1. Team Glass:
Matthew Baar
William Gregory
Angelo Kern
Tiffany Lehman
Malcolm Moody
BUS490 Advanced Business Seminar
Dwight D. Ham
Senior Seminar Final Project
April 30, 2015

2. Table of Contents
Intro................................................................................................................................................................................................3
People............................................................................................................................................................................................4
Company Profile and Background:.........................................................................................................................4
Project Management.......................................................................................................................................................6
How to Recreate the Magic of Google Glass.................................................................................................8
Summary...........................................................................................................................................................................9
Privacy........................................................................................................................................................................................10
Controversy.......................................................................................................................................................................10
Challenges...........................................................................................................................................................................12
Summary.............................................................................................................................................................................12
Price.............................................................................................................................................................................................13
Expected Revenues.......................................................................................................................................................13
Marketing Price Point..................................................................................................................................................16
Price: It was priced high on purpose ................................................................................................................16
Our suggested price.................................................................................................................................................17
Competitors: head mounted display design companies........................................................................18
Meta Pro.........................................................................................................................................................................18
Olympus MEG4.0.......................................................................................................................................................19
Optinvent ORA Digital Eyewear.......................................................................................................................20
Epiphany Eyewear...................................................................................................................................................20
Summary:............................................................................................................................................................................22
Product.......................................................................................................................................................................................23
Summary.............................................................................................................................................................................25
Conclusion................................................................................................................................................................................27
References:..............................................................................................................................................................................29

3. T e a m G l a s s | 3
Intro
A pair of glasses is supposed to bring the world into focus. Most often, the wearer is
dependent on this simple technology to understand and interpret their surroundings.
Innovation has occurred in terms of style and design, but the function has remained the
same. Our mission at Google is to organize the world’s information and make it universally
accessible and useful. In other words, Google is a pair of glasses that helps the user
understand and interpret the world around them. But what if we took that seriously? What
if we actually were a pair of glasses? In 2013, we released a technology that had the
potential to change how people view the world, literally. Since then, we have gathered data
and critical feedback to make this technology perfect, because anyone with a pair of glasses
knows that their vision is only as good as the lens they see through. Now we are ready to
share this project with the world, to take the information that your eyes process at any
given second and make it accessible and useful. This is Google Glass.
After the limited release of Google Glass, we discovered that this technology was far more
revolutionary than we expected. However, this came with its own set of challenges.
Specifically, we have focused on the people, privacy and price as the central issues that
overshadowed the product release. As a management team, Google did not have a clear
vision of where the project was heading. Even the Explorer Project, where we brought on
private consumers to help us refine this device, was divisive for our team. Secondly,
information is a sensitive issue. Google only intends to take information that is readily
available and make it useful; nevertheless, some have seen Google Glass as an invasive
device that breaks important social barriers. Finally, our initial price point, which was
designed to attract users who would provide honest, critical feedback, was mistaken as the
actual price for Google Glass. This was a failure of communication on the part of the
management team, and the final price of Glass will reflect our values as a company.
Information is not useful if it is not available to any consumer, regardless of socioeconomic
factors.
To successfully implement this project, we have addressed the above concerns of people,
privacy and price while looking at the development of the product. We believe that Google
glass offers substantial value to the world, but it needs to be a product that is functionally
and aesthetically useful. There is a reality that Google Glass will only reach its full potential
once it is in the hand of the consumer, but we have synthesized feedback from the
Explorers, news sources and designers to perfect Glass. Ultimately, Google is ready to re-
implement the Glass project with the intent to produce a new lens to the world.
Sincerely,
Team Glass

4. T e a m G l a s s | 4
People
Company Profile and Background:
Google actually has a very interesting history that started off in a college or grad
school, just like many other famous websites that a present in today’s society. In 1995, two
gentlemen named Larry Page and Sergey Brin started Google. They started their company
at Stanford, and they began collaborating on making a new search engine called BackRub.
The two ran their search engine on the Stanford bandwidth for a year, until BackRub began
to take up too much of the school’s bandwidth. At this point, the two decided to take their
company to the next level, and renamed it Google, after the mathematical term googol,
which means the number 1 with 100 zeros after it. They chose this because the wanted to
implant in their users minds the idea that their results were endless, which they pretty
much are. Coming to the end of the search results of Google is something that few if any
have ever done. A year later, Lance and Sergey filed for incorporation in California, and
they hired their first employee. From here, there was a massive jump in profitability, and
after that, Google never looked back. They’ve been on a track that’s been one of, if not the
most profitable business in America. The Mission Statement of Google is to organize the
world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.
Google has done this marvelously well, and the transition into Google glass is one
that is aligned with that aim. Google glass is something that allows even more information
to be even more readily available to the public. There’s the ability to have information now
at less than the push of a button. Having information right before your eyes automatically is
something that certainly would help make information accessible and useful.

