Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

a.wholelottanothing.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 72 posts

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#51

Post by andrewfelix »

tylermenezes wrote: post #50

I'm helping out with a Kickstarter project ( http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/studentrnd/plasma-speake... ) which is already 2 months behind the delivery date, and I just wanted to offer a view from the other side. Shipping a product is hard. Our initial prototype used some components we had in our parts organizer, and a $100k variable DC power supply Boeing donated. It was pretty cool, so we put it online, and it…

Well said. I think offering a constructive and meaningful response to your potential customers goes a long way.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#52

Post by [deleted] »

nodata wrote: post #47
kennywinker wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally appreciate your perspective on this. But I think you were missing part of the point of kickstarter. These are projects, not products. You're making a donation, not buying something. For that donation you are often promised a reward, but you are not guaranteed one. There is a certain amount of risk associated with backing a project on kickstarter. Projects don't always turn out the way you hope. Budget issue…

> You're making a donation, not buying something. I'm not making a donation, I'm buying a product in advance that hasn't finished being developed.

[deleted]

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#53

Post by InclinedPlane »

underwater wrote: post #37
marquis wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've funded a few projects of friends. One never materialized but it was worth the shot and the others are in production. If you spread your investments out, some are bound to take off no? I'm in line to receive some great products that wouldn't see the light of day otherwise and I'm excited. You don't get this excited over many things you can buy. I must say though, reading the content of this Kickstarter they don't…

I don't quite understand what the "investors" are getting out of KickStarter. It doesn't seem like prouducts are that unique or cheap. The risk of a project failing or being delayed means I wouldn't buy anything I really needed from there. It seems like all the benefits are on the producers side. They can start a project with little risk, ask for more money when they mess up their budgetting and still finish up makin…

As an investor you help create something that didn't exist before. Maybe something cool or interesting or important that you think should exist. Maybe something you desire to own as well.

Sometimes the rewards are worth more than the investment, sometimes the personal value of contributing to something worthwhile is enough. People volunteer their time and donate their money to things beyond helping sick children and the poor.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#54

Post by prodigal_erik »

541564654 wrote: post #45

I just cannot help but notice how much the perception of what Kickstarter is has changed from its initial days. I learned about Kickstarter at the time the Diaspora project was there collecting money. It was clear that people are not "buying" but "investing". They were not "consumers", they were "investors". Diaspora wasn't a "product" on "pre-order" but a "project" which was "under development". How the intent and p…

Kickstarter's guidelines specifically say

> Offering financial incentives, such as ownership, financial returns (for example, a share of profits), or repayment (loans) is prohibited.

If they ever claimed pledges were "investments", that was dishonest and I think the SEC could actually prosecute them for it.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#56

Post by 541564654 »

prodigal_erik wrote: post #54
541564654 wrote: post #45

I just cannot help but notice how much the perception of what Kickstarter is has changed from its initial days. I learned about Kickstarter at the time the Diaspora project was there collecting money. It was clear that people are not "buying" but "investing". They were not "consumers", they were "investors". Diaspora wasn't a "product" on "pre-order" but a "project" which was "under development". How the intent and p…

Kickstarter's guidelines specifically say > Offering financial incentives, such as ownership, financial returns (for example, a share of profits), or repayment (loans) is prohibited. If they ever claimed pledges were "investments", that was dishonest and I think the SEC could actually prosecute them for it.

I think I made the wrong choice of words there. I am really truly sorry. I think donations is much more appropriate. I don't know, maybe someone will understand. I just wanted to say that kickstarter didn't imply any ownership in anyway. Ever.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#57

Post by ThomPete »

rdl wrote: post #44
nirvana wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using Fenix lights for years. We have several L1Ds among us. I love the multi-mode of them, flashing, including SOS, etc. Since these are rechargable we have enerloop batteries that we can recharge using the computers USB port. Hate the idea of trying to find unusual batteries in an obscure location. Since we travel internationally all the time and since some of us are female, some form of self defense is n…

I totally agree about lights for self defense -- they're the one thing I carry all the time, followed by an inoffensive folder, and then escalating from there. There is basically no situation other than being in a shower where I don't have at least one 120+ lumen tactical flashlight, and no firearm-defense situation where I don't have a mounted light and/or handheld light. I keep lights stashed by the bed, in my desk…

You guys should check out wiseled.com

http://www.wiseled.com/wiseled_products_tactical_flashlight....

