Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Draco18s]

But when you're promising 4k t-shirts or baubles, that stuff eats up profit at an absurd rate.

Yes they do, which is why we didn't offer any such extras, because there was no way to figure out what to price them at such that we'd "make a profit" off of them.

[nenjin]

Any profit would be contingent on the assumption that the rewards drive more people to back. Basically, you should only start offering physical rewards at a level where the amount backed already covers the overhead AND is netting you a small profit at the same time. (Or, rather than profit, let's call it development funds.) Roughly, I figure that just offering a t-shirt, you'd need someone to back at ~$40. (Unless you'd already negotiated some awesome bulk rate, like 200 t-shirts at $5 a piece or something.) Which to me is higher than your average donation is. I know I get gun shy about backing for $30 or more unless it's a project I'm absolutely wild about.

Which is why I think so many Kickstarters find themselves in trouble very quickly. They're making promises and assumptions without first properly vetting their costs. They map out rewards before they've actually gone out and made sure the manufacturing and shipping isn't going to bleed them dry. And I mean, I don't honestly blame people for doing that....but it's what happens when business amateurs jump in with both feet, not realizing success and profit require very tight and well thought-out financial planning.

[Neonivek]

Sometimes I like the rewards at the higher levels but I really dislike what they are coupled with.

I know I am one of the few people who are like this but I uttarly dislike "Go out and meet the producers" rewards. Mind you they will always be out of my price range and thus my complaint doesn't mean anything.

[MorleyDev]

For an overfunded kickstarter, presumably any money left over from development, which would of been kept in reserve during development in case shit happens that needs money, would go into advertising and promotion, and go alongside the sales into the shit happens fund, and a war chest to allow for investigating, planning and developing further projects. As well as continuing support and bug fixes for the game.

There are a lot of things in a business venture that need keeping an eye on, all of which take time. Money allows for that time.

[Neonivek]

Look I am not so ignorant that I'd have no idea what money from overfunding could be used on.

The difference is that I know exactly what that overfunding is often used on. Usually in their pocket.

Some developers though tend to use the money remaining to fund their next project. One actually advertised that as one of their stretch goals which actually divided the community because most people, as I would, would want their money being used on the project they are funding and not on a completely different project.

Mind you we still havn't gone into what I call "overfunding" which is when a project has more money then they can legitimately use.

[MorleyDev]

Except at that point surely it's as if they got that much money in purchases anyway. That's what kickstarter means fundamentally, they just get the money first so don't have to have a lone investor with a lot of power over them...

I mean, at that point what does it matter what they do with the money? Presumably they'd use it like a business typically uses the money from sales. Hell so long as I get the product and the quality is acceptable, they can spend what's left on booze and hookers for all I care xD

[Neonivek]

at that point what does it matter what they do with the money?

Normally what would happen is they would give that money back because their project's cost was under the funding given to them.

Which is where I get into how Kickstarter encourages embezzlement. It has no mechanic for that.

[MrWiggles]

Spoiler: Zion Glasses rant by Servant Corps (click to show/hide)

It could well be the first fully funded Kickstarter to completely fall through (did those Zionist sunglasses actually get made in the end?  I forget).

An update on ZionEyez: it appears that they cannot give out any refunds as they have already spent all that money on production. They blame unexpected production cost increases as the reason why they were unable to complete the project successfully. They supposedly got some new investors lined up, but they have to wait for the due diligence process to be completed. So it appears that no Zionist sunglasses will ever be made.

But all is not lost. The co-founder of ZionEyez (Joe Taylor) landed a sweet job working for Microsoft as Senior Mechanical Engineer, and ZionEyez managed to successfully gain a patent on their nonexistent sunglasses (possibly so that ZionEyez would be able to reinvent themselves as a patent troll company).

But as for the people who "donated" money for this project? They appear to be out of luck.

Kickstarter claims that it is not legally responsible for the actions of people soliciting money, and it serves merely as a platform. The only recourse then would be to sue ZionEyez.
===
EDIT: But just because Kickstarter claims no legal liability doesn't mean that people have to believe them. "Kickstarter is being sued for crowd-funding a 3D printer that may infringe on another company's patents."

So, crowd funding projects magically ensure that any and all projects will succeed?

[nenjin]

at that point what does it matter what they do with the money?

Normally what would happen is they would give that money back because their project's cost was under the funding given to them.

Which is where I get into how Kickstarter encourages embezzlement. It has no mechanic for that.

Er, what? Give back money? In what world does someone ask investors for money and then be like 'hey guys, turns out we didn't the extra, you can have it back!"

[MrWiggles]

at that point what does it matter what they do with the money?

Normally what would happen is they would give that money back because their project's cost was under the funding given to them.

Which is where I get into how Kickstarter encourages embezzlement. It has no mechanic for that.

Er, what? Give back money? In what world does someone ask investors for money and then be like 'hey guys, turns out we didn't the extra, you can have it back!"

Yea, I dont understand why anyone who donated money to a project would expect a refund. Maybe you could sue to get  refund or the rewards promised, if they fall through on that.

[Neonivek]

And thus I have proven my point.

So, crowd funding projects magically ensure that any and all projects will succeed?

Ohh goodness no. You can find plenty of examples of terrible or failed projects that were crowd funded.

Mind you I still support crowd funding if only because often that is the only way risky projects are even attempted. To get out of this "Bland but profitable game" trend.

[MrWiggles]

And thus I have proven my point.

So, crowd funding projects magically ensure that any and all projects will succeed?

Ohh goodness no. You can find plenty of examples of terrible or failed projects that were crowd funded.

Mind you I still support crowd funding if only because often that is the only way risky projects are even attempted. To get out of this "Bland but profitable game" trend.

More power to them, but I think there a very strong unconscious perception that somehow, crowd funding is a magical way to fund projects.

[Neonivek]

If anything the popularity of Crowd Funding has caused the scum to rise to the surface.

A lot of people now who would make mediocre projects are now seeking crowd funding in order to make mediocre but profitable projects.

[i2amroy]

If anything the popularity of Crowd Funding has caused the scum to rise to the surface.

A lot of people now who would make mediocre projects are now seeking crowd funding in order to make mediocre but profitable projects.

That's the advantage of crowd funding though. If you see something that looks cool to you then you can fund it and it will happen. If you don't see something that looks cool then you don't fund it and nothing is lost. The end result is a bunch of games that the majority of people find cool, without needing to worry about all of those games like "Petz: Kittens!" and what have you cluttering up the shelves. Sure you are getting a bunch of mediocre projects, but you would have got those anyways, and if it actually makes it through development then you know that at least somebody thought it was cool, even if you don't.

[Neonivek]

Don't get me wrong I think Kickstarter and the rise of crowd funding has been a force for good.

I am only saying that one of the ways in which it goes wrong is that the large stream of good projects has also come with a large stream of terrible ones.

If you don't see something that looks cool then you don't fund it and nothing is lost

It means that here is less products being made for general use now that EVERYONE can make money off of it.

I remember when some of the earlier kickstarters actually took advantage of the kickstarter to actually make their final products free. On a side note I am wondering how Grandroids is comming along.