Slashdot Mirror
How Badly Are We Being Ripped Off On Eyewear? Former Industry Execs Tell All (latimes.com)
LA Times reports: Charles Dahan knows from firsthand experience how badly people get ripped off when buying eyeglasses. He was once one of the leading suppliers of frames to LensCrafters, before the company was purchased by optical behemoth Luxottica. He also built machines that improved the lens-manufacturing process. In other words, Dahan, 70, knows the eyewear business from start to finish. And he doesn't like what's happened. "There is no competition in the industry, not anymore," he told me. "Luxottica bought everyone. They set whatever prices they please."
Both Butler and Dahan (former executives with LensCrafters) acknowledged what most consumers have long suspected: that the prices we pay for eyewear in no way reflect the actual cost of making frames and lenses. When he was in the business, in the 1980s and '90s, Dahan said it cost him between $10 and $16 to manufacture a pair of quality plastic or metal frames. Lenses, he said, might cost about $5 a pair to produce. With fancy coatings, that could boost the price all the way to $15.
He said LensCrafters would turn around and charge $99 for completed glasses that cost $20 or $30 to make -- and this was well below what many independent opticians charged. Nowadays, he said, those same glasses at LensCrafters might cost hundreds of dollars. Butler said he recently visited factories in China where many glasses for the U.S. market are manufactured. Improved technology has made prices even lower than what Dahan recalled. "You can get amazingly good frames, with a Warby Parker level of quality, for $4 to $8," Butler said. "For $15, you can get designer-quality frames, like what you'd get from Prada."
Both Butler and Dahan (former executives with LensCrafters) acknowledged what most consumers have long suspected: that the prices we pay for eyewear in no way reflect the actual cost of making frames and lenses. When he was in the business, in the 1980s and '90s, Dahan said it cost him between $10 and $16 to manufacture a pair of quality plastic or metal frames. Lenses, he said, might cost about $5 a pair to produce. With fancy coatings, that could boost the price all the way to $15.
He said LensCrafters would turn around and charge $99 for completed glasses that cost $20 or $30 to make -- and this was well below what many independent opticians charged. Nowadays, he said, those same glasses at LensCrafters might cost hundreds of dollars. Butler said he recently visited factories in China where many glasses for the U.S. market are manufactured. Improved technology has made prices even lower than what Dahan recalled. "You can get amazingly good frames, with a Warby Parker level of quality, for $4 to $8," Butler said. "For $15, you can get designer-quality frames, like what you'd get from Prada."
LASIK is down to about $200 per eye, if you can afford a pair of glasses, you could probably afford to never buy them again.
The last time I got new astigmatic contacts, I discovered their focal length was further out than my arms could hold something I was trying to read. The brilliant solution of my optometrist was to try to sell me reading glasses...
Not affiliated, but I can get my lenses and frames from Zenni for about $30 a piece and I have terrible eyesight. They aren't ready in an hour like at LensCrafters et al but at those prices I just buy 3 or 4 in case I break a pair and have a pair always with me. It's still cheaper than the $200+ for a single pair.
Whats new here?
While I agree with this I will point out that depending on your vision the service you get in getting the glasses rightly fitted is the hard part that may be worth paying for. FOr simple single vision lenses that's only weakly important. But for bifocals and even more critically progressives, the fitting is everything. I usually have to get two and sometimes 3 sets of glasses made before I'm happy. I've done tests where I have my vision measures four times in a row. They never agree. But some optics shops have a little leeway on progressives to tilt the degree of maginification in the center one way or the other. And that really helps when they get it right. It sucks when they don't.
So I don't mind paying for the service even though I know the glasses are not worth the price in materials.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
TFS says:
Absent people who took no or a single econ class, why would anyone assume there is a relationship between cost to produce something and the cost we have to pay? Hell, Apple/Google get 30% of all app payments for credit card processing and hosting a static website. Corporate profits in general are at record highs.
And Luxottica is particularly horrible. They bought Oakley by refusing to stock them (they own LensCrafters, Pearl Vision, Sunglass Hut, Walmart Optical, Target Optical, and more). Then, when the stock cratered, they bought the company, started stocking it, and raked in the bucks.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
America's Best Contacts & Eyeglasses "2 Pairs Of Eyeglasses For $69.95".
You mean greedy, unscrupulous locals are massively overcharging for cheap, mass produced China-plastic kitsch? Shocking.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/07/24/ivanka-trump-shuts-down-her-namesake-clothing-brand/
If the market is bearing that price, then that's a signal that society thinks eyeware is worth it.
