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."
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!
The only reason I haven't got lasik is that even the best procedures have a significant risk of reducing night vision. Mine is already bad, and I can't imagine having it worse.
Aliexpress: https://hackernoon.com/how-to-...
Another risk in laser eye surgery is extreme dryness. My eyes are already on the dry side - damned if I'm going to gamble on having to depend on drops for the rest of my life, in addition to the posibility of poor night vision, or worse if the procedure goes sideways.
I can't even wear contacts - even when I ignore the irritation, all the ones I've tried cause my eyes to get gummy and blurry. I've resigned myself to wearing glasses, (and getting hosed because of it), for the rest of my life.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
$200 lasik myth
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...
Here you go!
A place to get cheap glasses
coupons to make them even cheaper
Oops, looks like the invisible hand is working after all!
Except the invisible hand already created Zenni, and I got my glasses from them for like $60.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
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...
I'll be sure to avoid anything Luxottica.
The problem is that practically nothing in the Luxottica empire is named Luxottica. They bought up numerous US eyeglass retailers, but kept the original names. They own a big vision insurance company, but not with their name. They own numerous "brands" of actual eyeglasses, but practically none with their own name.
Unless you read the articles carefully and note all of the names for the vision plan(s), eyeglass "brands", and eyeglass stores that together give the illusion of competition but in reality are all one giant singular entity, you won't see the forest for the trees.
As far as LASIK goes, I had it done about 18 years ago for something like $1800 per eye. Economically, it's been a big win, and practically it has been a big win as well. I was nearsighted enough to need glasses for everything but reading, and I enjoyed many years being eyeglass free. Once I got into my upper 40s and presbyopia set in I began to need reading glasses (first in low light, then generally). My optometrist tells me that would have happened anyway. When I had my LASIK procedure done, I hedged my bets and paid big $$$ to have a very experienced doctor perform the surgery (he was well-known for doing the eyes of some sports figures, including Tiger Woods). Even so, during the recovery period I kept asking myself what the flock I was thinking... fortunately it all worked out ok.
But the cost of the frame and lenses is completely separate from the cost of the exam and fitting for me.
No, lasik burns off parts of your lens, at the front of the eye, in order to reshape it so that it properly focuses light on the back of the eye - the retina.
If it were burning off the back of the eye it would simply make you blind.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.