It is currently Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:18 am



Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Does this concern anyone else?? 
Author Message
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:19 am
Posts: 59
Delryn wrote:
I think he understands that now is not the time to monetize on VR. Like many companies before him, he has to get his product out there and create a market, not turn a profit. If the Rift can catch on, then we can worry about this situation. I'd rather worry about the Rift not evolving and simply making big bucks. Right now I'm worried about the Rift not catching on.


I so much hope that you are correct :)


Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:09 pm
Profile
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:18 pm
Posts: 1314
You can't honestly try to blame everything that may have happened to Activision-Blizzard on a VP. Business direction is primarily the duty of the CEO and board of directors. Anyway, his job is likely to determine what is economically viable and the best way to pursue it. Expensive hardware can only sell if there's an established support base. For instance, a magical $1,000 computer mouse has a lot more potential in a market when it's compatible with software just like any other mouse. However, if that said mouse required software companies to specifically support it in order to work at all, then its market potential would be substantially lower. Yes, Oculus could try to sell the Rift for $10k, but that's not within the realm of the consumer market that they're targeting.

The way I interpreted him stating that the cost would likely be in the 3 figure range is that they may have actually considered an even lower price point like I mentioned earlier in this thread. If they can manage to get a low-end consumer model with similar specs to the dev kit at a price of around $100, they may just have the hottest selling computer gaming peripheral from a single manufacturer ever. In fact, selling one with a relatively low profit margin might be their best chance of selling higher-end flagship models with greater profit margins, because a large core user base ensures that the software support will be there. They also wouldn't have the risk of a lower model cannibalizing the sales of their better models if they have substantially better features.


Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:50 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:45 pm
Posts: 69
MSat wrote:
You can't honestly try to blame everything that may have happened to Activision-Blizzard on a VP. Business direction is primarily the duty of the CEO and board of directors. Anyway, his job is likely to determine what is economically viable and the best way to pursue it. Expensive hardware can only sell if there's an established support base. For instance, a magical $1,000 computer mouse has a lot more potential in a market when it's compatible with software just like any other mouse. However, if that said mouse required software companies to specifically support it in order to work at all, then its market potential would be substantially lower. Yes, Oculus could try to sell the Rift for $10k, but that's not within the realm of the consumer market that they're targeting.

The way I interpreted him stating that the cost would likely be in the 3 figure range is that they may have actually considered an even lower price point like I mentioned earlier in this thread. If they can manage to get a low-end consumer model with similar specs to the dev kit at a price of around $100, they may just have the hottest selling computer gaming peripheral from a single manufacturer ever. In fact, selling one with a relatively low profit margin might be their best chance of selling higher-end flagship models with greater profit margins, because a large core user base ensures that the software support will be there. They also wouldn't have the risk of a lower model cannibalizing the sales of their better models if they have substantially better features.



I don't see this thing costing $100 any time soon. $300 to me is the bottom end, even with a lower resolution screen. $100 is a pipe dream where it stands now. Maybe 2-3 years from now

_________________
http://www.paulageephotography.com


Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:56 pm
Profile
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 9:06 pm
Posts: 1644
Believe me, this is nothing but good news. Laird is a fantastic guy, and I would not have hired him if he were not a perfect fit for Oculus. He is a professor in USC's Advanced Games course, and mentored/guided Project Holodeck. He has a skill that, frankly, we lacked as a company: Getting a consumer product into the hands of as many people as possible.

If this guy were in it for the money, he had plenty of options that don't involve moving to a scrappy startup! :lol: We would not have hired him if we thought his vision was different than ours, and his position as COO still reports to me at the end of the day. If I don't want to go in a particular direction, then we don't.

We want to make a great headset that gamers can afford, not a luxury item. We know what happens when you launch a consumer product at $599, no need to repeat history.


Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:10 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:45 pm
Posts: 69
PalmerTech wrote:
Believe me, this is nothing but good news. Laird is a fantastic guy, and I would not have hired him if he were not a perfect fit for Oculus. He is a professor in USC's Advanced Games course, and mentored/guided Project Holodeck. He has a skill that, frankly, we lacked as a company: Getting a consumer product into the hands of as many people as possible.

If this guy were in it for the money, he had plenty of options that don't involve moving to a scrappy startup! :lol: We would not have hired him if we thought his vision was different than ours, and his position as COO still reports to me at the end of the day. If I don't want to go in a particular direction, then we don't.

We want to make a great headset that gamers can afford, not a luxury item. We know what happens when you launch a consumer product at $599, no need to repeat history.



This is great news and alleviates my fears. My dad started his own company about 30 years ago, it went public and got fairly large. Some members of the Board of Directors wanted to take the company's main project and spin it off to a subsidiary that they would own privately and reap all the benefits. My dad fought against a lot of them and ended up being kicked out of the company that he started. I just hope this doesn't happen to you, that was my main concern. This is your project and your product. I'm always rooting for the creative people

_________________
http://www.paulageephotography.com


Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:16 pm
Profile
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:18 pm
Posts: 1314
SartreFan wrote:
MSat wrote:
You can't honestly try to blame everything that may have happened to Activision-Blizzard on a VP. Business direction is primarily the duty of the CEO and board of directors. Anyway, his job is likely to determine what is economically viable and the best way to pursue it. Expensive hardware can only sell if there's an established support base. For instance, a magical $1,000 computer mouse has a lot more potential in a market when it's compatible with software just like any other mouse. However, if that said mouse required software companies to specifically support it in order to work at all, then its market potential would be substantially lower. Yes, Oculus could try to sell the Rift for $10k, but that's not within the realm of the consumer market that they're targeting.

The way I interpreted him stating that the cost would likely be in the 3 figure range is that they may have actually considered an even lower price point like I mentioned earlier in this thread. If they can manage to get a low-end consumer model with similar specs to the dev kit at a price of around $100, they may just have the hottest selling computer gaming peripheral from a single manufacturer ever. In fact, selling one with a relatively low profit margin might be their best chance of selling higher-end flagship models with greater profit margins, because a large core user base ensures that the software support will be there. They also wouldn't have the risk of a lower model cannibalizing the sales of their better models if they have substantially better features.



I don't see this thing costing $100 any time soon. $300 to me is the bottom end, even with a lower resolution screen. $100 is a pipe dream where it stands now. Maybe 2-3 years from now


If you were aware of the approximate pricing of components used in the Rift, particularly when purchased in large volumes, you would see that it is indeed possible to come very close to the $100 price range. The LCD panel is likely the most expensive component by a large margin. It may not be the perfect metric, but if you look at the bill of material for the Kindle Fire HD, the display which should be similar to the one used in the Rift dev kit (minus touch screen and related circuitry) costs ~$64. The rest of the components are quite cheap by comparison. You're right, it might take a year or two to get below $100, but around the time the consumer version is set to ship, a $120-175 low-end model should be quite possible. Even if it does take a couple years, wouldn't a cheap version be a good thing?


Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:33 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:01 pm
Posts: 68
SartreFan wrote:
PalmerTech wrote:
Believe me, this is nothing but good news. Laird is a fantastic guy, and I would not have hired him if he were not a perfect fit for Oculus. He is a professor in USC's Advanced Games course, and mentored/guided Project Holodeck. He has a skill that, frankly, we lacked as a company: Getting a consumer product into the hands of as many people as possible.

If this guy were in it for the money, he had plenty of options that don't involve moving to a scrappy startup! :lol: We would not have hired him if we thought his vision was different than ours, and his position as COO still reports to me at the end of the day. If I don't want to go in a particular direction, then we don't.

We want to make a great headset that gamers can afford, not a luxury item. We know what happens when you launch a consumer product at $599, no need to repeat history.



