Why the Virtual-Reality Hype is About to Come Crashing Down

[andybird123]

the remainder of 2016-2017seems too high...its more likely to be closer to 6million - which is roughly 1 in 10 PS4 owners by the end of next year

I think it was pretty clear I was talking about 6million by the end of next year and 40million plus 20million PS4's by end of next year are both Sony's numbers

I dont see how I could have made it much clearer when i used the actual letters and numbers both 2016-2017 and "the end of next year"

Just saying "the analysts numbers" isnt very clear, because there are 3 different analysts mentioned in the article. But 1 in 5 is 12 million, which no analyst mentions in the article. The only figure given in the article is 8 million by end of next year.

I can only conclude that this is a really low rent attempt at trolling, because you're even contradicting yourself now.

 

[Pottsey]

You have on a number of occasions lied by accusing me of saying things I never said, worse some of the things you accuse of me of saying are the opposite to what I said. As for the article we are talking about it doesn’t seem to match up with most of what you are saying. But somehow it’s me who is trolling?

“But 1 in 5 is 12 million, which no analyst mentions in the article.”
Seriously? I explained how I got to that number in detail more than once. I explained all my numbers in detail and how I got to them, even the 12million a year number which is unrealistic high I explained how I arrived at that. You just seem to have plucked 6million out of thin air and explained very little. There is logic to how I got to all the numbers I posted. I still think a small year on year growth hitting up to 10million a year is realistic.


Edit: Just thought of another way to explain my viewpoint. This all came about as I said the numbers in the article are unrealistic high and I gave out VR to PS4 ratios based on the analyst’s numbers. andybird123 in post #167 said I was wrong and used the 6 million number from the article. The problem being Analyst 1 was talking about 6 million by 2016 not 2017. Analyst 3 talks about 8 million by 2017. The 2rd Analyst said 1 to 3 million over 2016 with 3 months of 2017.

6 million by end of 2017 has nothing to do with the article. Yet andybird123 is saying that I am wrong based on those numbers.

 

[andybird123]

From the link Moor Insights & Strategy Associate Analyst, Anshel Sag said 3-4million in a 3 month time period this year which seemed rather high to me and a further 8 million] the following year. At an estimated 20 million new PlayStation 4 owners that’s saying around about 1 in 3 new PS4 will be sold with VR next year or 1 in 5 of all PS4 owners will have VR by end of next year. Which seems on the high side to me.

WRONG, the article says

Moor Insights & Strategy Associate Analyst, Anshel Sag believes the number will be as high as 8 million by the end of next year

you then said

1 in 5 of all PS4 owners will have VR by end of next year. Which seems on the high side to me.

8 in 60 is about 1 in 8, not one in 5

I never said 12 million by end of next year either, I said;

the remainder of 2016-2017seems too high...its more likely to be closer to 6million - which is roughly 1 in 10 PS4 owners by the end of next year

basic reading and comprehension failure on your part, leading to a massive argument about things the article and I never said

the article also says;

reached the conclusion that Sony will sell six million PlayStation VR (PS VR) headsets in 2016.
The figure matches another from Daiwa Securities which claimed that Sony is likely to ship 1-3 million PS VR headsets in fiscal 2016 (April 2016-March 2017)

again, it seems more likely that the analyst did not mean 6 million by end of calendar 2016

I posted the article and you immediately responded with

Fudzilla is hardly a reputable site. The very opposite in fact, anything from that site has to be taken with a large pinch of salt. Personally I thinks saying what was it 1 in 3 PS4 owners will have VR is unrealistic.

You didn't mention NEW PS4's, you said 1 in 3 PS4 owners

I then said;

It's not written by fudzilla, they are reporting on a report written by a research firm. And 6 million is no where near a 3rd of PS4 owners, it's less than a 6th. If sony's projection of selling another 20 million over the next year is accurate then it becomes less than 1 in 10, which seems more than reasonable.

I think you really need to go back and read through the train of responses, because what you are now claiming people said is nothing like what actually happened.

When i first challenged you on the 1 in 5 figure you claimed the article said 12m, and when i pointed out that was wrong you said *I* said 12m, neither of which is true.

