Hearing-aid Pricing
Mason C
An item manufactured for $100 should retail for $200. Add 20 hours of service
at $100 per hour only adds up to $2,200. 20 hours of service should be more
than enough and $100 per hour should be adequate. It adds up to $2,200.
Good modern hearing aids are available: online for less than $1,000; locally for
less than $1,000 or $2,000
A price of $6,000 per ear is thievery. It is taking advantage of the elderly,
the needy, and the ignorant. Such pricing is possible because of licensed
oligopoly, ignorance, and in some cases conspiracy. The latter is criminal.
If an HMO and a hearing-aid dispenser so conspire, they should be
reported to appropriate authorities (licensing agents, district attorneys).
Mason C
tanukiki
news:44mad21avnk7blu6n...@4ax.com...
Just a few thoughts...The problem with this argument is that you're leaving
out the cost to develop the product before it even goes into production. And
the cost involved with the fact that aids can be returned. If millions of
aids were sold, then the R&D cost, etc would be split amongst a lot of
product but it is not. HAs cost the audiologist/dispenser any where from a
little more to a lot more than your $200 figure depending on the brand/level
of technology, etc. Do I think it sucks that so many people cannot afford
HAs? Yes I do - very much so. I've also never worked anywhere that we've
sold one aid for 6000. I've heard some patients come in and say they've been
quoted that. Then they usually go shopping around. Some end up with me, some
elsewhere. Also as the vast majority of insurance policies (HMO or
otherwise) provide no or little coverage for HAs then I don't think you have
to worry so much that it is those entities that are conspiring.
--
JennL
Michael Ridenhour
This is such nonsense. He doesn't alert district attorneys because, as of
yet, it isn't illegal in America to make money.
Salary serfs make money for someone else. Private practice owners make money
to pay the government in taxes. Nobody gets a free ride, Mr. C.
You make these assertions and then cannot bring forth a single fact to back
a single one up.
Michael
Mason C
Fact #1 : Hearing aids priced at $12,000 a pair. A pilot from my
WW2 squadron paid that. Not a "fact" is my firmly believing that the
ones in his ears are "nothing special"
Fact #2 : The post here lamenting an HMO reference to a source
pricing them at $6,000 an ear.
Fact #3 : That you, Michael Ridenhour, are well aware of such pricing.
Your ideological defense rather than a factual defense is prima facie
evidence of this fact.
Fact #4 : It is against the law for two or more persons to conspire
to fix a price. Read the original post that started this chatter.
Mason C
Peter Weis
However sympathetic your outrage, it is out of reality.
Your initial statement is both moral and arbitrary.
You can buy hearing aids at $1000 and you can buy them at higher prices.
The difference is whether you get a good hearing aid with basic
functionality or a top-notch hearing aid with all the latest functionality.
It is like buying pens, watches, spectacles, consumer electronics and
other stuff.
Prices do not only reflect production costs, they never have and they
never will.
best regards
Peter
Michael Ridenhour
Whether or not it is your "belief" is not the issue, is it. You may believe
any doctrine. That does not make your "belief" accurate or factual. Has the
pilot complained? Is he satisfied with his purchase? Did he ask for you to
post his situation, making him look like a fool?
> Fact #2 : The post here lamenting an HMO reference to a source
> pricing them at $6,000 an ear.
>
There are top quality hearing aids which retail at $6000 an ear. So what?
You don't want them, you don't buy them. Its as simple as that. I offer you
freedom of choice. Make up your mind about what you are willing to pay for
something and find a seller who offers it. What I object to is the apparent
belief that you are the arbiter of what is right and fair.
> Fact #3 : That you, Michael Ridenhour, are well aware of such pricing.
> Your ideological defense rather than a factual defense is prima facie
> evidence of this fact.
>
Yes, I am well aware of such pricing. In fact, I offer such a product to
those who want the extras that such a huge expense entails. People pay
$700,000 for a Lamborgini. What's that to you? If you want the best, you pay
for the best. If you want the extras and the perks, you pay for the extras
and the perks. How about that for a factual defense?
> Fact #4 : It is against the law for two or more persons to conspire
> to fix a price. Read the original post that started this chatter.
>
> Mason C
Prove the conspiracy, rather than just go on about it. There are those who
threaten free enterprise by advocating government action against free trade,
free speech and freedom in general. The sort of attitude which is a very
real danger in today's victim-ridden society.
If $6000 hearing aids are overpriced, they will not be purchased. If
cost-cutter hearing aids meet the needs of the consumer better, they will
succeed. I've been in practice for 35 years and have seen get rich quick
schemes come and go and I have seen do-gooder, save the hearing impaired
schemes which preyed on the consumer to an equally nefarious extent.
I applaud your vigilance, Mr. C. I really do. But I would hope that you
realize that the world is a very large place, full of heros and brigands,
thieves and saints. Keep on the alert, post when you find inequity, but
realize that there are other opinions, without having rancor about it. You
haven't yet, so I'm not worried about it. I would ask that you keep your
comments impersonal and avoid the personal attacks which mention people by
name. I ask, not demand.
Michael Ridenhour
Mason C
Yes. He said "I'm very angry."
> Is he satisfied with his purchase?
Angry, but he needs them.
> Did he ask for you to
>post his situation, making him look like a fool?
No. And is he a fool for being angry about over-pricing?
>
>> Fact #2 : The post here lamenting an HMO reference to a source
>> pricing them at $6,000 an ear.
>>
>
>There are top quality hearing aids which retail at $6000 an ear. So what?
>You don't want them, you don't buy them. Its as simple as that.
Again you refuse to read the post that start all this. Here it is, quote:
We live in Northern Virginia and my wife just came back from an
audiologist recommended by our HMO, Kaiser Permanente. She was told she
had some hearing loss and that at pair of hearing aids would cost her
$6,200 for the Premier model, $4,000 for the regular model.
I almost had a heart attack when I heard the price. I know my wife is
hard of hearing but this is a fairly recent and gradual hearing loss
and not the congenital stone deafness that would warrant a really
powerful model.
Are we being price gouged here? My wife wants the $6,200 model which we
can barely afford, but I don't know what to tell her. Is there any
merit in shopping around or are we doomed to pay this exorbitant price?
