The reason 'nobody is buying them' is because the forecasts for sale where all written with the assumption that Oculus was to have been released in Q4 of 2015 so basically based on those numbers the reason why 'nobody is buying them' is because nobody could buy them' again based on orginal predictions of Oculus (CV1)being aviable to consumers in Q4 2015
Simply put... No.
that is very simply (to borrow your phrase) the reason why sales are lower than expected on these reports that were created last year.
The analyst report I posted was from May
wait so let me get this straight
a report from May that is designed to predict the sales outcome for the next 12 months is showing terrible results just 3 months in?
OR
is that 'report' showing the sales predictions on a report that was writen a year ago.
small details like that mater by a large margin
Not when was the article written or when was the report that evaulates the predictions but when was the forecasts made? 3 months into the authorship of a forecast is some 99% grade bullshit that is what that is.
also, to be clear Dev kits do not get reported as sales when it comes to forecasting
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
The reason 'nobody is buying them' is because the forecasts for sale where all written with the assumption that Oculus was to have been released in Q4 of 2015 so basically based on those numbers the reason why 'nobody is buying them' is because nobody could buy them' again based on orginal predictions of Oculus (CV1)being aviable to consumers in Q4 2015
Simply put... No.
that is very simply (to borrow your phrase) the reason why sales are lower than expected on these reports that were created last year.
The analyst report I posted was from May
wait so let me get this straight
a report from May that is designed to predict the sales outcome for the next 12 months is showing terrible results just 3 months in?
OR
is that 'report' showing the sales predictions on a report that was writen a year ago.
small details like that mater by a large margin
Not when was the article written or when was the report that evaulates the predictions but when was the forecasts made? 3 months into the authorship of a forecast is some 99% grade bullshit that is what that is.
also, to be clear Dev kits do not get reported as sales when it comes to forecasting
They downgraded growth just months after launch... it wasn't just a one off, I posted one from superdata as well as reuters.
Dev kits normally don't get reported as sales, but they definitely got reported for Oculus. If they weren't a sales metric you wouldn't have posted that they "sold out more often than not" for months on end LOL. Most development kits are NEVER OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
But thats besides the point. The point is, they downgraded earnings and growth for this year. I'm sure if December doesn't go very well we'll see a drastic change next year in VR growth.
You don't have to keep saying 12 months 12 months 12 months... if analysts start seeing a downward trend the market will equalize itself. Development well slow.
VR will never go away.. in the same way 3D TVs won't ever go away.. or cars from the 60s.. or vinyl records. It doesn't mean it's going to do well, or that this years sets will survive another year.
The reason 'nobody is buying them' is because the forecasts for sale where all written with the assumption that Oculus was to have been released in Q4 of 2015 so basically based on those numbers the reason why 'nobody is buying them' is because nobody could buy them' again based on orginal predictions of Oculus (CV1)being aviable to consumers in Q4 2015
Simply put... No.
that is very simply (to borrow your phrase) the reason why sales are lower than expected on these reports that were created last year.
The analyst report I posted was from May
wait so let me get this straight
a report from May that is designed to predict the sales outcome for the next 12 months is showing terrible results just 3 months in?
OR
is that 'report' showing the sales predictions on a report that was writen a year ago.
small details like that mater by a large margin
Not when was the article written or when was the report that evaulates the predictions but when was the forecasts made? 3 months into the authorship of a forecast is some 99% grade bullshit that is what that is.
also, to be clear Dev kits do not get reported as sales when it comes to forecasting
They downgraded growth just months after launch... it wasn't just a one off, I posted one from superdata as well as reuters.
Dev kits normally don't get reported as sales, but they definitely got reported for Oculus. If they weren't a sales metric you wouldn't have posted that they "sold out more often than not" for months on end LOL. Most development kits are NEVER OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
But thats besides the point. The point is, they downgraded earnings and growth for this year. I'm sure if December doesn't go very well we'll see a drastic change next year in VR growth.
You don't have to keep saying 12 months 12 months 12 months... if analysts start seeing a downward trend the market will equalize itself. Development well slow.
VR will never go away.. in the same way 3D TVs won't ever go away.. or cars from the 60s.. or vinyl records. It doesn't mean it's going to do well, or that this years sets will survive another year.
hold on their cowboy
I would be shocked if Dev kits got counted toward sales projections do you have any evidence of that?
Also, If I predict 1 trillion cars will be sold in a week and only a million get sold does that mean cars are selling poorly or that I am just an asshat at predicting?
the key to figuring these things out is to look for multiple datapoints rather than dry humping one to try and trump seveal hundern
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
The reason 'nobody is buying them' is because the forecasts for sale where all written with the assumption that Oculus was to have been released in Q4 of 2015 so basically based on those numbers the reason why 'nobody is buying them' is because nobody could buy them' again based on orginal predictions of Oculus (CV1)being aviable to consumers in Q4 2015
Simply put... No.
that is very simply (to borrow your phrase) the reason why sales are lower than expected on these reports that were created last year.
The analyst report I posted was from May
wait so let me get this straight
a report from May that is designed to predict the sales outcome for the next 12 months is showing terrible results just 3 months in?
OR
is that 'report' showing the sales predictions on a report that was writen a year ago.
small details like that mater by a large margin
Not when was the article written or when was the report that evaulates the predictions but when was the forecasts made? 3 months into the authorship of a forecast is some 99% grade bullshit that is what that is.
also, to be clear Dev kits do not get reported as sales when it comes to forecasting
They downgraded growth just months after launch... it wasn't just a one off, I posted one from superdata as well as reuters.
Dev kits normally don't get reported as sales, but they definitely got reported for Oculus. If they weren't a sales metric you wouldn't have posted that they "sold out more often than not" for months on end LOL. Most development kits are NEVER OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
But thats besides the point. The point is, they downgraded earnings and growth for this year. I'm sure if December doesn't go very well we'll see a drastic change next year in VR growth.
You don't have to keep saying 12 months 12 months 12 months... if analysts start seeing a downward trend the market will equalize itself. Development well slow.
