In 2019, E. Dean Butler visited the Chinese factories where most American eyeglass frames are manufactured. Butler founded LensCrafters in 1983 and built it into the largest optical chain in North America before it was acquired out from under him in 1995. He has no affiliation with the company anymore. He went to look at what the industry had become.
Quality frames, he reported, cost $4 to $8 to produce. Designer-quality frames, the kind that carry a Prada or Chanel label, run about $15. First-quality lenses cost $1.25 each.
Those same frames and lenses sell in the United States for $800.
"It's ridiculous," Butler told the Los Angeles Times. "It's a complete rip-off."
Charles Dahan backed him up. Dahan ran Custom Optical, one of the largest frame suppliers in America, providing 20% of LensCrafters' inventory before the acquisition. In the 1980s and 90s, he said, it cost him $10 to $16 to manufacture quality plastic or metal frames. Lenses ran about $5 a pair. With premium coatings, $15. LensCrafters would sell completed glasses for $99, and that was already well below what independent opticians charged.
Manufacturing costs have gone way down since then.
The markups now exceed 1,000%.
The company behind this is one most people have never heard of. But if you wear glasses or sunglasses, you've almost certainly given them money.
EssilorLuxottica is a Franco-Italian conglomerate headquartered in Paris. €27 billion in annual revenue. Over 18,000 retail stores. 600+ factories and 128 distribution centers across 150 countries. They are the largest eyewear company on the planet by a wide margin.
They own Ray-Ban, Oakley, Persol, Oliver Peoples, Costa Del Mar, and Vogue Eyewear.
They manufacture eyewear under license for Prada, Chanel, Versace, Giorgio Armani, Burberry, Dolce & Gabbana, Ralph Lauren, Tiffany, Michael Kors, Coach, Valentino, and Tory Burch. The "Prada glasses" at your optometrist were not designed by Prada. They were not crafted in a Prada atelier. They were made in the same Luxottica factory complex as everything else, on the same production lines, with a licensing sticker applied to the temple. Prada collects a royalty. Luxottica sets the price.
They own LensCrafters. They own Sunglass Hut, with over 3,100 locations worldwide. They own Pearle Vision. They run Target Optical. They own Glasses.com and EyeBuyDirect.
And they own EyeMed Vision Care, the second-largest vision insurance company in the United States, with 43 million members.
One company manufactures the product, owns the brands, controls the retail, and provides the insurance that pays for it. A columnist on 60 Minutes called it "an optical illusion." Fake competition. Dozens of brands on the wall, one company behind all of them.
This didn't happen by accident. It was built, deliberately, over sixty years, by one man.
Leonardo Del Vecchio was born in Milan in 1935. His father, a fruit and vegetable street vendor, died before Leonardo was born. His mother had four other children and couldn't support them all. At seven years old, she placed him in a Catholic orphanage. A letter she wrote to the Martinitt boarding school survives: she asked them to take loving care of her son because she had to work, and "before some misfortune befalls me I prefer his hospitalization also for a more accurate education."
Del Vecchio lived in the orphanage for seven years. The regimen was rigid. Wake at 6am regardless of season. Stand shirtless in January. Eat at exactly 7am. School until night. The orphanage taught the boys, in Del Vecchio's own words, to work tirelessly and fight against laziness.
He left at fourteen to apprentice at a metal factory, making cups and medals. The factory sent him to night school for drawing and engraving. His first contact with eyeglass frames came when he was handed aluminum temples to engrave decorations on. He later said he realized immediately that he was good at it, that his finished work never needed corrections, and that this meant something.
At 25, in 1961, he moved to Agordo, a village in the Dolomite Mountains that was giving away free land to attract businesses. He opened a workshop making small metal parts for eyeglass frames. Fourteen employees. He named the company Luxottica, from "luce" (light) and "ottica" (optics). He built his house next to the factory so he could start his day at 4am.
By 1967 he was selling complete frames under the Luxottica brand. By 1971 he'd stopped contract manufacturing entirely. In 1974 he bought his first distribution company. He wanted vertical integration from the start. Manufacturing wasn't enough. He needed to control how the product reached people.
The inflection point came in 1988, when Luxottica signed its first designer licensing deal with Giorgio Armani. Every fashion house had rejected Del Vecchio before this. Glasses carried a stigma. They were medical devices, not fashion. Armani took the risk.
It worked. And Del Vecchio understood something that would fuel the next thirty years of expansion: if you put a fashion label on a medical device, people will pay twenty times what it costs to make.
The acquisitions accelerated. He listed on the New York Stock Exchange in 1990, not Milan, because, as he put it, "if you have to sail, it's better to choose the big sea." He used the listing to fund a buying spree. Vogue Eyewear in 1990. Persol and LensCrafters in 1995 (through a hostile takeover of US Shoe Corporation, a company with a market cap five times Luxottica's). Ray-Ban in 1999. Sunglass Hut in 2001. Oakley in 2007.
