Author Topic: Vision "insurance"  (Read 18348 times)

Worsted Skeins

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Vision "insurance"
« on: December 18, 2013, 05:21:04 AM »
Our family has a basic vision care plan through my husband's job. The options are the "free" plan (one vision screening annually with a $15 co-pay and a 20% discount on frames/lens through providers accepting the plan) or the la-dee-dah plan that offers a greater discount on eyeglasses with biweekly payments into the plan.

I ran the numbers and saw no advantage to la-dee-dah.  While my husband and I both wear glasses, we do not replace them annually.  Further, la-dee-dah only pays for a portion of frames (since most seem to be absurdly over priced), does not cover my husband's transition lens, or does not pay for any of the premium stuff like coatings.

So yesterday I talked to the woman who peddles glasses in my doc's office about prescription sunglasses.  I wanted to get a price for the purpose of comparison shopping.  The peddler said to me,  "You are a smart woman.  You need the la-dee-dah plan!"  She said that her mother recently paid only $300 for her $900 glasses because of her plan.

Now hold on kids.  Mumsy pays $4 per month for her vision "insurance".  How does $48 per year translate into $600 savings without someone going broke--unless those eyeglasses were just overpriced to begin with and the "insurance" reduced the cost to something more reasonable (as though $300 for eyeglasses is reasonable!)

The peddler seemed to be a direct employee of VSP, the "insurance" company.  She did not show me glasses; she just provided miraculous savings numbers.  But companies, even non-profits like VSP, are not Santa Claus, I said.  How are they making their money if they are swallowing these costs?  Or are things just overpriced to begin with?

She was raising her voice, I was being tenacious not because I am an obnoxious person but because I wanted to understand her economical viewpoint of how vision "insurance" works.

OK people.  Am I just the densest human on the planet?  Do you buy la-dee-dah vision insurance plans?  I am thinking they might be worth it for contact wearers.  Do you break even or come out ahead? 

 

dcheesi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2013, 05:39:00 AM »
I haven't looked at this recently, but as I recall, you had to go to specific chain stores to receive the full discount. In which case the "insurance" creates a captive audience for those vendors. They make money because (as you suspected) their glasses are *still* overpriced even with the discount. And because you are "saving" thanks to your "insurance", you are buying from them rather than going elsewhere and paying a more reasonable price.

Take a look at online outlets like Zenni and Coastal; depending on your Rx, you could be paying less than $50 for a complete pair of glasses. There are some other threads around here discussing them as well.

rocksinmyhead

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1489
  • Location: Oklahoma
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #2 on: December 18, 2013, 07:57:36 AM »
Holy shit, I know glasses are overpriced but I don't know that I've ever seen $900?!!?! I share your suspicion that the initial price on the glasses is basically a fake inflated price.

I have VSP, but my company pays 100%. I get $140 worth of free contacts every year, so that is a bonus. I also had a shit ton of eye doctor appointments earlier this year to figure out when I couldn't wear contacts for more than a couple hours without my eyes freaking out... that was a game changer, and I think it would have been more expensive without the extra insurance since that covers "contact lens consultations". I think you're right that overall it is probably more useful for contact lens wearers.

I also second dcheesi's idea about the online glasses ordering, check out that other recent thread for recommendations.

rockstache

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7270
  • Age: 11
  • Location: Southeast
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #3 on: December 18, 2013, 08:23:08 AM »
I know people here hate Walmart, but their vision center does an eye exam for $100 and glasses are available for less than $40 with a 1 year no questions asked warranty. My vision plan is $10 per week through my company, so for me it was a no brainer to decline the insurance.

Rural

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5051
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #4 on: December 18, 2013, 08:25:00 AM »
I know people here hate Walmart, but their vision center does an eye exam for $100 and glasses are available for less than $40 with a 1 year no questions asked warranty. My vision plan is $10 per week through my company, so for me it was a no brainer to decline the insurance.

Cost for the exam varies by location, too; it's $68 here.