Thanks for any consoling thoughts. My wife is 60 and she was told this
set will last 8 years, so she figures this is the last one we'll ever
buy.
unquote
An attempt at price-gouging if there ever was one. Rip off the elderly.
> I offer you
>freedom of choice. Make up your mind about what you are willing to pay for
>something and find a seller who offers it. What I object to is the apparent
>belief that you are the arbiter of what is right and fair.
>
Morality is the right and obligation of all.
>
>> Fact #3 : That you, Michael Ridenhour, are well aware of such pricing.
>> Your ideological defense rather than a factual defense is prima facie
>> evidence of this fact.
>>
>
>Yes, I am well aware of such pricing. In fact, I offer such a product to
>those who want the extras that such a huge expense entails. People pay
>$700,000 for a Lamborgini. What's that to you? If you want the best, you pay
>for the best. If you want the extras and the perks, you pay for the extras
>and the perks. How about that for a factual defense?
>
So Lamborgini's are being foistered on the elderly and infirm?
Michael Ridenhour
>>> Fact #2 : The post here lamenting an HMO reference to a source
>>> pricing them at $6,000 an ear.
>>>
>>
>>There are top quality hearing aids which retail at $6000 an ear. So what?
>>You don't want them, you don't buy them. Its as simple as that.
>
> Again you refuse to read the post that start all this. Here it is, quote:
>
> We live in Northern Virginia and my wife just came back from an
> audiologist recommended by our HMO, Kaiser Permanente. She was told she
> had some hearing loss and that at pair of hearing aids would cost her
> $6,200 for the Premier model, $4,000 for the regular model.
>
> I almost had a heart attack when I heard the price. I know my wife is
> hard of hearing but this is a fairly recent and gradual hearing loss
> and not the congenital stone deafness that would warrant a really
> powerful model.
>
> Are we being price gouged here? My wife wants the $6,200 model which we
> can barely afford, but I don't know what to tell her. Is there any
> merit in shopping around or are we doomed to pay this exorbitant price?
>
> Thanks for any consoling thoughts. My wife is 60 and she was told this
> set will last 8 years, so she figures this is the last one we'll ever
> buy.
> unquote
>
> An attempt at price-gouging if there ever was one. Rip off the elderly.
Again, you refuse to read my posts.
"There are top quality hearing aids which retail at $6000 an ear. So what?
You don't want them, you don't buy them. Its as simple as that."
Kaiser may charge what they wish. They offered two choices, the lady prefers
the better model, her husband prefers to save money.
Wanna bet which set he'd get for himself?
Last post from me, Mason. You have the field to yourself.
Michae'
Jim
Here's a Wall Street Journal article from March, 2004 -
==============================
A set of hearing aids costs about $2,200 on average. Mead Killion
thinks that's crazy. He believes an effective aid for mild-to-moderate
hearing loss could be sold over the counter for around $100 - using
technology that already exists.
But bringing inexpensive hearing aids to the masses won't be easy. Dr.
Killion, a hearing-aid pioneer, is battling a tight-knit group of
licensed specialists who by law are the only people allowed to
dispense hearing devices.
The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates the industry, so far
has sided mostly with the specialists, who are trained to calibrate
and fit devices suited to each patient. If anyone could sell a hearing
aid, the FDA says, elderly people might be victimized by shoddy
merchandise and fail to get treatment for serious medical conditions.
Dr. Killion's campaign has revived a debate among hearing-aid
specialists and manufacturers about how to improve access to help for
the 30 million Americans with hearing loss. "We do such a poor job as
an industry meeting the needs of masses of individuals," says Wayne
Staab, an audiologist and the executive director of the American
Auditory Society. "We develop instruments for people who have the most
money and leave the other individuals on the sidelines."
Hearing loss is the third most common chronic condition in older
people, after arthritis and high blood pressure, according to a
recent study published in the Journal of the American Medical
Association. Another study in JAMA showed that elderly people who
don't treat their hearing loss are more likely to experience
depression, anxiety and paranoia. Medicare and many private insurers
don't pay for hearing aids.
Only about one in five people who needs a hearing aid has one,
according to Sergei Kochkin, executive director of the Better Hearing
Institute. The proportion has declined in the past two decades.
The web of regulations dates back to the mid-1970s. Evidence presented
at Senate hearings at that time showed that aggressive salespeople
from unregulated hearing-aid centers often sold elderly people
products they didn't need or that were defective. Audiologists
testified that some people bought hearing aids when their hearing loss
actually required medical treatment for infection, an acoustical nerve
tumor or too much ear wax.
Congress amended the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act to give the FDA
regulatory power over all medical devices, and the FDA followed with
the Hearing Aid Rule of 1977. It required consumers to see a physician
to rule out a medical problem before getting a hearing aid. It also
created an exception - adults could bypass a doctor if they signed a
waiver administered by a state-licensed hearing-aid dispenser. By
signing, customers would acknowledge that they understood the dangers
of skipping a full medical evaluation.
Today, two types of licensed specialists are the main vendors of
hearing aids. State-licensed hearing-aid specialists need only a
high-school education but have to pass tests proving their competence
to administer hearing exams, fit devices, and recognize underlying
physical problems. Audiologists must have at least a master's degree,
though they generally aren't medical doctors. After the FDA rule went
into effect, audiologists changed their professional code of ethics
and jumped into the business of selling hearing aids.
Under standards set by professional bodies, the specialists require a
battery of tests and fitting sessions, driving up the cost. That
results in the $2,200 average cost for hearing aids, a figure cited in
an industry study sponsored by Knowles Electronics, an Illinois
components maker.
"The prices are obscene," says Aaron Thornton, the recently retired
director of the audiology program at the Massachusetts Eye and Ear
Infirmary, which is affiliated with Harvard Medical School. "The
technology can be made for hundreds of dollars - the rest is
distribution."
Mead Killion agrees. In 1989, he developed a component that allowed
hearing aids to amplify soft sounds without simultaneously amplifying
loud sounds to a painful level. Today almost every manufacturer uses
circuitry patterned after his invention, called a K-amp. Last year the
American Academy of Audiology honored the 64-year-old inventor with an
award, saying he "profoundly influenced the path of hearing care."
