@BlackHawk said:
Does the data take in to consideration any seed money or outside investors. I doubt they only used Kickstarter.
No it does not. Should be viewed with that in mind. The numbers are so large though. Even if the comeback was 25% of the sale, $500 would have received back $100,000
As long as Oculus remains in the spotlight and continues to impress, rumors will be running rampant. Some people think Microsoft, Google, Apple or any number of tech or gaming firms will purchase Oculus. And you can bet some have already tried. For now, Luckey insists that he's staying independent.
"We want to do things our way. There are certainly people who are interested... but we have a vision for our consumer product and we know that we're going to be able to pull it off. We don't want to be assimilated into someone who's going to have us working on their own product or their own vision of VR - we want to be able to deliver our own vision of what VR is," he said.
So even if a company like Amazon made a huge offer, it wouldn't matter? "Nobody can say it doesn't matter - everyone has a number," Luckey admitted. "But I don't think there's a reasonable number that would make me say, 'You know I was going to change the world with VR and try to change humanity forever but here's a number. It really is about making sure that we get to deliver our vision of consumer virtual reality."
Guess that number was 1.6bil in Facebook stock and 400mil in cash.
I would imagine there's something in the contract that allows Palmer and the rest of OculusVR to carry on with their vision. I've met these guys IRL and they aren't the type to "sell out". Despite my feelings toward Facebook, I suspect OculusVR went in with a plan and conditions and would have walked no matter the amount of money if they weren't allowed to satisfactorily carry out their vision.
I still can't believe people are mad about this. Its a great story for inventors: Invent thing; get funding to make it mainstream; receive large payment and continue to work on what you love.
IMO: if you want repayment on your investment, don't use kickstarter. If you wanted something to go to market, goal accomplished.
Agreed CannonFodder. I've seen articles throwing around the term "investor" when that isn't at all what you are doing through Kickstarter. You are making a non-tax deductible donation to the person behind the Kickstarter with the goal that the idea will become a reality.
@Lincoln: Kenkel inserted a valid link. Markdown broke that link.
0
RequitThat one guySomewhere over there, I don't knowIcrontian
edited March 2014
@BHHammy said:
"But I don't think there's a reasonable number that would make me say, 'You know I was going to change the world with VR and try to change humanity forever but here's a number. It really is about making sure that we get to deliver our vision of consumer virtual reality."
I found the last few bits interesting.
Guess that number was 1.6bil in Facebook stock and 400mil in cash.
Let's be fair, here. Two billion is an incredibly unreasonable number. Two million is more reasonable. But billion? That's just insane.
I know from my Kickstarter. They are serious about their guidelines which say that backers cannot receive stock, shares, royalties, portions of IP sales, nor any other type of investment in exchange for their backing.
Some of their policies they don't take so seriously, but they claim that this one is a government regulation, and they come down hard on attempts to bypass it. In all the kickstarters I researched to prepare for mine, I saw plenty that broke other rules, and got away with it for whatever reason, but this rule everyone stuck to, or they got removed.
Look, just because someone made two billion on it does not make it a commercial success. Someone saw potential and invested a boat load of money. Is it mainstream? Has it changed anything? Not yet, I mean I can take a virtual tour of Seinfeld's apartment, that's worth something right?
@Cliff_Forster said:
Look, just because someone made two billion on it does not make it a commercial success. Someone saw potential and invested a boat load of money. Is it mainstream? Has it changed anything? Not yet, I mean I can take a virtual tour of Seinfeld's apartment, that's worth something right?
It's a pretty good bet that if you spend 2 bil on something, you're going to take it to market ASAP.
Companies spend billions on acquisitions that fail all the time.
Let me concede this, the Rift has gained more traction than I would have imagined. Is it a success just because Facebook flung 1.4 billion of questionably valued stock at it? Jury is still out.
logical reasons why the fb acquisition is a good thing, lol @ "it's easy to be an armchair critic when the only thing you lose out on is ... indie credibility"
Also where he states that they can sell with zero margin he means profit sharing with pay services using rift as a portal service, and data mining you. Palmer might not want to say that but it is a backside business deal that will happen since they are selling hardware not to make money since the real product is adopted VR.
Comments
Even if the kickstarter was half their funding, that would still be a lot of money.
