18K & FMJ
Jun 23, 2007 4:19 AM
I PM'd Dann about this and got his approval:

We're going to do something about this. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. But at least we're going to try. One thing is certain: if we do nothing, we will all lose. If we try, who knows what may come of it? Even if nothing comes of it, at least we didn't sit back and do nothing. So we have nothing to lose by trying... and everything to possibly gain.

Here's the PM that I sent Dann (with proprietary info removed):

Your message: I think we have to do at least SOMEthing. Now I'm gonna tell you this because I know you won't go doing anything or telling anyone to make this into a big ordeal... **** deleted content ****

But now I'm crying again. This time because the company that I so dearly love is about to be destroyed. I can't sit back and do nothing, Dann. I simply cannot. I must do SOMEthing. I cannot help but feel that if I don't try I'm just as guilty as the puppets of mediocrity (Luxottica) in this whole debacle. If I try & things still go the way they were intended to go, at least I know I tried. But I'm not leaving without a fight. To the last.

The reason why I'm telling you all this is because there is still a chance. JJ DOES listen to the individual. Trust me, I know this from personal experience (although I have never spoken to him personally). Perhaps you have. You can even show him this e-mail and confirm what I have said, because he'll back it up **** deleted content ****

We need to draft up some kind of petition that you can e-mail his secretary. I have her e-mail address. She will probably give it to him. I would never give out that info to anyone except you, because I know you're the site administrator and would use the info responsibly & treat it as proprietary info. But we need to do something. I know that we cannot do it individually... but if we work together, we just might have a chance. We must try.

Here's a cut & paste I did from another PM I received earlier:

tunafishmilkshake's previous message: What can I do?

Your message: You mean to possibly prevent this debacle of Oakley being bought out...? Not sure yet. We need to come up with a way of drafting a petition & signing it... perhaps even electronic signatures. I have Jim Jannard's secretary's e-mail, and I could give it to Dann & Dann could possibly have all of us electronically sign the petition & then e-mail it to her...

Please tell me what you think. We cannot go down without a fight, Dann. Even if we lose, we still win because we will lose for sure if we do nothing.

Think about it.

Dann's response message: I understand what you're saying and I agree. Personally when I forsee a losing battle, I put my efforts elsewhere. As much as I'd like to fight to the end, at some point I have to be realistic. A few of us nuts who mostly end up buying on ebay anyway won't sway a decision, but it is worth a shot. Since you have better contacts than I, perhaps we could, rather than a meaningless petition, get personal testimonials from whoever wants to participate, and then send all those off. I thinkt that may strike a chord better than a list of names. To get the essence of why we became fans in the first place. How we like being exclusive, and getting Oakley's to (and from!) the far regions of China isn't really going to help the brand image and negates what has been done since 1975 when the biggest O Store was a car trunk. Just my take on it, but I'm game to write something up, if you want to get other's feelings in writing. Let me know.


So here's what we're gonna do: I've read quite a few of the posts, and wholeheartedly agree with 99.9999% of them (I'm rounding up a bit, admittedly, but it's close). Each of us has a unique perspective about The O that has impacted our lives - a unique experience that has driven us over the edge. Any one of us could NEVER sum up in words the way we feel about this incredible company collectively... so I'm asking for your support. Not for me. Not for you. For us.

E-mail me a consise paragraph or two write-up about how Oakley has impacted you and what dangers the "merger" poses. Try to keep the perspective positive, and stress how important Oakley is to each of you. Also include your names (as an electronic signature) and maybe even a contact phone # and/or addr IF you feel comfortable providing that - just for authenticity's sake. I will collect them and edit where appropriate... or possibly forward them to Dann for editing if Dann deems that more appropriate. One of us (either Dann or myself) will then ensure that JJ's secretary and/or Jamin Jannard (Jim's son) receives the petition and forwards it on to The Man (JJ). We have nothing to lose, and EVERYTHING to gain. The choice is yours.

Here's where to forward the e-mails:


I'm trusting that my personal e-mail won't be bombarded with spam, 'cause I know everyone out there doesn't love TERRORISM. It's okay. Let's set aside our differences to do whatever we can to positively impact The O.


