Worse than Outrageous

Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
the cost -

$108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
$210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
$27 - tax
$55 - exam
_______________
$400 Totally Outrageous

I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be
nothing but pure gouging. Three years ago the exam, frames, and
lenses cost about $225. That is an outrageous price increase in just
a few years. The glass fitter gal said the frames would cost about
$240 at any other local area optometrist in private practice. We all
bitch about prescription drugs being way overpriced, but, the real
profit is in frames and lenses. The damn things are nothing but pure
profit.

Oh W. Baker and Ozgirl, remember our thread a few weeks ago about the
puff test? The results of the puff test this morning for each eye was
16, almost perfect. No sign of glaucoma. The dilation test showed no
sign of retinography. He had one hell of a time putting those drops
in my eyes.

I forgot to ask him one question - does a frequent dry eye problem in
one eye indicate a problem?
_____________________________________
http://www.healthdiabeticsoftware.com/ Free

Hi_Therre wrote:
> Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
> review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
> as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
> the cost -
>
> $108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
> $210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
> $27 - tax
> $55 - exam
> _______________
> $400 Totally Outrageous
>
> I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be
> nothing but pure gouging. Three years ago the exam, frames, and
> lenses cost about $225. That is an outrageous price increase in just
> a few years. The glass fitter gal said the frames would cost about
> $240 at any other local area optometrist in private practice. We all
> bitch about prescription drugs being way overpriced, but, the real
> profit is in frames and lenses. The damn things are nothing but pure
> profit.
>
> Oh W. Baker and Ozgirl, remember our thread a few weeks ago about the
> puff test? The results of the puff test this morning for each eye was
> 16, almost perfect. No sign of glaucoma. The dilation test showed no
> sign of retinography. He had one hell of a time putting those drops
> in my eyes.
>
> I forgot to ask him one question - does a frequent dry eye problem in
> one eye indicate a problem?

Do you have insurance? Many companies carry VSP which will cover the
cost of glasses. You might check with where you work.

Also, you really should see an opthamolgist or a retinoligist that
specializes in diabetic retinopathy to get a full battery fo tests.
The guy I go to is one of the best and charges about $225 for a
comprehensive exam and again, much of that will be covered by most
insurance plans. That's cheaper than your glasses.

Best,
Kurt

"Hi_Therre" <Bruce_The_KnotHead@Rosebud.com> wrote in message
news:ej9mn2h0hn81nabb3hobevhvli4fjqcgej@4ax.com...
> $400 Totally Outrageous

Last time I needed new glasses, I got them home and played with the kids a
bit. Younger Daughter accidentally knocked them off my face, jumped on them,
and totalled the frame. I'd changed house insurance the week before, and the
new insurance didn't cover glasses... I bought a new pair on the net, for
almost exactly a tenth of the optician's price, and pretty well the same
spec; still going fine 2 years later. You guys got anything similar to this
outfit?
http://www.glassesdirect.co.uk/relea...FQJPQgodhTbpAA

Nicky.

--
A1c 10.5/5.5/<6 T2 DX 05/2004
100ug Thyroxine
95/72/72Kg

I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the
past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse
them and cloth to dry them, no scratches or anything, but at that
time...they cost $375.00. I do have tri-focals and the lens do change in
the sun etc, but I don't think your cost is excessive. Well, let me take
that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous in
fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad.

--
Cheri

>I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be
>nothing but pure gouging. Three years ago the exam, frames, and
>lenses cost about $225. That is an outrageous price increase in just
>a few years. The glass fitter gal said the frames would cost about
>$240 at any other local area optometrist in private practice. We all
>bitch about prescription drugs being way overpriced, but, the real
>profit is in frames and lenses. The damn things are nothing but pure
>profit.

