Is Oakley ON crack ?

Quoted message said:

I am not here to [censored] about M-frmaes braking ( which I have had ) but
the overall pricing of Oakley's. Between the frame braking problems and
the OUTRAGEOUS PRICING of there sun glasses, THEY ARE LOSING CUSTOMERS
FAST. (HINT, HINT for OAKLEY.) Also the rude " I am doing you a favor"
attitude of their Boca Raton stores sales staff.

I dont get it, stop using flashy names like "Iridium coated" or
titaniam, THEY ARE PLASTIC !! Like the comedian Ron White side, "I like
em, but I dont Love em".

Only a Californian company could gouge people $200, $300 or $400 !!
FOR A PAIR OF PLASTIC GLASSES !!

They BETTER HAVE A LIFETIME WARRANTY !!

I would love to see an acurate, complete cost breakdown of the
manufacturing of their glasses. I am sure the profit margin is well
over 100%.

I am off to the local convienience store for a $10 pair.

Signed.
A FORMER OAKLEY CUSTOMER.

So don't buy them!

BTW the "normal" mark up on prescription optics is well OVER 100%.

While Oakley is not the only maker of high end sunglasses I have found
their optical quality to be excellent.

So, like for many other products you need to make a personal choice.

SInce you are going to reply like a rude ASS - I no longer buy them,
that was the point of the post. It's amazing people have that kind of
money to waste knowingly the markup is over 100%, now who is the fool ?
....just to look cool ?

Quoted message said:

SInce you are going to reply like a rude ASS - I no longer buy them,
that was the point of the post. It's amazing people have that kind of
money to waste knowingly the markup is over 100%, now who is the fool ?
...just to look cool ?

Duh! The markup is the same on your $10 pair. Do you understand
percentages?

Rude ASS. Now that cuts to the quick. On this NG I'm usually only a
dumbass.

And I really like your ability to rhyme.

Understandably, Precentages aside, I can live with spending $10, It
infuriates me to spend $200 and then have them break with normal use.
Especially with a 1 year warranty. True, maybe slightly better optics
than the cheap brands, but the $10 puppies, get the job done.

Like you said personal choice.

Quoted message said:

Understandably, Precentages aside, I can live with spending $10, It
infuriates me to spend $200 and then have them break with normal use.
Especially with a 1 year warranty. True, maybe slightly better optics
than the cheap brands, but the $10 puppies, get the job done.

Like you said personal choice.

Ok but now all kidding aside.
Make sure you get glasses with excellent UV protection. I grew up never
wearing sunglasses. Probably(one cannot be sure but...) related to that
I developed cataracts in both eyes requiring surgery. Probably related
to the surgery I developed a detached retina. That required big time
surgery.

I appreciate the advice. I am sorry to hear about the eyes. Detached
retina is pretty serious stuff. . Being in Florida, its hell on the
eyes. I read and studied quite a bit on optical lens coating, glass and
protection from UV and other light emitting rays. In the end, most sun
glasses, even the cheapies, must meet a certain standard for them to be
labeled and approved as UV protection. I am sure there are a few cheap
import brands out there that label as UV protectorant or polarized that
are not. Those are pretty easy to tell just by trying them on. Yes the
Oakley's have a good optic to protect but they lack in the durability
quality. Especially the frames, nosegards, etc.. If they had a lifetime
warranty, I would clench my teeth and pony up the $$ for another pair
of Oakley's. Raybans and other high-end sun glasses follow not far
behind the Oakley model.

After reading your post, it gives food for thought, for all, on eye
protection.

Quoted message said:

I appreciate the advice. I am sorry to hear about the eyes. Detached
retina is pretty serious stuff. . Being in Florida, its hell on the
eyes. I read and studied quite a bit on optical lens coating, glass and
protection from UV and other light emitting rays. In the end, most sun
glasses, even the cheapies, must meet a certain standard for them to be
labeled and approved as UV protection. I am sure there are a few cheap
import brands out there that label as UV protectorant or polarized that
are not. Those are pretty easy to tell just by trying them on. Yes the
Oakley's have a good optic to protect but they lack in the durability
quality. Especially the frames, nosegards, etc.. If they had a lifetime
warranty, I would clench my teeth and pony up the $$ for another pair
of Oakley's. Raybans and other high-end sun glasses follow not far
behind the Oakley model.

After reading your post, it gives food for thought, for all, on eye
protection.

A couple more things. Check out how the "el cheapo" glasses will break
(or not) when hit by flying debris or in a fall. The last thing you
want is sharps lens shards going into your eye.

I'm surprised that your Oakley frames failed before the lenses. My
problem is that my lenses get scratched beyond use long before the
frames go. So, I prefer those models with interchangable lenses.

