Talk:Luxottica

Suggestion

OneSight is not mentioned in Wikipedia's article for Luxottica. This could be a small edit and/or OneSight could have it's own page on Wikipedia as well. Marycontrary (talk) 20:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Luxottica also recently acquired Glasses.com, which does not have its own page. Would it be noteable if a page was created for it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.128.220.10 (talk) 16:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree that Glasses.com should probably be mentioned in the artcle; seems like a major acquisiton. +1 from me :) Vid2vid (talk) 05:40, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Untitled/Warning

Please, take note that I'm working on the restyling of Luxottica english profile on Wikipedia. These changes regard contents and page stucture. --Michele Laterza (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

As you appear to be an employee of the company please note that the page Wikipedia:Conflict of interest applies. You are strongly discouraged from editing the article, other than minor (e.g. grammar/formatting) edits or correcting patently false information. Gr1st (talk) 14:19, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Note also that Wikipedia is not a vehicle for propaganda and advertising and any content not written in an objective and unbiased style will be swiftly removed. No company, large or small, is entitled to a Wikipedia entry containing "officially sanctioned" material. Gr1st (talk) 14:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Gr1st, thanks for your advice. I work for Luxottica and I would like to improve the Wikipedia Luxottica's page with more info about our activities and links to our financial documents. Advertising is not my job, be sure. Stay tuned and write to me other suggestions if you want. It's a great pleasure for me!--Michele Laterza (talk) 21:48, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

You obviously completely ignored my advice. You copied and pasted text from past Luxottica annual reports, which failed throughout to be of a neutral point of view, had no third-party references (or any references at all!) and in some cases was even written in the first person, with words like "we" and "our"!!!!!! Here are just a few examples of the massive amount of totally unacceptable content:

"Luxottica seeks to be the ideal partner for fashion houses and stylists seeking to translate their style and values into successful premium quality eyewear collections..."

"Luxottica differentiates each designer’s offering as much as possible, meticulously segmenting it by type of customer and geographical market..."

"combines the comfort and functionality demanded by extreme sports enthusiasts..."

"Frames are manufactured in limited quantity and with deliberate anti-logo labelling so that only people "in the know" will recognize them..."

"The Chanel product line, targeting luxury-oriented consumers, reflects the essential characteristics of the brand: style, elegance and class..."

"increasing commitment to research, innovation, product quality and manufacturing excellence..."

""culture of quality" that has been central to the whole organization..."

"Our (!) future operating results and financial condition may be affected by various factors, including those set forth below..."

"We believe this is the only way, over and above the short-term results of our actions, to build a future for everybody..."

I could go on and on and on. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. It is absolutely not a place for companies to advertise, to build a presentation about themselves, to engage with the public, to push a "brand message". Companies should not consider it part of their marketing strategy or labour under the impression that they are entitled to an "officially sanctioned" article. The article as it stands sucks, but it is infinitely preferable to this. Gr1st (talk) 19:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposing new references for the Luxottica article

Hello,
in order to improve the Luxottica article, here I'm proposing new references for the existing content. Looking forward to hearing some feedback. Michele Laterza (talk) 10:32, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Update: I added the references proposed below to the Luxottica page. Any feedback to improve the article is more than welcomed. Thanks Michele Laterza (talk) 10:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Luxottica Group S.p.A. is the world's largest eyewear company. Its best known brands include Ray-Ban, Persol and Oakley, Inc.. It also makes sunglasses and prescription frames for a multitude of designer brands such as Chanel and Prada, whose designs and trademarks are used under license. Luxottica also makes sunglasses branded Burberry, Polo Ralph Lauren, Stella McCartney, Tiffany, Versace, Vogue, Miu Miu, Tory Burch and Donna Karan. Its prime competitor is the Safilo Group S.p.A.

References

History

Leonardo Del Vecchio started the company in 1961, in Agordo north of Venice, Italy; today the company is headquartered in Milan.

Del Vecchio began his career as the apprentice to a tool and die maker in Milan, but decided to turn his metalworking skills to making spectacle parts. So in 1961 he moved to Agordo in the province of Belluno, which is home to most of the Italian eyewear industry. The new company was Luxottica s.a.s. a limited partnership with Del Vecchio as one of the founding partners. In 1967 he started selling complete eyeglass frames under the Luxottica brand, which proved successful enough that by 1971 he ended the contract manufacturing business.

Convinced of the need for vertical integration, in 1974 he acquired Scarrone, a distribution company. In 1981 the company set up its first international subsidiary, in Germany, the first in a rapid period of international expansion. The first of many licensing deals with a designer was struck with Armani, in 1988.

The company listed in New York in 1990, and in Milan in December 2000, joining the MIB-30 (now S&P/MIB) index in September 2003. The listing raised money for the company and allowed it to use its shares to acquire other brands, starting with Italian brand Vogue in 1990, Persol and US Shoe Corporation (LensCrafters) in 1995, Ray-Ban in 1999 and Sunglass Hut, Inc. in 2001. Luxottica later increased its presence in the retail sector by acquiring Sydney-based OPSM in 2003, Pearle Vision and Cole National in 2004.

