Another KS bites the dust...

Legomancer wrote: Where is the stuff about Benzes and cigars?

I'll say this for Kickstarter, it does seem like cases like this are the exception.

There were tons of backers investigating the life of EDWARD J. POLCHLOPEK, III AKA "Ed Nash" and his company Altius Management, especially after the artist reached out and told us that he never got a cent, and the US Playing Card Company said that they had never heard of the guy.

Some of the many results from various blogs/social networks were gathered (although this is an incomplete list)








foursquare.com/.../5160b6aae4b033963802a41c ...

This is the information given to me by the disgruntled FB group member.

The thing is, the vagary about "buying something" and "backing a project" is exactly the kind of thing that is going to eventually wind up in a court case. It's wilfully tricky and potentially deceptive language. And when someone says "we will give you this product if you give us this money" and uses products to solicit said money and doesn't deliver, then the semantics of Kickstarter terminology no longer matter. Because it becomes fraud. If you follow through on what you're saying you're taking money for, you're good. No problem. Lots of projects fit that description. But there are more and more that do not.

Doesn't matter if you're just "promising" something to an "investor"...but wait, you're not really "investors", you're "backers"? Are these supposed "promises" legally binding or not? Why can a member NOT recieve a refund of funds when it is made clear that the "project" money will not be used to complete it? Why would anyone give a single cent to project where there is ZERO accountability or very specific ROI?

Seriously, if I were a lawyer, I would be all over this shit. I'm telling you all, it is just a matter of time before a high profile KS flop/swindle gets into court and Kickstarer is forced to DRASTICALLY change their business model. Or go away.

Michael Barnes wrote: Seriously, if I were a lawyer, I would be all over this shit.

Lawyers don't sue people that have run out of money.

This is a con man's dream, stupid money sent remotely, and I'm not talking about the greasy kind from Miami. You could have the money routed to a Russian account for protection, then use the funds to develop IP that you backers don't get a slice of and when you're done you say "we ran out of money before the manufacturing could be paid for!" What a racket.

S.

I have not been interested in any game offered on kickstarter to pay money in advance. i am not willing to navigate through ad copy and hype and promises etc to find out if there might be a good game there or to make guesses anout whether the people behind the project are serious or not.

It's easier for me to file KS under the nasty idioms A fool and his money are soon parted or Barnum's There's a sucker born every minute. Not judging anyone happy to take the risk,, this is simply SHORTHAND for me to stay away. I guess KS has helped see some interesting games see the light of day but if the whole thing goes away tomorrow, I won't be sorry.

I put my trust in companies like Zman (when it was led by Zman) with a track record, people who worked hard for their success and raised their own capital at their own risk, not flash in the pan gold rushes or snake oil salesmen.

It doesn't help KS that the ratio of crap to good ideas on KS is way out of whack. Realm coins, personalised figs and tons of other shit we dn't need to enjoy playing games. I will buy a personalised fig of Black Barney though and a fugly Barnes Fall singer guy if they sre produced, Also somebody KS Milch und gerkin while you're at it.

Kickstarter would do well to get ahead of this and split its website into two parts: a patronage half (where you donate money to fund art/movie/music projects and get a tote bag or whatever as a reward) and a commerce half.

You know, when you've got "projects" on Kickstarter than are soliciting RETAILER PREORDERS by offering funding levels sure you get case discounts and extra benefits directed at retail, then you are not just asking people to invest in your gee whiz idea out of the kindness of their patronizing hearts. You are SELLING a vaporware product. This whole notion that you're somehow sponsoring somebody's zany idea in order to get it made is bullshit. Who here has ever backed a project at $50, $100, $200 just because they thought it was a good idea? Who in their right mind would spend $200 to maybe get a game that looks neat according to its marketing materials? Have you ever backed a game and expected NOTHING in return?

Seriously, WTF is wrong with people...do people just have too much money and just need to donate it to would-be game publishers? Or to gamble it on vaporware products? I mean shit, if y'all want to give me $75 a piece I'll think about Milch & Gherkin some more.

Everytime I see mouth-watering KS I just think FFG game of similar price... the game may be crap, but you get buttloads of stuff and you're sure to get it unless some Somalian pirates snatch it on the way to Indonesia.

I wonder: has anyone here seen anyone come up with crappy ideas no one in their right mind would kickstart, only to see a few hundred bucks on the kickstarter? Sure enough, fail...and the guys who kickstarted it get a couple hundred bucks simply for coming up with a Shiite idea.

Producers anyone?

Springtime for Hitler in Germany"......

Let's not use the term "investor". An investor is buying a stake in the company. I don't own shares of Coca-Cola because I bought a 2-liter of their product. You aren't investing, you are donating. You may get something in return for your donation, and I believe those promises need to be honored, but let's not pretend that people giving money to Kickstarter are financial wizards building a portfolio.

Put it this way: if the next Angry Birds were funded through Kickstarter, nobody who had backed it would -- or should -- expect to see a share of those profits. Hence, not an investment.

But part of Kickstarter's success is in the vague, deceptive language that makes "backers" feel like they are either investors or at least patrons. It makes people feel like they are participating or supporting a product's development

Bt you are 100% correct, it is just giving money away under the assumption that you might get your fake collateral back in the form of a product.