Luxottica, Essilor in 46 billion euro merger deal to create eyewear giant: Sources

[Chris Ryser]

Comments deleted as the following link wants to make you pay before seeing the article.

See all of it, at : ===========>

https://www.ft.com/content/1c222c5c-...5-9e5580d6e5fb

[Chris Ryser]

The latest news and probably the biggest ever, in the optical industry is trickling towards an end.

It was 7 days of surprises, one after the other and have been recorded on OptiBoard for all to see, even in a few years from now.

We are now back to find answers to old questions concerning the way of life of the conventional optical retail end.

To sum it all up look again at this statement by Essilor:

Jan 17, 2017 7:55am

While Asia and Latin America are seen by the companies as potential growth markets, e-commerce will also be a top priority.

1) The merged corporation will own about 17 online optical retailers, and most probably will expand into that field by taking over more of the established online opticals.


2) The over 1,000 LensCrafter stores in the USA and Canada will also become service centers for their online outlets, without having to pass on the patients to independent opticians.

Any independent optician should think over just these two above points which would seem to a be natural, and easy and not costly solution for the newly merged corporation and could become a massive competitor to the conventional optician.

[Chris Ryser]

Posts : 126

Views : 7,714

Now that all the news is in the past and the subject is open for any comments or suggestions.

There are still plenty views on the counter, but no comments by active OptiBoard posters.

Subject: Total News Count by Google :
About 5,620 results (0.70 seconds)

[Chris Ryser]

Roger Hardy the former owner of “Coastal Eyeglasses” that he sold to ESSILOR, has done it again to another major Corporation, just a few short years later.



RETAIL & MANUFACTURING

Walmart acquisitions point to increased competition in online shoe selling Battle of e-commerce goliaths could hurt smaller players

By Glen Korstrom | Jan. 15, 2017, 6:55 p.m.


Recent moves by Walmart to compete with Amazon.com for online shoppers could make life more challenging for mid-sized e-commerce players, such as Vancouver’s Shoes.com – but that competition could also make them takeover targets, say analysts.

Walmart (NYSE:WMT) announced January 5 that it had shelled outUS$70 million to buy Shoebuy.com – a move that many interpreted as a shotacross the bow of Amazon.com (Nasdaq:AMZN), which operates the shoe e-commercedivision Zappos.com.

Zappos Stopped shipping to Canada In 2011 but has a foothold on a sizable chunk of the U.S. online shoe market.

Walmart Would not reveal how much Shoebuy generates in annual revenue, but the magazine Internet Retailer, in 2013, estimated its sales to be around US$315 million.
That’sa similar size to Vancouver’s Shoes.com, given that its CEO, Roger Hardy, told Business in Vancouver in mid-2015 that his company had an annual revenue run rate of $320 million, and that he aimed for that rate to rise to $1 billion by 2020.The company has since stopped giving revenue projections.

Shoebuywill be part of Walmart’s Jet.com e-commerce subsidiary – a venture thatWalmart bought in September for US$3.3 billion.

The Shoebuy acquisition is also expected to be part of “more than US$1 billion in global e-commerce initiatives” that Walmart will make in 2017, according to thebig-box giant’s 2016 annual report.

“Walmart could crush almost any competitor if they wished to doso,” said Retail Insider Media owner and retail analyst Craig Patterson. “If Walmart is serious about these e-commerce acquisitions, and you would think that they would be, then all online players should be concerned.”

Wal Mart’s Dominance as the world’s largest retailer is based on its US$482.1 billion in revenue during the 2016 fiscal year, which ended last January.

Its Earnings reports do not break out overall e-commerce sales, but estimates based on e Marketer data peg total sales at US$13.5 billion, or less than 3% of Walmart’s overall sales.

Incontrast, Amazon.com generated US$128 billion in the four quarters up untilNovember, with the lion’s share of that revenue coming from e-commerce.

Amazon.com also has the edge on Walmart when it comes to market capitalization – acompany’s total market value – which can provide a key measure in determiningwhether a target company is worth being bought for shares instead of cash.

Amazon.com market capitalization is US$378.2 billion, or about80% more than Walmart’s US$209.7 billion value.

The revenue and market capitalization metrics combine to makeclear that investors value online sales much more than bricks-and-mortar sales in determining a company’s worth.

