Rip Off Britain - Spectacles

poi55on

nedmundo wrote: »

1.6 index bifs?

No, he prob been sold 1.56s anyway. Only goin off Essilor but I doubt he's got 1.6s for that price? Prob just best blank size etc.

Good work by the way I had to stop reading thread as we're all getting tarred with the same brush.

rustyboy21

I have had bad eyesight since I was a kid, when I contacted measles, so My eyesight is very important to me

I was sick of always having the cheap option of perspex lenses,like bottle ends, so when the fashion for small frames came in, I opted for glass lenses instead.

My script is bad -12.5 both eyes and bad astigmatism. My frames cost me £79, my lenses cost me £690! that is for single vision not varifocals.

That was 2 years ago and I have my test every 12 months as my mum has glaucoma, so I get it done free.

I have bought sunglasses off a website( my bad, with all my moaning about the internet retailers !) with prescription lenses in them, cost me £195, but havent been able to wear them, because they don't fit properley and I am not looking through them right, everything is very blurred. ( something to take into account when buying glasses online !)

Last eyesight test was 3 months ago and was done by well known opticians. Locum opthamologist (optician?) she said I needed readers too, but then said will cost you a fortune, you could just push your glasses down your nose and will see better ! works too by looking through top of the lens, but a bit awkward.

Have since found someone, who sells clip on readers for my glasses, look a bit of a pratt, but what the hell, was quoted £900 for the varifocals this time, cost me £10 for the clip ons !

Anyone beat that?

Blobby8_2

http://www.goggles4u.com/index.asp

nedmundo

rustyboy21 wrote: »

I have had bad eyesight since I was a kid, when I contacted measles, so My eyesight is very important to me

I was sick of always having the cheap option of perspex lenses,like bottle ends, so when the fashion for small frames came in, I opted for glass lenses instead.

My script is bad -12.5 both eyes and bad astigmatism. My frames cost me £79, my lenses cost me £690! that is for single vision not varifocals.

That was 2 years ago and I have my test every 12 months as my mum has glaucoma, so I get it done free.

I have bought sunglasses off a website( my bad, with all my moaning about the internet retailers !) with prescription lenses in them, cost me £195, but havent been able to wear them, because they don't fit properley and I am not looking through them right, everything is very blurred. ( something to take into account when buying glasses online !)

Last eyesight test was 3 months ago and was done by well known opticians. Locum opthamologist (optician?) she said I needed readers too, but then said will cost you a fortune, you could just push your glasses down your nose and will see better ! works too by looking through top of the lens, but a bit awkward.

Have since found someone, who sells clip on readers for my glasses, look a bit of a pratt, but what the hell, was quoted £900 for the varifocals this time, cost me £10 for the clip ons !

Anyone beat that?

I can't think of any lenses that would be that expensive at my practice. 1.9 glass single vision would be £300 and Varis less than £500. I know I always advise folks to have their specs dispensed where they have their eyes examined, but I would ask around a few practices for options and prices 1st, then have your eyes examined there.

CrazyNerd

wow yeah, that is a lot. We do Ziess 1.9 glass lenses for less than 500£.

wallbash

I have ziess varifocal but my perscription is off the standard price chart the specsavers use. So the last couple of times they have had to ring up and get a quote.
Five years ago my spectacles cost nearly £600 but last year my replace ones were just over £325.

I was told that ziess prices had gone down ... could any one ( in the profession) confirm or deny this.

Ps as I have previously posted, I am very pleased with the service I have had from SpecSavers.

PhylPho

My grandmother went blind because of glaucoma in both eyes.

My mother slowly lost her sight because of late diagnosis of glaucoma in 1977. For years she struggled with pilocarpine drops, visits to a specialist, visits to the city's Eye Hospital etc. As her son, I soon learned much about tensions and irrecoverable sight loss, as well as the diagnostics involved and the equipment used at both the specialist's consulting rooms and the Eye Hospital.

The impact of the sight loss upon my mother's health was enormous and was accelerated by widowhood. Almost overnight, it seemed, she had lost her husband and also, slowly but surely, was losing her sight.

Clinical depression set in as a result. Hospitalisation followed. Although the glaucoma was actually in check, she developed age-related cataracts. Surgery would have dealt with that but her depressive state was such that no-one wanted to risk it in case her psychiatric condition deteriorated as a result, i.e., if she "thought" the outcome was not as promised, then she would "think" she had been further victimised by time and circumstance.

She was amongst the last patients in Britain to be routinely treated to Electric Shock Treatment. (Remember: this was, by then, 1981. Not 1881.) As her sight went, so, also, did her mind. Released from hospital, she attempted suicide, because no amount of Talking Books or recorded newspaper readings kindly provided by the local Rotary Club could make up for being denied the sight of her first grand-child.

She spent her latter years in a geriatric hospital, on a special care ward, and when she finally died in 1990 she could neither see the physical world around her nor mentally comprehend it.

