Live data from Hacker News

The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

a.wholelottanothing.org

21–30 of 72 posts

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#21

This is a fairly known issue in elec. design. What is happening here is that the case is acting as a Faraday cage ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage ) that blocks out signals. It is not just enough to wear the designer hat. An engineer hat is absolutely essential as well.

It pretty well blows my mind that they just wrapped the whole antenna in metal and didn't think that it might cause problems. You shouldn't need to wear any hats at all for that one, just apply some common sense.

When I saw the thing, I assumed they must have come up with some extremely clever way to avoid signal attenuation. Turns out they were just ignoring the blindingly obvious. Oops.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#22

Without Apple-like innovation and fabrication technology, how could could they got the aluminum casing to not completely block out the signal? It seemed like the entire project was doomed from the start.

"Apple-like innovation"? What's "Apple-like" about making an antenna? Wasn't "Apple-like" the reason for free bumpers and "you're holding it wrong"?

My guess is vast resources...

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#23
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe one way to solve this problem is to define several milestones, and a percentage of the funds get released once milestones are reached. At each milestone, each funder can decide whether or not the person has achieved their stated goal for the milestone. If the person who puts money into the project gets cold feet, they can back out at any time, but any money they have committed up to the current milestone goes t…

Problem is that oftentimes most of the money is needed before a first prototype. And many concerns wont emerge until the prototype comes out. So effectively what will happen is that the milestone system will be gamed so that most of them are "paper" or "cad" which dont take much effort.

well, with these projects that are vastly overfunded, like the case example, it seems like most of the money could have been safely put in some sort of escrow so that the founders wouldn't get lazy.

And if there's a proper description of the milestones, it seems like gaming might not be so easy.

For example, if there were a "test the metal case for signal loss" milestone, and if the founders only gave a half-hearted attempt, then a bunch of people could have had the option to pull out at that point.

Basically the founders need to create a proper plan, with reasonable milestones, and then the funders might be more willing to give more money. I think after a while, people would be able to flag a gamed milestone.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#24
I wish people would stop thinking of Kickstarter as a shop.

It's not.

The site is very clear in it's FAQ that once a project is funded, delivery of the promised perks is up to the project creator, not up to Kickstarter: http://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/backing%20a%20project#Wh...

I've seen some great projects on the site, but you have to realize that you're not buying something.

When you see a project that is developing a product, and the promised reward is one of those items, you are _not buying one of them_.

You are pledging your money to the sponsor in good faith that they will provide you with one. In effect, speculating your money on Kickstarter against the risk of the project failing after it's fully funded.

If you want to buy something, use a shop.

I actually think that Kickstarter (despite it not being in their best interests) should place an upper limit on the funding available on projects that effectively try to use Kickstarter as a shop, and dupe the public into thinking they are buying things.

There's really nothing to stop me creating a "cool laptop" shop on Kickstarter, claiming to "rebrand" macbook airs and resell them with laser etched designs for $500 each, take all the money and walk away.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#25
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

most project creators don't see Kickstarter as a real commitment to business, it's a way to get money for their "neat project" that they want to complete but without the hassle of raising money properly or selling pre-orders. But that's true, of course. Kickstarter isn't a marketplace like e.g. Etsy where customers buy items. Kickstarter lets people fund cool projects they like. Often (but not always) the item istelf…

This is what I'm talking about, if I choose to fund a project and the reward I choose is that project, isn't that the point of funding? For example, http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/petertreadway/spnkix-wea... is a project being funded at the moment and will reach it's goal, I've backed with $500 so I can get a pair, if they don't deliver on that isn't that an issue? Kickstarter does not present it as a chance to…

Man, I wish you didn't mention that project. I would have been very happy spending that money on something else instead, but now that I've seen it, there is no option. :)

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#26
When you are designing a product for Kickstarter and you show prototypes, backers will assume you have worked all the bugs out first.

Do backers on Kickstarter really assume that all the bugs will be worked out before the prototype is shown? I'm not familiar with how the community works, but would assume that the prototypes would be used to identify more bugs and design flaws, as well as elicit feedback from early users.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#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 underwrite manufacturing startup costs with asian and local suppliers. Having been well down the path of getting a consumer electronics product manufactured, and knowing the costs and understanding that a lot of those costs are upfront, I this seemed very reasonable to me. I thought his asking amount was a bit low, but the project was overfunded to the tune of $800,000 - more than enough to cover these startup costs.

Once funded, however, the October delivery date-- two months from the funding date, was never mentioned again.

Instead the updates have increasingly focused on design choices. In fact, the early updates made it very clear that many of the design choices hadn't even been settled!

He's clearly taking his time, doing some updates once a month or so, but it doesn't even look like this is full time. (excuses for having a new baby, etc. Jeez guy, you took on an $800,000 project with a baby on the way, really?)

I have the very strong impression that it was a slight con job-- he got the money to dick around with his ultimate flashlight and "really do it right", but doesn't seem too concerned about his commitment to deliver the flashlights in a timely manner.

I do believe has has every intention to deliver these flashlights... eventually.

But I bought them for christmas presents, I've been out several hundred dollars for 6 months and I don't even have a promise date for delivery. In fact, the whole thing is so half assed that he doesn't even know which colors I want because he didn't give us a way to tell him.

So, I contacted Kickstarter. I figured they had contingency plans for this kind of situation. I figured they were a standup organization. Their response? A form letter telling me that they advise their project leaders to deliver in a timely manner to backers. That's it. No suggestions for alternatives, nothing like that.

Of course the 30 day credit card dispute period has long passed. But I don't think it will come to that.