VR will never go away.. in the same way 3D TVs won't ever go away.. or cars from the 60s.. or vinyl records. It doesn't mean it's going to do well, or that this years sets will survive another year.
hold on their cowboy
I would be shocked if Dev kits got counted toward sales projections do you have any evidence of that?
Also, If I predict 1 trillion cars will be sold in a week and only a million get sold does that mean cars are selling poorly or that I am just an asshat at predicting?
the key to figuring these things out is to look for multiple datapoints rather than dry humping one to try and trump seveal hundern
Do you have any evidence that they didn't use the Development Kit as a sales metric? They certainly released numbers on it. You touted those very numbers before and were proud of how they "sold out" didn't you? Yes or no?
The industry relies on analysts to determine interest and growth based around multiple companies.
Don't get me wrong, they still predict growth.. but not nearly as much as before.. and on a sliding scale since VR actually launched. Every Facebook downgraded their expectations, it's not just the analysts.
This is all a culmination of the articles I've been posting in response to you for months. Not just one day I woke up and found something, when they made predictions in the past, we posted them, when they realized those predictions were wrong, they changed them -- and the market and development will change along with it.
When a company says something is "encouraging" it's basically their way of saying "It's not good, but we have too much invested to stop now"
I would be shocked if Dev kits got counted toward sales projections do you have any evidence of that?
Also, If I predict 1 trillion cars will be sold in a week and only a million get sold does that mean cars are selling poorly or that I am just an asshat at predicting?
the key to figuring these things out is to look for multiple datapoints rather than dry humping one to try and trump seveal hundern
Do you have any evidence that they didn't use the Development Kit as a sales metric? ...
the ridiculously safe assumption is that developer kits are not factored into sale projections or sales reports.
Your question is a bit like asking 'do you have any proove that magic unicorns did not create the sun?' because its about as likely.
and if they were the internet would be abuz about discussions about it
but again, because some asshat cant predict worth shit and overshoot like crazy and the numbers dont match this ones guys (or company) crazy dreams of acceptable hardly means its failing
and also, I still hold to the statement that nobody should be at all surprised that people havent been buying VR headsets when for the most part they fucking couldnt
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I would be shocked if Dev kits got counted toward sales projections do you have any evidence of that?
Also, If I predict 1 trillion cars will be sold in a week and only a million get sold does that mean cars are selling poorly or that I am just an asshat at predicting?
the key to figuring these things out is to look for multiple datapoints rather than dry humping one to try and trump seveal hundern
Do you have any evidence that they didn't use the Development Kit as a sales metric? ...
the ridiculously safe assumption is that developer kits are not factored into sale projections or sales reports.
Your question is a bit like asking 'do you have any proove that magic unicorns did not create the sun?' because its about as likely.
and if they were the internet would be abuz about discussions about it
No, they wouldn't be abuzz about it.. because nobody cares. If you're interested, just search for development kit sales... if it didn't matter they wouldn't post the information. Unfortunately they did very much so post detailed information about their sales....
and you kept stating they sold out didn't you? Right? You did I think. Not just that but YOU a non-developer bought a DK unit yes? Didn't you?
They were using this as a sales metric the entire time... they were using it to bolster their company.. lets not forget it started with a KICKSTARTER. If they didn't gauge their earnings based on the money they received where would they be? Not a company.
So I think you're way off here. You should buy a telescope and go find that unicorn.
I would be shocked if Dev kits got counted toward sales projections do you have any evidence of that?
Also, If I predict 1 trillion cars will be sold in a week and only a million get sold does that mean cars are selling poorly or that I am just an asshat at predicting?
the key to figuring these things out is to look for multiple datapoints rather than dry humping one to try and trump seveal hundern
Do you have any evidence that they didn't use the Development Kit as a sales metric? ...
the ridiculously safe assumption is that developer kits are not factored into sale projections or sales reports.
Your question is a bit like asking 'do you have any proove that magic unicorns did not create the sun?' because its about as likely.
and if they were the internet would be abuz about discussions about it
No, they wouldn't be abuzz about it.. because nobody cares. If you're interested, just search for development kit sales... if it didn't matter they wouldn't post the information. Unfortunately they did very much so post detailed information about their sales....
and you kept stating they sold out didn't you? Right? You did I think. Not just that but YOU a non-developer bought a DK unit yes? Didn't you?
They were using this as a sales metric the entire time... they were using it to bolster their company.. lets not forget it started with a KICKSTARTER. If they didn't gauge their earnings based on the money they received where would they be? Not a company.
So I think you're way off here. You should buy a telescope and go find that unicorn.
no absolutely not people would care and they absolutely should care and for very serious legal reasons.
You cant go around with finical reports like that and just assume dev kits are part of the profit projections oh hell no, wall street would explode and at min the S.E.C would be asking a lot of questions
I bring up the point that dev kits sold out but no way in hell would I assume or expect someone to assume that I am suggesting the dollar amounts for those kits would be wrapped up into an earnings report. Oh hell no.
So when finical forecasting reports like that come out its 1. related to retail products 2. pre-order sell out or not pre-orders will not be counted in that number the credit card charge has to have happend. So...I say again...nobody should be surprised that sales are low when the only sales that can count is HTC Vive all those pre-orders for Oculus pretty much going back to the first week are JUST NOW getting recorded in sales
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I would be shocked if Dev kits got counted toward sales projections do you have any evidence of that?
Also, If I predict 1 trillion cars will be sold in a week and only a million get sold does that mean cars are selling poorly or that I am just an asshat at predicting?
the key to figuring these things out is to look for multiple datapoints rather than dry humping one to try and trump seveal hundern
Do you have any evidence that they didn't use the Development Kit as a sales metric? ...
the ridiculously safe assumption is that developer kits are not factored into sale projections or sales reports.
Your question is a bit like asking 'do you have any proove that magic unicorns did not create the sun?' because its about as likely.
and if they were the internet would be abuz about discussions about it
No, they wouldn't be abuzz about it.. because nobody cares. If you're interested, just search for development kit sales... if it didn't matter they wouldn't post the information. Unfortunately they did very much so post detailed information about their sales....
and you kept stating they sold out didn't you? Right? You did I think. Not just that but YOU a non-developer bought a DK unit yes? Didn't you?
