In this episode, we discuss Mojo Vision's augmented reality contact lens prototype, Alibaba leading a $60 million investment round for Nreal AR glasses, Anthony Charlton arguing games should follow the play-and-earn model, DeFinance Capital and Delphi Digital backing Crypto Raiders, hackers stealing $620 million worth of cryptocurrencies from Axie Infinity, what it's like attending metaverse Fashion Week, and so much more!

Episode 19 Keywords: Mojo Vision, augmented reality contact lenses, Alibaba investments, Nreal, AR glasses, Anthony Charlton, play-and-earn models, DeFinance Captial, Delphi Digital, Crypto Raiders, hackers, cryptocurrencies, Axie Infinity, metaverse Fashion Week

Welcome to the metaphysics podcast. The Metaverse and web three are bringing about the

biggest revolution since the internet itself. With your hosts Paul the prophet Dawalibi And Jeff the

juice Cohen. We will be bringing you the latest Metaverse, business news and insight into what it

all means. The meta business podcast starts now.

From the boardroom to the metaverse. This is the meta business podcast. I am

Paul Dawalibi. I'm joined today by my friend and co host, Jeff, the juice Cohen. For those of you

who are new here, welcome to the official podcast of the metaverse, what we do is we cover the most

pressing, Metaverse, topics and news of the week. But we look at all of it through a business and C

suite lens, we dissect, we analyze the business implications of everything happening in this

amazing industry. For our regular listeners. Thank you guys for tuning in every week. Thank you for

all the love the five star ratings and reviews if you haven't yet, share the meta Business Podcast

with your friends, your family, your colleagues, leave a five star rating and review. Or if you

don't want to do any of the above, at least hit that follow or subscribe button. Wherever you

listen to this podcast. We really appreciate it. It helps others to find the show. Jeff, how you

doing this week?

Good. That felt like a new a new intro. And we face Oh,

it's same intro. I literally do it almost like three times a week with slight

variations between each one. And you as you know now, I don't do it with a script. And I do it live

every time. For whatever

reason I never thought I'd heard you save the official podcast matters. I was gonna say

we were now spot you know, we're now sponsored by the capital.

Well, our sister podcast business of esports podcast has always been the official

podcast of esports. Everyone knows that that way. And no reason why this shouldn't be the official

podcast of the metaverse. How was your week? It was good.

It's good. Yeah, it's always busy here. You know, ACC was traveling last week. So

it's good to be to be back in the home studio here. I feel like we have such a busy week of news

like, maybe not that we've had bigger weeks in terms of one story being bigger, but we have like

a bevy of stories that feels like too

many. I don't know if we're gonna get to them all we're gonna try. And so let me

introduce the first let's do the first two stories sort of together. And I think, you know, you

mentioned you were traveling. This is an interesting one in terms of getting into the

metaverse, right like we we've been talking a lot about the metaverse and what's there once you're

there, and you know, what it should be and what it's not. And but I think we've sort of hit very

little on how do you actually get there, right? Like, how do we access this virtual world. And

there's two articles here two technologies that I think are really interesting. The first one here,

this is from VentureBeat. And the headline is Mojo vision, unveils latest augmented reality contact

lens prototype, there's this very cool looking contact lens with what looks like circuitry and

stuff inside of it. Obviously, if you're listening to this, you can't see it. So I'm trying to

describe it here. But the smart what they call a smart contact lens is going to bring invisible

computing to life, the company believes it's a they've reached the sort of critical milestone

with this prototype. And it's going to enable what they call like innovation at the intersection of

smartphones, AR VR, smart wearables, health tech, etc. So it's going to have a display in it.

