# Optical Forums > Canadian Discussion Forum >  Coastal Q2 results ...

## oculus

2012 .. net loss for Q2  242,000   for 2013 ...  6,98 millions !!  

http://www.brandonsun.com/business/b...811.html?thx=y

----------


## HindSight2020

> 2012 .. net loss for Q2 242,000 for 2013 ... 6,98 millions !! 
> 
> http://www.brandonsun.com/business/b...811.html?thx=y


Regardless of investment, volume and market share, this is proof profit can only be derived from a successful formula. So when you sell that first pair of profitable glasses today, smile and know that you're ahead of them on the P&L statement.

The higher their sales, the higher their loss is!  Duh, I would be firing that whole board of incompetent morons at the annual shareholders meeting.

----------


## edKENdance

[QUOTE=oculus;461579]2012 .. net loss for Q2  242,000   for 2013 ...  6,98 millions !!

----------


## edKENdance



----------


## gibby2020

Wow 6mil+ loss
But as Chris Ryser has said: even with the mounting losses they are capturing sales form us B&M's. Question is for how long??? Plus there are tons of other onliners to choose from. Clearly's days are numbered as the competition is fierce out there to get to the bottom...

Gibby

----------


## Golfnorth

> Regardless of investment, volume and market share, this is proof profit can only be derived from a successful formula. So when you sell that first pair of profitable glasses today, smile and know that you're ahead of them on the P&L statement.
> 
> The higher their sales, the higher their loss is!  Duh, I would be firing that whole board of incompetent morons at the annual shareholders meeting.


Sitting back watching and smiling. :)

----------


## Golfnorth

> Sitting back watching and smiling. :)


Can you say abandon ship?

----------


## idispense

How many Ontario investors bought shares in on line companies presuming that online sales must be legal in Ontario otherwise they would have been shut down ?

How many of those Ontario investors will be hurt financially should their investment collapse? 

Are Ontario investors considered to be the same members of the public that are protected by various rules and regulations and legislation's of Parliament  ? 

What defines and limits harm to the public ?

----------


## edKENdance

I can't help smiling when I look at this.

----------


## oculus

> How many Ontario investors bought shares in on line companies presuming that online sales must be legal in Ontario otherwise they would have been shut down ?


I don't know the Ontario law .. but I was told that in Quebec .. the sales AND delivery is a restricted act .. thats why the college of optometry is in court with Coastal .. but in Ontario only the sales would be a restricted act .. and Coastal could argue that the sales is made in BC, and the Ontario law is not saying anything about the delivery ...

----------


## idispense

> I don't know the Ontario law .. but I was told that in Quebec .. the sales AND delivery is a restricted act .. thats why the college of optometry is in court with Coastal .. but in Ontario only the sales would be a restricted act .. and Coastal could argue that the sales is made in BC, and the Ontario law is not saying anything about the delivery ...


Ask yourself this very simple question: 

Is any resident of BC, Alberta , Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, P.E.I., Yukon, N.W.T. , or Labrador and Newfoundland exempt from the speed limits while driving in Ontario ?

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *2012 .. net loss for Q2 242,000 for 2013 ... 6,98 millions !!*



I have been following them for the last few years as I see them steam rolling ahead. Their website had another 5% increase in traffic over the last 3 month and is now in 7th position of all on line opticals world wide.

So do not have too much joy at this stage...........................all the glasses they have sold and are selling, you do not, while their reputation on the web is continously increasing.

They must have a plan and all of us are only looking at the loss they are showing. Why has nobody closed them down ?

----------


## oculus

> Ask yourself this very simple question: 
> 
> Is any resident of BC, Alberta , Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, P.E.I., Yukon, N.W.T. , or Labrador and Newfoundland exempt from the speed limits while driving in Ontario ?


When I ask why only Quebec is on court with Coastal, thats the explanation I got .. your Ontario reserve act have a big flaw .. the delivery is not a reserve act .... so Coastal could pretend that the sales is actually made in BC, not Ontario where it would be illegal, and since the delivery is not a reserve act in Ontario ... they can ship there ...  but in Quebec the delivery is a reserve act, this is why we can try to stop them with a court order.  Your comparaison is not good, since the illegal act would happen in Ontario .... Coastal pretend that their 'illegal Ontario act' is happening in BC !

----------


## oculus

> I have been following them for the last few years as I see them steam rolling ahead. Their website had another 5% increase in traffic over the last 3 month and is now in 7th position of all on line opticals world wide.
> 
> So do not have too much joy at this stage...........................all the glasses they have sold and are selling, you do not, while their reputation on the web is continously increasing.
> 
> They must have a plan and all of us are only looking at the loss they are showing. Why has nobody closed them down ?