Bruce Wilson
Jun 23, 2007 6:10 PM
I think some you of guys need to drop it do it on your own behalf, but leave the Review colective out of it in anything you say or write.
I think you need to leave it alone. This isn't your website, Phil pays for the web hosting on the server were on and Dann created it. It's their option if you use the OR in your letter's and emails as they created it and allow us to live it so to say, and you may draw negative attention to the site.
Eshan W.
Jun 23, 2007 5:40 PM
It's a difficult and confusing time for sure.. but I think we should all take a step back, try and keep our gut reactions and emotions in check as best we can and let it all just settle in. What's done is done, so all we've got now is time and plenty of it. Whatever the response, it should be made with clear heads and open minds and not pure adrenalin.. Whatever the future of Oakley may be, I for one would want above all to ensure the continued success of OR and thus act in a way that wouldn't jeopardize that.

Just my thoughts.. won't assign a monetary value to them
Eric Arsenault
Jun 23, 2007 6:27 PM
Mike: for the record, nothing you ever said or done would warrant a closing of your account, its only the people who have been dicks that are gone, I dont think nobody misses them...

I will not send an e-mail on the o-review's behalf or something like that, I can do that on my own instead of being just dismissed as (possibly) a freak and that my e-mail gets deleted.
Rick (The Doctor) Fawcett
Jun 24, 2007 12:47 AM
I agree that it may be a long shot, but saying someone is stupid for expressing their opinion on an issue they believe in is criminal. What a defeatist attitude that is. If people want to write Jim a letter, all the power to them. If you think it's a waste of time, then DON'T. I was on the fence about the whole letter thing, but hearing Mike's diatribe has encouraged me to actually do something. Call me stupid for trying, I could really care less.
Jun 24, 2007 3:20 AM
This is not an attack on anyone just an observation of what has been discussed in this thread. I'm just wondering what the big deal about writing the letters is. Mike seems dead set against any letters being written as a collective or as individuals. Why? I don't think anyone is making him or asking him to do it against his will. I just don't understand why he wants to prevent others from expressing their opinions to Oakley, JJ, etc. If Terrorism, The Doc, or anyone else wants to write and seem naive, in a business sense, that is no one else's business but their own and they have the right to do it without being chastised for doing so. I have a feeling that most writing would be doing so from a personal view rather than from a stockholders standpoint, so "businessmen laughing" would probably not be relevant anyway. This isn't Cold War Russia. Letting others know that you feel a letter will do nothing once is stating your opinion, doing it a second time and adding insults is uncalled for. Relax, have a drink, and let the people who want to "waste their time" writing "dumb" letters do it and look like "business idiots" do their thing.
Archer O
Jun 24, 2007 9:40 AM
First of all my heart goes out to all of the O-reviewers. I understand the mixed feeling. Second, Congratulation to Jim Jannard for his success. Thank You for the past 32 years and here's to a brighter future for oakley designs and yourself.

That being said we should all be supportive of Jim. It is not his job to secure our insecurity. Look deep inside yourselves and listen to the part of yourselves that you are trying to hide from each other. The selfishness is runnimg rampant here. It is like asking your father to work a little longer so you can have the life you have become accustom too. This man gives the world 32 years of his life and all we can think about is the negative in all of this. Let the man have his peace.

He is still the chairman, which means he is still involved in the Oakley line. Other sunglass brand names will benefit from this technology. That means people who do not like the oakley style glasses still benefit from the oakley lenses and frame materials. Every single person will have the chance to have the best optics in their favorite sunglass styles. Let us remove our biased heads from our asses for moment and think about someone other than ourselves. Are you upset because you didn't get your whole collection together before he (as some would put it) sold out. If that is the case the man would have to live another 32 years under our service before we would set him free and even at that I am afraid this would not be enough. Think of this from his point of veiw. He has the chance to reach further with his vision. He has the chance to touch a greater number of people. And in a world that is constantly finding ways of peeling back the earths protective layer, this is a very bright spot in the future of eye protection. Remember this is a man who could have thrown in the towel much earlier and done quite well for himself.

Now on a selfish note, I would love nothing more than to hold the strings that control this man, but in the end I would find it horrorably wrong to do so. Nothing good could be gained from this direction. Everyday we are faced with these strings within our own families, and everyday we have the choice of keeping ourselves and our families in the dark, or help each other to a more enlightened veiw. No! This is not the path I want for a man who has given us so much. Hundreds and hundreds of glasses and thousands of colorways should be enough for us all. If he decides to give us more then be thankful for his efforts. Because really he owes none of us an explaination. As a collective I would love to see us send him a thank you note and wish him all the best. If we decide to go the negative approach, then let these words stand as my contribution in support of Jim's pursuits.