Of course, if you think that price is too high, then that means there's a business opportunity—the market is telling you that society needs to enhance the supply of eyeware.
You see, the market is an instrument for measuring society's needs and wants. Do something productive with that information rather than just bitching about it.
most of the us health care system is an ripoff.
With
hidden fees
networks that are hard to stay 100% in.
any out of network person can drive by and bill you 100K with no control over stopping them.
each person can bill on there own.
if an place miss bills then you can be on the hook for the full rate
there are like 3-4 different rates for the same thing.
the mark up makes the apple app store look good
Last time I looked lasic didn't handle farsight.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Zenni
There's a joke about that in there somewhere... just can't put my finger on it right now.
Might be I finally need glasses...
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Eye exams cost 60 bucks or more, and they only last 1 or 2 years. The whole system is setup to rip off the eyeglass wearer.
My last pair cost upwards of 800 bucks!
The prices touted as phenomenally expensive seem like a bargain to me.
It's impossible for me to find a simple frame for men. No fancy stuff on the frame. No odd color of the frame like purple. Oval in shape. Not square. Not Harry Potter round. OVAL.
Cohen's Optical exists in NY and surrounding area -- they do exam + glasses for $100 and have a decent range of frames for that price.
It's even cheaper to order directly from China, and I doubt that US Customs really gives a fuck about ordering Rx glasses without a prescription when they have bigger fish to fry...
https://hackernoon.com/how-to-...
There was a consumer test program done by our national television station, they tested various sunglasses and what got you the most for your money.
Interestingly enough, some of the fashion brands where actually protecting you less against the dangerous UV rays from the sun, than the 7$ dollar ones they got at our version of the dollar stores. So in fact, in this case - you where better off buying the off-brand rather than the mainstream fashion brands.
Kind of reminds of a certain PC vs Another brand war that still today is on-going, you purchase a lifestyle, the product, well ...comes second.
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
Seems like a common sense solution here.
This is the invisible hand of unregulated capitalism.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
With places like Zenni Optical (http://zennioptical.com) available, where a complete set of glasses with all kinds of coatings and options and extras comes out to under $50 US, why are people still buying at their optometrist's office?
There's several different places like Zenni online. Even with shipping and currency conversion, it's a lot less expensive to buy online than any eye wear places here in Canada.
And the quality is quite good, comparable to $200+ US frames and lenses. Even if the quality isn't as good as the uber-expensive ones, you can always just buy 2 or 3 pairs each year and still come out ahead. :D
The prices in the summary are why some of our family have started using https://www.zennioptical.com/ (no connection except as customer). One family member got very basic lenses & frames for $9 if memory serves (could be off but it wasn't even $40 with shipping), Mine were more but had more features. It was worth getting the account and submitting photos to "try on" glasses, but one order I placed would have been better if I had paid attention to the posted length of the temple and actual frame & lens dimensions: next one I did better and it is good now.
(My one complaint is that their customer service gave info that was overconfident -- they didn't really know. And their site EULA had terms I didn't like, and nobody was willing to discuss it, either at the posted contact info or the customer service. But the site FAQs etc were helpful for other things, and I was able to adjust frames myself, etc.)
A Free, fast personal organizer for touch typists: onemodel
I live in a country where the state subsidises pretty much every health issue. Except glass lenses and frames. You go and make a health insurance around here and guess what it doesn't include in all but the top-of-the-line plan: everything eye prosthetic-related. It is literally cheaper here to perform corrective eye surgery than to buy 2 or 3 pairs of glasses (if you do it through public health and wait around 8-20 months).
And it's getting worse. 3 years ago I paid 35 bucks for top of the line Zeiss lenses, 70 a pair. In the same shop last month, I refreshed my frames and was charged 75 for each lens, 150 total, only this time they were the second best model. Same brand too. And I consider myself "connected" with the clerks, as I've been going there for some time and allow some tax and insurance shenanigans we both take advantage off.
Something even fishier I've noticed, is that frames have gotten cheaper as a way to fool the customer. You can buy a cheaper frame while trying out stuff at the shop, but you're pretty much forced to pay whatever lenses they have around, because the shop knows what's "better". I rarely see anyone downplay the lenses they get in opticians - they will always follow the suggestion of the clerk. Then you end up paying as much or more for the lenses than the frames.
No, we need prosecutions. Their business practices have been illegal for decades, if not centuries.
Hearing aids $3500 up. Cost to make? Under $100.00. Cheapest are less than $10.