Big database of customers + high traffic website + Value of the company going down = Nice take over by ESS or Lux or you name it ... our probleme will only be more serious.

----------


## Golfnorth

> I have been following them for the last few years as I see them steam rolling ahead. Their website had another 5% increase in traffic over the last 3 month and is now in 7th position of all on line opticals world wide.
> 
> So do not have too much joy at this stage...........................all the glasses they have sold and are selling, you do not, while their reputation on the web is continously increasing.
> 
> They must have a plan and all of us are only looking at the loss they are showing. Why has nobody closed them down ?


Reputation and selling products at a loss does not pay the bills. As a publicly-traded company investors want to see results and a few more results like Q2 that was just released would be disasterous for all shareholders. Granted they are selling lots of glasses that my fellow brothers and sisters in the profession are not but for how long can this continue in it's current form?

----------


## gibby2020

Sorry but even if we all get aggressive with our pricing and charge for all the services we previously gave away, I feel there is an oversupply of ECP's/eyeglass providers. Worse in some areas vs others but still too many of us.
Unfortunately some of us (providers & suppliers) will be dropping out of the marketplace! It's just a trickle now but it'll accelerate.
There's an oversupply of onliners. All desperate to race to the bottom. So CC cant last long with the current biz model. But the longer they last......
Bleak eh.
Gibby

----------


## idispense

> When I ask why only Quebec is on court with Coastal, thats the explanation I got .. your Ontario reserve act have a big flaw .. the delivery is not a reserve act .... so Coastal could pretend that the sales is actually made in BC, not Ontario where it would be illegal, and since the delivery is not a reserve act in Ontario ... they can ship there ...  but in Quebec the delivery is a reserve act, this is why we can try to stop them with a court order.  Your comparaison is not good, since the illegal act would happen in Ontario .... Coastal pretend that their 'illegal Ontario act' is happening in BC !



well I do not disagree with you but then how do you explain this from the College ?

UNREGULATED SELLING OF PRESCRIPTION 
EYEWEAR OVER THE INTERNET IN ONTARIO 
IS NOT JUST UNSAFE. IT IS ALSO ILLEGAL.



http://www.coptont.org/PUBLICINFO/in...dispensing.asp

----------


## idispense

> When I ask why only Quebec is on court with Coastal, thats the explanation I got .. your Ontario reserve act have a big flaw .. the delivery is not a reserve act .... so Coastal could pretend that the sales is actually made in BC, not Ontario where it would be illegal, and since the delivery is not a reserve act in Ontario ... they can ship there ...  but in Quebec the delivery is a reserve act, this is why we can try to stop them with a court order.  Your comparaison is not good, since the illegal act would happen in Ontario .... Coastal pretend that their 'illegal Ontario act' is happening in BC !



Have you read this court case ? It deals with online selling of items in Ontario and does give a College far reaching abilities and sets precedent. There are two cases, the original and the appeal ,

here is the link for the appeal:

http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlig...YWN5AAAAAAAAAQ


Here is the link for the first case :

http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlig...YWN5AAAAAAAAAQ


I presume that due diligence would make the above matters required reading for all Registrars,  Presidents, Executive Councils,  General Council members, all of the public members and the staffing .

----------


## oculus

> well I do not disagree with you but then how do you explain this from the College ?
> 
> UNREGULATED SELLING OF PRESCRIPTION 
> EYEWEAR OVER THE INTERNET IN ONTARIO 
> IS NOT JUST UNSAFE. IT IS ALSO ILLEGAL.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.coptont.org/PUBLICINFO/in...dispensing.asp



The college can state that it is illegal ... but my guess is it is if your are doing the sales within the limit of Ontario province.  If the sales is made in BC ..  Ontario law can't be applied.  Health in Canada is a provincial responsability, a province can't rules another one.  

For your judgement ... pharmacy law and optometry/optician law are completely different. By the way I would love the all province have the same reserve acts as Quebec have, we could have put all our effort in court together.

----------


## HindSight2020

> Have you read this court case ? It deals with online selling of items in Ontario and does give a College far reaching abilities and sets precedent. There are two cases, the original and the appeal ,
> 
> here is the link for the appeal:
> 
> http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlig...YWN5AAAAAAAAAQ
> 
> 
> Here is the link for the first case :
> 
> ...


Way to hijack the thread again!  Seriously is it possible for you to post anything other than the Colleges?  The topic is Coastal, not Colleges.

----------


## idispense

> Way to hijack the thread again!  Seriously is it possible for you to post anything other than the Colleges?  The topic is Coastal, not Colleges.


The response was not to you, you don't have to read the response which was not to you if you don't wish to, that is entirely your own choice, but should you decide to read the links then you might see and understand the relativity, but again that is entirely up to you.

