Page 2 of 3

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2025 6:10 am
by nicole57
@karen.chen3 Speaking from personal experience here, Self-reported deployment and uptime numbers from humanoid companies are inherently hard to independently verify, since there's no standardized, third-party reporting requirement yet - a healthy dose of skepticism toward company press releases is reasonable until independent data catches up. The humanoid robot market is estimated at roughly $5.41 billion in 2026, with projections reaching around $50 billion by 2035 (about 28% CAGR) - a genuinely huge projected growth curve, and also exactly the kind of number worth treating with healthy skepticism given how young and unproven the underlying revenue base still is.

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2025 1:00 am
by emilyperez
Just to be precise about one thing: Pilot-to-contract conversion rate is one of the most important and least publicly available numbers in this industry - a company running many flashy pilots isn't the same as a company converting those pilots into multi-year recurring revenue. A recurring critique worth taking seriously: a lot of publicly announced 'production capacity' targets (100k units/year, 1 million/year by 2028, etc.) are aspirational manufacturing targets, not confirmed sales or deployment numbers, and the gap between the two has historically been large in hardware industries.

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2025 12:30 am
by carol.robinson
@emilyperez Counterpoint: Late-stage funding rounds, essentially absent before 2025, became a defining feature of the market with roughly $1.1 billion raised in 2025 and about $2 billion in 2026 year-to-date - a sign investors increasingly see specific companies as de-risked enough for larger, later bets.

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2025 5:38 pm
by zoeanderson
@carol.robinson I'll believe the stronger version of that claim when it's independently verified. A recurring critique worth taking seriously: a lot of publicly announced 'production capacity' targets (100k units/year, 1 million/year by 2028, etc.) are aspirational manufacturing targets, not confirmed sales or deployment numbers, and the gap between the two has historically been large in hardware industries.

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2025 11:16 am
by camila.jackson0
@zoeanderson From what I've seen: This hype cycle differs from earlier robotics hype waves mainly in having real, verifiable revenue-generating deployments (BMW's Figure line, Amazon's Digit units) alongside the speculative funding activity - previous waves were almost entirely research-and-demo-stage without production deployments at this scale. Automotive OEMs becoming the leading early-adopter vertical isn't really about cars specifically - it's about those companies already having structured facilities, existing automation budgets, and risk tolerance for piloting new equipment at scale.

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2025 1:13 pm
by matthew43
@camila.jackson0 I dealt with almost this exact situation. Self-reported deployment and uptime numbers from humanoid companies are inherently hard to independently verify, since there's no standardized, third-party reporting requirement yet - a healthy dose of skepticism toward company press releases is reasonable until independent data catches up. Kind of makes me think about how different this all looked even three years ago.

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2025 9:14 pm
by erik_novi
Same conclusion I've come to. Also worth noting: Automotive OEMs becoming the leading early-adopter vertical isn't really about cars specifically - it's about those companies already having structured facilities, existing automation budgets, and risk tolerance for piloting new equipment at scale.

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2025 6:54 am
by mia.weber
@erik_novi I can speak to this a bit. Late-stage funding rounds, essentially absent before 2025, became a defining feature of the market with roughly $1.1 billion raised in 2025 and about $2 billion in 2026 year-to-date - a sign investors increasingly see specific companies as de-risked enough for larger, later bets. Pilot-to-contract conversion rate is one of the most important and least publicly available numbers in this industry - a company running many flashy pilots isn't the same as a company converting those pilots into multi-year recurring revenue.

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Fri May 09, 2025 12:58 am
by camila.jackson0
@mia.weber I'll believe the stronger version of that claim when it's independently verified. Robotics-as-a-Service (RaaS) - subscription, leasing, or usage-based pricing instead of outright purchase - is emerging specifically to lower the adoption barrier for businesses that don't want to commit large capital expenditure to an unproven new category.

Re: How much should we weight a company's safety incident disclosure practices?

Posted: Thu May 15, 2025 1:57 pm
by barbara.jones
@camila.jackson0 Short answer: Pilot-to-contract conversion rate is one of the most important and least publicly available numbers in this industry - a company running many flashy pilots isn't the same as a company converting those pilots into multi-year recurring revenue.