You can trot out that 640k comment to sell any piece of technology, it doesn't make it true. I could have said the same about Google Glass.

Indeed you could. And sometimes you'd be right; other times you'd be dead wrong. If you could be right even half the time, you'd be rich as all get out. Which is why I would suggest: Don't make overreaching bold predictions (or become an investor).

I'm right way more than half the time. How do I get rich predicting $newTech will fail?

Short the stock :)

Go for it flukus! Easy peasy! If what you say is true, you can probably become a millionaire before the decade is out!

and be ready to pay for as long as you're wrong.

Being right about half of failures isn't worth anything. You can't short SnapChat Spectacles.

You need to be right about half of successes, which is much harder for a raging pessimist like OP.

I agree with both of you. The glasses are silly, don't seem that technically complex, and I think they are poised to be a huge hit with Snapchat's base audience. Google Glass was a technically well made device that forgot product, I think those stupid glasses hit their product-market fit quite well. The recording indicator and their 'retro' style are both what I consider to be key components in this assessment.

No, young people will not stand in line to buy or wear those glasses. Snap chat is very popular. However, the current user base will outgrow it and those younger will have something else. Better get that 4B while they can. It doesn't have the roots or staying power of a Facebook or Twitter (I know Twitter isn't making money).

The problem with the Snapchat glasses is their re usability and if it catches on.

If your friends aren't using them and you're the only one with a pair you'd be less inclined to wear them. Everyone thought Google Glass was going to be the future but those glasses made you look like a total douche. Hopefully the Spectacles wont be branded as such.

Those glasses are designed to be the party Polaroid of a generation. The person holding the camera gets the attention of everybody keen on presenting themselves, the bet is that putting the camera on your face intensifies this experience. Expect these things to get passed around a bit when in use, so there will quite some local virality within groups. This is good for immediate sales, but long term usage could suffer hard if market saturation coincides with the novelty wearing off. If there is one Polaroid at a given party, it is the center of attention, if there are three of them, they are all just annoying. The me-too buyers well get quite the opposite result compared to the early adopters.

If Snapchat sets up the glasses business as an additional revenue stream, it could well become a reasonable but limited success, if they set it up "strategically", maybe even selling at loss, I predict terrible failure.

Not sure network effects are necessary there. It's fine if one person makes videos with glasses as long as friends enjoy watching them.

If the glasses are promoted as something you only wear when you want to record video and that you otherwise put away it might take off.

Nobody minds when you pull out a cell phone and record video because it's obvious you're filming. I think it was the omnipresent threat of being secretly recorded that made Glass creepy.

I would posit: your perception of "total douche-ness" (your words, not mine) are largely driven by marketing and/or culture.

Glass definitely failed in the marketing, branding, and roll-out departments (among others) -- but they're no more or less doofy (to me) than many other perfectly-accepted fashions: baggy pants, beats headphones, crocs, etc.

>(to me)

That is a fairly small focus group.