Interesting read on VR/AR investments

SEANMCAD

http://www.businessinsider.com/augmented-reality-virtual-reality-investment-hits-1-billion-oculus-rift-2016-3

lots of billions

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

I'm so glad you linked a BI article. I totally understand now.

however I dont..based on what you just said.

are you implying pulling predictions out of your A based on nothing is better than...? not sure

or are you saying the numbers are wrong because of reasons?

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

I guess RT and Enquirer just haven't published applicable articles for you to link here.

well I have a lot of links from forum posters that litterally take you to their A$$ but you know. goldman Sacks vs the smell of a random posters A$$ I think I might go with goldman

Adjuvant1

SEANMCAD said:

Adjuvant1 said:

I guess RT and Enquirer just haven't published applicable articles for you to link here.

well I have a lot of links from forum posters that litterally take you to their A$$ but you know. goldman Sacks vs the smell of a random posters A$$ I think I might go with goldman

I don't know what that means. Let's talk about business insider, since you're having difficulty. See the contributors in this article?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Insider

edit: or reception...

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

SEANMCAD said:

Adjuvant1 said:

I guess RT and Enquirer just haven't published applicable articles for you to link here.

well I have a lot of links from forum posters that litterally take you to their A$$ but you know. goldman Sacks vs the smell of a random posters A$$ I think I might go with goldman

I don't know what that means. Let's talk about business insider, since you're having difficulty. See the contributors in this article?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Insider

edit: or reception...

what that means is that the vast majority of critical statements on VR come here on the forums with ZERO...literally ZERO fact or figure of any kind to support their position.

I am just posting what Golman Sacks is saying is all..ever hear of them?

Adjuvant1

SEANMCAD said:

I am just posting what Golman Sacks is saying is all..ever hear of them?

Sure. What do you think you want to say here? Is it, "because GS is optimistic, I have proven something"? Just wondering.

But more to the point, why are you linking sensationalist clickbait as part of your argument?

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

SEANMCAD said:

I am just posting what Golman Sacks is saying is all..ever hear of them?

Sure. What do you think you want to say here? Is it, "because GS is optimistic, I have proven something"? Just wondering.

But more to the point, why are you linking sensationalist clickbait as part of your argument?

 a few things

1. that there is a lot of billions of dollars being invested in VR
2. a fact that you seem to imply is incorrect because of reasons...

Adjuvant1

SEANMCAD said:

Adjuvant1 said:

SEANMCAD said:

I am just posting what Golman Sacks is saying is all..ever hear of them?

Sure. What do you think you want to say here? Is it, "because GS is optimistic, I have proven something"? Just wondering.

But more to the point, why are you linking sensationalist clickbait as part of your argument?

 a few things

1. that there is a lot of billions of dollars being invested in VR
2. a fact that you seem to imply is incorrect because of reasons...

There were alot of billions invested in sub-prime mortgage before GS dumped it all in 07.

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

SEANMCAD said:

Adjuvant1 said:

SEANMCAD said:

I am just posting what Golman Sacks is saying is all..ever hear of them?

Sure. What do you think you want to say here? Is it, "because GS is optimistic, I have proven something"? Just wondering.

But more to the point, why are you linking sensationalist clickbait as part of your argument?

 a few things

1. that there is a lot of billions of dollars being invested in VR
2. a fact that you seem to imply is incorrect because of reasons...

There were alot of billions invested in sub-prime mortgage before GS dumped it all in 07.

and what does that have to do with number 2 on my list other than nothing whatsoever?

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

SEANMCAD said:

and what does that have to do with number 2 on my list other than nothing whatsoever?

basically you just wanted to post a negitive and the only thing you could come up with was to attack the validity of the article without thinking that stradgey thru very far.

Adjuvant1

SEANMCAD said:

Adjuvant1 said:

SEANMCAD said:

and what does that have to do with number 2 on my list other than nothing whatsoever?

basically you just wanted to post a negitive and the only thing you could come up with was to attack the validity of the article without thinking that stradgey thru very far.

I don't have a stradgey < sic >. I'm citing the truth to which you seem painfully unaware. You clearly have absolutely no idea about the sources you're citing or the veracity of statements involving investment. You linked clickbait. You misspelled "Sachs".  It's like a G.E.D. graduate arguing fission isn't "dirty". You need to back up and check yourself.

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

SEANMCAD said:

Adjuvant1 said:

SEANMCAD said:

and what does that have to do with number 2 on my list other than nothing whatsoever?

basically you just wanted to post a negitive and the only thing you could come up with was to attack the validity of the article without thinking that stradgey thru very far.

