• Take 30 seconds to register your free account to access deals, post topics, and view exclusive content!

    Register Today

    Join the largest Oakley Forum on the web!

Since italians bought Oakley...

I hate LUX and their business model about as much as the next guy, but I have to admit I do enjoy about 1 in every 20 or so frames that the new Oakley produces. I don't care for the laziness and uninspired design in what I would consider most of their basic model frames, but every now and then they get a good one lol.

(even a blind squirrel can find a nut every now and then) :crazy:

I do like the WJ 2.0
Seriously sweet
 
As you may or may not know, Luxottica holds contracts with nearly every designer brand and label you can think of, including: Chanel, Prada, Miu Miu, Dolce & Gabbana, Bulgari, Tiffany & Co., Versace, Burberry, Polo Ralph Lauren, Donna Karan, DKNY, Paul Smith, Brooks Brothers, Stella McCartney, Tory Burch, Coach, Armani and Starck Eyes and that’s not including the companies they actually own such as Ray-Ban, Oakley and more.

When you buy a pair of sunglasses, or even eyeglasses for that matter, not only are you most likely buying Luxottica-made glasses, but chances are that you buy them from a Luxottica-owned retailer too. The company has a retail network comprised of over 7,000 stores worldwide including the top eyewear chain, Lenscrafters, other big chains such as Pearle Vision and Oliver Peoples, and several boutique chains. They also operate Sears Optical and Target Optical. And if that wasn’t enough, they also own Sunglass Hut, the largest sunglass chain in the world and EyeMed, the second largest managed vision care company.

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, cutting off the life blood to companies that don’t want to play ball with Luxottica. That’s exactly how they treated Oakley (which was independent at the time) in the early 2000′s. Luxottica tried to buy/merge with Oakley but Oakley was not interested in any deal and wanted to stay an independent company. Luxottica caused Oakley’s stock to plummet simply by carrying fewer of their sunglasses through Sunglass Hut and other retailers that Luxottica owned, eventually leaving Oakley with no choice but to merge with Oakley in 2007.

That is why I hate Luxottica. When a company has the ability to strangle another (they want to force out of the game or onto their team) into submission, they will not have my support. To top it off, they took the Oakley brand and destroyed it. This is why Luxottica will never have my business, ever.

To be honest with you, I hope they never bring back older models. It would be an insult to what Oakley was. Sadly they already have brought a few back, but I will never buy them.


You are damn right. We are opticians and know what you talk about.

And, that's one more reason to buy our lenses :tongue:
 
Luxottica caused Oakley’s stock to plummet simply by carrying fewer of their sunglasses through Sunglass Hut and other retailers that Luxottica owned, eventually leaving Oakley with no choice but to merge with Oakley in 2007.

This line was from article way back when but it is mostly sensationalistic journalism. The article made it seem like Lux bled Oakley dry and took over, but that was no where near the truth. In fact Oakley was doing extremely well. Several months prior to the mid-2007 notification that Lux was buying out Oakley, Oakley had announced its RECORD annual sales..... Oakley Reports Record Annual Sales of $762 Million

Oakley’s stock prices was very much on the upswing at the time. Oakley shareholders did have a choice to sell or not....and the choice was made when they were offered a kingly sum of $2.1B which was a hefty 16% premium over its market value. An easy choice.
 
Oakley’s stock prices was very much on the upswing at the time. Oakley shareholders did have a choice to sell or not....and the choice was made when they were offered a kingly sum of $2.1B which was a hefty 16% premium over its market value. An easy choice.

I know what you’re saying, but if Lux was offering that much to buy Oakley, that tells me that they wanted the brand, period. You don’t think for one second, that if Oakley said no, Lux wouldn’t have put the squeeze on Oakley even more? They were showing Oakley they have the upper hand and their ultimate goal was to to acquire Oakley one way or another. Oakley knew that they didn’t have to retail locations to compensate if Lux removes their products and it would have been a matter of time before the sales would drop dramatically. It just so happens that Oakley took the offer before Lux had to force them. The result is still the same....a once great American company, now a ruined brand IMO.
 
