×
Mercor’s Brendan Foody calls out Sequoia over ‘dual-pricing’ valuation tricks | TechCrunch In recent days, founders and founders-turned-investors took to X to share horror stories about being mistreated by VCs. Their complaints ranged from VCs falling asleep during pitch meetings to investors suggesting a founder fire a co-founder. Brendan Foody, co-founder of the AI talent platform Mercor, which was last valued at billion, went so far as to call out Sequoia, arguably one of the most elite VC firms in the world. “The “sequoia scam” is worse than a single horror story,” Foody wrote on X. “in the last 6 [months] ive seen a half dozen rounds where sequoia invests in 2 tranches. everyone pretends they only did the higher valuation. founders misrepresent this to their employees & then shop it to angels too.” TechCrunch has previously reported on VCs investing in the same round at different valuations. Under this mechanism, the lead VC firm invests a significant chunk of its capital at a lower, preferential valuation, while putting a much smaller portion of capital in at a drastically higher price. The massive “headline” valuation that gets announced manufactures the perception of a dominant market winner, masking the fact that the lead investor’s actual average entry price was significantly lower. The disparity can be stark. For example, when the AI-driven IT helpdesk startup Serval announced a million Series B at a billion valuation, the announcement didn’t tell the whole story. According to The Wall Street Journal, Sequoia’s actual lowest entry point valued the company at just 0 million — less than half the headline figure. The gap between those two numbers is the gap between perception and reality that Foody is pointing at. Serval isn’t alone. At Aaru, a startup that uses AI to simulate user behavior for market research, lead investor Redpoint backed the company at a 0 million valuation despite an announced billion headline price. Sequoia’s Shaun Maguire pushed back on Foody’s characterization directly. “TBH I have seen some of this behavior but I think it’s unfair to call it the ‘Sequoia scam,’” Maguire wrote in response to Foody on X. “This has happened approximately five times during my seven years at Sequoia. What happens is other investors are willing to pay a high price for a hot company — usually AI — at multiples above what we’re willing to pay. So we try to decouple the company-building relationship with our partner from the capital, and this leads to two tranches at different valuations in close succession. “I’m not aware of anything shady here,” Maguire continued, “but if you’ve seen it I’d love to know. VC is a repeated game, so it just doesn’t make sense for us to try to mislead people. And if anyone has, I’d love to know. And in general, congrats on the success of Mercor — it was a miss for us.” Maguire’s response frames the practice as a market reality rather than a deliberate maneuver — Sequoia, he suggests, is simply unwilling to pay what competitors will pay for the hottest deals, so it structures its participation differently. Whether that explanation fully holds up depends on a question Maguire doesn’t address: what founders are telling the people who don’t already know about the lower tranche. Although Sequoia appears to use this pricing mechanism most frequently, Foody acknowledged it isn’t the only firm using this tactic. And while the dual-pricing structures certainly inflate a startup’s perceived worth and help attract top talent, calling the practice a “scam” may be going too far. That’s because employee stock options should theoretically be priced based on the blended value of all tranches — not the headline number — according to Jason Woo, partner in valuation and financial modeling at Armanino, whose firm provides the independent 409A appraisals startups use to set option prices. A 409A is supposed to reflect a company’s fair market value, giving employees a strike price that’s insulated from whatever valuation gets announced in a press release. There’s a catch: 409A valuations are widely understood to skew low. Because a lower strike price means a smaller tax bill for the company, there is a structural incentive to keep that number down. The appraisal that’s supposed to protect employees from an inflated headline valuation is also, by design, not trying particularly hard to reach the top of the range. The angel question is more complicated. Unlike employees, angels are writing checks, not receiving options. There is no independent appraiser standing between an angel investor and whatever number a founder chooses to share. The dual-pricing structure is just one of way VCs and founders game the perception of success in a hyper-competitive market. Another, more pervasive tactic involves manipulating or outright overstating annual recurring revenue (ARR). The VC Niko Bonatsos, a longtime veteran of General Catalyst who more recently founded Verdict Capital, addressed this issue during one of TechCrunch’s events in Athens last month. “We [at Verdict] mostly invest before metrics, before product, before the company [has fully taken shape] but I do have a past portfolio, and sometimes the conversations are telling. I’ll get a call or an email with a very high ARR number. I’ll think: I didn’t remember that company doing so well. So I reach out to the founder: ‘What happened? Why are the numbers so strong?’ And the answer is: ‘Oh yeah, it’s 365 times the revenue we made yesterday because one of our campaigns hit.’ So yeah, some of these terms have lost meaning.” Foody declined to comment further. Sequoia didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. — With additional reporting from Connie Loizos When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#Mercors #Brendan #Foody #calls #Sequoia #dualpricing #valuation #tricks #TechCrunchMercor,Sequoia Partners,Valuations

Mercor’s Brendan Foody calls out Sequoia over ‘dual-pricing’ valuation tricks | TechCrunch

In recent days, founders and founders-turned-investors took to X to share horror stories about being mistreated by VCs. Their complaints ranged from VCs falling asleep during pitch meetings to investors suggesting a founder fire a co-founder.

Brendan Foody, co-founder of the AI talent platform Mercor, which was last valued at $10 billion, went so far as to call out Sequoia, arguably one of the most elite VC firms in the world.

“The “sequoia scam” is worse than a single horror story,” Foody wrote on X. “in the last 6 [months] ive seen a half dozen rounds where sequoia invests in 2 tranches. everyone pretends they only did the higher valuation. founders misrepresent this to their employees & then shop it to angels too.”

TechCrunch has previously reported on VCs investing in the same round at different valuations. Under this mechanism, the lead VC firm invests a significant chunk of its capital at a lower, preferential valuation, while putting a much smaller portion of capital in at a drastically higher price. The massive “headline” valuation that gets announced manufactures the perception of a dominant market winner, masking the fact that the lead investor’s actual average entry price was significantly lower.

