Latest / The Interline Podcast / Can Technology Help New Entrants Break Into The Entrenched Eyewear Market?

Transcript

Can Technology Help New Entrants Break Into The Entrenched Eyewear Market? · The Interline Podcast

• speaker-0: One out of three high wear models you see in a shop will never be sold, which is quite massive. If you combine the waste and production, which is around 80 % of traditional production, plus one out of three or 30, around 30 % high wear that never gets sold, and to end, that is quite a big number of waste in total. speaker-1: Hey, welcome back to the Interline Podcast. You might not know it from my LinkedIn photo, but I wear glasses. Now, in my case, I need glasses for reading, using a computer, driving, and watching TV. So while I don't tend to wear them when I'm walking around or at show floors or on stage, which is where you usually see me, I actually do spend most of my days with frames on my face. In spite of that, though, I actually don't really know anywhere near as much about the eyewear industry as I do about apparel and footwear. I'm familiar with lot of the broad strokes that you probably are, which are that it's monopolized by a giant group, that it's a new frontier for wearables, and that it's one of those categories where people tend to choose either super familiar shapes that are designed to be unremarkable, or they see glasses as a chance to be bold, expressive, and colorful. I think I fall somewhere in those two camps depending on what different people tell me I can get away with at any given time. There's a lot more to eyewear than that though. From personalization and 3D printing to platforms that are designed to lower the barrier of entry and maybe start disrupting some of that homogenization I just mentioned. To get me up to speed, today I'm bringing on Marc Suary and Sebastien Poulouse who both work at Visage. Visage is conceived as a way to get individual eyewear designs from independent creators onto people's faces using AI powered face scanning and tailored fit and producing those designs on demand through additive manufacturing. Mark is a co-founder over there and Sebastian is head of optics and design. Together, the three of us get into what's actually really going on in eyewear and we talk about the positive and negative impacts that technology could have on its future. Okay, Mark Zawary, Sebastian Ploisay, welcome to the Interline Podcast. speaker-0: Thank you very much. speaker-2: Yeah, thank you, Ben. speaker-1: Wonderful to have you here. This is the first one we've done with two people. So it's going to be interesting to see how this develops. You both have very different areas of expertise. So I'm thinking as we go, the questions will make sense for one or both of you, but don't hesitate to add to what the other has to say as we go, if you think that's going to be valuable. Now, we always try and start these shows with like a baseline, a definition, some foundational understanding. ⁓ and that's especially useful when we're talking about a sector that is maybe less familiar to our readers than, and our listeners, than apparel and footwear would be. And when we think about eyewear, ⁓ that's an industry that's, it's pretty opaque when you look at it from the outside, it's really big and it's, it's kind of impenetrable to look at to a lot of people. So I want to start with just something definitional, which is what does the eyewear industry really look like? right now. You everybody's familiar with the idea that there's one mega conglomerate behind a lot of the consumer brands that we see, but I don't think it's as widely known how that affects the supply chain, the market opportunities and the mechanics behind the scenes. So big question to start with, but hopefully a shortish answer, which is what is what is going on in IWR? speaker-2: It's a wide question as you said. Maybe at first just to intro, it's a very complex industry because ⁓ it's a unique industry. would say that it's really at the confluence between the medical area because you have ⁓ at first people coming to a where because they need some prescription or even a sun protection but it's something that has a medical purpose. And also on the other side, you have something that ⁓ is related to trends, to style, and really sign our silhouettes. So this is something that is really unique. so of course then all the industry is a bit complex in terms of production and in terms of distribution as well. yeah, that said, yeah, you said that, yeah, we all know that there is a big group that is At the center, are talking about the Assyria Luxotica and they are managing both the lenses and the frame and their weight in the industry is really massive. But a part of that, you have multiple actors that are doing some, let's say, big turnover, middle turnover, a very small one. And you have all the industries that is organized around those players. I mean that ⁓ Of course, for the player like Asylum Luxotica, have a supply chain that is ⁓ with very, very big factory that have a big capacity of developing and that has a lot of MOQ, minimum order quantity, to be able to produce. And you have also a lot of, let's say, smaller industry that factory that permits to ⁓ to produce less volume, but let's say that mainly we need to produce in volume and the area where ⁓ frames are produced are mainly in Asia. But you have a lot of different factories and a lot of different areas. For example, have in Shenzhen, ⁓ all the high-end ⁓ production that is there, and then you have Wenju, you have Genju. other areas in China that are dedicated to smaller brands or to reach a very low price with high quantity of course. And