----------


## Chris Ryser

*Coastal.com Announces Second Quarter 2013 Financial Results*
*06/10/2013*

Download this Press Release


   Total sales increased 11% to $53.7 million   Glasses sales grew 31% to $16 million   Glasses Average Order Size grew 40% to $73.26   Contact lens sales grew 5% to $37.7 millionVANCOUVER, British Columbia, June 10, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Coastal Contacts Inc. ("Coastal.com" or "the Company") (Nasdaq:COA) (TSX:COA), the leading online provider of eyewear, today reported financial results for the second fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2013.

 "The overall business grew well in the second quarter, with glasses showing particular strength in key markets, such as North America," said 
Roger Hardy, Founder and Chief Executive Officer. "During the quarter the average order size for glasses grew 40% to $73.26, driven by increasing numbers of returning customers, increases in branded sales and a focused strategy to enhance specialty categories. We continue to see a secular shift towards a better way of buying eyewear as more and more consumers become aware of the value, savings and convenience of buying online. In Canada 47% of glasses revenues in Q2 were generated by returning glasses customers affirming our belief that we are building a stable and recurring revenue model in the eyeglasses category similar to our contact lens business. Since launching the glasses business four years ago, we have served approximately 1.5 million customers in North America alone. We continue to leverage the uniqueness of our offering, which includes vertically integrated state of the art manufacturing facilities; providing rapid delivery of our broad eyewear selection. In the quarter we also experienced record traffic, online impressions and increases in brand awareness. "Coastal.com is currently investing to become the market leader in the rapidly growing online eyeglasses category. Selling and marketing expenses during the quarter were 31% of sales compared with 23% during the same period in 2012. Over time we expect to reduce advertising expense as our growing glasses business becomes characterized by increased numbers of returning customers and higher gross margins. Cash generated from our profitable contact lens business and recently completed equity financing of approximately $20 million, places Coastal.com in a strong position to maintain our leadership position."
 Total sales for the first quarter increased 11% to $53.7 million. Net loss including the larger selling and marketing spend, totaled $7.0 million, or $0.23 per basic and diluted share. Non-IFRS adjusted EBITDA for the quarter totaled a loss of $5.4 million.
Second Quarter 2013 Financial Highlights

----------


## edKENdance



----------


## oculus

> *Coastal.com Announces Second Quarter 2013 Financial Results*
> *06/10/2013*
> 
> Download this Press Release
> 
>    Total sales increased 11% to $53.7 million   Glasses sales grew 31% to $16 million   Glasses Average Order Size grew 40% to $73.26   Contact lens sales grew 5% to $37.7 millionVANCOUVER, British Columbia, June 10, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Coastal Contacts Inc. ("Coastal.com" or "the Company") (Nasdaq:COA) (TSX:COA), the leading online provider of eyewear, today reported financial results for the second fiscal quarter ended April 30, 2013.
> 
>  "The overall business grew well in the second quarter, with glasses showing particular strength in key markets, such as North America," said 
> Roger Hardy, Founder and Chief Executive Officer. "During the quarter the average order size for glasses grew 40% to $73.26, driven by increasing numbers of returning customers, increases in branded sales and a focused strategy to enhance specialty categories. We continue to see a secular shift towards a better way of buying eyewear as more and more consumers become aware of the value, savings and convenience of buying online. In Canada 47% of glasses revenues in Q2 were generated by returning glasses customers affirming our belief that we are building a stable and recurring revenue model in the eyeglasses category similar to our contact lens business. Since launching the glasses business four years ago, we have served approximately 1.5 million customers in North America alone. We continue to leverage the uniqueness of our offering, which includes vertically integrated state of the art manufacturing facilities; providing rapid delivery of our broad eyewear selection. In the quarter we also experienced record traffic, online impressions and increases in brand awareness. "Coastal.com is currently investing to become the market leader in the rapidly growing online eyeglasses category. Selling and marketing expenses during the quarter were 31% of sales compared with 23% during the same period in 2012. Over time we expect to reduce advertising expense as our growing glasses business becomes characterized by increased numbers of returning customers and higher gross margins. Cash generated from our profitable contact lens business and recently completed equity financing of approximately $20 million, places Coastal.com in a strong position to maintain our leadership position."
> ...



To be able to increase their sales they have to spend 31% of their income on marketing !!!

----------


## NorthStar

> Big database of customers + high traffic website + Value of the company going down = Nice take over by ESS or Lux or you name it ... our probleme will only be more serious.


From Optinews today.  
Here comes LUX:
The Canadian online eyewear provider Coastal.com announced that it has signed a distribution agreement to launch Oakley eyewear on its market-leading European website, Lensway, and unveiled a sales increase of 11 per cent ($53.7 million) for the second fiscal quarter, ended April 30, 2013.