They were using this as a sales metric the entire time... they were using it to bolster their company.. lets not forget it started with a KICKSTARTER. If they didn't gauge their earnings based on the money they received where would they be? Not a company.
So I think you're way off here. You should buy a telescope and go find that unicorn.
no absolutely not people would care and they absolutely should care and for very serious legal reasons.
You cant go around with finical reports like that and just assume dev kits are part of the profit projections oh hell no, wall street would explode and at min the S.E.C would be asking a lot of questions
I bring up the point that dev kits sold out but no way in hell would I assume or expect someone to assume that I am suggesting the dollar amounts for those kits would be wrapped up into an earnings report. Oh hell no.
So when finical forecasting reports like that come out its 1. related to retail products 2. pre-order sell out or not pre-orders will not be counted in that number the credit card charge has to have happend. So...I say again...nobody should be surprised that sales are low when the only sales that can count is HTC Vive all those pre-orders for Oculus pretty much going back to the first week are JUST NOW getting recorded in sales
Can you offer me anything of substance or are you just going to continue making things up?
Wallstreet doesn't care.. the development kits were before any buyout. All it takes is a quick search and you can see that Oculus absolutely used DK's as a sales metric as they continued their business.
Sorry, but that's how it was.. they released those numbers, not because of wallstreet, but because they were trying to show people "look how successful this is" and it wasn't even that successful -- but they needed the influx of media attention, or else they wouldn't have posted it.
Can you offer me anything of substance or are you just going to continue making things up?
Wallstreet doesn't care.. the development kits were before any buyout. All it takes is a quick search and you can see that Oculus absolutely used DK's as a sales metric as they continued their business.
Sorry, but that's how it was.. they released those numbers, not because of wallstreet, but because they were trying to show people "look how successful this is" and it wasn't even that successful -- but they needed the influx of media attention, or else they wouldn't have posted it.
Sorry not sorry, tell that unicorn I said hi.
yeah umm no your wrong and I dont have time to start researching S.E.C guidelines and I.R.S. guidelines around but its safe to say that the idea of 'development' products is that they are not sold for profit and the money from them are put back into development and those finical numbers are seperated from reports regarding earnings. If they are sold as a profit then that can violate IRS regulations I am almost positive on.
now...I also know 100% for a fact that all pre-orders do NOT count as sales until the credit card is charged and I know for a FACT that the credit card does not get charged until the product is at least shipped although I think its until its recieved and I know this because I watched my credit card on this very issue
So...reports on sales of VR up to June of this year involve, HTC Vive, Gear VR, and about 3 days worth of Oculus pre-orders at best (estimating here)
nothing else.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Can you offer me anything of substance or are you just going to continue making things up?
Wallstreet doesn't care.. the development kits were before any buyout. All it takes is a quick search and you can see that Oculus absolutely used DK's as a sales metric as they continued their business.
Sorry, but that's how it was.. they released those numbers, not because of wallstreet, but because they were trying to show people "look how successful this is" and it wasn't even that successful -- but they needed the influx of media attention, or else they wouldn't have posted it.
Sorry not sorry, tell that unicorn I said hi.
yeah umm no your wrong and I dont have time to start researching S.E.C guidelines and I.R.S. guidelines around but its safe to say that the idea of 'development' products is that they are not sold for profit and the money from them are put back into development and those finical numbers are seperated from reports regarding earnings.
now...I also know 100% for a fact that all pre-orders do NOT count as sales until the credit card is charged and I know for a FACT that the credit card does not get charged until the product is at least shipped although I think its until its recieved and I know this because I watched my credit card on this very issue
So...reports on sales of VR up to June of this year involve, HTC Vive, Gear VR, and about 3 days worth of Oculus pre-orders at best (estimating here)
nothing else.
Preorders don't count because they aren't sales.. thats ridiculous to even bring that up.. DEvelopment kits were sales, to not just developers but consumers.. like yourself and you bought one. Without that and funding from the kickstarter it wouldn't be a company in the first place.
Again you have no real information regarding what or how the money was used. You actually have no information on anything aside from how you "believe" it's supposed to work. It's worthless.
Can you offer me anything of substance or are you just going to continue making things up?
Wallstreet doesn't care.. the development kits were before any buyout. All it takes is a quick search and you can see that Oculus absolutely used DK's as a sales metric as they continued their business.
Sorry, but that's how it was.. they released those numbers, not because of wallstreet, but because they were trying to show people "look how successful this is" and it wasn't even that successful -- but they needed the influx of media attention, or else they wouldn't have posted it.
Sorry not sorry, tell that unicorn I said hi.
yeah umm no your wrong and I dont have time to start researching S.E.C guidelines and I.R.S. guidelines around but its safe to say that the idea of 'development' products is that they are not sold for profit and the money from them are put back into development and those finical numbers are seperated from reports regarding earnings.
now...I also know 100% for a fact that all pre-orders do NOT count as sales until the credit card is charged and I know for a FACT that the credit card does not get charged until the product is at least shipped although I think its until its recieved and I know this because I watched my credit card on this very issue
So...reports on sales of VR up to June of this year involve, HTC Vive, Gear VR, and about 3 days worth of Oculus pre-orders at best (estimating here)
nothing else.
Preorders don't count because they aren't sales.. thats ridiculous to even bring that up.. DEvelopment kits were sales, to not just developers but consumers.. like yourself and you bought one. Without that and funding from the kickstarter it wouldn't be a company in the first place.
Again you have no real information regarding what or how the money was used. You actually have no information on anything aside from how you "believe" it's supposed to work. It's worthless.
Provide something concrete. Now.
