.


...

No...what I think he is trying to say is that there's no need for an optician.

----------


## Nikolay Angelov

PD is a body measurement. Like how tall one is.

It's simply the distance between the pupils.
What does responsibility got to do with it!?

A doctor measures how tall you are (5 feet).

Later you go to a tailor and tell him "i am 5 feet tall make me a suit" ... and the suit does not fit well.

Is the doc. responsible for anything? 
He told you how tall you are, and everyone can confirm it is true.

But to make you a suit, a lot more measurements are necessary ... which is your tailor's job *and thus his responsibility*.

----------


## drk

Incomplete and over-simplified, Nicolay, but I know what you're getting at.

Distance p.d. is a body measurement, indeed (that increases for awhile, like height).

But specifying where optical centers are to be placed depends on the application.

----------


## drk

> ...
> 
> No...what I think he is trying to say is that there's no need for an optician.


It is odd when a professional who has some audience within his profession advocates for retrogressive health care for U.S. citizens. 

I don't get it. Usually professionals advocate for protection, not deregulation.

I think some people get wrapped up in "evolution" of an industry, change in technology, etc. and assume that all change is somehow good. Or, if it can be done, it should be done. We have many tangible examples of how that's not true.

In the real world, you'll see that the only people pushing for deregulation are the crony capitalists in Utah and British Columbia; that is, they buy votes of a corrupt body of public officials in order to bring instant gratification in "job creation" or local income taxes, or blatant insider trading when a health minister is on the board of directors of a company in the involved industry. They're the worst of what's going on in this world: profiteering at the expense of public health.

I'd hate to be on their side of this issue.

----------


## Barry Santini

We would allow consumers choice that Ive not seen is necessarily worse than licensed b&m's deliver now.
Standards r standards. No online means you're friend down the street doin' schlock can't either.
B

----------


## drk

Well, there's no "we" here.  It's up to state legislatures.  You'd have to get some money together and lobby.  Don't see it happening from opticians, ODs or MDs.  

I only see it happening by Essilor, Luxottica, VSP, Frames Direct, Walmart/1-800, Coastal, etc.  A motley crew with NO interest in public health whatsoever.

----------


## Judy Canty

This is a "dead-end" conversation.  No one's mind is being changed and for this reason, online opticals and un-trained clerks will continue to infect our professionns.  We may disagree about who gets the "honor" of providing PD's or other measurements, on charging or not charging for the service, but so long as we enable these providers to exist, even flourish, we doom our respective professions to dial-spinning and ruler-reading. At some point, we (and our professional organizations) need to draw a line in the sand and say "no more". It's time to tell patients that we value their vision and visual health too much to trust them to the lowest bidder.  DIY is great on H&G-TV, unless you want the best and then it's time for Candace and the (expensive and top-drawer Divine Design team. If your patients want DIY, then let them, just don't help them.

----------


## Judy Canty

> Well, there's no "we" here. It's up to state legislatures. You'd have to get some money together and lobby. Don't see it happening from opticians, ODs or MDs. 
> 
> I only see it happening by Essilor, Luxottica, VSP, Frames Direct, Walmart/1-800, Coastal, etc. A motley crew with NO interest in public health whatsoever.


Those retail giants have way more money to spend than we do, so I think it would be smarter to stop them at the source.  Our professional organizations are "beholding" to many of them for money, speakers, trips, and innumerable "freebies".  Better to learn to stand on our own than to be no more than the ventriloquist's dummy.

----------


## drk

Two very excellent posts.

----------


## 4554lake

> No one's mind is being changed .



Actually ,Barry's comments have made me change my mind......Let the whole eyeglass industry be deregulated.,...

This way people can save money.....I dont care who sells/dispenses eyeglasses....

----------


## Wes

> Actually ,Barry's comments have made me change my mind......Let the whole eyeglass industry be deregulated.,...
> 
> This way people can save money.....I dont care who sells/dispenses eyeglasses....


REALLY?
Barry has been so far off base on this it's ridiculous.  Nearly every educated poster who has weighed in on this has opposed Barry.  Good luck.  I hope you're the best of the best, because if you're not, and he gets his way, you'll be unemployed before too long.

----------


## Wes

Not only that, but you should probably stay off of the road that these people who you have deemed no longer need professional vision service drive on, otherwise you may not be posting for very long.

----------


## RIMLESS

Hello everyone.  Please see the forest for the trees.  You can spend the  next decade arguing the PD issue for what?  We exist in a capitalistic  society where rules, laws and ethics are warped, bent and broken every  place you look. We all have something that the online retailers don't,  and never will.  The human element.  Most patients do want to try on and  actually touch what they are going to be wearing for the next two years  or so. For the most part they also do appreciate some professional  guidance along the way.  If you're not providing that to them then good  luck trying to compete with the cloud based on price points alone.  I hope the web takes all my miserable patients...please, the ones that  never listen to what I say...The ones who only order 1 box of Cl every  other leap year...The ones who only come back every six years or so  when their eyes are all jacked up... I say Gay Ga Zinta Hate!!!!!!!!!!!

----------


## Barry Santini

> Actually ,Barry's comments have made me change my mind......Let the whole eyeglass industry be deregulated.,...
> 
> This way people can save money.....I dont care who sells/dispenses eyeglasses....


I'm not saying that. And I'm not trying to twist words either.

I'm not for unregulated eyewear.  I'm for *intelligent* regulation, albeit with real-world risk-assessment, rather than "the sky is falling" if this happens.

Too much **** about the PD, IMHO.  Wes and others are right:  Excellent eyewear is much more than just PD.

It's funny that many look fondly back on the old, "high-skill/Guild" days as the epitiome of dispensing craft and skill.

Yet Bino PDs for bifocals and SV were the norm.  Go figure.

B

----------


## 4554lake

> REALLY?
> Barry has been so far off base on this it's ridiculous.  Nearly every educated poster who has weighed in on this has opposed Barry.  Good luck.  I hope you're the best of the best, because if you're not, and he gets his way, you'll be unemployed before too long.


Im not worried..I'm an OD...I'll just charge more for rechecks ....lol

----------


## 4554lake

> Not only that, but you should probably stay off of the road that these people who you have deemed no longer need professional vision service drive on, otherwise you may not be posting for very long.


You would already stay off the road ,if you saw as many people as I do, who cant see ,either due to pathology or from refusing to wear an rx......who drive anyway...

----------


## Judy Canty

> Im not worried..I'm an OD...I'll just charge more for rechecks ....lol


Sooooo....deregulate everyone but YOU?  Why not just kick it back to the 19th century and leave it all to the MD's?

----------


## Barry Santini

> REALLY?
> Barry has been so far off base on this it's ridiculous. Nearly every educated poster who has weighed in on this has opposed Barry. Good luck. I hope you're the best of the best, because if you're not, and he gets his way, you'll be unemployed before too long.


