Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 317 posts

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

#141

Post by chrisseaton »

noja wrote: post #21
eterm wrote: post #9

"Fashion accessory prices don't reflect supply cost" is hardly news or something to "gratify one's intellectual curiosity" as per the site guidelines. If you buy a fashion brand of glasses frames then you're no more or less getting "ripped off" than you are when buying a Gucci hoodie. Sure, all the brands are owned by the same company, but that affects a lot of things not just eyewear.

> then you're no more or less getting "ripped off" You are being ripped off. Look at how much of the industry they own. The only reason this hasn't been acted on yet is because people see their various brands as being separate.

I don't even know what 'ripped off' means? Does it mean if you chose to buy their product you'll have to pay more than you'd happen to like to pay for it? There no oracle that can give us one true price, and anything above that is a 'rip off.'

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

#142

Post by refurb »

jerf wrote: post #27

It's articles like this that make me wonder how much of our middle class burden comes from hidden rent seeking parasites like this. I honestly don't know. I'm not trying to imply any particular thing. I honestly wonder. These sorts of things can stack up through the layers of companies that make things. And where does this money go? What does it end up doing?

I think you'd be surprised just how many markets like this exist where there is a ton of slack in the system and profits are high.

In terms of the impact on middle class, I think most of these markets tend to command a relatively small part of a household budget.

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

#143

Post by dustindiamond »

perfmode wrote: post #138
mbell wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked at a sunglass hut part time during college. The _vast_ majority of sunglasses I sold were for fashion, not function. People weren't paying $250 for the lens, they are paying $240 for the style and 'real' D&G logo and $10 for the lens. In my time there I would say the only brands you should buy for performance are Maui-Jim (great lens / polarization) or Oakley (impact safety), everything else is junk lens put…

are prescription lenses not priced along the lines of the fashion lines?

It is just the frames, the lenses cost additional.

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

#144

Post by dalbasal »

jerf wrote: post #27

It's articles like this that make me wonder how much of our middle class burden comes from hidden rent seeking parasites like this. I honestly don't know. I'm not trying to imply any particular thing. I honestly wonder. These sorts of things can stack up through the layers of companies that make things. And where does this money go? What does it end up doing?

It's complicated, inevitably. This is not just increased cost to the middle class (and anyone who wears glasses, presumably), it's also their income.

For the most part, price inflation is a result of and/or caused by increased spending. Complimentary optometry at the mall of your choice. Attentive salespeople standing at glass counters. Brand licensing galore. I would imagine there's a substantial corporate layer, social media coordinators... Profit too, of course. It sounds quite lucrative.

It's interesting to note that a lot of economists predicted we'd be working way less by now. Keynes is a famous example. It's interesting because the theories haven't changed much, and the assumptions keynes and others made about growth and efficiency were about right.

Modern economists generally explain this as "people had an unexpected ability to consume more." I get the impression their not entirely satisfied though.

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

#145

Post by nyolfen »

ssully wrote: post #118
beering wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ended up with Warby Parker after decent experiences with Zenni. Warby Parker offers a home try-on service for free, where they ship you a pack of frames for you to try on (without prescription lenses). They also have a few retail stores. They still came out to be cheaper than Luxottica, and for something that I use for years, it ended up being worth it.

I've heard people dump on Warby Parker for being cheaply made, but honestly their stuff doesn't seem any worse then what my insurance covered at my optometrist. Also as a side note, my first pair from Warby Parker had the lenses go bad (they looked like they had dried water blotches on them, but it would never wash out. I assume some coating went bad) and they sent me a new pair for free. That was maybe 2 years ago a…

the warby parker glasses i tried felt so cheap they seemed like costume glasses or something. i got a pair from zenni in the mail yesterday, and while they’re not as nice feeling as the pair i paid 10x for at my optometrist, they feel well made and look higher quality than what i got from wp.

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

#146

Post by [deleted] »

Animats wrote: post #63
walterbell wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of these apps exist, but none are as accurate as a ruler and two post-it notes with a pinhole. If Apple opens up the depth sensor on the iPhone camera, such apps will be more accurate.

The trouble with do it yourself measurement of the distance between eyes is that it's done with eyes that need glasses, without wearing them. You need a second person or hardware.

[deleted]

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

#147

Post by linuxftw »

munchbunny wrote: post #109
commandlinefan wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, my first thought was - if eyewear can be produced for less, why doesn't somebody take advantage of the opportunity and do so? Capitalism at its finest and all that. But the answer immediately struck me: if somebody was offering a product at half the cost everybody else was, I wouldn't trust it - and I suspect most other people wouldn't, either. Considering the size of the initial investment, this upstart wouldn…

Companies can and do, e.g. Costco, for prescription glasses anyway. I bet what often happens instead is that the higher margin company just buys out the cheaper guy, and... it's back to the higher prices!

This is how it seems to work in the US Airline industry.

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

#148

Post by jerf »

wbracken wrote: post #42
jerf wrote: post #27

It's articles like this that make me wonder how much of our middle class burden comes from hidden rent seeking parasites like this. I honestly don't know. I'm not trying to imply any particular thing. I honestly wonder. These sorts of things can stack up through the layers of companies that make things. And where does this money go? What does it end up doing?

Employing people at each step in the eyewear industry. Plus, employing people at companies who support the eyewear industry. Plus, employing people at companies that support the companies that support the eyewear industry...etc. etc.

If that was the case, then there'd be no ability for something like Warby Parker or Costco to show how much cheaper it can be the way they do, and it would just be something that cost hundreds of dollars. Costs everybody has can't explain this. And even those costs can't really explain the differential here; 10% and 10x are very different beasts.

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

#149

Post by [deleted] »

mbell wrote: post #133
jerf wrote: post #27

It's articles like this that make me wonder how much of our middle class burden comes from hidden rent seeking parasites like this. I honestly don't know. I'm not trying to imply any particular thing. I honestly wonder. These sorts of things can stack up through the layers of companies that make things. And where does this money go? What does it end up doing?

I worked at a sunglass hut part time during college. The _vast_ majority of sunglasses I sold were for fashion, not function. People weren't paying $250 for the lens, they are paying $240 for the style and 'real' D&G logo and $10 for the lens. In my time there I would say the only brands you should buy for performance are Maui-Jim (great lens / polarization) or Oakley (impact safety), everything else is junk lens put…

[deleted]

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

#150

Post by astura »

whizzkid wrote: post #99

I think Luxottica CEO himself explained the whole situation in 1 second 7 years ago, and it is spot on (Not saying it is how it should be). Listen for yourself. https://youtu.be/VxPLGPO2q3E?t=749

For those that can't do audio right now:

"everything is worth what people are ready to pay"

Post reply on HN