I bring it up because my assumption on your understanding of a dev kit in this case was clearly wrong.
these are not sold for the possibly of profit, or at least we should hope not! The product is not released at that point a the DK versions where version that were under development technically speaking. I am nearly positive they would not be counted in the case of earning reports that would be twisted and wrong if they were.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
'First, we have to rule out the sales figures for SDKs and developer kits; those Ocul-i and Valve-i mind-tricks won't work here. Unless otherwise stipulated, figure that the first 200,000 in declared sales for all platforms are in fact SDKs sold or sent to hopeful content makers and press. In many cases, they could be purchased in multiples per location so developers have it in their hands. Whether they buy it or not, it's a valueless part of the equation. We are only interested in actual customers that just want to enjoy VR and immersive tech and are not bound to the technology in any other way. The following numbers are based on this mindset.'
I think that is pretty much understood in the finical markets
when a company like 'super data' make predictions and reads results they have to have this level of accuracy not pull i-tricks as they article says
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
No.. they don't have to pull any other tricks, I was hoping you'd pull that article, If you don't think I've done my research before I ask you to provide proof than you haven't been paying attention.
First of all, this guy is speculating.. ONLY speculating.. .. and that is in no small part to the fact that even in the part that you quoted that you probably didn't understand, throwing out the DK's is specifically because those WERE METRICS THEY WERE USING.
"The Oculus Rift DK1 dev kit was the product of the company’s famously successful Kickstarter which charged $300 for the unit and raised more than $2.4 million from some 9,500 supporters. The dev kit, with its 1280×800 display (640×800 effective resolution when split between each eye) went on to ship 56,334, Oculus shared in some signage at the company’s pre-E3 press event yesterday"
This was well before the article you sent, and that matters because this is how Oculus was purposefully displaying those metrics to developers at E3. Investors. Developers. Producers. Trying to bring in donations based on a SALES METRIC.
Thats it.. nothing else. What you didn't quote is the PRECEEDING text in your article:
"I've seen all kinds of media study blurbs and claims about VR. Everything from millions to tens of millions of units sold within the first year; most recently a study promoting the industry valued at $70 billion by 2020. With numbers like these, no wonder people think that VR's future is going to be determined within the next six months."
Then he proceeds to allude that they were basing this off of OCULUS SALES DATA that OCULUS was posting -- and that they are .. for all intents and purposes MIND TRICKS.
You have to rule them out when you're looking at the PROGRESS OF THE CONSUMER VERSION OF VR
Which is correct..
but that ISN'T what Oculus WANTS. The entire reason he had the sales data is because it was posted BY OCULUS.
No.. they don't have to pull any other tricks, I was hoping you'd pull that article, If you don't think I've done my research before I ask you to provide proof than you haven't been paying attention.
First of all, this guy is speculating.. ONLY speculating.. .. and that is in no small part to the fact that even in the part that you quoted that you probably didn't understand, throwing out the DK's is specifically because those WERE METRICS THEY WERE USING.
"The Oculus Rift DK1 dev kit was the product of the company’s famously successful Kickstarter which charged $300 for the unit and raised more than $2.4 million from some 9,500 supporters. The dev kit, with its 1280×800 display (640×800 effective resolution when split between each eye) went on to ship 56,334, Oculus shared in some signage at the company’s pre-E3 press event yesterday"
This was well before the article you sent, and that matters because this is how Oculus was purposefully displaying those metrics to developers at E3. Investors. Developers. Producers. Trying to bring in donations based on a SALES METRIC.
Thats it.. nothing else. What you didn't quote is the PRECEEDING text in your article:
"I've seen all kinds of media study blurbs and claims about VR. Everything from millions to tens of millions of units sold within the first year; most recently a study promoting the industry valued at $70 billion by 2020. With numbers like these, no wonder people think that VR's future is going to be determined within the next six months."
Then he proceeds to allude that they were basing this off of OCULUS SALES DATA that OCULUS was posting -- and that they are .. for all intents and purposes MIND TRICKS.
You have to rule them out when you're looking at the PROGRESS OF THE CONSUMER VERSION OF VR
Which is correct..
but that ISN'T what Oculus WANTS. The entire reason he had the sales data is because it was posted BY OCULUS.
You basically invalidated your own point.
you have wasted a great deal of your time I am afraid. I am not talking about what the article is about or his core point, I was only trying to borrow a quote from it to illustrate that its fairly common knowedge that you would not count dev kits in retail sales.
Look I am not talking about this anymore, those dev kits are not counted in 'super data' period we are done talking about it
incidentally, Oculus was not happy about the fact that regular consumers were buying the dev kits and the supply was intentionally kept low. So 'people are not buying them' at this stage in the game should not be a shocker to anyone for reasons I have explained about 4 times a day for a month now
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
No.. they don't have to pull any other tricks, I was hoping you'd pull that article, If you don't think I've done my research before I ask you to provide proof than you haven't been paying attention.
First of all, this guy is speculating.. ONLY speculating.. .. and that is in no small part to the fact that even in the part that you quoted that you probably didn't understand, throwing out the DK's is specifically because those WERE METRICS THEY WERE USING.
"The Oculus Rift DK1 dev kit was the product of the company’s famously successful Kickstarter which charged $300 for the unit and raised more than $2.4 million from some 9,500 supporters. The dev kit, with its 1280×800 display (640×800 effective resolution when split between each eye) went on to ship 56,334, Oculus shared in some signage at the company’s pre-E3 press event yesterday"
This was well before the article you sent, and that matters because this is how Oculus was purposefully displaying those metrics to developers at E3. Investors. Developers. Producers. Trying to bring in donations based on a SALES METRIC.
Thats it.. nothing else. What you didn't quote is the PRECEEDING text in your article:
"I've seen all kinds of media study blurbs and claims about VR. Everything from millions to tens of millions of units sold within the first year; most recently a study promoting the industry valued at $70 billion by 2020. With numbers like these, no wonder people think that VR's future is going to be determined within the next six months."
Then he proceeds to allude that they were basing this off of OCULUS SALES DATA that OCULUS was posting -- and that they are .. for all intents and purposes MIND TRICKS.
You have to rule them out when you're looking at the PROGRESS OF THE CONSUMER VERSION OF VR
Which is correct..
but that ISN'T what Oculus WANTS. The entire reason he had the sales data is because it was posted BY OCULUS.
