Coastal Sights Set on U.S. Markets

[HindSight2020]

The quote at the very end is both hilarious and hypocritical. Stay away from the Hardy Kool-Aid.

<<Setting their sights on U.S. boomers

Thursday, February 14, 2013

Vancouver-based online retailer Coastal Contacts sees great potential in the rapid rise of Americans 50 and overBRENT JANG

VANCOUVER -- At a gathering in Ottawa, Coastal Contacts Inc. president Gary Collins listened intently as two guests at his table started raving about ordering eyeglasses online.
For Mr. Collins, who served as B.C. Finance Minister from 2001-2004, the conversation last fall came as a pleasant surprise at the U.S. embassy's event for officials with experience in Canada-U.S. relations.

"I happened to notice a guy at our table and he had a black case for glasses, and it was our brand. A woman beside me wore glasses. That was ours, too," Mr. Collins recalled in an interview at Coastal's plant in Vancouver. "They were customers, and they talked about our product and service. I was just quiet and it was nice - better than me talking about politics."
Mr. Collins, who touted the importance of British Columbia's trading relationship with the United States during his time in politics, has set his sights on expanding Coastal's U.S. presence in 2013. Even though the Canadian dollar is hovering close to par with the greenback, Coastal is still able to provide good value to Americans through its Coastal.com website for U.S. consumers, he said. The Canadian website is called ClearlyContacts.ca.

Coastal founder Roger Hardy launched the company in 2000, selling contact lenses online until diversifying into eyeglasses in 2009. Since then, the company's eyeglasses category has grown rapidly, accounting for almost one-quarter of the company's $196-million in revenue in the fiscal year ended Oct. 31, 2012. Mr. Hardy, who is Coastal's chairman and chief executive officer, named Mr. Collins as the new president last August.

Coastal intends to step up its marketing in the United States in 2013, buoyed by forecasts that the number of people age 50 or over in the United States will climb roughly 19 per cent between 2010 and 2020, fuelling demand for eyeglasses. U.S. eyeglass sales nearly doubled at Coastal in its fiscal first quarter ended Jan. 31, 2013, compared with a year earlier, the company said Wednesday. First-quarter eyeglass revenue in Canada jumped 36 per cent.
Canada accounted for 32 per cent of Coastal's total revenue in the 2012 fiscal year, while 16 per cent came from the United States. The company's subsidiary in Sweden sells in overseas markets such as Europe through the LensWay brand name.

Mr. Hardy, 43, does not need eyeglasses, but Mr. Collins, 49, has started wearing reading glasses. Mr. Collins had been straining to read menus, so he knew it was time to order a pair of specs from his new employer.

In the online retailing of contact lenses, it is important for Vancouver-based Coastal to have large inventory on hand to allow workers to quickly process orders by picking from a certain prescription in stock and packing the product for shipment.

Coastal reckons that customers can save up to 20 per cent on its contact lenses, compared with brick-and-mortar retailers, while those who order eyeglasses might reap larger savings of 50 to 70 per cent. With such savings on glasses, the company is counting on winning repeat business and hoping that some customers will buy two pairs at a time.
But Coastal faces its share of challenges in marketing costs and stepped-up competition. The company lost $4.9-million in the 2012 fiscal year as it touted online promotions for getting the first pair of selected frames and standard lenses free. Some stores, such as the Bay's optical section, are offering discounts to narrow the price gap.
While traditional optical retailers say they offer better service and quality, Mr. Hardy defends his products, saying he orders premium eyeglass lenses from South Korea, Germany, France and the United States. He expects many people who obtained free glasses to return as paying customers in future.

Some institutional investors have toured Coastal's plant, located in a technology park on Vancouver's east side, and they are pleased to see automated machines reshape glass "pucks" into lenses for specific frames, Mr. Hardy said. Workers manually fit the glass lenses into frames, but the earlier automation speeds up the production process and cuts costs.
"We find that there is a real 'aha' moment for people when they come in here and say, 'Now I get it. You have to actually manufacture.' Each order is custom-made for each person in that
day, so getting the fit right and speed is part of it," Mr. Hardy said.

