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

51–60 of 317 posts

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

#51

Post by walterbell »

Animats wrote: post #41
abruzzi wrote: post #22

I've always followed the normal route--I have employer provided vision insurance, I would get myself tested every two years by a optometrist that my insurance covered, and I would buy glass using the prescription from the optometrist or a glasses store supported by my insurance. I don't have anything special in my glasses--single focal, no tinting or light sensitivity, and my glasses weren't remotely stylish, and I'd…

Here's a useful program someone in the HN/YC universe could write - something that uses your computer or phone camera to measure your interpupillary distance. This is a bit tricky to do yourself with a ruler and a mirror. Just have the user take a selfie while holding some object of known dimensions on their forehead. Like a dollar bill. Find the eyes and pupils (OpenCV can do that), find the reference object, calcul…

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.

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

#52

Post by wbracken »

Someone1234 wrote: post #49
wbracken wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why would any of these jobs be lost in a more competitive eyewear industry? People keep repeating this talking point, but I don't understand what they mean. Nobody is asking for the eyewear industry to stop existing. We're talking about a single monopoly controlling the majority and driving up prices. How does an artificially high price and artificially low competition generate more jobs?

I never said there shouldn't be competition. The parent asked where money goes...

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

#53

Post by derefr »

Animats wrote: post #41
abruzzi wrote: post #22

I've always followed the normal route--I have employer provided vision insurance, I would get myself tested every two years by a optometrist that my insurance covered, and I would buy glass using the prescription from the optometrist or a glasses store supported by my insurance. I don't have anything special in my glasses--single focal, no tinting or light sensitivity, and my glasses weren't remotely stylish, and I'd…

Here's a useful program someone in the HN/YC universe could write - something that uses your computer or phone camera to measure your interpupillary distance. This is a bit tricky to do yourself with a ruler and a mirror. Just have the user take a selfie while holding some object of known dimensions on their forehead. Like a dollar bill. Find the eyes and pupils (OpenCV can do that), find the reference object, calcul…

> something that uses your computer or phone camera to measure your interpupillary distance

Presumably any program that does face recognition already has this capability somewhere inside it, and you just need to either extract it out (if FOSS) or trick the engine into doing just that one thing for you.

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

#54

Post by mindslight »

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/…

Zenni requires you to do a bit of your own research, like every other new-economy self-service approach. But it's worth it.

Switching to Zenni has allowed me to move to cheap CR-39 lenses rather than expensive high index material. CR-39 is soft, and if I'm paying a lot for frames then the lenses getting scratched is a Big Deal. Then pile on further costs for coatings etc. But if the frames and lenses are both inexpensive, then needing to get a new pair sooner is not really a big deal.

(polycarb is right out due to its horrible chromatic aberration. If you don't know what that is, and you're perfectly content with the clarify of things you're seeing, don't look it up lest you sensitize yourself to it!)

I still need to find a decent sunglass frame on Zenni. Their basic aviators are way too small.

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

#55

Post by mhb »

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 you're suggesting that all these jobs are good, for their own sake, then:

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

#56

Post by sampo »

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?

> 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.

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

#57

Post by markdown »

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.

Trickle down, eh?

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

#58

Post by cazum »

wbracken wrote: post #48
bigdubs wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The share of incomes from private businesses (especially luxury businesses) isn't flat and benefits mostly the executives and directors and shareholders.

How can you say that? Luxottica employs 85,000 people. Do those people obtain no benefit from employment?

What? Nobody is claiming that they don't.

What is being claimed is that the majority of those employees are not seeing an increased benefit (wages) proportional to the increased profits of the company they work for, whereas shareholders and executives do.

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

#60

Post by fouc »

Someone1234 wrote: post #49
wbracken wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why would any of these jobs be lost in a more competitive eyewear industry? People keep repeating this talking point, but I don't understand what they mean. Nobody is asking for the eyewear industry to stop existing. We're talking about a single monopoly controlling the majority and driving up prices. How does an artificially high price and artificially low competition generate more jobs?

I don't believe the previous poster actually included any value judgement in their comment.

Basically the administrative overhead of all the layers is what is taking the bulk of that money.

I agree that those jobs can be redistributed elsewhere instead.

Post reply on HN