Dr. Killion and his wife, Gail Gudmundsen, both of whom hold
doctorates in audiology, think there's a place for high-priced hearing
aids and the professionals who dispense them, but they say many people
don't need elaborate tests and fittings. "There are a lot of
uncomplicated hearing losses in the mild to moderate range that don't
require a very sophisticated instrument," Dr. Killion says. "At the
worst, maybe it won't work for someone, but it won't hurt them."
Dr. Killion says technology developed over the last two decades has
made it possible to create a high-quality hearing aid at a low cost.
New materials allow a better fit without a custom-made ear mold.
Most hearing loss in the elderly is caused by a gradual deterioration
of hair cells in the inner ear that makes it difficult to hear
high-frequency sounds. It is a natural part of aging, akin to the
deterioration of eyesight over time. But in some 5% of cases, hearing
loss is a symptom of a medical problem that needs a doctor's
attention.
Last August, after he got the award, Dr. Killion and his wife
petitioned the FDA to permit the sale of hearing aids over the counter
and do away with the requirement for a physician's screening or
waiver. They argued that the potential harm was negligible and called
the present FDA policy "discriminatory against the low-income
population." They said hearing-aid packages should list warning signs
of a serious medical problem such as bleeding from the ear and chronic
dizziness.
The petitions rattled many in the profession. At a workshop at
Northwestern University, Dr. Killion says audiology graduate students
asked him why he wanted to take away their future jobs.
Audiologists say the complaints about prices fail to recognize the
work they do. Hearing professionals figure out how much amplification
patients need at various frequencies and use a computer to program the
aids accordingly.
Some colleagues accused Drs. Killion and Gudmundsen of proposing the
rule changes so that their company, Etymotic Research, could market an
over-the-counter aid. The company currently sells hearing-aid
circuits, earphones for hearing testing, and high-fidelity ear plugs
for professional musicians.
Wrote one audiologist on an industry Internet site: "They are business
people first and foremost. And the pocketbook is a highly motivating
factor for people. Obviously Mead and Gail are not exempt." Another
called for a "big effort" to stop the couple from their "money hungry
folly."
Dr. Killion confirms that he'd like to sell an over-the-counter
device, but insists his main motivation is to make hearing help more
affordable and easier to obtain.
The American Academy of Audiology and the International Hearing
Society, which represents mostly state-licensed hearing-aid
dispensers, opposed the petitions. The academy said granting the
petitions "could lead to widespread confusion and abuse." The
society's executive director, Robin Clowers, says over-the-counter
aids could bring a return to the bad old days, when fly-by-night
operators took advantage of the elderly by selling useless devices.
In February of this year, the FDA rejected the main petitions from Dr.
Killion and his wife. "FDA is concerned that if prospective purchasers
of hearing aids are not examined by a physician prior to using the
hearing aid, red flag ear conditions will go undiagnosed and
unevaluated and lead to irreparable damage," the rejection notice
said.
Eric Mann, head of the FDA's division of ear, nose and throat devices,
says the agency is also worried that defective over-the-counter
products would deter people from getting further help.
The decision was a "kick in the head," says Dr. Killion. He thinks
consumers would be smart enough to distinguish legitimate products
from junk. "A lot of manufacturers have a high-quality product waiting
in the wings," he says. "They tell me they would have it ready for
market if it was legal. They sell it now in India and other markets."
Several years ago, Dr. Thornton of Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary
purchased hearing aids lacking custom ear pieces and programming
capabilities that were made by Siemens for less-regulated European
markets. He says he paid $60 apiece for the devices, which Siemens was
closing out at the time, and sold them at his clinic for $200. "My
patients were very satisfied with them. In fact, they were mad when
the time came for new ones and I couldn't get them again."
Richard Goode, a professor at Stanford University and the former
president of the American Academy of Otolaryngology, thinks the FDA is
inconsistent. "If the FDA does not require the public to see a doctor
to rule out glaucoma or other diseases before getting reading glasses,
why does it do so for hearing aids?"
Some consumers are buying devices over the Internet or via mail order,
bypassing doctors and specialists. Those sales have grown 83% since
1997, to 3.5% of all hearing-aid sales, according to the Knowles
Electronics study. However, the quality of those devices varies
greatly, and some of the purveyors operate in a legally gray area,
since some states prohibit mail-order sales. Most, but not all,
include a waiver and the warning signs on their Internet site or
mail-order forms.
Dr. Killion still holds out hope for another petition he has submitted
to the FDA, which hasn't been ruled on yet. It calls for the agency to
create a new "one size fits most" classification for hearing aids that
would be subject to fewer restrictions than the hearing aids on the
market now. In effect, it is another stab at getting the FDA's
approval for over-the-counter sales.
Dr. Killion says many stores already sell "listening devices" for
people with normal hearing that differ little from hearing aids. For
example, sporting-goods stores sell ear devices for hunters that
muffle the sound of gun shots but also amplify quiet sounds, such as
animals rustling in vegetation. Dr. Killion says the hunters' device
is actually quite effective for people who have trouble hearing and
illustrates his point that there's no technological barrier to an
inexpensive over-the-counter hearing aid.
To prove his point, he recently played two recordings before an
audience of 50 audiologists. One was of a person speaking in cafeteria
noise, amplified by a $149 sporting-goods device. The other was of the
same speech amplified through a popular $2,000 digital hearing aid.
The audience rated the $149 device as having clearer sound.
"The point is, there are reasonably good OTC aids out there now," Dr.
Killion said.
--
If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
...Anatole France
Medman
We are one of the few independent manufacturers of hearing aids left in
the USA, although we have our chips burned overseas. We can manufacture
our older hearing aids, and factor in our amortization and expected
returns for a manufactured price of between approximately $175 and
$250. Our newer models (OTE) cost approximately $350 to manufacture.
These hearing aids have all the rich features of more expensive
competitiors.
Higher volume manufacturers can get their manufacturing costs down to
$100 - $150, and these prices should be your basis for wondering how
and why hearing aids cost so much. If it costs a manufacturer $150 to
$200 to make a hearing aid, they will sell it for between $300 and $600
to an audiologist; a 50 - 75% margin. The audiologist makes all the
money, marking up the product 100% - 400%. Family Physicians and
General Dentists come nowhere close to making these margins, in spite
of the fact they have the same type office and personnel overheads.