then you have some suppliers also that are based in Europe, based in other countries. But I have to say that the raw production is based in China and then you have a lot of different operations like finishing or... ⁓ specific parts developing in other areas. speaker-1: Perfect. Thanks, Sebastian. And I think, is it fair to say then that the dominant business model in eyewear is licensing? And if so, in what form? Because, you mentioned Essie Lerle of Exotica. Are the brands that consumers see online and in opticians, are those brands playing an active role in the design and the development of the products that people see? Or are they largely just licensing their names and reputations to... big conglomerates that have hundreds of brands in their portfolio that then do the product work. speaker-0: Yeah, absolutely. The industry is highly based on licensing. Sebastian said, is Solar Exotica, which is the biggest player, controls roughly 30 % Just so you know, our industry is approximately $180 billion globally. So that's a very, very big company. There's also smaller ones that are still huge, Safilo, Marcolin. basically the ones that handle the whole process from design to tooling to production to distribution. So when you go into an optician store today, first of all, you'll recognize that most optician stores have very similar brands, if not all the same, and all of them are indeed controlled by licensing giants. this is, I mean, that's how the system works. And let's say the system works in that end for them. It doesn't work as well for consumers. It doesn't work as well for independent brands who wish to innovate. And the fact that we're into this massive licensing standardized industry does play a role in the fact that ⁓ innovation is very slow within the industry. So to answer your question, yes, it is highly licensing industry. speaker-2: Yeah, a few words ⁓ in addition, but it's also because as I mentioned in intro, it's also medical devices. so for brands, even if they have a strong asset and strong DNA, it's sometimes really hard to have the knowledge of all these technical stuff. So it's much more convenient for them to work with specialists. in this way and I have to say that mainly they are not so involved in the design process. Of course they are because they are brands so they are taking care of how it's used but the license, I don't know how to say but the company that had the license to use it, they develop by themselves and then they make validation through the brand. So for the brands it's not ⁓ a full continuation of their DNA, if that's clear. speaker-1: It just, makes sense. it's, it's not, it's not a hands-on exercise necessarily when it comes to design and product development. And it's also something that falls outside their domain expertise, because as you said, they're not, they're not lens crafters. They're not opticians. They're not, they don't have that medical side of things. So when we think about all those elements you've just said, there's a question that I honestly don't know the answer to, which is what does it look like to try and stand up a new brand in that environment? Mark just mentioned innovation being low. So let's just park the unique parts of what Visage does for a minute, cause we'll come back to that. ⁓ But I'm a glasses wearer. I try and seek out kind of frames from unique brands. I'm wearing some glasses from Cubits in London. ⁓ I have no idea if they source their lenses and acetate from the same single pool of specialized suppliers that everyone else is using or whether there are new suppliers for them to find the way they are in fashion. ⁓ And we've mentioned demo cues before. ⁓ We've written a lot in the last couple of years about how apparel brands have been able to monopolize material supply and production capacity in a way that squeezes out new entrants who can't meet minimum order quantities and that that drives down innovation and newness. How true is that in eyewear? If I wanted to create a new eyewear brand, how big is the barrier to entry? speaker-2: Yeah, it's not so easy, ⁓ frankly speaking. ⁓ If you are thinking in a conditional way, mean, there is, of course, is lot of suppliers, but there is quite a lot. So as mentioned earlier, there is some big ones that are really dedicated to the biggest players. But the biggest players, have also their own production center. know, for example, they have a big factory in Italy. But then as soon as you are, even if you find ⁓ a new supplier that will help you to launch your ascetic connection, by the way, you need to buy the raw material. You have big minimum order quantity, even for small players because you buy the material in big quantities and you need to use it. And this is a big ⁓ barrier to start with. So you need to pay upfront. ⁓ buying material, sometimes the tooling if you are making some molds, for example, you have also to make some certification, you need to meet the optical constraints. So yeah, it's not a calm journey. It's not so easy. It's a ⁓ capital eating, I would say, to start with. So this is a barrier. speaker-1: Yeah. Mark, anything, anything from your side on that one? Cause I know you're, you're, you're in the business and the strategic end here at Bizaarj as well. speaker-0: Yeah, absolutely. Seb is absolutely right. If I'm a new brand, I want to create my eyewear collection. First of all, it takes a lot of time, which means that new brands try and stay within the trends of fashion and trying to innovate and create collections fast. to create a new collection, I'd count at least six to 12 months to launch one single eyewear collection. ⁓ In terms of ⁓ financial investments, ⁓ a few tens of thousands of euros at least to create the mold, to buy the raw material, and then to buy the stock. Buying stock means at least a few hundred pieces per SKU. Per SKU means per model, per color. So if you want a full collection with multiple colors and a little bit of personalization, it can go very fast. I mean, that's also one reason why brands are kind of locked out of the industry or obliged to go through these licensing giants because it's too heavy. It's very difficult to test a new product, very difficult to test a new shape without ⁓ needing considerable financial investments. speaker-1: And I think we've, we've kind of hinted at this, but they, to non-glasses wearers or to people who treat glasses as eyewear as a purely kind of medical functional device who just, just need a pair of things to help them read. think there's a sentiment that aside from the, obviously the wildest designs, eyewear is quite a samey, a non-differentiated category. ⁓ and where a lot of the innovation and form and function has kind of been exhausted. Now. independently of some of the sourcing and manufacturing challenges you've just mentioned, Mark, when it comes to new designers and brands entering the industry, how do you feel about the design challenge? Is it, is it the case that this is actually a sector that's short on ideas and that there isn't much new to be done in eyewear? Or is it more accurate to say that it's ended up being homogenized because so many brands have that single entity, that monolithic supply chain, those big barriers ahead of them. speaker-0: So, Sebastian is an amazing, by the way, eyewear designer. I think he's the best qualified to answer this question. speaker-2: ⁓ You're kidding me when you're saying that it's short on ideas. I can understand that. In fact, when you are launching right now a new collection, you need to take into consideration all the investment. So you have a lot of people that are really prudent. They don't want to take a lot of risk and so they capitalize on shapes that are working and so on. This is what could Letting that ⁓ there is a bit of a lake ⁓ of new ideas, but that's not true. At first there is a lot of innovation that is put ⁓ into some components, hinges and so on, that permits to be a ⁓ very long-lasting ⁓ product in terms ⁓ of quality, reliability. And you have also a lot of innovation that is put in terms of technology right now. example, you maybe we'll talk about this later, but you have a lot of electronics that is embedded into into a way that make things also evolves. I have to say that the new techs, ⁓ new technology like additive manufacturing, for example, that we are working a lot at this age. So 3D printing, let's permits to work with a lower quantity and also to really investigate a new ⁓ new shapes, new volumes with a very limited risk. And so you can see that, let's say the traditional brands and ⁓ even the new one, they are working traditionally, they are really conservative because of the investments at first. But you have a part of that, an unlocking of ⁓ new ideas with those new tech. And we really believe that we will see really soon a lot of Crazy stuff, totally crazy. And that we meet also, you know, the fitting issue and everything's a medical purpose, with shades that you wouldn't have able to have seen before. So, yeah, let's say that, you know, it's always a cycle, I would say. in the 80s, there were a lot of... new shape, new innovation, thanks to designers, fact, like Alain Mitry, like Jean-Francois, quite a lot that really investigate ⁓ today new things with regular acetate, et cetera. And then, yeah, it has been a bit calm in terms of style research. But now, yeah, if you look at the market, you can see that there is some very, very exciting stuff in terms of style and trends. speaker-1: So there's, there's creative space to go after basically, but the risk of doing so is high. ⁓ yeah. Okay. And I think that's, that's, that's, that teases up well for, ⁓ some of the things we're going to carry on talking about now before we get into some of the exciting kind of form and function stuff though. ⁓ I think our, audience is used to hearing about sustainability when it comes to soft materials, less so when it comes to more precision engineered and rigid products like eyewear. So. Humour me for a second, just how much waste actually comes about in the typical eyewear development sampling and production process. speaker-2: Quite a lot, you know, quite a lot. Because at first, you know, the main material that is used is acetate, as you know, and acetate is what we call subtractive manufacturing. So that means that you are starting from ⁓ a sheet of acetate that consumes a lot of water and material to be built, and then you remove 85 % of the material it saves to go to the trash. So yes, it's super wastey and it's not so sustainable. ⁓ There is a lot of research to make the raw material ⁓ more sustainable itself. So we talk about bioacetate and so on, but you know, same as soon as you waste 85 % of the material, you can't claim any real sustainable. practice. It's the same for the metal. We used to work quite a lot on the iron side with titanium, for example, or even stainless steel that are really consuming a lot of resources. One material that is very interesting is aluminum, but it's not very used in the iron ⁓ industry, unfortunately. ⁓ Things could change also in this. That's why I think that working with additive manufacturing solves quite a lot of this because you use only the material that you need to build the product. And according to me, is the most important, but 3D printing technology is not dominant right now from