How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all • Hacker News Board

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#81

Post by newnewpdro » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:13 PM UTC

ourmandave wrote: post #65

jasode wrote: post #8

I was able to slash my eyeglasses expenditures in both the exams and the frames: eye exams: I used to pay the optometrist $153 ($117 refraction + $36 dilation). I later found out that Costco often has an optometrist on site in a tiny office and will charge just $59 (and add +$20 for dilation). That's less than half the cost of most other optometrists. frames: switched to Zenni online to avoid the LensCrafters/Pearle/…

This same discussion on HN a couple months ago convinced me to try Zenni. I replaced my $300 walmart progressives with better for $80 and that includes shipping. That's less than my monthly cell phone bill. It's like my glasses went from sacred to disposable.

I had no idea you could spend $300 on glasses at walmart.

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#82

Post by mrfredward » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:13 PM UTC

glitchc wrote: post #46

I respectfully must disagree with all of the claims here regarding zenni and costco, unpopular as it may be. They are only comparable at the low end but have no matching product at the high end. I bought a pair of glasses at costco for $200 as a backup to my daily rimless wearers. First, costco and zenni don’t have any rimless options. Second, the lenses I did buy ( partial frame) were their lightest but still signif…

>my budget (read: insurance)

I wonder to what extent the presence of insurance in the mix has made things worse. Markets never work particularly well when the entity paying and the entity choosing the product aren't the same. Textbooks (vs normal books) come to mind as an obvious example of this.

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#83

Post by mayukh » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:13 PM UTC

eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #74

sampo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how much of our middle class burden comes from hidden rent seeking parasites like this. If you include the unwillingness to respond to demand by building enough new homes in the popular urban areas, probably a lot. A 1000 sq.ft. home (house or condo) should not cost more than $200,000 to build. Anything above that, someone is making profit.

It doesn't even seem like anyone has interest in building $200,000 houses anymore, but they will sell you a poorly made condo for $400,000 and $600/mo HOA fees. I am a single person trying to find a house that is not four or five bedrooms (I only need one or two) and doesn't cost 1/2 mil minimum and it's difficult. This used to be called "the starter house" but it doesn't seem to exist anymore with new construction.

Where is this ?

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#84

Post by arielweisberg » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:13 PM UTC

glitchc wrote: post #46

I respectfully must disagree with all of the claims here regarding zenni and costco, unpopular as it may be. They are only comparable at the low end but have no matching product at the high end. I bought a pair of glasses at costco for $200 as a backup to my daily rimless wearers. First, costco and zenni don’t have any rimless options. Second, the lenses I did buy ( partial frame) were their lightest but still signif…

https://www.zennioptical.com/b/rimless-glasses

Anecdata being what it is the last non-Zenni glasses I bought were from Lenscrafters and had a blurry spot they refused to acknowledge or fix and I lived with it for years.

Zenni glasses are so cheap if you get a bad pair you just buy another.

Can't comment on weight differences and so on. I haven't had a problem with the weight of the lenses w/my prescription. My wife has a very strong prescription and purchases the highest index option and she hasn't noticed a difference. Index is index and material is material so unless you are comparing apples to oranges is it actually possible for them to differ?

Regarding clarity. I get more mileage from cleaning my glasses with dish soap then I do from the optical qualities of the lens. Maybe mine get dirty faster then most.

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#85

Post by ourmandave » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:13 PM UTC

elliekelly wrote: post #16

I use every chance I get to tell people about ZenniOptical.com because they are so great. A full pair of glasses (yes, frames and lenses) start at $6.95 total. Even with some upgrades for scratch resistance & to prevent glare I don't think I've spent more than $50 on a pair of glasses since I found Zenni. There's also the added bonus of the expensive glasses/sunglasses paradox: the more money I spend on glasses & sun…

I recently bought a couple pairs from Zenni and couldn't be happier.

Just the lens were $55, probably because of progressives, but that's still way less than anything I've paid before.

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#86

Post by abakker » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:14 PM UTC

eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #74

sampo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how much of our middle class burden comes from hidden rent seeking parasites like this. If you include the unwillingness to respond to demand by building enough new homes in the popular urban areas, probably a lot. A 1000 sq.ft. home (house or condo) should not cost more than $200,000 to build. Anything above that, someone is making profit.

It doesn't even seem like anyone has interest in building $200,000 houses anymore, but they will sell you a poorly made condo for $400,000 and $600/mo HOA fees. I am a single person trying to find a house that is not four or five bedrooms (I only need one or two) and doesn't cost 1/2 mil minimum and it's difficult. This used to be called "the starter house" but it doesn't seem to exist anymore with new construction.

Regulatory burden - building code, permitting, etc make it relatively better and less risky to build bigger, nice homes. It gives you padding if it takes a while to sell, has extra change order, or gets stuck in permit/planning and zoning limbo for a year.

If the margins are paper thin, the risk is too large, so the only way to mitigate that risk is to make more expensive homes so that even if things go terribly wrong you can still pay your costs and your employees and make some profit.

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#87

Post by kmm » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

I understand how branding and marketing could drive the price of frames up, but I've never understood why the lenses themselves are so expensive. The tolerances are not very high, and there must be a massive economy of scale. The article itself states that they can be made for a buck and a half. Who manufactures those, is there a similar situation as with Luxottica? Why is that market not being disrupted?

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#88

Post by umvi » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

Seems like the majority of optometrists could be replaced by photo booth-esque optometry machines. Simply sit in a booth, look through some eye ports, and the machine will automatically start cycling through lenses and making you choose between 1, 2, or equal. At the end it spits out your prescription for a nominal fee. For an extra fee you could have additional eye imagery taken by the machine sent off to a remote optometry lab for analysis.

I've never been to optometry school, but 10/10 times I've gone to get a new prescription, the prescription process has been extremely algorithmic, to the point where I wonder if cartel-esque forces are preventing automated optometry machines.

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#89

Post by driverdan » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:15 PM UTC

eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #74

sampo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how much of our middle class burden comes from hidden rent seeking parasites like this. If you include the unwillingness to respond to demand by building enough new homes in the popular urban areas, probably a lot. A 1000 sq.ft. home (house or condo) should not cost more than $200,000 to build. Anything above that, someone is making profit.

It doesn't even seem like anyone has interest in building $200,000 houses anymore, but they will sell you a poorly made condo for $400,000 and $600/mo HOA fees. I am a single person trying to find a house that is not four or five bedrooms (I only need one or two) and doesn't cost 1/2 mil minimum and it's difficult. This used to be called "the starter house" but it doesn't seem to exist anymore with new construction.

You must be referring to a major city. Sub $200k houses are the norm for most of the USA.

Re: How badly are we being ripped off on eyewear? Former industry execs tell all

#90

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Mar 05, 2019, 7:16 PM UTC

glitchc wrote: post #46

I respectfully must disagree with all of the claims here regarding zenni and costco, unpopular as it may be. They are only comparable at the low end but have no matching product at the high end. I bought a pair of glasses at costco for $200 as a backup to my daily rimless wearers. First, costco and zenni don’t have any rimless options. Second, the lenses I did buy ( partial frame) were their lightest but still signif…

[deleted]