5. T e a m G l a s s | 5
Originating in 2012, Google Glass was announced under the alias “project glass.”
Sergey Brin wore a pair of the glasses to a fundraiser dinner a few months later and that
was their first public debut. The project was received quite well, and the public raved at the
idea of Project Glass. Another part of Project Glass was the initiative where Google made
people write an essay to them regarding what they were going to do with Glass, and if
Google liked what they said, then they charged the person $1,500 and sent them a pair of
Google Glasses to test out and get in the world. This was a massive part of raising
awareness about Google Glass, as it allowed people in the public to see them, ask questions
about them, and in some cases even get their hands on them.
Wearable technology has become something that has been very faddish in the last
several years. There’s been a huge influx in wearable technology that spans watches,
glasses, and bracelets. Interestingly enough, the first wearable technology originated in
casinos in the 1960’s to help gamblers cheat. Through the 70’s and the 80’s different types
of wearable technology were developed, including a helpful device for the blind that was a
visual-to-tactile device that featured a 10 inch pad that would allow those who were blind
to feel what their eyes were looking at. After this, more helpful, practical wearable
technology was further developed, and it began to gain more momentum. In 1994, the first
“wrist computer” came onto the scene, and by today’s standards, was a monstrosity that
had virtually no function, but it was a step in the right direction. Jump forward to 2013, and
wearable technology had actually gotten to the point where it could be something that was
helpful. Smart watches began coming onto the scene and became something that people
started looking at in a way that was practical. Although they’re still extremely expensive,

6. T e a m G l a s s | 6
they were just low enough in price where they could be viewed as something that the
common person could potentially purchase.
Around this time, Google got onto the wearable tech train and began developing the
Glass. In 2011, they began seriously working on the project. As Google pioneered seriously
into the wearable technology department, other companies like Apple, Samsung, and Sony
began to work hard into the same area. The wearable technology has become something
that is inevitable, and as soon as the price is something that everyone can afford, will rage
onto the market like never before. The technology for the devices has always been just a
little bit too useless for how expensive the devices themselves cost. However, as technology
has improved, there has been a massive increase in the practicality of these devices. As the
world moves forward, implementing technology into and onto our bodies is going to
become more and more realistic and practical. Glass is just a step in that direction, but it’s a
step that if Google takes correctly, would turn out to be a massive leap.
Project Management
What went wrong? When Google Glass first debuted, the public was ecstatic and
wildly supportive. Time Magazine, Vogue Magazine, New York Fashion Week, various TV
shows including The Simpsons, Saturday Night Live, and The Colbert Report, as well as
prominent people in today’s society all embraced and positively supported Glass openly.
Then, on January 15, 2015 Google announced they would be discontinuing the Glass
Explorer Edition. What went wrong?
The origin of Google Glass was called Google Brain. In the beginning stages it was
based on the idea of wearable computers. In 2009, Google’s chief executive Eric Schmidt

7. T e a m G l a s s | 7
recruited Sebastian Thrun to build this idea of Google Brain. Thrun called his lab ‘Google X’,
which became the covert name for Google Glass — The X Project. In this lab, Google Glass
was born. Soon, Thrun had recruited many other scientists and researchers, with Isabelle
Olsson as the designer. Soon, Sergey Brin, Google’s co-founder joined The X Project too.
Between Brin and Thrun as the project’s managers, the project stayed covert within
Google’s walls. As time progressed and the prototype was developed further, dissension
began to grow within the team concerning whether the product should be used as a
common daily device or for only specific functions. Soon, Mr. Brin, knowing Glass wasn’t
fully developed to its intended excellence, began to argue for an early release — a testing
phase — hoping to use the public’s feedback as the basis for its continued development. To
emphasize its underdeveloped status, Google limited its release to “Glass Explorers” — a
somewhat limited group of consumers who would buy Glass Explorer Edition for $1500.
This phase was intended to be exclusive. That exclusivity caught hold of the
attention of the public intensely, and instead of keeping the project exclusive and not
marketing it forward, Google did the exact opposite. Glass was promoted heavily, by Mr.
Brin and many of the models wearing a pair at a fashion show, by the Google developer’s
conference where they demonstrated Glass with skydivers. Rather than a quiet experiment,
this early release exploded with a front-loaded sense of excitement that wore off quickly, as
consumers began to get their hands on the under-developed Glass and realize it wasn’t all it
had been introduced to be.
From here, Glass seemed to disappear, and that can be blamed largely on The X
Project’s management. Mr. Brin chose to release Glass too soon. It wasn’t ready for public

