9 ms·

The reason glasses cost so much is because one company owns: (1) nearly all brand name frames including Ray-Ban, Oakley, Prada eyewear, Armani eyewear and so on

The reason glasses cost so much is because one company owns: (1) nearly all brand name frames including Ray-Ban, Oakley, Prada eyewear, Armani eyewear and so on, (2) nearly all retail stores such as LensCrafters, Pearle Vision, Sears Optical and Target Optical and (3) EyeMed, one of the largest vision insurance companies. Luxottica retail brands: http://www.luxottica.com/en/retail-brands http://www.luxottica.com/en/retail-brands Luxottica eyewear brands: http://www.luxottica.com/en/eyewear-brands http://www.luxottica.com/en/eyewear-brands Luxottica vision insurance: http://www.luxottica.com/en/node/6336 http://www.luxottica.com/en/node/6336 See 60 Minutes story on Luxottica: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM

dmacvicar 9y ago
A friend told me about this monopoly while I was admiring his Hawkers sunglasses, a spanish startup. Prices are 15-40€. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawkers_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawkers_(company) "In 2014 the company's revenue exceeded 15 million euros,increasing to 40 millions the following year, and in 2016 Hawkers projected 70 million euros in sales."
JustSomeNobody 9y ago
They were expensive before. 1-2000% markup on frames, etc. was pretty common in the 90s. Edit: Ok, here we go downvoter. From memory: I could get a Perry Ellis frame out of the Frames catalog for about $10. Sola would sell me bifocal CR-39 lenses for ~$3.50/pair. A bottle of dye to tint lenses was about $4.00 and would last a week. A bottle of UV solution was $12 and it too would last a week. We'd sell the Frames for $150, the lenses for $125 and $10 a pop for tint and UV. This was early 90's before Luxottica bought everyone. I know I was in the business and, well, stayed in the business even after they bought the company I worked for. I'm not defending Luxottica. I don't like them, but it paid for my education and I have a pension coming in 10 years or so. Anyway, it was expensive _before_ them. My point stands. The one hour shops all had more to do with the prices going up than Luxottica did at that time.
- PakG1 9y ago
  Standard economic theory would say that if there are egregious margins, new players would enter the market and competition would bring down the price. That appears to happen now and then and then Luxottica buys up the players, keeping the prices steady? Alternative explanation that keeps with the facts.
walterbell 9y ago
In Jan 2017, Luxottica announced a merger with the largest lens maker, Essilor. EU antitrust is reviewing, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-luxottica-essilor-merger/eus-vestager-says-essilor-luxottica-merger-requires-thorough-vetting-idUSKCN1BD0OY https://www.reuters.com/article/us-luxottica-essilor-merger/... In turn, Essilor has ownership in Shamir, Eyebuydirect, FramesDirect, Coastal, Coolwinks, Costa Del Mar, Elens, Eotica and Foster Grant, https://www.essilor.com/en/the-group/activities-and-distribution/distribution/ https://www.essilor.com/en/the-group/activities-and-distribu... If EU regulators allow the merger to go through, one $50B company will own the most online channels for eyeglasses and contacts, in addition to lens manufacturing & retail storefronts & vision insurance.
- dnh44 9y ago
  They also own lots of optical machine building companies as well as factories all over the world. It’s pretty much impossible to be in the optical business and not buy from Essilor.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
  Yes, Dems also specifically mention Luxottica in their 2018 platform. Not that I expect them to work on it, but maybe we can see the end of high priced glasses soon.
- homero 9y ago
  I shopped coastal to avoid them, not anymore
polpo 9y ago
I thought it was shady as hell when I got an explanation of benefits letter from my vision insurance (branded Aetna) with a return address of 4000 Luxottica Place.
JumpCrisscross 9y ago