The disparity can be stark. For example, when the AI-driven IT helpdesk startup Serval announced a $75 million Series B at a $1 billion valuation, the announcement didn’t tell the whole story. According to The Wall Street Journal, Sequoia’s actual lowest entry point valued the company at just $400 million — less than half the headline figure. The gap between those two numbers is the gap between perception and reality that Foody is pointing at.

Serval isn’t alone. At Aaru, a startup that uses AI to simulate user behavior for market research, lead investor Redpoint backed the company at a $450 million valuation despite an announced $1 billion headline price.

Sequoia’s Shaun Maguire pushed back on Foody’s characterization directly. “TBH I have seen some of this behavior but I think it’s unfair to call it the ‘Sequoia scam,’” Maguire wrote in response to Foody on X. “This has happened approximately five times during my seven years at Sequoia. What happens is other investors are willing to pay a high price for a hot company — usually AI — at multiples above what we’re willing to pay. So we try to decouple the company-building relationship with our partner from the capital, and this leads to two tranches at different valuations in close succession.

“I’m not aware of anything shady here,” Maguire continued, “but if you’ve seen it I’d love to know. VC is a repeated game, so it just doesn’t make sense for us to try to mislead people. And if anyone has, I’d love to know. And in general, congrats on the success of Mercor — it was a miss for us.”

Maguire’s response frames the practice as a market reality rather than a deliberate maneuver — Sequoia, he suggests, is simply unwilling to pay what competitors will pay for the hottest deals, so it structures its participation differently. Whether that explanation fully holds up depends on a question Maguire doesn’t address: what founders are telling the people who don’t already know about the lower tranche.

Although Sequoia appears to use this pricing mechanism most frequently, Foody acknowledged it isn’t the only firm using this tactic. And while the dual-pricing structures certainly inflate a startup’s perceived worth and help attract top talent, calling the practice a “scam” may be going too far.

That’s because employee stock options should theoretically be priced based on the blended value of all tranches — not the headline number — according to Jason Woo, partner in valuation and financial modeling at Armanino, whose firm provides the independent 409A appraisals startups use to set option prices. A 409A is supposed to reflect a company’s fair market value, giving employees a strike price that’s insulated from whatever valuation gets announced in a press release.

There’s a catch: 409A valuations are widely understood to skew low. Because a lower strike price means a smaller tax bill for the company, there is a structural incentive to keep that number down. The appraisal that’s supposed to protect employees from an inflated headline valuation is also, by design, not trying particularly hard to reach the top of the range.

The angel question is more complicated. Unlike employees, angels are writing checks, not receiving options. There is no independent appraiser standing between an angel investor and whatever number a founder chooses to share.

The dual-pricing structure is just one of way VCs and founders game the perception of success in a hyper-competitive market. Another, more pervasive tactic involves manipulating or outright overstating annual recurring revenue (ARR).

The VC Niko Bonatsos, a longtime veteran of General Catalyst who more recently founded Verdict Capital, addressed this issue during one of TechCrunch’s events in Athens last month. “We [at Verdict] mostly invest before metrics, before product, before the company [has fully taken shape] but I do have a past portfolio, and sometimes the conversations are telling. I’ll get a call or an email with a very high ARR number. I’ll think: I didn’t remember that company doing so well. So I reach out to the founder: ‘What happened? Why are the numbers so strong?’ And the answer is: ‘Oh yeah, it’s 365 times the revenue we made yesterday because one of our campaigns hit.’ So yeah, some of these terms have lost meaning.”

Foody declined to comment further. Sequoia didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

— With additional reporting from Connie Loizos

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#Mercors #Brendan #Foody #calls #Sequoia #dualpricing #valuation #tricks #TechCrunchMercor,Sequoia Partners,Valuations

Tech-news , ,

In recent days, founders and founders-turned-investors took to X to share horror stories about being mistreated by VCs. Their complaints ranged from VCs falling asleep during pitch meetings to investors suggesting a founder fire a co-founder.

Brendan Foody, co-founder of the AI talent platform Mercor, which was last valued at $10 billion, went so far as to call out Sequoia, arguably one of the most elite VC firms in the world.

“The “sequoia scam” is worse than a single horror story,” Foody wrote on X. “in the last 6 [months] ive seen a half dozen rounds where sequoia invests in 2 tranches. everyone pretends they only did the higher valuation. founders misrepresent this to their employees & then shop it to angels too.”

TechCrunch has previously reported on VCs investing in the same round at different valuations. Under this mechanism, the lead VC firm invests a significant chunk of its capital at a lower, preferential valuation, while putting a much smaller portion of capital in at a drastically higher price. The massive “headline” valuation that gets announced manufactures the perception of a dominant market winner, masking the fact that the lead investor’s actual average entry price was significantly lower.

The disparity can be stark. For example, when the AI-driven IT helpdesk startup Serval announced a $75 million Series B at a $1 billion valuation, the announcement didn’t tell the whole story. According to The Wall Street Journal, Sequoia’s actual lowest entry point valued the company at just $400 million — less than half the headline figure. The gap between those two numbers is the gap between perception and reality that Foody is pointing at.

Serval isn’t alone. At Aaru, a startup that uses AI to simulate user behavior for market research, lead investor Redpoint backed the company at a $450 million valuation despite an announced $1 billion headline price.

Sequoia’s Shaun Maguire pushed back on Foody’s characterization directly. “TBH I have seen some of this behavior but I think it’s unfair to call it the ‘Sequoia scam,’” Maguire wrote in response to Foody on X. “This has happened approximately five times during my seven years at Sequoia. What happens is other investors are willing to pay a high price for a hot company — usually AI — at multiples above what we’re willing to pay. So we try to decouple the company-building relationship with our partner from the capital, and this leads to two tranches at different valuations in close succession.

“I’m not aware of anything shady here,” Maguire continued, “but if you’ve seen it I’d love to know. VC is a repeated game, so it just doesn’t make sense for us to try to mislead people. And if anyone has, I’d love to know. And in general, congrats on the success of Mercor — it was a miss for us.”

Maguire’s response frames the practice as a market reality rather than a deliberate maneuver — Sequoia, he suggests, is simply unwilling to pay what competitors will pay for the hottest deals, so it structures its participation differently. Whether that explanation fully holds up depends on a question Maguire doesn’t address: what founders are telling the people who don’t already know about the lower tranche.