8. T e a m G l a s s | 8
criticism, and wasn’t ready to be released. Google released an unfinished product, and
fueled the flames of excitement when interest caught, instead of waiting for the product to
be developed further. The marketing for Glass went quickly out of control, and was lead
entirely by the public and the egos of the designers. Glass went from being a carefully
managed covert development with a standard of achieving excellence before releasing to
consumers, to being out of control and managed loosely, at best.
How to Recreate the Magic of Google Glass
The X Project had it right in their original plan to keep the project under wraps until
it was up to standards for release to the entire consumer population. Despite the
unfortunate beginning of Google Glass, it still holds ample value to the technological world
we live in today. Our analysis has lead us to a conclusion for moving forward with Glass:
There should be no public experimentation on the product, Glass should not be released
until it is perfect, when it is released, it should be done so with a bigger and better
marketing plan that leaves consumers excited and supportive, while answering and putting
to rest the concerns that arose in the early release of Glass Explorer Edition. Now, Glass is
under new management — Ivy Ross, the designer for Google’s smart-eyewear division, and
Tony Fadell, former Apple executive and creator of Nest. Fadell wholeheartedly agrees with
this plan, and he says, “Early Glass efforts have broken ground and allowed us to learn
what’s important to consumers and enterprises alike. I’m excited to be working with Ivy to
provide direction and support as she leads the team and we work together to integrate
those learnings into future products.” Fadell has stated there will be no public
experimentation, and he will not release Glass until it is perfect.

9. T e a m G l a s s | 9
Summary
Glass in its perfected form should: address privacy concerns, cost less, have a longer
battery life, improved sound quality, a better display, and be paired with more familiar
types of eye-wear. Despite the more secretive approach being different from Google’s usual
pattern of release, this product requires it even more-so in the face of its early release
debacle. Glass has huge potential to change the technological world as we know it entirely,
but it needs to have a better plan for debut. Ivy Ross and Tony Fadell are perfect for this
vision, and will most definitely keep Google Glass in line for excellence and confident public
acceptance in its second round of release.
Ultimately the statement Google released concerning the next steps in the project
was perfect and spoke directly to the improvements to come with Glass, saying, “Glass was
in its infancy, and you took those very first steps and taught us how to walk. Well, we still
have some work to do, but now we’re ready to put on our big kid shoes and learn how to
run.… As we look to the road ahead, we realize that we’ve outgrown the lab and so we’re
officially “graduating” from Google [x] to be our own team here at Google. We’re thrilled to
be moving even more from concept to reality.”

10. T e a m G l a s s | 10
Privacy
Controversy
The concept behind Glass is primarily a frame connected to a device allowing the
user to browse the Internet, watch videos, get the current weather, and much more. In the
midst of this great technological feat, there is a controversy of privacy surrounding Glass
due to its ability to take pictures and video. According to The Wall Street Journal, “Glass has
been criticized for invading people’s privacy because wearers can record video and take
photos unobtrusively. Early users became the butt of jokes, gaining the nickname
‘glassholes’.” The primary concern is that this feature is viewed at best as invasive and at
worst as a potential spyware device.
According to The Scientific American, a science magazine publication, the device is
“creepy” due to its recording abilities. While the recording technology is not necessarily
new, there are key areas of differentiation. The Scientific goes on to say that, “This puts
Glass wearers in a position of control. They can take pictures and videos, post things online
and even possibly use face-recognition apps to identify strangers in a crowd.” An article in
The Wall Street Journal agrees, saying, “The assumption nowadays is that you know [when]
you're on camera. With Google Glass, nobody's pointing a camera, camcorder or phone…An
unspoken social rule is being violated.” In today’s world, anyone can record video, but
Google Glass takes this ability to another level.