 

[Pottsey]

“You didn't mention NEW PS4's, you said 1 in 3 PS4 owners”

That’s true early post from both of us about the article are badly written. I did clarified myself to mean “around about 1 in 3 new PS4 will be sold with VR next year or 1 in 5 of all PS4 owners will have VR by end of next year.”

“When i first challenged you on the 1 in 5 figure you claimed the article said 12m, and when i pointed out that was wrong you said *I* said 12m, neither of which is true. “”

How many time do I have to explain how I got to 12m and 1 in 5 of all PS4s. Analyst 1 said 6 million by end of 2016. With a year on year growth rate that puts us on a minimum of 12million end of 2017. Which I said was unrealistically high but that’s how I got 1 in 5.

This is all pointless anyway as even if you don’t agree with me on the precise ratios you said I am right and you agreed that some of the Analyst numbers are two high. There is no point arguing over the small details when we agree on the same thing.

Lets try and get this friendly and start afresh

Analyst 1 said 6 million by end of 2016 which I think we both agree is unrealistic or should we say very unlikely. That requires PS4VR to ship over 6 million in 3 months with limited stock.

Analyst 3 has two parts. 4 million by end of year which like above is a 3 month shipping window with limited stock. This follows on to 8 million total by end of 2017 which we both said is too high.

Analyst 2 is more reasonable but I still believe too high. 1 to 3 million by end of March 2017. The shipping window doubles to 6 months so if the limited stock gets fixed and PS4VR does better then I expect then 1 million wouldn’t surprise me, although that is higher than I expect.

So based on what you wrote before we both agree Analyst 1 & 3 are two high. Analyst 2 on the other hand is one to watch. I still think its high but not unreasonable high like the other two.

 

[andybird123]

That’s true early post from both of us about the article are badly written. I did clarified myself to mean “around about 1 in 3 new PS4 will be sold with VR next year or 1 in 5 of all PS4 owners will have VR by end of next year.”

How many time do I have to explain how I got to 12m and 1 in 5 of all PS4s. Analyst 1 said 6 million by end of 2016. With a year on year growth rate that puts us on a minimum of 12million end of 2017. Which I said was unrealistically high but that’s how I got 1 in 5.

Your post is just an attempt to deflect rather than just admit that you completely misread the article and my first couple of posts.

here is a quick summary of your best moments;

post #164

Personally I thinks saying what was it 1 in 3 PS4 owners will have VR is unrealistic.

post #168

From the link Moor Insights & Strategy Associate Analyst, Anshel Sag said 3-4million in a 3 month time period this year which seemed rather high to me and a further 8 million the following year. At an estimated 20 million new PlayStation 4 owners that’s saying around about 1 in 3 new PS4 will be sold with VR next year or 1 in 5 of all PS4 owners will have VR by end of next year. Which seems on the high side to me.

1 in 5 being 12 million, and you having got that from the article because 8 + 4 = 12 (even though the article says 8 in total, not 12)

post #177

Really because you just picked and mixed numbers from different projections and it’s me that’s changing the narrative? You are the one that pulled out the 6million units from 1 projection mixed in with the 12month time frame from another projection mixed in with 20million PS4 from another projections all with timeframes that don’t overlap.

oh wait, wut now? so is that not what you did in post 164 to get the 1 in 3 figure? no? doesn't it therefore make sense that I replied to you and used your own method of calculating the 1 in 3 to say 1 in 10 of PS4 owners over the same period, considering what you actually said was

1 in 3 PS4 owners

and the best bit is;
post #175

You lied and accused me of many things I never did or said.

hmm, really, because when I pointed out you had mixed timelines, you said;

If you go back and read my first post on the ratios I used the 20 PS4 million projections for 2017 against the projected PS4VR sales from the Analyst for 2017 which is a matching timeline.

You responded by saying I picked the lowest figure for PS4 ownership when I had not. After accusing me of cherry picking numbers when I hadn’t you then posted from the article the 6 million VR figures which was for end of 2016 against an estimated PS4 ownership from 2017. At that point you hadn’t explained or stated that you meant 6 million across 2017. Given that the article says 6 million by 2016 and you are using those numbers it looks like you are stating 6 million by 2016.

20 / 8 is 1 in 3? Nope. Lets try 20 / 6... 3.33 ding ding ding, we have a winner... you took the 6 million from the article and the 20 million PS4 2017 figure and used them to come up with 1 in 3. I used your own calculation and statement to point out that there'll be 60 million PS4 owners and using the same 6 million you used to get 1 in 3, that would in fact be 1 in 10.