I know what you’re saying, but if Lux was offering that much to buy Oakley, that tells me that they wanted the brand, period. You don’t think for one second, that if Oakley said no, Lux wouldn’t have put the squeeze on Oakley even more? They were showing Oakley they have the upper hand and their ultimate goal was to to acquire Oakley one way or another. Oakley knew that they didn’t have to retail locations to compensate if Lux removes their products and it would have been a matter of time before the sales would drop dramatically. It just so happens that Oakley took the offer before Lux had to force them. The result is still the same....a once great American company, now a ruined brand IMO.

I think many fans tend to underestimate Oakley’s value as a brand. Lux certainly has a far reaching distribution superiority but the importance of Oakley to their sales is substantial. That’s why Lux signed multi year deals with Oakley in late 2001 to bring back and keep Oakley in the SGH stores. Certain brands you can try to squeeze out but you’d be hurting yourself in the process. That’s why Lux can’t squeeze out Maui Jim.

I think fans also tend to underestimate Oakley’s distribution channels. While not as strong as Lux’s, JJ put a lot of emphasis on developing Oakley’s wholesale accounts, starting up O Stores and buying pre existing retailers like Iacon back in the late ‘90s and early 2000s when pre-Lux SGH initially cut orders orders due to financial troubles. I’m sure if Lux ever tried to put the squeeze on Oakley again that it would hurt, but it wouldn’t bring them to it’s knees.
 
Lux see Oakley as a bit of a burden. Simple as that.

They do things they know will piss off hardcore repeat customers (laughing the idea of made in USA meaning anything, I've been in meetings) but do it anyway.

Believe me I worked for the company before and after. Oakley being a stand alone brand in itself is a production nusience.

But they don't care. Luckily for them they can produce frames at a couple of dollars with no innovation and still retail them for $100. That's why the brand means something and can still pull in profits. Oakley isn't what it was but profit margins have reached a high that people can only have dreamed of a decade ago. It's a love hate relationship . Im glad I'm out and out for good to me honest.
 
As you may or may not know, Luxottica holds contracts with nearly every designer brand and label you can think of, including: Chanel, Prada, Miu Miu, Dolce & Gabbana, Bulgari, Tiffany & Co., Versace, Burberry, Polo Ralph Lauren, Donna Karan, DKNY, Paul Smith, Brooks Brothers, Stella McCartney, Tory Burch, Coach, Armani and Starck Eyes and that’s not including the companies they actually own such as Ray-Ban, Oakley and more.

When you buy a pair of sunglasses, or even eyeglasses for that matter, not only are you most likely buying Luxottica-made glasses, but chances are that you buy them from a Luxottica-owned retailer too. The company has a retail network comprised of over 7,000 stores worldwide including the top eyewear chain, Lenscrafters, other big chains such as Pearle Vision and Oliver Peoples, and several boutique chains. They also operate Sears Optical and Target Optical. And if that wasn’t enough, they also own Sunglass Hut, the largest sunglass chain in the world and EyeMed, the second largest managed vision care company.

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, cutting off the life blood to companies that don’t want to play ball with Luxottica. That’s exactly how they treated Oakley (which was independent at the time) in the early 2000′s. Luxottica tried to buy/merge with Oakley but Oakley was not interested in any deal and wanted to stay an independent company. Luxottica caused Oakley’s stock to plummet simply by carrying fewer of their sunglasses through Sunglass Hut and other retailers that Luxottica owned, eventually leaving Oakley with no choice but to merge with Oakley in 2007.

That is why I hate Luxottica. When a company has the ability to strangle another (they want to force out of the game or onto their team) into submission, they will not have my support. To top it off, they took the Oakley brand and destroyed it. This is why Luxottica will never have my business, ever.

To be honest with you, I hope they never bring back older models. It would be an insult to what Oakley was. Sadly they already have brought a few back, but I will never buy them.
That sounds like an anti-trust issue from what I remember in business school. In this situation Luxottica is essentially a monopoly but also a vertically integrated company where Luxottica owns the brands, manufacturing, sales, and vision insurance. Does anyone know if they have been investigated for anti-trust issues?
 
That sounds like an anti-trust issue from what I remember in business school. In this situation Luxottica is essentially a monopoly but also a vertically integrated company where Luxottica owns the brands, manufacturing, sales, and vision insurance. Does anyone know if they have been investigated for anti-trust issues?

Call your Senator and Representative if you want to chase after a windmill. Although they probably have some Lux $$$
 
Back
Top