11. T e a m G l a s s | 11
The reality is, there is an extremely conspicuous light that illuminates when Glass is
recording. The use of the word ‘unobtrusively’ in The Wall Street Journal is an incorrect
representation of the product, leading the public to believe that Glass functions in a
discreet or covert mode of operation. It would behoove those marketing Google Glass for its
release to make it clear that recording on Glass is no different or less obvious than holding
up your phone to do the same.
Concerns center most heavily on personal space. The controversy is about being
recorded in sensitive, embarrassing or incriminating settings or conversations such as
going to the doctor’s office or a therapist, buying medications at a pharmacy, attending
support groups, financial transactions, attending political or religious events and other
such potentially compromising settings or situations without giving consent. Herein lies a
rather substantial rational inconsistency: With or without Google Glass, this privacy hack is
already in effect. Street cameras, store surveillance and the consistent use of smart phones’
video and photographic technology have contributed to the risk factor far before Google
Glass was ever released. The only difference is that Google Glass gives the public’s privacy
paranoia a tangible villain which threatens their safety. People want information, they
know knowledge is power, but they want their safety to remain intact. You can’t have it
both ways.
In this, technological and social etiquette is imperative. The issue of privacy is a
person-to-person problem. Blaming the device (an inanimate object) for a person’s
decisions is ridiculous. Which brings us to an opportunity to reinforce the faith Google
places in the public by emphasizing etiquette. It is their responsibility to be their best in
their use Google’s best. We suggest that in marketing Google Glass, a focus be placed on

12. T e a m G l a s s | 12
everyone putting their best forward -- Google does this in its mission provide the public
with information and the public does this by proceeding responsibly with the information
they are provided. It’s a relationship built on trust.
Challenges
Google’s mission is to organize information and make it accessible and useful,
therefore we believe that Glass’s ability to record images and video is essential to the
product. This allows users to interact on social media and capture moments that would
otherwise be ruined by the use of a phone or camera. Our primary concern in relation to
privacy is to make non-users comfortable with the device. We believe this is possible with
an emphasis on etiquette and using information responsibly.
Summary
In a world where technology comes second only to cash, and the race to produce the
next best thing never ends, there will always be risks to privacy. Making information
accessible to society will always have a certain level of risk. Managing that risk comes with
helping consumers to understand their social responsibility in etiquette, as Google works
alongside consumers to better society as we know it today.

13. T e a m G l a s s | 13
Price
There are two factors when considering the price. The first is at what price will we
receive the highest revenue stream, and the second is at what price consumers will
purchase the device. Another consumer on the marketing side is understanding that Google
is a socially-minded company that is trying to make information available to everyone. We
do not want Google Glass to be seen as an exclusive technology that is inaccessible to
consumers with lower disposable income.
Expected Revenues
The question for Google is not if we can afford to manufacture Glass. In 2014,
revenues grew to $66 billion, 18.9% from 2013 (2014 10k, 23). They had a net profit
margin of 23.3% and operating cash flow of $22.4 billion (2014 10k, 23). A closer look at
Google’s financials for the last 3 years demonstrates that our company has the financial
ability to sustain a project like Google Glass:
Illustration 1: Ratio Analysis
Financial Analysis: Google
Fiscal Year Ended
2012 2013
201
4
Liquidity
Overall
CurrentRatio.................................. 4.22 4.58 4.80
Acid-Test......................................... 4.18 4.58 4.80
Individual Assets

14. T e a m G l a s s | 14
Average Collection
Period................ 68.06 61.73 63.91
ReceivablesTurnover...................... 5.36 5.91 5.71
Capital Structure
DebtRatio....................................... 3.99% 4.73% 5.89%
Asset Management Efficiency
Total AssetTurnover....................... 0.49 0.50 0.50
Profitability
Cost Control
Gross ProfitMargin......................... 62.30% 60.39% 61.65%
OperatingProfit
Margin................... 30.05% 27.74% 24.99%
NetProfitMargin............................. 25.09% 23.27% 21.88%
Returns
OperatingReturnonAssets
(OROA). 15.43% 14.33% 13.16%
Returnon Equity(ROE).................... 16.11% 14.80% 13.82%
Google has had strong liquidity for the last 3 years, but it is interesting to note that
inventory plays a very small part in its current assets. While this is beneficial from a cash
standpoint, it begs the question of whether Google is equipped to handle a large inventory.
In the management notes for 2014, it was noted that Google’s non-advertising revenues are
increasing (from 9% to 11% of total revenues) (22). As a company that derives the
majority of its revenues through advertising (2014 10k, 7), this increase in non-advertising
revenues is an indicator that its foray into hardware and services is successful. Products
such as Google Play and the burgeoning Nexus line are providing more opportunities for
the company. However, it might be wise of Google to outsource the manufacturing of
hardware to another company as it has done with Nexus cellphones. This is further
supported by Google’s weak asset turnover. Google’s strength is not using its assets to
create revenues, therefore, increasing inventory would not necessarily help their business.
However, by expanding their product line to Glass, they give themselves the opportunity to
create more advertising opportunities, generating more revenues while extending the