Wes:

I'm thinking that you and others may not understand my position on this. I've tried to make my points as clear as I can. I understand that people won't agree with me on this...but I love to hear everyone's opinion.
I won't repeat anything here. Perhaps this subject is closed, as Curious Cat has stated.
Hope everyone thinks. That's always been my mission. Get out of your comfort zone, and address the challenges facing us. Even if what I've forcasted does not come to pass, I believe the role playing and point/counterpoint is in itself educational and instructive. I do not think of anyone opinion in this thread as stupid or the like. I respect you all. But I hope you won't mind me coming out of my corner and debating another side in these issues.
B

----------


## 4554lake

> I'm not for unregulated eyewear.  I'm for *intelligent* regulation, albeit with real-world risk-assessment, rather than "the sky is falling" if this happens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B




So,who will do the intelligent regulation and real world risk assessment?

----------


## 4554lake

> Excellent eyewear is much more than just PD.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B


We know that....the public doesnt....They dont even understand the concept of the three O's...

----------


## Barry Santini

> So,who will do the intelligent regulation and real world risk assessment?


Well, outside of what the COS has stated they've used as guidelines in creating their eye exam frequency recommendiations, I'm not aware anyone has.
My sentiments are completely anecdotal, but I suspect the same can be said for others that have staked out the opposite position.

The emotional color with respect to driving/vision risks is something I share. But I'm not aware of *any* DMV in the country that performs vision screening more often than every six years, and none that are done onsite at the scene of an accident.

I'd be interested in anyone can point to any studies that would enhance our understanding of health or harm risk in this regard.

B

----------


## 4554lake

If the onliners can perfect remote measurement taking,most of the B&M opticals are going to die.....Just look at what happened to the B&M video rental business...

----------


## idispense

removing post , discussion of solutions only allowed on Canadian page

----------


## Barry Santini

> If the onliners can perfect remote measurement taking,most of the B&M opticals are going to die.....Just look at what happened to the B&M video rental business...


This may be true. But the ones that survive will have figured out the skills necessary and added value quotient that sets them apart from the scenario outlined.

BTW, online fulfillment or rental of DVDs did not kill B&M video.  Streaming is what killed the beast.

B

----------


## 4554lake

> Well, outside of what the COS has stated they've used as guidelines in creating their eye exam frequency recommendiations, I'm not aware anyone has.
> My sentiments are completely anecdotal, but I suspect the same can be said for others that have staked out the opposite position.
> 
> The emotional color with respect to driving/vision risks is something I share. But I'm not aware of *any* DMV in the country that performs vision screening more often than every six years, and none that are done onsite at the scene of an accident.
> 
> I'd be interested in anyone can point to any studies that would enhance our understanding of health or harm risk in this regard.
> 
> B


Beats me....nobody cares....Ive also seen numerous nurses who cant see @near ....That really inspires confidence in their ability to administer drugs and read instructions....


The sad reality is, that a large segment of the population doesnt care about their eye health or vision....unless they're in the process of going blind...


Eye related matters are the ugly step child of the health industry...

----------


## 4554lake

> This may be true. But the ones that survive will have figured out the skills necessary and added value quotient that sets them apart from the scenario outlined.
> 
> BTW, online fulfillment or rental of DVDs did not kill B&M video.  Streaming is what killed the beast.
> 
> B


Sure,but only a small portion of the eyeglass buying public will pay extra for the added value....I would be surprised if 10% of the B&M opticals survive under these circumstances....


Most people just  dont care about their vision quality enough to pay for whatever added value an optical shop survivor could provide....


You are sadly mistaken if you think a lot of your "loyal" customers would stick with you ,if you charge double what an enhanced onliner could provide....W/O you providing a very noticeable improvement in perceived vision quality...

----------


## optical24/7

> If the onliners can perfect remote measurement taking,most of the B&M opticals are going to die.....Just look at what happened to the B&M video rental business...


Sorry, but this is the silliest post I've seen in years! Yea, the sky is falling. The net is the only cheap place to buy glasses? And cheap eyewear hasn't been around? For years? Eternity? ( At least in memory?) News Flash: There are places that sell glasses cheaper than you in a B&M location close by! Fear that! Look at how they are taking over the industry and putting everybody out of business! [ sarcasm mode: extreme]



Clue; Cheap is a sub-market out of many. Cheap has been around forever. If that's your market, then panic.

----------


## 4554lake

> I would not go buy parts for my car at one place and then go to another place and ask the mechanic if I can borrow his tools for nothing, so I could install those parts nor would I ask the mechanic to install them for me for free . 
> 
> This is the same thing that you are supporting with free PD's and the use of the optician's or optometrist's time, tools, equipment and experience. 
> 
> That is wrong and I don't give a damn about how bad the media might make us look in front of schmuck customers and schmuck onliners that are unlicensed and can't get their own PD's without me. 
> 
> .


Right on !.....I've never seen such a gutless industry......No other industry cares about what  the tightwads,chiselers and cheapskates think,who want services for free so they can purchase elsewhere.....

Last time I looked,all my anatomy is present......I'm charging for my services...and I dont care what the tightwads or media may think or say....


I wont provide technical help for free,to help the online competition....

----------


## 4554lake

> Sorry, but this is the silliest post I've seen in years! Yea, the sky is falling. The net is the only cheap place to buy glasses? And cheap eyewear hasn't been around? For years? Eternity? ( At least in memory?) News Flash: There are places that sell glasses cheaper than you in a B&M location close by! Fear that! Look at how they are taking over the industry and putting everybody out of business! [ sarcasm mode: extreme]
> 
> 
> 
> Clue; Cheap is a sub-market out of many. Cheap has been around forever. If that's your market, then panic.


Shlock B&M opticals dont sell comparable goods for half the price of what I have to charge.....The onliners can....

Once they improve their measurement process,the dynamics will change in a big way....If people experience first hand that the online glasses work well,why would they buy the next pair from you for twice the price?


The other consideration,is that their expectations will be lower ,since they will be paying so much less for the perceived comparable item...

Im a realist...not a pessimist.....This industry is going to keep evolving.....and not in a good way...

----------


## RIMLESS

> ...This industry is going to keep evolving.....and not in a good way...


And don't forget what Darwin said about survival of the fittest.  If players in this field are unwilling or unable to adapt, bye bye.
Every industry evolves over time.  Name one that doesn't and is still around.  While some of us seem angry I see this thread filled with smart, opinionated and tenacious fighters who will all find a common ground to endure and prosper.  Happy SP Day to all.

----------


## drk

Dudes.

The problem in the long run is not going to be even deregulation, which is the imminent problem.

It will be offshore optical goods and services.  Chinese (or Vietnamese or whatever) labor, exchange rates, lack of regulation of quality, etc. will make it difficult.  

In the age of globalism and the internet as a virtual marketplace, any business will have to face this stuff.  This problem is way bigger than our field.

