Any Info On The Current State Of X-metal?

[Rustpot]

It has been killed because the cost was not condusive with the profit margins that they get on other pairs, upper management at LUX has no Oakley heart/roots and they dont see the heritage in the ICONic items like the fans and collectors of the brand do. Pure profit in terms of low cost materials, cheaper manufacturing and cut down design time... I can understand if sales were falling off or flat, but they werent...
Net sales reached approximately Euro 1.9 billion... Thats +5.6% with double-digit growth in emerging markets (+17%) in less than 1 year...
Operating income rose to Euro 275 million... Thats +7.7% and operating margin rose to 14.7% in 1Q 2013 from 14.3% in 1Q 2012...
Net income increased to Euro 159 million... Thats +10.5% from net income of Euro 144 million reported in the first quarter of 2012...

So there are the facts, do with them what you will....

Those are *some* facts for 1Q 2013, which seem to have nothing to do with X Metal. Profits were/are on the rise. Oakley is also churning out weaker designs with more mainstream appeal and widening its overall market penetration. Any non-Jannard type business person might make similar strides to grow profits in every branch of the company and call it a success.

We all know Jim was a different cat in the core of his beliefs and how he conducted business. It sucks he's gone.I really wish he'd come back or start a new Oakley to really motherf*ck the people running Oakley now.

I get that Luxottica is in business to make money and all that, but I really have a hard time jumping to a lot of conclusions. There is a visible trend where one might extrapolate hypotheses from, no doubt. You, FGG, might have more info, but I guarantee you're in a small minority among members of the forum, yet there seem to be a lot of voices speaking in absolutely certain terms and willing to bet the farm on baseless assumptions.

I'm no champion for Lux, and I'm not happy with what's been seen going on in the last few years as a customer. I'm a champion for reasoned thought and analysis, though, and I know without being a fly on the boardroom wall I have no basis to comment on the motives and decisions made by Oakley, Luxottica, or whatever bastardized hybrid there may lie within.

In other words, I don't have one of these next to my computer;

Cuz, see, it's got different conclusions you can jump to. Get it?

 

[FearGearGarage]

What the raw facts have to do with X Metal as the discussion was is that they are cutting the line because it is not as profitable as the mainstream appeal lines as you put it, did the line need to be discontinued "No" because it was not for cost saving measures due to profit losses. The X Metal line was profitable, just not as profitable... Its not like they have pallets and pallets of unsold product due to consumer rejection either as with some other newer releases... I do know people inside, we have had discussions and not one I talked to agreed with the decision but they are not the decision makers so be it... I will tell you this and its not a jump, there will be a new metal line in the future but it wont be located here and the recipe if you will wont be the same...

 

[Rustpot]

I fear I may begin to talk in circles so I'll just reiterate;

Fear Gear (that guy^) has information from which to make statements. Which might not be the definitive truth, but not so far removed as to be unreliable. Which means when he types he's drawing on reliable information to make his statements. Which usually aren't fearmongering despite his moniker.

Most everyone else has snippets of Fear Gear's anecdotal information and what's being posted on the board, and draws wild assumptions. From which panic, mob hatred, and snippets of the aforementioned anecdotal information get disseminated AD NAUSEUM. Our friendly latin turn of phrase being what I have the most issue with.

 

[mjt42]

I am a massive fan of X-Metal but appreciate the fact that all good things come to an end......

In my eyes, the worst thing that could happen is for a re-release of Romeo 1's. Not because of damage to values but the fact that the original release pushed bounderies of what was achievable at that time. A re-issue would be just treading water.

It is now time to move on and for Oakley to develop a new range - perhaps build upon their carbon fibre technology. An affordable model based on a C Six would be hugely popular.

 

[emjaycee23]

you know it was Romeo, Mars, then juliet right? the XX came out before the Penny as well. But i'll agree with you to say the Romeo, Juliet and Penny distinguish the core of the Xmetal line pretty well, But i would include the Mars.

