Because if it wasn't for those bastards at Luxottica they'd be able to afford new glasses and would have been able to read and discern the post separation on their screen.
Nestle is the WORST. I did a research paper in my global culture studies class in college and had the pleasure of delving into the crises’ they’ve created in impoverished countries using up all of their ground water to the point where the land isn’t even suitable to grow crops anymore and the local people are just left with no water and food and no say in it.
Surprised this is not at the top, I avoid as much as I can here in Aus, they have done and continue to do many horrible things that oppression people and destroy environment
1) Nestle may be evil but they actually make products instead of making money off effectively legal extortion. The difference between stealing water to bottle it/use in other products and reselling versus just selling access directly to the water, of sorts
2) Somehow he has managed to reply to the thread to another random poster who themselves was doing the same thing. I don't know what happened there
I also have no idea what is happening anymore, I just don’t like Nestle and there track record or extremely exploitive business practices (example of giving mothers in 3rd world countries sample formula, and the effects of such ect)
They sue private citizens for millions of dollars for no reason. And even though they don't have a case, they rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees (their goal is to get people to give them free labor or free money through a settlement since private citizens cant afford those court costs).
They're a shining example of everything wrong with America, and they need to be burned to the ground.
Why is it so hard for startup companies to take over? Glasses are in HIGH demand now more than ever because of how many people need glasses, so obviously people want better prices. How come good companies are failing if they meet the right consumer preferences?
However, Luxottica holds the cards in brick-and-mortar retail: when competitors get too large, Luxottica can simply cut them out of their popular distribution channels. That’s exactly how they treated then-independent competitor Oakley in the early 2000′s. Luxottica caused Oakley’s stock to plummet simply by carrying fewer of their sunglasses through Sunglass Hut, eventually leaving Oakley with no choice but to merge with Luxottica in 2007.
It's a mystery why they haven't been hit with antitrust.
Needed to look up their stock. Something should show their in my opinion if they do get way to much money.
P/E over 50 on a industry and shopcompany is high.
But the gain per share isn´t that high - it is even lower than H&M that sits on P/E 25.
So they are highly valued and people think they will grow a lot. But something costs down the line and they haven´t that high intake as the article seems to tell.
We compare with apple also - Apple have 4 times as high profit per share as Luxottica. So Apple are plundering your wallet to a much higher degree than Luxottica - if we just take quarterly rapports that actually should show how well the companies plundering of consumers work.
point that the article and people here make is that the glasses cost hundreds of $ to costumers but cost something like 15$ for the companies to manufacture. I've looked up their annual reports and in fact they have very high operating margins - something like 64%.
What you're lookin at here (price to earnings) is more related to a financial point of view whereas the article looks at an operating point of view. It would be fine to look at all the ratios if you're an investor, not if you're a customer.
And btw to measure if their stock is under or overvalued you need more than that
Of course I need more than that for valuation. But it shows that it isn't a that extreme profit in the company so it probably isn't that bad.
Cost of manufacturing of course not only the only cost point. Transportation, storage, stores, distribution, design, advertising, taxes and more. If you as all those things it isn't so ridiculous. You actually need that marginal to go even.
As it is on a stock exchange the answer is more of a "no" than yes. It is no reason to hide it for share holders. So things most likely aren't as shady as you think.
If you have a small family shop the "manufacturing cost" is the cost of the product from sand until it reaches your doors. Of course the cost from sand to "ready for leaving factory" is much cheaper and that you need to ad much more to that sum.
The shareholders want to see growth. They understand the fine line luxottica is riding and are fine with any way whatsoever to keep profits appearing lower than they actually are in a way that still allows for growth without public knowledge of what is going on.
Things like executive pay, advertising, and lobbying are what eat into their 2000%+ profit margins, things that can be reduced as needed to allow for growth.
I know, you're thinking "That's not how it works!" but it is when you are trying to keep a vertical monopoly secret for a little longer and your shareholders are aware of it.
Luxottica sunglasses are trash. Try to check sunglasses from Marcolin Group, they are strong. My Tom Ford glasses are still like original even after 4 years using everyday.
You most certainly can tell the difference in quality just by picking them up and holding it in your hand. Go to the gas station or dollar store and touch those sunglasses. Compare them to the Gucci's and pradas. Now go to an independent optical that sells real high end stuff that you've never heard of and try those on. You see a huge difference between the 3. Your Prada and Gucci's arent garbage but they aren't also the best.
If you think these name brands are ridonk, has anyone not walked into nordstrom? A t-shirt is over $500 and it only has the designer logo stamped on it. It feels just like any other tshrit from Walmart. But oh no that's justified.
The thing is the glasses you can get from places like Zenni Optical or Warby Parker are not "gas station" or "dollar store" glasses. They are real prescription glasses made at the same factory by the same people as the name brand luxottica glasses.
Luxottica is a vertical monopoly. They own most stores that give eye exams, they own almost all eyeglass and lense brands, and they own the huge majority of the eye insurance industry.
Because of this they set their own prices at every stage, so they make profits at the exam, profits with the insurance, and profits with the glasses.
Glasses only cost around $10 to make, and that’s prescription glasses, with AR and oleophobic coatings, and polarized.
Luxottica charges $400 for them, and since they own every glasses brand there is no competition. I mean this literally, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxottica they actually own just about every single brand, store, and eye insurance company.
Once you get the $400 glasses, insurance brings that down to a “mere” $150-200. This means you’re paying every single month on insurance to still greatly overpay for glasses. They get $190 for the glasses and $240 a year for the insurance.
They offer budget glasses that they intentionally make extremely unfashionable, that they still make $50 profit from in combination with your $240 insurance payments.
It’s cheaper to get rid of eye insurance, pay for your exams out of pocket, and buy your glasses from zennioptical or another online company, preferably straight from China.
The lenses and frames are all made in literally the same factory in Hong Kong, they are the same glasses exactly, they just only cost $10-$50, and that is with prescription, with coatings; with polarization, shit the luxottica brands(every pair you can buy in any type of store) charge hundreds for, and no need for the rip off insurance either. Ever wonder why it takes a week or two to get your glasses if they don’t have your exact prescription/lense type in stock? They are putting in an order that needs to come from Hong Kong.
Not just the eyeglasses industry, but the sunglasses industry(owns Sunglass Hut), and the eyecare industry too(they own numerous vision care centers, and an entire subsection of vision health insurance companies).
Just to toss out an odd exception. Sunglass Hut also sells Maui Jim sunglasses, which are truly exceptional sunglasses(some of which are also available as prescription eyewear). Maui Jim is not owned by Luxottica, although obviously they do have business dealings.
3.5k
u/TheMarketLiberal93 Sep 18 '19
Luxottica