El Gringo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • Location: Washington, DC
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #5 on: December 18, 2013, 09:40:15 AM »
The last time I got frames was about two years.  I recently accidentally destroyed my glasses (funny story: I had them sitting on top of my head while I was reading. I went to put them down on the coffee table while I was still reading. Unbeknownst to me, I laid them down directly in a burning candle. Oops.) Anyway, Warby Parker just happened to have a bus traveling through town that was a pop-up shop, so I checked them out. For frames and glasses, it cost $95. And they don't work with insurance. I went back to check how much my glasses were from two years ago. They were something like $400-450 - and that was with an insurance discount! And I had shopped around for several months trying to find something I liked that was on the cheaper end. Needless to say, I went with Warby Parker this time. And they even are able to give a free pair away to those in need for every pair that you buy (http://www.warbyparker.com/do-good/#home)

They talk about the artificially high prices here: http://www.warbyparker.com/our-story/ and how WP's business model works here: http://www.warbyparker.com/how-we-do-it

BigRed

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 203
  • Age: 48
  • Location: NJ
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #6 on: December 18, 2013, 10:06:55 AM »
Google "Luxotica monopoly", and then you will realize that pretty much every pair of eyeglasses and sunglasses, as well as all of the retailers , are all owned/made by the same company.  Their prices are highway robbery and "insurance" like VSP is designed to funnel everyone to buy those overpriced glasses.  VSP is then able to offer a negotiated discount, I'm sure they actually pay little of it, from the super ridiculous prices to semi ridiculous prices and pocket your "premium."  Google Warby Parker to look at one of the players trying to break the monopoly.

Vision Insurance is also not insurance.  The costs are known and essentially fixed.  Why would you need vision insurance.  Insurance is for high variance costs and rare events, your vision is none of those.  You are just buying into an expensive "buyers club".  Of course, if someone else is paying that, and/or there a pre-tax advantages, it can still be worth it (it is for me, but just barely.  I did take my kids of my vision plan recently, since they don't need glasses or even eye appointments.)

Dr.Vibrissae

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 364
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #7 on: December 18, 2013, 11:08:06 AM »
For 12 dollars a month ($144 a year) I get a vision plan through my employer which covers yearly exams and $140 worth of contacts a year for each of us.  That amount buys me a years supply of lenses, so I think it works out in my favor, although I've always wondered how they were making any money since I get more in benefits than I pay in premiums every single year.

I'm still considering getting new glasses.  I haven't upgraded the prescription in a couple of years and it's starting to become noticable.  However, I hate those heavy plastic frames they hurt my head and look foolish on me.  I may just have to save up til I can afford the frameless lenses again (occasionally still wear my old pair, although they're an even older script.)

ketchup

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4323
  • Age: 33
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #8 on: December 18, 2013, 12:57:37 PM »
Google "Luxotica monopoly", and then you will realize that pretty much every pair of eyeglasses and sunglasses, as well as all of the retailers , are all owned/made by the same company.  Their prices are highway robbery and "insurance" like VSP is designed to funnel everyone to buy those overpriced glasses.  VSP is then able to offer a negotiated discount, I'm sure they actually pay little of it, from the super ridiculous prices to semi ridiculous prices and pocket your "premium."  Google Warby Parker to look at one of the players trying to break the monopoly.
This!  My parents are optometrists and have told me all about this game.  Vision insurance rarely is "worth it" at all.  Usually it means you pay x per month, and then get a "free" appointment each year.  Best case, you break even, but have more paperwork to fill out (and then the optometrist has more paperwork to fill out too, and if they screw it up, they get $0 for your appointment plus the time wasted trying to file the insurance claim).  My parents always strive to work places that don't take vision insurance because it is such a paperwork nightmare and timesuck for them.

El Gringo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • Location: Washington, DC
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #9 on: December 18, 2013, 01:36:01 PM »
So how much is an annual appointment without insurance? I pay $1.43 per bi-weekly paycheck for my vision insurance. Though I've discovered the wonders of Warby Parky, I imagine that, with such a low premium, it's still worth it for the free annual checkup?

