I just went to Winners and purchased three lovely pair of reading glasses for $16.
And yet, when I had to wear dispenser glasses, I couldn’t get out of there for under $400.
For one pair.
A bit of back story is needed here.
Until four years ago, I needed glasses to see near and far. That’s because my eyes had different strength lenses, so I was at the mercy of optometry. Every year, I had to fork out $800 plus, more because I also purchased prescription sunglasses for reading outside — a luxury, sure.
Scott is a four eyes. So is Marissa.
Needless to say, every year we spent the budget of some small countries on corrective lenses.
Then a miracle happened.
I met the brilliant and wonderful Dr. Michael Myles, the genius who took a cataract off my left eye. He gave me a bionic lens so the vision in both of my eyes matched. I can now see perfectly to a distance, although I am now blind as a near-sided bat.
He sent me back to my optometrist who told me I no longer needed dispenser lenses. He said I could wear the drug store variety — which are also rip offs, in my opinion, at $35.
Now I go to Winners and get a slew of glasses for less than a Starbucks’ coffee card. They work great.
Yet Scott and Marissa continue to get ripped off for the exact same glasses as I wear. They’re still forking out hundreds while I can get three pairs of glasses and a coffee for a deuce.
I suppose you could say that you’re paying for customer service. You could say that. I would say you are getting fleeced
Why doesn’t anyone call the dispensers on this?
Instead of cutting their prices, across the board, they concoct wild marketing schemes offering two pairs of glasses for one or “free frames.”
Angie Poirier and J.J. Clarke just can’t decide, the deal is so good!
I’ll tell you what’s good.
Couldn’t I just give Marissa a pair of my Winners’ glasses and have them pop in lenses?
I mean, it’s not dentistry.
I’ll give Lenscrafters and New Look their due. Lens crafting is a science and an art.
But the frames?
A lot of poor seniors and little kids could benefit from cheap lenses.
They shouldn’t have to be penalized for having one eye in the pot and the other in the kettle.
No lawsuits, please.
I’m still paying for Scott’s glasses.