Although Sequoia appears to use this pricing mechanism most frequently, Foody acknowledged it isn’t the only firm using this tactic. And while the dual-pricing structures certainly inflate a startup’s perceived worth and help attract top talent, calling the practice a “scam” may be going too far.

That’s because employee stock options should theoretically be priced based on the blended value of all tranches — not the headline number — according to Jason Woo, partner in valuation and financial modeling at Armanino, whose firm provides the independent 409A appraisals startups use to set option prices. A 409A is supposed to reflect a company’s fair market value, giving employees a strike price that’s insulated from whatever valuation gets announced in a press release.

There’s a catch: 409A valuations are widely understood to skew low. Because a lower strike price means a smaller tax bill for the company, there is a structural incentive to keep that number down. The appraisal that’s supposed to protect employees from an inflated headline valuation is also, by design, not trying particularly hard to reach the top of the range.

The angel question is more complicated. Unlike employees, angels are writing checks, not receiving options. There is no independent appraiser standing between an angel investor and whatever number a founder chooses to share.

The dual-pricing structure is just one of way VCs and founders game the perception of success in a hyper-competitive market. Another, more pervasive tactic involves manipulating or outright overstating annual recurring revenue (ARR).

The VC Niko Bonatsos, a longtime veteran of General Catalyst who more recently founded Verdict Capital, addressed this issue during one of TechCrunch’s events in Athens last month. “We [at Verdict] mostly invest before metrics, before product, before the company [has fully taken shape] but I do have a past portfolio, and sometimes the conversations are telling. I’ll get a call or an email with a very high ARR number. I’ll think: I didn’t remember that company doing so well. So I reach out to the founder: ‘What happened? Why are the numbers so strong?’ And the answer is: ‘Oh yeah, it’s 365 times the revenue we made yesterday because one of our campaigns hit.’ So yeah, some of these terms have lost meaning.”

Foody declined to comment further. Sequoia didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

— With additional reporting from Connie Loizos

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Source link
#Mercors #Brendan #Foody #calls #Sequoia #dualpricing #valuation #tricks #TechCrunch

Tag

Related Posts

AI-related job loss fears grow each time another company announces a round of layoffs. Through May of 2026, companies announced that close to 90,000 job cuts were tied to AI, and, by some accounts, up to 15% of U.S. jobs are projected to be eliminated by AI over the next five years. Promises from the tech industry that AI will also create new jobs does little to ease fears, especially for the generation wondering if anyone will be hiring when they graduate. 

A recent report from Ramp and Revelio Labs, which track enterprise AI spend and workforce records from nearly 22,000 companies, respectively, complicates that gloomy narrative. 

The report found that companies spending heavily on AI are growing headcount faster, even in the entry-level roles that many fear are doomed. According to the report, “high-intensity adopters” — firms that spend on average $30 per employee per month on AI in the first three months — saw headcount increase 10.2%.

Headcount also rose across functions, including engineering, sales, administration, customer service, finance, marketing, and scientist roles. The strongest job growth among high-intensity adopters was in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms. 

Despite these positive signals, the data isn’t as rosy as it seems. It skews heavily towards tech-forward, knowledge-work firms — ones that might have VC-backing and are growing fast anyway, making it difficult to say whether AI is contributing to the hiring or just showing up at companies that are expanding anyway.

“This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs,” the paper’s authors admit, “but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses.”

It also counters claims that AI is killing all junior jobs. Recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Gen Z and entry level workers taking the brunt of the burden. But in tech-forward firms, the report finds that entry-level headcount actually rose by 12%.

So what can we take away from this? Perhaps that AI isn’t always a tool for labor substitution, but that it can be a tool for firm-expansion instead. 

“For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development,” the report reads. “Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team.”

But companies that buy subscriptions and run pilots, yet did not go on to make sustained investments, don’t tend to see any gains in headcount, per the report. 

That sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms that have the resources — like capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth — to turn AI adoption into actual business gains and those that are stuck experimenting with subscriptions. In other words, this report suggests that firms that already have the resources are the ones who will see the largest gains. 

The paper’s authors speculate such a divide may continue to grow, saying: “Firms without those channels may fall behind.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#jobs #debate #messier #TechCrunchRamp,ai job loss,revelio labs">The AI jobs debate just got messier | TechCrunch AI-related job loss fears grow each time another company announces a round of layoffs. Through May of 2026, companies announced that close to 90,000 job cuts were tied to AI, and, by some accounts, up to 15% of U.S. jobs are projected to be eliminated by AI over the next five years. Promises from the tech industry that AI will also create new jobs does little to ease fears, especially for the generation wondering if anyone will be hiring when they graduate.  A recent report from Ramp and Revelio Labs, which track enterprise AI spend and workforce records from nearly 22,000 companies, respectively, complicates that gloomy narrative.  The report found that companies spending heavily on AI are growing headcount faster, even in the entry-level roles that many fear are doomed. According to the report, “high-intensity adopters” — firms that spend on average per employee per month on AI in the first three months — saw headcount increase 10.2%. Headcount also rose across functions, including engineering, sales, administration, customer service, finance, marketing, and scientist roles. The strongest job growth among high-intensity adopters was in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms.  Despite these positive signals, the data isn’t as rosy as it seems. It skews heavily towards tech-forward, knowledge-work firms — ones that might have VC-backing and are growing fast anyway, making it difficult to say whether AI is contributing to the hiring or just showing up at companies that are expanding anyway. “This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs,” the paper’s authors admit, “but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses.” It also counters claims that AI is killing all junior jobs. Recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Gen Z and entry level workers taking the brunt of the burden. But in tech-forward firms, the report finds that entry-level headcount actually rose by 12%. So what can we take away from this? Perhaps that AI isn’t always a tool for labor substitution, but that it can be a tool for firm-expansion instead.  “For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development,” the report reads. “Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team.” But companies that buy subscriptions and run pilots, yet did not go on to make sustained investments, don’t tend to see any gains in headcount, per the report.  That sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms that have the resources — like capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth — to turn AI adoption into actual business gains and those that are stuck experimenting with subscriptions. In other words, this report suggests that firms that already have the resources are the ones who will see the largest gains.  The paper’s authors speculate such a divide may continue to grow, saying: “Firms without those channels may fall behind.” When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.#jobs #debate #messier #TechCrunchRamp,ai job loss,revelio labs

announces a round of layoffs. Through May of 2026, companies announced that close to 90,000 job cuts were tied to AI, and, by some accounts, up to 15% of U.S. jobs are projected to be eliminated by AI over the next five years. Promises from the tech industry that AI will also create new jobs does little to ease fears, especially for the generation wondering if anyone will be hiring when they graduate. 