"Hi_Therre" <Bruce_The_KnotHead@Rosebud.com> wrote in message
news:ej9mn2h0hn81nabb3hobevhvli4fjqcgej@4ax.com...
> Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
> review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
> as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
> the cost -
>
> $108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
> $210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
> $27 - tax
> $55 - exam
> _______________
> $400 Totally Outrageous
>
> I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be
> nothing but pure gouging. Three years ago the exam, frames, and
> lenses cost about $225. That is an outrageous price increase in just
> a few years. The glass fitter gal said the frames would cost about
> $240 at any other local area optometrist in private practice. We all
> bitch about prescription drugs being way overpriced, but, the real
> profit is in frames and lenses. The damn things are nothing but pure
> profit.
>
> Oh W. Baker and Ozgirl, remember our thread a few weeks ago about the
> puff test? The results of the puff test this morning for each eye was
> 16, almost perfect. No sign of glaucoma. The dilation test showed no
> sign of retinography. He had one hell of a time putting those drops
> in my eyes.
>
> I forgot to ask him one question - does a frequent dry eye problem in
> one eye indicate a problem?
> _____________________________________
> http://www.healthdiabeticsoftware.com/ Free

Several years ago I had my glasses made with a pair of light weight titanium
frames. These frames are still in excellent condition, I have had new lenses
put in them 3 times since then. That is one way to save money and better
yet, I don't have to break in a new set of frames. These fit and feel 100%
comfortable.

Reusing the frames and taking advantage of coupon deals from Lens Crafters
has saved me big money, about half on my glasses.

On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 19:20:33 -0800, "Cheri"
<gserviceatinreachdotcom> wrote:

>I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the
>past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse
>them and cloth to dry them, no scratches or anything, but at that
>time...they cost $375.00. I do have tri-focals and the lens do change in
>the sun etc, but I don't think your cost is excessive. Well, let me take
>that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous in
>fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad.
>
>--
>Cheri

Much the same here. I have three - multifocal clear for
general use and night driving, multifocal polarised sunnies
for outdoors and day driving and "accent" graduated ones for
reading and computer. In this country and climate -
UV/polarised sunnies are a health requirement, not a luxury.

They range in price from AU$350-$575, but my private
insurance pays $200-300 depending on the situation. I tend
to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50%
of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens.

VA insurance will pay for the next pair - but only at basic
level.
Cheers, Alan, T2, Australia.
d&e, metformin 1000mg, ezetrol 10mg
Everything in Moderation - Except Laughter.
--
http://loraldiabetes.blogspot.com/
http://loraltravel.blogspot.com/
latest: Epidaurus

Hi_Therre wrote:
> Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
> review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
> as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
> the cost -
>
> $108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
> $210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
> $27 - tax
> $55 - exam
> _______________
> $400 Totally Outrageous
>
> I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be
> nothing but pure gouging. Three years ago the exam, frames, and
> lenses cost about $225. That is an outrageous price increase in just
> a few years. The glass fitter gal said the frames would cost about
> $240 at any other local area optometrist in private practice. We all
> bitch about prescription drugs being way overpriced, but, the real
> profit is in frames and lenses. The damn things are nothing but pure
> profit.

Especially true, but you're paying that much for the
fashion/convenience aspects.

I highly suspect that with very-low end frames and very-low end lenses
you would end up paying $50-$70 for the same frames/lenses.

That said, my glasses are on my face all the time during the day, and
I'm willing to pay a few extra bucks for extra features. I happen to
like very generic frames, so I save a little bit there. But I also
really really like non-reflective coatings on my regular glasses and
polarized lenses on my sunglasses, and those do cost extra, and I ended
up paying about $220 for my regular glasses and about $140 for a pair
of Ray-Ban frames with polarized lenses.

Tim.

I go to an opthalmologist (?Spl) and get my glasses. My husband had a
pair for about a year and our puppy chewed the arm off. He called the
doctor and the glasses were replaced without charge. I understand that
this is common in the US now for the seller to insure the glasses.

Take care,

Vickie B.

Couldn't help responding to this thread.

This is worse! How about $838.00 to
replace lens' in 2 of my own designer
eyeglasses at a private place where,
on 8/8/03 I paid $693 for a well known
frame and got one pair free. That's
with all the perks (coated, progressive, scratch & glare resistant,
transition, etc.).

I ran out of there fast. But now I know
I can't rely on Walmart either. I have no
insurance for eyeglasses. Only a small
discount from AARP.

A lurker just venting.
(Still not familiar with proper procedure of posting here.)

Dex'd '89 T-2
A1C 6.0 fighting for 5% club with your help

Alan S <loralgtweightandcarbs@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 19:20:33 -0800, "Cheri"
> <gserviceatinreachdotcom> wrote:

>>I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the
>>past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse
>>them and cloth to dry them, no scratches or anything, but at that
>>time...they cost $375.00. I do have tri-focals and the lens do change in
>>the sun etc, but I don't think your cost is excessive. Well, let me take
>>that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous in
>>fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad.
>>
>>--
>>Cheri

> Much the same here. I have three - multifocal clear for
> general use and night driving, multifocal polarised sunnies
> for outdoors and day driving and "accent" graduated ones for
> reading and computer. In this country and climate -
> UV/polarised sunnies are a health requirement, not a luxury.