You basically invalidated your own point.
you have wasted a great deal of your time I am afraid. I am not talking about what the article is about or his core point, I was only trying to borrow a quote from it to illustrate that its fairly common knowedge that you would not count dev kits in retail sales.
Look I am not talking about this anymore, those dev kits are not counted in 'super data' period we are done talking about it
incidentally, Oculus was not happy about the fact that regular consumers were buying the dev kits and the supply was intentionally kept low. So 'people are not buying them' at this stage in the game should not be a shocker to anyone for reasons I have explained about 4 times a day for a month now
Sorry, but analysts used those numbers as a metric just like Oculus wanted them to to gauge interest as I've stated many times before... because that's what OCULUS WANTED.
Also OCULUS specifically sold them to consumers... they HAD TO. From the moment they created the kickstarter to the DK2 which they stated would be available to consumers. They were happy about it.. they kept them on sale throughout it's entire lifecycle.
Ask yourself why they would happily post their numbers for developer kits sold but not for their consumer version.... Why were they all about numbers of units sold during their "development phase" but not when it came time for retail? Because the numbers are far less... the DK numbers were "encouraging" to investors and analysts....
That's specifically why the article you posted stated when you start to take actual consumers into the mix you have to throw out that data... not pay attention to the analyst reports.... which I agree with because they were ALL based off of 4 years of pushing development kits.
For that same reason Oculus was supposed to be the leader in the technology.... Because they already had 4 years and over 175K units out on all other competitors. When consumer versions launched... they won't even say how many they sold because it's paltry and most likely they're way under the Vive and soon to be way under PSVR, neither of which will make stellar sales either.
Dev Kits aren't included in CV1 sales.. they were included in sales data prior to the CV1.
No.. they don't have to pull any other tricks, I was hoping you'd pull that article, If you don't think I've done my research before I ask you to provide proof than you haven't been paying attention.
First of all, this guy is speculating.. ONLY speculating.. .. and that is in no small part to the fact that even in the part that you quoted that you probably didn't understand, throwing out the DK's is specifically because those WERE METRICS THEY WERE USING.
"The Oculus Rift DK1 dev kit was the product of the company’s famously successful Kickstarter which charged $300 for the unit and raised more than $2.4 million from some 9,500 supporters. The dev kit, with its 1280×800 display (640×800 effective resolution when split between each eye) went on to ship 56,334, Oculus shared in some signage at the company’s pre-E3 press event yesterday"
This was well before the article you sent, and that matters because this is how Oculus was purposefully displaying those metrics to developers at E3. Investors. Developers. Producers. Trying to bring in donations based on a SALES METRIC.
Thats it.. nothing else. What you didn't quote is the PRECEEDING text in your article:
"I've seen all kinds of media study blurbs and claims about VR. Everything from millions to tens of millions of units sold within the first year; most recently a study promoting the industry valued at $70 billion by 2020. With numbers like these, no wonder people think that VR's future is going to be determined within the next six months."
Then he proceeds to allude that they were basing this off of OCULUS SALES DATA that OCULUS was posting -- and that they are .. for all intents and purposes MIND TRICKS.
You have to rule them out when you're looking at the PROGRESS OF THE CONSUMER VERSION OF VR
Which is correct..
but that ISN'T what Oculus WANTS. The entire reason he had the sales data is because it was posted BY OCULUS.
You basically invalidated your own point.
you have wasted a great deal of your time I am afraid. I am not talking about what the article is about or his core point, I was only trying to borrow a quote from it to illustrate that its fairly common knowedge that you would not count dev kits in retail sales.
Look I am not talking about this anymore, those dev kits are not counted in 'super data' period we are done talking about it
incidentally, Oculus was not happy about the fact that regular consumers were buying the dev kits and the supply was intentionally kept low. So 'people are not buying them' at this stage in the game should not be a shocker to anyone for reasons I have explained about 4 times a day for a month now
Sorry, but analysts used those numbers as a metric just like Oculus wanted them to t....
proove it please because that is an outrageous claim so the burden is on you to provide evidence
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
No.. they don't have to pull any other tricks, I was hoping you'd pull that article, If you don't think I've done my research before I ask you to provide proof than you haven't been paying attention.
First of all, this guy is speculating.. ONLY speculating.. .. and that is in no small part to the fact that even in the part that you quoted that you probably didn't understand, throwing out the DK's is specifically because those WERE METRICS THEY WERE USING.
"The Oculus Rift DK1 dev kit was the product of the company’s famously successful Kickstarter which charged $300 for the unit and raised more than $2.4 million from some 9,500 supporters. The dev kit, with its 1280×800 display (640×800 effective resolution when split between each eye) went on to ship 56,334, Oculus shared in some signage at the company’s pre-E3 press event yesterday"
This was well before the article you sent, and that matters because this is how Oculus was purposefully displaying those metrics to developers at E3. Investors. Developers. Producers. Trying to bring in donations based on a SALES METRIC.
Thats it.. nothing else. What you didn't quote is the PRECEEDING text in your article:
"I've seen all kinds of media study blurbs and claims about VR. Everything from millions to tens of millions of units sold within the first year; most recently a study promoting the industry valued at $70 billion by 2020. With numbers like these, no wonder people think that VR's future is going to be determined within the next six months."
Then he proceeds to allude that they were basing this off of OCULUS SALES DATA that OCULUS was posting -- and that they are .. for all intents and purposes MIND TRICKS.
You have to rule them out when you're looking at the PROGRESS OF THE CONSUMER VERSION OF VR
Which is correct..
but that ISN'T what Oculus WANTS. The entire reason he had the sales data is because it was posted BY OCULUS.
You basically invalidated your own point.
you have wasted a great deal of your time I am afraid. I am not talking about what the article is about or his core point, I was only trying to borrow a quote from it to illustrate that its fairly common knowedge that you would not count dev kits in retail sales.