Initially, the target markets for people with like poor vision, but obviously we could see something

like this developing into an on ramp, a very seamless on ramp to potentially a virtual world

where you don't have to wear something, you know, big clunky headset on your face. I will put this

next to the next story, which is Alibaba on the news, leaving a $60 million funding round into AR

glasses maker Enrile. And obviously, that's going to go towards r&d. They're a Chinese company, or

at least the most, I think they're a Canadian company originally and but they released most of

their products in China first. They have two products today, the light or the air. There's a

picture here, they're a little bit clunky, they sort of look like clunky. What do you call those

sports glasses, like Oh, clean style glasses. And they also think they're going to be building sort

of the on ramps to, you know, great mixed reality experiences with these sort of cool more seamless

Looking Glasses. Now, you know, we like I said, we've spent a lot of time talking about the

metaverse itself. What do you make of new developments? Jeff around the on ramps to the

metaverse and what do you think will win The day like if you had to, you had a crystal ball here.

And I mean, the first one is super exciting. And I wonder if we had talked about a

similar company a bunch of episodes back, I wonder if it actually same one that was doing kind of

wearable, you know, AI technology, although it seemed like they were, you know, waiting way

earlier stage this one they have a prototype that will be very curious to, to actually try and see

what you know whether the reality is is kind of as much sold. The one thing I thought was funny, just

as an aside, you said the target market it was to start with people with that vision is just a

massively small, you know, vision vision pun intended, when you're thinking about what the what

they're going after creating the metaverse wearable technology that it's like, oh, actually,

it's just a contact lens. So that's felt funny to me. There, but you know, this this, this one is

super interesting. I think we've gone back and forth on this podcast and I know a lot of kind of

thought leaders around the metaverse have gone back and forth whether you know, the metaverse

needs to be VR, whether it will be us wearing some sort of wearable, like how we will enter the

metaverse if you will. And I've gone back and forth, you know, personally as well. I do think

you know, for us to get to like the capital T capital M Metaverse that we always sort of talk

about, I do think it's going to have to be some sort of virtual reality, you know, you're going to

have have physical field physical presence in a virtual world. And I'm not sure that you can get

that with the current platforms that we have Roblox fortnight to the world. I mean, I don't

know if you just

obviously, like the closest we come today or the good VR headsets, right? And let's

put aside other senses, right? Like, let's put aside smell, and taste and like movement and, you

know, like sensation in your body? Because that's solved by other hardware, right, potentially. So

like, park that for the moment? How do we solve like, making your vision and and what you're

seeing immersive to the point where you forget, potentially you're in a virtual world, or you can

spend most of your, your awake life in the virtual world, right? The closest we come today are these

VR headsets. But my question is, how immersive and invasive do the hardware solutions become over

time? And where what what is the end game, right? Because I can see the current crop of VR headset

VR headsets getting thinner and lighter, right? And maybe that look starts to look and feel more

like an Enrile pair of glasses, right? Where you can't really tell you're wearing anything other

than maybe a slightly thicker pair of sunglasses, right that I could see it as a potential end game.

But I could be convinced that contact lens with a whole bunch of intelligence inside of it, and the

microprocessor and battery, and screen and like all the things that Mojo was putting up putting in

this contact lens, I could see that as a potential end game. I think the ultimate end game and it's

not clear if we ever get if we get to this by choice or otherwise, is an implant right? Because

the fastest way to immerse your all your senses, in not just your vision is to just control the

electrical signals going to your brain. And that solves for potentially smell and other things as

well. I don't know, I don't know if there's a point where society sort of pushes back and says

that's too far. Or, or if we're just seeing sort of this evolution happen over time VR headsets,

contact lenses, eventually implants? I don't know. I'm curious where you think it ends.

I mean, implants is interesting. I think if we're talking, you know, 30 years, 50

years, then I could see that there's always with any of these things clearly going to be a an

adoption curve. You know, do I see people implanting themselves with these sort of VR

devices and entering the metaverse anytime really soon? No, um, might we get some early prototypes

and stuff like that in the next decade? I think I could kind of buy that. But if we're talking about

a large percentage of people kind of implanting themselves with a sort of psychedelic chip, if you

will, I think we're a long way away from that. mainstream adoption.

No, contact lens is a nice medium, right? It's not invasive, but it's also like the

probably the most seamless kind of experience you could imagine that what I think an implant solves

for though his other senses, right? Even with a contact lens. You can't solve for smell, you can't

solve for taste. You can't solve for some of these other things which an implant in theory could

Another thing an input or sorry, a contact lens can do is opens up a lot more AR

versus VR, which I think you know it maybe it gets us away from kind of the metaverse a little bit.