Suggestions?

----------


## fjpod

A lot depends on the rules of your state.  In NY, a PD is not required on an Rx.  It is not prohibited, but it is not required.  But,... on the other hand, a patient is entitled to their health records and the information contained therein.  So if any O in NY has the measurements in the records, we are required to hand it over.  

If I am asked for a PD, when I don't have one, I usually tell the patient it's the responsibility of the person that fits you with the eyewear.  I never offer to measure one for a fee or for free.

Also in NY, the state boards do not have rule making authority.  We follow the law, and when there is an ambiguity, the State Health or Education Department will rule...sometimes with consultation with the state boards, but sometimes without.

Although NY does not enforce it, it warns consumers on it's website that the standard of care in obtaining eyewear is that a professional must have a face to face contact with the patient to take measurements (not just the PD), and to perform the final dispensing.  That being said, (don't you hate that phrase) any New Yorker can get online glasses.  However, optical professionals licensed in NY risk censure if they sell eyewear without a face to face meeting with the patient.

----------


## Judy Canty

I guess it would be interesting to know how they view the records of an independent Optician.  Is it a health record, or the record of a sale?

----------


## Nikolay Angelov

Some people here think the PD (a body measurement) is the thing that will stop people from purchasing glasses online.

So various schemes are thought out to keep this information from the customer... is it a health record, can we think of some legal excuse for not giving it, put a hefty price on measuring it, say something witty to thwart PD wanting people.

No one has looked deeper at why people actually want to buy online. What is it:
PriceConvenienceFrame selectionEase of trying many models...

Somebody interested in the good of the customers would look at this and say ... 
Hey these online guys must have found a need that we are not satisfying... lets find out and do a better job.

Tom Harrington from the Marketplace asked:



> Are you protecting public interest or your own economic interest?


And you know what? You are protecting your own economic interest!

The public's interest have not once been the center of the discussions about onliners here. Not one has asked how to take some good ideas from the onliners and incorporate them in our practice.

The only discussions have been how to stop people purchasing online through legal/licensing means and not giving PDs.




> Shlock B&M opticals dont sell comparable goods for half the price of what I have to charge.....The onliners can....
> 
> Once they improve their measurement process,the dynamics will change in a big way.
> 
> ...
> 
> This industry is going to keep evolving.....*and not in a good way...*


Hey comparable goods for half the price seems like a very good development. Ohh but i see what you mean... it would be bad for *your* business. 

Who cares about public interest ... 

One more thing, the PD has been included in the prescriptions here since forever and all is well. And we are quite heavily regulated:
You can't sell anything in a optical store if you have not finished the optician school and got a diploma. Not even a frame.Until recently there were no optometrists, only ophthalmologists were allowed to write RXs.

PS: Carry on with the scheming to not give PDs for some convoluted excuse of a reason. The more you do it the more i root for the onliners. And i am a B&M optician ... imagine how you make the public feel.

----------


## Chris Ryser

I just can't see that you people can't see the facts. I have been following the trend for the last few years by posting the numbers of success of the on-line opticals on my website for you OptiBoarders. 

It does takes a lot of work and consumes time. So I can do only a few parts every week, but it is still a good indicator of what is happening. You can find it at http://optochemicals.com/web_listing.htm and scroll down to near the bottom where you can find the on-line opticals.

*Here come the punch.............The fully ESSILOR owned "Frames Direct" site ranks today 24,554 in global Alexa (in the USA 7,904) traffic ranking, which is the double of the best optical supplier ranking website "Luxottica" who's todays global ranking is 44,716.

Frames Direct has had an increase in website traffic of the last

**7 day*
*0.008*
*+30%*


*
and 

**3 month*
*0.0065*
*+11%* 




and the same goes for most of the other more popular one-opticals. If you laugh off these facts as not important I can not help you. The more visitors you get on a website the more you sell. The average of visitors against sales go invariably up or down.

*Your on-line competition goes up on a yearly....monthly..........and daily basis, and you still bicker around PD's and other little things you can not and will not change because all you do is argue "who should do something about it", while the B&M opticals loose customers by the minute.

You really have only 2 choices left at this stage:

1) Do like Barry on Long Island, and Craig in Ft Meyers, work with wealthy people that like top quality and are willing to pay for it whatever the cost. You can also go the way Johns is handling it.

or

2) Have a 2 tier system and continue as you have before, + have and publicize a service charge price list, for work on outside purchased glasses.
This should include service before outside purchase and service after outside purchase. Find you own price for your service charges.

The consumer is not going to wait for you they follow the trend as website rankings actually indicate their numbers, which are facts and no phantasy world.

*It does look that this endlsess discussion is going nowhere as you people don't see the light.

----------


## Nikolay Angelov

Chris i appreciate all the work you do and the information you bring  :Happy: . I am sure many optiboarders feel the same way.




> *It does look that this endlsess discussion is going nowhere as you people don't see the light.*


*+1*

There are other options as well:

3) Create a online-version in addition of your store. B&M + Online provides a powerful mix -> the best of both worlds.

4) If price is the sole determining factor: find a way to match the onliners or be in the same ballpark. Many have said there are already B&M stores selling for the same as the onliners meaning it can be done.

5) Go out of business. The way some people view their customers ... this option isn't all that bad for the public.

----------


## fjpod

> I guess it would be interesting to know how they view the records of an independent Optician.  Is it a health record, or the record of a sale?


I can tell you that in NYS, where opticianry is licensed and regulated by the state, that the opinion of the attorneys from the State Department of Education conisder the optician's record as part of a patient's health record.

----------


## Nikolay Angelov

Fighting your competitors through legislation seems to be IN these days.
Doing all the work to be better then them is so old fashion.

I wonder if the onliners (Essilor and all) decide to flex some legislative muscle as well  :Rolleyes:  where would you be...

*drk:*



> offshore optical goods and services


What percentage of optical goods and machinery in the USA is coming from outside?
Foreign lenses: Zeiss, Essilor, Hoya, Chinese suppliers etc.Foreign machines: SatisLoh, Schneider, Nidek/Santinelli, TopCon, Essilor, Leybold Optics, Weco, Huvitz ...Foreign monomers: Mitsui ChemicalsForeign frames: Luxotica and many more....

----------


## Barry Santini

> I can tell you that in NYS, where opticianry is licensed and regulated by the state, that the opinion of the attorneys from the State Department of Education conisder the optician's record as part of a patient's health record.


Which is why when one of my clients calls to obtain their PD and Rx, as happened on Saturday, I cheerfully gave them both (binoc) to facilitate a family member ordering custom shooting glasses as a gift.

With so many differing regulations from state to state on citation of health records, inclusion of PD, and Rx expiration dates, it seems obvious to me that the states that are freer in this regard (which outnumber those who are more restrictive) will be the ones cited by consumers and advocates as online optical grows as the standard against which a Federal law will be drafted...in the spirit of he FCLCA. 

