What's stirring with Clearly CL's and other onliners

[gibby2020]

Hey all

Whats the significance of Clearly CL's announcing they were to offer a whack of new shares to raise 40mil. Then they announced the plan has been shelved.
I have no $, so investing is the last of my concerns but I assume flooding the market with new shares would drive down the price for existing shareholders. So far their financials say no profits and dividends for the last 3yrs+. Perhaps the broker/bank managing the share offering advised against it? But just a sign that times are tough for all of us including online retail.

For the consumer, the beauty of online glasses is you can always find it for cheaper someplace else! But that puts tons of pressure on lower and lower margins for all those online sellers, as there are so many of them. The optical pie has been carved up so much there is very little left for that many players ( independent B&M+Chains B&M+Chains online+independent online+frame manufacturers online.....). This imbalance is going to be relieved in the form of less choice for consumers as some of us B&M's will close. Hope it's not me but cant be too sure

I've noted lately the CC banner ads have not been on every webpage. Plus there may be a CC ad at the top then a Zenni add on the side. Glasses for as low and $38..no wait you're overpaying...Glasses for as low as $6.95...no wait we'll pay you to wear 'em....BTW banner ads for Zenni are a new thing!

Also of note CC is making you type in the freeship code to get free shipping on your order over $99. Previously at checkout the shipping charge was automatically dropped once the total was over 99...hmmmm Looks like you cant give away product for too long. What other consumer commodity has had this type of marketing strategy? The prices of shoes at Zappos are not that much less than in a B&M store???

G'nite
Gibster

This an interesting move

[Johns]

Gibster, can't you see what's happening?

If you've ever heard of a homemade rat trap, this is it. I'll spare (most) of, the gory details, but (long story short) the rats (many of them) end up eating each other at the bottom of a 55 gallon barrel.

That's what's happening here. They are the bottom of the barrel types. Many that you do not even know about have already succumbed, and more will follow. Yes, some B&Ms will follow as well, but they have their own issues.

[NorthStar]

Speculation that they may be enticing amazon.com or other huge online retailer to buy the company by inflating the number of customers with so many free pairs? Seems like CC has been start up company to get big quick and sell to the highest bidder for a profit for the developer. Their profits have not been very good despite the huge numbers. Just my guess.

[Chris Ryser]

Coastal Contacts Announces Termination of Common Share Offering	11/16/2012
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, Nov. 16, 2012 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Coastal Contacts Inc. ("Coastal") (Nasdaq:COA) (TSX:COA) (Stockholm:COA.ST), an online retailer of vision care products, announced today that it will not proceed with its previously announced marketed offering of common shares asit has determined that current market conditions will not permit it to raise funds on acceptable terms. This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction.

....................obviously they have listened to their financial advisors and taken action on it.

The Vancouver Sun has listed them as one of the 10 fastest growing companies. To be still in business with no profits showing, doing heavy adverting which has to be paid for, having to pay suppliers on time, means very smart financial planning while still growing rapidly.

There are dozens of optical advise publications on the web, stating that the optical retail business has to accept the facts and has to adapt their status quo in order to survive. The consumer does not understand the price difference between the same product sold on-line or at a B&M store.

Online sellers have the overhead cost, as well as B&M's, which claim, that their lifelong service is free, while it has been bundled into their selling price.

[Johns]

Detailed Quote for Facebook Inc. - (FB) $ 25.94 0.00 (0.00%) Volume: 2.53 m 4:00 PM EST Nov 26, 2012 Pre-Market: $ 26.19 0.25 (+0.96%) Volume: 2.53 m 9:07 AM EST Nov 27, 2012

Today 5d 1m 3m 1y 5y Last Price 25.94 Change $ Change % Tick N/A Bid 26.19 Bid Size 800 Ask 26.20 Ask Size 1,000 Open N/A High N/A Low N/A Prev Close 25.94 Last Trade 11/26/12 Volume 2.53 m 52 Wk Hi 45.00 52 Wk Low 17.55 Market Cap 56.2 b Ex-Div Date N/A Div Rate N/A Yield N/A Shares 2,166,427,308 EPS (TTM) 0.10 PE Ratio 259.40 Exchange NGS

[tmorse]

And you point is?

[HindSight2020]

"To help achieve our aggressive volume growth initiative, why don't we just offer everyone a second free pair?" <<excerpt from minutes of CC's last board meeting>>

Virtuality only extends to the point of their web site - believe me, to process hundreds of thousands of pairs of eyewear and ship them globally requires a whack of money and resources - their overhead is enormous.

I predict they will soon position themselves for acquisition to BIG 'L', BIG 'E' or both...CC needs more money and the other two need more volume to survive long term.

[Galerie]

And here's the latest...

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/coa...ica-2012-11-26

[Johns]

And here's the latest...

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/coa...ica-2012-11-26

Interesting. Also interesting to see how their stock reacted.

[HindSight2020]

Interesting. Also interesting to see how their stock reacted.

This new benefit plan is missing a crucial link (B&M network) and will never fly without one - just another strategic chess move toward acquisition. However......

