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

211–220 of 317 posts

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

#211

Post by MrLeap »

RankingMember wrote: post #208
MrLeap wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I decided to take a break from society last year. I'm fortunate enough where I am that it's eminently reasonable to do. I found some Mennonites that build small 14 * 28 foot cabins with two sleeping lofts. It costs about 8k, and that includes delivery to your land. They come with the exterior/roof finished, but the interior is up to you. Your personal asceticism modulates the cost. My shower is actuated by a ball val…

Any chance you can pass along that Mennonite builder info and/or provide some pictures of the finished product (but before you did anything to it)? Just curious, as I'm always looking at alternative living arrangements.

https://www.backyardportablebldgs.com

The wraparound lofted barn cabin is the one I chose.

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

#212

Post by standerman »

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…

Sunglass Hut is owned by Luxottica and sells their products: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica Yes they do really produce that many different brands.

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

#213

Post by MrLeap »

hector_vasquez wrote: post #206
MrLeap wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I decided to take a break from society last year. I'm fortunate enough where I am that it's eminently reasonable to do. I found some Mennonites that build small 14 * 28 foot cabins with two sleeping lofts. It costs about 8k, and that includes delivery to your land. They come with the exterior/roof finished, but the interior is up to you. Your personal asceticism modulates the cost. My shower is actuated by a ball val…

Don't get me wrong, it's great that you found a way to reduce the work stress in your life! But ... I genuinely cannot tell whether the guy posting on Hacker News that he "dropped out of society" is being serious or tongue-in-cheek. If paying society's currency for all the solar panels and the batteries and the gas and the generator and the refrigerator and the laptops and the deeded property and all the other stuff…

It's a bit tongue-in-cheek but not totally inaccurate. I'm visiting the big city for now which is why I'm on HN. You all are my people, so I like to check in when I can ;)

I consider 'dropping out of society' to partially be a state of mind thing. Currently, when I'm 'in country', I am very disconnected from the world at large. I have to drive for 30 minutes in order to receive text messages or phone calls. In order to get internet, I have to drive an hour to the lake so I can get some LTE. I don't have a TV, and I don't listen to the radio. America could go to war and I could go a month without knowing about it.

I grew up in suburbia right outside of the densest city in the state. Until last year I had never put a screw into wood, nor had I ever wired up a light or planted a potato. MrLeap's life this year is 180 degrees different than it was every year prior. I think the contrast in my perspective makes the 'drop out' comment more appropriate, but it's a personal thing.

I obliterated most of my savings doing this, and I'm on track this year to make SIGNIFICANTLY less than the poverty line. I think that represents a certain uncoupling from the standard structures of society. I intend to increase that as time goes on, but if I fail, I should still keep on living. I've lived an arduous life, and my re-orienting is in reflection of that.

If I really put my soul into it, I could garden hard, raise animals and cut out the last human survival-y thing that takes me into town. I really like cans of mini-ravioli though so I might not take it that far.

I could get satellite internet, or maybe a cell phone booster and a tower to obviate my connectivity problems. Maybe I will someday. Right now, I'm focused on building a workshop and blacksmithing. The workshop is hexagonal, which I think is cool. Anybody want a forged spatula? ;D

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

#214

Post by werber »

beering wrote: post #18
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/…

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.

Warby Parker does an amazing job with their retail experience. They fit your glasses to your face and are generally a joy to work with. I had an extremely low opinion of them from one bad experience years ago with the online try on model and walked into their retail store just out curiosity and got hooked.

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

#215

Post by noja »

chrisseaton wrote: post #174
noja wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means not buying from a market with sufficient competition.

But there is sufficient competition - you can buy no-name glasses for a few dollars. You can’t buy these specific luxury fashion brands of glasses cheaply but that just means you don’t think the name is worth it. It’s not a ‘rip off’.

If there was sufficient competition you would have more "luxury" brands from different companies.