----------


## optimensch

Spending all that money on branding, both in absolute dollars and as a % of sales (increasing), means that now lots of people have heard of clearlycontacts, the brand. 
I think they now ought to find a product to sell which they can turn a net profit on - clearly it isn't eyewear or contact lenses. Maybe fresh produce? frozen seafood?

----------


## Galerie

Or maybe they'll continue to expand http://bit.ly/1375mOY

----------


## idispense

> Or maybe they'll continue to expand http://bit.ly/1375mOY


Ah, so now they are going to open in Toronto and Calgary . They can probably find a good deal on unused office space in high traffic areas downtown, to launch from.

it appears that there may only have been a short term lease in the beginning store as the building was to be torn down.

----------


## HindSight2020

> Ah, so now they are going to open in Toronto and Calgary . They can probably find a good deal on unused office space in high traffic areas downtown, to launch from.
> 
> it appears that there may only have been a short term lease in the beginning store as the building was to be torn down.


It will fly like the Wright brothers first flight...very brief. I don't see this as a threat whatsoever to independents, however chains like Hak crap, dirty Pearl and Lens scratchers will feel it initially. After the CC brief grand opening honeymoon which will suck out all bottom feeder consumers (while doing all of us independents a favour), they will wither away as planned and continue to bleed red.

The fact they only want short 6 month leases is simply because they have no idea what they are doing or what to expect. They are doomed and continues to be evident.

----------


## idispense

> It will fly like the Wright brothers first flight...very brief. I don't see this as a threat whatsoever to independents, however chains like Hak crap, dirty Pearl and Lens scratchers will feel it initially. After the CC brief grand opening honeymoon which will suck out all bottom feeder consumers (while doing all of us independents a favour), they will wither away as planned and continue to bleed red.
> 
> The fact they only want short 6 month leases is simply because they have no idea what they are doing or what to expect. They are doomed and continues to be evident.




I am with you brother but for a company that doesn't know what they are doing , they  sure got a lot of sales and they are not having issues raising funds so far, hope you are right but the Colleges may be renting them operating space before your predictions come true.

----------


## HindSight2020

> I am with you brother but for a company that doesn't know what they are doing , they sure got a lot of sales and they are not having issues raising funds so far, hope you are right but the Colleges may be renting them operating space before your predictions come true.


They know what they're doing, but not in the retail arena.  Since their plan to overwhelm and attempt to dominate the entire optical industry via the web has failed, they have no choice but to attempt the retail sector - the good news is that's our specialty not theirs.

As for their bottom line, they continue to bleed heavily - I think it's awesome.  They've been slayed by Braveheart. :Biggrin:

----------


## Stan Tabor

> They know what they're doing, but not in the retail arena.  Since their plan to overwhelm and attempt to dominate the entire optical industry via the web has failed, they have no choice but to attempt the retail sector - the good news is that's our specialty not theirs.
> 
> As for their bottom line, they continue to bleed heavily - I think it's awesome.  They've been slayed by Braveheart.


I also question the wisdom of opening a store.  Coastal just raised more funding a few months ago.  I am wondering how they explained their strategy to their investors.  They must have told them something compelling to get the investors to fork over the cash.

----------


## Golfnorth

> They know what they're doing, but not in the retail arena.  Since their plan to overwhelm and attempt to dominate the entire optical industry via the web has failed, they have no choice but to attempt the retail sector - the good news is that's our specialty not theirs.
> 
> As for their bottom line, they continue to bleed heavily - I think it's awesome.  They've been slayed by Braveheart.


So what if they are trying to build the company and sell it? What if they have no intentions of ever becoming profitable? Just trying to be the devil's advocate here.

----------


## idispense

I wonder if Netflix is doomed as well considering they have no shortage of investors ignoring their PE ratio of 597 ?

----------


## HindSight2020

> So what if they are trying to build the company and sell it? What if they have no intentions of ever becoming profitable? Just trying to be the devil's advocate here.


Time will tell...there's already rumblings of L&E jointly acquiring it.

----------


## Golfnorth

> I wonder if Netflix is doomed as well considering they have no shortage of investors ignoring their PE ratio of 597 ?


Netflix has nothing to do with the conversation here or the optical business!

----------


## gibby2020

CC vs Zenni

The beauty of online is you can always find someone that will sell you an item for cheaper. 
So how much market share are we and CC losing to the Zennis of the world. Why pay the inflated CC price when you can get a SV pair for under $20 shipped to your door!!?? PAL's for under 80 !!

I should be ditching my local (owned by one of the big 3) lab and asking Zenni to be my lab. Just send me uncuts !! I was joking initially but now that I think about it.............Scary eh

----------


## idispense

> Netflix has nothing to do with the conversation here or the optical business!


