Is the same thing as people trying to buy a Ferrari. Demand vastly exceeds supply so they will have no problem finding people that will think nothing of spending that amount of money. And frankly speaking $1,500 is not a lot of money. If you are poor or stingy I guess it is but at this point in time they are not targeting cheapskates.

I was with you until you mentioned poor/cheapskate. How's life in that bubble of yours?

Broke and programming everyday on a project I'm working on. And with no income for quite some time. I'm down to two sets of pants and some of my clothes have holes. My sneakers certainly have plenty of holes. My office is the local library. Life is great!

Let us know how it turns out!

speak for yourself buddy....$1500 is still a big slice of pie to some of us

> …Is the same thing as people trying to buy a Ferrari. Demand vastly exceeds supply

I think the normal idea under these circumstances is to increase the price until the demand meets the supply.

So they increased it from $0 to $1500. Sounds reasonable.

So, comrade, it costs $0 to produce a Google Glass?

Are you implying that they should have priced it higher? I mean, if we're going to go by "what we paid to produce it" rather than "what people previously paid for it", it should probably start at $10k.

I'm not sure what conversation you're having with yourself. I'm just pointing out that the time-honored capitalist response to demand outstripping supply is raising prices rather than having contests.

Probably not but developing it wasn't free.

I'm starting to think what we really need around here is an English proficiency test.

My bad, only skimmed the comment.

Many people who make millions or billions still pause at paying more than $1 for a cup of coffee.

You don't become a billionaire by wasting your money.

While there's some truth to that, you also don't achieve success by being penny wise and pound foolish, which that kind of thinking often leads to.