This is great news and alleviates my fears. My dad started his own company about 30 years ago, it went public and got fairly large. Some members of the Board of Directors wanted to take the company's main project and spin it off to a subsidiary that they would own privately and reap all the benefits. My dad fought against a lot of them and ended up being kicked out of the company that he started. I just hope this doesn't happen to you, that was my main concern. This is your project and your product. I'm always rooting for the creative people


How does that even happen? Was he tricked like in "The Social Network" or something?


Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:37 pm
Profile
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!

Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 5:18 pm
Posts: 204
Grix wrote:
How does that even happen? Was he tricked like in "The Social Network" or something?

It went public. The board hires(and fires) the CEO. The owners are the shareholders which the board reports to.


Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:39 pm
Profile
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:18 pm
Posts: 1314
PalmerTech wrote:
Believe me, this is nothing but good news. Laird is a fantastic guy, and I would not have hired him if he were not a perfect fit for Oculus. He is a professor in USC's Advanced Games course, and mentored/guided Project Holodeck. He has a skill that, frankly, we lacked as a company: Getting a consumer product into the hands of as many people as possible.

If this guy were in it for the money, he had plenty of options that don't involve moving to a scrappy startup! :lol: We would not have hired him if we thought his vision was different than ours, and his position as COO still reports to me at the end of the day. If I don't want to go in a particular direction, then we don't.

We want to make a great headset that gamers can afford, not a luxury item. We know what happens when you launch a consumer product at $599, no need to repeat history.



I'm really glad that you have assembled a killer team, Palmer. So many people have been waiting for affordable VR, so it's important that you have everything and everyone you need to make it right, now that you got the wheels turning. Make it happen, dude! We're rooting for you! :D


Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:44 pm
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:08 pm
Posts: 64
Interesting, http://www.projectholodeck.com/demo-day ... re-updates.

Wild Skies sounds cool. ;)

Image


Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:16 pm
Profile
Cross Eyed!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 3:38 am
Posts: 104
PalmerTech wrote:
Believe me, this is nothing but good news. Laird is a fantastic guy, and I would not have hired him if he were not a perfect fit for Oculus. He is a professor in USC's Advanced Games course, and mentored/guided Project Holodeck. He has a skill that, frankly, we lacked as a company: Getting a consumer product into the hands of as many people as possible.

If this guy were in it for the money, he had plenty of options that don't involve moving to a scrappy startup! :lol: We would not have hired him if we thought his vision was different than ours, and his position as COO still reports to me at the end of the day. If I don't want to go in a particular direction, then we don't.

We want to make a great headset that gamers can afford, not a luxury item. We know what happens when you launch a consumer product at $599, no need to repeat history.

Glad to see Palmer respond to our fears. heh
I'm even more excited for Oculus as a company now! :D Kinda reminds me of when Google was first gathering "big-names" in the industry. heh


Wed Jan 23, 2013 7:20 pm
Profile
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:38 am
Posts: 252
PalmerTech wrote:
Believe me, this is nothing but good news. Laird is a fantastic guy, and I would not have hired him if he were not a perfect fit for Oculus. He is a professor in USC's Advanced Games course, and mentored/guided Project Holodeck. He has a skill that, frankly, we lacked as a company: Getting a consumer product into the hands of as many people as possible.

If this guy were in it for the money, he had plenty of options that don't involve moving to a scrappy startup! :lol: We would not have hired him if we thought his vision was different than ours, and his position as COO still reports to me at the end of the day. If I don't want to go in a particular direction, then we don't.

We want to make a great headset that gamers can afford, not a luxury item. We know what happens when you launch a consumer product at $599, no need to repeat history.


Congrats on the hire. Lots of great info in that article.


Wed Jan 23, 2013 7:51 pm
Profile
Certif-Eyed!

Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:02 am
Posts: 559
Location: Geekenhausen
There seems to be a big underground VR scene in California supporting each other, with the topdogs of that scene now aligning at Oculus to set the foundation. Something special must be in the californian air, so many tech startups and innovations coming from that area, it's almost scary :lol:


Wed Jan 23, 2013 8:10 pm
Profile
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:39 am
Posts: 242
Location: Little Britain
VR Valley on the way !
Delryn wrote:
If the Rift can catch on, then we can worry about this situation. I'd rather worry about the Rift not evolving and simply making big bucks.