BTW have you looked at Smiths Sliders 01 ? They seem to now be
discontinued and while they were $109 thye are no on line for ~$50 with
three sets of lenses. I've used these with good results for a couple of
years. Of course, I manage to scratch the lenses but am able to easily
get replacements.

gds said:

A couple more things. Check out how the "el
cheapo" glasses will break
(or not) when hit by flying debris or in a fall.

How do you check that out?

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

Quoted message said:

How do you check that out?

JT

Well! Break them, of course.
Actually that is part of my point, many of the more expensive brands
publish data on how their lenses fare, this is almost impossible to
find on the less epxensive models.

gds said:

Quoted message said:

I appreciate the advice. I am sorry to hear about the eyes. Detached
retina is pretty serious stuff. . Being in Florida, its hell on the
eyes. I read and studied quite a bit on optical lens coating, glass and
protection from UV and other light emitting rays. In the end, most sun
glasses, even the cheapies, must meet a certain standard for them to be
labeled and approved as UV protection. I am sure there are a few cheap
import brands out there that label as UV protectorant or polarized that
are not. Those are pretty easy to tell just by trying them on. Yes the
Oakley's have a good optic to protect but they lack in the durability
quality. Especially the frames, nosegards, etc.. If they had a lifetime
warranty, I would clench my teeth and pony up the $$ for another pair
of Oakley's. Raybans and other high-end sun glasses follow not far
behind the Oakley model.

After reading your post, it gives food for thought, for all, on eye
protection.

A couple more things. Check out how the "el cheapo" glasses will break
(or not) when hit by flying debris or in a fall. The last thing you
want is sharps lens shards going into your eye.

I'm surprised that your Oakley frames failed before the lenses. My
problem is that my lenses get scratched beyond use long before the
frames go. So, I prefer those models with interchangable lenses.

BTW have you looked at Smiths Sliders 01 ? They seem to now be
discontinued and while they were $109 thye are no on line for ~$50 with
three sets of lenses. I've used these with good results for a couple of
years. Of course, I manage to scratch the lenses but am able to easily
get replacements.

You can get Gargoyles which are pretty indestructible unless you step,
or sit on them. They do a great job blocking wind and [censored] from your
eyes and are just as good for UV and optically for under $75. I started
using them because the AF was using them as safety/shooting glasses.
They work great for that and on both the motorcycle and bicycle.
Had good luck in the past with getting the few I've broken replaced
for a very reasonable cost. I seem to remember $25 for a standard pair
and $35 for their top of the line at the time.
Unfortunately they are getting harder to find so mail order might be a
better option.
Bill C

We had a bunch of glasses made up for OBRA that had the OBRA logo on the
corner of the lens. These were safety glasses so the breakage issue was
good. They have good UV protection and I have found them to have good
optics. OBRA made a marginal profit selling them for $10 a pair. Basically
the Oakleys are not significantly different. Given that they are producing
LOTS more I would imagine that their mark up after costs of manufacture is
probably closer to 1000% or more.

At any rate, if you want some OBRA sunglasses we still have a few. Our
marketing tag was "You are a whole lot less [censored] when you leave them
on top of your car."

--
Mike Murray

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

gds said:

Quoted message said:

I appreciate the advice. I am sorry to hear about the eyes. Detached
retina is pretty serious stuff. . Being in Florida, its hell on the
eyes. I read and studied quite a bit on optical lens coating, glass and
protection from UV and other light emitting rays. In the end, most sun
glasses, even the cheapies, must meet a certain standard for them to be
labeled and approved as UV protection. I am sure there are a few cheap
import brands out there that label as UV protectorant or polarized that
are not. Those are pretty easy to tell just by trying them on. Yes the
Oakley's have a good optic to protect but they lack in the durability
quality. Especially the frames, nosegards, etc.. If they had a lifetime
warranty, I would clench my teeth and pony up the $$ for another pair
of Oakley's. Raybans and other high-end sun glasses follow not far
behind the Oakley model.

After reading your post, it gives food for thought, for all, on eye
protection.

A couple more things. Check out how the "el cheapo" glasses will break
(or not) when hit by flying debris or in a fall. The last thing you
want is sharps lens shards going into your eye.

I'm surprised that your Oakley frames failed before the lenses. My
problem is that my lenses get scratched beyond use long before the
frames go. So, I prefer those models with interchangable lenses.

BTW have you looked at Smiths Sliders 01 ? They seem to now be
discontinued and while they were $109 thye are no on line for ~$50 with
three sets of lenses. I've used these with good results for a couple of
years. Of course, I manage to scratch the lenses but am able to easily
get replacements.

You can get Gargoyles which are pretty indestructible unless you step,
or sit on them. They do a great job blocking wind and [censored] from your
eyes and are just as good for UV and optically for under $75. I started
using them because the AF was using them as safety/shooting glasses.
They work great for that and on both the motorcycle and bicycle.
Had good luck in the past with getting the few I've broken replaced
for a very reasonable cost. I seem to remember $25 for a standard pair
and $35 for their top of the line at the time.
Unfortunately they are getting harder to find so mail order might be a
better option.
Bill C

Bolle Rogues are very good and can be had from a number of sources for under
$50. I use a similar Bolle with a prescription insert when not using Rudy
Project and contacts. The Rudy Project glasses are very well made. I've had
problems in the past with O.