The company also acquired Oakley in a US$2.1bn deal in November 2007.

Brands

Luxottica's two main product offerings are sunglasses and prescription frames. The company operates in two sectors: manufacturing & wholesale distribution, and retail distribution. The house brands include:

• Arnette
• Eye Safety Systems
• K&L
• Luxottica
• Mosley Tribes
• Oakley
• Glasses.Com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vid2vid (talk • contribs) 05:41, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
• Oliver Peoples
• Persol
• Ray-Ban
• Revo
• Sferoflex
• Vogue

The company also creates eyewear under license for designer labels such as:

• Anne Klein
• Brooks Brothers
• Bvlgari
• Burberry
• Chanel
• Chaps
• Club Monaco
• D&G
• DKNY
• Donna Karan eyewear
• Miu Miu
• Polo Ralph Lauren
• Prada
• Ralph Lauren Purple Label
• Salvatore Ferragamo
• Stella McCartney
• Tiffany & Co.
• Tory Burch
• Versace
• Versus

These brands are sold in the company's own shops, as well as to independent distributors such as department stores, duty-free shops and opticians.

Retail

Luxottica Retail has nearly 5000 retail locations in the United States, Canada, China, Australia, New Zealand,South Africa, Israel and the United Kingdom. The headquarters of the retail division is in Mason, Ohio. Their retail banners include: Sunglass Hut International, LensCrafters, OPSM, Laubman & Pank, Budget Eyewear, Bright Eyes, Pearle Opticians, Pearle Vision, Surfeyes, Sears Optical, Target Optical, BJ's Optical, Cole Vision Care, ICON, and ILORI. Luxottica also own EyeMed Vision Care, one of the leading managed vision care organizations in the United States.

References

Proposing the section "Financial performance"

Hello,
I would like to propose a table with comparative data covering the latest 5 years. Do you have any suggestions to improve the following content?
Thanks, Michele Laterza (talk) 17:03, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Financial performance*

Year	Net sales (€)	Operative income (€)	Net income (€)
2010	5,798,035	712,159	407,258
2009	5,094,318	571,085	299
2008	5,201,611	731,693	397,872
2007	4,966,054	833,264	498,199
2006	4,676,156	768,853	437,439

* data retrieved from Luxottica website

Information on Luxottica's shareholders

Hello,
I would like to add on Luxottica's article information about its shareholders. Do you have any feedback on this?
Thanks, Michele Laterza (talk) 15:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

This is simple factual information so it seems appropriate to add this. Gr1st (talk) 14:52, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello Gr1st, thanks for your feedback! Michele Laterza (talk) 12:44, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Major shareholders

The list of Luxottica shareholders with more than 2% of holdings, represented by voting shares at April 28, 2011.

• Delfin S.A.R.L. 66.98%
• Giorgio Armani 4.87%
• Treasury Share 1.39%
• Other shareholders < 2% 26.76%

_{Subscript text}

References

Monopoly!!!!

I think a criticism section regarding Luxoticca's near monopoly on sunglasses and eyeglasses is in order. Maybe monopoly is putting it too over the top, but there is at least a duopoly in the glasses market. Suggestions, ideas?Jr991999 (talk) 15:23, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, it is a highly important topic and should in no way be left out of the entry. I guess it could be called a duopoly with Safilo. These two companies control, and jack up the price of glasses to many times more expensive than the value goods produced. They buy out every frame designer. The only other way to get a frame thats not made by them is to import from asia (which they often are anyway, then swiftly marked up, way up) I worked in optical and it is common industry knowledge but here's a link since I guess I need one... http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57527151/sticker-shock-why-are-glasses-so-expensive/ WikiWikiWhat14 (talk) 06:04, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Come on, this is supposed to be WIKI pedia. Don't make this change take forever or make it a pain in the butt!!!!! WikiWikiWhat14 (talk) 23:43, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

 Done I summarized the segment in the best NPOV, balanced way I could. Daniel Case (talk) 14:57, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I added a link to Safilo, competitor and second largest company. The 2012 interview also mentioned that Walmart and Costco were also competitors but they aren't dedicated eyewear manufacturers.MartinezMD (talk) 15:01, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Personal attack

Not sure if you have caught this yet, but someone sneaked in a personal attack that needs to be removed:

"Del Vecchio had contracted a severe case of "Jungle Fever" by 1969 and could no longer operate without sastifying his demonic desires. He has been accused of sucking the life force out of over 5,000 Haitian children via oral sex." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.239.224.64 (talk) 18:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Numbers

This edit changed several numbers in the article. For example, €7,313 million was changed to €7,313 billion.