> They range in price from AU$350-$575, but my private
> insurance pays $200-300 depending on the situation. I tend
> to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50%
> of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens.

So a spec frame costs about the same as a cheap bicycle, and even
though it gets used much less harshly than a bicycle, it doesn't last
as long. I'd be fascinated to discover why they cost so much,
especially given the rather poor enginering and construction of the
average spec frame, and amazed if the explanation didn't leave me
disposed t outrage or laughtr, depending on how recently I've had to
pay for one.

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Hi Norma, welcome to the group. Please come out of lurkdom and post
often. :-)

--
Cheri
~norma~ i wrote in message
<529-457C11CA-111@storefull-3174.bay.webtv.net>...


A lurker just venting.
(Still not familiar with proper procedure of posting here.)

Dex'd '89 T-2
A1C 6.0 fighting for 5% club with your help

I guess they charge that much...because they can. You don't necessarily
need a bike, but if you need glasses you need them. They do the same
with dental and outrageous charges for repairing partial plates as well.
My friend just paid $145.00 to have a plastic tooth reset. Ridiculous
IMO.

--
Cheri

Chris Malcolm wrote in message <4u2jt1F1618ceU1@mid.individual.net>...
>So a spec frame costs about the same as a cheap bicycle, and even
>though it gets used much less harshly than a bicycle, it doesn't last
>as long. I'd be fascinated to discover why they cost so much,
>especially given the rather poor enginering and construction of the
>average spec frame, and amazed if the explanation didn't leave me
>disposed t outrage or laughtr, depending on how recently I've had to
>pay for one.
>
>--
>Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
>IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
>[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
>

On 10 Dec 2006 05:07:02 -0800, shoppa@trailing-edge.com wrote:

>Hi_Therre wrote:
>> Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
>> review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
>> as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
>> the cost -
>>
>> $108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
>> $210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
>> $27 - tax
>> $55 - exam
>> _______________
>> $400 Totally Outrageous
>>
>> I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be
>> nothing but pure gouging. Three years ago the exam, frames, and
>> lenses cost about $225. That is an outrageous price increase in just
>> a few years. The glass fitter gal said the frames would cost about
>> $240 at any other local area optometrist in private practice. We all
>> bitch about prescription drugs being way overpriced, but, the real
>> profit is in frames and lenses. The damn things are nothing but pure
>> profit.
>
>Especially true, but you're paying that much for the
>fashion/convenience aspects.
>
>I highly suspect that with very-low end frames and very-low end lenses
>you would end up paying $50-$70 for the same frames/lenses.
>
>That said, my glasses are on my face all the time during the day, and
>I'm willing to pay a few extra bucks for extra features. I happen to
>like very generic frames, so I save a little bit there. But I also
>really really like non-reflective coatings on my regular glasses and
>polarized lenses on my sunglasses, and those do cost extra, and I ended
>up paying about $220 for my regular glasses and about $140 for a pair
>of Ray-Ban frames with polarized lenses.
>

The frames are plain Jane lightweight titanium wire frames. The
lenses are simple polycarbonate. Regular plastic lenses cost $110,
the thinner and lighter polycarbonate cost $110 extra. The glass
fitter gal could not explain why the doubling of cost for the
polycarbonate, other than a ridiculous markup.

Yesterday we were looking at new laptops at Walmart for $500+. Somehow
the comparison between the glass cost and laptop cost is just absurd.

Hi_Therre wrote in message ...
>Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
>review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
>as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
>the cost -
>
>$108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
>$210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
>$27 - tax
>$55 - exam
>_______________
>$400 Totally Outrageous
>
>I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be
>nothing but pure gouging. . . . .

I buy my glasses from the supplier that services my previous employer.
Since the employer demanded 100% safety eyeglass use for all employees,
(umm. . .no contacts allowed in chemical plants) they paid for active
employees' glasses. Now that I am retired, I can use the same supplier
and pay the same price. . . . .as can my immediate relatives.

That said, my cost for wire frames with oversized "safety-rated"
polycarbonate lens is USD $84.