But I think it creates a lot of really interesting things you could do in the physical world with,

you know, gamifying different things that you see on your thigh as you're out in the world.

Jeff, I want to move on, because we've got a lot to cover here. And I think there's

two stories here. Again, I want to put them back to back. Because it's I think this will be a never

ending debate on this podcast, and I'm sure in other forums, but the headline here again, another

VentureBeat article says, games should promote, play and earn instead of play to earn. Now, this

is not the first time I've heard this argument, right. Like the panel I was on, someone used this

argument with me. You know, spoiler alert, I disagreed. But, you know, they talk about how they

give a little bit of history of MMOs and how, you know, people used to farm loot there and sell them

in the real world for dollars. And you know, this is really about meeting gamers where they live and

play to earn has had this rocky start people have, you know, this misconception about it. And one way

to make this palatable for gamers, is instead of play to earn may adopt this play and earn

philosophy when according to the author here, it says, what that means is making virtual items tied

to tokens and NF t's a nice bonus, instead of the objective. Fundamentally, gamers want to complete

a game not collect loot boxes, or become day traders. So interesting argument here for play and

earn versus play to earn. I want to put this next to another article, because I want to give you

sort of a trio of terms to argue over here. This is from coin desk, and they're talking about a

capital race. So defiance capital, and Delphi digital co lead a $6 million round for crypto

Raiders, which is an NFT game. But this NFT game, it's their role playing game, they prefer the term

play to own overplayed earn. So let me just summarize here, without going into too much detail

on any of these articles. It seems everyone now is allergic to play to earn. Right. And I think it's

that allergy came on very fast. Because no one wants to be associated with play to earn anymore,

even though it was maybe the hottest thing, literally just you know, a few months ago. And now

we're all everyone's trying to reframe it. Okay. And one of the proposed wordings here is play and

earn. And then the other proposed wording here is play to own I'm not sure if play and earn or play

to own are drastically different. But curious, your thoughts on kind of perhaps the

thoughts on this because I actually, and I'm 99% sure that the the makers of this

crypto Raiders game did not read my LinkedIn post a month ago and but if they did, I'd be super

honored. Because I wrote this on LinkedIn a month ago, and I think you actually had had the exact

same take I frankly, probably copied you because you're much smarter than I am. But I'll redo it is

that the web three game ecosystem is losing the PR battle with traditional games. I've seen a lot of

takes about play to earn versus play Ender. In my opinion, this distinction isn't the problem. The

problem is the focus on earning earning creates a connotation that the gamer is working, doing a job

I think the space would be well served to focus on ownership rather than earning potential.

Blockchain gaming enables players to have real ownership over the in game items they purchase the

current focus on earning creates a bad taste in gamers mouth and invites needless speculation.

This is unsustainable. Let's move to play and I pretty much nailed that. You know,

I mean, I was with you like 80% of the way and it was it was my take I made like that

was pretty much my take it at the you know the crypto conference I spoke at on Play to earn

gaming specifically. Now you used to play and own a force variation.

Ownership is not the point of play. I think that was like you're playing and

that's the difference between so I was with you completely You had me right with you.

gamers don't want to earn feels like a job right? You're gonna get pushed back whether it's to earn

or and earn. Right all feels about the same. But why was ownership different than earning because

you earn to own?

No, not necessarily right? Like owning like,

like, what's the point of owning if it has no value,

I own plenty of things that have no value. I collect pens, for example, I own those

pens, they definitely have no value, but I own them, I theoretically could sell them, I

theoretically could throw them away. Like I think that's the important thing about it is the

distinction. I actually think it is an important distinction, because it's like, when you're

talking about earning, like I go to work everyday, earn money, right ownership is is different. You

can own the assets and never think about them in a monetary sense. It could just be Hey, I own them.

