Oakley experiancing BIG changes

BB67 wrote:

I think Smith make ski goggles only now.After the stk is gone no more MX?

tdrewk wrote:

Scott unveiled their latest MX goggle this week, it's called the Prospect. I was at the dealer show today in Park City and tried on a...

Scott unveiled their latest MX goggle this week, it's called the Prospect. I was at the dealer show today in Park City and tried on a pair. The are very similar to 100% brand goggles in terms of design, but incorporate thicker lenses and a new 4 pt tear of system. My first impression is they will match or exceed any premium goggle on the market.

And yes, they are made in the USA!

jmc2 wrote:

I could be wrong, but aren't Scott goggles made in the USA?

logan_140 wrote:

Not sure, if that's the case I'm gonna buy a pair of the Scott's that just came out

jmc2 wrote:

I could be wrong, but aren't Scott goggles made in the USA?

logan_140 wrote:

Not sure, if that's the case I'm gonna buy a pair of the Scott's that just came out

Jefro98 wrote:

Just so you know, you're buying from a Swiss company then because Scott is Swiss.

Francis377 wrote:

Correct. And Scott is owned by the Korean Youngone corp. (majority shareholder) .

rohleder644 wrote:

I'll never understand why big business is vilified

TankSlapper wrote:

From Jannard's Facebook: Devastated. LUX has officially dismantled everything it took decades to build. Shakes head. Rolls eyes. Deep depression. Building Oakley took inventions wrapped in...

From Jannard's Facebook:

Devastated. LUX has officially dismantled everything it took decades to build. Shakes head. Rolls eyes. Deep depression. Building Oakley took inventions wrapped in art and an army of great people. It now has been reduced to a bottom line number. Sad day for me and everyone who invested their heart and soul in the "O".

FreshTopEnd wrote:

^^ But....bless him and his new ventures like Red, big fan and I appreciate his feeling...but really he reduced it to a bottom line number when...

^^

But....bless him and his new ventures like Red, big fan and I appreciate his feeling...but really he reduced it to a bottom line number when he cashed out, and that a company like LUX reduces things to a bottom line number going forward is about as shocking as Captain Renoux discovering gambling at Rick's.

Sometimes you can't eat your cake and have it, too. There's a little eyeglass company back east named Shuron that has been around since the 30's and 40's whose designs have been ripped by most other manufacturers, including LUX's Ray Ban (eg. Ray Ban's clubman). Shuron frames are about half the price.

You want to preserve culture, don't give up control.

TeamGreen wrote:

God, sometimes I love me some FTE! Here's a quote form one of the articles.. "Preserving Oakley’s unique DNA, which has made it an iconic leader...

God, sometimes I love me some FTE!

Here's a quote form one of the articles..

"Preserving Oakley’s unique DNA, which has made it an iconic leader in sports, will be a priority. Consumer-facing functions like product, manufacturing and marketing will continue to shape the brand from Foothill Ranch, CA."

Yet, if you read the articles that're more main-stream...it seems that only R&D stays at the Ranch.

So...what happens to the "Culture" that we know as Oakley?

Also, soooooo many folks love that "O"...
Back-packs
Shoes
Clothing
Yada, yada, yada...
Sounds like A LOT of this is going out the door.

Look, I'm not an Oakley guy.
One of my buds is at Dragon and I've been involved in product-testing and race support...
Also, there's a "local" component to it: there's a bunch of San Clemente dudes up in that brand.
Notably, when they came out with the NFX: it was game-over. Old school "ANSI" impact protection for my fat-assed eyes when I'm going 90mph in The Baja? SOLD!

Still, back to Oakley...

I'm worried about the "Culture"...

So, to the point FTE made...I'll respond as follows:

"X2"

Now, I've gotta make some calls and see if a former Super-Moto National Champ kept his job at the Ranch...

yak651 wrote:

Maybe because it puts shareholder earnings ahead of whats good for the company? A company still making money and providing jobs for many people, then a...