That amount represents a cost + profit figure for a bare-bones, low
overhead operation supplying a superior product. (The Company supplies a
rent-free, hole-in-the-wall for the vendor on Company property). Whatever
you do, wherever you look, that's a figure that will be tough to beat but
remains a viable target.

Thinking about my situation, I really don't know if they check to see if
customers are non-qualified walk-ins or actual retirees. I've been
shopping there so long that we're on a first name basis. We don't need
I.D. to enter the hole-in-the-wall but you would have to "be in the know" to
be able to find it. FWIW, active employees "buy" their required glasses
with a chit from their boss but they also can buy extra glasses (more
stylish than the oversized varieties best suited for chemical plants) ,
prescription sunglasses, et al for cash. Again, I think it's no
questions asked so a non-qualified younger-than-retiree might be able to
walk in.

I wonder if you can do some nosing around in your area. All they can do is
say no.

Thirty years ago, I did some nosing around for somebody who was paying top
prices for glasses for a passel of kids. I was told that the laws which
regulate eyeglass sales are a bit odd, and vary from state to state.
Folks in our Texas division asserted that folks in their area could save
half by shopping for glasses across a state line. (I can't remember
whether the Texans crossed the state line or folks in states around them
crossed into Texas)

Regards
Old Al

On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 19:20:33 -0800, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
wrote:

>I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the
>past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse
>them and cloth to dry them, no scratches or anything, but at that
>time...they cost $375.00. I do have tri-focals and the lens do change in
>the sun etc, but I don't think your cost is excessive. Well, let me take
>that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous in
>fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad.

Quite true, but look at the differential in cost of the exam vs the
cost of frame + lenses. The exam is the meat and potatoes. Just
think, you can buy a laptop pc for about $500. Look at the difference
between between exam/frames/lenses and a laptop? This is totally
absurb. A laptop has a lot of very complex components (though quite
unreliable) and a pair of glasses are quite simple. The main
difference is pure markup by the eyeglass industry. I would like to
know the gross markup by the frame mfg and the lens maker. Walmart
makes the lenses up in Fayettville.

Just outrageous.

Hi_Therre <Bruce_The_KnotHead@rosebud.com> wrote:
: On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 19:20:33 -0800, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
: wrote:

: >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the
: >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse
: >them and cloth to dry them, no scratches or anything, but at that
: >time...they cost $375.00. I do have tri-focals and the lens do change in
: >the sun etc, but I don't think your cost is excessive. Well, let me take
: >that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous in
: >fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad.

: Quite true, but look at the differential in cost of the exam vs the
: cost of frame + lenses. The exam is the meat and potatoes. Just
: think, you can buy a laptop pc for about $500. Look at the difference
: between between exam/frames/lenses and a laptop? This is totally
: absurb. A laptop has a lot of very complex components (though quite
: unreliable) and a pair of glasses are quite simple. The main
: difference is pure markup by the eyeglass industry. I would like to
: know the gross markup by the frame mfg and the lens maker. Walmart
: makes the lenses up in Fayettville.

: Just outrageous.

The low price (or sometimes even "free" price) of the exam is the come on
to get you to go to that store. then they hit you with expensive glasses.

Were these the only frames you could use or were there some at lower
price?

Wendy

Is that your sock puppet on m.c.f-l griping about the very same
subject, on the very same day?

In article <ej9mn2h0hn81nabb3hobevhvli4fjqcgej@4ax.com>,
Hi_Therre <Bruce_The_KnotHead@Rosebud.com> wrote:

> Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
> review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
> as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
> the cost -
>
> $108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
> $210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
> $27 - tax
> $55 - exam
> _______________
> $400 Totally Outrageous

Heh! I got new glasses summer before last: bifocals, progressive,
Transitions, anti-glare, super high index plastic, frameless.... total
was over $900. Thank goodness I had a 25% discount, but still!

Priscilla

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 17:21:35 GMT, WoolyGooly <boogers@lots.of.snot>
wrote:

>Is that your sock puppet on m.c.f-l griping about the very same
>subject, on the very same day?

What is m.c.f-I? Never heard of it.