Zenni Optical are the way to go, especially if you have kids who break/lose them periodically.
http://www.zennioptical.com/
Base glasses cost $7-13. When looking, start with "View All [Men's|Women's] Glasses" and then sort by Price: Low to High. The add-ons are what get you, but at least you have choices. Too many places, like Costco, have a one-size-fits-all mentality to add-ons. Last time (6 months ago) will be the last time we shop that way.
I bought 3 pair of $7 for myself and my wife just to have in each vehicle and our travel bag. No frills, no add-ons, just base glasses that fit our faces and have our prescription. They're more than adequate, but at this point, other than trying them on, they're just sitting around "just in case".
Here in Europe and as soon as glasses varifocals, we're talking about four-digit EUR figures for ones with good lenses...
My frames are safe.
Very cool Joe. Too bad eye care is not considered medical. Its why you generally need a different insurance for eye problems. Also high dollar frames are usually a fashion statement. You don't see people going into the hospital for the Prada approved Appendicitis surgery or the Armani Colonoscopy. Cheap glasses do exist, you just have to buy them online and you don't get to show off that fancy Medusa telling the world you are wealthy enough to afford Versace.
When Corp behaves badly, the employees are insulated by governmental regulation from any serious ramifications.
Naturally, the result is a den of psychopaths.
As always, the problem is Government, not the Market; a government is inherently antithetical to voluntary interaction (i.e., it's antithetical to a free market).
You want to use a violently imposed monopoly to save society from a voluntarily grown monopoly. That's absurd.
Try reading more than a single sentence, buddy.
First of all, you can get glasses from (say) EyeBuyDirect for around $15-$20 on a good day, for normal single vision lenses. (Search for coupons first.)
Secondly, it's like any other product. There will be a range of prices, depending on all sorts of factors from designer names, to service, to whatever. ALL of which will above the cost of manufacture, since these are businesses and not charities.
Firstly, yes, that is a signal that oxygen is worth it.
Secondly, as stated by the OP, that's a signal that it would be profitable to spend resources creating a way to reduce the cost of oxygen; it's a signal that society needs/wants more access to this particular resource—it's proof that it would be a decent investment to spend resources on this problem.
Do you get it yet?
The glasses are so cheap, I put an extra pair in my car, and another next to the chair in the den where I usually sit in to read.
Sure, if you get progressive bifocals with fancy designer frames, special coatings, and photosensitivity you can pay as much as $90, but for the extra plain-jane non-bifocals I buy, I pay less than $10 a set.
The only thing is, you have to supply your pupillary distance as well as your prescription when you buy, and your eye doctor won't give you the pd unless you specifically ask for it.
Is that you Pharma Bro? I thought you were in jail?
he is a survivor and can live in the most expensive part of the US on a pauper's wages
where did he get his glasses
unless he swiped them off a guy sleeping on the sidewalk
Not only is that a lie, but it's a red herring. Why TF are you banging on about political parties?
Absent people who took no or a single econ class, why would anyone assume there is a relationship between cost to produce something and the cost we have to pay?
That wasn't his point. His point that since eyeglasses are a monopoly controlled by Luxottica, they charge whatever they want. And because of that, they are gouging us. And it also affects other parts of the market. Contacts also cost way too much.
I went to Lensgrafters once, and they charged me $400 - and gave me this "coupon" when I balked for $100 off. And they still took a month to get my glasses because they fucked up the order.
Target's eye glasses are also Luxottica. There were only $300.
I don't give a shit whose name is on the side, I need vision correction.
I now buy direct from China. I'm still paying $99 for something that could be sold at a 100% profit for $50, but it's better than $400+ just to have some designer's name on the side that impresses no one.
I understand why there's no competition for Internet Providers. Laying cable is _expensive_. But Glasses? Anyone with a few million in capital should be able to enter this market and make a killing. There were some online glasses places but after they got established their prices shot up to match everyone else's. There's ophthalmologists who've got that kind of money just sitting around.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
To begin with, this doesn't mean that Luxottica isn't doing bad things. It's just this bullshit line of reasoning makes me a bit crazy.
Cost to produce something and get it into the hands of consumers does not equal the Bill Of Materials (BOM) cost. There are a lot of other people involved in the supply chain that - shockingly enough - don't want to work for free. This includes:
1) The designers and engineers that create the product.
2) The manufacturers that pay everyone from the people actually making the product, their managers, administrative support, etc.
3) The distributors and their overhead (this reduces the exposure of retailers to carrying excess inventory)
4) The salespeople that help you select the frames, fit them, take measurements for where your eyes are relative to the frames (critical for making the lenses focus properly on your retinas), their management, administrative support, etc.