DIG360 retail analyst Raymond Shoolman suggested that both Walmart and Amazon.com could be interested in buying Shoes.com as a way to buttress their online-shoe-sale market share.

“Walmart Is sending out a signal that they are developing their e-commerce business and most recently they’ve chosen to focus on shoes,” he said.

“They’ve Overhauled their software systems for e-commerce and they’re really serious about competing. They’re worried about prospects for their bricks-and-mortar business in the next five to 10 years.”
Shoes.com, meanwhile, has started to open bricks-and-mortar locations, such as one on Burrard Street near Robson Street.

It has contracted out much of its warehouse needs so its staff count has fallen to about 200 today from about 650 in 2015.

Shoes.compresident Brad Wilson told BIV that he did not think Walmart’s Shoebuyacquisition would affect Shoes.com much.

Walmart’s Acquisition is a continuation of consolidation in the online-shoe-selling sector.

Shoes.comhas its roots in Hardy simultaneously buying Vancouver’s Shoeme.ca and Seattle’s OnlineShoes.com in mid-2014 and running the companies under one umbrella.


In December of that year, he bought Shoes.com, which was then the online division of St. Louis-based Brown Shoe Co. (NYSE:BWS).

Hardy Then merged all the brands in 2015.
His penchant for acquisitions was also on display when Shoes.com bought socks manufacturer Richer Poorer in late 2015.

Source: ==============è

https://www.biv.com/article/2017/1/r...creased-compet

[Chris Ryser]

Shoebuywill be part of Walmart’s Jet.com e-commerce subsidiary – a venture thatWalmart bought in September for US$3.3 billion.
The Shoebuy acquisition is also expected to be part of “more than US$1 billion in global e-commerce initiatives” that Walmart will make in 2017, according to thebig-box giant’s 2016 annual report.

Will that new powerful company to start this year 2017 include an optical department ?

[Plausible]

Isn't there a rule against bumping your own thread? Last 9 posts have been by the thread starter and I think we all get the jist....................

[Jason H]

Yes, please, enough. We get it.

[drk]

Ok, I'll juice it a little.

So, I think Chris is providing "context".

The main point: everyone is dealing with e-commerce. Shoes, glasses, etc. ad nauseum. I guess that's somewhat comforting.

Big companies will not miss the boat. Example: essilux.

Ergo, get used to it.

[drk]

Which builds his main point:

If glasses are going to be sold by the bushel full online, who's going to service them?


My point is that:
a. they're Rx devices, not shoes
b. even if they were not Rx devices, they require custom measurements and aftercare

I still think we don't go along with it, as a profession. It's antithetical to what we are.

[DanLiv]

The main point: everyone is dealing with e-commerce. Shoes, glasses, etc. ad nauseum. I guess that's somewhat comforting.

Big companies will not miss the boat. Example: essilux.

a. they're Rx devices, not shoes
b. even if they were not Rx devices, they require custom measurements and aftercare

The big companies are in the business of dissuading the populace of exactly your 2 points. 100 years ago there were oodles of tailors, cobblers, jewelers, apothecaries, all ultimately providing products swaddled in extensive knowledge and service. At the time there was just no other way to get those things. Now there is, and all of those things can be casually and easily obtained completely divested from service; they have been commoditized.

There are of course still tailors, cobblers, and jewelers, but they serve only the custom niche market. Every tailor, cobbler, or jeweler will have a great list of reasons you should buy from them and how much superior their product and the surrounding service is than what you get in the mall or online. And I believe them. However, except in a rare case I doubt I will ever buy a tailored suit, custom made shoes, or bespoke jewely. I will buy off the rack, online from shoe vendors, and at the retail jewelry depots. What I get will not be the same, but it's good enough for my level of interest in those things, especially given the price gap. I don't disparage those custom things as overpriced, they ought to cost whatever people who want it will pay and whatever it takes to keep purveyors in business. But the good stuff just isn't worth it to *me*, I'm not their demographic.