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 10:14:49 -0500, "oldal4865" <oldal4865@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>
>Hi_Therre wrote in message ...
>>Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
>>review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
>>as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
>>the cost -
>>
>>$108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
>>$210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
>>$27 - tax
>>$55 - exam
>>_______________
>>$400 Totally Outrageous
>>
>>I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be
>>nothing but pure gouging. . . . .
>
> I buy my glasses from the supplier that services my previous employer.
>Since the employer demanded 100% safety eyeglass use for all employees,
>(umm. . .no contacts allowed in chemical plants) they paid for active
>employees' glasses. Now that I am retired, I can use the same supplier
>and pay the same price. . . . .as can my immediate relatives.
>
>That said, my cost for wire frames with oversized "safety-rated"
>polycarbonate lens is USD $84.
>
>That amount represents a cost + profit figure for a bare-bones, low
>overhead operation supplying a superior product. (The Company supplies a
>rent-free, hole-in-the-wall for the vendor on Company property). Whatever
>you do, wherever you look, that's a figure that will be tough to beat but
>remains a viable target.
>
>Thinking about my situation, I really don't know if they check to see if
>customers are non-qualified walk-ins or actual retirees. I've been
>shopping there so long that we're on a first name basis. We don't need
>I.D. to enter the hole-in-the-wall but you would have to "be in the know" to
>be able to find it. FWIW, active employees "buy" their required glasses
>with a chit from their boss but they also can buy extra glasses (more
>stylish than the oversized varieties best suited for chemical plants) ,
>prescription sunglasses, et al for cash. Again, I think it's no
>questions asked so a non-qualified younger-than-retiree might be able to
>walk in.
>
>I wonder if you can do some nosing around in your area. All they can do is
>say no.
>
>Thirty years ago, I did some nosing around for somebody who was paying top
>prices for glasses for a passel of kids. I was told that the laws which
>regulate eyeglass sales are a bit odd, and vary from state to state.
>Folks in our Texas division asserted that folks in their area could save
>half by shopping for glasses across a state line. (I can't remember
>whether the Texans crossed the state line or folks in states around them
>crossed into Texas)
>

I have serious doubts that anyone in town in cheaper. Everything
medical in this place is higher than in Little Rock. I already paid
for them, so I am stuck with them. To add insult to injury, they
won't be ready until 12/19. Oh well. At least I can bitch about them
being so overpriced.

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 16:53:41 +0000 (UTC), "W. Baker"
<wbaker@panix.com> wrote:

>Hi_Therre <Bruce_The_KnotHead@rosebud.com> wrote:
>: On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 19:20:33 -0800, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
>: wrote:
>
>: >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the
>: >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse
>: >them and cloth to dry them, no scratches or anything, but at that
>: >time...they cost $375.00. I do have tri-focals and the lens do change in
>: >the sun etc, but I don't think your cost is excessive. Well, let me take
>: >that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous in
>: >fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad.
>
>: Quite true, but look at the differential in cost of the exam vs the
>: cost of frame + lenses. The exam is the meat and potatoes. Just
>: think, you can buy a laptop pc for about $500. Look at the difference
>: between between exam/frames/lenses and a laptop? This is totally
>: absurb. A laptop has a lot of very complex components (though quite
>: unreliable) and a pair of glasses are quite simple. The main
>: difference is pure markup by the eyeglass industry. I would like to
>: know the gross markup by the frame mfg and the lens maker. Walmart
>: makes the lenses up in Fayettville.
>
>: Just outrageous.
>
>The low price (or sometimes even "free" price) of the exam is the come on
>to get you to go to that store. then they hit you with expensive glasses.
>
>Were these the only frames you could use or were there some at lower
>price?
>

I hate to admit but I was steered into the situation. I wanted to get
rid of those old metal frames. And I made a moment of it. Those old
frames are heavy and drive me crazy. So the glass fitter gal took me
directly to the lightweight titamium frames. It didn't take her long
to convince me that the $108 frame was the greatest thing since canned
budweiser. Same for the lenses. What can I say - sex sells, she was
a pretty lil gal.