Look I am not talking about this anymore, those dev kits are not counted in 'super data' period we are done talking about it
incidentally, Oculus was not happy about the fact that regular consumers were buying the dev kits and the supply was intentionally kept low. So 'people are not buying them' at this stage in the game should not be a shocker to anyone for reasons I have explained about 4 times a day for a month now
Sorry, but analysts used those numbers as a metric just like Oculus wanted them to t....
proove it please because that is an outrageous claim so the burden is on you to provide evidence
Already did... should have checked out the link I posted in my previous responses before posting.. it would have saved you time and you would have kept your word that you were "done talking about this".
proove it please because that is an outrageous claim so the burden is on you to provide evidence
Already did... should have checked out the link I posted in my previous responses before posting.. it would have saved you time and you would have kept your word that you were "done talking about this".
your link in question EXPLICTLY says it added the DK1 and DK2 to the figures AND that is the same article you are using in reference to horrible sales figures AND the quote in question is directly related to the sales report and not related to something else. No missing holes or loops here right?
do I have that right?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
proove it please because that is an outrageous claim so the burden is on you to provide evidence
Already did... should have checked out the link I posted in my previous responses before posting.. it would have saved you time and you would have kept your word that you were "done talking about this".
your link in question EXPLICTLY says it added the DK1 and DK2 to the figures AND that is the same article you are using in reference to horrible sales figures AND the quote in question is directly related to the sales report and not related to something else. No missing holes or loops here right?
do I have that right?
Did you read the first article? Did Oculus present a breakdown between both DK1 and DK2 headsets to developers, investors and analysts at E3? Yes or no? Yes or No Sean
proove it please because that is an outrageous claim so the burden is on you to provide evidence
Already did... should have checked out the link I posted in my previous responses before posting.. it would have saved you time and you would have kept your word that you were "done talking about this".
your link in question EXPLICTLY says it added the DK1 and DK2 to the figures AND that is the same article you are using in reference to horrible sales figures AND the quote in question is directly related to the sales report and not related to something else. No missing holes or loops here right?
do I have that right?
Did you read the first article? Did Oculus present a breakdown between both DK1 and DK2 headsets to developers, investors and analysts at E3? Yes or no? Yes or No Sean
none of those questions are remotely even close to related to my question so I am going to take my question as a no on your part.
thanks
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
proove it please because that is an outrageous claim so the burden is on you to provide evidence
Already did... should have checked out the link I posted in my previous responses before posting.. it would have saved you time and you would have kept your word that you were "done talking about this".
your link in question EXPLICTLY says it added the DK1 and DK2 to the figures AND that is the same article you are using in reference to horrible sales figures AND the quote in question is directly related to the sales report and not related to something else. No missing holes or loops here right?
do I have that right?
Did you read the first article? Did Oculus present a breakdown between both DK1 and DK2 headsets to developers, investors and analysts at E3? Yes or no? Yes or No Sean
none of those questions are remotely even close to related to my question so I am going to take my question as a no on your part.
thanks
E3 is a TRADE EVENT. Analysts go there... SUPERDATA GOES THERE
"Superdata's Joost van Dreunen didn't seem to be too impressed with either Microsoft or Sony. Microsoft's first-party lineup was "a bit sparse and predominantly centered on sequels" in his view, while Sony "spent a disproportionate amount of time showcasing its new IP Days Gone instead of providing more detail on the obvious big ticket titles.""
Oculus POSTED numbers at E3 SPECIFICALLY to bolster their image to analysts, investors and developers.
So did they present a breakdown between DK1 and DK2 headsets at E3 in 2015, Yes or No? That's all I'm looking for .. Yes or No.
proove it please because that is an outrageous claim so the burden is on you to provide evidence
Already did... should have checked out the link I posted in my previous responses before posting.. it would have saved you time and you would have kept your word that you were "done talking about this".
your link in question EXPLICTLY says it added the DK1 and DK2 to the figures AND that is the same article you are using in reference to horrible sales figures AND the quote in question is directly related to the sales report and not related to something else. No missing holes or loops here right?
do I have that right?
Did you read the first article? Did Oculus present a breakdown between both DK1 and DK2 headsets to developers, investors and analysts at E3? Yes or no? Yes or No Sean
none of those questions are remotely even close to related to my question so I am going to take my question as a no on your part.
thanks
E3 is a TRADE EVENT. Analysts go there... SUPERDATA GOES THERE
"Superdata's Joost van Dreunen didn't seem to be too impressed with either Microsoft or Sony. Microsoft's first-party lineup was "a bit sparse and predominantly centered on sequels" in his view, while Sony "spent a disproportionate amount of time showcasing its new IP Days Gone instead of providing more detail on the obvious big ticket titles.""
Oculus POSTED numbers at E3 SPECIFICALLY to bolster their image to analysts, investors and developers.
So did they present a breakdown between DK1 and DK2 headsets at E3 in 2015, Yes or No? That's all I'm looking for .. Yes or No.
not related to my question and I am done talking about this sub0subject as well unless you provide stronger evidence that address my question explictly
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
proove it please because that is an outrageous claim so the burden is on you to provide evidence
Already did... should have checked out the link I posted in my previous responses before posting.. it would have saved you time and you would have kept your word that you were "done talking about this".
your link in question EXPLICTLY says it added the DK1 and DK2 to the figures AND that is the same article you are using in reference to horrible sales figures AND the quote in question is directly related to the sales report and not related to something else. No missing holes or loops here right?
do I have that right?
Did you read the first article? Did Oculus present a breakdown between both DK1 and DK2 headsets to developers, investors and analysts at E3? Yes or no? Yes or No Sean
none of those questions are remotely even close to related to my question so I am going to take my question as a no on your part.
thanks
E3 is a TRADE EVENT. Analysts go there... SUPERDATA GOES THERE
"Superdata's Joost van Dreunen didn't seem to be too impressed with either Microsoft or Sony. Microsoft's first-party lineup was "a bit sparse and predominantly centered on sequels" in his view, while Sony "spent a disproportionate amount of time showcasing its new IP Days Gone instead of providing more detail on the obvious big ticket titles.""