Worsted Skeins

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #10 on: December 18, 2013, 02:18:19 PM »
Thanks to El Gringo and Big Red for bringing Warby Parker and the Luxotica monopoly to my attention.  Warby Parker has a home try-on program for those of us in the sticks--although I am tempted to plan a weekend trip to a city with a WP store to support them.  Very cool!

El Gringo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • Location: Washington, DC
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #11 on: December 18, 2013, 02:23:34 PM »
Thanks to El Gringo and Big Red for bringing Warby Parker and the Luxotica monopoly to my attention.  Warby Parker has a home try-on program for those of us in the sticks--although I am tempted to plan a weekend trip to a city with a WP store to support them.  Very cool!

Actually, their home try-on program is the bread and butter of their business. They been doing a special pop-up shop via the bus that travels to a different city for a few weeks at a time (I got lucky that it was in DC just when I needed it!), but besides that, you basically HAVE to get them through the home try-on. They *may* have a brick and mortar in NYC, but if so, that's the only one.

Worsted Skeins

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #12 on: December 18, 2013, 02:39:07 PM »
Thanks to El Gringo and Big Red for bringing Warby Parker and the Luxotica monopoly to my attention.  Warby Parker has a home try-on program for those of us in the sticks--although I am tempted to plan a weekend trip to a city with a WP store to support them.  Very cool!

Actually, their home try-on program is the bread and butter of their business. They been doing a special pop-up shop via the bus that travels to a different city for a few weeks at a time (I got lucky that it was in DC just when I needed it!), but besides that, you basically HAVE to get them through the home try-on. They *may* have a brick and mortar in NYC, but if so, that's the only one.

I have been looking for an excuse to go to Charleston where there just happens to be a store that has WP stock for try on purposes.  Everything I am reading about this company is just amazing! 

El Gringo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • Location: Washington, DC
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #13 on: December 18, 2013, 02:42:57 PM »
Thanks to El Gringo and Big Red for bringing Warby Parker and the Luxotica monopoly to my attention.  Warby Parker has a home try-on program for those of us in the sticks--although I am tempted to plan a weekend trip to a city with a WP store to support them.  Very cool!

Actually, their home try-on program is the bread and butter of their business. They been doing a special pop-up shop via the bus that travels to a different city for a few weeks at a time (I got lucky that it was in DC just when I needed it!), but besides that, you basically HAVE to get them through the home try-on. They *may* have a brick and mortar in NYC, but if so, that's the only one.

I have been looking for an excuse to go to Charleston where there just happens to be a store that has WP stock for try on purposes.  Everything I am reading about this company is just amazing!

Oh great! I'm glad you like them! :) I'm waiting for my glasses to arrive in the mail (I could try samples on in the bus, but my actual pair comes in the mail, of course, due to lenses). They're scheduled arrive tomorrow!

Worsted Skeins

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #14 on: December 18, 2013, 03:06:01 PM »

Oh great! I'm glad you like them! :) I'm waiting for my glasses to arrive in the mail (I could try samples on in the bus, but my actual pair comes in the mail, of course, due to lenses). They're scheduled arrive tomorrow!

Let me know what you think after you wear them for a bit--that is, if you have a minute.  After being so irritated yesterday by the pressure that the saleswoman in the Optometrist's office exerted, I am actually feeling a moment of gratitude.  Had she not been so rude, I would not have posted my small rant here and would not have learned about WP.  I love supporting alternatives to the Big Jerks out there.

MicroRN

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1042
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #15 on: December 18, 2013, 03:38:06 PM »
We don't have vision insurance, and I don't really see the point.  Unlike medical care, vision is generally cheap enough to just pay out of pocket.  I got my last glasses at Costco - $115 for new frames and lenses.  Their exam is $70, but I get annual vision screening through Tricare.  With very basic frames and lenses it could have been a lot cheaper.  Next year it'll just be an exam, and new lenses if necessary.  One of my friends buys her glasses from 39dollarglasses.com and has been very pleased with the quality.  She goes to WalMart for the exam.

I had vision insurance through a previous employer until I actually ran the numbers.  I was paying $7/mo, $25 copay for the exam, and at least $120 for the frames/lenses, because what was covered was so limited.   