I also like this bit where you accuse me of;

At that point you hadn’t explained or stated that you meant 6 million across 2017

when I had actually said

over the next year

trying to claim you used the 8 million (which is a combined 2016/17 figure) and the 2017 figure for PS4 doesn't add up, and even allowing for a 4 million discrepancy in your calculation, using a 2016/17 figure against a 2017 figure would still be mixing timelines anyway, which you claim you didn't do because you accused me of doing it and not stating it clearly

 

[Pottsey]

“Your post is just an attempt to deflect rather than just admit that you completely misread the article and my first couple of posts.”

I didn’t completely misread the article, what I did was make a maths mistake in one little area that doesn’t even matter as it doesn’t change the conclusion or point I was trying to make. Yes 1 of my ratios was a little off. The rest are all correct and that one ratio being off doesn’t change the rest of the numbers or the point I was trying to get across.

Yes I did misread your first posts because at first you forgot to say you added on 12 months extra over the article with the 6 million number. Then you went on to say “Your saying "1 in 3" is a reasonable thing to say, except it ignores the fact that what I was actually referring to was selling 6 million units over the next 18 months” which has nothing to do with the numbers in the article or my numbers.

“you took the 6 million from the article and the 20 million PS4 2017 figure and used them to come up with 1 in 3. I used your own calculation and statement to point out that there'll be 60 million PS4 owners and using the same 6 million you used to get 1 in 3, that would in fact be 1 in 10. “~

Going back to my very first post at that stage I was not using 6 million, I used 8 million. Analyst 3 said 8 million new PSVR owners by end of 2017. While those 8 million VR shipments happen we expect 20 million new PS4 owners. Now I am half a sleep right now but unless I just made another mistake rounded to a whole number that’s 1 in 3. Which matches around about 1 in 3 new PS4 will be sold with VR. As for my 1 in 5 numbers yes I made a mistake, sorry about that. For some reason I added 4+8 when it should have been a total of 8. That mistake throws my ratio of total owners off a little but doesn’t change my main point or conclusion about total sales estimate from Analyst 3 are too high.

I am not sure why you got so obsessed and focused on 6 million at that stage or why you got focuses on a minor ratio that doesn't really matter for the main point I was trying to make. The article and me at that stage wasn't talking about 6 million new VR against 20million new PS4.You even agreed with me that the Analysts numbers are to high. So yes 1 of my ratios was off due to my mistake but does that matter when it doesn't change the point I was trying to make which was the Analysts numbers are to high. Correcting the ratio doesn't change the fact the Analysts numbers are to high. You even agreed with me the numbers are high.

There is a difference between making a mistake and not knowing and flat out lying like you did multiple times and then not even apologizing for it when it’s pointed out. Which I am still waiting for.

 

[andybird123]

Keep digging, you are nearly in australia.

I've already quoted myself so many times, i clearly pointed out I was saying "over the next year".

You didnt even say 20 million in your first post and subsequently went to great pains to tell me 20 million was MY number.

If 20 million was MY number then why would you have used it before I'd even mentioned it?
So you are a time traveller as well now?

Doesnt really stack up to any scrutiny does it.

You could have meant your misread 12 million being roughly 1 in 3 of 40 million PS4 OWNERS, that starts to make sense. And it completely invalidates most of your other claims and accusations.

the only thing I'll apologise for is not spotting how obviously wrong your claim that you even used 20 million as the basis of your calculation was and that you've been frantically back pedaling since

 

[MrWhippy]

Put the hambags down ladies

 

[andybird123]

But mum, I REALLY want to see how Pottsey tries to explain away the fact that he says he used "my number" before I had even posted it.

 

[Pottsey]

“I've already quoted myself so many times, i clearly pointed out I was saying "over the next year".”

You didn’t in the first post #167 anyway what does over next year matter? I asked before and you keep deflecting. What has 6 million over 2017 which you keep using got to do with my ratios or the article? The 3 Analysts didn’t use 6 million over 2017. I didn’t use 6 million over 2017 but you keep going on and on about how I am wrong because you said 6 million over 2017.

