5 ms·

Huh... I've always thought that "this thing might totally fail" was something that people understood when backing a kickstarter project. The idea that if they

by blhack 11y ago

Huh... I've always thought that "this thing might totally fail" was something that people understood when backing a kickstarter project. The idea that if they fail, they have to refund everybody's contribution kindof stinks, since I've always thought kickstarter was for people trying new things (which is obviously going to have a lot of stories about failure) Maybe there is more to the story here.

TillE 11y ago
There's been a lot of persistent misinformation floating around about Kickstarter, and I don't really understand why. It's not complicated. Yes, Kickstarter projects are legally obligated to fulfill their promised rewards, or else provide refunds. It has always been this way. Really, the only difference between Kickstarter and a preorder is that the schedule is a lot looser.
- ghaff 11y ago
  That is no longer the case in the current ToS. Among the current verbiage: "they offer to return any remaining [emphasis mine] funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form." As you say, the older ToS looked a lot like a pre-order which wasn't really the intention and didn't frankly make a lot of sense for a project that had some material probability of failing. After all, if the money is gone, it's not there any longer to issue refunds.
  - makomk 11y ago
    It made sense because it was the only thing holding Kickstarters accountable to the people funding them. With an investment, you're taking a risk but have some control over how the company's run. With a pre-order, you have no control but they have to deliver the product or refund you. Kickstarter now is the worst of both worlds: projects don't have to deliver anything and you can't even make sure they give it a decent try. Someone could promise the Earth, use the money to pay all their friends living costs for years while they tool around and fail to make a working product, then say "sorry, the money's all gone" and that's fine now according to Kickstarter.
    - ghaff 11y ago
      Yes, but an ostensible requirement that the promised reward or a full refund had to be delivered no matter what simply never made any sense. You can't get blood from a stone and all. Now, like then, you could pursue legal action but this isn't a realistic option in most cases, at least outside of clear fraud. The current ToS does it pretty clear that not delivering a project or a full refund is a bad thing and also outlines other obligations. But, by not imposing requirements that are typically just not realistic to meet with most failed projects, to me it establishes a more useful baseline for behavior.
      - makomk 11y ago
        We already have a way of dealing with these kinds of debts that can't be repaid: it's called bankruptcy, it has a whole bunch of safeguards to stop people abusing it, and it's what you'd have to do if you took on any other kind of debt to fund your business and couldn't repay it. There is absolutely no reason why Kickstarter needs to be any different.
        ghaff 11y ago
        So now the Kickstarter project which has increased its costs by incorporating (though that's probably a good idea in any case) spends its remaining funds on bankruptcy lawyers and there's now nothing to return to the backers. Nothing is certain and Kickstarter projects certainly aren't. Whatever the ToS, it's probably not something you should use if you're looking for "satisfaction or your money back" sort of guarantees.
- sago 11y ago
  The KS Terms are a little more nuanced. The 'refund' stipulation, for example, only says that they must refund any 'remaining' money, not that they must provide a full refund. And there are several criteria that a project creator has to meet, in the absence of completion, to meet their obligations. The effect is that KS can be used for projects that may fail. And quite right too, since that was its original aim (before it got saturated with companies using it as pre-sales / marketing / investment credentials / etc.
zz1 11y ago
Maybe you should actually read the story: they decided they aren't going to build the product and they decided they are going to refund backers. The "stinking idea" is their own.
- dang 11y ago
  This comment breaks the HN guidelines, which say: Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." This comment can similarly be improved by removing "Maybe you should actually read the story". Since it's merely a trope by which forum users take jabs at each other, HN can do without it.
  - zz1 11y ago
    Right. Tthank you for patiently explaining me how to interact more constructively.
- geofft 11y ago
  Whether or not it was their idea to do so, it's interesting that there's a cultural norm that they refund all of the pledges. I don't see any claim in the article that they invented this concept on their own for fun.
burnte 11y ago
What bothers me is the bad reaction the backers are expressing. The builders, for whatever reason, have decided a refund is in order. You are entitled to be disappointed, but not upset considering you have lost nothing. The insults and such are completely out of line considering the honesty of the project creators. I never thought I 'd see the day when people were UPSET about getting a full refund. Talk about entitled attitudes.
- corobo 11y ago
  A full refund implies either they've spent nothing or have got way more money from elsewhere (i.e. used the kickstarter to back an outside investment push) As far as I'm aware kickstarter isn't really supposed to be used as an interest free loan, which is the problem. That's not what people were funding.
  - burnte 11y ago
    No, it's not an interest free loan. And WHY they're able to offer a full refund is really no one's concern. The fact is they feel they can't deliver what was promised, and they're giving refunds. Somehow they're just as bad as the people who keep claiming "it's coming!" for years and never give money back? Seriously, kickstarter is a risk, if you get a product, great, if you get your money back, also great. You pays your money you takes your chances. Complaining about getting a full refund is ungrateful and ridiculous.