Live in peace or live in pieces
Twenty Fifty
Jun 24, 2007 7:34 AM
I'm just wondering what the big deal about writing the letters is. Mike seems dead set against any letters being written as a collective or as individuals. Why? I don't think anyone is making him or asking him to do it against his will.
From as objective a stance as I can possibly give from what I've been reading, I don't think Mike's dead set against a letter to JJ per se. I think it's more the way he thinks the letter will be handled and expressed that may be the issue. There's a lot of passion for the Oakley brand. However, when some people are too passionate about something, it may come out more forcefully than expected and rub people the wrong way. Not everyone in the world understands our love of the O. That's one reason Star Wars fans are referred to as geeks and Rolex wearers = pricks.

While some say they don't care, there's still a lot of others who don't want to be known as "whiney freaks" because they collect Oakley and because of the actions of one individual.

That's the vibe I'm getting from people. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Archer O
Jun 24, 2007 7:59 AM
You're right on Oak...
Eric Arsenault
Jun 24, 2007 8:30 AM
Well said Oak and Archer, people are free to write a letter if they want, thats their business, just please dont write it on behalf of the o-review or its members.
Just call me Woody!
Jun 24, 2007 8:38 AM
I agree with you Archer. We should send Mr. Jannard a thank you for all he has done over the past 32 years. We should show him some appreciation for 32 years of his spent making us happy.
Mr. Jannard.. If you happen to stop by and read this, I would like to thank you very much for all the hard work and dedication you put towards your company. By doing so you have given the world superior eyewear. I wish you the best of luck in all your future endeavours. Thank you.
Philip Barket
Jun 24, 2007 8:46 AM
Phil pays for the web hosting on the server were on
Um... no. Longshot is your man there. I have only given time and years of experience.
Rick (The Doctor) Fawcett
Jun 24, 2007 8:53 AM
A mere pittance!
18K & FMJ
Jun 24, 2007 10:24 AM
The word "selfish" seems to be surfacing quite a bit lately...

But is the thought of preserving Oakley truly "selfish"? That depends on the motive...

For me, the main concern here is not the matter of selling the company; it is the matter of selling the company to Luxottica. Luxottica has done NOTHING to impress me - ever. Oakley, on the other hand, has impressed me numerous times over during the past 15 years that I have been collecting. So what am I to think when the company that is so near and dear to us is going to be given to the hands of the enemy?

I do hope that good comes out of all of this... but I remain very cautious, with even a foreboding. Again, I have seen nothing at all from Luxottica that has impressed me, so why would I believe that things would be different when they take over Oakley?

Yes, Jim Jannard created the company. Yes, Jim Jannard deserves to do whatever he wishes with his company. But wasn't there another solution, other than selling to a competitor - especially Luxottica? Perhaps.

And Mr. Jannard is going to be in charge yet? Awesome. But for how long? And who will be his successor? Since Luxottica will technically own Oakley, won't "they" be calling the shots? I don't know. And that's what makes me very uneasy.

Make no mistake: if the company is going to be run by a bunch of clowns, it WILL eventually turn into a circus.
Jun 24, 2007 1:51 PM
if the company is going to be run by a bunch of clowns, it WILL eventually turn into a circus.
Who said anything about clowns going to run Oakley? If you're talking about the Luxotica people, I can tell you from my own experience as one of their clients in the past, they run a very well organised company, with a very good backoffice. No wonder, they're the worlds largest manufacturer. Guess they're doing something right!
Please have a wider perspective when you look at things and don't let your feelings (disapointments?) narrow your thoughts.
Archer O
Jun 24, 2007 9:46 PM
I want to say before I wrote my response to this thread I felt very passionate about the whole matter. That's why it took me so long to write it down.I felt very much the way Terrorism has expressed himself. I think if we all look deep within ourselves we can identify and relate to what he is saying. Maybe not in the case of oakley and this merger, but surely in the same way when we feel we have been wronged. When I finally wrote down the words, it was not meant as an attack , but a reflection of ourselves. To find the real motives behind our passion and connect to the reality of all this.