And I can eventually hopefully be able to, there'll be interoperability, so I can bring them

to another game. So I might not, you know, I might own the gun and Call of Duty and bring it to

Battlefield. I know that example. Almost certainly never actually work. But hypothetically, I never

have to sell that gun, but I own it. And I can bring it to the next day.

I think that's basically just gaming them. Like, in every game I play there, I

have items in my inventory, right? Whether it's Wow, or Counter Strike, or Call of Duty or

fortnight or apex or right. I own things in all those games. Like, if it's not about the monetary

value of those things. It's sort of just gaming then.

Well, I mean, number one, I hope that is the case. I think for this to be sustainable.

It should be about gaming number one. So you're you're probably right. I think the

interoperability pieces where you may own them. But Activision, could one day just come and shut

down the servers. Wow, everything you bought, you don't really think you're you're renting it. So I

think there is that little bit of distinction. Well, I,

I feel like this whole the whole community loves getting lost in this intellectual

argument of like, what? Weiss? It At what point did play not become good enough? And we had to put

two words after it right. Like, and we were arguing is it to own to earn and earn and own to

this to that, like, play should just have been good enough. It's been good enough for a long

time. It should continue to be good enough. And, and then my pushback Oh, is and this is my take on

it. It's not that hard of a take anymore is why can't we find other ways to create value with

Blockchain or NF TS or things like that, that don't have to do with owning earning. Like any of

the above, right or any other verb people want to put after play. I just feel like we're all going

to agree play to own is better. And then six months from now, everyone's going to be surprised

when gamers don't want to play to own right and like and are going to push back. Just none of it

feels it feels real authentic to me, for gamers standpoint. But I don't know. It feels like a

little bit of a useless argument. Because anything that takes away from the play feels like the game

is worse in some small way. And if it can't be better, in an obvious way, it's all going to fail.

Now, I'm a big proponent of how do we figure out how to marry blockchain or NF T's with gaming

right? I'm a huge fan of this. I think it could be a massive piece of the industry. But I

continuously challenge myself and others to figure out how are we adding value to gamers beyond just

words? Right because the words feel fancy for nothing. And the arguments sort of feel academic

for nothing.

I guess one thing I'm think one does maybe other distinction. And maybe I don't even

know if this entirely accurate. But there's a difference between owning the endgame items versus

earning in game currency. Okay, know what's actually a big part of it is like you're playing

the game to earn that smooth Love Potion SLP that you can then trade for Fiat. Versus like, Hey, I

bought a sword I now own the sword. It's pretty cool to own the sword. I could sell it. I could

put it in a different game. Like, that's cool. Versus like, Hey, I'm gonna use the sword. I'm

gonna kill a monster there's gonna be a bunch of gold that shoots out and that gold is worth money

and I'm just gonna do it endlessly all day. Like that. Those are two different

Yeah, like you're right and so maybe owns a little bit better. But the end earn

or to earn to me are equally bad, like literally equally bad. And I always come back.

All these people infer that these people on Twitter and they say this take this

whole article They say it as if it's like, oh my god, you had this crazy thought. And it's like,

you fixed it.

We changed to

totally get it now, like, oh my god, we just had to change that one word and

everything's fixed.

makes me so angry. And you know, my counter is always just like, replace the play with

some traditional sport. So it's not a video game, and realize how ridiculous this argument is,

right? Like, I'm going to play basketball to earn versus play basketball and earn, like, it's not

going to change how many people want to play basketball, like it will literally have no impact.

It's it's a silly distinction. And it's, it feels like a crutch, right? Because because then people

can avoid the real problem, which is how do we figure out how to drive real benefit to the gamer?

You mentioned x infinity, Jeff, and I think it's a great segue to the next story x infinity in the

news. And, you know, maybe this is the biggest, you know, crypto NFT Metaverse web three story

this week. And and it's a huge hack. This is again, VentureBeat, and the article, the headline

is, hackers steal 620 million in Aetherium, and dollars from xe infinity maker sky matresses. Run

in network. Now, without getting too much into the details here, I'll just give you the high level

they stole 173,600 Ethereum worth $594,000,000.25 point 5 million US dollars. So for a total of 620

million. What was hacked was their layer two network called the ronin network. And basically,

they were able to take control, there's nine nodes that control this network. And they were able to

take control of a majority of them, which gave them control of the whole network. So five of the

nodes essentially were compromised out of the nine. And that allowed the hackers to take control

of the network and to fake essentially transaction. So have transactions executed on the

network that were not authorized, obviously, so huge hack, huge amount of dollars stolen?