By the time Del Vecchio died of pneumonia in 2022 at age 87, he was the second-richest person in Italy. The machine he built keeps running without him.
The Oakley acquisition is the clearest window into how EssilorLuxottica actually operates.
In the early 2000s, Oakley was one of the most valuable eyewear brands in the world. Athletes wore them. The brand carried real cultural weight. They were, for a brief period, a genuine competitor.
Del Vecchio had just purchased Sunglass Hut in 2001. One of his first moves was to demand that all suppliers lower their wholesale prices. Oakley's founder, Jim Jannard, refused.
Luxottica's response was immediate. They pulled every Oakley product from every store they owned. Sunglass Hut, at the time the largest sunglass retail chain on the planet. LensCrafters. Pearle Vision. All of it. Overnight.
Oakley's stock price dropped 33%.
While Oakley hemorrhaged market value, Luxottica returned with an acquisition offer. $2.1 billion. Oakley had no leverage left. They had been locked out of the dominant retail channel in America and couldn't recover their position. The deal closed in 2007.
After the purchase, Luxottica put Oakley products right back on the shelves of the same stores that had just boycotted them. And raised the prices.
One detail that tends to get lost: during the dispute, while Oakley was being strangled out of retail, Luxottica began producing Ray-Ban models that bore a noticeable resemblance to Oakley's signature designs. There was a legal fight. It didn't matter. Luxottica soon owned both brands.
They ran the same playbook on Ray-Ban, just from the other direction.
By the 1990s, Ray-Ban was effectively a dead brand. Bausch & Lomb had turned them into a mass-market commodity. You could buy a pair of Wayfarers at a gas station for $19.
Luxottica bought Ray-Ban from Bausch & Lomb in 1999 for $640 million. Industry analysts said they overpaid. Del Vecchio didn't care. He grabbed a sheet of paper, did the math, and made the offer.
The turnaround was surgical. Luxottica withdrew Ray-Ban from 13,000 retail outlets. They improved the product, increasing the lacquer layers on Wayfarers from 2 to 31 and consolidating manufacturing at a state-of-the-art Italian facility. And they placed the brand in Neiman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue, alongside the fashion labels they were already licensing.
Then they methodically ratcheted the price. Aviators started at $79 in 2000. By 2002, $89. By 2009, $129 as they introduced carbon fiber and new lens materials as justification. Today, basic Wayfarers retail for $150 to $200 or more.
Ray-Ban's revenue went from €252 million the year after acquisition to over €2 billion by 2014. An eightfold increase in fifteen years.
The quality improvement was real. But frames that cost a few dollars to manufacture don't become $200 products because you added lacquer. They become $200 products because you control the retail and eliminate every alternative at that price point. The scarcity was manufactured. The exclusivity was engineered. The price was strategic.
Luxottica's Chief Marketing Officer, Stefano Volpetti, described the strategy this way: "We needed to clean the market of many pieces of low-quality, old Ray-Bans and clean up the distribution."
Clean the market. That's one way to describe choking supply to inflate price.
The part of this story that gets the least attention is the insurance angle.
EyeMed Vision Care is a wholly owned subsidiary of EssilorLuxottica. It is the second-largest vision benefits provider in the United States. Approximately 43 million Americans are members. It is accepted at over 30,000 optometrists.
The closed loop works like this:
Your employer buys EyeMed vision coverage as part of your benefits package. Those premiums go to Luxottica.
EyeMed directs you to "in-network" providers. Visit their website. The retailers they list are LensCrafters, Target Optical, Pearle Vision, and Glasses.com. Every single one is owned by Luxottica.
You walk into one of those stores and select frames. Ray-Ban, Oakley, Prada, Coach, Versace. All manufactured by Luxottica.
Luxottica collects the insurance premium. The retail margin. And the manufacturing profit. Three separate revenue streams from the same transaction.
They never disclose the relationship. EyeMed does not tell its 43 million members that it is owned by the same company that owns the stores and the brands. The whole system is presented as if you're choosing between independent options.
The out-of-network situation is even more telling. EyeMed offers minimal to zero reimbursement for glasses purchased independently or online. They would rather cover a $400 visit to LensCrafters than reimburse $20 for glasses bought elsewhere. That makes no sense as cost containment. It makes perfect sense as market-share protection.
Employers and HR departments are, in many cases, paying premiums to Luxottica for the privilege of funneling their employees into Luxottica's retail ecosystem. One industry observer put it bluntly: "In essence, EyeMed is merely an instrument to protect the market share of the Luxottica family of companies, and it provides little to no substantive cost amelioration to consumers, what many would regard as the principal purpose of insurance."
It gets worse. The Better Business Bureau complaints against EyeMed tell a consistent story. Members told by customer service that their frame benefit could be used for frames alone, only to be denied after making a non-refundable purchase. Customers on hold for an hour, transferred multiple times, getting contradictory answers. Claims misattributed between family members on the same plan, taking months to resolve. One BBB complaint documents a member who contacted EyeMed three separate times before purchasing, was explicitly told the benefit applied, made a $578 purchase, and was then informed the benefit didn't cover what she'd been told it would.