Eyeglasses are halfway through the journey to the same result. There are lots of people for whom the quality and comfort of their vision just isn't a big priority, no matter how much we stamp our feet. They want a simple and easy solution to their vision needs, we aren't giving it to them, so there's the commodity market. Will the -1.00 sph OU who buys Warby Parker's enjoy an inexpensive, fun, easy vision solution? Yeah, probably. If $95 glasses is what they want, I let them, they are not my demographic. We still have enough demographic at this time in the journey to keep us plenty busy, but there is no long term solution that will prevent the opticians of tomorrow from becoming like the tailors, cobblers, and jewelers or today. We can't stop it, it's the inexorable progress of technology and economy. There will be a lot fewer of us in the future, and those that survive will be the ones that develop their niche and make themselves indispensable to those customers.

[Lelarep]

...I still think we don't go along with it, as a profession. It's antithetical to what we are.

I wonder at what point fighting the tide of inevitability changes from being honorable to being insane...

I look forward to dancing on the grave of your luddite ideals in the not too distant future.

[drk]

You're weird.

[Lelarep]

You're weird.

Flatterer.

[Chris Ryser]

Which builds his main point:

If glasses are going to be sold by the bushel full online, who's going to service them?


My point is that:
a. they're Rx devices, not shoes
b. even if they were not Rx devices, they require custom measurements and aftercare

I still think we don't go along with it, as a profession. It's antithetical to what we are.

drk start thinking hard,........................

It will be a totally natural, to service on line sold glasses at the newly acquired, over 1,000 store chain called "LensCrafters" within the USA and Canada. You might have heard of them.

They are well established and functioning, and can assume this new function at the stroke of a pen. They will charge a fee to the public, for servicing online purchased glasses which is also a natural. They now already own 17 of the larger online opticals.

So they will be available on a computerized plan for a service charge, over their continent wide area:

Preservice: Taking needed measurements before purchase on line.

After Service: Checking, adjusting and follow ups on the same plan just for that.

This will be continent wide, and all that is easily verified on their own corporation internet, and fully valid on a national or geographic level depending on the level the user has chosen and paid.

Walmart is now planning to enter the online market big time, over the next few months, and if they will sell Rx glasses on line which is just possible by now, and will follow above system, and declare their opticals also as service areas for online purchases, against a fee, and you will have a total service area that well covers the continent without you being part of it.

[Chris Ryser]

I still think we don't go along with it, as a profession. It's antithetical to what we are.

Goal of newly merged company

ONLINE FOCUS

Both companies have been grappling with slowing sales growth, hit by weakness in North America, and face rising competition from cheaper rivals and the challenge of online distribution.

While Asia and Latin America are seen by the companies as potential growth markets, e-commerce will also be a top priority.

source : ===========>

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-es...-idUSKBN14Z110

[drk]

OK, Chris, you have me ready to "mansplain" your concept to us unwashed masses.

I think it may have some merit.

Objective: Continue to provide materials and services

Strategy: Decouple materials and services pricing

Tactics: Begin servicing outside jobs. Pre- and after-service. Establish a fee schedule. Get customers used to paying for services. Then offer materials, as well, at "suddenly" competitive prices.

That might just work.

[drk]

The fact is that any optician can compete on materials price, if there are no professional services involved.

The problem has been the extreme shock of decoupling the services and the materials.

If we use this online piracy as an opportunity to decouple, then maybe that's lemonade.

[optical24/7]

You....

Will not....

Win.....

Competing on....


Price!


.

[drk]

Doomsday scenario, only 24/7.

[Stanley1993]

So what I clearly understand is that I need to develop my business to take advantage of the new opportunities presented by the WEB based consumer. Like most everything the omni channel is developing - except as it appears in the independent optometry channel. How do we develop this? Who can we partner with to help us stay relevant to the emerging consumer? How can I secure my place?

stan

[Chris Ryser]

Thread
Luxottica, Essilor in 46 billion euro merger deal to create eyewear giant: Sources

Started by Chris Ryser, 01-15-2017 11:32 PM

·Replies:....144….Views: 8,834, ..Stanley 1993, _.01-26-2017, 11:39

Above results have been achieved within a time period of some full 10 x 24 hour days, plus 30 minutes. If there would not have been some interest even after a few days the thread would have died, but reaching that number in that short time period was encouraging.

All this without any significant posts, by the general OptiBoard membership, which has mostly either just watched or not, with the exception of a few more interested parties, that participatet.