The point is that a company can be losing money yet still be able to raise funds for years  or it can be profitable but  trading at a ridiculous P/E ratio and still be able to raise funds. Two extremes yet relevant. Neither extreme proves long term viability or if a company will survive. Both extremes seem to have more to do with " investors risk tolerance" .

----------


## Chris Ryser

There are rumors in Europe that CC is closing their lab in Sweden and are going to do the jobs in a new digital lab (Toronto ?)

----------


## idispense

What happened with the new digital one that was for sale in Quebec ?

----------


## HindSight2020

> Netflix has nothing to do with the conversation here or the optical business!


idispense should get hired there and can be our mole.

----------


## Chris Ryser

Has anybody here on this thread ever wondered how much they are paying for a frame or for a pair of lenses ?

The answer is right on your keyboard of the computer ...........................

----------


## HindSight2020

> Has anybody here on this thread ever wondered how much they are paying for a frame or for a pair of lenses ?
> 
> The answer is right on your keyboard of the computer ...........................


?
Please share

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *Please share*



http://www.alibaba.com/showroom/eyeg...facturers.html

----------


## Stan Tabor

Chris, you make many informative posts, but this one should be deleted since it is posting wholesale prices.  This website is misleading as many of these cheap glasses are of so low quality most retailers would not sell them.  Also, consider the minimum quantities, shipping, sourcing trips to China, defective returns, customs and warranty costs and the pricing adds up quickly. It is not that easy.

Someone could post the raw chemical prices of what you are selling and I am sure it would look the same way.

----------


## OPTICALTROLL

> After the CC brief grand opening honeymoon which will suck out all bottom feeder consumers (while doing all of us independents a favour),.


I like how you think.

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *Chris, you make many informative posts, but this one should be deleted since it is posting wholesale prices. This website is misleading as many of these cheap glasses are of so low quality most retailers would not sell them. Also, consider the minimum quantities, shipping, sourcing trips to China, defective returns, customs and warranty costs and the pricing adds up quickly. It is not that easy.
> 
> Someone could post the raw chemical prices of what you are selling and I am sure it would look the same way.
> *


Stan........My prices are right on my website if you care looking for it. The website mentioned above can be found on the first page on a GOOGLE search after posting the question. So its not a secret, and or not a very hidden one. 

Raw chemicals are a lot cheaper than I sell a finished product, it but we work out a formula with most of them, and then start the next step of finding customers to buy and use them, doing the actual work for which they charge. 

There are probably lousy products mentioned there as well as the ones you know well and sell. You can not generalize. Minimum quantities vary, some large and some small. A good optician will or should know whats crap, good, decent or top quality for the price. You can also ask for samples as anywhere else.

People are not so stupid anymore that they can not do a little research on the web and find just about everything they want to know.. 

I will gladly delete the link, if Steve judges that it offends OB rules or he can do it himself directly.

----------


## idispense

> They know what they're doing, but not in the retail arena.  Since their plan to overwhelm and attempt to dominate the entire optical industry via the web has failed, they have no choice but to attempt the retail sector - the good news is that's our specialty not theirs.
> 
> As for their bottom line, they continue to bleed heavily - I think it's awesome.  They've been slayed by Braveheart.


 the good news is that's our specialty not theirs. ... Wish you were right about that but I doubt that you are , any company that can do what they have accomplished on the web, and any company that can make wimps out of regulatory bodies and redraw legislation to suit themselves , can surely learn retail very quickly and teach all of us a lesson very quickly, and if retail is our specialty then why have we been losing so much business to them for so many years, as we feed millions and millions into useless regulations ? They are not stupid.

----------


## Chris Ryser

*Coastal.com Launches Exclusive Alyssa Milano Eyewear Line*
*07/18/2013*




VANCOUVER, British Columbia, July 18, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Coastal Contacts Inc. ("Coastal.com") (Nasdaq:COA) (TSX:COA), the leading online retailer of glasses, sunglasses and contact lenses, announced today that it has launched an exclusive line of branded signature eyewear for women called "Touch by 
Alyssa Milano". In February 2013, Coastal reported that it had signed an exclusive multi-year licensing agreement with 
Alyssa Milano to develop a line of branded signature eyewear for women, exclusive to Coastal.com's industry leading websites.
Milano is a widely-recognized actress, producer, philanthropist, and former singer. She is best known for her roles in the television series _Who's the Boss_, _Charmed_ and _Mistresses_. Milano has also made a name for herself in the fashion industry with her other "Touch by 
Alyssa Milano" collections, synonymous with style and function. Other "Touch by 
Alyssa Milano" collections include unique apparel, jewelry and accessories designed for the stylish female sports fan. Alyssa's upcoming role as host of Project Runway All Stars demonstrates her interest in the next generation of fashion designers.
"It's been super fun working with Alyssa to develop an exclusive line of eyewear that fits perfectly with our customers," commented 
Aaron Magness, Coastal.com's VP of Marketing. "Her global fan base has been very vocal through social media, asking when the collection is coming. They are going to love what they see."Milano added, "Whether on the red carpet or relaxing at home, glasses are part of my everyday look. So, I wanted to design a line of fun and flirty eyewear that can take you from day to night."