PantsOnFire

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 141
  • Location: PA
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #16 on: December 19, 2013, 07:43:42 AM »
I agree with the sentiments that it's not really "insurance".  It's pretty much a scam but it benefits me because my known annual vision costs with the pitiful coverage that BCBS gives me are significantly higher than the sum of all my VSP payments.  Someone else is paying the difference and that's not fair but I'm not going to leave money on the table. 

jba302

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 622
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #17 on: December 19, 2013, 10:04:14 AM »
OK people.  Am I just the densest human on the planet?  Do you buy la-dee-dah vision insurance plans?  I am thinking they might be worth it for contact wearers.  Do you break even or come out ahead?

Absent fraud or luck, you should never come out ahead in insurance (by definition, indemnification is breaking even but you still pay for the company's overhead). So, at best you will come out even in the long run. Run the long term numbers and it is likely that self-insurance is the best way to go, even if it seems like a bargain up front.

Insurance should only be pursued when you cannot financially handle to self-insure the high side of it (house burns down, you hit a walker while driving, eyes fall out of face, etc.), and/or have a legal requirement to do so (or in the case of my LTC policy, the employer pays 100% and I only pay the tax burden).

abhe8

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 491
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #18 on: December 19, 2013, 01:25:49 PM »
I LOVE the suggestion on warby parker. i've been putting off buying glasses for years due to cost and these look perfect.

any ideas on deals on contacts?

i do pay for VSP, because the cost of contacts (from 1800contacts) and the exam is more expensive then I pay in premiums, but i would love to find a cheaper option.

capital

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #19 on: December 19, 2013, 10:56:56 PM »
Warby Parker makes good product and is fashionable but still kinda pricey. I have Zenni Optical glasses and they are fine quality and durable, and have paid $10-$40 per pair. (The $40 pair were expensive frames, by Zenni standards.)

El Gringo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • Location: Washington, DC
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #20 on: December 20, 2013, 07:41:05 AM »
Let me know what you think after you wear them for a bit--that is, if you have a minute.  After being so irritated yesterday by the pressure that the saleswoman in the Optometrist's office exerted, I am actually feeling a moment of gratitude.  Had she not been so rude, I would not have posted my small rant here and would not have learned about WP.  I love supporting alternatives to the Big Jerks out there.

Got my glasses last night in the mail! They're great! They feel and look great!

Cujo

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #21 on: December 20, 2013, 07:53:44 AM »
My employer provides VSP at no charge to employees, but even if it cost a modest amount, I would pay for it. I get hundreds of dollars a year in benefits from it:

* Five eye exams, which would be $60-100 each without insurance ($60 for glasses, $100 for contacts). Not covered by my medical plan.
* At least two, and most years more, glasses or contacts. Two are smallish children whose prescriptions change continuously and who need new frames annually because they're growing. Benefit is at least $100 per pair (or set of contacts).

I don't think it's substantively different from any other kind of insurance, and certainly not a "scam." It provides benefits to those who use it, paid for by those who pay premiums and don't use the benefits - just like every insurance plan. If it doesn't make financial sense for you to pay for it, then don't.

Worsted Skeins

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #22 on: February 27, 2014, 12:37:12 PM »

Got my glasses last night in the mail! They're great! They feel and look great!

Hello El Gringo!

I just requested five sets of frames to try from Warby Parker.  It has taken me a while to get my ducks in a row but I hope to be sporting a new pair of prescription shades soon.

Still happy with your frames?

El Gringo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 314
  • Location: Washington, DC
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #23 on: February 27, 2014, 03:11:50 PM »
That's great! Yes, I am very happy with mine! I went with a new style from my previous glasses and I've been getting tons of compliments! Totally happy with them - I'm never going back to the traditional model.

By the way, FastCo recently highlighted Warby Parker as one of their "Most Innovative Companies": http://www.fastcompany.com/most-innovative-companies/2014/warby-parker

Worsted Skeins

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #24 on: February 27, 2014, 05:47:48 PM »
That's great! Yes, I am very happy with mine! I went with a new style from my previous glasses and I've been getting tons of compliments! Totally happy with them - I'm never going back to the traditional model.