15. T e a m G l a s s | 15
hardware manufacturing to a company that specializes in design and hardware, allowing
Google to focus on the integration of their software and advertising into the product.
At this point, we are concerned with what impact Google Glass sales will have on
revenue. As mentioned above, the development of Glass will not be for the purpose of unit
sales so much as an increase in ad sales. However, several estimates indicate strong
demand for units. Business Insider showed the chart below, outlining their sales prediction.
“Early adopters will use them for medical training, scientific exploration, and photography.
They in turn will popularize Glass and other smart eyewear among wider populations still
unsure about the appeal” (Danova). This data was taken on the assumption that Google
Glass would be launched by 2014. The key note is price, which Danova said would decrease
“from $1,500 today to the $600 range in two years, and then lower”. An author from All
Things Digital said that “new units should sell for $349” (Gannes). So if Glass falls between
the $300-$600 price ranges, which would be consistent with other wearable technologies,
then Google is looking at a minimum gross profit of $750 million in the second year of sales.
However, as the device is adopted by the mainstream and developers get a handle on the
technology, Business Insider predicts sales to increase almost 1000% from second year to
fifth year. If they follow a model of decreasing the price from $600 to the $300 range, then
Google will add a billion in sales in the second year, increasing to $6.3 billion in the fifth
year. Due to the unique nature of the product, the further development of the android app
market and the market for related goods, demand should be high for this product, even in
the initial launch. At a launch price of $399, which is consistent with the above data,
Google will be in a position to earn millions, if not billions, in gross sales.

16. T e a m G l a s s | 16
Illustration 2: Business Insider
Marketing Price Point
Price: It was priced high on purpose
Google Glass’ price has been of much concern to its consumers. For the Explorer
edition, $1,500 was far too much, and many speculated that it would be the downfall for the
product if the price did not drastically drop. It makes more sense to lower the price for the
consumer edition, as it was purely by marketing reasons that the price for the Explorer
edition was $1,500. Even though it is largely criticized for being too expensive, Google
strategically priced it to reach a target market—the early adopters. The $1,500 cost
narrowed the potential Google Glass audience to those who are sincerely interested in
wearables and mobile technology. This reduces the chance of people using Glass and
simply dismissing it because they don’t understand it. Why kill a product with bad reviews
when the reviewers may not understand the technology, its potential impact, or the fact

17. T e a m G l a s s | 17
that it’s a work in progress? Although the general public may have its criticisms, Google has
effectively promoted and marketed a new high tech product through the Explorer edition.
However, Google is well aware that their pricing is important when it comes to the
consumer edition.
Our suggested price
A Google Glass poll conducted by UK blog Lifestyle surveyed 1,132 of its newsletter
subscribers to find out their viewpoint on the future success of the device. Based on the
survey, 53% think that $600 is too much for the product. A recent report from The China
Post cites the Topology Research Institute to suggest a price tag of around $300.
Illustration 3: Cost of Manufacturing
Based on the components used, it will cost less than $210 to produce one device. Techies at
Catwig dissected the product, making it relatively easy to explore all the components used
in detail—based on openly available information. Sergey Kovalev, head of production
support at electronics design house Promwad, said that according to his engineering team's

18. T e a m G l a s s | 18
estimations, the cost of Google Glass materials should not exceed $194 per unit when
produced in 10,000-unit batches. This matches the estimates of other experts on this topic,
who all come to the conclusion that the expected bill of materials (BOM) for Google Glass to
be under $200. However, the production cost does not necessarily reflect the price tag. The
retail price will therefore all depend on what margin strategy Google will choose to use. So
far, a Topology Research Institute analyst predicted that the device would carry an initial
price tag of $299. More recently, although, reliable sources have confirmed that it would
not be as low as $299. Smartphone makers usually go for a 60% to 70% margin in their
top-tier devices. The Samsung Galaxy 4's price tag includes an estimated 62% margin, and
the Apple iPhone 5 is sold with a 68% margin. However, $399, a 47% margin, is slightly
lower than cellphone manufacturers and reflects Google’s concern for ad revenues as
opposed to device revenues.
Competitors: head mounted display design companies
The differences between the Google Glass tech specs and the internals of its
competitors are subtle. All of them feature hands-free cameras and most have video
overlays to augment reality. But the intentions of these Google Glass alternatives vary;
some are meant for sports, others for lifestyle, and a few are destined to enhance social
interactions
Meta Pro
Considered the most advanced AR eyewear on the market and hailed the best
looking AR glasses on the market by Forbes Magazine. A Silicon Valley start-up company
called Meta is working on Augmented Reality glasses, similar to Google Glass, but with a
couple of major differences. One is that Meta's specs will use gestures to control the images

