Obscene Hearing Aid Profits!

While no business model is cast in stone, our economic system (almost 100% of the time) guarantees that the SECOND more profit can be made by altering the business model, it is. The business model has stayed relatively unchanged for so long not because of FDA regulations or “cartels” as a few on this board have labeled them, but because of the sheer fact that it is one of those models that is VERY difficult to change- and do it right. That’s why it’s been a pretty static model for so long, and for no other reason. Believe me, throughout my career, as I watched the internet explode and distribution methods change a little, I looked for a way to exploit the change (like the good little capitalist I am) and it was damn near impossible to provide quality services and lower the prices of the aid OR alter the distrubution method. You claim that the entry of a $500 product would split the industry, but it’s completely false. Look around. There are a number of different products for less than that (and some are actually half-decent) - check best buys new hearing aid online.

Wow. Great thread, the kind I would have really liked to sink my teeth into but I was on a vacation to beautiful Gulf Shores/Orange Beach and was busy watching dolphins, some kind of ray that swam by about 10 feet out, riding the ferry to Dauphin Island, and other fun and very relaxing stuff.

But, I did want to point out that many of the hearing aid manufacturers are publicly traded companies and as such their financials are public record. When I looked a few months ago they seemed to be healthy, profitable companies but not excessively profitable.

I don’t see any evidence of cartel but I’m open to the possibility if someone has some evidence. Cartel would require agreement or cooperation to control the market (prices, features, or availability).

My general feeling on profit is that more is better. If a person, or company makes a profit due to their own ideas, investment, efforts, and risk-taking, then they should be able to enjoy the fruits of it.

On the other hand, if an entity earns profit due to some kind of anti-competitive action, the profit should be forfeited.

@Don said:

Wow. Great thread, the kind I would have really liked to sink my teeth into but I was on a vacation to beautiful Gulf Shores/Orange Beach and was busy watching dolphins, some kind of ray that swam by about 10 feet out, riding the ferry to Dauphin Island, and other fun and very relaxing stuff.

But, I did want to point out that many of the hearing aid manufacturers are publicly traded companies and as such their financials are public record. When I looked a few months ago they seemed to be healthy, profitable companies but not excessively profitable.

I don’t see any evidence of cartel but I’m open to the possibility if someone has some evidence. Cartel would require agreement or cooperation to control the market (prices, features, or availability).

My general feeling on profit is that more is better. If a person, or company makes a profit due to their own ideas, investment, efforts, and risk-taking, then they should be able to enjoy the fruits of it.

On the other hand, if an entity earns profit due to some kind of anti-competitive action, the profit should be forfeited.

Wow, a sensible post on the subject. Thanks Don! Vacation sounded nice.

@DocAudio said:

I think it’s a little naive to just say “the consumer is always right” when it comes to a medical issue.

Yeah, I mean if we took that logic, why not just have antibiotics over the counter? Let well informed consumers from WebMD decide if they need to take a course of them. Save us all some money, no possible downside right?

And really, why not just do away with licenses altogether? Isn’t that just big government interfering with our rights anyway?

If someone opens a dentist office, and screws up enough times, market forces will put him out of business right? So why bother with the whole license thing? Let the free market run anything, and everything will be just fine.

Also Doc, thanks for pointing out the reason why eyes are not the same as ears. I was travelling and didn’t get a chance

@ed121 said:

If automobiles were marketed like the hearing aid industry, cars would cost $100,000 plus and require a flagman in front to warn the public and the horses.

Because it exists doesn’t make it right or efficient. Ed

As ridiculous as it is drawing a parallel between automobiles and hearing aids, it raises another reason why your logic is flawed. Cars are regulated more fiercely than almost anything else today. You can’t even drive one on the road without getting permission from the government, and purchasing products (such as insurance) mandated by the government. You can’t drive while drinking, drive at any speed you like, every mile of the road has its own sets of government regulations dictating how you must drive on it. In fact there are just about more rules and roadblocks to owning a car, than a gun, here in the US.

You can’t really argue for deregulation of everything and cite a car as an example. The car has become the most popular transportation device in the country, despite thousands of government regulations, rules, and laws.

X Sorry I used cars as an example.

How about TV’s? Better?
To protect your eyes the Government mandates that henceforth all TV’s will only be sold by Opthimologists. (sp?) after an examination of each purchaser’s vision by a licenced professional. TV’s will have the brightness set by the professional before delivery.
Better?

Ed

No Ed, every bit as stupid, as I’m sure you already know.

The average American home has 2.14 TVs, there is a TV in 99% of American homes, 66% of American households have three or more TVs. Annually Americans watch 250 billion hours of TV.

If the hearing aid industry could sell that many hearing aids, of course the price would be lower. Of course there again, the need for a TV is typically not a medical problem, so yet more silliness.

Since this discussion is being carried on in a HoH forum and pertains to those of us whom are HoH do you think the numbers would be any different?

there are never going to be as many people who want hearing aids as those who want a car or a TV, at any price.