By the way, FastCo recently highlighted Warby Parker as one of their "Most Innovative Companies": http://www.fastcompany.com/most-innovative-companies/2014/warby-parker

Very cool!

Well I am starting with prescription sunglasses because mine really need to be replaced--both in terms of the prescription itself and because the frames are worn out.  I have replaced the lens several times and have been warned that my lenses may not remain in place.

The prices at WP are great and the styles are so attractive that I may be lured into replacing my regular glasses as well.  I live in glasses and would love to have an alternate pair--which I am not doing at $400 per pair!

iris lily

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5672
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #25 on: February 27, 2014, 06:48:08 PM »
One may or may not save money, and good for you for running the numbers. I don't have the patience.

For eye care and dentistry we don't pay insurance because I have the philosophy: insurance is to protect me from major bills, not leetle bitty ones.

And our dentist gives 10% off for paying by check, and my eye care chain gives me 10 or 20% off since I don't have insurance. Oh, and then we can count these costs in a health tax protected plan, so that is further savings.

 I will say that DH buys glasses at least every 2 years and his are $800 when we buy them, so he might realize a savings with insurance. I buy new glasses sporadically and would have to plan for it and then, mine are around $400.

Worsted Skeins

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #26 on: May 22, 2014, 10:17:48 AM »
Time for an update to my rant from last December.

First, I have ordered both sunglasses and basic eyeglasses from Warby Parker to complete satisfaction.

Secondly, our insurance benefits changed with this calendar year.  Vision screening is now considered preventive care for us and is covered at 100% on our basic health insurance plan.  VSP is optional.  One pays for discounts on hardware, i.e. glasses or contacts.  We opted out.

College Boy went to see the eye doc today and gave me a panicked call from the lobby.  He was told that he did not have coverage for his eye exam.  I told him to proceed since it needed to be done anyway but that I would investigate.  Turns out that the optometrist's office workers assume that everyone who works for my husband's employer (a large company) has VSP.  They did not even run the United Healthcare card despite the fact that my son handed it to them!  The staff person who was prompted to run the card finally said, "United Healthcare covers the eye exam and refraction at 100%.  No contacts though."  Well none of us wear contacts!

He had to wrestle the people in the eye glass sales office there to give him the prescription.  They refused to measure pupillary distance knowing that he intended to place an online order.

It is disturbing that these sales people treat our medical information as proprietary.  I suspect that they are losing business to online storefronts.  This is certainly no way to lure me back.

« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 10:38:09 AM by Worsted Skeins »

MrsPete

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3505
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #27 on: May 22, 2014, 11:13:32 AM »
First, I wear bifocals, which are more expensive than regular lenses, and they still aren't $300, much less $900.  I find that number hard to believe.  Sounds like salesperson math.

Second, I adamantly advise against ordering prescription glasses from online places like Zenni.  I ordered a pair once and they frames did not fit my face AT ALL.  I don't mean I didn't care for the look. I mean the frames were too short and gave me a headache after only minutes.  I tried to have them adjusted at the mall, and there just wasn't enough material there to adjust.  Cheap glasses aren't cheap if they don't work! 

Finally, I have eye care insurance, and it pays next to nothing for glasses.  I get a better discount from a professional group of which I am a member.  Check everything in your wallet:  AAA, AARP, credit union, whatever else you have.  Quite a few places offer small discounts. 

BUT the insurance is still worthwhile.  It's pretty much a wash -- it's cheap insurance, and the amount off the glasses is cheap.  But IF you ever have to have any type of surgery, you're covered.  Many of us will have cataracts as we age, and insurance will cover that.  A relative of mine just had MAJOR eye surgery . . . and then had it again on the other eye.  That's when your eye insurance is worthwhile. 


Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4725
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #28 on: May 22, 2014, 11:22:49 AM »
He had to wrestle the people in the eye glass sales office there to give him the prescription.  They refused to measure pupillary distance knowing that he intended to place an online order.