Coastal's Vancouver plant produces more than 4,000 pairs of eyeglasses a day for customers in North America, Australia, New Zealand and Brazil. The automated machines are capable of handling nearly 12,000 daily in Vancouver, so there is plenty of room to ramp up production.
The company sought to raise $40-million (U.S.) through an offering of common shares in November, but cancelled the plans owing to unfavourable market conditions for financing, Mr. Collins said. Still, Coastal remains keen on the large U.S. market and is well-positioned to expand its customer base south of the border in 2013. "It's a big market for us and a real opportunity," Mr. Collins said, emphasizing that he is looking ahead and not reminiscing. "I spent 14 years in politics and that was a long time. It was a great experience, but I'm happy doing what I am doing now."
*****
COASTAL CONTACTS AT A GLANCE
Business
Selling contact lenses and eyeglasses online.
Fiscal year ended Oct. 31, 2012
$196-million in revenue; $4.9-million loss.
First quarter ended Jan. 31, 2013
U.S. sales climb 95 per cent, compared with year-earlier quarter.
Employees worldwide
700
Head office
Vancouver
North American websites
Coastal.com in the United States and ClearlyContacts.ca in Canada.
Quote
"You're going to come back for the quality. You're not going to come back if the product is made cheaply and doesn't feel right. We want repeat customers." -Founder and CEO Roger Hardy>>

[idispense]

OMG,

Lets see now, Hardy has single handly knocked out an entire provinces regulatory body and politely rewrote their laws for them while selling millions more of eyeglasses and contact lenses than you probably have and he has robbed cutomers from probably every optician in 33 countires or so.

He has made laughing stock of every regulatory body out there. He has changed the entire perception of the value of eyewear in the public's mind across many nations and still you have such a bad case of anal glaucoma ?

He has single handedly made the public think we are greedy and still you don't take him seriously.

We need more leaders like you, please move on up to the big ivory tower in Toronto.

[idispense]

Sorry, I erred , its not 33 countries as stated above it's more like 150.

It amazes me how people can take this company for granted and ignore their effect on the marketplace.

This sounds like a Toronto Ivory Tower attitude, if they bury their heads deep enough under the sand and tell people its not a problem then they hope they will still be standing at the end of the mess, whereas if they actually try to enforce the law then they might mess up seriously like BC did.

Either way the attitude seems to be to ignore their accomplishments and effect in the marketplace.

[Chris Ryser]

Mr. Collins said, emphasizing that he is looking ahead and not reminiscing. "I spent 14 years in politics and that was a long time. It was a great experience, but I'm happy doing what I am doing now."

14 years in politics...........is building up a lot of connections, and you learn how to pull the strings. Coastal has used these tactics successfully so far, by influencing politics in BC to get laws changed, that degrade the opticians profession below the one of a barber.

Coastal's Vancouver plant produces more than 4,000 pairs of eyeglasses a day for customers in North America, Australia, New Zealand and Brazil. The automated machines are capable of handling nearly 12,000 daily in Vancouver, so there is plenty of room to ramp up production.

So far of the active OptiBoard members, "idispense" seems to be one of the few optical retailers on OptiBoard that fully understands the looming clouds on the conventional optical retail skye.

While here on OptiBoard a thread dealing with opticians education draws the largest responses, arguments and viewers, the warning signs to its continuing existence are mostly ignored. Maybe a thread started under the title "Is really more education needed or wanted ? ", would draw more attention.

By the way......................... would not 4000 pairs of glasses a day make Coastal the largest optical retailer in Canada ? No expansion needed if they are going to sell 3x as much, and when will that figure be reached ?

[optimensch]

no doubt they are having an effect Chris. Lots of patients I see have purchased from them or know about them, but I ask a lot of questions. I take the client to the computer screen, go on CCs site and price match them on Contacts, or even beat them. I use their site AGAINST THEM - it is actually an AMAZING marketing tool. This is AIKIDO. Use the opponents own strength against him. I NEVER lost a battle using this method, and the patients love the open, web-friendly approach. Yes, I make a smaller mark up on the contacts, but that is the new reality, and I charge a bit more for the exam. If you can't make more, well then make a bit less. So what. Adapt or die.
As far as glasses go, it really isn't that difficult either. There is a ton of product out there that can be sourced less expensively and you can choose to price a bunch of frame-lens packages at a level that will keep your client in-house.
A client who buys from CC or WP is NOT LOST to you. I have purchased shirts online and I still shop at b/m stores. The website doesnt OWN me or my retail dollar. So what if a client purchases a pair on the web? we don't own all the optical dollars they will spend in their lifetime.
Up your game, improve your online offer, every ECP should have a decent website with some message/offer that is unique and meaningful. You gotta pay to play and if you can thrive by sitting back and relaxing , you're either really lucky or about to go over a fiscal cliff.