5) The capital involved in all of this - machines to make the eyewear and lenses, buildings people work in, retail space leased, their computers, furniture, etc., etc., etc.
In most cases, BOM is maybe 10%-15% of the price you pay because everything else costs money too. I don't see of this isn't fucking obvious, but apparently the world needs constant reminders because ZOMG CONSPIRACY!!!
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
I did not see that coming.
Enjoy your wildly out of spec lenses while your eyes are being damaged by them.
Look around, the entire industry is a racket.
You can cure your eyes naturally, but instead they just give you an over priced crutch that they keep increasing to such levels that your atrophy will provide a lifetime of income.
It's not merely expensive to lay cable; cities or counties or states pass ordinances/statues to declare as The One True Way some "utility" company; the result is not just a monopoly, but a monopoly that is violently imposed (in contrast to a monopoly that was grown voluntarily by providing a good service).
It's absurd to suggest that you should use a violently imposed monopoly (i.e., a government) to save society from a voluntarily grown monopoly.
Capitalism cannot fail, and is indeed the only means by which any society maintains (let alone creates) its wealth; this is because capitalism is just evolution by variation and selection (known much longer as "The Invisible Hand" of the market—a phenomenon that appears to be some kind of divine, Intelligent Designer, but is actually nothing of the sort; it can even be totally mindless, and yet produce novel solutions to problems, without people even realizing that there was a problem or that a solution is emerging).
These "market" failures to which you point are pretty much always tied back to the root of society's core foundation of coercive, violent imposition: Government. A corporation is a governmental creature, whose employees (e.g. executives) are insulated by governmental regulation from the ramifications of their abusive, self-serving decisions—it's not surprising that the repeating result is a den of psychopaths.
The problem is involuntary interaction (imposition; coercion), not voluntarily interaction; the problem is government, which is inherently antithetical to voluntary interaction (and therefore inherently antithetical to capitalism or a free market).
While you can buy prescription glasses online from China in Canada. But you need all your correct eye measurements, which Canadian eye doctors do not give you (except in BC) or they might charge extra fees, because if they give it to you you have no reason to buy glasses from them. People have gone to jail for measuring eyes with automated machines and selling prescription glasses. If you see better, you see better, it's not like prescriptions for medication. It's corrupt industry.
Source : cbc market place
Your first point is telling.
Homogeneous nations can easily implement citizenship serving policies like healthcare because no one is worried about "those people" getting tax supported services.
But in a diverse country, the political leadership of the "right wing/nationalist" party glorifies itself by blaming every societal ill on the "other people". In other words, demagoguery and scapegoating.
This is why we need a basic income for all citizens, tax paper supported basic healthcare and education, and a wealth tax. Get rid of sales and income taxes, tax net wealth at ten percent or so and require federal service (military, peace corps, local government service outreach, etc) for an increase in that basic minimum.
Enough glasses for me. Employer covering it, too.
Zap zap. Bionic upgrade time.
..don't panic
Notice how you never know what anything costs until you receive the bill, and even then it's a complicated network of indirect liabilities and codes? Yeah. That ain't normal; that's the result of government regulation.
Insurance is the industry that manages risk. But that's not what health-care "insurance" companies do; rather, they spend nearly all their resources managing a highly specialized, highly regulated payment network for this one particular industry: "Health care". This makes it very easy for the powers-that-be to control the situation; politicians have a one-stop, centralized place to regulate, and thereby buy votes with other people's money; similarly, health-care corporations have a legal way to collude on setting prices and controlling the competition.
Nothing about this is capitalism; it's all the dirty work of people with an authoritarian nature; it's product of an organization that is a coercive, violently imposed monopoly—and we call that organization "Government".
They also lie they cannot update the lenses in your current $400 frames even though the machines can run the inside of the frame for sizing.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Who is shocked by this exactly? Glasses, especially designer frames, are fashion statements as much as vision correction. I look at what my wife pays for designer jeans - $75-$100 a pair - what does that pair of jeans actually take to manufacture? $10? Heck, Jordans are $200 or more. Does that sneaker even cost $10?
I always suspected the 'prescription always changes' was a scam to make money. My prescription kept getting stronger over the years, so I decided to do an experiment. I stopped wearing them for 2 weeks prior to my checkup, and I changed doctors so they had no history. I telecommuted and I didn't need them for the computer, and my wife drove during this period when I needed to go somewhere. My prescription was 1/2 as strong as it was before, only 0.50 worse from when I first got glasses. Then I switched to CRT lenses, which also prevents them from testing your prescription strength because they can't tell what your natural eyesight is, they can only test whether you can see 20/20 (the correction wears off after 24-48 hours). You have to stop wearing them to get an accurate prescription. It's been 6 years, no prescription increases...in fact I still have the same lenses.