"Hi_Therre" <Bruce_The_KnotHead@Rosebud.com> wrote in message
news:r64pn21o804fh9lc5o7de2mjh766lfe10p@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 16:53:41 +0000 (UTC), "W. Baker"
> <wbaker@panix.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi_Therre <Bruce_The_KnotHead@rosebud.com> wrote:
>>: On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 19:20:33 -0800, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
>>: wrote:
>>
>>: >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the
>>: >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse
>>: >them and cloth to dry them, no scratches or anything, but at that
>>: >time...they cost $375.00. I do have tri-focals and the lens do change
>>in
>>: >the sun etc, but I don't think your cost is excessive. Well, let me
>>take
>>: >that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous
>>in
>>: >fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad.
>>
>>: Quite true, but look at the differential in cost of the exam vs the
>>: cost of frame + lenses. The exam is the meat and potatoes. Just
>>: think, you can buy a laptop pc for about $500. Look at the difference
>>: between between exam/frames/lenses and a laptop? This is totally
>>: absurb. A laptop has a lot of very complex components (though quite
>>: unreliable) and a pair of glasses are quite simple. The main
>>: difference is pure markup by the eyeglass industry. I would like to
>>: know the gross markup by the frame mfg and the lens maker. Walmart
>>: makes the lenses up in Fayettville.
>>
>>: Just outrageous.
>>
>>The low price (or sometimes even "free" price) of the exam is the come on
>>to get you to go to that store. then they hit you with expensive glasses.
>>
>>Were these the only frames you could use or were there some at lower
>>price?
>>
>
> I hate to admit but I was steered into the situation. I wanted to get
> rid of those old metal frames. And I made a moment of it. Those old
> frames are heavy and drive me crazy. So the glass fitter gal took me
> directly to the lightweight titamium frames. It didn't take her long
> to convince me that the $108 frame was the greatest thing since canned
> budweiser. Same for the lenses. What can I say - sex sells, she was
> a pretty lil gal.

She probably did you a big favor, titanium frames last and last and....
You can probably just get new lenses for the next 5 years.

>>Hi_Therre wrote:
>> I hate to admit but I was steered into the situation. I wanted to get
>> rid of those old metal frames. And I made a moment of it. Those old
>> frames are heavy and drive me crazy. So the glass fitter gal took me
>> directly to the lightweight titamium frames. It didn't take her long
>> to convince me that the $108 frame was the greatest thing since canned
>> budweiser. Same for the lenses. What can I say - sex sells, she was
>> a pretty lil gal.
>
"Anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote in message
news:lsmdnXOp7egECeHYnZ2dnUVZ_rWnnZ2d@giganews.com ...
>
> She probably did you a big favor, titanium frames last and last and....
> You can probably just get new lenses for the next 5 years.
>

I love my titanium frames. And they cost way more than $108, too.

They're flexible, as well as lightweight. They bend instead of breaking if
they get wronked around or something.
bj

Alan S wrote:
> to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50%
> of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens.

Sigh. Over here the strategy is to change the style every year.
They don't carry any frame the exact shape as the one you have,
and they (say they) can only make lenses to fit the frames they sell.

--
Wes Groleau

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you
what can't be done and why. Then do it.
-- Robert A. Heinlein

"Hi_Therre" <Bruce_The_KnotHead@Rosebud.com> wrote in message
news:ej9mn2h0hn81nabb3hobevhvli4fjqcgej@4ax.com...
> Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
> review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
> as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
> the cost -
>
> $108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
> $210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
> $27 - tax
> $55 - exam
> _______________
> $400 Totally Outrageous
>
<snip>

I just stepped on my glasses. Don't ask me how because I had set them on my
computer desk. How they got under my foot in my bedroom is beyond me.
But... They are no longer. My new frames cost $188, but I've paid as much
as $325 for frames alone. I didn't have much choice this time though. The
glasses were less than 2 years old and I didn't need a new prescription.
Since the lenses were still intact, I hoped to get them fitted into new
frames. And now come to find out the only frames they had they would fit in
are not a perfect fit. I accidentally bumped my head on the van door and
that slight jar knocked the lenses loose. So now every few hours I have to
keep checking them to make sure they're still intact. *sigh* Guess I'll be
getting a whole new pair next time I go in.

--
See my webpage:
http://mysite.verizon.net/juliebove/index.htm

Hi_Therre wrote:
> budweiser. Same for the lenses. What can I say - sex sells, she was
> a pretty lil gal.

When you go through the checkout line at the market,
surely you've noticed all the women's magazines with
covers that nonverbally imply, "Buy this magazine
and read how you can look like this!"

Well, on my last trip, I noticed a rag called "Men's Health"
Was there a Charles Atlas type on the cover? No, it
was a female in a very skimpy bikini.

