Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

beta_vulgaris t1_j7idh6u wrote

Reply to comment by slipperysuarez in Cranston Police Searching for Women They Say Stole $1,400 in Sunglasses by Orangefan71

This is not some locally owned small business selling fine quality handcrafted goods. If someone steals $1400 worth of overpriced hot garbage from a faceless corporation - why should I care?

10

Orangefan71 OP t1_j7jcivg wrote

You think it's overpriced, then how bout this...DON'T FUCKIN BUY IT. Some of you people have clearly never owned or managed a business before, never mind held a real job. Heck from the sounds of it, I doubt half the posters here even graduated high school.

6

degggendorf t1_j7k9n4p wrote

I don't think you quite understand how Luxottica operates

8

sqiub23 t1_j7kasg3 wrote

Go on…

1

degggendorf t1_j7kfv5v wrote

I personally enjoy research and trust my own work over anything I read on reddit, and thought that the person I was responding to might be the type to reject anything anyone else says too based on their combative comments.

But here's the short version: Luxottica is basically a vertically-integrated monopoly. It's not as simple as "Think Sunglass Hut is too expensive? Don't buy it, go to a different store" because Luxottica owns that store too. Okay fine, skip the stores and just get some mall kiosk glasses. Wait no, Luxottica owns that too. Okay well then at least I'll make sure I'm getting high quality expensive glasses direct from the Ray-Ban store. Oops! Luxottica owns them too. Fine, I'll go to Ray-Ban's competition. No, Oakley is owned by them too. Okay well at least I can trust my independent optician to sell quality goods. Oh sorry, no they only sell Luxottica brands and get kickbacks for selling them too. Okay I give up, I'm just going to get glasses at Walmart. Except Luxottica owns that Foster Grant brand too. How about Walmart's competition then? Nope, Luxottica directly own Target Optical.

Beyond that, those seemingly all-encompassing first-party retail brands are only 60% of their business. The other 40% is wholesale glasses and components to other brands, so even your non-Luxottica glasses could be Luxottica.

I don't think a typical person could name a store that doesn't sell Luxottica glasses.

Here's some more info on their business model from an unbiased (or at least biased toward the company) business analysis source: https://fourweekmba.com/vertically-integrated-business-model/

And here's a partial list of Luxottica brands:

  • Alain Mikli

  • Arnette eyewear

  • Costa Del Mar

  • Eye Safety Systems (ESS)

  • Luxottica

  • Native Eyewear

  • Oakley

  • Oliver Peoples

  • Persol

  • Ray-Ban

  • Sferoflex

  • Vogue Eyewear

  • Giorgio Armani

  • Armani Exchange

  • Brooks Brothers

  • Bulgari

  • Burberry

  • Chanel

  • Coach

  • Dolce & Gabbana

  • Emporio Armani

  • Michael Kors

  • Miu Miu

  • Polo Ralph Lauren

  • Prada

  • Ralph Eyewear

  • Ralph Lauren

  • Scuderia Ferrari

  • Starck Biotech Paris

  • Tiffany & Co.

  • Tory Burch

  • Valentino

  • Versace

  • Sunglass Hut

  • Apex by Sunglass Hut

  • Sunglass Outfitters

  • Spectacle Hut

  • LensCrafters

  • Pearle Vision

  • Target Optical

  • OPSM

  • ILORI

  • EyeMed Vision Care

  • Optical Shop of Aspen

  • Laubman & Pank

  • GMO

  • Oliver Peoples

  • Alain Mikli

  • Oakley

  • David Clulow

  • Glasses.com

  • Econópticas

  • Paris De Gaulle

  • John Lewis Opticians

  • Salmoiraghi e Viganò

  • Óticas Carol

  • VistaSì

More here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica#Monopolistic_pricing_practices

11

Orangefan71 OP t1_j7l1ert wrote

Blah blah blah. I've never had any trouble finding decent sunglasses for under $100. STOP excusing theft.

0

degggendorf t1_j7l2ja7 wrote

Yep sounds like my suspicion was correct about you not being receptive to learning anything new.

5

degggendorf t1_j7l37oz wrote

> I've never had any trouble finding decent sunglasses for under $100.

From where/which glasses?

2

Orangefan71 OP t1_j7qdpkp wrote

> From where/which glasses?

Last was a pair of Oakleys that I bought on special for around ~$90. Can't remember the site. I've also bought cheaper at TJ Maxx, Marshall's etc.that were totally fine.

1

degggendorf t1_j7qesp2 wrote

> Last was a pair of Oakleys that I bought on special for around ~$90.

......that's still Luxottica, which is my whole point. "Don't like it, just avoid them" doesn't really work when it's a functional monopoly.

1

Orangefan71 OP t1_j7qfh78 wrote

  1. I only purchase them if they offer them at a reasonable price that i have the means to pay.

  2. If they do not, I don't give them my business. Simple as that. Can find stuff at TJ Maxx, Job Lot, etc. that does just fine.

  3. DOES NOT GIVE ANYBODY THE RIGHT TO STEAL!

−1

degggendorf t1_j7qgwoc wrote

Every single one of those things is beside the point...are you deflecting on purpose, or should I try to explain what I'm saying in different terms you might understand?

1

Orangefan71 OP t1_j7qhudm wrote

You are the one deflecting. They stole something that didn't belong to them. End of story.

−1

degggendorf t1_j7qks6s wrote

What exactly do you think I'm deflecting from?

1

Orangefan71 OP t1_j7r9msz wrote

From the fact that they stole and deserve punishment under the law.

−1

degggendorf t1_j7ra0pn wrote

Where have I made any statement about that? I am just correcting your misconception about the ability to boycott this business.

1