A number of posters have intimated doom and gloom for B&M as a result on line and the free exchange of related optical info. But I think that if you believe that freeing the PD will doom you business...your business model must be very fragile indeed.

B

----------


## Chris Ryser

Funny.........................7 hours later and no more posts ...............only dead silence

----------


## Nikolay Angelov

Well not complete silence  :Ninja: 

Here is quote about FramesDirect by PhiTrace from another thread  :Wink: :



> Framesdirect gives me access to many frames that I did not have access to in the past, yes I have actually bought and resold frames from them, plus I use their database for frame color and sizing.


http://www.optiboard.com/forums/show...l=1#post416405

Hmm onliners do some things well ... and not just with the price it turns out.

What other improvement ideas can we take from them.

----------


## Wes

I don't recall many people saying giving out pds would doom their businesses.  A couple years ago I'd see one or two people per week walk in off the street asking me to measure their pd. I declined then on the grounds that it was the responsibility of the eyewear manufacturer to determine those (meaning more than one) measurements and that I did not wish to be a third party to the transaction.  I still stand by that position.  I can recall only one actual patient asking for the info in all this time and I gave it to him. It's been well over a year now since anyone has asked me for a pd.

I do not believe a pd measurement should be included on rx for reasons stated earlier.  Some things that should be included are best corrected visual acuity and near working distance, but I don't see anyone screaming for that.

----------


## AustinEyewear

> Which is why when one of my clients calls to obtain their PD and Rx, as happened on Saturday, I cheerfully gave them both (binoc) to facilitate a family member ordering custom shooting glasses as a gift.B


Probably anything that you write down in their record is part of the health record.  That doesn't mean you have to write it down.  We don't bother wasting our time taking PD's with a patient who hasn't picked out a pair of glasses.  We take a lot of measurements in addition to the PD in order to customize the glasses for that patient, so PD alone doesn't do us or the pt any good anyway.

----------


## 4554lake

> Some people here think the PD (a body measurement) is the thing that will stop people from purchasing glasses online.
> 
> So various schemes are thought out to keep this information from the customer... is it a health record, can we think of some legal excuse for not giving it, put a hefty price on measuring it, say something witty to thwart PD wanting people.
> 
> No one has looked deeper at why people actually want to buy online. What is it:
> PriceConvenienceFrame selectionEase of trying many models... 
> 
> Somebody interested in the good of the customers would look at this and say ... 
> Hey these online guys must have found a need that we are not satisfying... lets find out and do a better job.
> ...


I almost dont know where to begin......You must be a closet onliner.....

OF course Im concerned about my economic well being......Why do you think Im working?......

Onliners arent going to go away.....But it's not my role to help their business.....

Since the standard of care here is that other than the actual rx,   measurements related to the fabrication of eyewear is the responsibility of the optician,   Im not going to release the pd ,unless Im paid to do so.....


Im also not going to do any troubleshooting, verification or frame adjustments for free.....Of online purchases...These services are priced into our goods....


Low cost is the reason for the majority of online purchases.........


High overhead costs are why my prices are higher than onliners......People cant have it both ways,with the same cost of goods as online,along with professional service and the convenience of a B&M location.....


Im not prepared to operate an optical as a loss leader as a service to customers......




So,perhaps you can explain how it is in the public's interest to be their own optician,and order direct from the lab....I never knew that any amateur could spec out eyewear properly.....

----------


## Nikolay Angelov

> Some things that should be included are best corrected visual acuity and near working distance


Yup it's a convenience to have those. We made them mandatory for our RXs and it saves a lot of headaches (ordering PALs with ADD power for 70 cm "refracted for PC" distance isn't fun  :Redface: ).

4554lake:



> Low cost is the reason for the majority of online purchases.........


I was under the impression that discounters offered comparable to online vendors prices.

I could be misinformed, but if true this would mean that there is more to people buying online then price.

----------


## 4554lake

> Yup it's a convenience to have those. We made them mandatory for our RXs and it saves a lot of headaches (ordering PALs with ADD power for 70 cm "refracted for PC" distance isn't fun ).
> 
> 4554lake:
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that discounters offered comparable to online vendors prices.
> 
> I could be misinformed, but if true this would mean that there is more to people buying online then price.


Online vendors undercut any B&M location by a huge margin.....They have the economy of scale  when purchasing goods.......plus low overhead costs...no storefront....low labour costs  ......   no  before/after sales service,other than  providing the glasses....



Its impossible to compete price wise with these outfits....unless you want to subsidize the costs yourself....


It is about the price......

----------


## MakeOptics

> Actually ,Barry's comments have made me change my mind......Let the whole eyeglass industry be deregulated.,...
> 
> This way people can save money.....I dont care who sells/dispenses eyeglasses....


I agree his points are valid even though they are hard to hear.  When patients bring up online eyewear we talk honestly and most the time they stay.  If they don't, it's usually because these online patients were looking for cheaper anyway so those 2 for $69.00 joints down the road are getting their business.  Every so often one of these patients get's tired of the rat race and parks their business with me and they stay loyal. 

I don't want to compete with the bottom of the barrel so if they want to go there fine.

----------


## MakeOptics

> I just can't see that you people can't see the facts. I have been following the trend for the last few years by posting the numbers of success of the on-line opticals on my website for you OptiBoarders. 
> 
> It does takes a lot of work and consumes time. So I can do only a few parts every week, but it is still a good indicator of what is happening. You can find it at http://optochemicals.com/web_listing.htm and scroll down to near the bottom where you can find the on-line opticals.
> 
> *Here come the punch.............The fully ESSILOR owned "Frames Direct" site ranks today 24,554 in global Alexa (in the USA 7,904) traffic ranking, which is the double of the best optical supplier ranking website "Luxottica" who's todays global ranking is 44,716.
> 
> Frames Direct has had an increase in website traffic of the last
> 
> **7 day*
> ...


Your numbers ignore the fact that theyir stock prices are steady or dropping while they are selling more units and wasting more money on web site resources.

----------


## Barry Santini

B&M eyewear, with branded designer frame=$600.
Frames Direct for same=$300.00
Difference=$300.00
Useful/average life of primary pair:2-2.7 yrs,
1/2 Difference averaged over 1 year:$12.50 per month, or approx $3.00 per week.
ECP service epack, i.e., adjustments, repairs, plus parts $1.50/wk
Not too much difference now, eh at about $6/mo?

----------


## 4554lake

> B&M eyewear, with branded designer frame=$600.
> Frames Direct for same=$300.00
> Difference=$300.00
> Useful/average life of primary pair:2-2.7 yrs,
> 1/2 Difference averaged over 1 year:$12.50 per month, or approx $3.00 per week.
> ECP service epack, i.e., adjustments, repairs, plus parts $1.50/wk
> Not too much difference now, eh at about $6/mo?