Meanwhile, Luxottica has been steadily cutting reimbursements to independent optometrists who accept EyeMed. Some in the industry believe this is deliberate. Lower reimbursements make it less attractive for independent practices to accept EyeMed patients, pushing more of those patients toward Luxottica-owned retail locations. A 2017 analysis in The Hill estimated that the combined Essilor-Luxottica entity would exert influence over 83% of American optometrists through EyeMed's network.
When 60 Minutes confronted the Luxottica CEO about this, asking how vertical integration benefits people, Andrea Guerra's response was revealing:
"Everything is worth what people are ready to pay."
There's more.
In August 2020, hackers breached a web-based appointment scheduling application used by EyeMed and LensCrafters. The personal and protected health information of 829,454 patients was exposed, including names, Social Security numbers, medical diagnoses, treatment information, and credit card numbers.
A month later, in September 2020, a separate Nefilim ransomware attack hit Luxottica's systems, shutting down operations in Italy and China.
In March 2021, yet another breach through a third-party partner exposed the personal information of over 70 million customers. Names, email addresses, physical addresses, phone numbers, dates of birth. The data surfaced on hacking forums in late 2022 and was offered for sale.
The settlement for the 2020 breach that exposed health records, Social Security numbers, and credit card data of 829,000 people? $250,000.
A quarter of a million dollars. For a company with €27 billion in annual revenue.
They also got caught lying about their technology. LensCrafters spent a decade advertising its AccuFit Digital Measurement System as "five times more accurate" than traditional methods, using this claim to upsell premium prescription lens products. The claim was false. A class action resulted in a $39 million settlement approved in September 2024, covering purchases made between 2013 and 2023. Ten years of false advertising about the precision of a tool used to measure people's vision.
And there is an active antitrust class action filed in 2023 in San Francisco federal court, naming EssilorLuxottica and 48 co-defendants, including subsidiaries, manufacturers, and fashion houses, accused of conspiring to inflate eyewear prices by up to 1,000%. The complaint calls EssilorLuxottica the "instigator and primary enforcer" of a price-fixing conspiracy in the American eyewear market. The case is ongoing.
In 2018, Luxottica merged with Essilor, the world's largest prescription lens manufacturer. The deal was valued at $32 billion. It combined the dominant frame maker with the dominant lens maker, adding Essilor's proprietary technologies (Varilux progressive lenses, Crizal anti-reflective coatings, Transitions photochromic lenses) to Luxottica's existing empire of brands, stores, and insurance.
Tim Wu, Columbia law professor and antitrust expert who served in both the Obama and Biden administrations, called Luxottica's profit margins "relatively obscene." On the Essilor merger, he was more direct: "It obviously should have been blocked. That was the byproduct of another era. And we look back at that and like, how did you let that one go?"
His analogy: "Imagine if in the luxury-bag industry, like Hermès and Louis Vuitton, if they were all actually the same company. That's kind of the trick here with Luxottica, is they own all the brands people think are competing brands, like Ray-Ban and Oakley, and they sort of mimic competition."
The FTC approved the merger anyway. No conditions. No remedies. No divestitures.
Ryan McDevitt, professor of economics at Duke University, summarized it simply: "They have full control over prices, and that's just a license to mint money for them."
The machine continues to expand. In July 2024, EssilorLuxottica acquired Supreme, the streetwear brand, from VF Corporation for $1.5 billion, a discount from the $2.1 billion VF paid in 2020. Analysts were baffled. An eyewear company buying a streetwear brand. EssilorLuxottica's stock dropped 4% on the announcement. But the pattern is familiar if you've been paying attention. Supreme had been enshittified by VF Corp, overexposed and losing cultural relevance. Luxottica picked up a degraded brand at a discount. The same playbook they ran on Ray-Ban thirty years ago.
And then there's the Meta partnership. EssilorLuxottica has been building smart glasses with Meta since 2019. They sold 2 million units combined in 2023 and 2024. In 2025, they sold 7 million. They're racing toward production capacity of 10 to 20 million units per year. Smart glasses already account for more than a third of EssilorLuxottica's quarterly revenue growth. Twenty percent of buyers opt for prescription lenses.
The company that monopolized what sits on your face is now building the next computing platform to sit there permanently. They control the form factor, the retail channel, the lens technology, and the insurance. Every layer of the smartphone ecosystem, hardware, distribution, accessories, service plans, has an eyewear parallel that EssilorLuxottica already dominates.
Leonardo Del Vecchio died in 2022. He once said, when he was younger, "You get rich by selling $2 sunglasses for $150 bucks and aggressively running out or buying your competition."
He wasn't wrong. His company now collects €27 billion a year proving it.
Know someone who just spent $400 at LensCrafters? Forward this to them.
If someone forwarded this to you and you want the next one, subscribe here.
Got an industry horror story or a brand I should investigate next? Reply and let me know.