![smile direct club review smile direct club review](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZA_81YWdSjc/maxresdefault.jpg)
average fees (including diagnostics and in-person exams) for treatment of mild-to-moderate malocclusion with Invisalign as reported in a national survey of practicing dentists and orthodontists. "60% less than Invisalign" claim is based on Single pay vs. SDC then launched new advertising claiming "60% less than Invisalign," with a disclosure stating: Subsequently, SDC commissioned a new survey (Second Survey), which was modified to address the concerns raised by Align in the 2021 reopened matter. In its advertiser statement, SDC agreed to comply with the 2021 decision. Make clear that the SDC price being compared is its one-time single payment price, not the higher SmilePay monthly payment price, and does not include the cost of any additional services, such as retainers.įurther, NAD recommended that SDC discontinue the claim "60% less than other brands" because its survey did not ask respondents which brand of aligners they prescribe, making it unclear how much of the market is represented by the responses.Clearly disclose the basis of the price comparison, including that the average typical price was derived from a survey of orthodontists asking the price for treatment of mild-to-moderate malocclusion with braces as well as the additional services included in the average typical price (i.e., costs associated with diagnostics and exams).Make clear that SDC consumers may not obtain the same results as those that could be obtained from braces.Therefore, NAD recommended that the advertising should be modified to: However, NAD determined that without additional information, a consumer could take away an overly broad and potentially misleading message from the advertiser's "60% less than braces" claim. NAD determined that SDC's survey constituted reliable evidence. NAD granted the petition to re-open based on its review of a new survey of 200 practicing orthodontists conducted by a third-party market research company to address the concerns NAD had expressed in the prior decision. In 2021, SDC petitioned to reopen the matter pursuant to NAD/NARB Procedures. Based on NAD's recommendation, SDC agreed to discontinue those claims. In a 2020 challenge brought by Align, NAD had recommended that SDC's "60% less than braces" and "60% less than other brands" claims both be discontinued. The claim at issue, which appeared on several of SDC's webpages, was challenged by Align Technology, Inc., maker of Invisalign clear aligners.
![smile direct club review smile direct club review](https://www.honestbrandreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Smile-Direct-Club-invisible-aligners-review-14-1024x1024.jpeg)
Therefore, NAD recommended SmileDirectClub (SDC) modify the claim to clearly and conspicuously disclose that SDC aligners do not correct the same range of issues that might be addressed with Invisalign. NEW YORK, J/PRNewswire/ - In a reopened case arising from prior NAD decisions, The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs determined that SmileDirectClub, LLC's claim that its treatment costs "60% less than Invisalign," without further qualification, was overly broad.