[planetsprite]

Why can't a new company simply undercut the competition? I don't imagine the barriers to entry are too high for manufacturing glasses, are they?

[selcuka]

> Why can't a new company simply undercut the competition?

They can and they do [1]. They just don't have the same marketing budget, so you don't hear as much about them.

[1] https://www.zennioptical.com/

[adzm]

Not to mention the pupillary distance is not commonly included on optical prescriptions which creates a significant hurdle, even though it can be measured yourself or usually given when asked.

[at_compile_time]

I'll second this recommendation. I've had the same pair of $35 glasses for 5 years now, I wear them every day, and they're still good as new.

[jschveibinz]

I have been using zennioptical for years, and I’ve saved friends and family lots of money with my recommendations. They don’t do fancy, brand name frames. But otherwise the quality is fine.

[argondonor]

It would be nice if any of these sites had an AR solution that was completely clientside. I can't bring myself to agree to let them store my face + face info for 3 years.

[tyrfing]

What they don't have is a good anti-reflective coating. If you want that, you end up back with Luxottica (Essilor.)

[Someone1234]

Your employer may offer pre-tax vision insurance, this vision insurance is run by Luxottica, and works exclusively at their retail locations and brands.

Sometimes employers will even pay part of the vision insurance premium, thus making it, so your choices are to leave that money on the table OR pay completely out of pocket post-tax dollars.

There are alternative ways to use pretax dollars on eyeware, but many people aren't familiar with them and they require some management.

[kmonsen]

Doesn’t all fsa account cover glasses? Pretty easy to use that for pre tax dollars on eyeware. You can spend it wherever you want.

[petilon]

If you manufacture glasses, how are you going to get it into the hands of consumers? Luxottica owns the retail stores and the insurance company.

[lotsofpulp]

Retail stores can be started by anyone, and there are tons of optometrists that sell glasses from their own store.

The “insurance” company presents a higher barrier, since it is basically the government handing a discount to people for buying via employer subsidized vision “insurance”. The discount is that this benefit can be paid with pre tax dollars, so it obfuscates the real prices when people with vision insurance shop for eyewear.

I put “insurance” in quotes because the annual benefit maximums, like dental “insurance”, are so low that the premiums are simply prepaying for routine exams/eyeglasses. In effect, employer subsidized dental/vision insurance is just an advantage for large employers who can afford to administer those benefits and the employees who are lucky enough to work at those kinds of employers get to pay for routine dental/vision with pre tax dollars.

[Aunche]

I'm guessing that part of is that they have a very tight relationship with insurance. Insurance covers Luxottica much more than the budget brands, so for me personally, it's actually a similar price if I choose a frame that's on sale. I tried a pair of Zennis, but they honestly felt super low-quality compared to my other glasses, even though I got all the upgrades.

[csomar]

There are two markets: The cheap, and the "brand". You either buy a "cheap" one for $10 and get a lens for it; or you go for a "brand" name like RayBan (which is Luxottica).

I started buying cheap 4 years ago, and surprisingly the frame is still doing well (brand frames usually last 2-3 years)

[wyclif]

Since Luxottica bought out RayBan, the quality has plummeted. I have a pair of original Wayfarer II's that I got years before the buyout. The plastic is noticeably higher quality, the lenses are polarized and Bausch & Lomb. And they have five barrel hinges! Built like a tank and have survived many drops. Mine are still going strong and are 'buy it for life' quality. Still going strong after 38 years...I got them when I was 16 years old and in HS for a trip to the Bahamas.

Compare that to current RayBans. Cheap plastic. Plastic lenses. Spring hinges that break quickly and don't last. And worst of all, branding everywhere. On the temple. And again on the lens. Terrible.

[fshbbdssbbgdd]

Because the people who can measure which glasses you need are in on it.

[ska]

It's probably higher than appears at first blush, at least to do at scale. But not a huge barrier.

But there isn't an open market for manufactured lenses, you have to get them into consumers hands, and you have to get prescriptions, and people want fitting and ability to try frames.

Superficially it seems that glasses are highly vertical in practice, which is why budget outfits like zenni and warby parker seem mostly to be focused on the margins of direct-to-consumer.

[jwr]

Not for manufacturing, but you need good designs first, something people will want to buy. And most people will want to buy something with a BIG BRAND NAME on it.

I tried buying glasses online and discovered another problem: the industry hasn't standardized on measurements. It's very difficult to buy frames online. The numbers/measurements will be, for example, for lens width and nose bridge width only — go figure how large the entire frame is. I tried, and failed, accepting that I pretty much need to visit a store.

[kolp]

The frame size is normally written (in Europe, at least) on the inside of one of the arms of the glasses. Find an existing pair that fits you and note the measurements. That measure, together with your prescription and PD should be sufficient to order online.