That is why companies like ourself are allowing consumers to order
directly from our website, bypassing the middleman and saving thousands
of dollars. We do recommend that the customer get a hearing test and
get checked out by an audiologist for any pathology of the ear before
they order, but once they have done that, why buy from the audiologist?
This is especially true for the hearing aids that do not require a
mold.
Just so you don't think this is a flack promotion for our hearing aids,
the following are competitor websites who offer top quality hearing
aids at reasonable prices:
www.lloydhearingaid.com
www.hearinghelpexpress.com
Regards
Phil Wyatt
www.hearingaidscentral.com
JimL
wrote:
Ebay has a very wide selection of new and used hearing aids that sell
for $10 to $300 that should meet your needs.
Walmart sell an excellent hearing aid in their sports department for
about $30 for the ITE pair.
Peter Weis
> Here's a Wall Street Journal article from March, 2004 -
>
> ==============================
>
> A set of hearing aids costs about $2,200 on average. Mead Killion
> thinks that's crazy. He believes an effective aid for mild-to-moderate
> hearing loss could be sold over the counter for around $100 - using
> technology that already exists.
...
> To prove his point, he recently played two recordings before an
> audience of 50 audiologists. One was of a person speaking in cafeteria
> noise, amplified by a $149 sporting-goods device. The other was of the
> same speech amplified through a popular $2,000 digital hearing aid.
> The audience rated the $149 device as having clearer sound.
>
> "The point is, there are reasonably good OTC aids out there now," Dr.
> Killion said.
I have met Mead Killion several times, and he is an excellent
entertainer. He is also a bright scholar, but sometimes the entertainer
in him takes the better of him.
Mead Killion sells circuitry for digital hearing aids
(http://www.etymotic.com/ha/digik.aspx). I wonder how he can defend that
if a $149 sporting goods device is better.
No-one disagrees that there are good hearing aids out there at less than
$1000.
I and Michael Ridenhour disagrees with the claims that everything above
that price is theft. There is added value in (most) $3000 devices.
Whether the added value is worth the price, is a question of available
funds and any special needs.
Personally I also disagree that the $200 hearing aid is within sight. If
it were, it would have such a huge potential that it could drive the
present suppliers out of the market in no time and that it would drive
up sales volumes to levels to ignite the interest of the big electronic
companies.
best regards
Peter
Mason C
Jim
>No one disagrees that there are good hearing aids out there at less than
>$1000. I and Michael Ridenhour disagree with the claims that everything above
>that price is theft. There is added value in (most) $3000 devices.
Some folks have claimed that $1,000 aids may have precisely the same
circuitry as $3,000 aids, with some functions disabled. Has anyone
actually confirmed that?
Michael Ridenhour
"Jim" <s...@wfv.inv> wrote in message
news:uk9fd2dltts07p39v...@4ax.com...
> Peter Weis <p.w...@email.dk.slet> wrote:
>>No one disagrees that there are good hearing aids out there at less than
>>$1000. I and Michael Ridenhour disagree with the claims that everything
>>above
>>that price is theft. There is added value in (most) $3000 devices.
>
> Some folks have claimed that $1,000 aids may have precisely the same
> circuitry as $3,000 aids, with some functions disabled. Has anyone
> actually confirmed that?
>
>
I said a few weeks ago that I remember back in the olden days of computers
when the 286 and the 386 were the top of the line, (except of course for
Apples). When the 486 chip came out, there were two models as I recall, the
486SX and the 486DX. The DX was the best money could buy. I asked how it
differed from the SX and they said that the SX was the same chip with some
of the features disabled so that they could sell cheaper. It was more
economical to disable features than to have two production lines.
Hearing aids? I don't know. These days there are so many different ways of
doing things that I wouldn't think so. But I don't have any facts on the
issue.
Michael
Peter Weis
> Some folks have claimed that $1,000 aids may have precisely the same
> circuitry as $3,000 aids, with some functions disabled. Has anyone
> actually confirmed that?
It is openly told by the supporters of open platforms.
Most commonly old $3000 circuitry will be reused in $1000 hearing aids,
when more advanced $3000 circuitry has been developed.
best regards
Peter
Michael Ridenhour
hearing aid he invented, sold , I believe, in kiosks in shopping malls. The
idea was potentially very profitable for him. He was not successful.
Congress is inundated with reports from interested parties as to how they
should legislate income for invetors of various projects. They demurred. He
has no experience in hearing aid sales and service, but was operating from
academic models which, he was assured, were real-life focus group approved,
genuine estimates. He's a very intelligent fellow, but an academic. A
scientist, violinist, pianist and barber shop singer. A Renaissance man.
Great guy.
The brief existence of the Songbird, (the same type) proved most people want
customer service above price. The only Wal-Mart Songbird hearing aid set-up
in the country was established a few miles from my office. It failed.
Michael
"Jim" <s...@wfv.inv> wrote in message
news:1iked2tserihret9j...@4ax.com...
Medman
Yes: I didn't include your site because your prices are too high :)
Medman
There ARE good OTC hearing aids out there! And Mead is right. I had
lunch with him a couple of months ago, and he said he is going to
resubmit the request to the FDA and offer additional arguments. The
main one being that if you don't want a hearing aid that has a mold,
why should you pay a professional for the privilege of selling you a
hearing aid with a 200% - 400% markup?
Mike Burke wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 07:46:43 -0700, Jim <s...@wfv.inv> wrote:
>
> >"The point is, there are reasonably good OTC aids out there now," Dr.
> >Killion said.
>
> Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus.
>
> Mike
Mason C
>
>Yes: I didn't include your site because your prices are too high :)
>>
>> Mr. Wyatt omitted http://americahears.com Does he have a reason?
(1) It is not *my* site.
(2) I do now have an AmericaHears aid -- two weeks.
(3) I did look at the others and made my choice.
(4) Others may check them out and choose differently.
Mason C
Michael Ridenhour
"Medman" <ph...@hearingcentral.com> wrote in message
news:1155048304....@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Yes Mike:
> There ARE good OTC hearing aids out there! And Mead is right. I had
> lunch with him a couple of months ago, and he said he is going to
> resubmit the request to the FDA and offer additional arguments.