by blhack 11y ago

TillE 11y ago

There's been a lot of persistent misinformation floating around about Kickstarter, and I don't really understand why. It's not complicated. Yes, Kickstarter projects are legally obligated to fulfill their promised rewards, or else provide refunds. It has always been this way. Really, the only difference between Kickstarter and a preorder is that the schedule is a lot looser.

ghaff 11y ago
That is no longer the case in the current ToS. Among the current verbiage: "they offer to return any remaining [emphasis mine] funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form." As you say, the older ToS looked a lot like a pre-order which wasn't really the intention and didn't frankly make a lot of sense for a project that had some material probability of failing. After all, if the money is gone, it's not there any longer to issue refunds.
- makomk 11y ago
  It made sense because it was the only thing holding Kickstarters accountable to the people funding them. With an investment, you're taking a risk but have some control over how the company's run. With a pre-order, you have no control but they have to deliver the product or refund you. Kickstarter now is the worst of both worlds: projects don't have to deliver anything and you can't even make sure they give it a decent try. Someone could promise the Earth, use the money to pay all their friends living costs for years while they tool around and fail to make a working product, then say "sorry, the money's all gone" and that's fine now according to Kickstarter.
  - ghaff 11y ago
    Yes, but an ostensible requirement that the promised reward or a full refund had to be delivered no matter what simply never made any sense. You can't get blood from a stone and all. Now, like then, you could pursue legal action but this isn't a realistic option in most cases, at least outside of clear fraud. The current ToS does it pretty clear that not delivering a project or a full refund is a bad thing and also outlines other obligations. But, by not imposing requirements that are typically just not realistic to meet with most failed projects, to me it establishes a more useful baseline for behavior.
    - makomk 11y ago
      We already have a way of dealing with these kinds of debts that can't be repaid: it's called bankruptcy, it has a whole bunch of safeguards to stop people abusing it, and it's what you'd have to do if you took on any other kind of debt to fund your business and couldn't repay it. There is absolutely no reason why Kickstarter needs to be any different.
      - ghaff 11y ago
        So now the Kickstarter project which has increased its costs by incorporating (though that's probably a good idea in any case) spends its remaining funds on bankruptcy lawyers and there's now nothing to return to the backers. Nothing is certain and Kickstarter projects certainly aren't. Whatever the ToS, it's probably not something you should use if you're looking for "satisfaction or your money back" sort of guarantees.
sago 11y ago
The KS Terms are a little more nuanced. The 'refund' stipulation, for example, only says that they must refund any 'remaining' money, not that they must provide a full refund. And there are several criteria that a project creator has to meet, in the absence of completion, to meet their obligations. The effect is that KS can be used for projects that may fail. And quite right too, since that was its original aim (before it got saturated with companies using it as pre-sales / marketing / investment credentials / etc.

zz1 11y ago

Maybe you should actually read the story: they decided they aren't going to build the product and they decided they are going to refund backers. The "stinking idea" is their own.

dang 11y ago
This comment breaks the HN guidelines, which say: Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." This comment can similarly be improved by removing "Maybe you should actually read the story". Since it's merely a trope by which forum users take jabs at each other, HN can do without it.
- zz1 11y ago
  Right. Tthank you for patiently explaining me how to interact more constructively.
geofft 11y ago
Whether or not it was their idea to do so, it's interesting that there's a cultural norm that they refund all of the pledges. I don't see any claim in the article that they invented this concept on their own for fun.

burnte 11y ago

What bothers me is the bad reaction the backers are expressing. The builders, for whatever reason, have decided a refund is in order. You are entitled to be disappointed, but not upset considering you have lost nothing. The insults and such are completely out of line considering the honesty of the project creators. I never thought I 'd see the day when people were UPSET about getting a full refund. Talk about entitled attitudes.

corobo 11y ago
A full refund implies either they've spent nothing or have got way more money from elsewhere (i.e. used the kickstarter to back an outside investment push) As far as I'm aware kickstarter isn't really supposed to be used as an interest free loan, which is the problem. That's not what people were funding.
- burnte 11y ago
  No, it's not an interest free loan. And WHY they're able to offer a full refund is really no one's concern. The fact is they feel they can't deliver what was promised, and they're giving refunds. Somehow they're just as bad as the people who keep claiming "it's coming!" for years and never give money back? Seriously, kickstarter is a risk, if you get a product, great, if you get your money back, also great. You pays your money you takes your chances. Complaining about getting a full refund is ungrateful and ridiculous.