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

Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

kickstarter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 120 posts

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#41

Post by Udo »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #33
Udo wrote: post #30

The expectations some people have about crowdfunding are unrealistic. It has to be clear from the start that when you donate money to those projects the money will be spent and the project might fail anyway. People have been using Kickstarter as a pre-order site which I think is not ideal in many cases. The option to preorder should be different from supporting a project in general, but Kickstarter sadly doesn't offe…

A project failing and a project going completely silent are two different things.

I agree, but I'd say that a project being fraudulent or going silent is an expected failure mode.

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#42

Post by k-mcgrady »

mkhaytman wrote: post #36
k-mcgrady wrote: post #15

There is a simple solution to this problem. Don't allow project creators to offer the project as a reward! It should be ok for people to try and fail with projects on Kickstarter. By preventing creators from offering the product as a reward backers will understand better that it isn't a pre-order system. It's an "I need money for this idea. It might work or it might fail but if you want to help me try, give me money"…

Unfortunately, this project creator hasn't provided any proof that the money was spent working on the product. If there were photos and records of work and progress being attempted, and at least some communication with the backers along the way, I suspect the tone and deposition of the comments would be different. It's a lot to read through, but there's pages of people just asking for transparency to see the status a…

I agree that they should be posting updates to prove the money is being put to use. However looking through the comments I see a number of people referring to the backing as a 'loan' and complaining they didn't get the product 'they ordered'. I think it's clear this 'company' has screwed people but backer expectations are also completely wrong and Kickstarter needs to solve that problem. People seem to think if they give you money and you fail they can get a refund. That's not how Kickstarter works/should work.

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#43

Post by joosters »

princess3000 wrote: post #23
mkhaytman wrote: post #2

This project has been funded for a year and half with no progress to show for it, only thousands of comments from backers wondering when they will receive a refund or at least an update on whats going on. Unfortunately the project founder has flown the coop and kickstarter doesn't claim a lick of responsibility. Want to get away with stealing 200k? Just make a kickstarter project and never deliver, it's working for t…

I was kind of wondering when this would happen. For a very small investment you could mockup a slick iPhone gadget, make 10x your initial request of $100k and then take the money and run. Aside from the morality of it, I don't think there are many legal obstacles to this, especially if you made it seem like you were making a "good faith" effort up until you disappeared with the cash.

Perhaps Kickstarter could insist that projects account for their spending on the project? e.g. if you've raised $100k, you'd better be able to show that you spent that $100k in ways that are related to the project, and not on a shiny new car. This would form part of the contract between project & funders and could open the way to lawsuits if the project couldn't demonstrate reasonable use of the cash.

The mere threat of future legal problems would (hopefully) keep Kickstarters more honest, and would reassure funders, making them more likely to fund more stuff.

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#44

Post by k-mcgrady »

giovannibajo1 wrote: post #35
jdechko wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe even only release 50% of the funds initially and hold the rest in escrow until a given set of circumstances are met. That way the users are exposed to less risk knowing they could get half of their funding back. On the downside, if this keeps happening, users aren't going to back as many projects, and fewer projects will be successfully funded (which may or may not actually be a bad thing).

If you go down this road, just let project creators decide their milestones and timing, and then release the funds. Different projects have different cash flow problems, so each creator should be able to decide. Want all money upfront? Fine, but people will know and decide accordingly whether to back your project.

The problem here is what to do if you estimate the milestones wrong. People backed it under those terms and you supposedly can't change the terms after they give you money.

What if your initial expenses are higher than thought but you can't access your next milestone for 4 weeks meaning you miss important deadlines with suppliers/manufacturers and the company goes bust, just because you couldn't access the money people pledged in time.

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#45

Post by incision »

Udo wrote: post #30

The expectations some people have about crowdfunding are unrealistic. It has to be clear from the start that when you donate money to those projects the money will be spent and the project might fail anyway. People have been using Kickstarter as a pre-order site which I think is not ideal in many cases. The option to preorder should be different from supporting a project in general, but Kickstarter sadly doesn't offe…

>People have been using Kickstarter as a pre-order site which I think is not ideal in many cases.

Kickstarter backs this perception.

"In just 24 hours, 20,000 people bought an Ouya console — a product they had never heard of before yesterday." - Yancey Strickler - Cofounder/Head of Communications at Kickstarter [0]

0: http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/ouyas-big-day

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#46

Post by srumple »

zokier wrote: post #21
mkhaytman wrote: post #2

This project has been funded for a year and half with no progress to show for it, only thousands of comments from backers wondering when they will receive a refund or at least an update on whats going on. Unfortunately the project founder has flown the coop and kickstarter doesn't claim a lick of responsibility. Want to get away with stealing 200k? Just make a kickstarter project and never deliver, it's working for t…

Are failed startup founders also stealing millions of VC money? KS is a risk-investment, not a preorder webshop.

But startup founders are accountable to the VCs. They have to provide updates and let the VCs know what it is they've been doing with the money. If the KS project fails, it fails. But to not provide some sort of update to backers is a serious problem.

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#47

Post by itsybitsycoder »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #15

There is a simple solution to this problem. Don't allow project creators to offer the project as a reward! It should be ok for people to try and fail with projects on Kickstarter. By preventing creators from offering the product as a reward backers will understand better that it isn't a pre-order system. It's an "I need money for this idea. It might work or it might fail but if you want to help me try, give me money"…

I would stop using Kickstarter (as a backer) if this were the case.

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#48

Post by Udo »

incision wrote: post #45
Udo wrote: post #30

The expectations some people have about crowdfunding are unrealistic. It has to be clear from the start that when you donate money to those projects the money will be spent and the project might fail anyway. People have been using Kickstarter as a pre-order site which I think is not ideal in many cases. The option to preorder should be different from supporting a project in general, but Kickstarter sadly doesn't offe…

>People have been using Kickstarter as a pre-order site which I think is not ideal in many cases. Kickstarter backs this perception. "In just 24 hours, 20,000 people bought an Ouya console — a product they had never heard of before yesterday." - Yancey Strickler - Cofounder/Head of Communications at Kickstarter [0] 0: http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/ouyas-big-day

There is no denying failing to make that distinction is good for Kickstarter's business, but I assert it's bad for crowdfunding in general.

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#49

Post by k-mcgrady »

Caerus wrote: post #40
k-mcgrady wrote: post #15

There is a simple solution to this problem. Don't allow project creators to offer the project as a reward! It should be ok for people to try and fail with projects on Kickstarter. By preventing creators from offering the product as a reward backers will understand better that it isn't a pre-order system. It's an "I need money for this idea. It might work or it might fail but if you want to help me try, give me money"…

Then what's the incentive to participate at all? Would backing a project be equivalent to a 12 month high interest loan? Or, equivalent to an IPO where "backers" get a certain percentage of the company (which I'm sure opens a massive legal mess). I don't think most people have a problem with projects failing. It's when creators take the money and don't appear to even attempt to produce the product that something is w…

>> "Then what's the incentive to participate at all?"

Someone believes they can create a product you want. They can only create it if you give them some money to get going. The incentive is a product you want getting built. Do you want this thing enough that you're willing to risk $10 backing it? I think for a lot of people that's enough incentive.

Re: Kickstarter project raised $196K and stopped responding

#50

Post by hop »

Im a backer and they offered refunds twice to anyone that wanted it so I don't know why anyone is complaining.

This project was before Kickstarter disallowed renderings (for good reason) and they would probably never have gotten to this shitty position if they had to actually prototype it and find out how insanely expensive it would be to manufacture.

Post reply on HN