Ever heard of a Separation of Powers? It was a really awesome idea that gained traction in the year 1215 (with the signing of the Magna Carta), and had its culmination in the founding of the United States of America.
The epiphany was thus: The only way to protect against Tyranny is competition; there needs to be a separation of powers. Hence, the founders of the United States designed a government with multiple branches of government.
Now, frankly, that's not enough. A real separation of powers is provided by competition in a market of voluntary interaction, where "voluntary" is defined by contracts in advance of interaction (the enforcement of which is part of the contracts, and is therefore by definition also voluntary).
You suggesting that we dispense with any separation of powers; you're suggesting that we go straight to a monopoly—and not a monopoly that grown voluntarily through providing a good service, but rather a monopoly that is imposed violently at the point of a gun! This flies in the face of nearly 1000 years of societal development. Your solution is an astonishing leap back to the nearly primordial belief in divine authoritarianism.
Your total lack of appreciation for these facts is exactly why the founders encoded the right to keep and bear arms so simply right after the right to free speech. They knew your ilk are an ever present danger to Liberty.
I did what any sane person would.
I shopped around the outlets, tried on the frames and chose one.
I then went online and ordered it from overseas. You just enter in the numbers on your prescription and choose the frames.
I got the frame I wanted for half the price it would have cost locally. The lenses only cost $10 with anti-reflective coating and I got another spare set on cheap frames for another $10.
Given how big they are in other countries like Australia and many European countries, I am surprised that a giant like SpecSavers hasn't tried to come into the US market and complete.
If SpecSavers came into the US market with the same cheap glasses they offer here in Australia they could probably easily capture a huge market share.
People are posting that Lasik only rarely had adverse effects. Actually the rate of complications is very high. Below are a couple of excerpts from a recent NYTimes article:
"A recent clinical trial by the F.D.A. suggests that the complications experienced by Mr. Ramirez are not uncommon.
Nearly half of all people who had healthy eyes before Lasik developed visual aberrations for the first time after the procedure, the trial found. Nearly one-third developed dry eyes, a complication that can cause serious discomfort, for the first time."
and
"Yet few studies have followed patients for more than a few months or a year, and many are authored by surgeons with financial ties to manufacturers that make the lasers.
One such study, written by the global medical director for a large laser eye-surgery provider, reported high satisfaction rates among patients five years after Lasik.
But the study also found that even after all those years, nearly half had dry eyes at least some of the time. Twenty percent had painful or sore eyes, 40 percent were sensitive to light, and one-third had difficulty driving at night or doing work that required seeing well up close."
I was thinking about Lasik until I read this. No thanks.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0...
Nazism is National Socialism; it was and is a "left wing" phenomenon, not "right wing".
In every society, the "right" wing is the group of people who are trying to preserve what they've already got, while the "left" wing is the group of people who are trying to overthrow the existing institutions in favor of some Utopian society inhabited by some New Man.
In Europe, right wing were/are the people who wanted/want to protect the monarchy (such as the Kaiser of Germany); in Britain, this mean protecting a monarchy restricted by parliamentary representation.
In the United States, the right wing are the people who want to protect the idea of a small, explicitly limited government designed around a separation of powers, whose role is just to protect the rights of each individual, chief among which are the rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness (i.e., the pursuit of self-interest).
The problem is not the right wing; the problem is the left wing, especially when the left wing adopts socialism, which has been tried both in its supranational form (Communism) and its national form (Fascism, the key example being Nazism).
Bill got caught lying 12-25 times repeatedly stating "Blood plasma is sterile" and then later that "The Chinese Govt does not directly censor Chinese citizens" and other absolute bullshit head-in-ass retard-level lies. You're not trustworthy.
You are not a source of information that anyone should or even could trust, knowing your dishonest history. Sorry. That's what accountability means when you get caught lying repeatedly, over and over, even after directly corrected.
You're a liar, Bill.
This might be stupid but it sounds like there is a monopoly that has gone unchecked. The government has broken other monopolies, even fairly recently. So one must wonder why nothing has happened yet...
When 2 individuals agree voluntarily to a trade (e.g., money for labor), then both individuals have profited; they create wealth together; it's not a zero-sum game.
I suspect your main fallacy is confusing the scarce nature of our indifferent universe for involuntary "agreement". Your anger is misdirected; you should not be angry at the factory owner for providing you with the structure/institution/framework for eking out an existence, but rather you should be angry at your parents for conjuring your existence without much thought at all for the situation they were creating for you.