Indeed, we all know how the 3DFX adventure ended...
(And how it started, again with Carmack's magic involved in the very beginning :o )
MSat wrote:
around the time the consumer version is set to ship, a $120-175 low-end model should be quite possible. Even if it does take a couple years, wouldn't a cheap version be a good thing?

Sure, once the market is created, we would want to see lower and higher versions (120 and 270°!)


Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:41 pm
Profile
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:42 pm
Posts: 227
Price = (√(HFOV*VFOV))+150

(√(80*100))+150
=$240

(√(270*270))+150
=$420

:D

_________________
This member owns things.


Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:55 pm
Profile
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:18 pm
Posts: 1314
Randomoneh wrote:
Price = (√(HFOV*VFOV))+150

(√(80*100))+150
=$240

(√(270*270))+150
=$420

:D


lol


Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:28 pm
Profile
Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:39 am
Posts: 242
Location: Little Britain
mine is more elegant :
Price = Pi*HFOV

Pi*95 (optimistic value)
= $298.5 <= we are ripped off here

Pi*270
= $848 <= still ok i guess, seeing that you have already the $3000 cluster to go with it

I may have found the next new Moore's law here
it's cheaper for 100 first autograph requests


Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:04 am
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:19 am
Posts: 59
PalmerTech wrote:
Believe me, this is nothing but good news. Laird is a fantastic guy, and I would not have hired him if he were not a perfect fit for Oculus. He is a professor in USC's Advanced Games course, and mentored/guided Project Holodeck. He has a skill that, frankly, we lacked as a company: Getting a consumer product into the hands of as many people as possible.

If this guy were in it for the money, he had plenty of options that don't involve moving to a scrappy startup! :lol: We would not have hired him if we thought his vision was different than ours, and his position as COO still reports to me at the end of the day. If I don't want to go in a particular direction, then we don't.

We want to make a great headset that gamers can afford, not a luxury item. We know what happens when you launch a consumer product at $599, no need to repeat history.


As others have already stated, thanks for clearing the background up ;) It is soothing to hear you got things under control.


Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:41 am
Profile
Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 8:19 am
Posts: 59
SartreFan wrote:
PalmerTech wrote:
Believe me, this is nothing but good news. Laird is a fantastic guy, and I would not have hired him if he were not a perfect fit for Oculus. He is a professor in USC's Advanced Games course, and mentored/guided Project Holodeck. He has a skill that, frankly, we lacked as a company: Getting a consumer product into the hands of as many people as possible.

If this guy were in it for the money, he had plenty of options that don't involve moving to a scrappy startup! :lol: We would not have hired him if we thought his vision was different than ours, and his position as COO still reports to me at the end of the day. If I don't want to go in a particular direction, then we don't.

We want to make a great headset that gamers can afford, not a luxury item. We know what happens when you launch a consumer product at $599, no need to repeat history.



This is great news and alleviates my fears. My dad started his own company about 30 years ago, it went public and got fairly large. Some members of the Board of Directors wanted to take the company's main project and spin it off to a subsidiary that they would own privately and reap all the benefits. My dad fought against a lot of them and ended up being kicked out of the company that he started. I just hope this doesn't happen to you, that was my main concern. This is your project and your product. I'm always rooting for the creative people



German wrote:
Grix wrote:
How does that even happen? Was he tricked like in "The Social Network" or something?

It went public. The board hires(and fires) the CEO. The owners are the shareholders which the board reports to.


If one has read Steve Jobs biography its pretty much the same story. So this kind of things do happen when things start to go nuts (one should take care). At that point for the big boys it doesn't matter who founded what, ethics goes out of window when there is hungry wolves with their stock lusting for more profit. Ever wonder what would have happened to Valve if it wasn't fully kept in private hands?


Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:00 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 49 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by STSoftware.