[HindSight2020]

no doubt they are having an effect Chris. Lots of patients I see have purchased from them or know about them, but I ask a lot of questions. I take the client to the computer screen, go on CCs site and price match them on Contacts, or even beat them. I use their site AGAINST THEM - it is actually an AMAZING marketing tool. This is AIKIDO. Use the opponents own strength against him. I NEVER lost a battle using this method, and the patients love the open, web-friendly approach. Yes, I make a smaller mark up on the contacts, but that is the new reality, and I charge a bit more for the exam. If you can't make more, well then make a bit less. So what. Adapt or die.
As far as glasses go, it really isn't that difficult either. There is a ton of product out there that can be sourced less expensively and you can choose to price a bunch of frame-lens packages at a level that will keep your client in-house.
A client who buys from CC or WP is NOT LOST to you. I have purchased shirts online and I still shop at b/m stores. The website doesnt OWN me or my retail dollar. So what if a client purchases a pair on the web? we don't own all the optical dollars they will spend in their lifetime.
Up your game, improve your online offer, every ECP should have a decent website with some message/offer that is unique and meaningful. You gotta pay to play and if you can thrive by sitting back and relaxing , you're either really lucky or about to go over a fiscal cliff.

Nice to see somebody out there is embracing it by being creative and finding ways to combat it, instead of constantly complaining about it and doing nothing for themselves like most.

[idispense]

Nice to see somebody out there is embracing it by being creative and finding ways to combat it, instead of constantly complaining about it and doing nothing for themselves like most.

Why Hindsight are you embracing an attitude of don't complain , when there are options to correct this ?

Hindsight if you like the approach by optimensch of "turning the opponents strength to be used against him" then why do you embrace a College accepting membership $$ for public protectionism ?


Hindsight is your approach not encouraging illegals to continue on against the College advertisements to the public ? Are you not telling us to accept and embrace illegals when the College states otherwise ?

Why should opticians not believe in the College advertisiements to the public ? Optician membership, through self governance is approving these advertisements to the public ? What if these advertisements should prove to be false ? Isn't it the duty of self governing membership to be certain of what they advertise to the public ? Are you saying that membership should not protect the public as they advertise ? Are you saying that membership should not pursue and uphold local applicable laws even if GOOGLE and Kijiji shows us the ways to make them comply with our local applicable laws ?

Why Hindsight are you encouraging that we do not remove the tools that onliners need to reach our customers ?

Why hindsight are you so against insisting that we not fight back with the tools that GOOGLE and Kijiji offer to us to ensure they are in compliance with local applicable laws ?

If we remove the tools that all onliners use to market to our customers then we cripple their geographic reach and it can be repeated in many provinces , states, and other countries ? Why do you not support the legal options available to us that will not put us directly in harms way ?









Google offers us a simple solution
as does kijiji and many other search engines and on line marketing tools. Each of these explains to us the process to launch and file a complaint against offenders who use those marketing tools to circumvent local applicable laws. This complaint resoltion process has been used before by other and it resulted in 500 million dollar fines.

The Ontario College advertises to both the public and its membership that it is illegal in Ontario to sell eyewear over the internet. Thats a pretty bold statement.

http://www.coptont.org/PUBLICINFO/in...dispensing.asp

EYEWEAR OVER THE INTERNET IN ONTARIO
IS NOT JUST UNSAFE. IT IS ALSO ILLEGAL.They also advertise to the membership and to the public :

Only Opticians, Optometrists and Ophthalmologists are legally authorized to dispense prescription eyeglasses and contact lenses in Ontario. Don’t trust your eyes to anyone else.

http://www.coptont.org/UNAUTHORIZED/unauthorized.asp

Unauthorized Practice

Under Ontario law, no person other than a Registered Member of the College of Opticians of Ontario or the College of Optometrists of Ontario or the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario are authorized to fit and dispense eye glasses, contact lenses and subnormal vision devices to the public; Opticianry Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 34, s. 9(1). Those persons who are engaged in or who condone Unauthorized Practice place the public in harm’s way and it is important for this College and its Members to do everything possible to protect the public.

[optimensch]

Hi idispense,

But is it illegal for an Ontario resident to PURCHASE the glasses from an internet provider located in say, China? It is one thing to control the dispensers on the ground in your Jurisdiction, but if the public wants to buy this stuff online how is that going to be controlled?

For example the orders of opticians and optometrists are going to make the rules much tougher for us operating in Quebec, tougher against unlicensed people who work in opticals to so much as touch a frame to adjust a crooked temple. That's the extent to which these organizations care to act. Their "role" is to protect the public from local operators. They are going to do a great favor to the onliners, maybe unwittingly.