19. T e a m G l a s s | 19
on the glasses. And Meta's specs are designed to be more stylish than Google's connected
specs. Its newly unveiled metaPro has a visual display 15 times larger than Google Glass.
The lenses are made by Zeiss.
The metaPro is available for pre-orders at Meta's website and the glasses go on sale
next July. We do have to point out that the glasses are not wireless, but instead connect by
wire to a mini-computer in the user's pocket. This computer, which handles connectivity
and processing for the metaPro, is larger than an iPhone. It is powered by a 1.5GHz Intel i5
CPU and includes 4GB of RAM. Eventually, the company plans on cutting the umbilical cord
and offering completely wireless connected specs like Google Glass.
The company expects early buyers of the specs to use them at home, syncing to their
smartphones in another room. Users can hold out their hands and see a virtual image of
their handset. Apps being worked on by developers include a live action game and one for
medical technicians that shows a patient's vital signs on the display.
Meta’s previous versions: Meta's two earlier iterations of its glasses sold for $667
and brought in $650,000 in revenue. It goes beyond just entertainment. It is focused on that
because the glasses that Meta is developing resemble something from an "Iron Man" movie.
Look through the lenses, and physical objects are rendered virtually. Then, whatever you're
looking at — be it a phone or a document or even a keyboard — can be all manipulated by
your hands. Started delivering in June 2014
Olympus MEG4.0
News of the Olympus MEG4.0 smartglasses landed back in July 2012 in the
aftermath of Google’s I/O Glass reveal. The original press release described a device that
hooks up to your smartphone thanks to Bluetooth 2.1 support. It had a 320 x 240 pixel

20. T e a m G l a s s | 20
virtual screen and would last for 8 hours based on 15 second “bursts of use.” It also
attached to a regular pair of glasses in the only image released. We haven’t heard anything
else about these glasses, though a Japanese patent application from Olympus was
uncovered by Egami blog.
Optinvent ORA Digital Eyewear
A French company called Optinvent has been working on augmented reality glasses
for a number of years now. It eventually showed off its head-mounted display, dubbed ORA,
in June this year. These augmented reality glasses could be used for navigation, messaging,
watching video, and gaming. ORA would hook up to your computer or smartphone via Wi-
Fi. The device itself will also include various sensors, a camera, microphone, and
loudspeaker, and Bluetooth connectivity. It’s based on a proprietary platform and
developers can sign up for the SDK now. Optinvent claims the construction from “low cost
molded plastic optical elements” makes it much cheaper than the competition.
Epiphany Eyewear
Does it take more than a camera to make your glasses smart? Epiphany Eyewear is
offering glasses with an HD digital video camera built-in for one-touch recording. They
come in 8GB ($300), 16GB ($400), or 32GB ($500) varieties and there’s a Micro USB plug
for recharging and data transfer. There’s also an electric sunglasses switch that allows you
to change the level of tinting. If you hook them up to a tablet or smartphone and use the
YouGen.TV app you could live stream your P.O.V. to the world. You can pre-order and they
are supposed to be released around now.

21. T e a m G l a s s | 21
Cast AR Gaming Glasses
Though it’s made for gaming, the CastAR is not just an Oculus Rift competitor.
Designed by a couple of ex-Valve employees, it projects a miniature virtual reality into the
3D space of the real world. A prototype of CastAR was shown off in May.
According to The Verge, there are two miniature projectors that shoot images to
each screen on the glasses. Then active shutter glasses filter the images for each of your
eyes, creating a 3D effect. Finally, a camera built into the glasses “sees infrared LEDs
positioned around the edges of that projector screen so that the glasses can optically track
the exact position of your head.” This allows a game to detect exactly when you move your
head and what you’re looking at. We imagine that glasses like this could be used for a lot
more than games, and look forward to learning more about the project.
Illustration 3: Competitor Price Points

22. T e a m G l a s s | 22
Summary:
Google’s cash pile means that a project like Google Glass is no challenge. One
challenge moving forward is that Google is not set up for large inventories. However, our
marketers are developing partnerships with several eye-glass manufactures, allowing
Google to focus on software development and advertisements. We believe that a price of
$399 gives a competitive edge to other smart glasses while being indicative of the value
contributed by Google as a software and advertising company.