I did some work for them years back, have a sweet forensic set at home.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#58

Post by jonnathanson »

kennywinker wrote: post #29
nirvana wrote: post #27

I got burned by a kickstarter project. Like others, I naively believed that they were at least an above board outfit. I also appreciated that Amazon was the payments service because I believe they are above board as well. I fell for the "Hexbright Flashlight" project: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/527051507/hexbright-an-o... His pitch was that the product was designed and that he just needed the funding to unde…

I totally appreciate your perspective on this. But I think you were missing part of the point of kickstarter. These are projects, not products. You're making a donation, not buying something. For that donation you are often promised a reward, but you are not guaranteed one. There is a certain amount of risk associated with backing a project on kickstarter. Projects don't always turn out the way you hope. Budget issue…

Generally I agree with you here, though I once read that the majority (perhaps the vast majority?) of the best-funded projects in Kickstarter history presented themselves as product pre-sales. They showed tangible goods, linked those goods to donation levels, and in all but name only, gave the impression that users were trading "donations" for the goods they saw in the pictures.

Perhaps this says something about Kickstarter and its userbase, or about the way Kickstarter describes itself to its users. I am a big fan of Kickstarter, and I've funded about ten projects on the site. I realize that not everything I fund is going to ship me something, and I'm fine with that.

But I suspect I am not a typical user. Indeed, I suspect that the typical user funds a single project, which he or she believes will directly result in the shipment of a physical product. In fact, I would be very curious to know what the user stats tell us on this matter. If Kickstarter says it's X (a donation site), but a preponderance of its users believe it's Y (a pre-sales site), then it's got an interesting dilemma on its hands. A site that believes itself to be X will not be a good enough Y for people who think it's Y, and vice versa. Maybe Kickstarter doesn't want the Y people sticking around, or it thinks that a preponderance of Y people indicates that the site is still in its infancy and has yet to mature. Fine. But if that's the case, and the Y pipeline eventually dries up, is X actually a viable business model? To date, it seems that Y users have been keeping X afloat.

If I build a ski run, and the majority of my users show up to snowboard on it, do I still call it a ski run? Do I chase the snowboarders off? Do I try to reason with the snowboarders, and convince them to trade their snowboards for skis? Do I advertise for more skiers, hoping that their numbers will eventually outweigh those of the snowboarders? Or do I embrace snowboarding? There isn't a right answer, and obviously my analogy is a little silly, but hopefully you see what I'm getting at.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#59

Post by DanBC »

antimora wrote: post #6

Could the founders take only a small portion of money and proceed till the bugs were resolved?

With hardware a lot of costs are up front. I have some knowledge of PCB manufacture.

So, you need to design the PCB. You need to get artwork made. You need some prototypes. Then you need to decide whether you'll re-design, or include a mod. Re-design is expensive, that is balanced by having a bit of wire soldered between two points and a track cut by a low paid operative in some random factory.

You now have some PCBs. You need production aids. You may need stencils for screen printing solder paste. The design can be generated from the PCB gerber files. But again, there are artwork costs for this. You need a pick and place machine program. If there are many conventional components you'll want a cropping machine plate made. (A steel plate which the PCB sits on with small holes for conventional components; you then put this on the cropping machine which pins the components down while a blade slides and crops the component leads).

Then you build your prototypes. You need someone to buy components; to put these onto the pick and place machine (Which means stripping that machine down from the last job); to load the programs and set the reflow oven and align the screen print stencil.

You can new see that it's just as easy to produce ten as it is to produce one. (I'd recommend people building prototypes to build a batch of, say, 3 rather than just 1 or 2. That gives you an early alpha; a beta, and a neat and tidy beta to create documents and production drawings from.)

Hopefully I've shown how many of the costs are up front. The costs of components and actually building stuff is relatively cheap.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#60

Post by DanBC »

milurally wrote: post #49

I don't see it as the worst project. I don't know why you are so dissapointed

Kick Starter appears to need to manage people's expectations of projects a bit better? People are not buying product, they're "investing" to help someone create a product. The return on a successful investment is a cheap version of that product, or some stickers, or a warm fuzzy feeling of helping someone.
Post reply on HN