Hacker News Reader

Comment by smt88 | Hacker News Reader

I'm very confused by this company and uBeam. Is it really possible that both companies could raise so much money without an astounding breakthrough to demonstrate to investors?

Or do investors really have enough cash that they can blow a few million on companies that, if successful, should be worth many tens of billions?

View on HN

Or do investors really have enough cash that they can blow a few million on companies that, if successful, should be worth many tens of billions?

That's precisely it.

To be fair I think Theranos might have a stronger case, but needs more money to have it implemented

For uBeam I'm just waiting for it to blow up (I wonder if they only saw a high impedance voltmeter showing a big number)

Lol

Did you see this? I didn't actually see it on HN for some reason:

http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/08/how-ubeam-works/

Interesting, but there seems to be no new concrete information (beyond some easily speculated info)

The real issue is efficiency and charge time

There are only 2 asset classes that yield reasonable ROI now - real estate bubbles in the mega cities and unicorns. Investors don't have a lot of choice.

Imagine you took a time machine from 1900 to 2015 and could only read you statement. Fantastic! =D

Is there a sound debunking of uBeam? The only one I've seen widely circulated is the one here [1] and it has problems [2].

[1] http://lookatmeimdanny.tumblr.com/post/101432017159/how-putt...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9984822

http://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/the-ubeam-faq/

All of the uBeam debunking and de-debunking goes over my head. It all sounds convincing when I read it. I personally will probably have to wait until we get an ex-insider who blows the whistle (like Theranos) or the product just comes out.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com