12 ms·

Warby Parker built a 1,400-employee company by focusing on team culture

167 points by pmp301 8y ago

astura 8y ago
Honest non snarky question, why does it take 1,400 employees to sell mail order glasses, which are essentially a quasi-commodity product? What are all those employees doing? And since TFA says that balloons are put on the new hire's desk it implies these are all desk jobs, implying they probably outsource their manufacturing to factories in China. I ask because I worked at a company that sold machinery at scale (which is much more complicated than glasses, which don't require novel engineering). We did all our physical manufacturing in-house, we had a manufacturing floor on the other side of the wall from the cubicles. We had somewhere between 250-275 employees to run the entire shop, that's manufacturing, engineering, software (embedded and application), marketing, IT, sales, logistics... Not sure if we outsourced our cleaning crew or not. I wouldn't expect a mail order glasses company to have more than 500 employees.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- darkstar999 8y ago
  Check out their job listings to get an idea. https://www.warbyparker.com/jobs https://www.warbyparker.com/jobs They have a bunch of retail locations. Software. Accounting. R&D. Marketing. Logistics.
- manacit 8y ago
  They're not just mail order - the article wasn't clear, but perhaps that 1,400 number includes all of the people that work at their retail stores: https://www.warbyparker.com/retail https://www.warbyparker.com/retail There are certainly enough of them that I'd imagine it bumps the numbers up quite a bit.
  - astura 8y ago
    Okay, I didn't realize they had retail stores, that makes more sense then.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- whitepoplar 8y ago
  This is going to sound really insensitive, but I've noticed that trendy VC-backed startups often hire people that they believe are smart, but who often turn out to be entitled and ineffective, and thus the company needs to hire more employees than is typical to get the job done. I think there's also a tendency for people not spending their own money to chase absolute outcomes rather than Pareto outcomes. e.g. if an 85% solution costs $n, startups often spend $10n on the 100% solution. My guess is that if you're a founder spending your own money, you'd pick the 85% solution.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - freehunter 8y ago
    On the other hand, what is a startup if not an experiment? Especially a VC-backed startup. Hiring non-traditional employees in non-traditional ways (compared to enterprise companies), playing around with headcount and job roles in non-traditional ways, and seeking non-traditional ways of doing business. Many of them fail, but the ones who succeed often change the way business is done in multiple industries. Every startup is an experiment in doing business a different way. If they went with the 85% solution or hired off-the-shelf employees, they'd just be another small business. There's nothing wrong with being another small business, but startups are so drastically different that we came up with an entirely different term to talk about small businesses who do things in wildly non-traditional ways with the hope that those non-traditional tactics will lead to unprecedented success. We call them startups.
  - conductr 8y ago
    Ineffectiveness in this sense is leaderships fault. They hired without vision for why the role was needed, what’s expected, and established accountability. Combine that with a culture where you’re expected to be real friends with everyone results in a lot of people sitting around drinking coffee and playing ping pong.
- owyn 8y ago
  I can't say this is the case here, but Warby Parker does have like a hundred retail outlets now. Frequently (as with Apple) journalists will just report the total number of employees including retail employees without breaking it down into categories. This obviously throws off a lot of weird numbers if not accounted for, which is part of what "public relations" is all about. According to wikipedia they do manufacture their glasses in house now, and there are apparently 150 employees in that factory.
  - teddyaltman 8y ago
    This is a big part of their growing numbers. They used to be a small, direct-to-consumer digital brand. But after early adopters bought glasses, they needed to get more eyes on their product so they started with small showrooms in NYC. Now they've expanded more and more. I think the margins on the glasses are still good so they're not over expanding but they definitely need more employees in this stage of the company.
- detaro 8y ago
  Without knowing the details of what your example did: You probably didn't have 75+ retail locations, didn't need to do the kind of marketing effort a quick-growing consumer/fashion brand requires, might have needed less customer support (due to having fewer, larger customers, unless you did very custom things), had less logistics overhead than a company that ships frames to people to try on and return. They also do parts of the production chain in-house.
  - astura 8y ago
    I didn't realize they had retail locations, the employee count makes much more sense when you're running retail locations. I thought they were just a mail order company. I think what really threw me off was "welcome balloons on desks" which heavily implies (at least to me) all of employees have desk jobs.