23. T e a m G l a s s | 23
Product
As Google and other companies begin to build wearable technology like glasses and
watches, an industry not known for its fashion sense is facing a new challenge — how to be
stylish. Design has always been important to technology, with products like Apple
becoming fashion statements, but designing hardware that people will wear like jewelry is
an entirely different task.
Google has two options when it comes to style. They can either modify their smart
glasses to be more aesthetically appealing, or they can target their efforts to professional
applications, like doctors using Glass to record surgeries for training purposes. The Google
Glass poll conducted by UK blog Lifestyle additionally found that 68% of those polled
wouldn't feel comfortable wearing Google Glass in public. Of those people, a vast majority
said it was because "they would be too embarrassed to wear Google Glass in front of other
people." Sony’s new SmartGlasses attach clips on to your existing sunglasses or
prescription glasses so that you can wear it whenever you feel like you may need it. With
Sony's approach, you can wear the same glasses you've always worn — the style is barely
an issue.
In a sign of how acute the challenge is for Google, the company is negotiating with
Warby Parker, an e-commerce start-up company that sells trendy eyeglasses, to help it
design more fashionable frames, according to two people briefed on the negotiations who
were not authorized to speak publicly because the partnership has not been made official.
Google and Warby Parker declined to comment. They join other companies that are

24. T e a m G l a s s | 24
grappling with these design challenges, including big companies like Apple, Nike and
Jawbone and smaller ones like Pebble, MetaWatch and Misfit Wearables. Jawbone’s health-
tracking wristband, Up, for instance, was designed by Yves Behar, the company’s chief
creative officer and a well-known designer who has worked with fashion and furniture
companies. Apple, which is said to be making a smart watch, has assigned some of its top
designers to make curved glass that is comfortable and aesthetically appealing.
New Management, New Design
New management: In February 2015, The New York Times reported that Google
Glass was being redesigned by former Apple executive Tony Fadell, and that it would not
be released until he deemed it to be "perfect." The frames do not have lenses, though
Google is experimenting with adding sunglass or prescription lenses in some versions.
They have a tiny screen that appears much bigger from the wearer’s perspective than it
does on the frame.
Google’s design team has made Glass’s look and comfort a priority, according to a
person briefed on the company’s design process. Designers first made it in black, thinking it
would flatter everyone, but they added colors because black frames can look heavy on a fair
person. The glasses, which 18 months ago weighed eight pounds, are now lighter than a
typical pair of sunglasses. Engineers have worked to shrink the components so wearers
look less like cyborgs.
In addition to considering partnering with Warby Parker, Google is doing other
things to recruit the fashion-savvy, particularly women. It could open retail stores where
people can try on the glasses, according to news reports. At Fashion Week last year, models

25. T e a m G l a s s | 25
wore colored versions on the runway for Diane von Furstenberg, and the designer made a
behind-the-scenes video wearing the glasses.
Summary
We recommend Google to market primarily to the professional environment when it
launches. There is a great need in the fields of healthcare and higher education. According
to a recent survey by Northwestern University, when physicians spend too much time
looking at a computer screen in the exam room, their ability to listen, problem-solve, and
think creatively is not optimal. Google Glass can help alleviate this through its ability to
collect data and update important information through casual conversation rather than a
doctor spending hours inputting information into a computer. With the ability to collect
data through verbal communication, physicians can focus on the patient at hand and
provide better service and care. Through facial recognition, Google Glass is able to interpret
data and communicate, giving physicians more insight and providing data at-hand, when
needed.
In the higher education field, teachers and students are able to collaborate and learn
through hands-free technology as well. Google Glass is able to help students learn new
languages in real-time, teachers connect with other educators from different parts of the
world, and students who are reluctant to ask questions can text an SMS to Google Glass.
This technology reduces the gap between students and teachers and creates a more
dynamic learning experience. Learning experiences vary from learning a language to
streaming a live operation to colleagues in about 30 different countries.

26. T e a m G l a s s | 26
Once Google establishes a strong market in the professional field, the public consumers will
follow.

27. T e a m G l a s s | 27
Conclusion
Project X has flourished into a valuable piece of technology. Its first debut may have
seemed to be unsuccessful, but not so! Glass was released to give the management team a
direction with the product, and to learn how to make it better. Ultimately, the limited
release of Google Glass was a tremendous opportunity for its project management team to
develop a path for its future — a vision.
In focusing on the impact of Glass on people, privacy, and pricing, we have established a
path for Glass’ new promotion strategy. First, Google is committed to organize the world’s
information and make it universally accessible and useful. Glass fits perfectly within this
vision, and Google’s commitment to people and excellence serves as an excellent
foundation for the future of Google Glass. The project’s management team has been rebuilt
and has invented a clear vision for Glass, based on consumer’s responses to the product.
This includes making Glass more functionally and aesthetically useful and pleasing. Second,
privacy is a main concern with Google Glass, as personal information is sensitive, and a
breach of one’s confidential matters is not to be taken lightly. Making information
accessible to society will always have a certain level of risk. As the technological world has
expanded over the years, it has become imperative that consumers develop social etiquette
and responsibility in their use of information. Google works alongside consumers to better
society as we know it today, and managing the risk of privacy invasion entails the
consumers stepping up to the plate and being socially responsible. Third, after a
competition and manufacturing analysis, the price of Google Glass will drop significantly in
comparison with its exclusive testing group price for Glass Explorer Edition. Financing the