far. It's really acetate that takes the biggest part of the cake. speaker-1: So the environmental cost of experimentation is also high. It would be a glove summary of that. Now this might be an ignorant follow on question, but how much waste is kind of retail unsold product and post consumer? So I instinctively know the average return rate for apparel, is super high. ⁓ And particularly depending if you're dealing in mass market. I've got a rough idea of what the typical markdown and sell through rate, full price sell through rate is for clothing. ⁓ I'm in the dark about both of those statistics when it comes to eyewear. Just walk me through that. We talked about the production waste. Let's talk about the retail and consumer waste. speaker-2: Yeah, know, same. I would say that at first, to meet the MOQ, you have a lot of brands that at first are not able to sell all the amount of frame that they are about. So you have wastage before going into the retail. And in the retail, same. You have a lot of, you know, opticians right now. think that in sort the average amount of frame that they have is around 1,000 or something like that. And so there is a stock that is there, but just to be displayed, but will never be sold in the end. this is an issue. Also, there is a lot of bad practice there because, for example, if you have a temple that is broken, the opticians, what they use to do is not to remove the temple and replace it, but they are sent back the frame and receive a new one. you have... big wastage in this end. And then on the consumer side, you know, we used to change all the frame when we change our prescription. And so that means that you have, every time you buy a frame, when you need prescription, I'm not talking about some gas, when you need prescription, every time you buy a new one, the other one is going to the trash directly. There is no... not really a second life, even if that starts. In many countries, you have some retailers that are specializing themselves in second-hand market. But let's say that it's a very, very beginning of this. I think that it will come also from the consumer ask. It's never the retailer that will push in this direction, but that will come from the consumer side. speaker-0: Just one simple statistic on the walk. One out of three eyewear models you see in a shop will never be sold. Which is, which is quite massive. If you combine the waste at production, which is around 80%, which additional production plus one out of three or 30 around 30 % I were that never gets sold. And to end that is a quite a big number. of waste in total. I think there are some incentives to finding some new ways of doing because this is not ethical or sustainable in the long run. speaker-1: Yeah, absolutely. That's, that is some stark context there. let's just talk a bit about the eyewear buying experience. So I mentioned I'm a glasses wearer. I've been through it myself, although I'm due to renew my prescription. ⁓ so it's a duty to go through it again soon. ⁓ there's definitely been some movement where virtual try on is concerned, right? ⁓ and I think that's at least partly because. That feels like an easier technical challenge to tackle with rigid materials and soft fabrics. Virtual try on in apparel is still one of the most contested and hardest problems that there is out there, I think. But to me, it still doesn't feel like I can buy online with full confidence about fit. And it still feels like the optics side of things is a bit divorced from the style and the design side of things when I'm buying, you know, the prescription and the fashion. you know, the function and the fashion side of it feel a bit separate. How do you guys see the shopping side of things and what do you think are the opportunities to improve it? speaker-0: That's a great question and probably the right people to ask. As you may know, we declared war to standardized products. overall, when you want some eyewear or prescription eyewear that works, you need three things. You need a frame that fits your face or your facial features. And you need a lens that is qualitative enough to answer to your prescription needs and well centered to your pupil. And finally, someone to be able to assemble the frame, the lens according to your pupil. So if we look at how it works in store up to now, we have the lens parameter because the prescription, I mean, we're selling in the industry, sells very individualized lenses that costs very often quite a lot of money. So on the lens side, we're doing one lens for one customer, which totally makes sense. You have the optician in store that is there to adjust the lens to your face. However, the frame is still an issue because we may adjust it, but most of the frames are completely standardized. ⁓ As Sebastian said earlier, it's not just a pair of jeans, you you wear once in a while. This is ⁓ really between the medical products and the fashion accessory. And you have it on your face all day long. If you're wearing prescription, then you know what I'm talking about. So do I. You better have something that works well and that's comfortable for your face. So online, to come back to the main question, there is a massive lack of tools when it comes to selling online. There is indeed Virtual Trion, which takes a few parameters into consideration and kind of drops a frame on your face with some kind of degree of precision that is not yet met in our opinion. But that's far from enough ⁓ to deliver precisely adjusted prescription eyewear. There are two key measurements that are crucial for adjusting a prescription lens. The first one is the pupillary distance, which is a horizontal measurement on where