    - weberc2 8y ago
      This thread exemplifies why employee count isn't suitable as even a rough indicator of corporate performance.
      - chrisco255 8y ago
        What is? Revenue per employee or net profit per employee?
        quickthrower2 8y ago
        Profit? Cashflow?
        izzydata 8y ago
        Average salary excluding executives.
        Spivak 8y ago
        Average with a blacklist seems like it's just a worse median.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  Honest non snarky question, why does it take 1,400 employees to sell mail order glasses, which are essentially a quasi-commodity product? Ideally, a whole lot of them would be brilliant people working on improving design, improving support, and improving the supply chain. Most likely, a lot of them are working on or administering the retail storefronts, which in 2018 is a somewhat a marketing function. Also more likely: A lot of them are working on marketing. The incentives of the investors and customers don't quite align. This misalignment vector generally expresses itself through the Marketing, PR, and legal teams.
- seppin 8y ago
  > Honest non snarky question, why does it take 1,400 employees to sell mail order glasses, Because before technology fucked the labour balance of the global economy, this is how industry worked.
leowoo91 8y ago
IMHO, as long as founders are engaged, employees will be happy.
- frogpelt 8y ago
  Engaged in what?
  - ProAm 8y ago
    I think he meant to each other?
    - MartinCron 8y ago
      True story: I worked at a startup where the founders were married. Nobody told me, they had different last names, and I looked like a complete fool when I was shocked they were going on a beach vacation together.
      - astura 8y ago
        Married couples co-owning a small business isn't uncommon, of all the small business owners I know probably half or so are married couple co-owners. But, you're right, it's not like their relationship status is necessarily discussed with new employees, since it's not a business matter.
      - jmcgough 8y ago
        I had a similar situation happen - was really confused when they showed up together as dates to a wedding I attended.
      - yawaramin 8y ago
        Protip: next time don't act shocked, and you won't look like a complete fool ;-)
- agency 8y ago
  What makes you think that?
physcab 8y ago
[deleted]
- singhrac 8y ago
  This is another market entirely. A lot of those 1400 employees are retail, which can't be auto-scaled away as easily. I mean, if they can make meaningful jobs that pay ok without shady business practices or bad work conditions, more power to them. I'm all for leveraging people more effectively, but sales and in-person support is a nice job I still like being done by humans.
cheriot 8y ago
The 60 minutes episode on Luxottica and why glasses are so expensive was interesting context for reading about Warby Parker. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM
chiefalchemist 8y ago
A lot of things are important, but in terms of sustainability and longevity onboarding has to be in the Top 3. Whether it's new employess or new customers, establishing the foundation for the ongoing relationship is essential. It's not something that should be assumed, left to chance, etc. Else, the odds of having to back fill that hole - and probably failing to do so - at some future date is going to be very expensive.
Traster 8y ago
I have so many problems with this article, and of course Warby Parker in general. First off, it seems they're going to commit the cardinal sin of every Silicon Valley company - completely ignoring anyone who isn't in the head office. Balloons on every desk - let's just ignore the vast majority of employees are sales staff who don't have desks. The more major problem I have with WP is that their product is entirely generic and their entire business model is just to sell the same thing everyone else does but invest in a different style of woke signalling marketing. Which is exactly what this article is. The whole thing just reads as a "Isn't it great that we're in the growth phase so we can completely ignore our costs!". Tell me about when your sales dropped and you kept your staff motivated and happy - that's what I want to know. I don't want to know staff like free stuff - I already know that. It's kind of easy to keep retention rates high when all your staff are so knew that there's no legacy systems to deal with and they haven't been at your company long enough to grow out of their jobs. This article brings literally nothing knew to the table. But to be fair, it's literally an article on an e-mail marketting website.
- freewilly1040 8y ago
  The product is generic, but the incumbent competition charged exorbitant price for glasses frames and offered poor customer service. Charging more reasonable prices is of course very replicable, and the mail order model has been replicated by other companies. The characterization of ignoring the sales staff is very at odds with my experience - the staff at their brick and mortar stores I've been to have been very helpful and capable.
  - heywire 8y ago
    Wasn't Zenni Optical years ahead of Warby Parker in the reasonably priced mail-order prescription eyewear game?
    - pm90 8y ago