A recent report from Ramp and Revelio Labs, which track enterprise AI spend and workforce records from nearly 22,000 companies, respectively, complicates that gloomy narrative. 

The report found that companies spending heavily on AI are growing headcount faster, even in the entry-level roles that many fear are doomed. According to the report, “high-intensity adopters” — firms that spend on average $30 per employee per month on AI in the first three months — saw headcount increase 10.2%.

Headcount also rose across functions, including engineering, sales, administration, customer service, finance, marketing, and scientist roles. The strongest job growth among high-intensity adopters was in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms. 

Despite these positive signals, the data isn’t as rosy as it seems. It skews heavily towards tech-forward, knowledge-work firms — ones that might have VC-backing and are growing fast anyway, making it difficult to say whether AI is contributing to the hiring or just showing up at companies that are expanding anyway.

“This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs,” the paper’s authors admit, “but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses.”

It also counters claims that AI is killing all junior jobs. Recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Gen Z and entry level workers taking the brunt of the burden. But in tech-forward firms, the report finds that entry-level headcount actually rose by 12%.

So what can we take away from this? Perhaps that AI isn’t always a tool for labor substitution, but that it can be a tool for firm-expansion instead. 

“For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development,” the report reads. “Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team.”

But companies that buy subscriptions and run pilots, yet did not go on to make sustained investments, don’t tend to see any gains in headcount, per the report. 

That sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms that have the resources — like capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth — to turn AI adoption into actual business gains and those that are stuck experimenting with subscriptions. In other words, this report suggests that firms that already have the resources are the ones who will see the largest gains. 

The paper’s authors speculate such a divide may continue to grow, saying: “Firms without those channels may fall behind.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#jobs #debate #messier #TechCrunchRamp,ai job loss,revelio labs">The AI jobs debate just got messier | TechCrunch

AI-related job loss fears grow each time another company announces a round of layoffs. Through May of 2026, companies announced that close to 90,000 job cuts were tied to AI, and, by some accounts, up to 15% of U.S. jobs are projected to be eliminated by AI over the next five years. Promises from the tech industry that AI will also create new jobs does little to ease fears, especially for the generation wondering if anyone will be hiring when they graduate. 

A recent report from Ramp and Revelio Labs, which track enterprise AI spend and workforce records from nearly 22,000 companies, respectively, complicates that gloomy narrative. 

The report found that companies spending heavily on AI are growing headcount faster, even in the entry-level roles that many fear are doomed. According to the report, “high-intensity adopters” — firms that spend on average $30 per employee per month on AI in the first three months — saw headcount increase 10.2%.

Headcount also rose across functions, including engineering, sales, administration, customer service, finance, marketing, and scientist roles. The strongest job growth among high-intensity adopters was in the information sector, which includes software, internet, media, and tech-adjacent firms. 

Despite these positive signals, the data isn’t as rosy as it seems. It skews heavily towards tech-forward, knowledge-work firms — ones that might have VC-backing and are growing fast anyway, making it difficult to say whether AI is contributing to the hiring or just showing up at companies that are expanding anyway.

“This paper does not show that AI universally creates jobs,” the paper’s authors admit, “but it does counter claims that AI will lead to broad job losses.”

It also counters claims that AI is killing all junior jobs. Recent research from Goldman Sachs found that AI has already erased about 16,000 net jobs per month over the past year, with Gen Z and entry level workers taking the brunt of the burden. But in tech-forward firms, the report finds that entry-level headcount actually rose by 12%.

So what can we take away from this? Perhaps that AI isn’t always a tool for labor substitution, but that it can be a tool for firm-expansion instead. 

“For software and technology firms, AI can make core output cheaper or faster to produce: writing code, debugging, building internal tools, producing technical documentation, and supporting product development,” the report reads. “Lower production costs in these workflows can raise the return to expanding the whole firm, not just the engineering team.”

But companies that buy subscriptions and run pilots, yet did not go on to make sustained investments, don’t tend to see any gains in headcount, per the report. 

That sets up the potential for a widening gap between firms that have the resources — like capital, technical staff, founder networks, and management bandwidth — to turn AI adoption into actual business gains and those that are stuck experimenting with subscriptions. In other words, this report suggests that firms that already have the resources are the ones who will see the largest gains. 

The paper’s authors speculate such a divide may continue to grow, saying: “Firms without those channels may fall behind.”

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

#jobs #debate #messier #TechCrunchRamp,ai job loss,revelio labs
MacBook and iPad models in India. The updated prices show an increase of around 20% to 42% across many devices. However, the company has not increased iPhone prices at this stage. Apple says the rapid rise in costs of memory and storage components, driven by growing AI demand, led to the decision.

Why Did Apple Increase MacBook and iPad Prices?