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

#216

Post by caymanjim »

1996 wrote: post #195
caymanjim wrote: post #43

Lens Crafters charges a huge markup if you want their lenses put into your own frames. It's almost cheaper to buy new frames from them (and in the case of particularly-expensive lenses, it is in fact cheaper to buy new frames). That's clearly a scam. Warby Parker sells glasses at more reasonable prices, but their frames are god-awful hideous tortoiseshell plastic abominations. If you want nice metal frames, they have…

> one for distance, one computer-specific How do you find the correction for the computer specific glass? I have a pair for distance but it is a horror to use with computers.

Life-changing. I should have gotten them decades ago. I had no idea how much I was straining my eyes trying to use distance glasses for the computer, until I finally got them.

I sat at my desk and measured the exact distance to the monitor, then asked my optometrist to give me glasses with a focal length of that +/- about eight inches. For me, it's roughly arms' length, about three feet.

Many optometrists try to sell me on progressives or some other half-solution, but using large 30" monitors, or sometimes multiple 24" monitors, I need a wide field of view. Having specific glasses is perfect. It's a minor inconvenience having to switch back and forth, but I'll just leave them on my desk and swap when I sit down.

I bet my distance vision would be a lot better now if I hadn't spent 25 years straining to see a monitor with the wrong glasses.

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

#217

Post by ohazi »

MrLeap wrote: post #213
hector_vasquez wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't get me wrong, it's great that you found a way to reduce the work stress in your life! But ... I genuinely cannot tell whether the guy posting on Hacker News that he "dropped out of society" is being serious or tongue-in-cheek. If paying society's currency for all the solar panels and the batteries and the gas and the generator and the refrigerator and the laptops and the deeded property and all the other stuff…

It's a bit tongue-in-cheek but not totally inaccurate. I'm visiting the big city for now which is why I'm on HN. You all are my people, so I like to check in when I can ;) I consider 'dropping out of society' to partially be a state of mind thing. Currently, when I'm 'in country', I am very disconnected from the world at large. I have to drive for 30 minutes in order to receive text messages or phone calls. In order…

America is currently at war, yet most of us still living in society don't seem to know about it.

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

#218

Post by eeeeeeeeeeeee »

driverdan wrote: post #89
eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Denver Colorado, so, yes, plus our housing increases over the past few years seem to be a bit more insane than other metro areas (looks like it might be slowing this year). I'm really kicking myself for not buying when I moved here. The area I came from was somewhat depressed on the east coast, but I could have easily picked up a neat row home there for ~$100k-$150k.

Overall, I'm struggling to justify paying 2x or 2.5x for a home here over just moving somewhere much cheaper and sticking to remote work / consulting where I can find it.

There is a lot that I like about city living (being able to walk everywhere), but I'm having a harder time justifying the cost of it now. And the job market is pretty solid around Colorado right now.

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

#219

Post by RandomTisk »

sampo wrote: post #173
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…

> the only brands you should buy for performance are Maui-Jim (great lens / polarization) or Oakley (impact safety) Sunglass Hut doesn't sell them, but Serengeti makes some great lenses. Maui Jim might even not make lenses that are both photochromic and polarized, but Serengeti does.

Serengeti with amber lenses are my goto sunglasses for driving since about 2 years ago. I used to wear nothing but Ray Bans but the dark tint inhibits overall visibility slightly where the Serengeti's seem to augment it, while both cut out glare like they should.

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

#220

Post by eeeeeeeeeeeee »

52-6F-62 wrote: post #114
eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I've been wondering as well! The suburbs are filled with 4-5 bedroom McMansions— smaller 2-3 bedroom homes are hardly being built at all (except in the form of a townhouse, maybe). So one can't even just "move to the 'burbs" to save money instead of living right in town. It's all the same price.

Yep, even the houses I've looked at in the suburbs here are all enormous. This seems odd to me considering how people are having fewer kids these days anyway. Plus I really hate the look of the "sea of suburbia" with big box houses that have enormous garages that take up 2/3rd of the front of the house, looks ugly.

So you basically need to find a mid-sized city with houses from the mid-late 20th century when sizes were more reasonable.

Post reply on HN