Nazism is National Socialism; it was and is a "left wing" phenomenon, not "right wing".
In every society, the "right" wing is the group of people who are trying to preserve what they've already got, while the "left" wing is the group of people who are trying to overthrow the existing institutions in favor of some Utopian society inhabited by some New Man.
In Europe, right wing were/are the people who wanted/want to protect the monarchy (such as the Kaiser of Germany); in Britain, this mean protecting a monarchy restricted by parliamentary representation.
In the United States, the right wing are the people who want to protect the idea of a small, explicitly limited government designed around a separation of powers, whose role is just to protect the rights of each individual, chief among which are the rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness (i.e., the pursuit of self-interest).
The problem is not the right wing; the problem is the left wing, especially when the left wing adopts socialism, which has been tried both in its supranational form (Communism) and its national form (Fascism, the key example being Nazism).
Somalia was a country run according to "Scientific Communism" with a single political party (as usual). That it failed catastrophically is no surprise.
Even less of a surprise is that warlords arose from the ashes of an already explicitly authoritarian culture. Nevertheless, there has been an interesting outcome: Local communities have fallen back on old, quasi-capitalist tribal rules of trade (e.g., "black markets", frankly), the result of which has been a significant improvement in the quality of people's lives; the quality of life in Somalia has in many ways surpassed that of nearby "stable" countries. After all, the only thing that has ever kept any society function (including North Korea or the former Soviet Union) has been capitalism (again, often called "black markets" by the detractors).
In short, choose a better example. Somalia favors my position, not yours.
You want a violently imposed monopoly to save society from a voluntarily grown monopoly. That's totally absurd.
They work for a pittance and we pay what we think they are worth. We are not the victims here...
There are industries and fields where "you get what you pay for". But eyeglasses is not one of them. The price is driven by fashion and by monopolistic practices.
Ask any engineer to estimate the COGS (cost of goods) for the eyeglasses on your head. It works out to just a few dollars. Yet I've been unable to convince many people that the $20 Zenni Optical glasses are just as good as the $600 Gucci glasses at the local optometrist.
My best argument is that you should go buy both and see for yourself. Try the $8 glasses from Zenni, leave extra pairs in your car, at your office, etc.
It is true that you have to understand your pupil distance measurement and your temple length measurements, but it's not any harder than buying shoes or clothes online.
I've tried EyeBuyDirect and a others like it and while it does take longer, the quality appears to be identical to that from local optical shops, at a fraction of the cost.
...about the difference between price and value.
Instead of focusing on the value provided, he focuses on the cost.
I have news for him. Cost and value aren't related. This is news to the reporter, but not the eyewear industry.
Now we know why the eyewear CEOs are where they are, and the reporter is where he is.
Oh, and no, my eyeglasses aren't made by Luxottica's brand. My optometrist specifically steered me away from them and I have these titanium things made in eastern Europe.
I ordered a pair of prescription glasses from clearly.ca for $40 CAD. They were delivered to my door the next day. Checking on their site right now, I see glasses for as low as $25 CAD.
You shouldn't wear glasses anyways.
Glasses are what cause myopia in the first place.
https://youtu.be/x5Efg42-Qn0
You will find black markets in every communist country. My wife is from Poland, and she tell me that is where they got most everything they wanted.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
and maybe aspirin what good would knowing the price do you? Would you really be able to judge the relative merits of two pace makers? Or two antibiotics? Or the surgery done by two doctors at different hospitals? How about the same hospital?
This is why no other civilized country on Earth leaves paying for healthcare up to individuals or "insurance" companies (quotes because you buy insurance in case you need something, but in 2019 we all know damn well we need healthcare).
TL;DR; paying for healthcare is too complex and too essential to leave up to a free market. Doctors and Hospitals can be privately run, but insurance? No. Just no.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Sam Knight: The spectacular power of Big Lens — 10 May 2018; 8700 words
Overall, it's a good article, but I really hated a few bits:
Speak for yourself, numbnuts.
Speak for yourself, numbnuts.
Study for yourself the Nazi platform, the rhetoric, the actions, the connections to Mussolini, and ideological heritage from Marxism, etc.
It's absurd to suggest that a national party came to prominence on a socialist platform BUT THEY DIDN'T REALLY MEAN ANY OF IT. What a joke. It's as stupid as saying the Democrats and Republics all swapped parties with each other in the 1960s. GTFOH!
