Comments on: Sticker shock: Why are glasses so expensive?
Add a Comment
- The good folks at 60 Minutes neglected to mention the following:
To save a lot of money, you should order POLARIZED prescription glasses made out of real glass; not flimsy plastic lenses that scratch as soon as you clean them with a paper towel and don't have the same sun-blocking qualities. The cost of glass lenses is the same as plastic lenses. This obviates the need for prescription sunglasses. I have worn the same pair of polarized glasses for years in the bright Texas sun and like it much better than a separate set of sunglasses. As the 60-Minute piece stated, go to WALMART, where you can still get a reasonable deal on frames. They may sell for 10-20 times the manufacturing cost, but are a lot cheaper than what that monopolist Italian manufacturer mentioned in the piece, over-charges you. Manufacturers slap a silly 2-cent label onto something, mark it up to an unconscionable level and people flock to the mall to buy stupid name-brand goods. Unbelievable how ignorant the American consumer is. It keeps the economy humming, but our wallets empty. - Reply to this comment
- It is funny to see the excuses that are made for this...Luxottica is a vertical monopoly...illegal in the US. But I do not think that having any government intervene would be advantageous...what is needed is more companies like Walmart that are willing to compete. What is wrong, though, is if Luxottica is getting any special privileges because of being an integrated vertical monopoly. What we need are smarter buyers, more entrepreneurs and more venture capitalists to support new businesses
- Reply to this comment
- How is it possible Leslie Stahl details this fascinating story but Never once mentions that Giorgio Armani is the number one shareholder with $1.4bn in stock. She never even mentioned Armani amidst the other Labels Luxottica manufactures on behalf of. Knowing Leslie Mr Armani must be a Huge contributor to the democratic party in the USA.
- Reply to this comment
- If they are dominant because they are the best and the strongest among the rest then they've earned it but if not they could lose their dominance to a more ingenious and innovative firm in future.
- Reply to this comment
- I was quite surprised by the the breadth and depth of luxottica's control and ownership within the eyeglass industry. As such, I was disappointed that the reporting did not include interviews by the U.S. federal government concerning antitrust laws. Whether or not there are any violations, it would have been informative to understand how such restrictive practices are allowed to exist in the U.S., negatively affecting competive pricing.
- Reply to this comment
- Let's not forget how Eyemed has been "private" labeled! I'm all for being successsful but do it in an honest fashion. Sadly most patients have no real understanding of the industry.
- Reply to this comment
- COMPETITION it what makes people and businesses better, always has and always will.
And monopolies are ALWAYS bad for the consumer and innovation.
Those are historic realities and simply cannot be disputed.
Upstart companies invest more (percentage wise) on R&D to push innovation and gain a market share. Monopolies have too much invested in their success to do the same.
Thanks for the article CBS. I'll be shopping at Wal-Mart and doing lots of research in the future and make sure my money is going to anyone BUT Luxottica. - Reply to this comment
- Back in the day, I had the privilege to work for Pearle Vision when it was owned by Bausch & Lomb. I also worked for a high end small optical chain that still exists, but has changed hands many times. Though my time in the optical industry was short, I learned something that still guides my eyeglass purchases for me and my family today; I always look for the brand names that were around when I was selling eyeglasses, (Silhouette, Safilo, etc.) and with the exception of Silhouette, I always look to make sure the frames we purchase are made in Italy. It is easy to do. All frames are marked where they are made, just like many products are. The above mentioned companies have stood the test of time and make a quality product. However, unless the frame is from Austria, the best made frames are still made in Italy. I think it is wonderful that Italy has a successful company such as Luxottica, considering all the economic downturn in Europe right now. Lastly, I believe the dept. of commerce only has jurisdiction over U.S. owned companies, unless they are merging with an overseas company, then they can get involved. But, I'm not a lawyer, and there is a good chance I could be mistaken. Long live the free market!
- Reply to this comment
- Yes. Their prices are high. The quality is also high, as is the exceptional technology that you find in their stores. Also, Luxottica's charitable flagship, onesight was conveniently left out of the article. ONESIGHT gives away millions of pairs of eyewear worldwide to children and adults in need. If you're going to show the profit side of a company for doing exactly what every other for profit company strives for then show how that profit is shared freely with those in need.
- Reply to this comment
- Yes. Their prices are high. The quality is also high, as is the exceptional technology that you find in their stores. Also, Luxottica's charitable flagship, onesight was conveniently left out of the article. ONESIGHT gives away millions of pairs of eyewear worldwide to children and adults in need. If you're going to show the profit side of a company for doing exactly what every other for profit company strives for then show how that profit is shared freely with those in need.
- Reply to this comment
