"About half" of Reality Labs spend is in AR R&D according to Bosworth. I'll be very interested to see what Apple brings to the table, but would not expect Meta to be playing catch up.
It would appear as though they are, at least according to this article from 2015. One would imagine they wouldn't continue expanding once the $/sqft leveled off:
"$3,785 in sales per square foot, a figure that would put Warby Parker behind only Apple in terms of retail efficiency. Though those numbers have dipped somewhat as Warby Parker has grown, the company is still averaging about $3,000 per square foot of retail space, a figure that’s in the same breath as Tiffany’s estimated $3,043."
Those numbers say nothing about the interaction between retail and online sales. There is no question the Warby Parker retail stores cannibalize the online sales. The only reason I went to the store was because it was quicker than a home try on. The brand is what attracted me as a potential customer and not the store itself. It is a mistake to only credit the store with the potential sale.
True, but that is how you report in-store sales, and the exact same dynamic applies to Apple sales.
In terms of "There is no question the Warby Parker retail stores cannibalize the online sales", I wouldn't call in "cannibalization", I'd call it (excuse the business buzzword) synergy. I did the exact same thing, but both parts of the experience enhanced each other for me. That is, I liked being able to browse and search online, and then get a real feel and fitting in-store. I'm sure they expanded into brick-and-mortar retail because they know a large number of folks aren't going to want to go through the mail-order-try-on-five-pairs thing.
There is a new D2C company out there called Hubble. They don't offer custom base curve or correction for astigmatism, but I was able to get one year's worth for $265.
it could be that the licensing fees on the name are a significant enough drag on revenue, and/or the agreement has an expiration date and there's an expectation that the licenser won't renew the agreement.
I've been a part of situations like that. You can try and get ahead of it like TW is doing now where you create the second name ahead of time and try to build up the recognition and awareness around it in advance.
Time Warner Cable was bought by Charter, and the Spectrum "rebranding" is Charter's existing name for cable services. If there are continuing licensing fees for using the Time Warner name, I don't see why Charter would continue using it over its own brand name.
Will be very interesting to see what impact a successful model here would have on the trade-in/re-sell revenue of brick and mortar. I believe these numbers have been hovering in the 25% range for the past few years.