There's no longer a lab in your local Lenscrafters - so "about an hour" is now "within 2 weeks". Actual turn-around is about 3 business days.
So Zenni's delay doesn't seem so bad anymore.
Some really smart people used mathematics to define mortgage-backed derivatives as a more efficient way to buy and sell debt; they said, "Hey, these are pretty neat, but they only work under these strict conditions."
Then, some dummy psychopaths at the top of corporations, who were protected by governmental regulation from the nasty ramifications of their stupid, destructive, self-serving machinations, took those mathematical objects and said "I don't really understand these things or their conditions, but I'm going to use them anyway, because I've been told they'll make me more money." Politicians agreed with them, and said "Hey. Let's force banks to lend dumbfucks money they'll never be able to pay back, you know, so those dumbfucks will vote for us."
Well, guess what happened when peopled ignored the mathematically required conditions for derivatives? They didn't work; they failed miserably. Dumbfucks. You're the reason we can't have nice things. Dumbfucks. It's the same story throughout history; you dumbfucks fuck everything up and then blame everyone else but yourselves.
This has been known for years.
There is a lens maker next door to my mechanic and my mechanic used to own 1/3 of it. It's a good business with good margins, but the main cost is in the frames which are ridiculously marked up.
I'm fortunate enough to have perfect vision, but my brother doesn't. Thanks to my mechanic doing me a solid, my brother got his lens prescription filled for a fraction of the price the optometrist wanted.
a 70-year old thinks things are expensive. Big surprise. Also, a wholesaler thinks retail is expensive. Again, big surprise.
So I bought a fancy pair of fancy frameless frames and lenses. When it comes to eyeglasses, I probably bought the brand we all know to be considered the fanciest. I'm exceptionally happy with them. I've bought the same brand, for roughly the same dollar amount, three times in a row.
Basically, my entire adulthood, I've been buying the same shadowy brand. My prescription has changed those three times. I've kept going back.
At ~$650 CDN per pair, I'm paying roughly $1.50 per week of my life on glasses. On high-end glasses that make me comfortable. Right next to them were options for half the price.
Who's complaining that they bought, retail, $300 glasses that last for years?
Who's complaining about spending $2 bucks a week on defective eyes?
Do these people buy coffee? At coffee shops for $5 a cup, in k-cups for $1 a cup? I'd wager they aren't grinding their own beans for pennies a cup. I'm the only one who does that -- and my friends howl at me for doing so.
Perhaps these people buy bottled water for $2 a bottle, instead of $0.20 per metric tonne from the their own tap.
Oh wait, maybe they buy water pitchers with carbon filters in them, for about ten times the cost of fitting the exact same type of filter to their cold water line.
I spent $650 CDN on my glasses. I bought them retail. Conveniently. From someone who answered my questions on three separate visits for a total of almost three hours. Someone who let me try on a few dozen pairs. They were shipped across the ocean. They were stocked and cleaned and supported and guaranteed -- even if I just changed my mind about the coatings. And I could have chosen the cheaper brand.
I'm not complaining. Remind me, on my death-bed, to complain that over the course of 90 years, I spent $9'000 for perfect vision. Also remind me what I did for a living, and that I liked to look at stuff.
There are plenty of things to complain about. Nearly all of them are that people choose to spend money, when they have perfectly free alternatives. This is not one of them. Either of them.
I discovered this in the late 90's early 2000's when I got a replacement warranty set of Oakley lenses from their call in number. They owned a shit ton of brands even back then. I've since noped out of buying "expensive" brand frames for anything and stick with Walmart brand crap that has a polarized lens. If I lose them, so what? If they get scratched? So what? I bop in to the nearest Walmart and pick up yet another $15-20 pair and replace them in a year or so.
No shit eyeglasses are high-profit. It starts with frames: You cant convince me that a few scraps of wire should cost $50, $100, or more. You can buy a BluRay player, with dozens of precision mechanical parts, motors, a laser diode, control electronics, power supply, and remote for well under half the price of the cheapest frame at my local optometrist.
I need new glasses right now actually, I was able to pay for the office visit but the glasses cost $250.00. I can't afford it so I'm stuck with my old blurry glasses right now. I don't have a vehicle so I can't go out of town.
Thought about getting my prescription and having my friend in the Philippines get me a pair, for what he said was about $20 USD. I honestly can't see =(
This is not an advertisement, but you can buy a cheap pair of glasses from Goggles4U or some of the other manufacturers for pretty cheap. Like around $10 cheap with their specials. Buy a couple of pairs of glasses and stash them around where you need them. At $10 you don't care if they get broken or eaten by a puppy.
