Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok then --- why don't you tell me the way it should be done and tell me the break even on Amazon's purchase.
It should be pretty simple to understand that 1.4 billion in gross sales won’t give you a breakeven on a 1.4 billion investment as those sales have some cost associated with them. I don’t have a clue what the margins are on the doorbell but they sure as hell aren’t profiting 1.4 billion on 1.4 billion in sales, if they were they’d be worth a lot more than this transaction detailed.
For the record the guy sold 140,000 of those doorbells on QVC last year in 24 hours. With that kind of demand, the price Amazon paid doesn't look crazy. Not to mention, they sell more products than just doorbells.
It should be pretty simple to understand that 1.4 billion in gross sales won’t give you a breakeven on a 1.4 billion investment as those sales have some cost associated with them. I don’t have a clue what the margins are on the doorbell but they sure as hell aren’t profiting 1.4 billion on 1.4 billion in sales, if they were they’d be worth a lot more than this transaction detailed.
Right. So what you are really saying is that they need to sell a lot more than 5.6 million of these things to break even. Let's say they make $100 profit on each one (again for simplicity's sake). Now the break even point is 14 million units. You just made my point, they overpaid for this thing.
Most of us really can't fathom paying $1.4 billion for Ring. Amazon didn't pay that for the doorbell. They paid for the technology that will be part of the grand plan to start offering more services instead of just selling and shipping products. Amazon also bought Blink in 2017 that offers a similar technology.
It's another part of creating a connected home utilizing Alexa and to stay ahead of Google and Apple. When Alexa goes beyond telling you the weather and allows you to arm your security system, protect your Amazon delivery sitting on the porch, letting and using Amazon Key to let the Whole Foods delivery dude, dog walker, plumber, and house cleaner in and out, et al. And you just might pay them $XX per month to be able to do all those things while they collect a cut from all those services who use the Amazon platform.
Google paid $3 billion for Nest and is now offering a Nest doorbell that comes with a Google Mini. They also have their eyes on that market.
This is the beginning of the fight to become the dominant platform for the internet of things. Think VHS vs. Beta, IBM vs. Apple, Android vs. iOS.
Most of us really can't fathom paying $1.4 billion for Ring. Amazon didn't pay that for the doorbell. They paid for the technology that will be part of the grand plan to start offering more services instead of just selling and shipping products. Amazon also bought Blink in 2017 that offers a similar technology.
It's another part of creating a connected home utilizing Alexa and to stay ahead of Google and Apple. When Alexa goes beyond telling you the weather and allows you to arm your security system, protect your Amazon delivery sitting on the porch, letting and using Amazon Key to let the Whole Foods delivery dude, dog walker, plumber, and house cleaner in and out, et al. And you just might pay them $XX per month to be able to do all those things while they collect a cut from all those services who use the Amazon platform.
Google paid $3 billion for Nest and is now offering a Nest doorbell that comes with a Google Mini. They also have their eyes on that market.
This is the beginning of the fight to become the dominant platform for the internet of things. Think VHS vs. Beta, IBM vs. Apple, Android vs. iOS.
It must just be me.... but I don't want Amazon to have access to my house, and I'm not interested in letting the whole foods dude, the dog walker (I'll take care of my own pets), plumber (don't trust him either), or house cleaner (we try to keep our own house clean) into my house when nobody is home. The technology is cool but I question whether all of these things really make sense.
It must just be me.... but I don't want Amazon to have access to my house, and I'm not interested in letting the whole foods dude, the dog walker (I'll take care of my own pets), plumber (don't trust him either), or house cleaner (we try to keep our own house clean) into my house when nobody is home. The technology is cool but I question whether all of these things really make sense.
That's all understandable and I don't want people in my house when I'm gone either. Whether you and I want unaccompanied visitors had little to do with the number Amazon was willing to pay for Ring. I assume that smarter people than me with far more information decided that it made sense.
It must just be me.... but I don't want Amazon to have access to my house, and I'm not interested in letting the whole foods dude, the dog walker (I'll take care of my own pets), plumber (don't trust him either), or house cleaner (we try to keep our own house clean) into my house when nobody is home. The technology is cool but I question whether all of these things really make sense.
I hear ya, but if enough people get it, you'd be forced to get it, since it will be 'normalized'. Imagine the day when all plumbing services would be on Amazon or similar Google platform that requires Amazon Key... Imagine you call up 10 plumbers in your area and all of them require you to have an account with one of these.
As others mentioned, Amazon is not paying $1.4 billion for a doorbell. They need that doorbell to "enter" your house and tie it to Alexa and other future services on their Prime platform.
I hear ya, but if enough people get it, you'd be forced to get it, since it will be 'normalized'. Imagine the day when all plumbing services would be on Amazon or similar Google platform that requires Amazon Key... Imagine you call up 10 plumbers in your area and all of them require you to have an account with one of these.
As others mentioned, Amazon is not paying $1.4 billion for a doorbell. They need that doorbell to "enter" your house and tie it to Alexa and other future services on their Prime platform.
LOL they will NEVER force me to go through this nonsense to let in a plumber. Not happening.
LOL they will NEVER force me to go through this nonsense to let in a plumber. Not happening.
They didn't force you to get an e-mail account either. But unless you are a hermit you literally have to get it to function in modern society. Once all those businesses and contractors roll over to these platforms like Uber/Lyft with taxis, its over.
Right. So what you are really saying is that they need to sell a lot more than 5.6 million of these things to break even. Let's say they make $100 profit on each one (again for simplicity's sake). Now the break even point is 14 million units. You just made my point, they overpaid for this thing.
They aren’t just selling doorbells. I’m not sure why you don’t get that. Amazon bought a product suite, subscription service and technology. I’m also not sure why you are hung up on everyone having access to your home which they wouldn’t unless you gave it to them. I’d wager Amazon put more thought and work into valuing this transaction than you did but that’s just a guess
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