Unfortunately I just don't see how, in this era of tight budgets and deficits, government bodies are going to spend 2 cents enforcing rules by taking overseas operators to court in order to punish them for illegal activity in Quebec. But clamp down and menace the local professionals? sure. theyre good at that.

[idispense]

optimensch , you miss the entire point !

Remove the tools by which onliners breach our local applicable laws and you severly cripple their geographic reach and it does not matter then if those onliners are in China or on the moon. Remove the tools and they can't reach our "public protectionsim customer base".

They need the marketing tools they have to reach the customer cheaply but those same marketing tool companies also know their customers may be using those tools in contravention of our local applicable laws and no entity is allowed to breach and violate local applicable laws.
Stop those marketing tool companies from profiting by supporting others to violate our laws and we stop illegals no matter where they are and then it does not matter if the orders were originating in Ontario or China or BC .

Stop buying into that BS of tight budgets , the laws are the laws no matter the economic hardship. You are supporting lawlessness if you even think for a moment that economic times should dictate the application of laws.

Those that put forth the argument of "where does the order take place " , " and "the internet can't be stopped " have put no thought into a solution that upholds local applicable laws.

Those that believe and buy into the theory of "where does an order take place" are saying that we can not uphold any form of law because the internet exists .

Think about the BS contained in that theory .

If there is any truth in that theory then there is no point in anyone paying membership dues to any College of any description.


That theory is simple BS

[optimensch]

Idispense,

I am not a lawyer, and don't pretend to know all the nuances. This is a matter of international law, and our local yokel professional orders were created long before the internet came along. But if you think our local board is going to take Google or Bing to court (if that's what your are even suggesting, since that is how I read your comment) in a matter which will take many years and drag to the supreme court possibly, I wouldnt hold my breath. Consumers want the web. The public (which is ultimately who decides) will no way no how side with reducing consumers options in a matter that frankly they dont see as a public safety or health issue. Were this about drugs or medical devices it would possibly be another matter. But glasses? No chance.

[optimensch]

in theory I agree with your position, it is sound. It is the practical application that gets dirty. If the public learns that "greedy monopolistic" opticians and optometrists (not even real doctors!! oh my...) want to block their access to cheap eyewear, I know which side I'd rather represent as a lawyer (if I were a greedy opportunistic lawyer).

[optimensch]

by the way, and slightly off topic but related, I am pretty certain that very few pure online opticals, if any, are profitable (or ever will be). But, one company I can guarantee is making boatloads of money from online optical and is phenomenally successful at it, is......................one guess. And it rhymes with KOOGLE. that'll be the only hint. And the boys at that company will not take kindly to their cheese being moved. Even just the optical cheese.
Every time somenone clicks through to an onliner, whether they purchase or not, CHA CHING CHA CHING> forget about it. They will lawyer up and can go deep. Do not stand at the beach in defiance of a tsunami you know is coming. Get the hell to higher ground regroup and fight a different battle.

[idispense]

Idispense,

I am not a lawyer, and don't pretend to know all the nuances. This is a matter of international law, and our local yokel professional orders were created long before the internet came along. But if you think our local board is going to take Google or Bing to court (if that's what your are even suggesting, since that is how I read your comment) in a matter which will take many years and drag to the supreme court possibly, I wouldnt hold my breath. Consumers want the web. The public (which is ultimately who decides) will no way no how side with reducing consumers options in a matter that frankly they dont see as a public safety or health issue. Were this about drugs or medical devices it would possibly be another matter. But glasses? No chance.

This is local applicable law not international law. International laws have nothing to do with this.

[idispense]

by the way, and slightly off topic but related, I am pretty certain that very few pure online opticals, if any, are profitable (or ever will be). But, one company I can guarantee is making boatloads of money from online optical and is phenomenally successful at it, is......................one guess. And it rhymes with KOOGLE. that'll be the only hint. And the boys at that company will not take kindly to their cheese being moved. Even just the optical cheese.
Every time somenone clicks through to an onliner, whether they purchase or not, CHA CHING CHA CHING> forget about it. They will lawyer up and can go deep. Do not stand at the beach in defiance of a tsunami you know is coming. Get the hell to higher ground regroup and fight a different battle.

No entity is above the law ! None ! Not you or I or all of the Colleges ! None are above the law. That's why they have lost this same battle before and why precedent exists.

[HindSight2020]

Why Hindsight are you embracing an attitude of don't complain , when there are options to correct this ?

Hindsight if you like the approach by optimensch of "turning the opponents strength to be used against him" then why do you embrace a College accepting membership $$ for public protectionism ?


