Oh My - Has Phonak stopped using disposable batteries?

@mr.smithster said:

I get it and it sucks if you like batteries, but same when my Betamax tapes went extinct because VHS won the consumer demand.

Man that has to be one of the worst comparisons I’ve ever read. And I don’f follow your twisted logic, unless your saying people hear better with rechargeable aids - which they flat out don’t. There are pros and cons for both types of aids but is it really market demand? Or is it a money grab on the part of HA manufacturers to charge more for chargers, costly charging batteries, and more money down the road ($$$) for repair costs when circuitry charging issues pop up when using recharging battery.

If you want to cut to the chase every Audi worth their true salt will tell you (off record) aids that use rechargeable batteries break down and need repair far more often then aids that use disposable batteries. Certainly that was more true fifteen plus years ago when rechargeable batteries went “show time”, but it’s also still the case today to a lesser degree.

So maybe when an Audi sells his or her next aid to a newbie, there should be a “alert warning” that says rechargeable aids and/or battery chargers will need to be serviced more often than aids that use disposable batteries.

I think the issue is that those of us who prefer replaceable batteries no longer have that choice with Phonak (and probably most brands will likely do the same). Choice is being taken away. I don’t want to have my hearing aids run out of battery in the middle of the night when I am dealing with an emergency. With replaceable batteries I can make sure that doesn’t happen by replacing them before a work shift and by being able to reliably predict this need.

There is one model of Phonak (Lumity) that doesn’t have a disposable battery option. There are still lots of Phonak choices that have disposable batteries, There are situations that favor either a hearing aid with disposable batteries or one with rechargeables. We make our choices from what is available. We don’t have the right to demand hearing aid manufacturers make an aid exactly how we would like.

At $Au 10,000 a set, pardon me if I want my needs met. And I’m not buying a superseded set of aids because the length of time they will be supported is less. And they are still very expensive.

I think a lot of the strong feelings are due to the cost of hearing aids and our dependence upon them. If they were cheap we could just have a spare pair in a case ready to go at any time. If they were cheap we would just upgrade more often and not be stuck if we found there was a problem out of the trial period or outside the warranty. If they were cheap we might have two pairs to make the most of different features. But they are generally quite expensive and not always covered well by insurance so we have high expectations that our needs will be met and the product reliable for many years.

@MDB said:

We don’t have the right to demand hearing aid manufacturers make an aid exactly how we would like.

So HA manufacturers bend over for mild to mid level hearing loss group yet give the “shaft” to upper mid level to profound hearing loss group. Gee that sure sounds fair to me. (NOT).

This is all about money MDB - as if you didn’t know already.

@ian said:

This topic reminds me of politics and religion

A topic where no one changes their mind? Maybe so. Nevertheless I think it’s an important conversation. To my knowledge, this forum is the place on the internet for hearing aid discussion, and I believe that the industry and analysts and the press pay attention to it. This is one way to let them know that a significant constituency wants hearing aids with disposable batteries.

Rechargeable aids were created in response to consumer demand, no question. Changing batteries has been a source of frustration for some users for a long time. So, no, it’s not a conspiracy. But now that rechargeables are here, the manufacturers have an incentive to convert over entirely. They’d save money by having fewer models to make and distribute. Rechargeables already increase their revenue by selling another category of accessory (spare and/or premium chargers). And they benefit from limited battery lifespans by charging high prices for battery replacement, and/or by users replacing their aids more frequently. So disposable battery aids may well become extinct if we don’t speak up for our interests.

@mr.smithster said:

The demand speaks for itself

Let’s cut to the chase since you right about demand, but way way off base as far as which type of aid is best for which type of person with a hearing loss. Since the majority of individuals with a hearing loss fall into the mild to mid level hearing loss range - HA manufacturers are going to cater to that group because its their bread and butter for sales. I thoroughly understand that. But right now they are Over Catering.

There are other individuals who have a serious hearing loss that require a power hearing aid that won’t fit in one’s ear canal. Or can’t be hidden deep in an ear canal or can’t use a dome fitting. This “minority group” obviously isn’t the the “bread and butter” revenue group that HA manufactures would prefer.

Yet this group is by far the more hearing impaired, and far more HA dependent on hearing aids than the first group I mentioned. Oh and brilliant comment on rechargeable growing ever year when Audis push those aids/batteries first (probably due to higher commission) and the fact that they can get more repeat business when battery chargers break down and HA users have to buy special rechargeable batteries. Which might not be sold at you local drug store.

