5 ms·

That's the beauty of Kickstarter. No downside for those who get the money, very limited upside for those who pledge.

by FigBug 12y ago

hgferee 12y ago
Why are you singling out Kickstater? You statement holds true for any form of investment. There seem to be a misconception what Kickstarter is. Their FAQ is clearly explains it is funding. I'm sure if everyone who backs a project would read it, there wouldn't be so many complaints.
- FigBug 12y ago
  Because in a standard investment there is a potential for a huge upside, the product is a huge success and and you make a bunch of money. Kickstarter the upside is capped at getting your reward. I've read their FAQ and I won't participate in Kickstarter. I consider it a bad deal. If I see something on Kickstarter I want, I'll wait until it gets retail release and buy it for probably the same amount and have no risk. And if it doesn't get a retail release I'll live without it.
  - hgferee 12y ago
    That is completely situational. They are what they are. If you ignore the contract/FAQ it is only your fault. You seem to do so, which is great, but slandering is not honest.
- rhino369 12y ago
  Kickstarter is not a form of investment. It is at it's base a donation with some purchase aspects for some the projects. With an investment you get the upside for the risk as well as the downside.
  - hgferee 12y ago
    If you agree that the language you are speaking is English we all speak, then it is certainly a form investment or funding. You are making an assumption that investment guarantees some stake, it doesn't. You only get what is in the contract.
    - anigbrowl 12y ago
      'Investment' generally has connotations of owning a financial asset, and potential future profit-sharing. It's a legal term of art, and that's why Kickstarter makes it very clear in the terms of service that backers are not investors - otherwise Kickstarter would become subject to a lot of complex regulation which would wreck their business model. Casually, you might say that you 'invest' in a new computer that you bought at the computer store (because you plan to make money by using it). But legally, a purchase and investment are two very different things.
    - mynameishere 12y ago
      It is technically a donation: http://www.forbes.com/sites/chancebarnett/2013/09/09/donation-based-crowdfunding-sites-kickstarter-vs-indiegogo/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/chancebarnett/2013/09/09/donatio... ...when I first heard about it, it was frankly obvious that kickstarter was a devious way around SEC investment rules regarding the category of "accredited investor". Nothing since then has suggested to me otherwise. But that's how the scam works. It's a donation that feels like an investment. If people are actually stupid enough to donate money thinking they are "investing" that merely shows the success of the con.
- aikah 12y ago
  I wish people stop saying that. Backers are not investors.They are essentially pre-ordering a product,whatever it is. Today the language is vague enough to confuse the "bakers", Kickstarter knows it. What's even more amazing is that no backer has successfully sued Kickstarter for a failed project yet, because one could clearly get the money lost from them directly. They are a store, period.
  - hgferee 12y ago
    That is your impression. You seem to be relying on word of mouth i.e. the general public representation of what Kickstarter is. Unfortunately that is not accurate. Simply reading FAQ will shows they are not a store, quoting: At the same time, backers must understand that Kickstarter is not a store. When you back a project, you’re helping to create something new — not ordering something that already exists. you might think they are( a store ), but that doesn't make it true.
    - aikah 12y ago
      You talk about investment, I ask you where is the Equity? it isn't an investment. It doesn't matter what Kickstarter FAQ says, a judge need to decide once and for all what Kickstarter really is and how can its customers defend themself against fraud and scams like Triggertrap. "I was an idiot who didn't know what he is doing" is never an excuse when you take other people's money and you promise them something.
    - ghaff 12y ago
      It actually looks as if there have been some changes to the Kickstarter TOS. For a long time, it seemed to imply that you needed to return the money if you didn't deliver the rewards. (However unrealistic that was--blood from stone and all that.) Now it seems to explicitly refer to returning remaining funds. ("they offer to return any remaining 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.)" Kickstarter has been tiptoeing this line forever between Not-a-store and Not-giving-people-what-they-paid-for-is-a-very-bad-thing.