To me The Xmetal line tells a story, so I like all of em. The Romeo came out first and was CRAZY, then Jordan went all out and made those signature ROUND design Mars. Then they introduced the 'mainstream' pair - the Juliet. of course design a larger sized one for those with bigger heads - XX.

Then the penny came out with all new spring hinge technology, and suited the 'smaller head' sector. now with all bases covered they sat on it for awhile.. then debuted the Romeo2. Half rimmed, a first for the line, with those classic ellipse icons instead of a jet intake hole. And the name indicating a rebirth, although it flopped somewhat by not living up to the innovation of the first. It may have been technologically the most advanced (CNC milled frame, super light, half rim etc) but that flex coupler still plagued it, and being a half frame, was flimsiest of the lot.

Next the HalfX was sort of like an attempt at maximising the durability and practicality of the R2. Do away with flex couplers, and take away the fancy lens design to make it simpler, and also add a more sophisticated spring hinge. but this only made things 'worse', as all it was now was just a glorified HalfWire.

So their last hoorah.. The Xsquared. Back to the CORE of Xmetal.. an improved nosebridge to facilitate repairs, the classic jet intake icon, hammerstems, full rimmed. In some ways, this was the 'perfecting' of the Xmetal ideology. but its surgical precision and execution meant it lacked character somewhat... like Lamborghini making a BMW M3 clone as their last hoorah.

to me, each step of the way was cool. you can see the evolution of the designs, and also their thought processes if you line it up with the problems/issues they faced at the time. Simply put, these 8 represent a cool part of Oakley's history. now, please dont go mess it up by reviving it with some aluminium/palladium alloy or whatever they come up with. Start a new line, I say. Leave the Xmetal name to rest.

Very well said bro brip.

 

[dragonvoi]

I am a massive fan of X-Metal but appreciate the fact that all good things come to an end......

In my eyes, the worst thing that could happen is for a re-release of Romeo 1's. Not because of damage to values but the fact that the original release pushed bounderies of what was achievable at that time. A re-issue would be just treading water.

It is now time to move on and for Oakley to develop a new range - perhaps build upon their carbon fibre technology. An affordable model based on a C Six would be hugely popular.

Although I would probably buy a re-release, I agree that it should be left alone, because it was a breakthrough piece at the time. and of course to quote "E" ; I never look back, darling! It distracts from the now.

 

[Supero100]

I think the thing that bugs me is the removal of support via periodic lens releases and the unobtainium consumables, to say nothing of the tune ups. I understand if they stop making frames; but to let the x-metals in circulation wither on the vine for a lack of support is a bummer - and lets the pinnacle of Oakley design become associated with inferior replacement parts.

 

[Y K]

The thing is x-metals serve mainly a niche market, apart from this forum, were i lurk and read for a week now, I hardly see any x-metals. Let alone the fanatics that own more then 1. (damn it's big competition to get 1 or 2 more frames )

Also the fact that they made the frames that good, is also a "mistake" because apart from the mentioned fanatics who collect them. I don't think a regular sunglass wearer would need to buy another frame during his/her lifetime.

And indeed it wouldn't be that bad if they just kept making spare lenses and kits

 

[SuperAmerica]

Any info on the current state of x-metal? And what comes next?

I've recently read that Oakley discontinued the line. When I heard the news, my stomach twisted.

If I had the $$$ I'd run out and buy a pair of XS.

I've done all the reading I can, and haven't found out what Oakley has up their sleeves after x-metal. Anybody have any more info? I see they are expanding carbon fiber in their frames, both prescription and sunglasses.

I talked to Oakley CS today to set up a tune-up on my Juliets and was told that something X-metal was coming but that it was super secret squirrel and they weren't discussing it with employes outside of "need to know" circles.

 

[SuperAmerica]

I think the thing that bugs me is the removal of support via periodic lens releases and the unobtainium consumables, to say nothing of the tune ups. I understand if they stop making frames; but to let the x-metals in circulation wither on the vine for a lack of support is a bummer - and lets the pinnacle of Oakley design become associated with inferior replacement parts.

This is what scares me the most. If they stop the tune-up services and all the NOS parts dry up what will we be left with?