your pupil lies within your frame box. Your frame box being your frame shape, where your lens comes. ⁓ is super important and there is also the pupillary height. So it's the same measurement but vertically in order to know where your pupillary is. And today online these measurements are not yet taken, which is a massive problem because brands still try to deliver prescription malware online. There's a lot of returns because obviously the adjustment is not right. Some brands fail to do so or don't even try to do so because of lack of tools and the result of all this is that eyewear is one of the only industries that hasn't yet really had this digital transformation or transition. Because I think on one hand you've got consumers that don't really trust the process online and the brands on the other hand know that they can't deliver products that are adjusted to the face and to the prescription of the other consumer. So there is a real lack of innovation and lack of tools. when it comes to selling online and virtual try on for sure right now is not yet ⁓ precise after given accurate representation. speaker-1: Okay. Now walk me through your vision. You you mentioned you declared war on, ⁓ you know, common products. Walk me through your vision for how we exert a deeper change behind the shopping experience than behind the transaction. Because it's one thing to plug a nicer front end into the existing way of doing things. It's one thing to say, here's a great consumer experience. It's another to try and disrupt that by doing what your folks are doing, producing on demand or migrating towards additive manufacturing. What led you to believe that it's actually possible to disrupt the back end of eyewear to the extent that it needs to be done? speaker-0: Yeah. So every, every issue I mentioned earlier is, an issue that we're trying to take into consideration. And the vision is, is really a 360, let's say, omnichannel experience. It's very difficult to change the front end or the user experience for the consumer when the backend doesn't follow. So at some point in order to innovate correctly, there is a necessity to kind of control the whole value chain. not necessarily control, but innovate within the whole value chain. And for this, think technology comes in the front end, whether it be virtual try-on, whether it be starting the consumer experience through a facial scan, which would make sense, right? Before buying shoes, we're asking you what's your measurements, what your shoe size is, right? I mean, I think the base from this is to really understand your face. Once we understand your face, we can redirect you to which frames would suit you best, which frames are adapted to your prescription, which frame is adapted to your face shape, what color would be adapted to your own color, to your eye color, to your skin color. That's for the more style part. For the more medical parts, we would really be able to give you a full adjustment to one-tenth of a millimeter to really understand where your pupil lies, which frame and which lens is the most... you know, appropriate for your face. I'm not speaking just online. I'm really speaking on the channel. So this could be an experience in store and it could also be online. So this is once we have this information and we understand which frame fits the best, or if we want to push it even further, um, using 3d printing to manufacture on demand, a unique frame that could suit your face individually. Um, so 3d printing, we, we touched upon this subject earlier, but 3d printing or additive manufacturing. is a new way of manufacturing that's kind of entering a lot of industries right now, mostly for prototyping until now, but we are seeing a new direction that's really around industrialization. So this really allows for more customization, more individualization, production on demand, meaning your consumer, you order your eyewear, you choose your size or you choose the custom fit and your eyewear gets printed once you order. which means that we're only producing what needs to be produced and what will be really worn. So end-to-end, if you put this whole chain together, we've got the front end where we start from the consumer's face. We understand the features. We recommend what products the customer should buy. And then on the backend, we follow through with a new way to produce on demand sustainably with a lot of customization. in order to really adapt to the customer's individual taste and medical requirements. speaker-1: Okay, excellent. That is a lot of insight there. And I think being able to link that back to the challenges that we talked about before, it gives us a good through line to understanding the mandate for it. Now, so far we've been talking about eyewear as kind of pretty fixed medical and fashion objects. ⁓ But we've been conveniently ignoring a pretty big elephant in the room, which is the fact that eyewear seems to have been chosen as the next platform shift in wearables. as well as being maybe the easiest way to put AI on our bodies. I'm keen to get both of your perspectives on this because for me, feels like there's a lot to be excited about from a technical point of view, like miniaturization, fitting, fitting the things that you need, microphones, speakers, cameras, and things into existing product categories is inherently cool. And then lens technology in the kind of non-commercial Orion stuff that Meta was working on the silicon carbon carbide wave guides. But. It also feels like a moment where, this sort of like consolidation and market dominance of big companies we've already talked about could repeat itself. ⁓ you know, we could be going beyond the billions