Make love, not reality television.
That's UK pounds, about a dollar thirty this week. Any optician wants to charge me UKP100 or more. The pound shop glasses are worse, but not _that_ much worse.
I'm lucky - I just need +2 reading glasses, my distance vision is still fine at 60.
Yeah. My first pair of prescription glasses, were about $600, 25 years ago. I paid for progressive lenses (accommodation syndrome the diagnosis), flexible frames, optometrist's shop. That was a superb experience, and the next 3 pairs were at similar shops, but a variety of styles. Some were great, one pair had to go back and be redone, none were less than $600. After insurance it was still $400 out of pocket.
The last full price pair I bought, 4 years ago, were $845, the frames just $125, out of pocket about $500. These taught me a lot. First, they were enameled, allegedly, but actually painted. Paint failed. I made the mistake of researching this, and found these frames retailed online for $89, could be had off eBay for $60 or so. I don't begrudge my shop a profit, though. So I took it, but it taught me that even the best shop sells average or worse frames.
Oh, and his optometrist, independent contractor, found astigmatism, the first of 4 to find this in me. I'll actually be visiting an ophthalmologist this summer to get the second opinion, judge my cataracts, and generally double-check things. It's been at least 12 years since I was refracted by an MD.
And it taught me that there are online services. So I looked into one. My prescription did not include pupillary distance, so I asked and they provided it. It seems to agree with the ruler I got later. And I ordered progressives, online, a rimless/hingeless frame virtually identical to the most popular and mostly most expensive brand in shops. $129. With 2 clip on sunglass lenses. All the options except photochromic, Took 5 weeks to arrive. My second pair actually broke after 2 years, and were welded back together locally for $60. Feh.
It took me a few days to get them adjusted correctly, and they were superb. NO complaint.
Now, my lenses three back were fairly high end progressives, a design with a little distance added into the bottom edge, to help with walking. I noticed that. Changing shops I got a different technology, and they were fine. Going online, a different and older technology, and they were just fine. If you can search for a patent number, you can determine what the offshore shops are using, since they are often obliged to disclose that. Having the latest tech is interesting, but no longer critical for me.
Saving $700? Almost Priceless.
I'm wearing my third pair now, and they took 2 weeks to arrive, price now is $129. The frames were loosely assembled, but they come with a tool, spare bolts and nuts, etc, and the clip ons were kinda wierd shaped. All bendable. It took me almost a week to get these right, but I usually don't take them to a shop for help, it's not right to ask and one shop told me a fitting would be $100. But, my wife buys locally, she has single vision prescriptions, and her guy said he would be HAPPY to fit these for me, gratis. He's a nice guy,
Local shop, $850. Offshore, $129. This is no longer a hard choice for me.
Now, in fairness, my sunglasses fetish is no longer affordable, first because designer and brand-name frames are not going to be available at the offshore shops. I'm partial to Persol and Ray-Ban, and that means full price shops or online no-deal shops. But I learned that Persol acetate frames are nearly indestructible, like Ray-Bans, and Persol polarized glass lenses are so damned good. Even Oakley lenses were not that much better that I would suffer their frame fit issues. I've got a wide head, and wide frames are very difficult to find because, well, the same reason fashion clothing in large sizes is hard to find, designers seem to prefer smaller, it seems to them to look better. Another few months on a carnivore diet should help with this, but my head size will never be small. Rimless and hingeless give me good options, but it's tough to get the larger frames from designers, they seem to reserve that inventory for special customers. At one time Persol simply sent collections to movie stars without asking, and if you look, they are very common in films. Easy to spot
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
This was covered in Last Week Tonight:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
And also in "Adam Ruins Everything":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
However while people are talking about breaking up tech (which I don't like as a tech worker), the retail has long consolidated, and there is almost no choice in brands anymore.
This is not how free markets are supposed to work. We need more coverage on this issue, so that we can start a real dialogue towards a solution / solutions.
I once paid $150 for a "premium" frame knowing full well I could buy 1000 for them for $3 each. Literally. My mouse hovered over the buy button for that case of frames, but I decided to just suck it up and get fleeced. I could only justify 4 or so of them, so it made no financial sense to pay for 1000 of them.
If you can get lenses which work for a type of frame, it makes sense to buy an assortment case, but different lens providers cover different frame types, so be sure you've got a match.
Prices are way up. I normally wear contacts and they've gotten cheaper over the years. I only periodically update my glasses (for emergency backup). Last time I did it was $59. This time $249. At the same place. The cheap place. Everybody else quoted even higher. Ugh.