Im not disputing this....IN an affluent area,as long as the customer likes and trusts you ,the price difference wont be a problem....IN other less affluent areas,a lot of people will walk....

I find most people are insurance driven and dont want to spend more than they absolutely have to on vision care....It's about number 129 out of 130 in terms of priorities....


I see people  daily who have  computer related eyestrain ,who wont get a second pair of eyeglasses for computer work.....Because it costs money......OR who wont have regular eye health assessments,even though there is a strong family history of eye disease....because it costs money...

Had one a couple days ago who said it will only be another 3 years ,of 7 hrs computer work/day ,until he retires...So ,he will manage w/o the appropriate rx....


I should have gone into the tatoo or tanning business....People have no problem paying for these priorities... :Eek:

----------


## gmc

> I should have gone into the tatoo or tanning business....People have no problem paying for these priorities...


Or cell phones

----------


## chip anderson

Awful lot of discussion about why one should be able to put off a 30 second effort or *The Terrible responsiblity and liablity* of such a mundane task.  Hell, it's one even doctor's can do.

Chip

----------


## RIMLESS

> Im not disputing this....IN an affluent area,as long as the customer likes and trusts you ,the price difference wont be a problem....IN other less affluent areas,a lot of people will walk....


I'll second that, in fact I'll third and forth it too.

----------


## gmc

Okay, you've given that patient his free PD. When he comes back for the initial fit and wants it done for free, do you do it? When he can't see as well as he thinks he should, do you troubleshoot it for free? Do you give him nose pads for free? When he comes back for routine adjustments, do you do them for free? When he breaks one of the $6.95 metal frames do you solder it for free?

You can make a case for doing all that for free in hopes that he will think you are the greatest optician ever and he will be willing to pay your premium prices henceforth for all your knowledge and the wondrous services you offer.

Or you can make a case for charging a one time fee for these services. If he doesn't want to pay it, he can go down the road to the next optician or do it himself.

Or you can make a case for unbundling and charging a fee for your services.

That's the discussion we need to have. Because online eyewear ain't going away.

----------


## Barry Santini

Fee for service. A la carte is my preference. Cash pay too. Grandfather first time in as a complimentary service, but point out fee schedule printed/laminated on back of reading card.

B

----------


## 4554lake

> You can make a case for doing all that for free in hopes that he will think you are the greatest optician ever and he will be willing to pay your premium prices henceforth for all your knowledge and the wondrous services you offer.
> 
> 
> .


I could never understand this line of thought....

Why would someone pay a higher price for glasses from you,   so that you can be paid for your time and expertise,   if you will do all of the after sales service for free, for less expensive eyewear obtained elsewhere?


That's like me doing contact lens follow ups for free ,for cls obtained elsewhere.....That wont happen in this life time....

----------


## 4554lake

> Fee for service. A la carte is my preference. Cash pay too. Grandfather first time in as a complimentary service, but point out fee schedule printed/laminated on back of reading card.
> 
> B


This is a good way to make sure they wont come back a second time,when other opticians will do it for free....lol


One of the big reasons on liners have done so well,is because most opticians will do after sales service for free....This takes away most of the risk for the online purchase...

----------


## drk

Nicolay, you're kind of a dope.

I'm not a "xenophobe" about "foriegn goods".  I think that certain economic players in the global economy have an "unfair advantage".

And you're right about another thing you pointed out: buying off the lawmakers. We call it "crony capitalism" here in the U.S.

----------


## drk

I think the endgame is this:
1. Buying stuff on the internet is clearly never going to stop.   It's a new global marketplace, with virtually no rules.
2. Most of these online entities will fold in five to ten years.  Most are operating on thin or no margins or worse.
3. You will always be able to buy non-regulated non-U.S. goods online.  Glasses, CLs, medicine, whatever.
4. Somehow, sometime when everyone gets their heads out of their @$$es, the discussion will turn to U.S. online retailers flouting regulations.  There will be money in that.
5. People will probably continue to sell frames online.  It offers frames to the consumer without the sales costs, overhead expense, and inventory carrying costs that "Bricks and Mortar" stores incur.   The experience will be different, of course.
6. We will probably fit quite a few lenses to "patient supplied frames".  If it's a good frame, we'll use it.

----------


## Wes

Judy Canty has an article in ECPMag about un-bundling.  It's worth a read.

http://www.ecpmag.com/1webmagazine/2012/03mar/content/dispensing_opt/case-for-un-bundling.asp

----------


## RIMLESS

What if every time a patient was to ask for a PD you simply vaporized them with a Laser.  Problem solved.

----------


## Golfnorth

> I could never understand this line of thought....
> 
> Why would someone pay a higher price for glasses from you, so that you can be paid for your time and expertise, if you will do all of the after sales service for free, for less expensive eyewear obtained elsewhere?
> 
> 
> That's like me doing contact lens follow ups for free ,for cls obtained elsewhere.....That wont happen in this life time....


Not sure if this is appropriate to post here but I wanted to post this;

I met a fellow at a New Years party this year. He said that he was going to try an "experiment" that since he was never satisfied with his progressives that he purchased from his optometrist he was going to buy a pair online this time. He purchased them from the Z site. I asked him how he got the measurements correct and he told me that his OD gave him his mono PD measurements (idiot). Then I asked him how he would know what height to put the progression and he said that he would just choose a frame that is close to what he was already wearing. Anyway I told him that he was wasting his money and that he wouldn't be getting free-form technology which is what he wanted as he was complaining about peripheral distortion. Well he was in today and ordered new free form lenses to his own frame. He couldn't read out of the online glasses. Besides fitting too low on him the PD was OD-30 OS-30 instead of OD-34 OS-34. So he gave them the proper PD on a silver platter and they weren't even close. He said that he hated being proved wrong.

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## 4554lake

> Not sure if this is appropriate to post here but I wanted to post this;
> 
> I met a fellow at a New Years party this year. He said that he was going to try an "experiment" that since he was never satisfied with his progressives that he purchased from his optometrist he was going to buy a pair online this time. He purchased them from the Z site. I asked him how he got the measurements correct and he told me that his OD gave him his mono PD measurements (idiot). Then I asked him how he would know what height to put the progression and he said that he would just choose a frame that is close to what he was already wearing. Anyway I told him that he was wasting his money and that he wouldn't be getting free-form technology which is what he wanted as he was complaining about peripheral distortion. Well he was in today and ordered new free form lenses to his own frame. He couldn't read out of the online glasses. Besides fitting too low on him the PD was OD-30 OS-30 instead of OD-34 OS-34. So he gave them the proper PD on a silver platter and they weren't even close. He said that he hated being proved wrong.
> 
> Regards,
> Golfnorth


Good for you!....IF you were like some of the posters,you would have corrected the measurements and frame adjustment for free,and then let him re order them online.....

 :Bounce: This way he would be happy...save money....and think you are a great guy!

