Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by binarysolo 5093 days ago
Reads a bit too much like ad copy for my tastes. Or rather I read it with the intent to understand more about the content in the parentheses, not Warby Parker. :)

That being said they are situated in a vertical that has efficiency players (Zenni Optical, Coastal Contacts) but haven't mastered the design/marketing/CS game yet. Going Zappos-style is their entrenchment mechanism, as well as the in-house designers.

3 comments

I agree. One thing that isn't mentioned is that all of Warbly Parker's frames are plastic, as opposed to the titanium (and other) alloys that you find in the brick and mortar stores. Moreover I just don't see enough variety of styles at Warbly Parker.

The article just feels like submarine PR that's disconnected from reality. There are better online glasses stores.

They don't sell a single pair of wire frames, just the thick plastic 'hipster' style that's currently in fashion. No wonder they're only $95...
Absolutely. The notion that Amazon "subscribe and save" reference disrupted toilet paper in particular caught my attention.

Subscribe and save is interesting, but paying 40% more for toilet paper doesn't sound very disruptive to me. It's cool for offices and people with more money than time, but not disruptive.

Yikes, yeah, maybe I was being too bold there for the sake of humor. But Subscribe & Save is actually very cost competitive, as long as you have Amazon Prime. I just took a few minutes to look up Charmin Ultra Strong Bath Tissue on Amazon vs. the Wegmans in Princeton, NJ and Amazon is $0.84/roll vs. Wegman's $0.83/roll. It's not really disruptive by itself, but more an example of a disruptive business model (Amazon) increasing selection, which was the point I think I meant to make.
The same toilet paper was $15 at ShopRite and my wife had a 3 dollar coupon. Sales matter!
That's a fair criticism. I came this article it from a strategy perspective, and would actually like to know more about their operations.

I agree about Zenni Optical and Coastal Contacts --- they are basically pure price plays, while WP is aiming at a very specific customer segment and brand image/personality that's backed up by every interaction you have with them.

I'm fine with the strategy perspective, but curiously omitting the presence of their competitors in the same vertical (but different niches) makes the article a bit too gushing and the picture just a tad biased.

To be fair I think the brand play is a much better game to play than the price game -- if you know how to play it -- since it inherently leaves more money on the table.

If you go to the last sentence of the post, you can probably tell I meant to write a follow-up post about the competitive landscape and do some sort of SWOT analysis. I ended up just moving on to another topic, but that would have been a good sequel to this post.