Oculus has sold like 100K headsets at most. They raised 75M in funding then got bought for $2B. Definitely not profitable if you consider money invested to profit made.
Another metric might be burn rate to income. 100000 units x $350 = $35M, so maybe to this point they haven't spend that $35M. Something feels off about this. Oh right, cost of devices. So it's burn rate to profit. 100000 units x $50 = $5M. They may have spent less than $5M so far, but I'd be surprised.
I think "Oculus or Leap developers" was referring to developers making software that uses Oculus or Leap, not the companies producing the hardware. I also assume that the answer must be no (for now) since the install base is still quite small.
This is why Salman Khan is one of (if not) the greatest teachers of our generation. When I read this article, I remembered when Khan Academy first started... it was the first attempt to make good education free and easily accessible, exactly the way it should be. Hats off to you sir, thanks for another great lesson I will teach my kids some day :).
It would be pretty difficult to weaponize a closed system design without significant R&D. The only risk I see would be if some small component of their design was transferred to an existing military weapon to make it better.
I feel sorry for the pre-sale investors, there is a very high probability that they will not see their BTC back. If you are considering investing, be careful.
The platform charges 2% fee to all projects funded, 1% to investors, 1% to founders. The investors hold a total of 100,000,000 swarmcoin and the presale is at a rate of 5250 SWARM/BTC. At that rate, the platform would need to do over $1 billion in sales to just get a ROI, something that took kickstarter over 5 years.
I do too. In the history of Bitcoin public offerings, never has a single company outperformed holding BTC itself over a modest time frame. SwarmCo is raising a boatload of BTC up front for a risky venture, and taking 1/3 of the funds to pay salaries.
Startups are all incentivized to do BTC public offerings, but no one is incentivized to actually deliver products. IPOs are the easiest way to "earn" BTC. It's cringeworthy how so many of these pseudo-IPOs focus on the marketing and the limited time buy opportunity without so much as producing a working prototype. I'm always astounded by the amount of BTCs that get raised. It just reeks of unsophisticated investors getting sheered.
From the perspective of SWARMCO, once you raise thousands of BTCs, you're golden. Your investors shoulder all the risk, because the moment they irreversibly send you the most liquid and stable crypto asset, you can effectively disappear, or keep delaying "two weeks" as Butterfly Labs is infamous for doing. If anything goes wrong, just ask Mark Karpeles for advice.
Satoshi dice outperformed holding btc, and that was during the period when btc skyrocketted from 10 to 100.
Also, but I may be wrong here, asicminer did a similar trick.
ASICMiner is in the gutters, as is literally every other Bitcoin stock. Who benefited from the company going public? Over a short time frame, those who exploited the pump and dump; over a modest time frame of 1-2 years, the company profits at the expense of investors, every single time, without exception.