Obviously, your thoughts on this, but like, Where does a company like xe infinity go from here? I'm

assuming these are player losses, not just company losses, like, are they going to have to cough up

hundreds of millions of dollars to reimburse players also?

I don't know. I mean, it's it's very interesting. And I really get there's so much

here, like at the intersection of gaming and crypto and some of it I don't even know if I'm

necessarily qualified to even, you know, get in depth into, like, for example, to answer your last

question. I don't know if it's player losses, or if it's, I know there is a governance token,

right. So the players of the game can earn this, he gets ROI, that Ronan pokin. And then there's

like a dowel and the XE Dow. That's one of the validators. So I don't know if it's the Dow that

lost money. I don't know if it's the company's governance tokens, which are partially owned by

sky Mavis, the company that owns x infinity and partially by the community. You know, we're

pulling up another article here. So for people who are watching there, it looks like the the the

ronin governance token. So aro n, you know, was down 40%, you know, on this news, so obviously,

that's a massive hit. I think I think the biggest takeaway for me, it's a disaster for Sky Maven. I

mean, they've already been facing, I would say, a lot of criticism around xe, you know, xe, if we

rewind to kind of like, over the last summer, I think, was sort of the belle of the ball, because

it was kind of the first player to earn game that really went. I use mainstream with kind of quotes

because it didn't really go mainstream.

Yeah, first of all, it's some kind of significant player, but yeah,

exactly, exactly. But then I think people pretty quickly realize, you know, recognize

a lot of the inherent flaws in the model and how it, you know, kind of relied on a little bit of a

Ponzi mechanic and sort of like it wasn't really sustainable. So it's taken a fair amount of heat,

and they've had some changes that they're looking to make to get away from that. But I think a big

part of the reason why Skye Mavis was able to raise so much money was this, this Ronan? Shane,

and kind of the I think Ronan has a wallet as well. And it was a little bit how when people talk

about epic and fortnight they're like, well, fortnight maybe we're declining, but like people

are buying investors are buying epic because of the Unreal Engine. The store, like Ronin, I think

was that part of the story where it was like Hey, other company, other game companies are gonna

build on road to chain and it's this infrastructure play. It's more than just x

infinity. And so the fact that Ronin was come to the part of the company that you know, obviously

had this had this hack, I think is a huge issue. For DJI Mavic, because it literally shows that the

chain of vulnerability, and what will happen here, I think it'll be interesting to see whether

they're able to recover it. I know, in the history of crypto, there's been a lot of these sort of

Acts where sometimes they're able to kind of do something to get the money back. Other times, not

so, you know, it'll be interesting to follow. Obviously, we wish sky Mavis the best of luck and

really for the industry, because, you know, we're both very bullish on kind of this this industry.

And we don't want, you know, something like this to be a black mark, which currently right now, I

think it is, like, how sustainable can this be if the biggest behemoth out there just lost, you

know, over half a billion dollars, you know, in Finnair that's my it's

a huge number, like mind boggling, mind boggling in terms of the size of the number.

I think what has always worried me is as the complexity of these platforms, increase it, like,

here's my take, sometimes it feels like these platforms are needlessly complex. And they're

needlessly complex. Because it, you know, it, it confers some benefit, some small benefit to the

user, or it makes it sound more interesting as a platform to investors, or whatever the reasoning

is, I find some of these plays. And I'm not saying specifically with xe infinity here, but needlessly

complex. And when you have complexity, it's hard to protect, right? Like, any system that has many,

many pieces to it, and entry points and ways to get in and ways to hack is difficult to secure.