Mead is NOT right, he is trying to market a product with a possible
multimillion dollar payback. Why not? He has as much right to make a buck as
anyone. What I object to and will continue to object to, is the holier than
thou mind set some folks have about everyone else in business. If I could
convince Congress that my product and methods were the only ones helpful to
the poor, downtrodden, elderly. unprotected,
ravaged-by-unscrupulous-hearing-aid-dealer, victims of hearing loss so that
I could make a fortune, perhaps I would do the same.
BTW, did Mead pick up the check?
Michael
Larry Caldwell
@earthlink.net (Mason C) says...
> Good modern hearing aids are available: online for less than $1,000; locally for
> less than $1,000 or $2,000
I paid $850 each for my last two hearing aids, 3-channel Sonic
Innovations digital instruments. I did a little negotiating with the
fitter. Typical markup is about 300%, so factory price on that $2000
aid is about $500.
Medman
Mike:
Your comment "You get what you pay for" is valid in some circumstances,
and not in others.
If you are talking about cheap analog hearing aids shipped in from
China that cost less than $15.00 in volume, and selling for less than
$100, then you are absolutely right.
However, with reputable companies like ourselves, if we can manufacture
and sell a top-of-the-line quality digital hearing aid with all the
bells and whistles at less than $700 and make a reasonable profit, then
for those customers who are price-conscious, why shouldn't they buy
from us?
For those who feel more comfortable with a face-to-face visit with an
audiologist, and want a lot of handholding, then by all means let them
do so. They will just pay more for the privilege. The hearing aid, for
all intents and purposes, will not be any different.
The important thing is choice in a reasonably free marketplace. That is
what manufacturers and resellers like ourselves provide to the cost
conscious. It's the difference in going to Walmart vs. Saks 5th Avenue.
The product and warranties may be the may be the same, its just the
personal service that is different.
Cheers.
Peter Weis
> However, with reputable companies like ourselves, if we can manufacture
> and sell a top-of-the-line quality digital hearing aid with all the
> bells and whistles at less than $700 and make a reasonable profit, then
> for those customers who are price-conscious, why shouldn't they buy
> from us?
With all due respect ... do your top-of-the-line models equal those of
Oticon, Phonak, Widex and GNReSound in performance?
I do not talk about bells and whistles, as they have nothing to do with
hearing aid performance.
I ask out of ignorance and curiosity. I have no experience with your
products, wheras I know most of the top products from the rest of the
"big six".
However, knowing the ICs available from Gennum and others, I must admit
being a little sceptical to a confirmative answer. But I love to be
proven wrong.
best regards
Peter
Mason C
Are Gennum IC's any good? Who else makes hearing aid IC's?
Mason C
Medman
companies. please visit our specifications page at:
http://www.hearingaidscentral.com/productDetails-Digi-Ear-DS.asp
regards,
Phil Wyatt
www.hearingaidscentral.com
Peter Weis
> Are Gennum IC's any good? Who else makes hearing aid IC's?
Oticon, Siemens, Widex, Phonak and GNReSound make their own ICs. As they
account for app. 80% of the world market, there is limited room for
alternative suppliers.
I don't know about Starkey.
Gennum and DSPFactory (now AMI Semiconductor) has made ICs for hearing
aids. Maybe others that I don't know.
DSPFactory was a spin-off from Unitron (now part of Phonak), so some of
their models might have DSPFactory inside.
Sonic Innovations has previously supplied Starkey.
My experience is a couple of years old.
best regards
Peter
Peter Weis
> Our hearig aids ARE equal to or better than hearing aids from larger
> companies. please visit our specifications page at:
>
> http://www.hearingaidscentral.com/productDetails-Digi-Ear-DS.asp
I see nothing on that page that suggest other than say 1998 technology.
On top, I see confusion on terminology. Echo cancellation is a term
normally applied in the telephone-industry where feedback will produce
echoesin the far-end. If I remember it well, only Apherma used echo
related terminology when they launched roughly three years ago.
Feedback cancellation consisting of noise reduction layers has nothing
to do with proper cancellation. It is feedback reduction, working
through gain reductions.
Cancellation designate systems which adds a inverse-phase feedback
signal in order to cancel out the acoustic feedback.
best regards
Peter
Michael Ridenhour
healthyhearing.com, myhearpod.com, lloydhearingaid.com, hearusa.com and
AmericaHears?
Michael
"Medman" <ph...@hearingcentral.com> wrote in message
news:1155220099.1...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Mason C
wrote:
Hearing Aids on Line -- a quick scan -- no guarantee of accuracy
( list from Michael Ridenhour post - thanks) and hearingaidcentral
ahearingaid.com distributor - local dispenser
hearingplanet.com distributor - local dispenser
healthyhearing.com directory (some nearby)
hearusa.com directory (none northern California)
myhearpod.com online-sale factory-programmed BTE soft plug $695
lloydhearingaid.com online-sale $280-$1,500
AmericaHears.com online-sale self-programmable "FreedomAD" $1,049-$1,395 +
hearingaidcentral.com online-sale ITC $295 - $695 no audiogram needed (????)
I had trouble with the last one. I found no indication of an audiogram used.
Corrections welcomed !
Mason C
Mason C
That's odd. I typed a different subject but it went into the old thread.
By the way, the distributors and directories list many brands.
Perhaps they have some influence (control?) prices, at least on
the hardware. Perhaps this improves the efficiency of competition.
zaf...@yahoo.com
Peter Weis wrote:
> Medman wrote:
> > Our hearig aids ARE equal to or better than hearing aids from larger
> > companies. please visit our specifications page at:
> >
> > http://www.hearingaidscentral.com/productDetails-Digi-Ear-DS.asp
>
> I see nothing on that page that suggest other than say 1998 technology.
>
>
instrument professionally fit, for about the same price.
Michael Ridenhour
<zaf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1155349698.9...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Do you start with beginner glasses, or do you get the best available
eyeglasses, for their quality? It is your life you're talking about.
Michael
Paul Revere
possible in real time by processing an audio signal
using a fast Forier transform to derive the spectral
content of the signal at any given time in the
waveform.