I think we're looking at a case of varying uses of commas and periods in numbers. 7,313 million generally means 7,313,000,000 (seven thousand three hundred thirteen million = over 7 billion). The edit seems to be using the comma as a decimal indicator (7 point 313 billion). Please refer to WP:DECIMAL.

Luxottica did not have revenue of €7.3 trillion (roughly US$8.3 trillion). For comparison, ExxonMobil (a substantially larger company) reports revenue of US$407 billion. Additionally, the source cited clearly states "Net income was also up 20% over 2011, reaching Euro 542 million", a realistic figure against revenue of 7 billion (absurdly low against revenue of 7 trillion). - SummerPhD (talk) 17:32, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Luxottica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141227170940/http://www.consob.it/mainen/documenti/assetti_proprietari/semestre2-2014/112887_Az.html?filedate=23%2F12%2F2014&sem=%2Fdocumenti%2Fassetti_proprietari%2Fsemestre2-2014%2F112887_Az.html&docid=0&link=Pie-chart+Capitale+ordinario%253D%252Fdocumenti%252Fassetti%252Fsemestre2-2014%252F112887_TOrdDich.html%253B+Pie-chart+Capitale+votante%253D%252Fdocumenti%252Fassetti%252Fsemestre2-2014%252F112887_TVotDich.html&nav=false to http://www.consob.it/mainen/documenti/assetti_proprietari/semestre2-2014/112887_Az.html?filedate=23%2F12%2F2014&sem=%2Fdocumenti%2Fassetti_proprietari%2Fsemestre2-2014%2F112887_Az.html&docid=0&link=Pie-chart+Capitale+ordinario%253D%252Fdocumenti%252Fassetti%252Fsemestre2-2014%252F112887_TOrdDich.html%253B+Pie-chart+Capitale+votante%253D%252Fdocumenti%252Fassetti%252Fsemestre2-2014%252F112887_TVotDich.html&nav=false

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:56, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Luxottica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131226202920/http://www.nyse.com/listed/lux.html to https://www.nyse.com/listed/lux.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:55, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Who bought whom?

The lead of the Luxottica article currently states:

In January 2017, Luxottica announced a merger with Essilor [...]

And the lead of the Essilor article states:

In January 2017 Essilor announced a combination with Italian eyewear giant Luxottica [...]

It is not clear from this as to which company acquired the other.

Also, shouldn't the infobox of one of them contain a "Fate" line, stating "Acquired by ____ in 2018"? 96.22.66.24 (talk) 20:44, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Wholeheartedly agree with these arguments, that, 1) this Wiki article should definitively mention - ideally up in the top-right corner's InfoBox - which company acquired/bettored the other, and 2) the Wikipedia page "Fate" line should be added and would state, "Aquired by.." for whichever of the two technically was acquired. -- Along these lines, my suggestion is below! Vid2vid (talk) 05:47, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Shouldn't this Luxottica page auto-redirect to EssilorLuxottica ??

Pretty much what I wrote in Headline above. Any agree'ers?? This page Luxottica should AUTO-redirect to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EssilorLuxottica - Thanks for reading this far! Vid2vid (talk) 05:47, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

 Disagree Hi, @Vid2vid: the transaction between Essilor and Luxottica is neither an acquisition nor a merger, it’s a “combination”. After few technical steps, the process ended up in forming a parent company named EssilorLuxottica, which holds 100% of the share capital of the two operating companies, Essilor International and Luxottica Group. --Federica Lusenti (talk) 15:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

on top of this, the two companies have storied histories. Unless you want to do the same thing as what we did with ExxonMobil and create a joint history page (see History of ExxonMobil), this merger aint gonna happen anytime soon. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 19:17, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Infobox Contains Stale Stock Exchange Listing Information

Perhaps this history should make its way into the article but it appears to me that Luxottica has been listed at different exchanges over the years and since the ownership/structure change in 2017 hasn't been listed independently.

NYSE:LUX (as per infobox now) BIT:LUX

Perhaps we should update/remove the information in the infobox.

or how about fold it into history section?

I agree with you the stock numbers are to variable to be in this article. But, perhaps the historical numbers cited (the only numbers that we have) can be useful context about ownership and put into the history section? I made some small edits to the "Major shareholders" section to make it up to date, but was thinking it should be either reformatted into a paragraph style in the History section, or just move the section to immediately follow after History?

Maybe the history should be updated to include some post EssilorLuxottica merger updates? Or maybe this article should be merged, as suggested below? I don't know enough about the topic. Rusl (talk) 22:22, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

If you'd like to start History of EssilorLuxottica, go ahead. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 19:17, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

How many countries?

The line "With its merger with Essilor in 2018 the company owns Coastal/Clearly, an online contacts and glasses retail giant bought in 2014 that ships to over 200 countries beside its original North American market." need some citation given that there's fewer than 200 countries recognized by the UN. Unless they're shipping to every recognized country plus a few others, this number doesn't seem correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18D:57F:9D3A:91BF:A91:CE4E:759F (talk) 20:11, 22 December 2020 (UTC)