By developing their own program, they are simply trying to attempt to legitimize and raise their 'industry value, stock and net worth' to gain more volume through employers before creating an arm's length transaction for the big boys to gobble up and not look dirty when it executes.

This deal has already been done - the vertical integration and synergies are endless and will most likely become a part of VSP or Davis type of network. This model would not work in Canada but may be successful in the U.S. where the market is huge and price is king.

It will be impossible to pull this off and remain non-transparent since both companies are public, so time will tell.

[Chris Ryser]

This deal has already been done - the vertical integration and synergies are endless and will most likely become a part of VSP or Davis type of network. This model would not work in Canada but may be successful in the U.S. where the market is huge and price is king.

You would not hav said that, if you would remember Canadian optical history, which was the first and only country world wide, that was dominated for over 50 years by the Hermant family's "IMPERIAL OPTICAL" before it collapsed in the mid 1980's. They just about contolled both, the retail and manufacturing end of the optical trade, with the support of politicians and governments.

They even owned the optical associations.

[idispense]

This new benefit plan is missing a crucial link (B&M network) and will never fly without one - just another strategic chess move toward acquisition. However......

By developing their own program, they are simply trying to attempt to legitimize and raise their 'industry value, stock and net worth' to gain more volume through employers before creating an arm's length transaction for the big boys to gobble up and not look dirty when it executes.

This deal has already been done - the vertical integration and synergies are endless and will most likely become a part of VSP or Davis type of network. This model would not work in Canada but may be successful in the U.S. where the market is huge and price is king.

It will be impossible to pull this off and remain non-transparent since both companies are public, so time will tell.

How did they get this far, then ?/

[HindSight2020]

How did they get this far, then ?/

???

[idispense]

???

You are suggesting they need a critical link to B & M , why ? They seem to have done quite well without it have they not? They only needed to control the Colleges or the legislation.

[HindSight2020]

You are suggesting they need a critical link to B & M , why ? They seem to have done quite well without it have they not? They only needed to control the Colleges or the legislation.

You're missing the point...forget about Canada and the Colleges for a minute...to now further up their game and offer a benefit plan requires a network of BM locations.

Yes they've done well, but...they are close to being out of a positive cash flow and through an acquisition they could be a part of a major one tomorrow (in the U.S.) since organizations like VSP and Davis already exist. It would be quite simple to implement and the bulk of the market they want is the U.S., not Canada (for now).

The fact they set up shop in BC in close proximity to a U.S. border is no mistake.

[Galerie]

You're missing the point...forget about Canada and the Colleges for a minute...to now further up their game and offer a benefit plan requires a network of BM locations.

Yes they've done well, but...they are close to being out of a positive cash flow and through an acquisition they could be a part of a major one tomorrow (in the U.S.) since organizations like VSP and Davis already exist. It would be quite simple to implement and the bulk of the market they want is the U.S., not Canada (for now).

The fact they set up shop in BC in close proximity to a U.S. border is no mistake.

But why do they need a network of BM locations? They are not looking to offer a benefit plan, they are offering a benefit plan. It's launched already.

As for being in close proximity to a U.S. border, approximately 75 per cent of Canadians are within a 100-mile radius of the U.S. border. Where else would they set up?

[idispense]

They don't need B & M , the industrial safety business model in play will work for them including the insurance benefits . Insurance companies were on their side from the beginning and before they broke the legislation. Their biggest asset was breaking down the College and Government regs, so now they can operate in the open and the flood gates will open for others to follow and fast !

This company has to grab the insurance market to survive and have a net worth and they need to be the leader in that field. They have competition in the insurance business already that is grabbing a niche piece of the pie. They must secure their portion or lose, but B & M is not part of it.

Start watching your industrial safety numbers decline over the next year and watch those numbers decline rapidly, you won't even know who moved your cheese and how .

Opticians have been silly to not insist on reg enforcement and keep paying their dues while their $$ are used against them .

Vertical integration makes sense from a frame and lens manufacturers point of view but the same holds true for insurance companies.

[HindSight2020]

But why do they need a network of BM locations? They are not looking to offer a benefit plan, they are offering a benefit plan. It's launched already.

As for being in close proximity to a U.S. border, approximately 75 per cent of Canadians are within a 100-mile radius of the U.S. border. Where else would they set up?

You're definitely missing something...and I'm too tired to explain the obvious.

[idispense]

Try explaining it after you have rested. I'd like to hear your point of view. They don't need B & M to file the claims or adjust the glasses or measure them so why do they need B & M ?

[HindSight2020]

Try explaining it after you have rested. I'd like to hear your point of view. They don't need B & M to file the claims or adjust the glasses or measure them so why do they need B & M ?

CC's customer base is bottom feeder cheap consumers looking for a great deal period. These are not people with insurance coverage or benefits (perhaps a very small percentage do) and if they do are willing to forfeit using their coverage for the best price, so in a sense people with benefits is a whole new market for CC - however...

Accepting insurance plans and having the ability to provide your own are two completely different things. Anybody that can register online with a BM location is pretty much guaranteed approval as a provider.