Maybe because it puts shareholder earnings ahead of whats good for the company? A company still making money and providing jobs for many people, then a bigger company buys them out and shuts the doors. People say the 4 stroke killed this sport, it had a part in it, but lack of good paying jobs is what will finally do it in

jmc2 wrote:

I could be wrong, but aren't Scott goggles made in the USA?

731chopper wrote:

Are they? I assumed they were made in China. If they're still made in the USA that will greatly impact my next goggle purchase.

swedishfishmx wrote:

Still made in USA

JackLHyde wrote:

What's the point of being made in the USA? I understand the willingness to support local / national industries, but other than that quality standards are...

What's the point of being made in the USA? I understand the willingness to support local / national industries, but other than that quality standards are pretty similar nowadays worldwide.

731chopper wrote:

Sounds like you do understand the point then. It typically isn't a quality issue, it's one of economic impacts. I don't only buy "Made in America"...

Sounds like you do understand the point then. It typically isn't a quality issue, it's one of economic impacts. I don't only buy "Made in America" but it does affect my buying decision if I'm looking at two things similarly and one is made in America.

yak651 wrote:

Maybe because it puts shareholder earnings ahead of whats good for the company? A company still making money and providing jobs for many people, then a...

Maybe because it puts shareholder earnings ahead of whats good for the company? A company still making money and providing jobs for many people, then a bigger company buys them out and shuts the doors. People say the 4 stroke killed this sport, it had a part in it, but lack of good paying jobs is what will finally do it in

yak651 wrote:

Maybe because it puts shareholder earnings ahead of whats good for the company? A company still making money and providing jobs for many people, then a...

Maybe because it puts shareholder earnings ahead of whats good for the company? A company still making money and providing jobs for many people, then a bigger company buys them out and shuts the doors. People say the 4 stroke killed this sport, it had a part in it, but lack of good paying jobs is what will finally do it in

FreshTopEnd wrote:

"Maybe because it puts shareholder earnings ahead of whats good for the company" Well, shareholder earnings are why corporations exist. That's the point of a corporate...

"Maybe because it puts shareholder earnings ahead of whats good for the company" Well, shareholder earnings are why corporations exist. That's the point of a corporate form, whether it's one shareholder or many. There's a balance, but the job and duty of directors is to return value to shareholders, not preserve a vibe if doing that limits returns.

It has a lot less to do with big or small - there are many large companies that are private - more about what sort of control you are going to trade off for access to capital. That's usually a zero sum game.

TeamGreen wrote:

Operational Efficiency is what you're witnessing...

And, you can bet on The Oakley Culture taking a hit.

TeamGreen wrote:

Operational Efficiency is what you're witnessing...

And, you can bet on The Oakley Culture taking a hit.

FreshTopEnd wrote:

Well, maybe efficient, maybe not. Any business should be operationally efficient, but that begs the question of whether efficiency is at odds with any given workplace...

Well, maybe efficient, maybe not. Any business should be operationally efficient, but that begs the question of whether efficiency is at odds with any given workplace culture.

What Oakley culture is now showing are the bruises from the hit it actually took when JJ sold to an entity with different objectives and different culture.

bwilky wrote:

I would assume that LUX will eventually get rid of any and all product that isn't eyewear. Bottom line, they are an eyewear company. They do...

I would assume that LUX will eventually get rid of any and all product that isn't eyewear. Bottom line, they are an eyewear company. They do not sell t-shirts, hats, backpacks, shoes, etc. This also brings up another question... if they discontinue all AFA (apparel, footwear, accessories), what will they fill their Oakley stores with? Will they convert them into Sunglass Hut or LensCrafters locations? The stores are too big to just sell Oakley sunglasses.

In early 1996, Oakley had a pricing dispute with Luxottica, the world's largest eyewear manufacturers and retailers. Luxottica stopped carrying Oakley's products in their stores, including Sunglass Hut, and Oakley's stock market value declined 33%.