I see an independent ophthalmologist. He stocks both Luxottica and non-Luxottica frames. Every time, they and I blindly select frames with a bias against Luxottica. Every time, I choose the Luxottica frame. Somehow, that company has cornered the market for decently-built frames for non-hipsters.
- lighthazard 9y ago
  The lack of good designs for non-Luxottica brand frames is appalling. I use a third party eye glass company to order frames + lenses for < $100 and get good quality stuff (but not the best styles). Why are they not able to compete on style and fashion?
  - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
    > Why are they not able to compete on style and fashion? I am honestly curious if this is primarily a materials, vendor, distribution, design personnel or intellectual property bottleneck.
    - StillBored 9y ago
      I've purchased ~6-8 pairs of glasses from zenni, primary because I'm really happy that they don't gouge the heck out of me for lenses with high refraction indexes or various coatings. That said, the frames are totally hit or miss, with some of them feeling like they aren't worth the $10-20 or whatever they cost. I find though, its no so much materials as attention to detail. The materials themselves withstand a beating. One of my favorite pairs _rattled_ when I got it because the little plastic nose pieces, and the little plastic piece that fit over the end of the arms was lose. Drop of glue in the ear pieces, and a softer nose piece and they are now my favorite glasses. OTOH, I also owned a half dozen pairs of ray-bans before I switched to zenni, and probably 3/4 of them had finish problems within the first couple years. The coating on the plastic pieces started to disintegrate leaving a sticky residue on one pair, and three pairs with metal frames had the clear varnish like substance start to crack and peel from the metallic finish. Another started to discolor after a couple years. I guess at least rayban has perfected planned obsolescence...
dba7dba 9y ago
Another monopoly that needs to be broken up... Can you imagine Comcast owning most of the media production companies, all of college/professional sports broadcast rights, internet access for home/business, AND forcing you to rent all personal computers you can use at home? This is exactly what's happening with the eyewear industry.
- user-on1 9y ago
  Why isn't anyone launching a competitor in this space. There should be lot of room for innovation with current tech to create a entire organization competing in everything Luxottica does and may be more. Clearly because of this monopoly there is no innovation from within industry except for designs. There is no substantial feature development around glasses, lenses or frames, again Silicon Valley has to step in and do innovation by combining two different industries. Seems like this problem will never get solved. Governments seem to be just surrendering to Corporate all over the world. Clearly Corporate have more buying power and they take care of themselves and not the general public. So there is no entity to take care of general public's interest. :(
kevando 9y ago
Yes this is all true, but the real reason glasses cost so much is because people buy vision, not glasses. And people value vision extremely high. I started a glasses company and when I'd tell people their $900 glasses cost the eye doctor less than $100, they would give me this blank stare like "so what? I can see."
- quicklime 9y ago
  I'm not sure about that. I value hydration more than vision (I could live blind, but not without water). But I wouldn't pay $900 for a bottle of water and say "so what?"
  - kevando 9y ago
    Yes you bring up a good point. A pair of glasses is quite different than a bottle of water.
csomar 9y ago
I'm pretty sure that if you look long/hard enough, you'll find creative Glass designers in your area. Here is one in some remote place in a small third-world country: https://www.facebook.com/vakay.eyewear/ https://www.facebook.com/vakay.eyewear/ Their eyewear is not cheap but it works out the same as Luxottica after you add import tariffs. Edit: It is important to mention that it is handmade.