But, what we are discussing here is virtual online company that has developed their own policy coverage for purchase to employers/employees. Companies will not support an insurance policy that only offers its services and products through a monitor and keyboard - I dealt with HR departments for many years and trust me, they do their homework before committing to any supplier, especially when it will fully impact employees and their families. How do you pick a suitable frame for a 5 year old child with strabismus?? It requires a BM location, there's no other way.

The majority of people who have coverage are not flocking to the web - they are supporters of real 'ophthalmic professionals'. Even if it did transpire, where would the employee go when they have an issue and nobody wants to see or help him? That's right - to the HR administrator at their employer to complain about their dismay and lack of satisfaction.

So when I say they need a network of BM locations - they need to be tapped into and have access to 'real professionals' with 'real' locations - they don't need to own a chain, but they do have to be strategically aligned with this network, and if there were an acquisition and the same owner owns both the supply chain and the dispensing network - voila!

[uncut]

They don't need B & M , the industrial safety business model in play will work for them including the insurance benefits . Insurance companies were on their side from the beginning and before they broke the legislation. Their biggest asset was breaking down the College and Government regs, so now they can operate in the open and the flood gates will open for others to follow and fast !

This company has to grab the insurance market to survive and have a net worth and they need to be the leader in that field. They have competition in the insurance business already that is grabbing a niche piece of the pie. They must secure their portion or lose, but B & M is not part of it.

Start watching your industrial safety numbers decline over the next year and watch those numbers decline rapidly, you won't even know who moved your cheese and how .

Opticians have been silly to not insist on reg enforcement and keep paying their dues while their $$ are used against them .

Vertical integration makes sense from a frame and lens manufacturers point of view but the same holds true for insurance companies.

There is one problem........safety eyewear, in Canada, must be fitted and dispensed by a recognized eyecare professional, no exceptions. If it isn't, then it is not a safety product.

[HindSight2020]

They don't need B & M , the industrial safety business model in play will work for them including the insurance benefits . Insurance companies were on their side from the beginning and before they broke the legislation. Their biggest asset was breaking down the College and Government regs, so now they can operate in the open and the flood gates will open for others to follow and fast !

This company has to grab the insurance market to survive and have a net worth and they need to be the leader in that field. They have competition in the insurance business already that is grabbing a niche piece of the pie. They must secure their portion or lose, but B & M is not part of it.

Start watching your industrial safety numbers decline over the next year and watch those numbers decline rapidly, you won't even know who moved your cheese and how .

Opticians have been silly to not insist on reg enforcement and keep paying their dues while their $$ are used against them .

Vertical integration makes sense from a frame and lens manufacturers point of view but the same holds true for insurance companies.

Safety has nothing to do with this....

[idispense]

There is one problem........safety eyewear, in Canada, must be fitted and dispensed by a recognized eyecare professional, no exceptions. If it isn't, then it is not a safety product.

Where do you get the MUST from ? MUST is only meaningful if there is someone or something to back it up. Who checks ?

What organization is charged with checking the labs and who checks the dispensing of it ?

[HindSight2020]

Where do you get the MUST from ? MUST is only meaningful if there is someone or something to back it up. Who checks ?

What organization is charged with checking the labs and who checks the dispensing of it ?

As for safety eyewear being manufactured and dispensed through through professional networks, I can assure it's being done properly and above board.

[ManitobaOD]

Where do you get the MUST from ? MUST is only meaningful if there is someone or something to back it up. Who checks ?

What organization is charged with checking the labs and who checks the dispensing of it ?

idispense, your knowledge of the ophthalmic/optical industry seems either very limited or you're trying to blame someone for not doing their due diligence. Either way you come across as somewhat condescending, full of yourself and completely absent of any working knowledge of our industry.

In order for eyewear to be deemed as "safety" the manufacturing lab, its facilities, the eyeglass frame & lenses need all be validated/certified for safety use.

Furthermore, In Canada, the pertinent standard is Z94.3-2002 developed by the Canadian Standards Association (CSA). Impact performance is assessed with the 1/4" steel ball traveling at 46.5 m/sec or 152 ft/sec. Impact points that must be evaluated include the midpoint of the protector, as well as multiple frontal and lateral locations, some of which duplicate those assessed for ANSI Z87.1-2003. Other points are selected to test areas of the protector that could be vulnerable to impact such as where the lens attaches to the frame, where the temple pieces attach to the frame or where thin material sections are present. These sites will vary with the design of the product, providing a thorough evaluation of its ability to provide protection. Failure criteria are equivalent to those in ANSI Z87.1.

A manufacturer may test the products on its own, or as an option may submit products to CSA International to have them tested and thus “3rd party” certified as being in compliance. In the latter case, a product in conformance may be marked with the CSA logo, a recognized Quality Mark in Canada. It can be compared to marks such as Underwriter’s Laboratory (UL). Certain manufacturers, such as Sperian Protection (Uvex), are authorized by CSA International to test products on its behalf because their laboratories have been audited to a strict set of guidelines. This allows the CSA logo to be marked on the product after review and acceptance of the test results by CSA.

idispense I hope this sheds some light on your concern.