I don't have a stradgey < sic >. I'm citing the truth to which you seem painfully unaware. You clearly have absolutely no idea about the sources you're citing or the veracity of statements involving investment. You linked clickbait. You misspelled "Sachs".  It's like a G.E.D. graduate arguing fission isn't "dirty". You need to back up and check yourself.

and what 'truth' would that be? that the article is misken and billions are not being invested in VR/AR?
or just not true for whatever...reasons...yes..no...thing

Adjuvant1

Of course there are "billions invested in VR". What do you think it means? That it's going to be successful? No. It's a game. People are being attracted to a popular concept, investing money which inflates apparent value, until just the proper moment to dump stock near an anticipated apex. Now you know, this is the side of this particular battle to which you're cleaving.

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

Of course there are "billions invested in VR". What do you think it means? That it's going to be successful? No. It's a game. People are being attracted to a popular concept, investing money which inflates apparent value, until just the proper moment to dump stock near an anticipated apex. Now you know, this is the side of this particular battle to which you're cleaving.

I posted an article that says 'billions are being invested in VR'
my point in that articel is that 'billions are being invested in VR'

based on what you first posted it seems you do not believe this to be true.

If you believe it to be true and obvious why did you post that?

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

I'm so glad you linked a BI article. I totally understand now.

can someone explain this post to me because it makes no sense

Adjuvant1

You're not getting it. I don't know how to fix it. I tried. Whatever.

I think you missed Motley Fool, AAG and CommerceTopics links in your presentation. I eagerly await your further insight.

SEANMCAD

Adjuvant1 said:

You're not getting it. I don't know how to fix it. I tried. Whatever.

I think you missed Motley Fool, AAG and CommerceTopics links in your presentation. I eagerly await your further insight.

my post doesnt not have any hidden meaning its explict, the article is explict you however are not.

this:

'I'm so glad you linked a BI article. I totally understand now. '

what specifically do you 'understand now'? and what is do you mean by the former. barely anything in that statement makes sense.

... and the more you write the more confused I get, because in your reply just now I havent a %^&*() clue what you are  asking me

thinktank001

Adjuvant1 said:

I'm so glad you linked a BI article. I totally understand now.

Most users here are completely ignorant of how gawker and most of the video game/pc industry " articles " work. 

SEANMCAD

thinktank001 said:

Adjuvant1 said:

I'm so glad you linked a BI article. I totally understand now.

Most users here are completely ignorant of how gawker and most of the video game/pc industry " articles " work. 

so there isnt billions being spent on VR/AR?

not sure what either of you are saying. I THINK you are trying to suggest the article is factually incorrect but then at the same time nobody is saying that it is nor providing any information they would consider correct. its all very random

mgilbrtsn

Just saw an article that the first VR theater opened in Europe.  Sweden, I think.  Small start, but may herald things to come.

tawess

Paid puff piece or not.... As long as the numbers are true you have a ripple effect. 

Big investors entice medium investors and since they outnumber the big ones more projects get funding leading to more development and that in turn makes VR less susceptible to when the bubble burst. 

So... Point?

SEANMCAD

tawess said:

Paid puff piece or not.... As long as the numbers are true you have a ripple effect. 

Big investors entice medium investors and since they outnumber the big ones more projects get funding leading to more development and that in turn makes VR less susceptible to when the bubble burst. 

So... Point?

no point, no 'agenda' just showing an article that demonstrates that billions of dollars continue to be invested in an uptick.

Now since everyone is trying to pull out a point out of me I could say that nearly on a weekly baises something comes out that a year ago critics would say will 'never happen' and then they have to come up with a new excuse as to why its was always predicted.

case in point, if I told people 3 years that VR will be so big that McDonalds and Disney will get into it would people really say 'yeah...well...yeah...and?'''

tawess

Sean... not talking to you.... Again... I agree with you... 


You are making enemies of your allies

SEANMCAD

tawess said:

Sean... not talking to you.... Again... I agree with you... 


You are making enemies of your allies

it helps to quote

mgilbrtsn

People seem to believe that good articles are puff pieces and bad articles are unbiased honest articles. Before deciding whether something is either, best to research the source to see if it's one that has a track record for accuracy and not a track record that agrees with your point of view.

Big companies don't invest that much coin without seeing a future and they have a lot of smart guys working for them who do a lot of research.  Doesn't always pan out, but I imagine that they have some inkling of what's to come.

tawess

SEANMCAD said:

tawess said:

Sean... not talking to you.... Again... I agree with you... 


You are making enemies of your allies

it helps to quote

Ok

it also helps to read and not lunge at everybody all the time.