And if a company that has that as sort of as mature as a sky Mavis, right, probably more mature

than other players in the space by a significant margin. Again, not a, it's not some runtime meta

company that's been around for the last 20 years, but you know, they've raised quite a bit of money

they've been they've had success, you would think their platform would be very secure. I just think

part of the challenge is the massive complexity of these platforms, make them very, very, very

difficult to secure. And when you're talking about this large of a prize, you're gonna have people

trying to get in rightly, it's just this is just the reality of it. And so I don't know what the

answer is, I don't know, if when we need to be simplifying some of these platforms and how they

operate, we need, you know, we need a whole crop of companies that are all about security around,

you know, some of these played around games, I don't know, I suspect this will not be the this is

not the first this is not the last big hack we're gonna see. But I think it's something that is

doesn't get enough attention and really needs to write like, this needs to be fixed fast, or that

whole segment of that gaming play to earn gaming space. I mean, if I personally lost money here,

what's the chance I come back to xe infinity?

Probably pretty, pretty low. Probably pretty low. And I think this gets to the heart of

one of the you know, I think the term for it is the blockchain trilemma. And it's it's basically

this concept of, you know, there's there's three things. You have decentralization, scalability and

security, security. And you can really pick two of the three, I think, with Ronan, you know, they

kind of picked scalability and decentralization and obviously, security was was an issue.

That's an interesting, I've not I've not heard that term. And I think it's an

interesting one, Jeff, I mean, and maybe that's the case, right? Maybe no one will be able to pick

all three. I can guarantee more. We'll be picking security after new stories like that. Let's move

on. This last story, I think is super interesting. You know, it's a topic we've touched on before.

But the take here, and the article here was particularly interesting. And the headline is I

went to fashion week in the metaverse now. It's a long article. I'm not going to recap everything.

But they talk about you know, the metaverse in general. They talked about some of the stores they

went to like Dolce and Gabbana and decentraland. They talk about, you know how they entered the

metaverse. Although this author she says she was using her decade old MacBook Air, which I probably

could have advised was the wrong piece of hardware to be doing this to begin with, you know, making

her Avatar the problems with the graphics. an after party that she went to, you know, some of

the stores in the luxury district and decentraland inside some of the stores. There's some images

here, but in general talked about her experience going to Fashion Week and her experience

interacting with both the events and the static, call it presence that many brands now have in

decentraland. Specifically, I'll just read this one thing it says decentralized event has been

described as the first inclusive fashion week, offering a front row seat to anyone with a crypto

wallet. But it took two Mac computers and a Dell laptop for me to finally enter decentraland. And

even then my sessions lasted 15 minutes at a time before crashing. Now, this is definitely user

error, right? Because you don't play you know, graphically intensive games on a decade old

MacBook or a Dell laptop. But they concluded by saying glitches aside the experience diff did

offer a window into a fascinating furred future worthy of exploration. The ambition behind

decentralized first Fashion Week was cause for celebration, and fashion is about newness and

novelty than the metaverse was the most on Vogue venue in town. What did you make of this article?

I know Jeff, you read it. What did you think of this take on going to the first fashion week in

the metaverse and the future of fashion in the metaverse?

Well, I think he did a pretty good job of being being balanced. I mean, like you said,

some of the issues that she faced were obviously, you know, her own fault by trying to access the

metaphors via, you know, a 10 year old MacBook Air. Having said that, I think it's important to

point that out, because, you know, most people don't have a game, an amazing gaming PC. So if

we're going to tout, you know, the metaverse is something where you can get billions of people

into, clearly we're going to need a lot more gaming PCs. So maybe go buy a video or something

like that. That's a as a joke, obviously. But you know, the I think that's number one, just saying

how, you know, the tech isn't necessarily widely dispersed in order to get into this metaverse.