With the money saved after purchasing these affordable HA we could then buy more stuff

surely thats only because people never want to admit a hearing loss? If hearing aids were totally invisible and cost very little then everyone who needed one would buy one.

Its vanity that stops the purchase for many . IMHO

@ZCT said:

I was at the lab recently and they were showing us the inside of a Starkey Wi hearing aid. Over 80 components, a four layer flex circuit with over 300 connections, world class multi layer water and oil proof nano technology coating, one of the smallest antennas of its kind in the world.

Every time this cost of hearing aids comes up you chime in with a gem like this. You clearly have no idea what it costs to produce technology. Yes, hearing aids are not made in the 10s of millions like inkjet printers that contain multi layer flex circuits, but this is commodity technology.

We have recently been having problems with corrosive gasses attaching component terminations in the far east. The solution was a 50 cent conformal coating of a circuit board 500x the size of a hearing instrument board. No need for fancy made up marketing terms required, just get the job done.

@cluistrom said:

If hearing aids were totally invisible and cost very little then everyone who needed one would buy one.

Its vanity that stops the purchase for many . IMHO

I would completely disagree with that statement. It’s not the size, it’s not the cost, it’s the pervasive attitude that still permeates society that hearing loss is something to hide and be ashamed of and yet no one balks at wearing glasses. I see people, every week who could afford the best hearing aid technology available with no problem and continue to plod along without doing a darn thing about it. The stigma of a hearing aid is still very much alive and thriving that hearing loss and the subsequent wearing of a hearing aid means you are old. Now all of us on this board realize that this is complete bunk…but society, as a whole, does not.

People just don’t view hearing loss the same way they view other deficits. There’s a negative association with it and that is something that will take a great deal of time to eliminate. But we can all argue back and forth and those who believe it’s all about money will continue to do so even when presented with differing information.

Doc Audio,
I agree with you, I know people with diagnosed hearing loss and those with obvious hearing loss that either won’t get hearing aids or are in complete denial about their hearing loss. Both my parents were told they needed HA but never got them: my father said “his hearing wasn’t that bad and besides the price of HA was too high”, my mother said " her mother had HA in the 40’s and they didn’t work and she would not get them until my father did". A friends mother listens to the TV at full blast and say " everybody mumbles," but mention HA’s and she says " no one in her family ever has needed HA’s or glasses and she doesn’t have a problem if people would just speak clearly." When told they have invisible HA she told me to leave. I think the stigma of HA is more with the older generations those in their 60’s and older than those that grew up with kids that had HA and were mainstreamed in public schools. However, I do think that those with mild to moderate hearing loss are more apt to put off getting HA for a variety of reasons: cost, vanity or just no ready to name a few, but those with a severe loss are stuck paying high prices every few years for HA that they need to function in their jobs and the hearing world. Perhaps ZCT could get Starkey to start a program with their giving away HA to the needy program where they help out those with severe losses by giving them a break on the price instead of just giving away a HA to someone who can’t afford it. Maybe this is a way for Starkey to boost sales by stealing those clients away from other manufacturers and doing something noble.

@seb said:

Perhaps ZCT could get Starkey to start a program with their giving away HA to the needy program where they help out those with severe losses by giving them a break on the price instead of just giving away a HA to someone who can’t afford it. Maybe this is a way for Starkey to boost sales by stealing those clients away from other manufacturers and doing something noble.

I appreciate your overestimate of the importance of my position! :rolleyes: At the end of the day Starkey has given away right around, 500,000 hearing aids to those in need since the year 2000. Exactly how much more do you want?!? :eek:

In addition to that, there are special low price programs I’ve seen for Teachers and NRA members, and a few others as well.

It seems to me that some people on this forum want a little more than is realistic for a company to be viable. Discounts here, special deals here for this group and that group.

Frankly, of all the hearing aid companies I have ever dealt with, I’ve found Starkey to be the most giving. They have always gone the extra mile to help me with my patients. The only thing that ever came close to that in my career was Danavox UK before they were bought by GN. They used to be very friendly and helpful, but their technical ability was not even close to Starkey, and I ended up deciding never to use them again after the launch of their bug ridden Premiere product which was next to worthless and upset many of my patients.

I just wanted to add my two cents. Both money and vanity (worry about ageism) played a role in my decision to get aids.

I am in my sixties. I had known I had a hearing loss for quite a while. But I refused to even look into aids until I saw an ad for the Deltas. I was so excited about the prospect of being able to hear and not have it show. As a retired teacher who still goes back into the schools to do long leave replacements, I didn’t want to be viewed as older than I was and I felt that a hearing aid aged me.

However, once I found out that the Deltas were going to cost me $6000, I gave up until someone sent me to the Bureau of Rehabilitation Services which paid for my Deltas. (As an aside I cried with joy when I got them.)

I lost of my aids after five years and was turned down by the BRS for new ones. But someone there told me the mark-up on aids was 200%. I think from the paper work I caught sight of BRS only paid wholesale prices for the aids plus a $750 for adjustments etc.

There are no judgments in this posting. Just want to share my experience for what it’s worth.