----------


## idispense

removing post , Canadian solutions only allowed on Canadian page

----------


## drk

Interesting...

----------


## Barry Santini

Others don't. In a global economy, i really cant see how states will be able to sustain limiting access within their borders
B

----------


## idispense

removing post, Canadian retreating to Canadian page

----------


## Golfnorth

> Good for you!....IF you were like some of the posters,you would have corrected the measurements and frame adjustment for free,and then let him re order them online.....
> 
> This way he would be happy...save money....and think you are a great guy!


Yes I know how they are. Posters have taken me to task for charging for adjustments when the glasses were not purchased from me originally. I charge them $5-$10 and generate a receipt and advise the "customer" to keep the receipt and bring it in and I will deduct the cost from their next eyewear purchase. I have not gotten one redemption! So these are the people that will never buy from you no matter what you do and if you let them get away with it, only want free service from you. At least I am putting a value on my service and getting paid for it.

Regards,
Golfnorth

P.S. I think I'm a great guy.

----------


## idispense

removing post , Canadian retreating to Canadian page

----------


## idispense

removing post , Canadian retreating to Canadian page

----------


## idispense

retreating to Canadian page

----------


## Golfnorth

> For most of the Americans out there you might want to give some thoughts as to how Canada, a country 1/10th your size managed to get all provinces licensed and then produced national unified exams and produced Optician videos and national branding . You guys and gals should have more unification than us but you are still bickering over the wrong things and remain totally uncommitted and not unified . Have you considered that you are not focused on the real problems ? PD 's are not the real problem .



It would stand to reason that the smaller the country the easier it would be to be more unified in licensing so to say that we are 1/10 the size and we managed to get it done is a misnomer.

----------


## chip anderson

Not to mention that we were not raised to believe in homage to the Crown, we are a bunch of revolutionary dissidents.

Chip

----------


## Wes

> For most of the Americans out there you might want to give some thoughts as to how Canada, a country 1/10th your size managed to get all provinces licensed and then produced national unified exams and produced Optician videos and national branding . You guys and gals should have more unification than us but you are still bickering over the wrong things and remain totally uncommitted and not unified . Have you considered that you are not focused on the real problems ?   PD 's are not the real  problem .


As Golfnorth says, The smaller the group, the easier it is to reach a consensus.

----------


## idispense

Canadian retreating to Canadian forum

----------


## idispense

Canadian retreating to Canadian forum

----------


## Wes

> Not quite true , we had a dedicated leader , a visionary, an implimenter and an organizer.  They don't . That's why the Americans will eventually buy in to Canada's branding.


Aside from recent developments with deregulation, I agree that Canada (and Europe) have a better model than we do.

----------


## tmorse

> Not quite true , we had a dedicated leader , a visionary, an implimenter and an organizer. They don't . That's why the Americans will eventually buy in to Canada's branding.


Aww shucks, fellows. It was nothing. :Wink:

----------


## gmc

> You guys argue endlessly about PD's while none of you bother to read that onliners can be stopped where applicable laws prohibit dispensing except by a licensed optician or optometrist.


North Carolina's board attempted to regulate online optical sales. The FTC didn't think much of their rule.

http://www.ftc.gov/os/2011/01/1101ncopticiansletter.pdf

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *Online vendors undercut any B&M location by a huge margin.....**They have the economy of scale when purchasing goods.......plus low overhead costs...no storefront....low labour costs ...... no before/after sales service,other than providing the glasses....
> **
> Its impossible to compete price wise with these outfits....unless you want to subsidize the costs yourself....
> 
> It is about the price......
> *



Coastal had a Press release, I think it 2 years ago, that they just hired employee number 300 in Vancouver BC. How much will it cost to pay 300 peoples salary in the town with highest real estate prices, and have or rent or own  the premises for a workplace for each of them? Storage space for stock and lab space ?

Their purchases are cheaper for the products they buy because they most probably by-pass the importer/wholesaler by purchasing direct in China.

Many of them have the lab work done in China in labs that are as modern as the one here.

Why don,t you admit that this is where the world has gone and the internet has not only become the place for information but also a world of competition to long established businesses of all sorts and types.

*If you do not shoot down the satellites that transmit the internet and paralize it........................you will have to live with it and whatever goodies it will bring you in the future. The future is also coming at a faster pace with every day. What is happening today was discussed years ago on OptiBoard to be reality by 2025 to 2030 and it is all here now.
*
We all have to adapt to new situations, and the smart ones will continue to make a living while the others will jump off the cliff.

----------


## Golfnorth

> You guys argue endlessly about PD's while none of you bother to read that onliners can be stopped where applicable laws prohibit dispensing except by a licensed optician or optometrist. it is simple,it is easy and it does not cost much to do. You only have to read the bottom of GOOGle's web pages and Kijiji's to see how to do it . You only have to read about how Goofgle was fined for illegal application of their technologies in the pharmacy advertisements and the Olympic Lottery ticket sale and Spec Savers etc etc etc . 
> 
> It can be done and done easily and effectively . Your own Colleges, Regulatory bodies and Associations are not working for you by not doing it . They are working against you and using your money to work against you . 
> 
> 
> You guys only want to bicker. If you wanted to fix it you would pay attention to Chris and start reading up on how GOOFGle has been fined hundreds of millions of dollars and then they stopped the illegal ads geographically where it was against local applicable laws . 
> 
> 
> Why are all of you so blind ?
> ...


Wondering what specifically you have done about this issue other than post on Optiboard. Have you contacted our College and what was their response?

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## idispense

Canadian retreating to Canadian forum

----------


## idispense

Canadian retreating to Canadian forum

----------


## Golfnorth

> We have been over this before Golfnorth. The College is locked in internal power struggles and is without valid leadership , they are too embroiled in protecting their past to move forward to meet the future . They do not answer or respond .


So you contacted them by phone or in writing? 
If you wrote the College are you saying that you never received a reply?

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## idispense

Canadian retreating to Canadian forum

----------


## Golfnorth

> Golf , look at the College's latest press release , it declares internet vendors to be illegal in Ontario and they have been saying that for years now , but what have they done about it? The Press release means nothing because they have done nothing. It is clear that these sales can be stopped in Ontario . The pharmacy ads were stopped in the states and Goofgle was fined 500 million. In the UK the Olympic Lottery Ticket sales by illegals was stopped by action against Goofgle using the same tactics . In Australia Spec Savers has an injunction against Coastals ADs and Goofgle. 
> 
> 
> It can be done and has been done.


Once again you are not answering the question that I have asked you.
Did you contact the College in writing and are you saying they did not respond to you?
That is a simple question.

----------


## Chris Ryser

How about moving this discussion to the Canadian Forum, I don,t think that the US OptiBoarders are much interested in it.

----------


## Wes

So in an 8 page, 180+ post thread,  the last handful are by Canadians, and you have determined that it should be moved?  How'd you come by that leap of logic?