Also, some of the pictures in the article, you know, for people who are watching this and not,

you know, listening to this, it's, it's not that impressive. The graphics, you know, decentraland

graphics just aren't very good. It's not, you know, like HD stuff. It's more like, Bro boxy,

kind of like block graphics. It also just looks very sparse. Like there's not a ton of people

it's, you know, sparsely attended. So that is that's, that's kind of a little bit of a black

mark. I think in general, though, I love this idea. I think we talked about it a couple months

back when this was first announced. We're both fairly bullish on this. And I like the idea of

fashion in the virtual world. I think it's one of those things along with gaming that just like they

will be parts of the metaverse very clearly. So I'm pretty bullish on that. And I'd like

hopefully, you know, this, this continues, and we see more of these and continues to grow in terms

of people and interest. I didn't see that many art, you know, besides the fact that we do this

podcast and literally, you know, Google every week articles in the metaverse, I didn't see this

Pierce, kind of the more of the consciousness of the the mainstream, like I didn't see on the Today

Show or on CNBC or, you know, other outlets like talking about this, which I'm a little I would

have liked to have seen a little more mainstream coverage.

Of that that piece is an interesting insight. Interesting thought. I'm

maybe not too surprised by that, like it, here's my tinfoil hat theory on that one, you know. It's

like this is in some ways a threat to real Fashion Week's right, like New York Fashion Week, or, or

Paris Fashion Week, or any, any of the big sort of global in the sense that those are pretty like for

anyone who's been to a show, or like a big show, right? For big design, or in any one of those

fashion carries. It's a pretty closed world, right? For the most part, they're invited only,

you either have to be a tremendous customer of the brand, or from the industry or a buyer, or media

from the industry, right? Like it's a very closed off world, just loving fashion and being

interested in being interested in fashion. Like, you're never going to be invited to Le sabse you

know, runway show in Paris, that's just not gonna happen. And so, I love this accessibility argument

and I love sort of being able to bring that Fashion Week experience to potentially millions,

billions of other people that would never otherwise get that experience and I think that's

special. You know, the author does make a good point that you need a gaming PC Now, having said

that, her phone was probably a better a way better piece of hardware to do this than her 10 year old

MacBook Air and probably could have rendered these graphics a lot better. But like it's hard not to

be a fan right and not to like the fact that what I would consider, like, you know, there's an image

here of the LE sub store and decentraland, Elissa, like spent 10s. Fifth, like 50 million plus

building a store on Madison Avenue in New York, right? This probably cost a fraction of that. What

is the long term value of a presence like this, assuming these platforms really take off in a big

way? My guess is the ROI here is probably considerably higher, right? If you look at a five

or 10 year, kind of timeline. And so you have to appreciate that. Brands that maybe aren't the most

tech savvy in the world to begin with, have taken a pretty big leap here into into the unknown. And,

and I think long term it's gonna pay off I do believe, I think what has to be solved. And we

started with this, and we'll close with this is how do you get here? Right? Like, what are the on

ramps, and how do you make those on ramps? And on one hand accessible, but also high fidelity?

Right? Because if you look at her photos, this is not this is not high fidelity, high fashion worthy

graphics. Let's put it that way. But I I'm less worried about the technology problems. I think

solving the adoption problem is the bigger one. And the fact that most of the brands are here,

says something. Jeff, that wraps up this week's podcast.

Is it goodbye, Action Pack, we got action tag stories in there.

Guys, make sure to subscribe to the podcast. Make sure to hit that follow subscribe

button, whether you're on Spotify or Apple podcast or Google Play or Stitcher or, you know, literally

any of the 50 platforms you can find our podcast on. Also go subscribe to our sister podcast

business of esports and met a woman they're equally great. And, and let us know. Send us

feedback. Reach out to Jeff reach out to myself. Let us know maybe things you want to hear us talk

about. Go follow Jeff on Twitter at Jeff Cohen 23. He's always got interesting takes on on the

business of the metaverse and, and yeah, let us know how you're liking the show and anything you

want to hear us talk about. Guys. Don't forget the future is fun. And we will see you next week.

Thanks for joining us here on meta business. Make sure to subscribe to this podcast

everywhere you get your podcasts, leave a five star review and tell your friends, family and

colleagues all about us. Also make sure to follow metta TV on all socials to get more of the best

Metaverse content anywhere. Tune in every week for another episode of meta business