--
Wes Groleau

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you
what can't be done and why. Then do it.
-- Robert A. Heinlein

Anon wrote:
> She probably did you a big favor, titanium frames last and last and....
> You can probably just get new lenses for the next 5 years.

See my post about the style-changing strategy.

--
Wes Groleau

The man who says, "I can do it!" may sometimes fail.
The man who says, "Impossible!" will never succeed.

"Wes Groleau" <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote in message
news:_d4fh.930$IO5.377@trnddc01...
> Alan S wrote:
>> to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50%
>> of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens.
>
> Sigh. Over here the strategy is to change the style every year.
> They don't carry any frame the exact shape as the one you have,
> and they (say they) can only make lenses to fit the frames they sell.

I go either to Walmart or Lens Crafters and the both have made lenses for my
old frames more than once. They do charge a fee for resusing the frames and
the agreement says they are not responsible if the frames are damaged in the
process of fitting the new lenses. They have never daaged my old frames.
I could give AGRA about style.


>
> --
> Wes Groleau
>
> Always listen to experts. They'll tell you
> what can't be done and why. Then do it.
> -- Robert A. Heinlein

In alt.support.diabetes on Mon, 11 Dec 2006 03:26:50 GMT in Msg.#
<_d4fh.930$IO5.377@trnddc01>, Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org>
wrote:

> Alan S wrote:
> > to keep them a few years unless the scrip changes; about 50%
> > of the time I can re-use the frame when that happens.
>
> Sigh. Over here the strategy is to change the style every year.
> They don't carry any frame the exact shape as the one you have,
> and they (say they) can only make lenses to fit the frames they sell.

Where are you, Wes?

--
DonnaB : ^> shallotpeel <*> Yahoo Messenger: shallotpeel
http://www.amazingtunes.com/mrpresident

"You're going to the cemetery with your toothbrush. How Egyptian." - Armand,
The Birdcage (1996)

Wes Groleau <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote:

>Hi_Therre wrote:
>> budweiser. Same for the lenses. What can I say - sex sells, she was
>> a pretty lil gal.
>
>When you go through the checkout line at the market,
>surely you've noticed all the women's magazines with
>covers that nonverbally imply, "Buy this magazine
>and read how you can look like this!"
>
>Well, on my last trip, I noticed a rag called "Men's Health"
>Was there a Charles Atlas type on the cover? No, it
>was a female in a very skimpy bikini.

I'm feeling better already.
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Julie Bove <juliebove@verizon.net> wrote:

> I just stepped on my glasses. Don't ask me how because I had set them on my
> computer desk. How they got under my foot in my bedroom is beyond me.
> But... They are no longer. My new frames cost $188, but I've paid as much
> as $325 for frames alone. I didn't have much choice this time though. The
> glasses were less than 2 years old and I didn't need a new prescription.
> Since the lenses were still intact, I hoped to get them fitted into new
> frames. And now come to find out the only frames they had they would fit in
> are not a perfect fit. I accidentally bumped my head on the van door and
> that slight jar knocked the lenses loose. So now every few hours I have to
> keep checking them to make sure they're still intact. *sigh* Guess I'll be
> getting a whole new pair next time I go in.

A small touch of adhesive would fix that. I've sometimes had new specs
where the lenses could be knocked out like that, and a small touch of
breakable adhesive has kept them going for many years without any
problems.

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

"Hi_Therre" <Bruce_The_KnotHead@Rosebud.com> wrote in message
news:ej9mn2h0hn81nabb3hobevhvli4fjqcgej@4ax.com...
> Went to the Walmart optometrist this morning for the annual eyeball
> review. Needed new lenses. Since the existing glasses weigh as much
> as a bowling ball on my nose, new frames would be beneficial. Look at
> the cost -
>
> $108 - new spring wire frames, very lightweight
> $210 - poly carbonate lenses, very lightweight
> $27 - tax
> $55 - exam
> _______________
> $400 Totally Outrageous
>
> I've seen outrageous bills over the years, but, this one has to be
> nothing but pure gouging.

Hi,

My last eyeglasses cost more than that. Partly because I really want my
glasses to look really outstanding, but partly for practical reasons too.
If I am going to have some apparatus hanging on my face in public, you can
bet I want them to look really "stylin'" :-) This costs money.