Terrorism has been made an excuse for personal attacks and the same compassion that we afford Jim Jannard should apply to Terrorism also. The whole is the sum of all it's pieces and he is a part of us too. Opinions have been bantered about before and will continue to manifest iself in the future. Lets not alienate each other based on a single passion, a passion we have all shared sometime in our own lives.

Growth is not in the judgement of each other. Lets not sacrifice our own to preserve ourselves. If we dub him a witch, then which one of us will be next. We all know that Terrorism is an Oakley fanatic like us all. His collection is masterfully crafted. If we listen carefullly we can hear echos of our own passion when we try to explain our collection to anyone outside of this forum. We are all misfits on the outside , but in here we all share something in common. Let's not lose sight of that.

Though I don't always agree with everyones opinion, I respect that I have a place to voice one with people who understand my obsession. This is a time we need to help each other through this transition and their struggles with this merger. Some will take this harder than others but time will heal these moments too. Patience and understanding will get us ALL there sooner.

Michael Blayney
Jun 24, 2007 10:32 PM
My thoughts, not that anyone asked for 'em:

As with everyone else here, I love Oakley. I love what it stood for, and I thank JJ for everything he's given us over the years.

A couple days ago, my first reaction to the merger was one of not quite shock, but definitely disappointment. That was quickly replaced by the sad acknowledgment that things change, and life goes on regardless. At the end of the day, it was never ours. We love the product, but we're a very small fraction of the market; any decisions made for the good of the company would rightfully not take our feelings into account.

Sounds harsh, and I suppose it is. Oakley was a business. Is a business. It's an enterprise designed to make money for the owner and its employees. That hasn't changed.

I'll stick by the brand for as long as I can, but if the quality dips I have no problem abandoning it for something else. That's the upside of having no stake in the company's future, or any say in its direction.
Archer O
Jun 24, 2007 10:42 PM
Eloquently stated Michael...
Mike Bahr
Jun 25, 2007 3:09 AM
Very well put Michael.
Rick (The Doctor) Fawcett
Jun 25, 2007 3:38 AM
Very wise words there Michael. Always good to put things into perspective and that's exactly what your post has done.
James brown
Jun 25, 2007 4:45 AM
Hey guys, been busy over the weekend and i have to say, I am a bit suprised that this has sunk into a quagmire. I have said this (in different ways) throughout this thread but the only reason I started it was to consider an O-Review (Dann) authorised statement to highlight the review and just say hello. No pleading, no "helpfull" hints as to how they should design future frames, no criticisms of Lux as a company. A bit more like "we come in peace" than "guess what I am going to do to you if you wreck this company" or even worse "I dont think this merger should take place".

I am the guy that managed to break a juliet whilst taking it off and lose the whole damned thing to the sea. When I called up Oakley CS, and after highlighting what a fan I was and how many pairs I had, the CS manager wrote me a really nice email explaining how, "despite the fact I was talking about a frame with no known catastrophic failures in its entire history, and didnt even have a single shred of evidence to prove it was a product fault, he was going to send me a brand new pair of Juliets for being such a loyal customer".

How might that change when Lux takes over. It might sound like a sarcastic question but its not. It may change for the worse, it may change for the better. Who knows???

If I had intended to go on a childish rant and plaster the o-review's fingerprints all over it I would hardly have started a thread about it. After having some time to think about it, and to read some of the more constructive criticism on the idea, I slowly came to the realisation that I shouldnt be wasting my time caring about this shit. I have a new kid, a stressful job and about 4 hours sleep a night. Who needs to borrow (perceived) problems from a billionaire:-)

Speaking from my own point of view, I am not exactly thrilled with most of the O's offerings for the last few years. Thats why I was so happy to see the new header. Makes me miss the late 90's:-) WHich is why I celebrated/mourned the news by going out and buying another pair of Oakley RX. The pinnacle of their 90s achievement and my first Oakley product. The Dark Square Wire SH.

As for a business man laughing at us, I am guessing that such a businessman would also laugh at someone with more than one pair of sunglasses fullstop:-)

I agree with what Michael said and am glad to see the other guys acknowledge his words. One thing though, how many lux brands let you trash your shades and send their earthly remains for a discount against a new pair. Oakley is indeed a business, just a whole other type of business.


O-Review Logo & Design
© 2004-2019 Atom Crown Design and DCJ Productions.
Product Images, Logos and Artwork © 1975-2019 Oakley Inc.
All personal photos © 2004-2019 by their owners...or Rick.