Why Has Apple Increased MacBook and iPad Prices by Up to ₹70,000? Apple has announced a major price hike for several MacBook and iPad models in India. The updated prices show an increase of around 20% to 42% across many devices. However, the company has not increased iPhone prices at this stage. Apple says the rapid rise in costs of memory and storage components, driven by growing AI demand, led to the decision. Why Did Apple Increase MacBook and iPad Prices? This price increase has been justified by Apple due to rising costs of producing its products. Specifically, the prices of memory and storage have risen due to strong demand from AI data centers. These components are used in nearly every Mac and iPad. According to Apple, the cost of memory chips and RAM has increased rapidly over the past several months. The company said it absorbed these higher expenses before deciding to revise product prices. Apple believes the current rise in component costs is unlike anything it has seen before. Although iPhone prices remain unchanged today, industry analysts expect Apple to review them if production costs continue to rise. Which Apple Products Have Become More Expensive? The price hike isn’t limited to a handful of devices. Almost all of Apple’s hardware lineup in India has become more expensive, including iPads, Macs, MacBooks, HomePods, and even the Apple TV lineup. The only major exception, for now, is the iPhone, whose prices remain unchanged. Among the biggest increases, the base iPad now starts at ₹49,990 instead of ₹34,990, while the iPad Air has jumped from ₹64,900 to ₹89,900. The flagship iPad Pro has also seen a significant hike, with prices now starting at ₹1,39,900. Apple’s Mac lineup has also become noticeably more expensive. The Mac mini M4 now starts at ₹94,900 (up from ₹59,900), while the iMac M4 has climbed to ₹1,74,900 from ₹1,34,900. The Mac Studio has also received a substantial increase, with the M4 Max model now costing ₹2,79,900 and the M3 Ultra variant reaching ₹5,99,900. The same trend continues across Apple’s notebook lineup. The MacBook Air M5 now starts at ₹1,49,900 instead of ₹1,19,900, while the base 14-inch MacBook Pro M5 has jumped from ₹1,69,900 to ₹2,39,900. The top-end MacBook Pro M5 Max now costs ₹4,99,900, up from ₹3,99,900. Even Apple’s home products haven’t escaped the price revision. The HomePod now costs ₹44,900, the HomePod mini is priced at ₹15,900, and the Apple TV 4K lineup has received one of the steepest hikes, with the 64GB model increasing from ₹14,900 to ₹25,900. #Apple #Increased #MacBook #iPad #Pricesapple

This price increase has been justified by Apple due to rising costs of producing its products. Specifically, the prices of memory and storage have risen due to strong demand from AI data centers. These components are used in nearly every Mac and iPad.

According to Apple, the cost of memory chips and RAM has increased rapidly over the past several months. The company said it absorbed these higher expenses before deciding to revise product prices. Apple believes the current rise in component costs is unlike anything it has seen before. Although iPhone prices remain unchanged today, industry analysts expect Apple to review them if production costs continue to rise.

Which Apple Products Have Become More Expensive?

iPad air different colors

The price hike isn’t limited to a handful of devices. Almost all of Apple’s hardware lineup in India has become more expensive, including iPads, Macs, MacBooks, HomePods, and even the Apple TV lineup. The only major exception, for now, is the iPhone, whose prices remain unchanged. Among the biggest increases, the base iPad now starts at ₹49,990 instead of ₹34,990, while the iPad Air has jumped from ₹64,900 to ₹89,900. The flagship iPad Pro has also seen a significant hike, with prices now starting at ₹1,39,900.

Apple’s Mac lineup has also become noticeably more expensive. The Mac mini M4 now starts at ₹94,900 (up from ₹59,900), while the iMac M4 has climbed to ₹1,74,900 from ₹1,34,900. The Mac Studio has also received a substantial increase, with the M4 Max model now costing ₹2,79,900 and the M3 Ultra variant reaching ₹5,99,900. The same trend continues across Apple’s notebook lineup. The MacBook Air M5 now starts at ₹1,49,900 instead of ₹1,19,900, while the base 14-inch MacBook Pro M5 has jumped from ₹1,69,900 to ₹2,39,900. The top-end MacBook Pro M5 Max now costs ₹4,99,900, up from ₹3,99,900.

Even Apple’s home products haven’t escaped the price revision. The HomePod now costs ₹44,900, the HomePod mini is priced at ₹15,900, and the Apple TV 4K lineup has received one of the steepest hikes, with the 64GB model increasing from ₹14,900 to ₹25,900.

#Apple #Increased #MacBook #iPad #Pricesapple">Why Has Apple Increased MacBook and iPad Prices by Up to ₹70,000? Apple has announced a major price hike for several MacBook and iPad models in India. The updated prices show an increase of around 20% to 42% across many devices. However, the company has not increased iPhone prices at this stage. Apple says the rapid rise in costs of memory and storage components, driven by growing AI demand, led to the decision. Why Did Apple Increase MacBook and iPad Prices? This price increase has been justified by Apple due to rising costs of producing its products. Specifically, the prices of memory and storage have risen due to strong demand from AI data centers. These components are used in nearly every Mac and iPad. According to Apple, the cost of memory chips and RAM has increased rapidly over the past several months. The company said it absorbed these higher expenses before deciding to revise product prices. Apple believes the current rise in component costs is unlike anything it has seen before. Although iPhone prices remain unchanged today, industry analysts expect Apple to review them if production costs continue to rise. Which Apple Products Have Become More Expensive? The price hike isn’t limited to a handful of devices. Almost all of Apple’s hardware lineup in India has become more expensive, including iPads, Macs, MacBooks, HomePods, and even the Apple TV lineup. The only major exception, for now, is the iPhone, whose prices remain unchanged. Among the biggest increases, the base iPad now starts at ₹49,990 instead of ₹34,990, while the iPad Air has jumped from ₹64,900 to ₹89,900. The flagship iPad Pro has also seen a significant hike, with prices now starting at ₹1,39,900. Apple’s Mac lineup has also become noticeably more expensive. The Mac mini M4 now starts at ₹94,900 (up from ₹59,900), while the iMac M4 has climbed to ₹1,74,900 from ₹1,34,900. The Mac Studio has also received a substantial increase, with the M4 Max model now costing ₹2,79,900 and the M3 Ultra variant reaching ₹5,99,900. The same trend continues across Apple’s notebook lineup. The MacBook Air M5 now starts at ₹1,49,900 instead of ₹1,19,900, while the base 14-inch MacBook Pro M5 has jumped from ₹1,69,900 to ₹2,39,900. The top-end MacBook Pro M5 Max now costs ₹4,99,900, up from ₹3,99,900. Even Apple’s home products haven’t escaped the price revision. The HomePod now costs ₹44,900, the HomePod mini is priced at ₹15,900, and the Apple TV 4K lineup has received one of the steepest hikes, with the 64GB model increasing from ₹14,900 to ₹25,900. #Apple #Increased #MacBook #iPad #Pricesapple

and iPad models in India. The updated prices show an increase of around 20% to 42% across many devices. However, the company has not increased iPhone prices at this stage. Apple says the rapid rise in costs of memory and storage components, driven by growing AI demand, led to the decision.