      Zenni is pretty amazing but seemingly not well known. Many of my friends with kids buy many cheaper frames from them (kids tend to accidentally destroy glasses it seems)
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
mediocrejoker 8y ago
I hate to sound cynical but I am very skeptical of the chart that claims employees place a higher importance on "Culture and Values" compared to any/all of "Senior Leadership, Career Opportunities, Business Outlook, Work-life Balance" or that they value "Compensation and Benefits" least of all
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  I noticed that too. This seems more like how Senior Management wants things to be. Culture doesn't cost money.
pseudolus 8y ago
The podcast "How I Built This" featured an episode with Dave Gilboa & Neil Blumenthal the founders of Warby Parker. It's an interesting background into why they chose the eyeglass market and some of their initial problems. The podcast can be found at: https://www.npr.org/2018/03/26/586048422/warby-parker-dave-gilboa-neil-blumenthal https://www.npr.org/2018/03/26/586048422/warby-parker-dave-g...
schnevets 8y ago
The article has definitely been fluffed up by marketing, but if you read it with a critical perspective, there is a valuable message: The company network is a cheaper retention strategy than career/salary growth People are less likely to career-hop to the next $10k boost that a headhunter sends them if they like their employees and feel like their time is well-spent.
wj 8y ago
Unsuccessfully tried to order my third pair of Sibley's last week but they were discontinued. :( Got the Wilkie instead but just not the same. Too large and a white line I didn't notice online. Still ordering through them is a great experience.
pl0x 8y ago
Zenni Optical eats Warby for lunch. They are over hyped and over priced.
yowlingcat 8y ago
Pretty surprised this hasn't been flagged already. It's clearly content marketing that doesn't have anything of substance. As for Warby Parker, it is not a particularly innovative technology company, which is neither a good thing or bad thing on its own. I will give it credit for being a solvent business with a working business model. I interviewed for a pretty high level position there and was pretty unimpressed. I got the impression of a company that has an undifferentiated product, more funding (and likely dilution) than they should, fairly slick marketing, a healthy dose of startup kool-aid combined with altogether pretty ordinary people who were really sure they were doing something more technologically sophisticated than running a DNVB. Given how late stage they were, I was surprised by their offer being as mediocre as it was, and I took a competing one. No regrets.
yawaramin 8y ago
In my experience 360 peer evaluations will be gamed. Employees cosy with each other but not necessarily in exactly the same team will give each other good reviews and won't ask for reviews from their direct teammates. They'll pull out extremely harsh criticisms without warning, and without fully understanding the person they're reviewing. Btw, this isn't just my personal experience. Here's a bit from that NYT piece on Amazon again: > After she had a child, she arranged with her boss to be in the office from 7 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. each day, pick up her baby and often return to her laptop later. Her boss assured her things were going well, but her colleagues, who did not see how early she arrived, sent him negative feedback accusing her of leaving too soon. ... “I can’t stand here and defend you if your peers are saying you’re not doing your work,” she says he told her. She left the company after a little more than a year. ... Ms. Willet’s co-workers strafed her through the Anytime Feedback Tool, the widget in the company directory that allows employees to send praise or criticism about colleagues to management. ( https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/technology/inside-amazon-wrestling-big-ideas-in-a-bruising-workplace.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/technology/inside-amazon-... )
- ethiclub 8y ago
  It appears the manager did not comprehensively 'arrange' this for the employee. Part of this job would have been ensuring that this information was transparent, and the decision fair. If employees are complaining, it is presumably a mix of a) company culture issues and b) a lack of information that meant they perceived it as unfair.
  - yawaramin 8y ago
    c) they've been given an easy outlet to complain without taking the time to understand what's going on. Complaint as gamification. d) other.
rland 8y ago
I had a pair of WP frames that were just fine (my first pair of glasses). When they broke, I ordered not one, but two pairs of similar acetate frames for $20 from Zenni. Quality was identical, so much so that I wonder if they came from the factory. A pair from one company cost 10 times the other, and they both came quickly in the mail... I don't anticipate that this will be sustainable. The Takeaways section is pretty funny. It reads like an rote instruction manual for an extraterrestrial middle manager who has never socialized with human beings before. Straight out of Office Space.
cityzen 8y ago
PSA - If you have a Costco membership, try getting your glasses there. Great prices, pretty decent selection, will fix and tune your glasses free for life.

