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

231–240 of 317 posts

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

#231

Post by munk-a »

dustindiamond wrote: post #139
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 pays for leasing storefronts.

Oh absolutely... the concept of a thing I'd call a "restaurant" that would need four times the footprint, something like 5% of the ratio of sale price / cost per unit and would take about 90 minutes to finish servicing a customer must be an entirely ludicrous fantasy I dreamed up last night.

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

#232

Post by munk-a »

eberkund wrote: post #33
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?

> And where does this money go? What does it end up doing? Some of it goes to providing jobs to those same middle class people.

You should familiarize yourself with the broken window fallacy[1], it fits this scenario pretty precisely and... well, it's a fallacy.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

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

#233

Post by zippergz »

zymhan wrote: post #170
Someone1234 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is worth noting that the same company selling you glasses also owns most Vision Insurance plans. The plans only cover their vendors.

And that company is EyeMed. Your Vision insurance is almost certainly through them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica

I don't know the numbers, but for my entire working life across several companies, my insurance has been through VSP, not EyeMed. So "almost certainly" seems like an overstatement.

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

#234

Post by Scoundreller »

mthoms wrote: post #198
forthispurpose wrote: post #17

What are some good online companies that are fighting this status quo?

Clearly.ca in Canada is doing a decent job. They have quite a few in-house brands and stock store fronts in major metro areas for trying on frames.

They’re owned by Essilor.

TBD what the merger with Luxxotica will mean.

My guess is that the online model will replace the costly in-store model, capturing more profit.

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

#235

Post by wickedOne »

i've got a strong impression this article is about sunglasses rather than eyewear in general.

"Armani, Brooks Brothers, [ ... ], Vogue and Versace" neither of them, as far as i know, make decent "regular" glasses.

i've been wearing glasses for the last 42 years and apart from when you're a kid (because you break more shit than your parents would like to admit) you don't need (nor want) a different frame each year; it's not a fashion thing, it's something you actually need to function.

with that in mind: you don't go to a pearl store to get measurements for your eyes, at least not if you want them to be accurate.

so yeah, Luxottica might be behind a lot of "fashion based" eyeware, but hey who's running the show for sneakers or training suits other than nike and adidas? i mean, this is nothing new and if you want to be trendy it's going to cost you.

meanwhile i think i spent ~€1000 on frames and lenses the last 15 year whilst wearing silhouette. so, at least for me, it's not as bad as the article makes it out to be

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

#236

Post by junaru »

1996 wrote: post #200
pedasmith wrote: post #62

I dipped my toe into the "online glasses" market -- and let me say it's a game-changer. The eyeglass store wanted about $300 per frame, meaning that I'd grudgingly get one pair. The online purchase was only $75 for high-end frames and coatings, plus $27 for three pairs of prescription "computer monitor" glasses (one for the office, one for the home office, one for the other home office!). And by having more pairs, I…

> $27 for three pairs of prescription "computer monitor" glasses You are the second person to mention "computer monitor" glasses so I wonder, are they the same correction as your normal glasses? I am new to wearing glasses. I have a pair I use outside, they make everything crystal clear. I love them!! But for computers they are a pain after while, so I don't use them. As other people mention costs, I paid about $30 t…

Guessing "computer glasses" means that they have a blue light filter. The filter doesn't cost much extra and really helps.

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

#237

Post by LifeLiverTransp »

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?

Paying into huge pension fonds who hold whole industries- we are effectively take for a ride by the baby-boomers to a bitter end.

No anti-trust laws of course, because those who benefit are the most loyal voters.

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

#238

Post by mindslight »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #30

I worked in the industry until a little over a decade ago, putting myself through an engineering degree. The company I started with was bought by LensCrafters, but before it was we pretty much knew the wholesale prices on everything. After LC, LC just distributed stock to us so we didn't follow pricing. I was always amazed at the markup. A pair of Sola lens blanks for FT28 bifocals was about $3.50. A typical name bra…

Do you have any recollection what the blanks for higher index materials cost?

Zenni's fancier materials are completely lackluster (Abbe wise), and I'm curious if that's because the proprietary high index materials are really so expensive that it would be out of their market, or if Luxottica's anticompetitive behavior extends deep into the supply chain as well.

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

#239

Post by seem_2211 »

troels wrote: post #227
seem_2211 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are a few interesting wrinkles with regards to rent seeking in the current economy and how that works out for the middle class. • As a few people have pointed out, people often buy sunglasses for fashion and social signaling rather than on price. Wearing Tom Ford glasses means you're getting very good quality glasses, but mostly you are paying to wear Tom Ford glasses, in the same way that a Rolls Royce…

Curious - Where do you have the information fro that TAG have a smaller advertising budget than Rolex? I would've assumed the opposite.

That was more anecdotal than fact based.

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

#240

Post by dingaling »

SquirrelOnFire wrote: post #12
monksy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're still making a profit off of it.

Sure. You want businesses you deal with to make profit, otherwise they won't be around to do business with in the future. In industrial supply chain, if you have two suppliers who are each charging the same price and you know that one is making higher profit margins, go with the one with higher margins - they're more likely to be stable.

Some profit is useful for saving as a cushion. But in general remember that profit is money that the business literally didn't find a way to spend, to the extent that they're willing to throw away 20% of it as tax.

I'd rather deal with a company that ploughs surplus back into salaries or R&D or even charity than squandering it as profit.

Post reply on HN