NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #23/NN_1992_23.iso/spool/misc/consumer/17680

Text File | 1992-10-10 | 1.5 KB | 30 lines

Newsgroups: misc.consumers
Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!princeton!mccc!pjh
From: [e-mail] (Pete Holsberg)
Subject: Re: Cheap glasses
Organization: The College On The Other Side Of Route One
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 18:40:05 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 19

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John De Armond) writes:
=At least in Georgia it is illegal to link requiring an exam with any
=promotion.  What I found with Pearl was these 'economy' frames,
=frequently also specified for vision insurance plans, are such that
=I'd not inflict them on my dog.  These are the classic bait-n-switch
=scam.  After they get you in the store they show you the basic $200
=glasses and then try to scare you into another $100 worth of useless lens
=treatments such as UV coatings and tints.

Not to mention pushing plastic over glass.

A dentist friend told me that the ophthalmologist across the street and
his in-house optician recently came to a parting of the ways. Seems that
some years ago, when they first established their relationship, the
ophth promised eventual partnership to the opt, and now the opt was
claiming his due. The bottom line was that the ophth was will to split
everything 50/50 except the net from the optician's part of the business
-- he wanted it all! It seems that the profits are enormous! Bigger than
ophthalmic surgery, no less!