167 points by pmp301 8y ago

Honest non snarky question, why does it take 1,400 employees to sell mail order glasses, which are essentially a quasi-commodity product? What are all those employees doing? And since TFA says that balloons are put on the new hire's desk it implies these are all desk jobs, implying they probably outsource their manufacturing to factories in China. I ask because I worked at a company that sold machinery at scale (which is much more complicated than glasses, which don't require novel engineering). We did all our physical manufacturing in-house, we had a manufacturing floor on the other side of the wall from the cubicles. We had somewhere between 250-275 employees to run the entire shop, that's manufacturing, engineering, software (embedded and application), marketing, IT, sales, logistics... Not sure if we outsourced our cleaning crew or not. I wouldn't expect a mail order glasses company to have more than 500 employees.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
darkstar999 8y ago
Check out their job listings to get an idea. https://www.warbyparker.com/jobs https://www.warbyparker.com/jobs They have a bunch of retail locations. Software. Accounting. R&D. Marketing. Logistics.
manacit 8y ago
They're not just mail order - the article wasn't clear, but perhaps that 1,400 number includes all of the people that work at their retail stores: https://www.warbyparker.com/retail https://www.warbyparker.com/retail There are certainly enough of them that I'd imagine it bumps the numbers up quite a bit.
- astura 8y ago
  Okay, I didn't realize they had retail stores, that makes more sense then.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
whitepoplar 8y ago
This is going to sound really insensitive, but I've noticed that trendy VC-backed startups often hire people that they believe are smart, but who often turn out to be entitled and ineffective, and thus the company needs to hire more employees than is typical to get the job done. I think there's also a tendency for people not spending their own money to chase absolute outcomes rather than Pareto outcomes. e.g. if an 85% solution costs $n, startups often spend $10n on the 100% solution. My guess is that if you're a founder spending your own money, you'd pick the 85% solution.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- freehunter 8y ago
  On the other hand, what is a startup if not an experiment? Especially a VC-backed startup. Hiring non-traditional employees in non-traditional ways (compared to enterprise companies), playing around with headcount and job roles in non-traditional ways, and seeking non-traditional ways of doing business. Many of them fail, but the ones who succeed often change the way business is done in multiple industries. Every startup is an experiment in doing business a different way. If they went with the 85% solution or hired off-the-shelf employees, they'd just be another small business. There's nothing wrong with being another small business, but startups are so drastically different that we came up with an entirely different term to talk about small businesses who do things in wildly non-traditional ways with the hope that those non-traditional tactics will lead to unprecedented success. We call them startups.
- conductr 8y ago
  Ineffectiveness in this sense is leaderships fault. They hired without vision for why the role was needed, what’s expected, and established accountability. Combine that with a culture where you’re expected to be real friends with everyone results in a lot of people sitting around drinking coffee and playing ping pong.
owyn 8y ago
I can't say this is the case here, but Warby Parker does have like a hundred retail outlets now. Frequently (as with Apple) journalists will just report the total number of employees including retail employees without breaking it down into categories. This obviously throws off a lot of weird numbers if not accounted for, which is part of what "public relations" is all about. According to wikipedia they do manufacture their glasses in house now, and there are apparently 150 employees in that factory.
- teddyaltman 8y ago
  This is a big part of their growing numbers. They used to be a small, direct-to-consumer digital brand. But after early adopters bought glasses, they needed to get more eyes on their product so they started with small showrooms in NYC. Now they've expanded more and more. I think the margins on the glasses are still good so they're not over expanding but they definitely need more employees in this stage of the company.
detaro 8y ago
Without knowing the details of what your example did: You probably didn't have 75+ retail locations, didn't need to do the kind of marketing effort a quick-growing consumer/fashion brand requires, might have needed less customer support (due to having fewer, larger customers, unless you did very custom things), had less logistics overhead than a company that ships frames to people to try on and return. They also do parts of the production chain in-house.
- astura 8y ago
  I didn't realize they had retail locations, the employee count makes much more sense when you're running retail locations. I thought they were just a mail order company. I think what really threw me off was "welcome balloons on desks" which heavily implies (at least to me) all of employees have desk jobs.
  - weberc2 8y ago
    This thread exemplifies why employee count isn't suitable as even a rough indicator of corporate performance.
    - chrisco255 8y ago
      What is? Revenue per employee or net profit per employee?
      - quickthrower2 8y ago
        Profit? Cashflow?
      - izzydata 8y ago
        Average salary excluding executives.
        Spivak 8y ago
        Average with a blacklist seems like it's just a worse median.
stcredzero 8y ago
Honest non snarky question, why does it take 1,400 employees to sell mail order glasses, which are essentially a quasi-commodity product? Ideally, a whole lot of them would be brilliant people working on improving design, improving support, and improving the supply chain. Most likely, a lot of them are working on or administering the retail storefronts, which in 2018 is a somewhat a marketing function. Also more likely: A lot of them are working on marketing. The incentives of the investors and customers don't quite align. This misalignment vector generally expresses itself through the Marketing, PR, and legal teams.
seppin 8y ago
> Honest non snarky question, why does it take 1,400 employees to sell mail order glasses, Because before technology fucked the labour balance of the global economy, this is how industry worked.