----------


## idispense

Canadians discussing solutions for Americans not allowed , retreating to Canadian forum

----------


## drk

I really, truly think Idispense has the correct framing of the problem, and solution.

Tell more about the optician branding initiative, please, as well.

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *So in an 8 page, 180+ post thread, the last handful are by Canadians, and you have determined that it should be moved? How'd you come by that leap of logic?*



Then you should check the Canadian Forum where the same posters have discussed this exact same subject for the last few weeks.

----------


## idispense

Canadian solutions not allowed on American forum, retreating to Canadian forum

----------


## Wes

> Aside from recent developments with deregulation, I agree that Canada (and Europe) have a better model than we do.





> Canadian solutions not allowed on American forum, retreating to Canadian forum


As you can see from the above post, some of us welcome "foreign" ideas.

----------


## uncut

You know....idispense has had many interesting point, but a week later they all get edited out, kinda like following footprints in a snowstorm...........   .....                .....    .....       ......LOL

----------


## idispense

didn't know anyone cared ,,,  I thought I was being extradited ,,, can we have a group hug ?

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *didn't know anyone cared ,,, I thought I was being extradited ,,, can we have a group hug ?
> 
> *


We all care................just that we don't do nothing about it

Half of the US is not even regulated and they do not care, and do less than nothing about it. In Canada we have at least a structure in which also nobody does anything. 

This thread about PD has been pretty active, but has anything positive been reached, I don't think so.

----------


## Golfnorth

> You know....idispense has had many interesting point, but a week later they all get edited out, kinda like following footprints in a snowstorm........... ..... ..... ..... ......LOL


Yes I have noticed that his posts vanish more than any other poster here. Is it the work of a foreign government? The College of Opticians of Ontario? Or is he not very confident in his posts?

----------


## Wes

> Yes I have noticed that his posts vanish more than any other poster here. Is it the work of a foreign government? The College of Opticians of Ontario? Or is he not very confident in his posts?


Posts? What posts?  The first rule of vanishing posts is "you don't talk about vanishing posts."

----------


## Golfnorth

> Posts? What posts? The first rule of vanishing posts is "you don't talk about vanishing posts."


I had the flu that day and must have missed that class.

----------


## anthonyf1509

> Originally Posted by Golfnorth
> 
> 
> Yes I have noticed that his posts vanish more than any other poster here. Is it the work of a foreign government? The College of Opticians of Ontario? Or is he not very confident in his posts?
> 
> 
> Posts? What posts?  The first rule of vanishing posts is "you don't talk about vanishing posts."


It's also the second rule

----------


## nicksims

> What if every time a patient was to ask for a PD you simply vaporized them with a Laser.  Problem solved.


Best solution ever!

----------


## idispense

shhhh !  I have secretly infiltrated idispense's posts and have discovered that if he/she deletes them periodically then the vanishing posts can not be referred back to and then CHRIS can not claim that this or that post has been discusssed before and  extradite idispense back to Canada ..... keeep this to your self ... uh oh he is coming I have to run and hide ....

----------


## iokuok2

Along those lines I'm wondering something and I've seen two large shops with opposite takes on this--If the Rx has the PD on it is it ok for the Optician to retake the PD anyway?  Occasionally I've checked the supplied one and it isn't the same.  Do we call the Dr, go with the one we took, or go with the Dr version?  I don't know that a Dr is very likely to clarify when the PD is done for a specific reason and not just their general measurement.  I get particularly worried when the PD's , OD and OS are the same , that they were taken as binocular. 
When I measure them and they are the same I like to notate that mono pd was taken so the next person reading the order will know for sure it was mono.    I would love a good argument for my management that it is ok to retake or check the PD that the DR office supplies .  Am I ok for thinking this or out of line for not trusting the DR at face value?   Thanks!  I'm in CA by the way.

----------


## drk

Could you change a fitting height on a Rx?
Can you change the add?
Can you wrap compensate?
Can you measure your own measurement?

Of course you can.  In fact, you MUST.

----------


## iokuok2

thanks!

----------


## iokuok2

Sorry for the late reply but this issue has come back to life in my work.  Not only do we get the PD on the RX but I'm being told I can't verify it by taking my own PD measurements , and consequently, if they differ, changing them, without calling the DR and asking permission to change it.  IF the DR took Binocular then we have to put down half of that as though it was  mono. This is where it gets really sticky because the Dr doesn't specify how this was taken or in what context it is being supplied. His assistant (who in many states is not required to be licensed, when working directly under the DR) is not the one with their license on the line if they are wrong. We are either way. So we are left between the proverbial rock and a hard place. -Not to mention the coworkers, especially uncertified in the background chorus "ooh ooh , you're supposed to type the RX EXACTLY as written."   augherrrrr!   It is to the point that if I take a mono  PD and both eyes are the same I put in the notes that I took mono just so the next guy will know how the measurements got there; ie this 30/30 is really a 30/30. (yes it is a large retailer) If the DR puts a mono pd on the rx and some opticians are required to go with that than it doesn't take much to realize that if the order is for progressives both eyes could easily be wrong. WE have to use the DR PD but that doesn't excuse us if we have to do a Redo later. This really bothers me , and suffice to say the more I learn the more it bothers me. (math once again falls victim to politics?)  So the arbitrary use of a DR PD without some assured autonomy for those who "like" to be accurate (seriously-yea right?) and this really takes our integrity and not just our value but the choice to do things with value and integrity back a notch without recourse. I tried to call our state board on this and still have not been able to pin them down to a concrete answer as to what the state law is on the responsible application of the Dr supplied PD.  They then said to get clarity I should call the state optometric society.  So, I did.  The optometric society said that the answer to that question was privileged to those that are paid members--so I looked into joining... --only to find that "members" are optometrists, not Opticians.  I think you are right that this measurement is placed their by well meaning Dr who perhaps had to comply with the two door laws but then the retailer upper level management-also well meaning, -but not necessarily certified- see the DR supplied one and consider , "oh oh its a DR so we,-: "you must use this!".  Not really sure how someone without certification or license can mandate someone with a license not to take this measurement , but it happens, I'm living it. If you read that rant, thanks , love to get the feed back. Refreshing to come home and be able to pitch to the choir.

----------


## lensmanmd

Wow.  Run.  Don’t look back. Get the heck out of that practice.  They don’t need an optician, just sales robots.

----------


## AngeHamm

> Wow.  Run.  Don’t look back. Get the heck out of that practice.  They don’t need an optician, just sales robots.


+1. That's awful.

Also, why in the world is an OD providing PDs?

----------


## mervinek

> Wow.  Run.  Don’t look back. Get the heck out of that practice.  They don’t need an optician, just sales robots.


+1 Agreed.  Did you say this is a large retailer and not a private practice?  I assume this is just the rules coming from management?  So sad.