Her story was not unique. Though many people find within themselves what is to me a heroic inner-strength to cope, others -- like my mother -- cannot. It's not their fault. They try. They fail. And so a physical condition triggers a psychiatric condition and each feeds the other to vicious effect.

By virtue of my family history, I therefore receive a free eye test every 12 months at a major opticians in our local city centre. I don't have to remember the date: the opticians keep track of my record and write to me as and when.

Because I can remember so well the ordeal experienced by my mother, I know full well that the equipment used by my opticians out-performs all the then state-of-the-art equipment at Manchester Eye Hospital not that long ago (and to which you had access only if referred there by a doctor or consultant: you couldn't just make your own appointment and pop in from some city centre shopping zone or High Street when it suited.)

I also know something about how city centre businesses function, and in particular, the Business Rates incurred, the payments made to landlords, the public liability insurance premiums demanded, the cost of utilities, the cost of employers' NI contributions, the extra charges levied by Local Authorities for refuse collection etc.

All too clearly, those posting on here in outrage about The Great Spectacles Rip-off know little if anything about such retail economics.

All too clearly, the presenters being paid handsomely to work themselves into a cosmetic froth on that dumb BBC TV programme don't want anyone to know, either. (Though as for the programme Editor, and Head of Programming, they certainly do know something: how easy it is to provoke a furore by targeting the gullible and the ignorant amongst a TV audience.)

To those who think the way the BBC wishes 'em to think, good luck. Nothing I say would ever make them change their mind because the kind of myopia they have isn't treatable with spectacles anyway.

But what a pity it is that vision is so blinkered when it comes to protecting the gift of sight.

rustyboy21

my lenses were supposedly Zeiss lenses, but were made up in Japan for me according to the optician. Does this sound feasable?

I have harped on in other threads about you cannot say retailers are ripping us off and internet are selling at the correct price, as you cannot compare them alike with what the above poster has said, re business rates etc. I own a shop and know how expenseive running a business is.

The sunglasses I bought online were a supposed british site, but the receipt came from California and the lenses/sunglasses were assembled/made in Hong Kong. Go figure !

You are allowed to take your script away with you so you can shop around/think about it, but how many of us actually do that? you normally get the vibe that they will sort you out and you have been looked after well instore.

I know I wont buy any proper specs off the internet anymore as it seems false economy, as they do not get fitted to your personal requirements. It may be ok for very low scripts, but if you have complex script you really need to have them sorted face to face.

BTW The optician I bought them froms name had the following initials.... 2nd letter of alphabet and 4th letter. If thats any good to the optician bods on here !

Lirin

Unsure what practise Zeiss follow in regards to glasses, but for optical lenses in cameras, particularly Sony, the Zeiss lenses are not made by Zeiss. They're made by the company, who are assessed every so often by Zeiss. If the lenses meet a Zeiss standard, they can be called Zeiss lenses (after the right to do so has been purchased, obviously). Eg, Sony cameras with Zeiss lenses are actually Sony with Sony lenses meeting Zeiss standards.

rustyboy21

Having read through all of the posts on here, I do feel sorry for the opticians, who have contributed and seem to be getting shot down in flames by people thinking they are geting ripped off.

In my youth I used to work for a very large supermarket chain on the Non food dept. I was shocked to see the mark up on the products they were making, especially things like watches. Big name watches bought for 99p and selling out at £24.99. But look at how many people actually buy a watch every week, not many, so you make the margin where you can.

Spectacles are exactly the same. Not everyone has to wear them, so take 2/3 rds of the population out of the equation. Then take into account how often they have to renew them ( every 2 years or so ) so therefore you are only getting half of that amount of people buying.

Then take out the cost of staffing, how many of you see the same person from testing to paying for the product? I see the receptionist, then the optician, then the girl who helps choose the products then the clerk to pay my deposit. Thats 4 peoples wages they have to pay. This is before the business rates, VAT,PAYE,Public liability insurance, Insurance on the property,Mortagage/rent, lights,heating ,utiliities etc.

Therefore this does go somewherwe to how much it costs to supply you with your glasses.

It is pure sensational journalism, which has got you all wound up, thinking you were being ripped off. Think before this programme, did you have palpitations over going to the optician. You need to see and they are were you go to get it sorted.

Media these days are out to beat each other. I got cut off of the jeremy vine show the other week when I suggested he was lying when he said that airbus superjumbo's engine had fallen off, whenit was only a bit of carbon fibre which had. The bbc seem to be going worse and worse lately with factual codswallop, just to make some news. And we all jump on it as being correct.

Everyone jumped on buying all their presents online this year, due to a bit of snow, this has compounded delivery problems and you are all moaning about it. It stems from the BBC saying getting to shops was difficult in the weather and people will go without presents this year , everyone panicked, this is what people are doing judging opticians incorrectly.

Yes I said that I felt that the price I got was high, it was my fault that I didnt shop around to find a better quote, each to their own.

Just dont buy complex lenses off the net, you will be sorry, take my experience as word for it, £200 down the drain.