leowoo91 8y ago

IMHO, as long as founders are engaged, employees will be happy.

frogpelt 8y ago
Engaged in what?
- ProAm 8y ago
  I think he meant to each other?
  - MartinCron 8y ago
    True story: I worked at a startup where the founders were married. Nobody told me, they had different last names, and I looked like a complete fool when I was shocked they were going on a beach vacation together.
    - astura 8y ago
      Married couples co-owning a small business isn't uncommon, of all the small business owners I know probably half or so are married couple co-owners. But, you're right, it's not like their relationship status is necessarily discussed with new employees, since it's not a business matter.
    - jmcgough 8y ago
      I had a similar situation happen - was really confused when they showed up together as dates to a wedding I attended.
    - yawaramin 8y ago
      Protip: next time don't act shocked, and you won't look like a complete fool ;-)
agency 8y ago
What makes you think that?

physcab 8y ago

[deleted]

singhrac 8y ago
This is another market entirely. A lot of those 1400 employees are retail, which can't be auto-scaled away as easily. I mean, if they can make meaningful jobs that pay ok without shady business practices or bad work conditions, more power to them. I'm all for leveraging people more effectively, but sales and in-person support is a nice job I still like being done by humans.

cheriot 8y ago

The 60 minutes episode on Luxottica and why glasses are so expensive was interesting context for reading about Warby Parker. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM

chiefalchemist 8y ago

A lot of things are important, but in terms of sustainability and longevity onboarding has to be in the Top 3. Whether it's new employess or new customers, establishing the foundation for the ongoing relationship is essential. It's not something that should be assumed, left to chance, etc. Else, the odds of having to back fill that hole - and probably failing to do so - at some future date is going to be very expensive.

Traster 8y ago

I have so many problems with this article, and of course Warby Parker in general. First off, it seems they're going to commit the cardinal sin of every Silicon Valley company - completely ignoring anyone who isn't in the head office. Balloons on every desk - let's just ignore the vast majority of employees are sales staff who don't have desks. The more major problem I have with WP is that their product is entirely generic and their entire business model is just to sell the same thing everyone else does but invest in a different style of woke signalling marketing. Which is exactly what this article is. The whole thing just reads as a "Isn't it great that we're in the growth phase so we can completely ignore our costs!". Tell me about when your sales dropped and you kept your staff motivated and happy - that's what I want to know. I don't want to know staff like free stuff - I already know that. It's kind of easy to keep retention rates high when all your staff are so knew that there's no legacy systems to deal with and they haven't been at your company long enough to grow out of their jobs. This article brings literally nothing knew to the table. But to be fair, it's literally an article on an e-mail marketting website.

freewilly1040 8y ago
The product is generic, but the incumbent competition charged exorbitant price for glasses frames and offered poor customer service. Charging more reasonable prices is of course very replicable, and the mail order model has been replicated by other companies. The characterization of ignoring the sales staff is very at odds with my experience - the staff at their brick and mortar stores I've been to have been very helpful and capable.
- heywire 8y ago
  Wasn't Zenni Optical years ahead of Warby Parker in the reasonably priced mail-order prescription eyewear game?
  - pm90 8y ago
    Zenni is pretty amazing but seemingly not well known. Many of my friends with kids buy many cheaper frames from them (kids tend to accidentally destroy glasses it seems)