Why Did Apple Increase MacBook and iPad Prices?

Why Has Apple Increased MacBook and iPad Prices by Up to ₹70,000? Apple has announced a major price hike for several MacBook and iPad models in India. The updated prices show an increase of around 20% to 42% across many devices. However, the company has not increased iPhone prices at this stage. Apple says the rapid rise in costs of memory and storage components, driven by growing AI demand, led to the decision. Why Did Apple Increase MacBook and iPad Prices? This price increase has been justified by Apple due to rising costs of producing its products. Specifically, the prices of memory and storage have risen due to strong demand from AI data centers. These components are used in nearly every Mac and iPad. According to Apple, the cost of memory chips and RAM has increased rapidly over the past several months. The company said it absorbed these higher expenses before deciding to revise product prices. Apple believes the current rise in component costs is unlike anything it has seen before. Although iPhone prices remain unchanged today, industry analysts expect Apple to review them if production costs continue to rise. Which Apple Products Have Become More Expensive? The price hike isn’t limited to a handful of devices. Almost all of Apple’s hardware lineup in India has become more expensive, including iPads, Macs, MacBooks, HomePods, and even the Apple TV lineup. The only major exception, for now, is the iPhone, whose prices remain unchanged. Among the biggest increases, the base iPad now starts at ₹49,990 instead of ₹34,990, while the iPad Air has jumped from ₹64,900 to ₹89,900. The flagship iPad Pro has also seen a significant hike, with prices now starting at ₹1,39,900. Apple’s Mac lineup has also become noticeably more expensive. The Mac mini M4 now starts at ₹94,900 (up from ₹59,900), while the iMac M4 has climbed to ₹1,74,900 from ₹1,34,900. The Mac Studio has also received a substantial increase, with the M4 Max model now costing ₹2,79,900 and the M3 Ultra variant reaching ₹5,99,900. The same trend continues across Apple’s notebook lineup. The MacBook Air M5 now starts at ₹1,49,900 instead of ₹1,19,900, while the base 14-inch MacBook Pro M5 has jumped from ₹1,69,900 to ₹2,39,900. The top-end MacBook Pro M5 Max now costs ₹4,99,900, up from ₹3,99,900. Even Apple’s home products haven’t escaped the price revision. The HomePod now costs ₹44,900, the HomePod mini is priced at ₹15,900, and the Apple TV 4K lineup has received one of the steepest hikes, with the 64GB model increasing from ₹14,900 to ₹25,900. #Apple #Increased #MacBook #iPad #Pricesapple

This price increase has been justified by Apple due to rising costs of producing its products. Specifically, the prices of memory and storage have risen due to strong demand from AI data centers. These components are used in nearly every Mac and iPad.

According to Apple, the cost of memory chips and RAM has increased rapidly over the past several months. The company said it absorbed these higher expenses before deciding to revise product prices. Apple believes the current rise in component costs is unlike anything it has seen before. Although iPhone prices remain unchanged today, industry analysts expect Apple to review them if production costs continue to rise.

Which Apple Products Have Become More Expensive?

iPad air different colors

The price hike isn’t limited to a handful of devices. Almost all of Apple’s hardware lineup in India has become more expensive, including iPads, Macs, MacBooks, HomePods, and even the Apple TV lineup. The only major exception, for now, is the iPhone, whose prices remain unchanged. Among the biggest increases, the base iPad now starts at ₹49,990 instead of ₹34,990, while the iPad Air has jumped from ₹64,900 to ₹89,900. The flagship iPad Pro has also seen a significant hike, with prices now starting at ₹1,39,900.

Apple’s Mac lineup has also become noticeably more expensive. The Mac mini M4 now starts at ₹94,900 (up from ₹59,900), while the iMac M4 has climbed to ₹1,74,900 from ₹1,34,900. The Mac Studio has also received a substantial increase, with the M4 Max model now costing ₹2,79,900 and the M3 Ultra variant reaching ₹5,99,900. The same trend continues across Apple’s notebook lineup. The MacBook Air M5 now starts at ₹1,49,900 instead of ₹1,19,900, while the base 14-inch MacBook Pro M5 has jumped from ₹1,69,900 to ₹2,39,900. The top-end MacBook Pro M5 Max now costs ₹4,99,900, up from ₹3,99,900.

Even Apple’s home products haven’t escaped the price revision. The HomePod now costs ₹44,900, the HomePod mini is priced at ₹15,900, and the Apple TV 4K lineup has received one of the steepest hikes, with the 64GB model increasing from ₹14,900 to ₹25,900.

#Apple #Increased #MacBook #iPad #Pricesapple">Why Has Apple Increased MacBook and iPad Prices by Up to ₹70,000?

Apple has announced a major price hike for several MacBook and iPad models in India. The updated prices show an increase of around 20% to 42% across many devices. However, the company has not increased iPhone prices at this stage. Apple says the rapid rise in costs of memory and storage components, driven by growing AI demand, led to the decision.

Why Did Apple Increase MacBook and iPad Prices?