That's the beauty of Kickstarter. No downside for those who get the money, very limited upside for those who pledge.

by FigBug 12y ago

That's the beauty of Kickstarter. No downside for those who get the money, very limited upside for those who pledge.

Why are you singling out Kickstater? You statement holds true for any form of investment. There seem to be a misconception what Kickstarter is. Their FAQ is clearly explains it is funding. I'm sure if everyone who backs a project would read it, there wouldn't be so many complaints.

FigBug 12y ago
Because in a standard investment there is a potential for a huge upside, the product is a huge success and and you make a bunch of money. Kickstarter the upside is capped at getting your reward. I've read their FAQ and I won't participate in Kickstarter. I consider it a bad deal. If I see something on Kickstarter I want, I'll wait until it gets retail release and buy it for probably the same amount and have no risk. And if it doesn't get a retail release I'll live without it.
- hgferee 12y ago
  That is completely situational. They are what they are. If you ignore the contract/FAQ it is only your fault. You seem to do so, which is great, but slandering is not honest.
rhino369 12y ago
Kickstarter is not a form of investment. It is at it's base a donation with some purchase aspects for some the projects. With an investment you get the upside for the risk as well as the downside.
- hgferee 12y ago
  If you agree that the language you are speaking is English we all speak, then it is certainly a form investment or funding. You are making an assumption that investment guarantees some stake, it doesn't. You only get what is in the contract.
  - anigbrowl 12y ago
    'Investment' generally has connotations of owning a financial asset, and potential future profit-sharing. It's a legal term of art, and that's why Kickstarter makes it very clear in the terms of service that backers are not investors - otherwise Kickstarter would become subject to a lot of complex regulation which would wreck their business model. Casually, you might say that you 'invest' in a new computer that you bought at the computer store (because you plan to make money by using it). But legally, a purchase and investment are two very different things.
  - mynameishere 12y ago
    It is technically a donation: http://www.forbes.com/sites/chancebarnett/2013/09/09/donation-based-crowdfunding-sites-kickstarter-vs-indiegogo/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/chancebarnett/2013/09/09/donatio... ...when I first heard about it, it was frankly obvious that kickstarter was a devious way around SEC investment rules regarding the category of "accredited investor". Nothing since then has suggested to me otherwise. But that's how the scam works. It's a donation that feels like an investment. If people are actually stupid enough to donate money thinking they are "investing" that merely shows the success of the con.
aikah 12y ago
I wish people stop saying that. Backers are not investors.They are essentially pre-ordering a product,whatever it is. Today the language is vague enough to confuse the "bakers", Kickstarter knows it. What's even more amazing is that no backer has successfully sued Kickstarter for a failed project yet, because one could clearly get the money lost from them directly. They are a store, period.
- hgferee 12y ago
  That is your impression. You seem to be relying on word of mouth i.e. the general public representation of what Kickstarter is. Unfortunately that is not accurate. Simply reading FAQ will shows they are not a store, quoting: At the same time, backers must understand that Kickstarter is not a store. When you back a project, you’re helping to create something new — not ordering something that already exists. you might think they are( a store ), but that doesn't make it true.
  - aikah 12y ago
    You talk about investment, I ask you where is the Equity? it isn't an investment. It doesn't matter what Kickstarter FAQ says, a judge need to decide once and for all what Kickstarter really is and how can its customers defend themself against fraud and scams like Triggertrap. "I was an idiot who didn't know what he is doing" is never an excuse when you take other people's money and you promise them something.
  - ghaff 12y ago
    It actually looks as if there have been some changes to the Kickstarter TOS. For a long time, it seemed to imply that you needed to return the money if you didn't deliver the rewards. (However unrealistic that was--blood from stone and all that.) Now it seems to explicitly refer to returning remaining funds. ("they offer to return any remaining 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.)" Kickstarter has been tiptoeing this line forever between Not-a-store and Not-giving-people-what-they-paid-for-is-a-very-bad-thing.