----------


## optical maven

So new Coastal/Clearly financials for Dec 2013.  Sales up, but net loss is up.  They have never shown a profit on their financial statements since inception.  Is there anyone reading this blog that understands a financial report and explain how any business can stay in business and never make money?

----------


## oculus

> So new Coastal/Clearly financials for Dec 2013.  Sales up, but net loss is up.  They have never shown a profit on their financial statements since inception.  Is there anyone reading this blog that understands a financial report and explain how any business can stay in business and never make money?



Everytime they need cash they have to convince investors to put more money, the day those won't believe anymore in the bussiness case .. end of the story (selling to another corp. or closing ..  more chance for a sell since they have a volume of sales).

----------


## HindSight2020

A $60M loss. I'm literally laughing on the basement floor. Oh wait, what's underneath me? 

Ahh, it's just CC's latest record setting loss. 

Ok, back to work everyone, nothing to see here (snicker).

----------


## gibby2020

Maybe deep pockets of E & L sustain them, so they can gradually reduce competition from independent B & M's (OD's an Opticians). Meanwhile trying to sell their wares to us at the same time! Of course I no longer buy E or L products.

I see oversupply of us OD's, opticians and ophthos. The market is over-served. Already opticians are mainly employees of chain opticals, big box stores or independents. The opticians' program is not longer a stepping-stone to small business ownership.
Soon most OD's will be in same boat. New grads will be waking up to a job in optometry, not as a business owner. Stay tuned

----------


## idispense

> A $60M loss. I'm literally laughing on the basement floor. Oh wait, what's underneath me? 
> 
> Ahh, it's just CC's latest record setting loss. 
> 
> Ok, back to work everyone, nothing to see here (snicker).



You have an interesting viewpoint, but in July the stock price was around $ 4.60; in December it was around $ 7.00 and it just kissed $ 9.00 

 I seem to recall that GM lost a SL of money, went bankrupt and then restarted again with a clean Balance Sheet and continued on as if nothing ever happened and now after unloading the debt and liabilities GM is paying dividends. 

Why are  you so sure there is nothing to see here ? They don't have issues raising money or selling stock or taking market share or changing the perception of value of eyewear. They are a game changer, not something to snicker at.

----------


## HindSight2020

> I seem to recall that in December the stock  price was less than it is today and today it ended substantially higher than it was last June as well. I seem to recall that GM lost a SL of money, went bankrupt and then restarted again with a clean Balance Sheet and continued on as if nothing ever happened. 
> 
> Are you so sure there is nothing to see here ?


The obvious difference here is CC has never been profitable and never will be.  Their business trajectory is absolutely backwards - businesses usually improve their bottom line with increased volume and market share.

Stock value means zip when a company enters bankruptcy, however I'm sure *E*vi*L* will gobble it up before that happens.  There's already been rumblings of that.

----------


## idispense

Is it possible your definition of profitable is skewed ?

----------


## idispense

> So new Coastal/Clearly financials for Dec 2013.  Sales up, but net loss is up.  They have never shown a profit on their financial statements since inception.  Is there anyone reading this blog that understands a financial report and explain how any business can stay in business and never make money?




If all of the employee wages were paid then the employees are not disgruntled or unhappy. 

If the share prices rise then the long investors are happy, if the share prices fall then the shorts are happy.

----------


## optical maven

I think, with no disrespect, no one (including me) who has responded understands a financial statement.  CC is definitely a darling for some analysts.  Their stock took a little tumble after they reported their most recent earnings (loss).  I suspect the investing world sees their business as having great potential and once their initial growing pains subside they will be a very profitable company.

----------


## idispense

In the world of international economies and multinational business can one financial statement explain everything ? 
 In terms of black and white a loss is a loss, but is that the big picture ? 

Look ok at GM. The loss is reflected in share prices falling but many made or lost fortunes still in the fluctuations. 

Still the bailout transferred the debt to the shareholder, yet from public funds emerged a debt free, clean balance sheet company that is now profitable and pays dividends, then the public funds are replenished by the timely selling off of Government Motors back to the same public. Sure there were huge black and white losses but they were nothing more than hiccups to be resold to the public a second time. The public is gullible, opticians are too.

----------


## Golfnorth

> Is it possible your definition of profitable is skewed ?


Profit is profit.....it's black & white.
A business can either be profitable, post a loss or break even.
CC is not profitable period.
Now I'm going to sit back and wait for you to tell me why I'm wrong in my definition which is just wacked.