It is disturbing that these sales people treat our medical information as proprietary.  I suspect that they are losing business to online storefronts.  This is certainly no way to lure me back.

The optometrist is "supposed" to be independent of the eyeglass store. So much for that, I guess!

Second, I adamantly advise against ordering prescription glasses from online places like Zenni.  I ordered a pair once and they frames did not fit my face AT ALL.  I don't mean I didn't care for the look. I mean the frames were too short and gave me a headache after only minutes.  I tried to have them adjusted at the mall, and there just wasn't enough material there to adjust.  Cheap glasses aren't cheap if they don't work!

Zenni is so cheap compared to brick & mortar eyeglass shops that you could make a mistake and have to reorder two or three times and still come out ahead.

Worsted Skeins

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #29 on: May 22, 2014, 11:29:57 AM »
First, I wear bifocals, which are more expensive than regular lenses, and they still aren't $300, much less $900.  I find that number hard to believe.  Sounds like salesperson math.

Second, I adamantly advise against ordering prescription glasses from online places like Zenni.  I ordered a pair once and they frames did not fit my face AT ALL.  I don't mean I didn't care for the look. I mean the frames were too short and gave me a headache after only minutes.  I tried to have them adjusted at the mall, and there just wasn't enough material there to adjust.  Cheap glasses aren't cheap if they don't work! 

Finally, I have eye care insurance, and it pays next to nothing for glasses.  I get a better discount from a professional group of which I am a member.  Check everything in your wallet:  AAA, AARP, credit union, whatever else you have.  Quite a few places offer small discounts. 

BUT the insurance is still worthwhile.  It's pretty much a wash -- it's cheap insurance, and the amount off the glasses is cheap.  But IF you ever have to have any type of surgery, you're covered.  Many of us will have cataracts as we age, and insurance will cover that.  A relative of mine just had MAJOR eye surgery . . . and then had it again on the other eye.  That's when your eye insurance is worthwhile.

Our VSP plan never covered medical stuff like surgery.  I had cataract surgery last year which was covered under my major medical plan. 

I have not used Zenni but have friends who have and who are satisfied with their specks.  I paid more through Warby Parker, taking advantage of their at home trial of five pairs of frames.  WB will reimburse for adjustments too if one needs them.

Indeed, bifocals and progressives are another kettle of fish!  Glad I do not need them (yet)!

Worsted Skeins

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 381
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #30 on: May 22, 2014, 11:32:41 AM »
He had to wrestle the people in the eye glass sales office there to give him the prescription.  They refused to measure pupillary distance knowing that he intended to place an online order.

It is disturbing that these sales people treat our medical information as proprietary.  I suspect that they are losing business to online storefronts.  This is certainly no way to lure me back.

The optometrist is "supposed" to be independent of the eyeglass store. So much for that, I guess!


Seems to me that the eyeglass sales people are in bed with VSP!  We are wondering if VSP pays a commission given how they promote this "insurance" plan.

plantingourpennies

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 443
  • None.
    • Money, Kittens, Happiness
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #31 on: May 22, 2014, 02:48:39 PM »
FWIW, I just went through helping some coworkers decipher plans, and there are indeed different networks of VSP (Choice and Signature), each of which has a "regular" and a "Plus" plan.  The network (Choice / Signature) referred to which doctors were covered, and the "regular" or "Plus" referred to how often you could get services (like frames), and how big your copays/coinsurance/out of network allowances were. 

There may be more, this was all we were evaluating. 

The big difference for folks at our workplace was whether or not their existing OD would take VSP Choice, since the payment it offers doctors is less than that of VSP Signature.  From our relatively small sample size, the more full service ODs (ones that include full field of vision tests, etc in the "standard" exam) wouldn't take VSP Choice.  So for folks with family histories of eye problems like glaucoma that want/need these things, the Choice coverage would have been largely insufficient.  For people like me with minimal Rx and a slight astigmatism, I'm probably A-OK with the Choice providers. 