What is this good for? Watch the sequel to Patriot
Games, Clear and Present Danger ( Willem Dafoe and
Harrison Ford.) .
They show where this process shines in this movie. I
still doubt anyone can |sight read| this display for
speech, but it is great to compare two signals and make
probability assumptions about the audio sources origin.
Now only if they could find out how to submit every
telephone callers audio stream to a DSP engine and
compare every talkers voice to Cortez's, they would
actually have something useful.
peace
Phil.
zaf...@yahoo.com
Michael Ridenhour wrote:
> <zaf...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1155349698.9...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> eyeglasses, for their quality? It is your life you're talking about.
>
> Michael
You must be in one of your Dr.Jeckly moods Michael. Personally, I have
the good fortune to be able to afford high end instruments and replace
them every few years, which is what I do. What I was suggesting is
those that are not so fortunate would likely be better off having a
professionally fit $700 instrument (which I'm guessing there is such a
thing, certainly <$1K), rather then spend a like amount on the
referenced instrument.
BTW, your analogy for eyeglasses is poor. The fact is those eyeglasses
you see for $10 at the drug store work just fine for many people, the
optics being no different then those sold for several hundred dollars
with designer named frames (but still made in china by the low cost
supplier).
Michael Ridenhour
news:1155440832.7...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
This certainly is a nasty post. Because I disagree, you make personal
comments about me?
Please analyze your hostility. I have done nothing wrong and would
appreciate an apology from you for your mean response.
Michael Ridenhour
Mason C
wrote:
Michael, your thin skin ill becomes you. What's the source of
your insecurity? This is the Internet. What's worse, this is Usenet.
Easy bruisers best stay away. This is a tough neighborhood.
Mason C
Michael Ridenhour
"Mason C" <mas...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:icbtd2hpo46413s80...@4ax.com...
Thin skin isn't the issue here. The issue is calling me a serial bully and
bane of usenet, then demonstrating that I am, in fact, usually the aggrieved
party.
You're right in one sense, though. If I actually cared what was written
about me in this venue, I would only be demonstrating insecurity, an
attribute which no one in my life who has ever met me has accused my of.
This neighborhood isn't tough. Battery Park is tough. Watts is tough. Right
now Haifa is tough. This is only a newsgroup. You should get out more.
BTW, hope you don't have to eat your words. Try going against prejudice and
incompetence, stupid reasoning and lazy thinking. You'll get the same
treatment.
Michael
Michael Ridenhour
"zorro" <zo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4k8vhmF...@individual.net...
> On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 07:57:03 -0400, "Michael Ridenhour"
> or psychopathic personality that, when called to account, they will
> accuse the person who is unmasking them of being the one with the
> personality disorder or psychopathic personality from which they, the
> bully, suffer.
>
> Evidence of Michael's personality disorder and serial bully demeanor
> is well documented in usenet archives. Google is your friend.
I couldn't have said it better, "Zorro". You left out the most important
characteristic of psychopathic disorder, the resolute refusal to allow
anyone to know who one is. It manifests itself by hiding behind false names
at all times. Such deviant personalities hide from the world, fearing
exposure.
How funny!
Michael
Michael Ridenhour
> On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 07:57:03 -0400, "Michael Ridenhour"
Medman
I don't know about Gennum IC's, but we design our own and have them
made in Singapore.
Regards,
Phil Wyatt
www.hearingaidscentral.com
Xu Zhian Wen
> Spectrograms are visualizations of an audio signal made
> possible in real time by processing an audio signal
> using a fast Forier transform to derive the spectral
> content of the signal at any given time in the
> waveform.
>
> What is this good for? Watch the sequel to Patriot
> Games, Clear and Present Danger ( Willem Dafoe and
> Harrison Ford.) .
>
> They show where this process shines in this movie. I
> still doubt anyone can |sight read| this display for
> speech, but it is great to compare two signals and make
> probability assumptions about the audio sources origin.
I think they're using laser light angular deflection on a window to
eavesdrop on a conversation.
>
> Now only if they could find out how to submit every
> telephone callers audio stream to a DSP engine and
> compare every talkers voice to Cortez's, they would
> actually have something useful.
I assume they're working on this as we speak. I sure what I'm typing is
being processed for certain keywords by governments foreign and domestic.
>
>
> peace
> Phil.
>
>
Paul Revere
"Xu Zhian Wen" <"Xu Zhian Wen"@hawaiiantel.net> wrote
in message
news:bPmdnSsD4v_Zm3zZ...@hawaiiantel.net...
: Paul Revere wrote:
: > Spectrograms are visualizations of an audio signal
made
: > possible in real time by processing an audio signal
: > using a fast Forier transform to derive the
spectral
: > content of the signal at any given time in the
: > waveform.
: >
: > What is this good for? Watch the sequel to Patriot
: > Games, Clear and Present Danger ( Willem Dafoe and
: > Harrison Ford.) .
: >
: > They show where this process shines in this movie.
I
: > still doubt anyone can |sight read| this display
for
: > speech, but it is great to compare two signals and
make
: > probability assumptions about the audio sources
origin.
:
: I think they're using laser light angular deflection
on a window to
: eavesdrop on a conversation.
Please look at the spectrograph display on this page
and then watch the movie again.
http://philsaudio.com/spectrographs.htm
What you mention above is not what I am talking about
nor is it what the person inquiring about the
spectrograph is talking about, but it is in the movie.
They also use big walkie talkies and telephones and
baseball bats in the movie but they are not what I am
talking about either.
peace
Paul Revere
Medman
We strongly recommend an audiogram before we sell a hearing aid
(www.hearingaidscentral.com), but it is not mandatory (same policy as
the other online hearing aid sites you listed). Although they state
they want an audiogram, they will sell without one.
Our hearing aids are advertised for moderate hearing loss (20Db - 75Db)
and for those whose hearing loss is age-related (bell curve results
with the right hand side dropping in the 4000Hz to 8000Hz range.) If
someon'e hearing chart showed any hearing loss of greater than 80Db
along any of the frequencies, we would not sell them a hearing aid.
Number one is that we would be doing them a disservice by selling them
a product that would not work for them, and number two, we would get
the hearing aid back which we really don't want. We also would not sell
to them if their audiogram showed any anomalies.