that Metta has already invested in SLO Luxottica, for example, and extending into even more of a monopoly and even more of a monoculture when we get into the integrated tech side of things as well. What's your outlook on this? Like, how do you see glasses from a ⁓ wearables point of view and from a platform point of view. speaker-2: This is super interesting question and that describes a very exciting moment. Yeah, you're absolutely right. Eyewear are turning into something new that is a technological object. Maybe that will be the next big object, technological, that you will wear and that will replace. This is a view of Mark Zuckerberg, for example, that the smart eyewear will replace. our smartphone in a quite near future. this could happen because at first, AI, embedding AI into an AIware is something that is super relevant ⁓ to ask a question to your agent about what you are seeing when the camera is looking at the same point as you. So you will have super precise question. You have also a microphone, you have earphones that are placed in the just in the proper way so you could have really a conversation with your AI and as soon as you combine this with with waveguides for example and we saw the first experiment from from Meta with the with Rabban Meta display that's quite amazing that you know we could think about this new object and the new way that we'll use all this tech you know if we think about AIWare as your new smartphone then you will use it to enter into the internet and so you will need to have something, totally new experience, new interface, new way of interacting. So that will really drive the industry strongly. yeah, this is, and I have to say that we are working quite a lot on our hand on designing some smart hardware. So we know exactly that the interest that there is in the market right now to... work on those on the subject. ⁓ Maybe the challenge there is to let's say for the traditional world to be part of this because integrating electronics into an area is something that is very very complex and a very small brand can't do that so you need something on shelves to be integrated and a software platform that is common etc etc. So it's not that simple. Maybe the risk is this industry is not able to be part of it, that we leave ⁓ all the tech side to the GAFAM, so to the big ones. And then if we look at what happened on watches, which is quite close in terms of market, you can see that now smart watches are far bigger than the traditional market. Apple itself is, with the Apple Watch, is bigger than all the Swiss industry. yeah, there is also ⁓ a risk in this area, but this is ⁓ a timing that is really exciting. And I would say in terms of design also the risk that, you know, as soon as you have a lot of electronics are miniaturized, but it's a lot of smartphone into an eyewear is something that is quite complex. can imagine the number of electronics that is inside. And so in terms of form factor, you will. we have something that will be more standardized in a way. there's variety of shapes. I don't know on this side if the consumer are ready because as we mentioned, I wear a totally part of your personality, that sign, your personality. so seeing everybody with the same kind of glasses, maybe that would be an issue. But in terms of functionality, it's just an evidence. that the IWI is the best subject to do that. speaker-1: Yeah, I would agree with that. I think ⁓ you're right. There has to be some standardization of form and packaging and things when it comes to inclusion of electronics. I think it's a sadness long-term if it ends up with everybody wearing the same glasses, the way that it's ended up with everybody wearing the same watch and everybody carrying the same phone. ⁓ Like, I'm sure there's expression to be wrung out there. It is a very interesting period though. And we're particularly keen to see how that turns out. ⁓ Let's try and end on a forward looking question. ⁓ and I'll, I'll do both of you. ⁓ I'll start with you, Mark. then, Sebastian, you can, you can finish. And I want to ask you both to give me two perspectives, two reads on what eyewear could look like in the next decade. One can be your optimistic read, which is based on your expectations for technology and business model change and innovation. And one that's more pessimistic, which is based on. the way things stand today and what opportunities are going to be missed if we don't try to do something different. So Mark, I'll start with you. What could the eyewear industry look like a decade from now if things go well? speaker-0: That's a very good question and it can go in many, ⁓ many directions. mean, I'm excited for one vision that I choose to believe in. think that we're going in this direction. mean, smart eyewear is, think the definition of augmented reality, right? I mean, when you're looking somewhere or, mean, we're all pretty much all using some AI of some sort on a daily basis or on a weekly basis. We've all opened. these websites in order to help us or to write something and to receive some improvements. Imagine having this directly into your own lens, literally. You're looking somewhere, you're looking at a tree and you're getting the definition of what that tree is, how old it is and why it's here. You're driving your car and it gives you direct GPS directions within your lenses and you're receiving a call. Everything you have on your smartphone but in your lenses. The good part is maybe we'll be less distracted by our cell phones as we are now. you're based in London, so if you go in the Chou, I used to live there as well. I mean, think 80 % of the people there are just, you know, head down