Hope that helps clarify some of the difference between this stuff. 

deborah

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15961
  • Age: 14
  • Location: Australia or another awesome area
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #32 on: May 22, 2014, 05:19:08 PM »
Holy shit, I know glasses are overpriced but I don't know that I've ever seen $900?!!?!
I won't tell you what my glasses cost - and I need 3 pairs.

frugalnacho

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5055
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #33 on: May 23, 2014, 09:09:08 AM »
OK people.  Am I just the densest human on the planet?  Do you buy la-dee-dah vision insurance plans?  I am thinking they might be worth it for contact wearers.  Do you break even or come out ahead?

Absent fraud or luck, you should never come out ahead in insurance (by definition, indemnification is breaking even but you still pay for the company's overhead). So, at best you will come out even in the long run. Run the long term numbers and it is likely that self-insurance is the best way to go, even if it seems like a bargain up front.

Insurance should only be pursued when you cannot financially handle to self-insure the high side of it (house burns down, you hit a walker while driving, eyes fall out of face, etc.), and/or have a legal requirement to do so (or in the case of my LTC policy, the employer pays 100% and I only pay the tax burden).

lol.  Walking dead.


MissPeach

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 352
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #34 on: May 23, 2014, 05:26:01 PM »
I remember seeing a really good show on glasses. Basically one company owns all the lenses in some way or another except for Costco and Walmart. So they mark them up into crazy amounts because the essentially have a monopoly. I don't see the benefit to vision insurance because you pay in insurance pretty much what you would pay at Costco or Walmart or more.

Primm

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
  • Age: 55
  • Location: Australia
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #35 on: May 23, 2014, 06:26:05 PM »
Absent fraud or luck, you should never come out ahead in insurance (by definition, indemnification is breaking even but you still pay for the company's overhead). So, at best you will come out even in the long run. Run the long term numbers and it is likely that self-insurance is the best way to go, even if it seems like a bargain up front.

Insurance should only be pursued when you cannot financially handle to self-insure the high side of it (house burns down, you hit a walker while driving, eyes fall out of face, etc.), and/or have a legal requirement to do so (or in the case of my LTC policy, the employer pays 100% and I only pay the tax burden).

Sometimes you hit the "jackpot" though. We paid into health insurance for years, never getting close to taking out what we put in. Then hubby's kidneys failed, and now we're claiming to the tune of $1k a month for dialysis until he has his transplant, probably 3-4 years.

Sorry to the people with the same company who are subsidising us, but we'd never be able to pay an extra $150-$200k in medical bills and maintain any sort of standard of living, as well as saving and investing. We'll have taken out about 65 years worth of premiums by the time this episode is over.

To stay closer to the topic though, our insurance includes extras like physio and glasses, so we're well and truly in front. We get $300 per person per year, which covers a new pair for each of us.

dodojojo

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 806
Re: Vision "insurance"
« Reply #36 on: May 24, 2014, 12:18:16 PM »
Second, I adamantly advise against ordering prescription glasses from online places like Zenni.  I ordered a pair once and they frames did not fit my face AT ALL.  I don't mean I didn't care for the look. I mean the frames were too short and gave me a headache after only minutes.  I tried to have them adjusted at the mall, and there just wasn't enough material there to adjust.  Cheap glasses aren't cheap if they don't work! 


Based on my experience the last six months, I'd have to agree.  I suppose if the online options are so cheap, you can afford to have a couple of problems.  But in my case, if I had taken that option, I would have lost out.

First, distance glasses.  Yep, I was guilty of going to a fairly expensive place and bought a designer brand.  Slap me, I wanted something a bit fancier after the last pair of boring fuddy duddy glasses.  Long story short, I suffered from massive headaches and an optician pointed out that the frame didn't fit me and no amount of adjusting was going to fix the problem.  The store replaced frame and lenses without cost.

Second, reading glasses.  Again, massive headings from wearing them.  I've followed up 3 times with the optometrist at no cost.  The store where I had the glasses made (same as above) has made up 3 prescriptions for my frames--without additional cost. 

Maybe it would have cost less, even with all the lenses/frames changes, online.  But I think the frustration I've experienced would have been doubly worse if I was dealing with multiple mailings/returns of glasses.