Why Has Apple Increased MacBook and iPad Prices by Up to ₹70,000? Apple has announced a major price hike for several MacBook and iPad models in India. The updated prices show an increase of around 20% to 42% across many devices. However, the company has not increased iPhone prices at this stage. Apple says the rapid rise in costs of memory and storage components, driven by growing AI demand, led to the decision. Why Did Apple Increase MacBook and iPad Prices? This price increase has been justified by Apple due to rising costs of producing its products. Specifically, the prices of memory and storage have risen due to strong demand from AI data centers. These components are used in nearly every Mac and iPad. According to Apple, the cost of memory chips and RAM has increased rapidly over the past several months. The company said it absorbed these higher expenses before deciding to revise product prices. Apple believes the current rise in component costs is unlike anything it has seen before. Although iPhone prices remain unchanged today, industry analysts expect Apple to review them if production costs continue to rise. Which Apple Products Have Become More Expensive? The price hike isn’t limited to a handful of devices. Almost all of Apple’s hardware lineup in India has become more expensive, including iPads, Macs, MacBooks, HomePods, and even the Apple TV lineup. The only major exception, for now, is the iPhone, whose prices remain unchanged. Among the biggest increases, the base iPad now starts at ₹49,990 instead of ₹34,990, while the iPad Air has jumped from ₹64,900 to ₹89,900. The flagship iPad Pro has also seen a significant hike, with prices now starting at ₹1,39,900. Apple’s Mac lineup has also become noticeably more expensive. The Mac mini M4 now starts at ₹94,900 (up from ₹59,900), while the iMac M4 has climbed to ₹1,74,900 from ₹1,34,900. The Mac Studio has also received a substantial increase, with the M4 Max model now costing ₹2,79,900 and the M3 Ultra variant reaching ₹5,99,900. The same trend continues across Apple’s notebook lineup. The MacBook Air M5 now starts at ₹1,49,900 instead of ₹1,19,900, while the base 14-inch MacBook Pro M5 has jumped from ₹1,69,900 to ₹2,39,900. The top-end MacBook Pro M5 Max now costs ₹4,99,900, up from ₹3,99,900. Even Apple’s home products haven’t escaped the price revision. The HomePod now costs ₹44,900, the HomePod mini is priced at ₹15,900, and the Apple TV 4K lineup has received one of the steepest hikes, with the 64GB model increasing from ₹14,900 to ₹25,900. #Apple #Increased #MacBook #iPad #Pricesapple

This price increase has been justified by Apple due to rising costs of producing its products. Specifically, the prices of memory and storage have risen due to strong demand from AI data centers. These components are used in nearly every Mac and iPad.

According to Apple, the cost of memory chips and RAM has increased rapidly over the past several months. The company said it absorbed these higher expenses before deciding to revise product prices. Apple believes the current rise in component costs is unlike anything it has seen before. Although iPhone prices remain unchanged today, industry analysts expect Apple to review them if production costs continue to rise.

Which Apple Products Have Become More Expensive?

iPad air different colors

The price hike isn’t limited to a handful of devices. Almost all of Apple’s hardware lineup in India has become more expensive, including iPads, Macs, MacBooks, HomePods, and even the Apple TV lineup. The only major exception, for now, is the iPhone, whose prices remain unchanged. Among the biggest increases, the base iPad now starts at ₹49,990 instead of ₹34,990, while the iPad Air has jumped from ₹64,900 to ₹89,900. The flagship iPad Pro has also seen a significant hike, with prices now starting at ₹1,39,900.

Apple’s Mac lineup has also become noticeably more expensive. The Mac mini M4 now starts at ₹94,900 (up from ₹59,900), while the iMac M4 has climbed to ₹1,74,900 from ₹1,34,900. The Mac Studio has also received a substantial increase, with the M4 Max model now costing ₹2,79,900 and the M3 Ultra variant reaching ₹5,99,900. The same trend continues across Apple’s notebook lineup. The MacBook Air M5 now starts at ₹1,49,900 instead of ₹1,19,900, while the base 14-inch MacBook Pro M5 has jumped from ₹1,69,900 to ₹2,39,900. The top-end MacBook Pro M5 Max now costs ₹4,99,900, up from ₹3,99,900.

Even Apple’s home products haven’t escaped the price revision. The HomePod now costs ₹44,900, the HomePod mini is priced at ₹15,900, and the Apple TV 4K lineup has received one of the steepest hikes, with the 64GB model increasing from ₹14,900 to ₹25,900.

#Apple #Increased #MacBook #iPad #Pricesapple

Backrooms, the surprise hit of the summer, wants you back in the room. And by room, we mean theater. Its distributor, A24, is reportedly gearing up to release a new version of the film with 15 extra minutes of footage starting on July 3.

According to the AMC Theaters website, the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition “includes 15 minutes of new, theatrically exclusive post-credit bonus footage from [director] Kane Parsons.”

What exactly is in that footage, we don’t know, and surely A24 is hoping you go to the theater to find out. We would be very, very surprised, though, if it expands too greatly on the mythology of the world or its creepy, ambiguous ending. That’s certainly the hope, but with a sequel almost certainly on the way, we’d imagine most secrets will be held until then. And yet, what about Backrooms has been traditional so far? We’re just speculating. It could very well be a whole new ending with twists and turns about what exactly the backrooms are, where they came from, and what their purpose is.

The move comes as the summer season really heats up with the upcoming releases of Minions & Monsters, The Odyssey, and Spider-Man: Brand New Day over the next few weeks. Currently, Backrooms sits at about $185 million domestically but grossed only about $4 million this past weekend, good enough for sixth place.

Adding additional footage to get a few more repeat viewings is probably aimed at crossing the $200 million mark domestically, which would be an incredible feat. Not that grossing over $185 million in the U.S. and over $330 million worldwide isn’t already an incredible feat on its own.