This all happen because you made a mistake. You got obsessed over a number I wasn’t using. You thought I used 6 million when I hadn’t. To quote you
“you took the 6 million from the article and the 20 million PS4 2017 figure and used them to come up with 1 in 3. I used your own calculation and statement to point out that there'll be 60 million PS4 owners and using the same 6 million you used to get 1 in 3, that would in fact be 1 in 10. “~“

Basically you misread both the article and my post. I didn’t use 6 million which makes most of your comments about 6 million wrong and invalid as a counter point. My 1 in 3 ratio is correct based on Analyst 3 numbers of PSVR numbers sold now to end of 2017 against new PS4 owners over the same timeframe.

Anyway I am fed up of talking about ratios as they don’t even matter. Yes I made a mistake in 1 of the ratios but the point I was trying to get across is that the Analyst numbers are too high. You already agreed with that, changing the ratios doesn’t change that. Why are you so focuses on a minor maths mistake that doesn’t affect anything? Correcting the ratio mistake I made doesn’t prove what I was trying to say wrong. You already agreed my main point was correct in that the higher end Analyst numbers are to high. Your own numbers are lower than two of the Analyst’s.

“You didnt even say 20 million in your first post and subsequently went to great pains to tell me 20 million was MY number.

If 20 million was MY number then why would you have used it before I'd even mentioned it?
So you are a time traveller as well now?”
“But mum, I REALLY want to see how Pottsey tries to explain away the fact that he says he used "my number" before I had even posted it. “

I was talking about ratios of PSVR sales against new PS4’s. Analyst 3 said between now and end of 2017 8 million new PSVR. Next I needed projections for PS4 sales while covering the same timeframe so looked up Strategy Analytics http://blogs-images.forbes.com/insertcoin/files/2015/02/sales.jpg which gives a prediction of around of about 25 million new PS4s by the end of 2017 over the timeframe PSVR has been up for sale (you can pre order PSVR now so I counted it as for sale May/June). Giving me 3.125 which is why I said around about 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 by end of next year. Next you posted (6 million is no where near a 3rd of PS4 owners). Well I never said 6 million and at this point I clarified my meaning of 1 in 3 new units and re ran your numbers of 20 from now till end of 2017 to keep you happy. Only after I used your numbers and explained how I got to 1 in 3 you got unhappy and lied saying “cherry picking the highest number you can find for a projection and applying it to the lowest figure you can find for PS4 ownership” Not only is that statement a lie but I swapped to using your numbers thinking you would consider them more accurate. But that was a mistake on my part as swapping to your numbers is apparently cherry picking.

I already apologized for my first posts not being clear and the math's mistake in my 1 in 5 number being wrong. That post could have been better written but the point I was trying to get across is still valid.

“the only thing I'll apologise for is not spotting how obviously wrong your claim that you even used 20 million as the basis of your calculation was and that you've been frantically back pedaling since “

Well that says what type of person you are when you won’t admit mistakes and make up flat out lies about another person time and time again and refuse to apologise. Though-out this forum thread you have lied about things I said. Just some examples out of a few.

“we have 4k displays being demoed now, but pottssy seems to think its going to be 5 years before they make it in to devices” Not true, I don't recall ever saying anything like 5 years until 4k screens arrive.

“was referencing pottsey's posts writing off VR” another lie, I never wrote off VR.

“this is the guy thats been predicting PowerVR will make a return to desktop graphics for the last however many years.!”” Another lie

“cherry picking the highest number you can find for a projection and applying it to the lowest figure you can find for PS4 ownership” another lie, I never did this.

“you took the 6 million from the article and the 20 million PS4 2017 figure”
More fiction by you. Among all the other stuff you made up.

“I know you are trying to discount anything other than an Oculus Rift type headset,”
“1 guy on a forum thinks VR won't be used for anything other than gaming.”
Two more and well I cannot be bothered to keep going on. You clearly like making stuff up that is not true.

Why should I waste any more time over someone who keeps flat out lying like that?

 

[Skynet5]

far too much energy is being wasted here.

 

[andybird123]

Lmao. I knew he would keep digging and try to lie his way out of it. He said on about 5 different occaisions that he used 20 million to get his 1 in 3 and that the number came from me, now he's dug through google to find numbers to post rationalise how completely wrong he was in the first place.

