3 ms·

My personal hypothesis on this is that they're eating a loss at the price range right now and are trying to figure out if people are interested in the spectacle

My personal hypothesis on this is that they're eating a loss at the price range right now and are trying to figure out if people are interested in the spectacles and at what price.

johngrefe 10y ago
I've scanned through twitter, they have users driving hours to try to buy them. I'm confident people are super excited. Being in the consumer electronics space myself, it takes about 80% of expected sales as capital to get anything into commercialization. This is just throwing huge flags for me as an investor.
huac 10y ago
They'll probably create different models for different price points. Capturing the teen market is more important than the tech yuppie market, but if you can gouge a willing audience, you probably should.
usrusr 10y ago
If anything they are creating a whole lot of media buzz, likely to be perfectly timed ahead of their IPO. The message isn't "we have head mounted cameras, head mounted cameras will dominate the world", the message is "we are more than just another entry in the endless stream of icq successors, continue to expect the unexpected". This might turn out to be more valuable to founders and VCs than the total hardware cost of the first few batches of camera sunglasses. For that function, the final spectacles price could be purely a balancing act between looking financially responsible to future investors and not deterring consumers to much, with no relation to hardware cost at all.
- johngrefe 10y ago
  That, is totally great. It doesn't get me excited as a market investor. Twitter has been living off their hype and not their balance sheet, and eventually it degrades and erodes a business until it practically isn't one. My experience is of course entirely anecdotal since I'm so heavily involved in hardware startups now. As an ancillary to bolster hype, I agree, it's great.

My personal hypothesis on this is that they're eating a loss at the price range right now and are trying to figure out if people are interested in the spectacles and at what price.

johngrefe 10y ago

I've scanned through twitter, they have users driving hours to try to buy them. I'm confident people are super excited. Being in the consumer electronics space myself, it takes about 80% of expected sales as capital to get anything into commercialization. This is just throwing huge flags for me as an investor.

huac 10y ago

They'll probably create different models for different price points. Capturing the teen market is more important than the tech yuppie market, but if you can gouge a willing audience, you probably should.

usrusr 10y ago

If anything they are creating a whole lot of media buzz, likely to be perfectly timed ahead of their IPO. The message isn't "we have head mounted cameras, head mounted cameras will dominate the world", the message is "we are more than just another entry in the endless stream of icq successors, continue to expect the unexpected". This might turn out to be more valuable to founders and VCs than the total hardware cost of the first few batches of camera sunglasses. For that function, the final spectacles price could be purely a balancing act between looking financially responsible to future investors and not deterring consumers to much, with no relation to hardware cost at all.

johngrefe 10y ago
That, is totally great. It doesn't get me excited as a market investor. Twitter has been living off their hype and not their balance sheet, and eventually it degrades and erodes a business until it practically isn't one. My experience is of course entirely anecdotal since I'm so heavily involved in hardware startups now. As an ancillary to bolster hype, I agree, it's great.