They own Oakley, Ray-Ban, LensCrafters, Pearle Vision and Sunglass Hut. They also operate Sears Optical and Target Optical.
They also produce eyewear under license for names such as Coach, Anne Klein, Bulgari, Prada, Polo, Versace, Ralph Lauren, and Tiffany.
Making manufacturers divest of retail operations is a way to break up their monopoly.
My wife and friends (24-27 years old) have been getting their glasses at $100 a pop, no strings attached, from these companies for a few years.
Isn't this a case where the free market actually would account for that scenario? It's not like they have a car monopoly.
e.g. let's say my apple laptop breaks, even if I could fix it or get it fixed by a third party for cheap, I have to take it to the apple store to not risk losing my warranty completely.
The manufacturer's warranty can only be voided if the manufacturer can prove that the warranty claim arose directly due to the owner (or someone they paid). So if the owner changes their own oil and the rear bumper falls off? Warranty.
btw, there is a bug the hn code... add a period at the end of the url to see the link
That sounds interesting. I'm curious why.
It is basically the story of stopping evil monopolies combined with need for companies to expand reach quickly in a non-internet world (see Singer sewing machines and GM) dovetailing into more anti-trust laws and then local job protection schemes meshed with laws codifying the 100 year old business model (we are talking stuff that started before automobiles).
Apple doesn't have a problem because they came after. If you think this is screwed up, then don't buy a boat.