Sometimes, while searching for one thing, one stumbles upon some other thing that was never meant to be seen, or only by a select few.* I am not talking about Edward Snowden material here — no, just certain things that people who want to sell you their products and services would rather you didn’t know.
In late 2012, I wrote a post about one such example from the financial planning industry that I encountered while reading an old trade magazine. Today, I discovered another.
I am shopping for new eyeglasses, so I have been trying to find out who makes the best progressive lenses (i.e., no-line bifocals) these days. My search for “Zeiss vs Hoya” led me to a website called Optiboard, which touts itself as “The Premier Online Community for Eyecare Professionals.” Sounded to me like a goldmine of inside information that could help me decide on a lens.
The latest thing in eyewear seems to be individually personalized lenses. I don’t know how these differ from normal lenses, but ordering them involves something above and beyond your everyday eye exam. Here, the eyecare professionals on Optiboard talk about the reality behind your individually-personalized lenses:
We had a demonstration of the iTerminal [Zeiss digital eye measurement machine] in our office about a year ago and the whole thing was a comedy of errors. I love the Individual [brand of personalized Zeiss progressive lenses] but I don’t feel the need for the equipment. I’ve had many satisfied patients whom I’ve measured manually. [NCspecs, dispensing optician, Charlotte, NC]
The iTerminal looks great. We don’t have one but are at the moment deciding between that and the Hoya measuring device (by the way, could you explain the significant differences between the two?). The main reason we’re getting one is not to improve our accuracy (although I’m sure it will, but we will still double-check it!) but to generate theatre and to impress patients, and thus to set us apart from our competitors. [Robert S, optical laboratory, UK]
Generate theatre and impress patients. Remember that the next time you pay $300 or more for your lenses. Chances are, a good part of that is no more than a marketing fee that pays for the machine that allows your optician to “stand apart from his competitors.”
In my last years at Kodak, in the days when Kodak made film and people wanted to buy it, I attended a meeting where Kodak’s next-generation motion picture print film was being discussed. The “improved” film (from Kodak’s standpoint) had a lower silver content than the current version. It would be cheaper to manufacture and so provide Kodak a greater profit margin. The only problem was what to tell the processing labs. Film processing labs recover the silver from processed film and sell it at the market price, thereby reducing their costs. But if there is less silver in the original film, there would be less silver to recover in processing, and so less “money back” to the processing labs. What should Kodak tell them about the upcoming change? Would the labs notice?
During the meeting, I stood up (almost no one there knew who I was) and argued that we should tell the labs what was coming down the pike. I also suggested that the change might go over better with the labs if there was a way to pass along some of our savings to them. This would be a win-win, I recall telling the gathering, because it would generate trust and the labs would figure it out eventually anyway. As I recall, unless there was a change of heart after the meeting, the Kodak decision-makers decided not to tell the labs anything. This was a disappointment and eye-opener for me.
Here’s the bottom line. Be it large business or small business, product or service, global or national or hometown, the person on the other end of the transaction is thinking of every possible way to relieve you of your cash, because his or her livelihood is at stake and, like a mosquito’s blood meal, you are the key to keep it going. To think otherwise is naive.
Want a reputable optometrist? C. F. Eyecare.**
_______________
There are some things that just don’t work:
Jordan Klepper as a correspondent for “The Daily Show.”
Nuclear power plants in earthquake and tsunami zones.
Anita Bryant (and may she continue not to work).
Shopping malls from February to October.
Bon Jovi comeback concerts.
“The View” without Joy Behar and Barbara Walters, or with them.
Porta-Potty hand-wash stations.
The ego-endowed but sterile offspring of Oprah Winfrey and Donald Trump.
Windows 8. It’s 2014 and your cursor freezes. C’mon man.
Stock brokers (and the brokest ones too).
Saturday deliveries by the U.S. Mail.
Lawnmowers you haven’t started since last November.
Wrath without grapes.
Surgeon General warnings.
Pennies, if I may offer my two-cents worth.
Antibiotics for a cold virus.
Four out of five men on a road construction project.
Anti-joules (for you thermodynamics nerds out there).
Token liberals who appear on Fox News.
The token conservative in The New York Times.
Joint checking accounts at The First Bank of Nigeria.
David Spade trying to be less annoying than Hugh Grant.
Google Plus (or Minus).
Craft beer in a plastic cup.
Bob Hope and Frank Zappa in the same headline.
Afghanistan (No. 7 on the Failed States Index.)
Right-wing politicians who, once a year, claim they care about the poor.
Non-disabled Social Security disability recipients (0.7% of total).
The United States Senate and House of Representatives.
Every Middle-East “peace” settlement.
Karaoke and drunk people. For simplicity, let’s just say karaoke.
That said, watered-down drinks.
A dandelion on a windless day.
Clouds with painful raining or weak flow.
USB Barbeque Drives.
A tick at a zombie picnic.
Sausage stuffed into plum skins.
Steve Jobs trying to chat up Thomas Edison in heaven.
Yoko Ono for-the-ever.
Link-infested blog posts.
There are some things that just don’t work.