Hindsight is your approach not encouraging illegals to continue on against the College advertisements to the public ? Are you not telling us to accept and embrace illegals when the College states otherwise ?

Why should opticians not believe in the College advertisiements to the public ? Optician membership, through self governance is approving these advertisements to the public ? What if these advertisements should prove to be false ? Isn't it the duty of self governing membership to be certain of what they advertise to the public ? Are you saying that membership should not protect the public as they advertise ? Are you saying that membership should not pursue and uphold local applicable laws even if GOOGLE and Kijiji shows us the ways to make them comply with our local applicable laws ?

Why Hindsight are you encouraging that we do not remove the tools that onliners need to reach our customers ?

Why hindsight are you so against insisting that we not fight back with the tools that GOOGLE and Kijiji offer to us to ensure they are in compliance with local applicable laws ?

If we remove the tools that all onliners use to market to our customers then we cripple their geographic reach and it can be repeated in many provinces , states, and other countries ? Why do you not support the legal options available to us that will not put us directly in harms way ?









Google offers us a simple solution
as does kijiji and many other search engines and on line marketing tools. Each of these explains to us the process to launch and file a complaint against offenders who use those marketing tools to circumvent local applicable laws. This complaint resoltion process has been used before by other and it resulted in 500 million dollar fines.

The Ontario College advertises to both the public and its membership that it is illegal in Ontario to sell eyewear over the internet. Thats a pretty bold statement.

http://www.coptont.org/PUBLICINFO/in...dispensing.asp

EYEWEAR OVER THE INTERNET IN ONTARIO
IS NOT JUST UNSAFE. IT IS ALSO ILLEGAL.They also advertise to the membership and to the public :

Only Opticians, Optometrists and Ophthalmologists are legally authorized to dispense prescription eyeglasses and contact lenses in Ontario. Don’t trust your eyes to anyone else.

http://www.coptont.org/UNAUTHORIZED/unauthorized.asp

Unauthorized Practice

Under Ontario law, no person other than a Registered Member of the College of Opticians of Ontario or the College of Optometrists of Ontario or the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario are authorized to fit and dispense eye glasses, contact lenses and subnormal vision devices to the public; Opticianry Act, 1991, S.O. 1991, c. 34, s. 9(1). Those persons who are engaged in or who condone Unauthorized Practice place the public in harm’s way and it is important for this College and its Members to do everything possible to protect the public.

I'm not against it all - rather I applaud others and myself that are emracing it and taking matters into our own hands legally ad doing well.

[HindSight2020]

And its not illegal provided it passes through a licenced person's hands prior to shipping.

[idispense]

Back to square one, that person would have to show on the Ontario Public registries.

[Chris Ryser]

Whatever you are discussing is getting you nowhere. In the meantime the on liners are steamrolling ahead..............and if you ever would succeed by initiating any action to prohibit their business it would be too late.

Find a way to get present and future customers that are switching to on line purchases back to your store to get your services which they badly need. When will I see the first add that offers services for optical on line purchasers to correct and service these products.

[HindSight2020]

Whatever you are discussing is getting you nowhere. In the meantime the on liners are steamrolling ahead..............and if you ever would succeed by initiating any action to prohibit their business it would be too late.

Find a way to get present and future customers that are switching to on line purchases back to your store to get your services which they badly need. When will I see the first add that offers services for optical on line purchasers to correct and service these products.

+1.

[optimensch]

I have thought a lot about that - an ad (even just in the window) saying something like "web friendly" or "bring us your frames, even purchased on line" to fit the lenses, adust etc.

It is a matter of finding the right verbiage. It takes some cojones too, I imagine the licensing body deciding it is time to give me a thorough full body cavity search type of inspection if I do that ;). who knows.

[optimensch]

On that note, I remember a story told to me by my dad (od as well) - back in the mid 70s, he did the UNTHINKABLE. He put a VISA sticker in his window, indicating he accepted this new fangled plastic payment method. Lord have mercy, that was an outrageous act to the governors of the profession. He received a registered letter, a reprimand and was advised to take down the offensive commercial notice or face the disciplinary committee.

[idispense]

I have thought a lot about that - an ad (even just in the window) saying something like "web friendly" or "bring us your frames, even purchased on line" to fit the lenses, adust etc.

It is a matter of finding the right verbiage. It takes some cojones too, I imagine the licensing body deciding it is time to give me a thorough full body cavity search type of inspection if I do that ;). who knows.

If on line dispensers do not show up on your Colleges public registry then would it not be the Colleges turn to have that search and forensic accounting done?

That public registry is proof of the job they do or do not do.