> Tower Optical began in a Norwalk, Connecticut, machine shop in 1933, and remained in the same family until 2025.
The article doesn't go into too much detail beyond this snippet, but yeah, the original family business was sold to a cohort of investors in 2025[1]. The retrofit was outsourced to a European firm to add the tap-to-pay functionality, so I guess there's nothing left of the original manufacturing business.
It's almost an alternate universe reading this as throughout my childhood I noticed all of those coin operated binoculars were manufactured in Fairhope, Alabama. No doubt there were regional preferences for units from one company over the other but I do remember seeing Fairhope originated binoculars in the Midwest and Canada.
Rent seeking for rentseeking's sake makes it one of the worst inventions. It could have been useful if it didn't need a coin to use. It should be removed. What are local governments for? I have my own zoom monocular/binocular, and am way happier, although I have to find a surface against which to hold it steady.
I don’t think this is a good example of rent seeking, this seems like an entirely positive sum interaction with no attempts to restrict the supply.
There is a cost to installing the binoculars. That cost can be recouped by people paying a small fee to use the binoculars. The binoculars are in no way impeding your view of the scenery, so no one is being coerced into making the purchase. You aren’t prevented from bringing your own pair of binoculars.
So you're only going to be spending your spare change on the enhanced zoom if you believe it’s worth more than your unimpeded view. You get a view you wouldn’t have had otherwise, whoever installed the binoculars earns a small profit. Win-win.
In this case, the grievance feels legitimate. Nature is an opportunity for people to feel more connected to the planet, to feel more at peace, and we're ruining it with pointless capitalism. Kids love to see through binoculars and often they don't have the money to pay for a viewing. Imagine a world where the usage was free, making people happier.
> Tower Optical began in a Norwalk, Connecticut, machine shop in 1933, and remained in the same family until 2025.
The article doesn't go into too much detail beyond this snippet, but yeah, the original family business was sold to a cohort of investors in 2025[1]. The retrofit was outsourced to a European firm to add the tap-to-pay functionality, so I guess there's nothing left of the original manufacturing business.
[1] https://www.wsj.com/business/entrepreneurship/tourist-binocu...
Seems like the perfect place to install a credit card scraper… I would not tap anything on that.
Would have been a great How Its Made segment
It's almost an alternate universe reading this as throughout my childhood I noticed all of those coin operated binoculars were manufactured in Fairhope, Alabama. No doubt there were regional preferences for units from one company over the other but I do remember seeing Fairhope originated binoculars in the Midwest and Canada.
Rent seeking for rentseeking's sake makes it one of the worst inventions. It could have been useful if it didn't need a coin to use. It should be removed. What are local governments for? I have my own zoom monocular/binocular, and am way happier, although I have to find a surface against which to hold it steady.
I don’t think this is a good example of rent seeking, this seems like an entirely positive sum interaction with no attempts to restrict the supply.
There is a cost to installing the binoculars. That cost can be recouped by people paying a small fee to use the binoculars. The binoculars are in no way impeding your view of the scenery, so no one is being coerced into making the purchase. You aren’t prevented from bringing your own pair of binoculars.
So you're only going to be spending your spare change on the enhanced zoom if you believe it’s worth more than your unimpeded view. You get a view you wouldn’t have had otherwise, whoever installed the binoculars earns a small profit. Win-win.
how do they obtain the prime real estate at a scenic overlook?
Presumably they pay the local govt.
Note that said "prime real estate" is not exclusive; it doesn't reduce your ability to enjoy said scenic overlook for free.
The same real estate should've been used by the respective local government to offer viewing sites for everyone to benefit.
Also, sometimes the device doesn't work right, effectively stealing money or pointlessly taking up space.
Are you just looking for something to be mad at?
In this case, the grievance feels legitimate. Nature is an opportunity for people to feel more connected to the planet, to feel more at peace, and we're ruining it with pointless capitalism. Kids love to see through binoculars and often they don't have the money to pay for a viewing. Imagine a world where the usage was free, making people happier.
That's not what rent seeking means.