Are you ready to head back to the theater to see more Backrooms? Is there anything that could be added that would be a disappointment? Let us know below. And to check if the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition is coming to your local theater, check its ticketing website.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Backrooms #Adding #Rooms #FootageBackrooms,Kane Parsons">‘Backrooms’ Wants You Back and Is Adding More Rooms (Footage) Backrooms, the surprise hit of the summer, wants you back in the room. And by room, we mean theater. Its distributor, A24, is reportedly gearing up to release a new version of the film with 15 extra minutes of footage starting on July 3. According to the AMC Theaters website, the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition “includes 15 minutes of new, theatrically exclusive post-credit bonus footage from [director] Kane Parsons.” What exactly is in that footage, we don’t know, and surely A24 is hoping you go to the theater to find out. We would be very, very surprised, though, if it expands too greatly on the mythology of the world or its creepy, ambiguous ending. That’s certainly the hope, but with a sequel almost certainly on the way, we’d imagine most secrets will be held until then. And yet, what about Backrooms has been traditional so far? We’re just speculating. It could very well be a whole new ending with twists and turns about what exactly the backrooms are, where they came from, and what their purpose is. The move comes as the summer season really heats up with the upcoming releases of Minions & Monsters, The Odyssey, and Spider-Man: Brand New Day over the next few weeks. Currently, Backrooms sits at about 5 million domestically but grossed only about million this past weekend, good enough for sixth place. Adding additional footage to get a few more repeat viewings is probably aimed at crossing the 0 million mark domestically, which would be an incredible feat. Not that grossing over 5 million in the U.S. and over 0 million worldwide isn’t already an incredible feat on its own. Are you ready to head back to the theater to see more Backrooms? Is there anything that could be added that would be a disappointment? Let us know below. And to check if the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition is coming to your local theater, check its ticketing website. Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who. #Backrooms #Adding #Rooms #FootageBackrooms,Kane Parsons

Backrooms, the surprise hit of the summer, wants you back in the room. And by room, we mean theater. Its distributor, A24, is reportedly gearing up to release a new version of the film with 15 extra minutes of footage starting on July 3.

According to the AMC Theaters website, the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition “includes 15 minutes of new, theatrically exclusive post-credit bonus footage from [director] Kane Parsons.”

What exactly is in that footage, we don’t know, and surely A24 is hoping you go to the theater to find out. We would be very, very surprised, though, if it expands too greatly on the mythology of the world or its creepy, ambiguous ending. That’s certainly the hope, but with a sequel almost certainly on the way, we’d imagine most secrets will be held until then. And yet, what about Backrooms has been traditional so far? We’re just speculating. It could very well be a whole new ending with twists and turns about what exactly the backrooms are, where they came from, and what their purpose is.

The move comes as the summer season really heats up with the upcoming releases of Minions & Monsters, The Odyssey, and Spider-Man: Brand New Day over the next few weeks. Currently, Backrooms sits at about $185 million domestically but grossed only about $4 million this past weekend, good enough for sixth place.

Adding additional footage to get a few more repeat viewings is probably aimed at crossing the $200 million mark domestically, which would be an incredible feat. Not that grossing over $185 million in the U.S. and over $330 million worldwide isn’t already an incredible feat on its own.

Are you ready to head back to the theater to see more Backrooms? Is there anything that could be added that would be a disappointment? Let us know below. And to check if the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition is coming to your local theater, check its ticketing website.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Backrooms #Adding #Rooms #FootageBackrooms,Kane Parsons">‘Backrooms’ Wants You Back and Is Adding More Rooms (Footage)‘Backrooms’ Wants You Back and Is Adding More Rooms (Footage) Backrooms, the surprise hit of the summer, wants you back in the room. And by room, we mean theater. Its distributor, A24, is reportedly gearing up to release a new version of the film with 15 extra minutes of footage starting on July 3. According to the AMC Theaters website, the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition “includes 15 minutes of new, theatrically exclusive post-credit bonus footage from [director] Kane Parsons.” What exactly is in that footage, we don’t know, and surely A24 is hoping you go to the theater to find out. We would be very, very surprised, though, if it expands too greatly on the mythology of the world or its creepy, ambiguous ending. That’s certainly the hope, but with a sequel almost certainly on the way, we’d imagine most secrets will be held until then. And yet, what about Backrooms has been traditional so far? We’re just speculating. It could very well be a whole new ending with twists and turns about what exactly the backrooms are, where they came from, and what their purpose is. The move comes as the summer season really heats up with the upcoming releases of Minions & Monsters, The Odyssey, and Spider-Man: Brand New Day over the next few weeks. Currently, Backrooms sits at about $185 million domestically but grossed only about $4 million this past weekend, good enough for sixth place. Adding additional footage to get a few more repeat viewings is probably aimed at crossing the $200 million mark domestically, which would be an incredible feat. Not that grossing over $185 million in the U.S. and over $330 million worldwide isn’t already an incredible feat on its own. Are you ready to head back to the theater to see more Backrooms? Is there anything that could be added that would be a disappointment? Let us know below. And to check if the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition is coming to your local theater, check its ticketing website. Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who. #Backrooms #Adding #Rooms #FootageBackrooms,Kane Parsons

Backrooms, the surprise hit of the summer, wants you back in the room. And by room, we mean theater. Its distributor, A24, is reportedly gearing up to release a new version of the film with 15 extra minutes of footage starting on July 3.

According to the AMC Theaters website, the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition “includes 15 minutes of new, theatrically exclusive post-credit bonus footage from [director] Kane Parsons.”

What exactly is in that footage, we don’t know, and surely A24 is hoping you go to the theater to find out. We would be very, very surprised, though, if it expands too greatly on the mythology of the world or its creepy, ambiguous ending. That’s certainly the hope, but with a sequel almost certainly on the way, we’d imagine most secrets will be held until then. And yet, what about Backrooms has been traditional so far? We’re just speculating. It could very well be a whole new ending with twists and turns about what exactly the backrooms are, where they came from, and what their purpose is.

The move comes as the summer season really heats up with the upcoming releases of Minions & Monsters, The Odyssey, and Spider-Man: Brand New Day over the next few weeks. Currently, Backrooms sits at about $185 million domestically but grossed only about $4 million this past weekend, good enough for sixth place.

Adding additional footage to get a few more repeat viewings is probably aimed at crossing the $200 million mark domestically, which would be an incredible feat. Not that grossing over $185 million in the U.S. and over $330 million worldwide isn’t already an incredible feat on its own.

Are you ready to head back to the theater to see more Backrooms? Is there anything that could be added that would be a disappointment? Let us know below. And to check if the Backrooms: Everything Must Go Edition is coming to your local theater, check its ticketing website.

Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

#Backrooms #Adding #Rooms #FootageBackrooms,Kane Parsons

Post Comment