RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Take over is coming.horseshoefalls wrote: CoolGuy2016 wrote:
I might be wrong, but the technology they have created is pretty unique and would complement bigger players VR plans. They are generating substancial revenues, as well as recurrent revenues. The value for a potential buyer, is more than just the current profit, It must also consider how much would it cost to develop an equivalant technology, and how much time would it takes.
Good luck!
I wouldn't say the revenues are substantial at all, and they are declining. Not only that, but there is no 'current profit' they are losing money. So my question is, why would you even want the current technology if it's just a money loser, particualrily in a declining theatre / film market.
I'm not disputing the technology isn't amazing, I just think DBOX has done a bad job scaling it and has shown absolutely no regard for shareholders and to return capital to people who have invested. Maybe the CEO should take a pay cut or have some more realistic performance based incentives. When you're getting paid that kind of money and issues millions of options, it's easy to coast.
If FB bought Oculus for 2B$ US in 2014 when they didn't even have a product on the market yet and had pretty much 0$ revenue, it is certainly not farfetched to think that someone could write a fat check to buy D-Box and it's tech considering the potential of VR.
Time will tell.