Oculus POSTED numbers at E3 SPECIFICALLY to bolster their image to analysts, investors and developers.
So did they present a breakdown between DK1 and DK2 headsets at E3 in 2015, Yes or No? That's all I'm looking for .. Yes or No.
not related to my question and I am done talking about this sub0subject as well unless you provide stronger evidence that address my question explictly
I'll take your dismissal as you conceding that you have read the article (which was the answer to your question) and that you know you're wrong, but because you can't refute it you'll leave the conversations as per the usual.
I learned something intresting about steam rating. If you hover over the rating it will give you the % of the review that are positive.
so for example:
Rim World is 'Overwhelmingly Positive' with 2,149 reviews and 97% of those are positive The Lab is 'Overwhelmingly Positive' with 734 reviews and 99% of those are positive.
is 734 a good population statistically speaking? I would think not, a high level of variance is still possible at this level, however, at this time this data point suggests things are going well insteadof things are going bad. That is not to say this is the only data point on VR by a long shot but its one that can be added to the list of 'good'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I learned something intresting about steam rating. If you hover over the rating it will give you the % of the review that are positive.
so for example:
Rim World is 'Overwhelmingly Positive' with 2,149 reviews and 97% of those are positive The Lab is 'Overwhelmingly Positive' with 734 reviews and 99% of those are positive.
is 734 a good population statistically speaking? I would think not, a high level of variance is still possible at this level, however, at this time this data point suggests things are going well insteadof things are going bad. That is not to say this is the only data point on VR by a long shot but its one that can be added to the list of 'good'
No... as was explained before, this is a free demo geared towards a small subset of players.. I don't know why the rating percentage is news to you, it was posted with the original article you mentioned. 734 reviews is a small amount of players that 1. Bought the Rift prior to mainstream (which would be basically only major proponents of VR) and 2. Downloaded and played the game, the majority of which were less than 4 hours total prior to writing the review.
More than half of the reviews state "This is a great Demo, detailing what the Vive can do and how to learn about roomscale"
Most don't even consider it a game. And if you want to consider a poor demo with less than 1000 reviews and a general playtime of under 4 hours as a signature of VR doing well in comparison to the next game on the list... Portal 2, with over 70K reviews and a general play time of over 13 Hours, by all means go right ahead... but you're reaching quite far to make a very minuscule and poor point.
That early adopters of VR like VR demos that are done well.
Comments
a report from May that is designed to predict the sales outcome for the next 12 months is showing terrible results just 3 months in? OR is that 'report' showing the sales predictions on a report that was writen a year ago. small details like that mater by a large margin
Not when was the article written or when was the report that evaulates the predictions but when was the forecasts made? 3 months into the authorship of a forecast is some 99% grade bullshit that is what that is.
also, to be clear Dev kits do not get reported as sales when it comes to forecasting
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Dev kits normally don't get reported as sales, but they definitely got reported for Oculus. If they weren't a sales metric you wouldn't have posted that they "sold out more often than not" for months on end LOL. Most development kits are NEVER OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
But thats besides the point. The point is, they downgraded earnings and growth for this year. I'm sure if December doesn't go very well we'll see a drastic change next year in VR growth.
You don't have to keep saying 12 months 12 months 12 months... if analysts start seeing a downward trend the market will equalize itself. Development well slow.
VR will never go away.. in the same way 3D TVs won't ever go away.. or cars from the 60s.. or vinyl records. It doesn't mean it's going to do well, or that this years sets will survive another year.
I would be shocked if Dev kits got counted toward sales projections do you have any evidence of that?
Also, If I predict 1 trillion cars will be sold in a week and only a million get sold does that mean cars are selling poorly or that I am just an asshat at predicting?
the key to figuring these things out is to look for multiple datapoints rather than dry humping one to try and trump seveal hundern
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
The industry relies on analysts to determine interest and growth based around multiple companies.
Don't get me wrong, they still predict growth.. but not nearly as much as before.. and on a sliding scale since VR actually launched. Every Facebook downgraded their expectations, it's not just the analysts.
This is all a culmination of the articles I've been posting in response to you for months. Not just one day I woke up and found something, when they made predictions in the past, we posted them, when they realized those predictions were wrong, they changed them -- and the market and development will change along with it.
When a company says something is "encouraging" it's basically their way of saying "It's not good, but we have too much invested to stop now"
and if they were the internet would be abuz about discussions about it
but again, because some asshat cant predict worth shit and overshoot like crazy and the numbers dont match this ones guys (or company) crazy dreams of acceptable hardly means its failing
and also, I still hold to the statement that nobody should be at all surprised that people havent been buying VR headsets when for the most part they fucking couldnt
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
and you kept stating they sold out didn't you? Right? You did I think. Not just that but YOU a non-developer bought a DK unit yes? Didn't you?
They were using this as a sales metric the entire time... they were using it to bolster their company.. lets not forget it started with a KICKSTARTER. If they didn't gauge their earnings based on the money they received where would they be? Not a company.
So I think you're way off here. You should buy a telescope and go find that unicorn.
You cant go around with finical reports like that and just assume dev kits are part of the profit projections oh hell no, wall street would explode and at min the S.E.C would be asking a lot of questions
I bring up the point that dev kits sold out but no way in hell would I assume or expect someone to assume that I am suggesting the dollar amounts for those kits would be wrapped up into an earnings report. Oh hell no.
So when finical forecasting reports like that come out its 1. related to retail products 2. pre-order sell out or not pre-orders will not be counted in that number the credit card charge has to have happend.
So...I say again...nobody should be surprised that sales are low when the only sales that can count is HTC Vive all those pre-orders for Oculus pretty much going back to the first week are JUST NOW getting recorded in sales
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Wallstreet doesn't care.. the development kits were before any buyout. All it takes is a quick search and you can see that Oculus absolutely used DK's as a sales metric as they continued their business.
Sorry, but that's how it was.. they released those numbers, not because of wallstreet, but because they were trying to show people "look how successful this is" and it wasn't even that successful -- but they needed the influx of media attention, or else they wouldn't have posted it.