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

mediocrejoker 8y ago

I hate to sound cynical but I am very skeptical of the chart that claims employees place a higher importance on "Culture and Values" compared to any/all of "Senior Leadership, Career Opportunities, Business Outlook, Work-life Balance" or that they value "Compensation and Benefits" least of all

maxxxxx 8y ago
I noticed that too. This seems more like how Senior Management wants things to be. Culture doesn't cost money.

pseudolus 8y ago

The podcast "How I Built This" featured an episode with Dave Gilboa & Neil Blumenthal the founders of Warby Parker. It's an interesting background into why they chose the eyeglass market and some of their initial problems. The podcast can be found at: https://www.npr.org/2018/03/26/586048422/warby-parker-dave-gilboa-neil-blumenthal https://www.npr.org/2018/03/26/586048422/warby-parker-dave-g...

schnevets 8y ago

The article has definitely been fluffed up by marketing, but if you read it with a critical perspective, there is a valuable message: The company network is a cheaper retention strategy than career/salary growth People are less likely to career-hop to the next $10k boost that a headhunter sends them if they like their employees and feel like their time is well-spent.

wj 8y ago

Unsuccessfully tried to order my third pair of Sibley's last week but they were discontinued. :( Got the Wilkie instead but just not the same. Too large and a white line I didn't notice online. Still ordering through them is a great experience.

pl0x 8y ago

Zenni Optical eats Warby for lunch. They are over hyped and over priced.

yowlingcat 8y ago

Pretty surprised this hasn't been flagged already. It's clearly content marketing that doesn't have anything of substance. As for Warby Parker, it is not a particularly innovative technology company, which is neither a good thing or bad thing on its own. I will give it credit for being a solvent business with a working business model. I interviewed for a pretty high level position there and was pretty unimpressed. I got the impression of a company that has an undifferentiated product, more funding (and likely dilution) than they should, fairly slick marketing, a healthy dose of startup kool-aid combined with altogether pretty ordinary people who were really sure they were doing something more technologically sophisticated than running a DNVB. Given how late stage they were, I was surprised by their offer being as mediocre as it was, and I took a competing one. No regrets.

yawaramin 8y ago

In my experience 360 peer evaluations will be gamed. Employees cosy with each other but not necessarily in exactly the same team will give each other good reviews and won't ask for reviews from their direct teammates. They'll pull out extremely harsh criticisms without warning, and without fully understanding the person they're reviewing. Btw, this isn't just my personal experience. Here's a bit from that NYT piece on Amazon again: > After she had a child, she arranged with her boss to be in the office from 7 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. each day, pick up her baby and often return to her laptop later. Her boss assured her things were going well, but her colleagues, who did not see how early she arrived, sent him negative feedback accusing her of leaving too soon. ... “I can’t stand here and defend you if your peers are saying you’re not doing your work,” she says he told her. She left the company after a little more than a year. ... Ms. Willet’s co-workers strafed her through the Anytime Feedback Tool, the widget in the company directory that allows employees to send praise or criticism about colleagues to management. ( https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/technology/inside-amazon-wrestling-big-ideas-in-a-bruising-workplace.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/technology/inside-amazon-... )

ethiclub 8y ago
It appears the manager did not comprehensively 'arrange' this for the employee. Part of this job would have been ensuring that this information was transparent, and the decision fair. If employees are complaining, it is presumably a mix of a) company culture issues and b) a lack of information that meant they perceived it as unfair.
- yawaramin 8y ago
  c) they've been given an easy outlet to complain without taking the time to understand what's going on. Complaint as gamification. d) other.

rland 8y ago

I had a pair of WP frames that were just fine (my first pair of glasses). When they broke, I ordered not one, but two pairs of similar acetate frames for $20 from Zenni. Quality was identical, so much so that I wonder if they came from the factory. A pair from one company cost 10 times the other, and they both came quickly in the mail... I don't anticipate that this will be sustainable. The Takeaways section is pretty funny. It reads like an rote instruction manual for an extraterrestrial middle manager who has never socialized with human beings before. Straight out of Office Space.

cityzen 8y ago

PSA - If you have a Costco membership, try getting your glasses there. Great prices, pretty decent selection, will fix and tune your glasses free for life.