Does the data take in to consideration any seed money or outside investors. I doubt they only used Kickstarter.
No it does not. Should be viewed with that in mind. The numbers are so large though. Even if the comeback was 25% of the sale, $500 would have received back $100,000
Its amazing the difference between millions and billions.
YET YOU DON'T "AWESOME" HIS POST BECAUSE LAZY
Or because pointless.
Since most of my near-term plans for Icrontic include filtering content based primarily on Reactions, that's not so much the case.
Hey, if Icrontikarma will start to do something, I'm game to pres butans.
Top 10 Lolziest Icrontic Posts You Won't Believe - "I was shocked when I saw number 4!"
Prepare anus.
Someone pointed this article from barely a month ago out to me.
I found the last few bits interesting.
Guess that number was 1.6bil in Facebook stock and 400mil in cash.
I would imagine there's something in the contract that allows Palmer and the rest of OculusVR to carry on with their vision. I've met these guys IRL and they aren't the type to "sell out". Despite my feelings toward Facebook, I suspect OculusVR went in with a plan and conditions and would have walked no matter the amount of money if they weren't allowed to satisfactorily carry out their vision.
I still can't believe people are mad about this. Its a great story for inventors: Invent thing; get funding to make it mainstream; receive large payment and continue to work on what you love.
IMO: if you want repayment on your investment, don't use kickstarter. If you wanted something to go to market, goal accomplished.
Grats to him.
Agreed CannonFodder. I've seen articles throwing around the term "investor" when that isn't at all what you are doing through Kickstarter. You are making a non-tax deductible donation to the person behind the Kickstarter with the goal that the idea will become a reality.
Unless, of course, you happen to hit limits on gift tax.
Someone let Cliff know he was already right, once again, before he lets us know he was already right, once again.
Edit: I'm leaving that broken link. I still have no markdown guide and that's what the site suggested with the "insert link" button.
@Lincoln: Kenkel inserted a valid link. Markdown broke that link.
Let's be fair, here. Two billion is an incredibly unreasonable number. Two million is more reasonable. But billion? That's just insane.
I know from my Kickstarter. They are serious about their guidelines which say that backers cannot receive stock, shares, royalties, portions of IP sales, nor any other type of investment in exchange for their backing.
Some of their policies they don't take so seriously, but they claim that this one is a government regulation, and they come down hard on attempts to bypass it. In all the kickstarters I researched to prepare for mine, I saw plenty that broke other rules, and got away with it for whatever reason, but this rule everyone stuck to, or they got removed.
Look, just because someone made two billion on it does not make it a commercial success. Someone saw potential and invested a boat load of money. Is it mainstream? Has it changed anything? Not yet, I mean I can take a virtual tour of Seinfeld's apartment, that's worth something right?
The oculus what?
All my feels.
I'm hoping Amnesia will be able to be played on this. I would watch the hell out of those Youtube playthroughs.
It's a pretty good bet that if you spend 2 bil on something, you're going to take it to market ASAP.
Tell that to companies that spend that and more to buy a product and bury it.
(Of course I don't think that's what's going to happen here, just saying the above statement is nowhere near a guarantee.)
Yea, that is true, but facebook doesn't compete with anything like Oculus Rift. They wouldn't have lost money if they hadn't purchased it.
Did Oculus have any trademarks/IP worth buying for the future?
http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/28/hp-buys-palm/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast.com
http://www.ign.com/articles/2002/09/24/microsoft-buys-rare
Companies spend billions on acquisitions that fail all the time.
Let me concede this, the Rift has gained more traction than I would have imagined. Is it a success just because Facebook flung 1.4 billion of questionably valued stock at it? Jury is still out.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/04/11/palmer-luckey/7612715/
logical reasons why the fb acquisition is a good thing, lol @ "it's easy to be an armchair critic when the only thing you lose out on is ... indie credibility"
Also where he states that they can sell with zero margin he means profit sharing with pay services using rift as a portal service, and data mining you. Palmer might not want to say that but it is a backside business deal that will happen since they are selling hardware not to make money since the real product is adopted VR.
This. Is. Awesome. I might have to get the Razer Hydra just to play this game.
What could you do with $2B in Facebook cash? Run your own space program.
http://www.newspacejournal.com/2014/03/26/could-a-facebook-deal-revive-armadillo-aerospace/