Instead of using any of the other number from the article, like 3 or 6 or even 8 million, he fabricated 12 million in order to make it sound completely unreasonable, and keeps trying to say he didnt cherry pick anything. Well i suppose making stuff up is actually not cherry picking, so he's technically correct.

This is Hi-Larious

 

[Pottsey]

“Instead of using any of the other number from the article, like 3 or 6 or even 8 million, he fabricated 12 million in order to make it sound completely unreasonable,”

Why do you lie so much? First of all you didn't use any of the numbers from the article as you used 6 million over 18months when the article was 6million over 6 months. You know full well I used 8 million. Everyone can see I used 8 million, you are right this is Hi-Larious. You seem to think you can lie your way out of being wrong. Fine by me, stay delusional and pretend I was wrong. It just shows what type of person you are.

“He said on about 5 different occaisions that he used 20 million to get his 1 in 3 and that the number came from me,”

Yes because that’s true. If you noticed my first 1 in 3 number was posted before you posted 20million so I couldn't have used your number. Then when you posted 20 million over 2017 I switched to using that number. For some reason you don't seem to understand that. Anyway you’re deflecting away from your mistakes and lies again. I see you have zero defense for all those times you lied and made things up. You tried to deflect away or ignored all the mistakes you made. Giving your poor history it’s clearly a waste of time continuing this with you.

 

[andybird123]

uh huh, you totally used 8, except when you used 12

in all of the last two pages you never mentioned forbes and 25 million and kept going on about how I'd said 20 and it was my number, and only when it was pointed out that using my 20 would have been time travel did you scratch around to find somewhere else you could claim you'd seen a similar number

 

[Pottsey]

uh huh, you totally used 8, except when you used 12

In other words you are completely confused about what I was saying, what a surprise you made a mistake and got it wrong again.

uh in all of the last two pages you never mentioned forbes and 25 million and kept going on about how I'd said 20 and it was my number, and only when it was pointed out that using my 20 would have been time travel did you scratch around to find somewhere else you could claim you'd seen a similar number

That’s the most stupid thing I read in weeks. Have you any idea how silly that sounds? 20 million was your number and was the number I was using from post #167 onwards as it’s the number you wanted to use. You never asked what numbers I based my data on for older posts. If you asked I would have given it to you. Anyway anyone with half a brain can see my post#164 was before you mentioned 20 million so it couldn't have been using your number.

Let’s see what stupid thing you come up with next. although if its as stupid as above don't expect me to respond. This cannot get any more funny.

 

[sprite-]

You both do realise, no matter how hard you try to out internet debate each other... You both lose, ultimately looking very... very... very... silly.

Reminds me of the time I saw two colleagues argue about the meaning of "upto" and whether you needed to say "and including" following it.

 

[andybird123]

I gave up trying to debate anything quite a while back, i just find it really funny watching him tie himself in knots and come up with ever increasingly ridiculous and unlikely explanations for why things he said supposedly should have a completely different meaning to what anyone could reasonably have taken.

This is going to be good

You never asked what numbers I based my data on for older posts. If you asked I would have given it to you.

Like totally, no, i mean, whats this;

20 / 8 is 1 in 3? Nope. Lets try 20 / 6... 3.33

Seems like I was asking where you got 1 in 3 from. You replied;

.
Going back to my very first post at that stage I was not using 6 million, I used 8 million. Analyst 3 said 8 million new PSVR owners by end of 2017. While those 8 million VR shipments happen we expect 20 million new PS4 owners.

Your explanation for your first post, no mention of forbes or 25 mil.

I mean, if I had such poor understanding of my own words I would be pretty salty as well.

 

[Pottsey]

andybird123 if you truly believe that I feel sorry for you. The only reason my explanations seem unlikely and ridiculous to you, is you made up a large list of lies about me then you seem to have muddled up those lies you said with what I said which has confused you. I already listed a long list of comments you lied about and you never defended as that shows you are wrong. Worse after I posted that list you promptly write more lies and then quoted me showing the opposite of what you just said showing you lied again.

I was enjoying this but now I just feel sad for you. Bye for now.

 

[andybird123]

Your list is just arguing semantics. I'm not going to defend something that doesnt need defending.

On the other hand you keep making claims that are demonstrably not true.



#ineversaidthat
#isaidthat

 

[Kiyoshi]

Can you both please stop talking?