watching their smartphone. Maybe the fact that we have it directly in our lens will allow us to actually be more into reality, although it's augmented and more connected. At least I'm hoping for this direction. I also see a lot of extremely positive impacts in a medical way. We're working on some extremely exciting projects with some medical companies that are integrating technology with the DIY that are truly impactful for people that need it. Seb will maybe add on to this later. So on that end, I see a very positive ⁓ impact. On the other end, obviously, ⁓ There is a downside that at what point will we actually be into the real life? At what time will we come back to our own moment of pure consciousness, of non-connected, non-data collecting consciousness? And that is a question that is important, which is when will you take your eyewear off apart for sleeping at night? And I really hope we manage to dissociate this. And I think that the big tech companies behind have a major responsibility and role to play to make sure that this is... the case. today when you buy eyewear, whether you buy online or in store, I think from now on, these tech giants will have to sell these smart eyewear directly to the consumer. there will be a business impact for petitions, for brick and mortar retail, ⁓ just like we saw with the Apple Watch kind of shifted the... the dynamic for buying watches. No one really bought watches online, but I mean, now it's the case. So I think this is also why we're building tools to allow brands to sell directly online before it's too late and before one player takes it all in a sense. So yeah, that's my take. I can go on for a while, but I'll give some room to said as well. speaker-1: Yes. And Sebastian, from your point of view, maybe they'll lean into the design and the production side of things, like the revolutions that are talking there. speaker-2: Yeah, I would try not to say the same as Mark, but Mark, you said it all. In fact, maybe in positive way, talking just about style and etc. I'd love that in a decade, additive manufacturing and all these possibilities will allow to see a lot of creative stuff and even for a very small creator that would like just to launch. their own connection with a ⁓ really creative angle. know, like in fact, in music though, because we digitalize music that allows ⁓ independent producers to do it by themselves, their creation. And I think that, you know, this is something that is totally feasible. And so in terms of style, that would bring something really positive. In addition also with the technology that is embedded into AIware, think that in a decade we'll have probably the best agents that we could dream of powered by AI and so we could discuss directly and so we increase our knowledge. Also the technology will measure a lot of stuff that you can't imagine yet, but we are able for example to detect with eye tracker some disease like Parkinson's Alzheimer's a lot in advance. we could stay also healthier. So this is there is a lot of benefits with the rising of technology in two ways and I'm really excited about that. On the other hand, hand, know, the less positive way, know, the technology is evolving really, really fast and faster than the profession. I wear professional, I would say, are able to follow and to integrate it. And so I'm afraid that if ⁓ all this network of professional ⁓ is not evolving, then ⁓ tomorrow we'll buy our eyewear at Apple or Samsung. And what makes an eyewear very special is, you know, it's the only object that permits you to. to see the world as its best, as precise as it is, thanks to your prescription. tomorrow, maybe seeing well would be just an option. And you will see through filter and through a virtual world, an augmented world that will be decided by the GAFAM, so how it's good for you to have your vision enhanced. And on this I'm not so, yeah, I won't be so positive. I think that, you know, the health area and the beauty to see the world that brings also connection between people is very important. And I'm afraid that with this technology inside the lens we'll be more isolated as ever. speaker-1: I think that's a great place to bring us to a close. We're generally technology optimistic, but I also think it's fair to say that nobody wants it to come at the expense of losing craft, and nobody wants it to be a forced control and mediation layer over reality. Neither of those things are desirable outcomes. Well, guys, on that basis, I'm looking forward to seeing what Visage does over the coming years. I'll be paying attention to the work you guys are putting in. ⁓ For the time being though, Mark, Sebastian, thank you so much for joining me. I've enjoyed this. speaker-0: Thank you so much for inviting us. It was a real pleasure to speak all together. speaker-2: Yeah, thanks a lot. speaker-1: And that's the end of my chat with Sebastian and Mark. As you could tell, I treated this one as an opportunity to build a better understanding of the eyewear sector. So I hope it's been instructive for you on that basis as well. I definitely learned a lot. It's particularly important, I think, to dwell on both the possibilities that technology offers to augment the core eyewear product and the potential that tech gives companies to escape the heavy consolidation and monopolization we talked about. Definitely lessons in both of those things for apparel, footwear and accessories. We have some very different episodes coming up back in more typical space for the Interline, so stay tuned for those. Send your questions in via LinkedIn, via email, however you want to get a hold of me. And I'm going to look forward to speaking to you again,