The FTC has a rule, that if you take money for a product, you have to deliver it in 6 weeks. This is why TV commercials and magazine ads often say "delivers in 4-6 weeks". Because they're using drop shippers, or whatever. If you don't deliver in 6 weeks, you have to get the customers permission to delay shipment, or you have to refund their money. Thems the rules.

Its debatable whether the 6 weeks started at the funding date when our cards were charged (and kickstarter got their $80,000), or at the "end of october" when they were originally supposed to ship. Either way that time is up.

Because I think this guy intends to deliver them, and was only dishonest about the level of completion of the project, and because I know that last %10 can take a lot of time, I'm going to give him a bit longer. Maybe the end of January. I'd go to the end of February if he promises to ship in that month.

After that point, I'm going to take up the dispute with Amazon. I expect that amazon, having handled the payment will resolve the issue, but if they don't then I'm going to escalate.

I actually blame kickstarter more than I do the guy behind the project. They should not blow people off when projects fail to deliver. This isn't a donation to some kid who wants to take pictures of trees in the Sierras. They are selling products here, and they are promising tangible goods on a specified date in exchange for the funds. That's the definition of being a store.

I don't mind giving people some time. I only even got annoyed about this one after christmas came and went and there wasn't even an apology for not shipping in a reasonable amount of time. And I only got upset when kickstarter blew me off when I wrote them. Because of that, if this isn't resolved in 4-8 weeks, I'm going to Amazon, and then the police.

Needless to say, I won't be backing any more Kickstarter projects, and until they start taking some responsibility, I no longer consider them a trustworthy outfit.

Here's the introduction of the project: "I am offering pre-orders for two unique and powerful lights, the HexBright Prime for $35 and the HexBright Flex for $60. Both models are virtually identical looking with an ergonomic, very comfortable grip and use the best available LED light source. ... The major difference between the Prime and Flex models is the HexBright Flex is USB rechargeable and USB programmable. If you want, you can re-write the default code and tweak the HexBright Flex however you desire."

He's offering pre-orders. That's what the project promised. (Elsewhere it gave a "late september, early october" ship date, but that has since been removed.)

Kickstarter offers a FAQ. Here's the FAQ entry for this project: When will you ship? "Short answer- as soon as we can. Long answer- HexBright is not a product already on the shelf ready to be shipped. You are funding development of a top quality product where almost all your money is going into the parts and materials with almost no overhead, marketing or middlemen costs (we are projecting future retail prices to be over $100). As the saying goes, "CHEAP, FAST, GOOD, pick any two". Our price is fixed so we are choosing between "fast" and "good". Good wins every time. "

The thing is, this FAQ was changed. Kickstarter helpfully tells us so:

Last updated: Monday Nov 14, 1:22pm EST

So, during the time he was asking for money, we were given the opportunity to "pre-order" these flashlights that are described as already existing:

"the HexBright Flex is USB rechargeable and USB programmable."

NOT: "the HexBright Flex WILL BE USB rechargeable and WILL BE USB programmable."

Then, about 2 months after he was supposed to ship, the FAQ changes to "You are funding development of..."

So, the project says one thing, but the FAQ says another, and the wording on the FAQ, updated 2 months after it should have started shipping, implies that people who expected it to ship when promised weren't actually promised a shipping product on any specific date.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#28
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…

>Of course the 30 day credit card dispute period has long passed.

You may want to check with your card issuer on this. Some cards have a 30-60 day window to file for a chargeback. Others, notably AmEx, will issue chargebacks going back six months or even a year.

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#29
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 issues, design flaws, etc, are all par for the course.

I've backed a number of projects now. I just checked, and I've backed 15 projects out of which 9 have received funding ($346 pledged, $284 charged) since August 2011. So far I have only received two items.

I hope to receive all the items I've funded, but I know that even with the best intentions, not every project will be able to deliver.

Since you believed you were "purchasing" items, perhaps kickstarter needs to do a better job of making it clear that what you are doing is making a donation, and the whole thing is running on the honor system. They do say that (http://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/backing%20a%20project#Ac...), but I guess they could do a better job of stressing it.

Because it's a donation, it's my understanding that kickstarter, amazon, and the police would have no real recourse unless there has been serious fraudulent claims of some kind.

Anyway, I would urge you to change the way you look at kickstarter, and then give it another go. I'm a huge fan of the model, and have enjoyed both the items I've received so far. You can always give them for xmas next year :)

Re: The worst project I ever funded on Kickstarter

#30
post #26

When you are designing a product for Kickstarter and you show prototypes, backers will assume you have worked all the bugs out first. Do backers on Kickstarter really assume that all the bugs will be worked out before the prototype is shown? I'm not familiar with how the community works, but would assume that the prototypes would be used to identify more bugs and design flaws, as well as elicit feedback from early us…

Yes. Backers on kickstarter are not sophisticated startup people. They're regular consumers. Most kickstarter projects are ones that appeal to them, and are also low tech. If a project expects a lengthy development process they can say it in the project.

I've done some mechanical engineering, but I'm no mechanical engineer. I can't know whether an iPhone dock is going to require 3 prototypes and 4 nearly complete versions before being ready to ship, and all this will take 9 months, or if what they're showing in the picture can be manufactured in 60 days in volume, all they need is the money for the injection molding forms, which are very expensive.

Hell, I bet most people who fund kickstarter projects don't even know injection molding forms are expensive.

So, if the project has high risk, and this isn't disclosed by the leader of the project when asking for funding, that's an error on their part.

The problem projects I've seen (that are products, rather than pieces of art) tend to pitch themselves as completed products that just need manufacturing help.

Post reply on HN