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## HindSight2020

> Profit is profit.....it's black & white.
> A business can either be profitable, post a loss or break even.
> CC is not profitable period.
> Now I'm going to sit back and wait for you to tell me why I'm wrong in my definition which is just wacked.
> 
> Regards,
> Golfnorth


+1.  He must read his P&L's in Klingon.

----------


## idispense

The losses are absorbed by shareholders equity, but shareholders equity is driven by the high  number of consecutive quarters of revenue growth, so as long as new issues of stock can be floated based on revenue growth then the business will continue.

----------


## HindSight2020

> The losses are absorbed by shareholders equity, but shareholders equity is driven by the high  number of consecutive quarters of revenue growth, so as long as new issues of stock can be floated based on revenue growth then the business will continue.


The issuance of new stock is nothing more than a fancy term for refinancing.  When a business continues to bleed red ink in consecutive record losses, stock value is eventually diminished then devalued to be worthless.  They are growing their losses instead of their profit, certainly not the formula for success!

The only reason they are gaining additional stock holders is because of market share - no other reason.  Anybody investing in them at this point deserves to lose their investment.

----------


## idispense

> The issuance of new stock is nothing more than a fancy term for refinancing.  When a business continues to bleed red ink in consecutive record losses, stock value is eventually diminished then devalued to be worthless.  They are growing their losses instead of their profit, certainly not the formula for success!
> 
> The only reason they are gaining additional stock holders is because of market share - no other reason.  Anybody investing in them at this point deserves to lose their investment.


You could be right, however their revenue growth has continued unchallenged since about 2000 and the refinancing still works and the employees and management must be happy with their wages. 

Speaking of losing your investment, I am glad you brought that up because many people do **** their money against the wall every December with a zero return. So let's take an annual "investment" of say $ 800.00 and hypothetically "invest"  that same $800.00 into this stock. Historical monthly stock prices are available back to 2004 so if we look at December closing prices then a ten year investment of 800.00 at the beginning of each December since 2004 would mean that we would have a total investment of $ 8000.00 and presently own 5590 shares which had a closing price of approximately 48968.00 or a return of $ 40,968.00. 

This is is hypothetical of course but does use historical data, so which would you rather do with 800.00 that you were going to **** away and lose each year anyhow ?

----------


## optimensch

For what it is worth......I watch the cl pricing on cc......i notice a bump in prices, in particular for acuvue oasys 6 pk and 24 pk.....
they are considerably MORE expensive than other onliners in Canada, and easy to price match for any optical shop....
I guess they figure people won't notice, or maybe they just can't afford to be giving everything away for much longer...

----------


## idispense

> So new Coastal/Clearly financials for Dec 2013. Sales up, but net loss is up. They have never shown a profit on their financial statements since inception. Is there anyone reading this blog that understands a financial report and explain how any business can stay in business and never make money?


There is no magical mystery to it. There is no Wizard of Chartered Accountants needed to understand it. Just do your own research and read the  SEC filing information paying attention to the full version (approx 100 pages ) of the 40 - F and SC- 13s.  Research and Google and Wikpedia  whats in front of you.

----------


## gibby2020

> For what it is worth......I watch the cl pricing on cc......i notice a bump in prices, ..


Yes they've spent so much on building their brand that the consumer uses their pricing as their benchmark for what CL's should cost. Most don't look for other online CL vendors to find that they could be had for even less!

That's the beauty of the net...you can always find it for less! But that destroys a brand's reputation with me the seller and the consumer.

----------


## optical maven

Check out www.contactsexpress.ca
Who are these guys?

----------


## edKENdance

> Check out www.contactsexpress.ca
> Who are these guys?


Seem to be tied to http://www.postalcontacts.com/index.html  I googled some of the wording used in their FAQ and this site uses some of the same word for word.

----------


## idispense

> Check out www.contactsexpress.ca
> Who are these guys?


They are about two blocks from the COO offices in downtown Toronto and their web site offers Rx eyeglasses as well. 

Perhaps all of the COO staff, Registrar and Execs could pop over there together during tomorrow's meeting and report back?

----------


## optical maven

What's their address.  I'll pay them a visit and let you know the results.

----------


## idispense

ContactsExpress.ca
120 Adelaide St. W.
Suite 2500
Toronto, ON M5H 1T1

----------


## Chris Ryser

They are nothing more than another online optical, but another Candian set up in the middle of Toronto. I am only waiting for one in French out of Montreal..................so far "ZIP"

----------


## optimensch

it is not illegal for opticians or optometrists in quebec to sell online to quebec residents.....there are professional rules which need to be respected, but it can be done. it might just not be profitable......I suspect this is basically the case in every state or province. Not everyone can get $500,000 or more in start up capital to get a real online site going in an already crowded web-space....there are only so many links on the first page of a google search.
I doubt if any pure on-line optical is actually profitable - but one company which is for sure making boatloads of profits off of on-line optical is..............GOOGLE!!!