Sorry not sorry, tell that unicorn I said hi.
now...I also know 100% for a fact that all pre-orders do NOT count as sales until the credit card is charged and I know for a FACT that the credit card does not get charged until the product is at least shipped although I think its until its recieved and I know this because I watched my credit card on this very issue
So...reports on sales of VR up to June of this year involve, HTC Vive, Gear VR, and about 3 days worth of Oculus pre-orders at best (estimating here)
nothing else.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Again you have no real information regarding what or how the money was used. You actually have no information on anything aside from how you "believe" it's supposed to work. It's worthless.
Provide something concrete. Now.
these are not sold for the possibly of profit, or at least we should hope not! The product is not released at that point a the DK versions where version that were under development technically speaking. I am nearly positive they would not be counted in the case of earning reports that would be twisted and wrong if they were.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
http://www.displaydaily.com/display-daily/34079-build-to-last-vr-sales-figures-you-can-count
'First, we have to rule out the sales figures for SDKs and developer kits; those Ocul-i and Valve-i mind-tricks won't work here. Unless otherwise stipulated, figure that the first 200,000 in declared sales for all platforms are in fact SDKs sold or sent to hopeful content makers and press. In many cases, they could be purchased in multiples per location so developers have it in their hands. Whether they buy it or not, it's a valueless part of the equation. We are only interested in actual customers that just want to enjoy VR and immersive tech and are not bound to the technology in any other way. The following numbers are based on this mindset.'
I think that is pretty much understood in the finical markets
when a company like 'super data' make predictions and reads results they have to have this level of accuracy not pull i-tricks as they article says
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
First of all, this guy is speculating.. ONLY speculating.. .. and that is in no small part to the fact that even in the part that you quoted that you probably didn't understand, throwing out the DK's is specifically because those WERE METRICS THEY WERE USING.
http://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-reveals-175000-rift-development-kits-sold/
Oh look it's your favorite website.
"The Oculus Rift DK1 dev kit was the product of the company’s famously successful Kickstarter which charged $300 for the unit and raised more than $2.4 million from some 9,500 supporters. The dev kit, with its 1280×800 display (640×800 effective resolution when split between each eye) went on to ship 56,334, Oculus shared in some signage at the company’s pre-E3 press event yesterday"
This was well before the article you sent, and that matters because this is how Oculus was purposefully displaying those metrics to developers at E3. Investors. Developers. Producers. Trying to bring in donations based on a SALES METRIC.
Thats it.. nothing else.
What you didn't quote is the PRECEEDING text in your article:
"I've seen all kinds of media study blurbs and claims about VR. Everything from millions to tens of millions of units sold within the first year; most recently a study promoting the industry valued at $70 billion by 2020. With numbers like these, no wonder people think that VR's future is going to be determined within the next six months."
Then he proceeds to allude that they were basing this off of OCULUS SALES DATA that OCULUS was posting -- and that they are .. for all intents and purposes MIND TRICKS.
You have to rule them out when you're looking at the PROGRESS OF THE CONSUMER VERSION OF VR
Which is correct..
but that ISN'T what Oculus WANTS. The entire reason he had the sales data is because it was posted BY OCULUS.
You basically invalidated your own point.
Look I am not talking about this anymore, those dev kits are not counted in 'super data' period we are done talking about it
incidentally, Oculus was not happy about the fact that regular consumers were buying the dev kits and the supply was intentionally kept low. So 'people are not buying them' at this stage in the game should not be a shocker to anyone for reasons I have explained about 4 times a day for a month now
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Also OCULUS specifically sold them to consumers... they HAD TO. From the moment they created the kickstarter to the DK2 which they stated would be available to consumers. They were happy about it.. they kept them on sale throughout it's entire lifecycle.
Ask yourself why they would happily post their numbers for developer kits sold but not for their consumer version.... Why were they all about numbers of units sold during their "development phase" but not when it came time for retail? Because the numbers are far less... the DK numbers were "encouraging" to investors and analysts....
That's specifically why the article you posted stated when you start to take actual consumers into the mix you have to throw out that data... not pay attention to the analyst reports.... which I agree with because they were ALL based off of 4 years of pushing development kits.
For that same reason Oculus was supposed to be the leader in the technology.... Because they already had 4 years and over 175K units out on all other competitors. When consumer versions launched... they won't even say how many they sold because it's paltry and most likely they're way under the Vive and soon to be way under PSVR, neither of which will make stellar sales either.
Dev Kits aren't included in CV1 sales.. they were included in sales data prior to the CV1.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
do I have that right?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2016-06-14-analysts-split-on-e3-showings
"Superdata's Joost van Dreunen didn't seem to be too impressed with either Microsoft or Sony. Microsoft's first-party lineup was "a bit sparse and predominantly centered on sequels" in his view, while Sony "spent a disproportionate amount of time showcasing its new IP Days Gone instead of providing more detail on the obvious big ticket titles.""
Oculus POSTED numbers at E3 SPECIFICALLY to bolster their image to analysts, investors and developers.
So did they present a breakdown between DK1 and DK2 headsets at E3 in 2015, Yes or No? That's all I'm looking for .. Yes or No.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
so for example:
Rim World is 'Overwhelmingly Positive' with 2,149 reviews and 97% of those are positive
The Lab is 'Overwhelmingly Positive' with 734 reviews and 99% of those are positive.
is 734 a good population statistically speaking? I would think not, a high level of variance is still possible at this level, however, at this time this data point suggests things are going well instead of things are going bad. That is not to say this is the only data point on VR by a long shot but its one that can be added to the list of 'good'
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
More than half of the reviews state "This is a great Demo, detailing what the Vive can do and how to learn about roomscale"
Most don't even consider it a game. And if you want to consider a poor demo with less than 1000 reviews and a general playtime of under 4 hours as a signature of VR doing well in comparison to the next game on the list... Portal 2, with over 70K reviews and a general play time of over 13 Hours, by all means go right ahead... but you're reaching quite far to make a very minuscule and poor point.
That early adopters of VR like VR demos that are done well.