Page 2 of 3
Re: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Sat May 31, 2025 7:44 am
by ethan_fisc
Short answer:
The 'labor shortage' framing in a lot of humanoid robotics pitch decks is doing real narrative work - it's a genuinely true dynamic in some sectors like warehousing and logistics, but it's also a much more palatable framing than 'labor cost reduction,' and both are usually true simultaneously.
Re: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2025 8:58 pm
by dubois35
@ethan_fisc This lines up with my experience.
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.
Re: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2025 10:30 am
by jhansen
I dealt with almost this exact situation.
Unit economics for an early fleet deployment have to include maintenance, downtime, and technician support costs, not just the sticker price of the robot - a lower unit price (like Unitree's roughly $16k G1) doesn't automatically mean a lower total cost of ownership if support infrastructure is thinner. Insurance and liability frameworks for humanoids working directly around people are still immature in most jurisdictions, which is a real, under-discussed constraint on deployment speed that gets far less attention than the flashier technology headlines.
Re: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2025 3:36 am
by chloe_jack
Slightly off-topic, but related:
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. Q1 2026 alone saw about $2.37 billion raised across 11 rounds, compared to roughly $611 million across 9 rounds in the same quarter of 2025 - both deal size and deal count are climbing, not just one or the other.
Re: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2025 1:46 pm
by sharonschmidt
@chloe_jack Appreciate the detailed answer.
Chinese humanoid startups reportedly accounted for around 65% of deal volume in 2025, while US companies still won the largest individual rounds, with at least three raises exceeding $400 million - deal count and deal size tell different stories depending on which region you're looking at. 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: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2025 11:19 pm
by cynthia.muller
@sharonschmidt This matches something I went through recently.
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. Chinese humanoid startups reportedly accounted for around 65% of deal volume in 2025, while US companies still won the largest individual rounds, with at least three raises exceeding $400 million - deal count and deal size tell different stories depending on which region you're looking at.
Re: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2025 2:16 am
by mia_lars
@cynthia.muller I don't think that's quite right, for what it's worth.
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: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2025 4:40 pm
by cynthia.muller
@mia_lars Can I ask a dumb follow-up -
The market consolidation question (which of the 100+ companies chasing this space survive) is complicated by the fact that hardware is genuinely capital-intensive to scale, so smaller players without a clear cost or technology moat are structurally at risk once the well-funded leaders reach real manufacturing scale.
Re: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2025 2:48 pm
by mia_lars
@cynthia.muller I'd frame this differently.
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. 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: Anyone following how leasing terms are actually structured for early RaaS deals?
Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2025 8:52 pm
by young56
@mia_lars Side note that might be relevant:
Q1 2026 alone saw about $2.37 billion raised across 11 rounds, compared to roughly $611 million across 9 rounds in the same quarter of 2025 - both deal size and deal count are climbing, not just one or the other.