@stevemink said:

Oh and brilliant comment on rechargeable growing ever year when Audis push those (1) aids/batteries first (probably due to higher(2) commission) and the fact that they can get more repeat business when battery chargers break (3) down

1. No we don’t.
2. No there isn’t. We’re an independent, so there’s no commission involved, just profitability. The rechargeable aid cost the same or more due to the cost of the charger.
3. The only chargers that have broken in the last five years have been 2 GN ones, due to a failure of the USB B socket. GN have now modified their charger to a stronger USB C socket.

Also: Sonova have definitely botched the integration of rechargeable which will probably result in them losing their slot as #1 supplier in the World. Power product definitely needs a better rechargeable solution, but I’m wondering if this will come from one of the crossover manufacturers who are providing ‘airpods’ (or equivalent) with a longer life.

Also Mulder: THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY! I can see you like a good whinge, so why let the facts get in the way of a good argument.

Separate question: do you regard Elon Musk’s argument for driving a Tesla on the same basis as the points above or do you feel that it’s a conspiracy by ‘big electric’ to keep you in hock to the system?

(Not withstanding the fact you can own your own small-scale Solar farm, but harnessing dinosaur juice is a bit more of a big industry situation. I’m not on that train BTW, the Mercs prefer the 95 Octane; it’s just looking like the government, car-industry and the greenies ALL want me headed that way. I’m not on board with that paradigm yet, but I’ll probably have to consider it in either the next (or following) car upgrade.)

@mr.smithster said:

80% of all aids sold last year were rechargeable and that number has been growing every year. The demand speaks for itself

OK, rechargeables outsell disposables by a considerable margin. And they were probably the first choice for most of the people who bought them. But would you agree that some ended up buying rechargeables because

1. The model that they wanted, or that the clinic recommended, wasn’t available with disposables. That could be some Phonaks, or models like Oticon More which were released rechargeable-only with disposables becoming available only later.

2. Most or all of the clinic’s inventory was rechargeables, and as a result, either:
   a) Rechargeable was the path of least resistance, because it was available right away.
   b) The clinic preferred to sell from its inventory, and influenced the patient in that direction.

I get the impression that you object to disposables being available to the fraction of buyers (I’ll guess 25%-30%) who prefer them, even though it wouldn’t threaten your access to rechargeables. Can you explain why?

Nobody here saying that the industry moving towards rechargeables is responding to consumer demand is saying that they object to disposable batteries. That’s not a logical extension of the argument. I would guess that everyone here supports choice, they just also recognize market pressures.

Per your other questions: I don’t know if it’s common practice for other clinics to carry stock, but we typically do not. Every order is ordered for each individual patient, so there’s no difference in access time. Also, maybe it makes me a bad clinician, but if I ask my patient “do you want rechargeable or traditional batteries” and they want traditional batteries, I just don’t even talk about the lumity (or any other rechargeable hearing aid) with them. In most cases there are a dozen other hearing aids that will meet their needs and preferences.

Let me say once again that it is NOT the case that phonak is abandoning traditional batteries, it is just the lumity line that will only be rechargeable. They’ve historically been better than average at supporting the smaller market segments like profound loss and pediatric, so it would be a shock of they suddenly stopped. But release cycles are getting tighter and tighter and they can’t do everything at once. Maybe the “conspiracy” is less the rechargeable issue and more marketing minor changes as new when realistically big changes take longer than that.

@Neville said:

Let me say once again that it is NOT the case that phonak is abandoning traditional batteries, it is just the lumity line that will only be rechargeable

Seems really odd for Phonak who has made power aids for decades to come out with Lumity line with just rechargeable battery. When everyone knows power aids work best with large disposable batteries. So what statement exactly is Phonak making with Lumity brand and weak rechargeable batteries?

Sure seems like Phonak (power HA wise) is cutting its nose to spite its face. As in - Makes No Rational Sense At All, from a company standpoint nor a hearing aid user standpoint.

@stevemink said:

but way way off base as far as which type of aid is best for which type of person with a hearing loss

Actually, i wrote that the best aid for a user is based on personal choice. You have your opinion and I have mine. 80% of users have an opinion similar to mine. And i have been to many audi’s and none tried to push me toward rechargeable. They gave me the choice. Curious, how many audiologists have you been to that have offered no choice?