B. Lafferty said:

"Bill C" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

gds said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> I appreciate the advice. I am sorry to hear about the eyes. Detached
> retina is pretty serious stuff. . Being in Florida, its hell on the
> eyes. I read and studied quite a bit on optical lens coating, glass and
> protection from UV and other light emitting rays. In the end, most sun
> glasses, even the cheapies, must meet a certain standard for them to be
> labeled and approved as UV protection. I am sure there are a few cheap
> import brands out there that label as UV protectorant or polarized that
> are not. Those are pretty easy to tell just by trying them on. Yes the
> Oakley's have a good optic to protect but they lack in the durability
> quality. Especially the frames, nosegards, etc.. If they had a lifetime
> warranty, I would clench my teeth and pony up the $$ for another pair
> of Oakley's. Raybans and other high-end sun glasses follow not far
> behind the Oakley model.
>
> After reading your post, it gives food for thought, for all, on eye
> protection.

A couple more things. Check out how the "el cheapo" glasses will break
(or not) when hit by flying debris or in a fall. The last thing you
want is sharps lens shards going into your eye.

I'm surprised that your Oakley frames failed before the lenses. My
problem is that my lenses get scratched beyond use long before the
frames go. So, I prefer those models with interchangable lenses.

BTW have you looked at Smiths Sliders 01 ? They seem to now be
discontinued and while they were $109 thye are no on line for ~$50 with
three sets of lenses. I've used these with good results for a couple of
years. Of course, I manage to scratch the lenses but am able to easily
get replacements.

You can get Gargoyles which are pretty indestructible unless you step,
or sit on them. They do a great job blocking wind and [censored] from your
eyes and are just as good for UV and optically for under $75. I started
using them because the AF was using them as safety/shooting glasses.
They work great for that and on both the motorcycle and bicycle.
Had good luck in the past with getting the few I've broken replaced
for a very reasonable cost. I seem to remember $25 for a standard pair
and $35 for their top of the line at the time.
Unfortunately they are getting harder to find so mail order might be a
better option.
Bill C

The Rudy Project glasses are very well made. I've had

Quoted message said:

problems in the past with O.

My son's Rudy project glasses have been seriously used and abused for
years and have survived really well. I'd have no problem recommending
them on durability, quality and convenience in changing lenses. Great
glasses in my experience.
Bill C

Mike Murray said:

We had a bunch of glasses made up for OBRA that had the OBRA logo on the
corner of the lens. These were safety glasses so the breakage issue was
good. They have good UV protection and I have found them to have good
optics. OBRA made a marginal profit selling them for $10 a pair. Basically
the Oakleys are not significantly different. Given that they are producing
LOTS more I would imagine that their mark up after costs of manufacture is
probably closer to 1000% or more.

yes. not only is the markup very high even if you factor in the cost of
materials and design, the cost isn't decided by supply and demand or
the costs of production, the price is controlled to protect the brand's
image (and perhaps the retailer).

oakleys are never discounted and the only online source is oakley and
at full price. if a retailer tried to discount them they would probably
lose their oakley account.

Slightly better? You obviously have no idea what you are saying. BTW,
the basic models start at around $100 and $140 for the mirrored lenses.
I guess you just had to have your fancy poseur model huh? Now you
[censored]?

Call customer service and you will probably find they will honor the
warranty. I never had a problem.

[email hidden] wrote:
the cost isn't decided by supply and demand or

Quoted message said:

the costs of production, the price is controlled to protect the brand's
image

Actually that is exactly following the laws of supply & demand. In this
case it is just that the supply & demand include the fashion or
prestige factor as well as the eye protection factor. I don't know the
financial success of Oakley. But they have been ar ound for a long time
so let's assume they are at least modestly successfull. That being the
case that means that there is enough demand for their product at their
price to clear enough supply so that they can be successfull.

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

gds said:

A couple more things. Check out how the "el
cheapo" glasses will break
(or not) when hit by flying debris or in a fall.

How do you check that out?

The glasses should say what material they are made out of. Polycarbonate
is very strong, CR39 is less so, but should not sharter into shards that
could cut your eye.
---------------
Alex

Pez had a bit about a guy that made Rx lenses (not inserts) for Rudy.
www.sportsoptical.com (No affiliation)

email hidden said:

Pez had a bit about a guy that made Rx lenses (not inserts) for Rudy.
www.sportsoptical.com (No affiliation)

Certain Rudy Projects can have RX lenses w/o inserts -- see
www.rudyrx.com

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************