28. T e a m G l a s s | 28
project will be no great feat to accomplish, as Google is more than prepared to give Glass all
the resources necessary to create technological excellence.
The key to success with Google Glass is debuting it only when it is complete and excellent.
The test run gave the project management team much information to learn from and
develop a vision for the future of their product, but it wasn’t the smoothest of entries.
Consumers expect Google to uphold its standard of excellence in serving the public
according to its mission statement. Project Glass is one that has the ability to revolutionize
life as we know it today. Google has done an excellent job in keeping the public aware and
beginning the steps toward its next release of Glass saying, “Glass was in its infancy, and
you took those very first steps with us and taught us how to walk. Well, we still have some
work to do, but now we’re ready to put on our big kid shoes and learn how to run... As we
look to the road ahead, we realize that we’ve outgrown the lab and so we’re officially
“graduating” from Google [x] to be our own team here at Google. We’re thrilled to be
moving even more from concept to reality.” Being careful to focus on the concerns that
arose among consumers in Glass’ trial period will be key to the success of its promotion.
Glass is a tremendous project — one that has the potential to bring the world into a special
and unique focus. Perfecting its features in this developmental period, based on the
feedback received from its limited release gives it a direction that only can end in success.

29. T e a m G l a s s | 29
References:
Barr, Allistar. "Google Isn’t Giving Up on Glass, Eric Schmidt Says." TheWall Street Journal.
Dow Jones, 23 Mar. 2015. Web. 17 Apr. 2015.
<http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/03/23/google-isnt-giving-up-on-glass-schmidt-
says/?KEYWORDS=Google>.
Danova, Tony.BI INTELLIGENCEFORECAST:GoogleGlass WillBecomeA MainstreamProduct
AndSell MillionsBy2016. 31 December 2013. Document. 12 April 2015.
Gannes, Liz. GoogleGlassCouldBe$3-Billion-a-YearBusiness,Says Analyst.4September
2013. Document. 12 April 2015.
"Google Glass and Privacy." ElectronicPrivacy InformationCenter.EPIC,17 Apr. 2015. Web.
17 Apr. 2015. <https://epic.org/privacy/google/glass/>.
Pogue, David. "Why Google Glass Is Creepy." Scientific American.Scientific American, 14
May 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2015. <http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-google-
glass-is-creepy/?page=1>.
"Why Google Glass Costs $1,500 Now and Will Likely Be around $299 Later (Updated)."
Gigaom. N.p., 08 Aug. 2013. Web. 23 Apr. 2015.
"Google Glass Release Date News: $600 Price Tag Is Too Much For Consumers According To
UK Poll."IDigitalTimes.com. N.p., 09 Jan. 2014. Web. 23 Apr. 2015.
"Google to Sell Heads-Up Display Glasses by Year's End." Bits Google to Sell HeadsUp
Display Glasses by Years End Comments. N.p., 21 Feb. 2012. Web. 23 Apr. 2015.
"A Look at All the Google Glass Competitors in Development." Digital Trends. N.p., 21 Aug.
2013. Web. 23 Apr. 2015.
"Google Glass Competitors: What Are They and How Do They Compare?" TechRadar. N.p.,
n.d. Web. 23 Apr. 2015.
Levy,Karyne. "Hands On With Meta's Amazing 3-D Glasses, WhichAre Poised To Take The
World By Storm." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc,14 June 2014. Web. 23 Apr. 2015.
Bilton, Nick. "Why Google Glass Broke." The New York Times. The New YorkTimes, 04 Feb.
2015. Web. 23 Apr. 2015.
Miller, Claire Cain. "Google Searches for Style." The New York Times. The New YorkTimes,
20 Feb. 2013. Web.23 Apr. 2015.
Eadicicco,Lisa. "Sony Just Solved The Biggest Problem With Google Glass." Business Insider.
Business Insider, Inc,06 Jan. 2015. Web. 23 Apr. 2015.
"A Look at All the Google Glass Competitors in Development." Digital Trends. N.p., 21 Aug.
2013. Web. 23 Apr. 2015.