EclectEcon

I have worn tri-focals for about a decade. My eyes aren't all that bad (I can pass the driving test without glasses), but they don't adjust to different distances all that well; hence the trifocals.

After my most recent eye examination, both my optometrist and Ms. Eclectic suggested that I should re-consider getting progressives — trifocals that have no lines on them; they don't have three distinct viewing areas but instead have a progressive change from top to bottom. The two advantages of this type of lens are that (1) there is no line or abrupt change in the prescription from one portion of the lens to another, and (2) by slightly tilting your head up or down you can always find an angle at which things are in focus, regardless of how far they are from you.

The major disadvantage of progressives is that because of the physics/optics, it is impossible to make the lenses so that you can see much to the sides of what you are looking at; the field of vision is very narrow. I had tried progressives when I first got bifocals and hated them because I had to pivot my head from side-to-side to read a newspaper. I was assured, though, that newer designs meant that the field of vision is much wider now.

My local monopolist optometrist initially quoted me a price $530 just for new lenses (I like the rimless titanium frames I'm using and see no need to replace them). They also said that lined trifocals would cost about the same amount. And they guaranteed that if I didn't like the progressives (with transition lenses that go darker in the sunlight and and and, etc.), I could change to trifocals at no charge.

I was about to place the order with them when they called and said they'd made a mistake: the price would be $630, not $530. Okay. That seemed a bit steep, but mistakes happen. [I must say, though, that most businesses that give you a quote honour it even if they make a mistake like this.]

I then asked whether, if I didn't like the progressives, I would get a $100 refund if I switched back to the lined trifocals. The person I was speaking with said she'd never been asked that before, but she checked with others and said that yes I would.

The next day I received ANOTHER phone call from their office telling me that she was new there and had answered incorrectly (despite having checked with others) and that if I ordered progressives, the price would $630 even if I switched back to lined trifocals.

By this time I was beginning to feel jerked around. This optometry company has about five optometrists working in it with offices in two of the local towns. I don't know of any other dispensing opticians within a 20-mile radius of where I live. Due to their locational advantage and their aggressive expansion [shades of Alcoa? or perhaps this is a better reprise of the Alcoa case.], they have some degree of market power. But not so much that they can irritate me as much as they did.

So I went to an optician in London, ON, with my prescription [London is about an hour's drive from the small town where we live, and I go there maybe once every week or two, even when I am not teaching at the university there.]. Their price? $420, with the same guarantee that I can switch back to lined trifocals at no charge if I don't like the progressives. So I placed the order.

I now have the progressives. I'm not thrilled with them. When I get a chance, I will probably return them and get lined trifocals. With these new progressives, not even the entire 12.1" screen on my small laptop is in focus from side to side. The field of vision is still too narrow to suit me.

Next week: Other options when there appears to be a local monopoly: ordering glasses from China.