As far as the watch goes, I think it will make money but less than the iPad. It's clearly pitched as a fashion accessory and will find a market. Just not a big enough one to satisfy analysts.
It's far from clear that they're actually willing to do anything about it. Look at 3D TVs. No one wants to sit on their couch lazily watching whatever's on with special glasses.
If VR was a passive technology like HD -- by which I mean you buy a new TV and everything is better without any further action on your part -- I'd be more confident that you're correct. But it's not. I can't see headsets as a thing people are going to wear sitting on their sofa with the family. Game consoles seem like an obvious target with an audience that might be receptive, but otherwise, I just can't envision mass adoption.
The cumbersome nature of VR goggles could potentially be outweighed by the sheer novelty and intensity of the experience.
This generation's VR is the real deal, and while the technology isn't quite there yet, it's within touching distance. People will be prepared to put up with the inconvenience because the experience will be significantly more compelling than anything else they've seen. It will be massive based on word of mouth alone.
Putting on skis and getting to the top of a mountain is inconvienent but people still do it.
People don't wear skis around in their daily life. Skis are very much a special purpose item that most people use between never and about once a year, with never the runaway winner, if you consider the fraction of even relatively affluent people who don't ski at all.
If you think of VR as being a new screen technology, I can see why you might come to the conclusion you have. But true VR (where you have 'presence') goes far, far beyond that. I agree it's not going to be a general purpose platform like the smartphone, but I think it will still be high impact.
Do I think people will be browsing Facebook with VR? Probably not. The challenge for Facebook will be to create an environment based on their content that you would want to visit.
If the argument is that VR will become "an experience", then I'm fine with that. But a capital-E-Experience is the opposite of everyday mass adoption.
Maybe eventually this is the world we'll be living in. Right now, and for enough of the foreseeable future to worry about trying to predict, people with those needs will want to have a real keyboard and mouse or trackpad, and at that point, they will just use a laptop. Any benefit you get from the VR is, I think, outweighed by the downsides of not being able to just look around the actual physical environment.
You don't have to beat the competition on every axis to succeed, but you do have to eliminate any axis for which you are an immediate non-starter. I think the headset makes it an immediate non-starter for widespread general purpose use.