dmacvicar 9y ago

A friend told me about this monopoly while I was admiring his Hawkers sunglasses, a spanish startup. Prices are 15-40€. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawkers_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawkers_(company) "In 2014 the company's revenue exceeded 15 million euros,increasing to 40 millions the following year, and in 2016 Hawkers projected 70 million euros in sales."

JustSomeNobody 9y ago

They were expensive before. 1-2000% markup on frames, etc. was pretty common in the 90s. Edit: Ok, here we go downvoter. From memory: I could get a Perry Ellis frame out of the Frames catalog for about $10. Sola would sell me bifocal CR-39 lenses for ~$3.50/pair. A bottle of dye to tint lenses was about $4.00 and would last a week. A bottle of UV solution was $12 and it too would last a week. We'd sell the Frames for $150, the lenses for $125 and $10 a pop for tint and UV. This was early 90's before Luxottica bought everyone. I know I was in the business and, well, stayed in the business even after they bought the company I worked for. I'm not defending Luxottica. I don't like them, but it paid for my education and I have a pension coming in 10 years or so. Anyway, it was expensive _before_ them. My point stands. The one hour shops all had more to do with the prices going up than Luxottica did at that time.

PakG1 9y ago
Standard economic theory would say that if there are egregious margins, new players would enter the market and competition would bring down the price. That appears to happen now and then and then Luxottica buys up the players, keeping the prices steady? Alternative explanation that keeps with the facts.

walterbell 9y ago

In Jan 2017, Luxottica announced a merger with the largest lens maker, Essilor. EU antitrust is reviewing, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-luxottica-essilor-merger/eus-vestager-says-essilor-luxottica-merger-requires-thorough-vetting-idUSKCN1BD0OY https://www.reuters.com/article/us-luxottica-essilor-merger/... In turn, Essilor has ownership in Shamir, Eyebuydirect, FramesDirect, Coastal, Coolwinks, Costa Del Mar, Elens, Eotica and Foster Grant, https://www.essilor.com/en/the-group/activities-and-distribution/distribution/ https://www.essilor.com/en/the-group/activities-and-distribu... If EU regulators allow the merger to go through, one $50B company will own the most online channels for eyeglasses and contacts, in addition to lens manufacturing & retail storefronts & vision insurance.

dnh44 9y ago
They also own lots of optical machine building companies as well as factories all over the world. It’s pretty much impossible to be in the optical business and not buy from Essilor.
frgtpsswrdlame 9y ago
Yes, Dems also specifically mention Luxottica in their 2018 platform. Not that I expect them to work on it, but maybe we can see the end of high priced glasses soon.
homero 9y ago
I shopped coastal to avoid them, not anymore

polpo 9y ago

I thought it was shady as hell when I got an explanation of benefits letter from my vision insurance (branded Aetna) with a return address of 4000 Luxottica Place.

JumpCrisscross 9y ago

I see an independent ophthalmologist. He stocks both Luxottica and non-Luxottica frames. Every time, they and I blindly select frames with a bias against Luxottica. Every time, I choose the Luxottica frame. Somehow, that company has cornered the market for decently-built frames for non-hipsters.

lighthazard 9y ago
The lack of good designs for non-Luxottica brand frames is appalling. I use a third party eye glass company to order frames + lenses for < $100 and get good quality stuff (but not the best styles). Why are they not able to compete on style and fashion?
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago
  > Why are they not able to compete on style and fashion? I am honestly curious if this is primarily a materials, vendor, distribution, design personnel or intellectual property bottleneck.
  - StillBored 9y ago
    I've purchased ~6-8 pairs of glasses from zenni, primary because I'm really happy that they don't gouge the heck out of me for lenses with high refraction indexes or various coatings. That said, the frames are totally hit or miss, with some of them feeling like they aren't worth the $10-20 or whatever they cost. I find though, its no so much materials as attention to detail. The materials themselves withstand a beating. One of my favorite pairs _rattled_ when I got it because the little plastic nose pieces, and the little plastic piece that fit over the end of the arms was lose. Drop of glue in the ear pieces, and a softer nose piece and they are now my favorite glasses. OTOH, I also owned a half dozen pairs of ray-bans before I switched to zenni, and probably 3/4 of them had finish problems within the first couple years. The coating on the plastic pieces started to disintegrate leaving a sticky residue on one pair, and three pairs with metal frames had the clear varnish like substance start to crack and peel from the metallic finish. Another started to discolor after a couple years. I guess at least rayban has perfected planned obsolescence...

dba7dba 9y ago

Another monopoly that needs to be broken up... Can you imagine Comcast owning most of the media production companies, all of college/professional sports broadcast rights, internet access for home/business, AND forcing you to rent all personal computers you can use at home? This is exactly what's happening with the eyewear industry.

user-on1 9y ago
Why isn't anyone launching a competitor in this space. There should be lot of room for innovation with current tech to create a entire organization competing in everything Luxottica does and may be more. Clearly because of this monopoly there is no innovation from within industry except for designs. There is no substantial feature development around glasses, lenses or frames, again Silicon Valley has to step in and do innovation by combining two different industries. Seems like this problem will never get solved. Governments seem to be just surrendering to Corporate all over the world. Clearly Corporate have more buying power and they take care of themselves and not the general public. So there is no entity to take care of general public's interest. :(

kevando 9y ago

Yes this is all true, but the real reason glasses cost so much is because people buy vision, not glasses. And people value vision extremely high. I started a glasses company and when I'd tell people their $900 glasses cost the eye doctor less than $100, they would give me this blank stare like "so what? I can see."

quicklime 9y ago
I'm not sure about that. I value hydration more than vision (I could live blind, but not without water). But I wouldn't pay $900 for a bottle of water and say "so what?"
- kevando 9y ago
  Yes you bring up a good point. A pair of glasses is quite different than a bottle of water.

csomar 9y ago

I'm pretty sure that if you look long/hard enough, you'll find creative Glass designers in your area. Here is one in some remote place in a small third-world country: https://www.facebook.com/vakay.eyewear/ https://www.facebook.com/vakay.eyewear/ Their eyewear is not cheap but it works out the same as Luxottica after you add import tariffs. Edit: It is important to mention that it is handmade.