For the last 2 days this thread was listed number 6 of a few hundred newspapers, on Google, under “news of the largest optical merger “.

[Chris Ryser]

OK, Chris, you have me ready to "mansplain" your concept to us unwashed masses.

I think it may have some merit.

Objective: Continue to provide materials and services

Strategy: Decouple materials and services pricing

Tactics: Begin servicing outside jobs. Pre- and after-service. Establish a fee schedule. Get customers used to paying for services. Then offer materials, as well, at "suddenly" competitive prices.

That might just work.

Thank you drk.........................

I will get back to this thread as soon as I can , and respond in my way, which will be probably by tomorrow.

[rbaker]

[QUOTE=DanLiv;532952]The big companies are in the business of dissuading the populace of exactly your 2 points. 100 years ago there were oodles of tailors, cobblers, jewelers, apothecaries, all ultimately providing products swaddled in extensive knowledge and service. At the time there was just no other way to get those things. Now there is, and all of those things can be casually and easily obtained completely divested from service; they have been commoditized.

There are of course still tailors, cobblers, and jewelers, but they serve only the custom niche market. Every tailor, cobbler, or jeweler will have a great list of reasons you should buy from them and how much superior their product and the surrounding service is than what you get in the mall or online. And I believe them. However, except in a rare case I doubt I will ever buy a tailored suit, custom made shoes, or bespoke jewely. I will buy off the rack, online from shoe vendors, and at the retail jewelry depots. What I get will not be the same, but it's good enough for my level of interest in those things, especially given the price gap. I don't disparage those custom things as overpriced, they ought to cost whatever people who want it will pay and whatever it takes to keep purveyors in business. But the good stuff just isn't worth it to *me*, I'm not their demographic.[/QUOTE]

I still wear a pair of boots that I had made in 1974 by Peter Limmer up in Intervale, NH at the princely cost of $350.00. We will be driving the motor up that way this summer and I will bring the boots along as they need resoling for the third time in the past 43 years. I will be wearing a pair of $8.00 flip flops from Walmart for most of the trip but I'll be lucky if they last the week. There is footwear and there is footwear.

The point is, there is a need for both Limmer boots and flip flops and there is a place in the market for both. The pendulum has, in recent years, been swinging to the flip flop side of the arc but the point is; as an optician or optometrist what do you want to sell? Limmer boots or flip flops.

If you really know your optical cookies and are dedicated to providing the highest level of customer service and have sufficient business acumen you can be a Peter Limmer.

[Chris Ryser]

The point is, there is a need for both Limmer boots and flip flops and there is a place in the market for both. The pendulum has, in recent years, been swinging to the flip flop side of the arc but the point is; as an optician or optometrist what do you want to sell? Limmer boots or flip flops.

If you really know your optical cookies and are dedicated to providing the highest level of customer service and have sufficient business acumen you can be a Peter Limmer.

There is a small sector left on the market for the Peter Limmers boot lovers, that is a fact. They can afford the best, want the best, and buy the best, and sell the best.

Dick, You should actually try to find somebody that will sell you a brand new pair of high class boots in the same category, which would probably cost you $ 750.00 on today's market, instead of having the old 47 year old ones re-soled.

Today's optical fashions are changing much faster than ever, that is also the goal of the large corporations. If the customer does not change fast enough, let them fall apart.

Since I had my cataract done a few years ago I can now wear some of the glasses from the old times because the Rx fits and the frames are the latest style again

Even new optical cookies do not taste the same as they did some time ago.

[Chris Ryser]

OK, Chris, you have me ready to "mansplain" your concept to us unwashed masses.

I think it may have some merit.

Objective: Continue to provide materials and services

Strategy: Decouple materials and services pricing

Tactics: Begin servicing outside jobs. Pre- and after-service. Establish a fee schedule. Get customers used to paying for services. Then offer materials, as well, at "suddenly" competitive prices.

That might just work.

If I put myself into the thinking process of today's electronics loving purchaser, I would appreciate that.

I would or could be tempted to purchase online, do it and hope the glasses would fit.

However if they don't, I can also go to the optical retailer and pay him/her to fix what is not perfect for the charge of their service.

The following time when glasses are needed I can get them at a similar price directly from them, plus the cost to service them.

All of it in the same place makes sense.