With our prices in the $300 - $700 range, why wouldn't someone purchase
from us ?(or any other online dispenser for that matter).
And regarding the lunch with Mead. A friend of ours picked up the check
:)
Mason C
>Hello Mason:
>
>We strongly recommend an audiogram before we sell a hearing aid
>(www.hearingaidscentral.com), but it is not mandatory (same policy as
>the other online hearing aid sites you listed). Although they state
>they want an audiogram, they will sell without one.
>
>Our hearing aids are advertised for moderate hearing loss (20Db - 75Db)
>and for those whose hearing loss is age-related (bell curve results
>with the right hand side dropping in the 4000Hz to 8000Hz range.) If
>someon'e hearing chart showed any hearing loss of greater than 80Db
>along any of the frequencies, we would not sell them a hearing aid.
Without an audiogram, how would you know what their loss is?
>Number one is that we would be doing them a disservice by selling them
>a product that would not work for them, and number two, we would get
>the hearing aid back which we really don't want. We also would not sell
>to them if their audiogram showed any anomalies.
>
>With our prices in the $300 - $700 range, why wouldn't someone purchase
>from us ?(or any other online dispenser for that matter).
In my case, BTE and self-programmable.
>
>And regarding the lunch with Mead. A friend of ours picked up the check
>:)
>
>
>
>Mason C wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 16:51:00 -0400, "Michael Ridenhour" <oc...@medbush.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hearing Aids on Line -- a quick scan -- no guarantee of accuracy
>> ( list from Michael Ridenhour post - thanks) and hearingaidcentral
>>
>> ahearingaid.com distributor - local dispenser
>> hearingplanet.com distributor - local dispenser
>> healthyhearing.com directory (some nearby)
>> hearusa.com directory (none northern California)
>> myhearpod.com online-sale factory-programmed BTE soft plug $695
>> lloydhearingaid.com online-sale $280-$1,500
>> AmericaHears.com online-sale self-programmable "FreedomAD" $1,049-$1,395 +
>> hearingaidcentral.com online-sale ITC $295 - $695 no audiogram needed (????)
>>
>> I had trouble with the last one. I found no indication of an audiogram used.
>>
>> Corrections welcomed !
>>
>> Mason C
Mason C
Xu Zhian Wen
> >
> Please look at the spectrograph display on this page
> and then watch the movie again.
> http://philsaudio.com/spectrographs.htm
>
> What you mention above is not what I am talking about
> nor is it what the person inquiring about the
> spectrograph is talking about, but it is in the movie.
> They also use big walkie talkies and telephones and
> baseball bats in the movie but they are not what I am
> talking about either.
>
> peace
> Paul Revere
>
Sorry about my mistake. Thanks for the spectrograph links. I'll have to
pay more attention to this movie when it's on the telly, though, I think
it easier if I take your word for it. :-) I guess your point is that
this is a useful tool for automated voice recognition. Sounds reasonable.
Paul Revere
More specifically for recognition of someones voice not
recognition of what words someones (or anyone's voice)
voice is speaking.
peace
Paul Revere
Xu Zhian Wen
>
> More specifically for recognition of someones voice not
> recognition of what words someones (or anyone's voice)
> voice is speaking.
>
> peace
> Paul Revere
>
>
I understood what you meant. I should have said, automated voice
identification. However, I'm sure that technologies are being developed.
kol_Isha
> or psychopathic personality that, when called to account, they will
> accuse the person who is unmasking them of being the one with the
> personality disorder or psychopathic personality from which they, the
> bully, suffer.
>
> Evidence of Michael's personality disorder and serial bully demeanor
> is well documented in usenet archives. Google is your friend
Ummm... careful here. I don't know Michael, I don't know Zorro, and I'm
relatively new to the group and have mostly just sat back and watched,
chosen not to get involved in the personality conflicts that inevitably
occur in most Usenet groups. I prefer to focus on the group's purpose... in
this case, to learn as much as I can about hearing loss and hearing aids.
However, I can't help but commenting here....
As a mental health professional qualified to diagnose mental health
disorders, I can assure you that nowhere in my DSM-IV (diagnostic manual...
sitting right in front of me at the moment) does it specify that people with
personality disorders, "when called to account, will accuse the other person
as having a personality disorder." Sorry... it just isn't one of the
diagnostic criteria for PD's. Furthermore, it would be presumptuous (and
inappropriate... and probably illegal) to ever attempt to diagnose somebody
based on how they express themselves online. There's a lot more to a person
than what they write or post. I know that I am very careful about ever
using an Axis II (personality disorder) diagnosis... as it involves
identifying a pattern of behavior that has developed over many years, and
even skilled clinicians can't always ascertain this until they've had an
opportunity to observe a patient over a period of time. Besides which it
means giving somebody a label that may haunt them for years. I'm very
careful about using a PD diagnosis in clinical practice, so it amazes me
when people throw this around casually.
Finally, I realize this is a delayed response to a days old post... but I
have just returned from an incredible vacation and am just catching up.
I've spent time in Seattle (across the country, as I live in South Florida),
attending a wonderful guitar camp (Puget Sound Guitar Workshop), and am
still coming down from the high. While in the Pacific Northwest, I had the
opportunity to get together with some of my friends on another Usenet group
(RMMGA... an acoustic guitar group). These are people whom I've chatted
with for several years now... we're all like old friends. I've met other
RMMGA people at other gatherings in other parts of the country (Boston,
California, Texas, Virginia). Wherever I go, there are always "friends"
from that group to get together with (and strum and play with). I've seen
nastiness even on that group, but mostly people tend to be friendly and
respectful of one another. I was reminded, during this past visit, of not
judging people too harshly until you've had an opportunity to really get to
know them. A few of the people I met in Seattle are people whom I had
formed negative opinions of based on what they wrote and how they posted.
What a pleasant surprise to discover that, in real life, they turned out to
be warm, friendly, wonderful people. Maybe that's what music does to
people. :) I haven't yet figured out why there is so much contentiousness
and rudeness on this group so often. Is it something about the hearing
impaired population that I'm not aware of?
Just a reminder that we are all more than what we present online... we all
have observations and insights to share with others... and we are all worthy
of being respectfully listened to.