----------


## idispense

They have received fines in the hundreds of millions of dollars before when it could be proven they were profiting from their technologies at the expense of local applicable laws. 

Are our local applicable laws being broken ?

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *Not everyone can get $500,000 or more in start up capital to get a real online site going in an already crowded web-space....there are only so many links on the first page of a google search.
> 
> **I doubt if any pure on-line optical is actually profitable* *- but one company which is for sure making boatloads of profits off of on-line optical is..............GOOGLE!!!*



I have made a listing of the optical on-line companies over the last few years and there are plenty of them, you can find it at http://optochemicals.com/web_listing.htm, then scroll towards the bottom of the page and you will see the whole section. My web listing has close to 1000 optical lnks.

Three of the highest traffic ranking ones belong to Essilor who makes lenses and frames these days, so they will make some money somewhere selling on-line and they are not stupid.. They just purchased the latest USA located one a few month ago.
They also own GKB, the largest lab in India with over 500 employees in locations all over the country and has launched the largest on-line optical a few years back.

----------


## optimensch

Chris - as a sidebar - I am not sure that Alexa rankings, especially for websites that are not in the top 100,000 world-wide, are all that accurate....

http://www.soccerwidow.com/blogging/...ry-popularity/

----------


## mike.elmes

funny!!! the CEO pictured is a posterboy for online sales. Who fitted his glasses?? they are quite crooked.HA!


> I can't help smiling when I look at this.
> 
> Attachment 9931

----------


## Uncle Fester

> funny!!! the CEO pictured is a posterboy for online sales. Who fitted his glasses?? they are quite crooked.HA!


"But the progressives work when I make the glasses crooked!"

----------


## edKENdance

Now they have a try before you buy program like Warby BUT with prescription lenses already cut to the frame.

http://www.wwd.com/fashion-news/fash...0Scoops-bullet

----------


## Stan Tabor

> Now they have a try before you buy program like Warby BUT with prescription lenses already cut to the frame.
> 
> http://www.wwd.com/fashion-news/fash...0Scoops-bullet


I guess since they own underutilized MEIs, they can do this.  But here is the problem...let's say they use cheap uncoated CR-39 lenses...the customer will want them replaced anyway.  If they lose better lenses, they will lose too much money on customers who do not buy.  Even with automation, the labor involved in getting this done is going to be significant. 

They seem like a company that is experimenting rather than innovating.

----------


## idispense

Probably a smart move. Read the fine print. It should boost sales. Boosting growth will also facilitate another round of stock shares to be issued from the treasury again. Free money without having to pay it back. Does it get better than that ?

----------


## idispense

> I guess since they own underutilized MEIs, they can do this. But here is the problem..._let's say they use cheap uncoated CR-39 lenses...the customer will want them replaced anyway. If they lose better lenses, they will lose too much money on customers who do not buy._ Even with automation, the labor involved in getting this done is going to be significant. 
> 
> They seem like a company that is experimenting rather than innovating.



Stan:

I think you will find that their offer includes the coatings of your choice. I think their offer includes Progressives and single vision. I think you  choose what you want and they ship it as you ordered the Rx. 

Normally there is a 365 day warranty and that still applies to this offer as well BUT the Try Before You Buy warranty is only for 30 days and you must use a credit card to purchase. If you have not returned the glasses within 30 days then your credit card is charged. Now you still have  the 365 day warranty but it only applies to unworn eyeglasses.

Is this any different than what Luxottica has been doing at Lens Crafters ? Where is the experimentation ? 

Cost of the mail out shipping  is no different than before. Returns may go down. 

This is likely an excellent marketing strategy.

----------


## edKENdance

I'm intrigued by the potential for errors.  I mean, trusting the client to provide the proper PD measurement for their glasses combined with the way they determine what height to place a progressive at combined with tons of other variables.  They might be able to see great out of all 4 pairs or not see well out of any of them.  Maybe they'll see well out of 2 but they're not the ones they really like.

----------


## Doug

> 2012 .. net loss for Q2  242,000   for 2013 ...  6,98 millions !!  
> 
> http://www.brandonsun.com/business/b...811.html?thx=y


If you had bought shares in COA when this post (_June 10th, 2013_) was started, as of today you'd be up 86% ROI.

----------


## idispense

You would be up over 40,000.00 from the time they went public till now, by once a year investing the equivalent of your 800.00 license renewal fee.  

And if you didn't renew your license at all and and invested that too, then you would be up over 80,000.00, not including the cost of CE credits internetters don't face.

----------

