Hacker News Reader

Comment by ctdonath | Hacker News Reader

The problem with grokking Facebook's involvement is the lack of any apparent connection between VR and FB's core competencies. Google at least can use Glass for ever-more data mining. VR? FB? Carmack can sure put the $2B to good use, but how it benefits FB nobody seems to know.

View on HN

What's funny is that everyone would breathe a giant sigh of relief if, when asked about the deal, Zuckerberg just grinned boyishly and said, "It's a VR company run by Carmack, and I'm a multibillionaire. Of course I wanted to own it."

Maybe; but Zuckerberg didn't buy the company, Facebook did.

Zuckerberg has complete control, with 57% of Facebook voting rights.

http://venturebeat.com/2012/02/01/zuck-power-play/

This article could be out of date because it was written in 2012. It's been reported that he has sold some shares.

As a public company, isn't Facebook required to report how much of the company is owned by all major shareholders?

If Z doesn't have complete control, he's still got most control. Either way he knows that it's easier/cheaper to make FB the legal owner.

If you're gonna spend $2B to buy something you want, better if you can get someone else to foot the bill.

Except that Carmack and Oculus won't see a lot of that money. Oculus raised $91 million (2.4 of that from Kickstarter) [1] including a $75 million series B round last December. [2]

It's the investors who will get a lot of Facebook's money. Also, Facebook's stock dropped yesterday in reaction to the move and it's being reported that the deal is worth $200 million less as a result. [3]

The B round investors held it for such a short time it's almost like they flipped it to Facebook.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oculus_Rift

[2] http://venturebeat.com/2013/12/12/oculus-vr-raises-75m-from-...

[3] http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2014/03/26/facebook-sha...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com