On the upside of that, people almost always ask me where I got my glasses
and tell me how really GOOD they look. My current pair is 'Silhouettes'
with no real frame to speak of, just really cool shaped lenses with a couple
of wires. I almost look like I am not wearing glasses. I have had three
friends go out and buy the same ones I have because they look so good. And
they are still cutting edge style after 7 years. (my scrip hasn't changed,
fortunately). They are incredibly light weight, and I often forget I am
even wearing them.

I always get the lenses made of Crizal, because it helps my night vision
immensely. Unfortunately these lenses are more money than even the regular
hardened ones, but they have the glare reduction and scratch proof, built
right into the lens, not some icky coating that gets dirty easier or some
such. I always used to get the coated lenses and they helped, but not
nearly so much as this Crizal stuff. My lenses are as good today as they
were 7 years ago when I got them. No scratches, and glare reduction to the
max.

Then I get progressive lenses because it gives me the most normal vision,
and I can see at any distance with them. Driving and looking at directions
or a map at the same time is so much easier that way, because you don't have
to switch glasses to read it. This costs more money, but you save on
reading glasses, and they aren't ugly like bifocals, cause there is no line.
This adds to the cost.

Then I get a separate pair of prescription sun glasses (also in the Crizal
material), which increases the cost again. Most of the time I am driving
in the daytime or watching TV at home, so the separate sun glasses and clear
glasses works out well for me. Last trip which included all of this cost me
about $700. (That was only for me, hubby got his from a different place
and I forget how much it was.)

I recently lost my prescription sun glasses, and we are both (hubby and me)
due for new exams, lenses and frames, so I am going to probably end up
spending a lot.

I know it costs to get the good stuff, and yes, it is probably a big ripoff,
but on the plus side, I haven't needed to replace my glasses in all these
years and they haven't turned out to be weird looking or old fashioned after
a couple of years either. Fortunately my scrip is the same.

We are both going to go for exams from the Opthalmologist (a real doctor,
not an optometrist) and get our glasses from a place that has a huge
selection of frames which is separate. I know this is going to cost
bigtime.... Insurance will help, but we will still bear the main cost.

So about the ripoff.... Over the years I have tried some of the discount
places and had very bad experiences with lenses that were wrong etc. I
have also gotten the cheaper lenses, and been disappointed how scratched
they got very soon. I can't see any way around it and think that the
only thing to do is bite the bullet and play along..... but that is exactly
what they (the eyeglass industry) knows too, and so they don't make it any
easier.
--

Best Regards,

Evelyn
(to reply to me personally, remove 'sox')

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 15:13:50 -0800, "Anon" <anon@anon.com> wrote:

>
>"Hi_Therre" <Bruce_The_KnotHead@Rosebud.com> wrote in message
>news:r64pn21o804fh9lc5o7de2mjh766lfe10p@4ax.com.. .
>> On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 16:53:41 +0000 (UTC), "W. Baker"
>> <wbaker@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Hi_Therre <Bruce_The_KnotHead@rosebud.com> wrote:
>>>: On Sat, 9 Dec 2006 19:20:33 -0800, "Cheri" <gserviceatinreachdotcom>
>>>: wrote:
>>>
>>>: >I don't know Bruce. My glasses and sight have stayed the same for the
>>>: >past 8 years. I am very careful with them, only using water to rinse
>>>: >them and cloth to dry them, no scratches or anything, but at that
>>>: >time...they cost $375.00. I do have tri-focals and the lens do change
>>>in
>>>: >the sun etc, but I don't think your cost is excessive. Well, let me
>>>take
>>>: >that back, I do think it's excessive for a bit of plastic, outrageous
>>>in
>>>: >fact, but comparable ballpark cost is not that bad.
>>>
>>>: Quite true, but look at the differential in cost of the exam vs the
>>>: cost of frame + lenses. The exam is the meat and potatoes. Just
>>>: think, you can buy a laptop pc for about $500. Look at the difference
>>>: between between exam/frames/lenses and a laptop? This is totally
>>>: absurb. A laptop has a lot of very complex components (though quite
>>>: unreliable) and a pair of glasses are quite simple. The main
>>>: difference is pure markup by the eyeglass industry. I would like to
>>>: know the gross markup by the frame mfg and the lens maker. Walmart
>>>: makes the lenses up in Fayettville.
>>>
>>>: Just outrageous.
>>>
>>>The low price (or sometimes even "free" price) of the exam is the come on