Regards,
Arlene
itazuke
developing hearing aids in relation to the high sales prices. For the
most part some chip manuf. develops the chip and sells them to the aid
mfg'. The factory which actually makes the aids has minimal cost for
putting out the aids. It's just a sellers market and as long as we are
driven by desparation and government support of those high mark-ups
then we are SCREWED. There's no real reason the aids should be
selling for more than $300 or less. The chip in the best of them is
only worth about $40.
For about a year before my recent purchase of CIC's for $1300/ea from
America Hears, I used an Ameriphone Amplifier obtained from ebay for
$30 (including postage) and some decent earphones from Radioshack for
about $20. The sound was excellent. The aesthetics were not great but
they worked very well.
John
> > thinks that's crazy. He believes an effective aid for mild-to-moderate
> > hearing loss could be sold over the counter for around $100 - using
> > technology that already exists.
>
> ...
Peter Weis
> I saw the argument earlier on this thread about the costs involved in
> developing hearing aids in relation to the high sales prices. For the
> most part some chip manuf. develops the chip and sells them to the aid
> mfg'. The factory which actually makes the aids has minimal cost for
> putting out the aids. It's just a sellers market and as long as we are
> driven by desparation and government support of those high mark-ups
> then we are SCREWED. There's no real reason the aids should be
> selling for more than $300 or less. The chip in the best of them is
> only worth about $40.
Please read and comment on the arguments in the thread in stead of just
stating these uninformed opinions.
> For about a year before my recent purchase of CIC's for $1300/ea from
> America Hears, I used an Ameriphone Amplifier obtained from ebay for
> $30 (including postage) and some decent earphones from Radioshack for
> about $20. The sound was excellent. The aesthetics were not great but
> they worked very well.
Small is beatifull, but it is also more expensive.
A chip running on 1V/0.5mA is more expensive than one running on
5V/5+mA. Small microphones are more expensive than larger ones. Small
connectors take more engineering and higher grade material than large ones.
best regards
Peter
jim
jim
Cost estimate post left out of above by mistake:
Mason C
Jim, thanks for these. We can now end this thread :-) :-)
Mason C
itazuke
I hate to resort to personal attacks (like you did) but there is
nothing magical about small electronics.
As a retired computer programmer at AT&T I've dealt with the largest
computers in the world and the technology for smaller better computers
existed then and does so now.
Most of those formerly huge room-sized computers was empty space.
Likewise, with our hearing aids for space and for technology. A better
chip is already available but manufacturers are continuing with the
older ones till they use up the large quantities they bought from the
chip mfg. A decent run-of-the mill chip capable of massive
computational abilities only costs a few dollars. The best chip as you
tout below does not cost more that $60 in quantity. So why should we
have to pay not 200 to 400 percent markup, but more like 2000 percent
markup?????
Do you sell them also?
John
Peter Weis wrote:
> itazuke wrote:
> > I saw the argument earlier on this thread about the costs involved in
> Please read and comment on the arguments in the thread in stead of just
> stating these uninformed opinions.
>
zaf...@yahoo.com
itazuke wrote:
> In a few words, Peter; you are so full of shit.
> I hate to resort to personal attacks (like you did
Really? Was there a personal attack between the lines in there
somewhere I missed?
This has been discussed ad nausium many times. Yes, the parts are
cheap. Yes, there are people in the supply chain who make money.
Being a programmer, you should appreciate that R&D is not cheap, and
developing the algorithms used in todays modern instrument is
nontrivial. If your $30 solution from ebay works for you, use it and
save $5K. My loss is such that simple frequency based amplification
does not yield anywhere near the comprehension of the full DSP
algorithms in my instrument. In the long run the $5K I spent is a
bargin, because it allows me to hold a job where I make enough money
that it is not an issue.
Paul Revere
for that chip? I would like to get a spec sheet.
thanks
Paul Revere
"itazuke" <obrien...@itazuke.org> wrote in message
news:1156990909....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
: In a few words, Peter; you are so full of shit.
:
Mason C
<PauuulRrevv@impeeach_the_efffin_chimp.gov> wrote:
>I am also an engineer. Do you happen to have a Mfg/PN
>for that chip? I would like to get a spec sheet.
>
>thanks
>Paul Revere
I'm not sure what is meant by *that* chip but here you can find
the spec for what I'm quite certain is the America Hears chip:
http://www.gennum.com look for a 21 page .pdf file
Mason C
Peter Weis
> In a few words, Peter; you are so full of shit.
> I hate to resort to personal attacks (like you did) but there is
> nothing magical about small electronics.
> As a retired computer programmer at AT&T I've dealt with the largest
> computers in the world and the technology for smaller better computers
> existed then and does so now.
> Most of those formerly huge room-sized computers was empty space.
> Likewise, with our hearing aids for space and for technology. A better
> chip is already available but manufacturers are continuing with the
> older ones till they use up the large quantities they bought from the
> chip mfg. A decent run-of-the mill chip capable of massive
> computational abilities only costs a few dollars. The best chip as you
> tout below does not cost more that $60 in quantity. So why should we
> have to pay not 200 to 400 percent markup, but more like 2000 percent
> markup?????
You don't pay a 2000% mark-up.
A hearing aid consists of more than a chip. Jim has supplied you with an
estimate of the BOM of a hearing aid.
The cheapest hearing aids sell out of the factories for prices close to
the BOM, but more advanced hearing aids are priced higher.
Typically the mark-up is 100% in each part of the distribution chain.
100% by the whole-saler and 100% by the retailer.
It is higher in the US than in China, because labor is more expensive in
the US. This includes truck drivers, audiologists and school teachers.
Distribution of hearing aids is more expensive than distribution of
computers. It takes a much higher investment in technical equipment to
do hearing tests than it takes to retail computers.
Most of your conclusions concerning hearing aid pricing is downright wrong.
> Do you sell them also?
No. I have previously worked as R&D engineer in hearing aid
manufacturing. I am now working as R&D engineer in user electronics.
best regards
Peter
Paul Revere
Paul
"Mason C" <mas...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:j64ef25bef3ce047g...@4ax.com...
: On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:51:54 GMT, "Paul Revere"