4 ms·

I have many friends who backed and received their Elevation Docks. It's anything but vaporware. They asked for 75,000 and got 1,464,000. Scaling up that much an

I have many friends who backed and received their Elevation Docks. It's anything but vaporware. They asked for 75,000 and got 1,464,000. Scaling up that much and that fast is incredibly difficult and can't be done overnight. The system seems fine to me.

smackfu 14y ago
Products should really consider capping their number of backers, rather than just saying "as many as people want!" and possibly losing money on every one.
- bduerst 14y ago
  The purpose is to capture as much capital in early sales as possible. Caps would defeat this purpose.
  - antr 14y ago
    "Caps would defeat this purpose." What purpose? The purpose of delivering an obsolete product by the time it reaches customers months after?
    - bduerst 14y ago
      Capturing as much capital as possible.
      - antr 14y ago
        I totally disagree, sounds like you work in Wall Street. Your argument defeats the purpose of a minimum total pledged, and is pure internet speculation. Companies and individuals go to Kickstarter to create great products - that can't be financed in no other way (bank debt, VC capital, etc.). More capital (pledges) result in more orders, more inventory, higher working capital and a production/logistics nightmare. None of the hardware projects/companies I've seen to date on Kickstarter have the required infrastructure to handle "as much capital as possible" or as many orders as possible.
        bduerst 14y ago
        These businesses come to Kickstarter for the purpose of getting as much capital as possible to seed their projects. Just because it is not implicitly stated doesn't mean that the business owners do not have that motive. Just because some business owners cannot scale effectively does not change their original motive. Just because you would personally run the businesses or the website different does not change the motive. I'm not going to waste any more time having a speculative "internet argument" with you on this.

smackfu 14y ago

Products should really consider capping their number of backers, rather than just saying "as many as people want!" and possibly losing money on every one.

bduerst 14y ago
The purpose is to capture as much capital in early sales as possible. Caps would defeat this purpose.
- antr 14y ago
  "Caps would defeat this purpose." What purpose? The purpose of delivering an obsolete product by the time it reaches customers months after?
  - bduerst 14y ago
    Capturing as much capital as possible.
    - antr 14y ago
      I totally disagree, sounds like you work in Wall Street. Your argument defeats the purpose of a minimum total pledged, and is pure internet speculation. Companies and individuals go to Kickstarter to create great products - that can't be financed in no other way (bank debt, VC capital, etc.). More capital (pledges) result in more orders, more inventory, higher working capital and a production/logistics nightmare. None of the hardware projects/companies I've seen to date on Kickstarter have the required infrastructure to handle "as much capital as possible" or as many orders as possible.
      - bduerst 14y ago
        These businesses come to Kickstarter for the purpose of getting as much capital as possible to seed their projects. Just because it is not implicitly stated doesn't mean that the business owners do not have that motive. Just because some business owners cannot scale effectively does not change their original motive. Just because you would personally run the businesses or the website different does not change the motive. I'm not going to waste any more time having a speculative "internet argument" with you on this.