----------


## gaspoweredrobot

Even when I worked for chain/retail optical, we never had nonsense like that. Sounds like the doctor's on a company-endorsed power trip.

----------


## Tallboy

If I worked somewhere that did that I would just change the PDs if they were given to me wrong.  Then if I was questioned why I didn't use the  measurements written down I would say, "Because they were wrong."

I would do all that while looking for a better opportunity though of course!

----------


## Uilleann

This, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with licensure, certification, or board status.  That's a red herring best put to bed, and left out of the discussion.  But yes, you're 100% spot on with the political and bureaucratic nature of many stores - particularly chain retailers.  It certainly seems in your best interest to seek a new employment situation with all possible haste.  You're certainly not in an environment that values even basic quality over quantity.

----------


## iokuok2

But do we have to accept their PD? Some of these offices take binocular PD's; some just plain aren't right and aren't taken by licensed opticians who are going to be responsible for following up on their work.  Is there an issue if we want to retake  a PD when the one provided causes concern.

----------


## Uncle Fester

The PD responsibility zombie rises from the dead.....

----------


## Barry Santini

Just what is so wrong with using a binocular PD?

----------


## NAICITPO

> Just what is so wrong with using a binocular PD?


Nothing is wrong with it per se, especially for small Rxs. But I know I don't need to explain to you if a patient's eyes are not symmetrical it will create horizontal prism and depending on their Rx it could be within tolerance or it could not.

----------


## dima

> Nothing is wrong with it per se, especially for small Rxs. But I know I don't need to explain to you if a patient's eyes are not symmetrical it will create horizontal prism and depending on their Rx it could be within tolerance or it could not.


I think many pd on rx are taken by autorefration unit...and They are often soo wrong.

on autorefraction due to position I have a 70mm PD..... with pupillometer or by hand I have a binocular 67.5...

----------


## Lelarep

When in doubt, re-measure. A PD is not part of an Rx.

----------


## Barry Santini

> Nothing is wrong with it per se, especially for small Rxs. But I know I don't need to explain to you if a patient's eyes are not symmetrical it gwill create horizontal prism and depending on their Rx it could be within tolerance or it could not.


But if they look in any direction except straight ahead, the consequences apply.

Now what?

----------


## Robert_S

Yes Barry and if the patient moves their head up or down, their heights will be wrong. But the point of what we do is start from a position of the highest accuracy possible, to minimise errors and maximise the patient's vision for as large a part of their life as possible.
Nothing is perfect, but that doesn't stop us aiming for perfection.

----------


## AngeHamm

If there's a PD on a computer-printed RX, I always assume it was generated by an autorefractor and disregard it.

----------


## iokuok2

I was told that we should keep using an existing PD even it it is slightly off because a person's brain gets use to it and it would be more of an issue for them to have to readjust if it is not that far off.  The issue of late that regenerated this issue was  in looking at a customer's former pd it appeared that one eye was off from the PD given.  I was going to re-measure the PD but was then told not to for the reasons given above.  The horizontal prizm was probably about .3.  Does anyone have more insight as what concern there is for changing a PD that has been used for several years?.  I do not recall any questions on the ABO about  people getting 'use to' a new PD or it causing a problem.  However I have heard it come up in conversation. Up until now if I thought there was any doubt about the PD I just retook it.  This was the first time someone intervened and said no.  ( I wasn't too happy but I stayed cool, aughhh)  Yes there is some adjustment sometimes with a new Rx but as to the harm of adjusting to a correct measurement I'm skeptical.  Anyone have some insight?   many thanks for the validation above.

----------


## Quince

I think of it as adjusting by baby-steps. If my PD reading is off from someone who has, oh let's say been wearing the same pair for 15 years, I will usually attempt to shift the PD in the right direction by small increments. Adjusting by a half millimeter at a time will offer a better fit without shocking the patient. Be sure to thoroughly document a gradual shift so that the intent doesn't get lost with future pairs. 

We do the same thing with growing children. They (hopefully) aren't wearing outdated RXs but we do shift the PD to grow with them. At some point they were looking through a more narrow PD than what we remeasure the new pair for and the brain adapts. Not quite the same, but another example of not reusing a PD.

----------


## waynegilpin

> I was told that we should keep using an existing PD even it it is slightly off because a person's brain gets use to it and it would be more of an issue for them to have to readjust if it is not that far off.  The issue of late that regenerated this issue was  in looking at a customer's former pd it appeared that one eye was off from the PD given.  I was going to re-measure the PD but was then told not to for the reasons given above.  The horizontal prizm was probably about .3.  Does anyone have more insight as what concern there is for changing a PD that has been used for several years?.  I do not recall any questions on the ABO about  people getting 'use to' a new PD or it causing a problem.  However I have heard it come up in conversation. Up until now if I thought there was any doubt about the PD I just retook it.  This was the first time someone intervened and said no.  ( I wasn't too happy but I stayed cool, aughhh)  Yes there is some adjustment sometimes with a new Rx but as to the harm of adjusting to a correct measurement I'm skeptical.  Anyone have some insight?   many thanks for the validation above.


Technically, you are right.  BUT, sometimes it's better to let a sleeping dog lie.

----------


## Barry Santini

> Yes Barry and if the patient moves their head up or down, their heights will be wrong. But the point of what we do is start from a position of the highest accuracy possible, to minimise errors and maximise the patient's vision for as large a part of their life as possible.
> Nothing is perfect, but that doesn't stop us aiming for perfection.


If high accuracy is the goal, you’d never use a PD taken objectively with a ruler or via corneal reflection

B

----------


## optimensch

> If high accuracy is the goal, youd never use a PD taken objectively with a ruler or via corneal reflection
> 
> B


I guess by accuracy you mean the wearer's comfort and the visual experience of having the best possible optics in their direction of gaze (primary position for far and whatever the reading distance is) - centering the optics with their main visual axis - 

I was wondering if you had a trial frame with 2 single pinhole lenses which allowed for monocular adjustment of pd - if you had a well designed target at 20 ft straight ahead of the patient - and you ask them to subjectively center the pinhole in each eye to put the target in the middle (best position) - would this be optimal.

Thoughts?

----------


## Jason H

A ruler has worked for centuries, PD gauge (corneal reflection) for decades. Now they're inaccurate? No sale here.

----------


## Barry Santini

> I guess by accuracy you mean the wearer's comfort and the visual experience of having the best possible optics in their direction of gaze (primary position for far and whatever the reading distance is) - centering the optics with their main visual axis - 
> 
> I was wondering if you had a trial frame with 2 single pinhole lenses which allowed for monocular adjustment of pd - if you had a well designed target at 20 ft straight ahead of the patient - and you ask them to subjectively center the pinhole in each eye to put the target in the middle (best position) - would this be optimal.
> 
> Thoughts?


Sounds goods. But I implied nothing about wearer comfort. Just accuracy of positioning

B

----------

