Most likely their website was designed to redirect anyone who isn't logged in to their login page, but then they configured the web server to just server the farewell notice no matter what page you are looking at.
So, I work in the Valley, and I read & participate here, but I'm not working at a startup, and most of it is unknown to me.
With that note, I have a question!
>Most significantly and to our unpleasant surprise, our investors recently backed out of our funding round.
I don't understand something about this.
I mean, yes, it is very un-specific, but I am wondering, when is the 'point of no return' for something like this? Is it possible for a VC firm to go through all the motions, and say all the right things, and then back out 10 seconds before wiring payment for whatever reason they want?
Of course, I don't know if that happened here. It just seems to me like stories regularly appear of a VC backing out at the last minute.
Yes, as long as money haven't changed hands you can pull out usually at any time.
Furthermore funding is often not a one time payment but is paid in installments with preset milestones which means that the investor can still pull out at any time.
For the most part the investors hold all the cards, sure you can potentially draft a contract that would lock investors but no one would commit to those terms.
Point of no return is when the VCs wire money to you.
These people tend to exaggerate their funding prospective, saying things like "they backed out". Ultimately VCs don't owe anybody money and startups are not entitled with funding.
Investing is just like any other purchase, and as a VC if you believe that a company is not worthwhile to invest then you should be ready to say no no matter what stage the conversation is in.
Ironically the fact that the company couldn't raise another round / continue without finding is a sign that VCs did make a right choice.
VCs are notorious for blowing smoke up your ass and then pulling funding at the very last second. Things like that happen all the time, it's not actually a surprise.
Yeah thats how mentorship works.. you give your support and encouragement, but you take care of yourself first and foremost, and dont go down with a sinking ship. Parents do the same, they help their kids, but if they still turn into little shit bags, parents will kick em out on their ass eventually.
So from what I have read they have only received one round of funding, that was their seed, of 150k, that was from the CEO/Founder Cival Van Der Lubbe. So I think he backed out when he realized he couldn't do what several companies have already done.
Hmm. There was an excellent comment here that has vanished. It added that there's been bad reviews of the product in the last week, and more importantly, a claim that the startup offered bribes of $500 for good reviews. Bad reviews are one thing, but I can see if there's even accusations of corruption, that might cause investors to back off at least until it can be cleared up.
The video review link is here - I've updated the timestamp directly to the bribe claim. Worth noting that the video title seems to have been updated in the last 24 hours too:
Yep, I noticed that too. All the same, offering to pay for a review, especially for completing it before a specific deadline, seems rather dodgy. At a minimum it would require reviewers to disclose that they had received compensation for the review.
It's worth mentioning that a reviewer on YouTube recently posted a scathing review of their product[1]. It's a long video so TL;DR: product is junk and they knew it plus they tried to pay him off with a paltry $500. No idea how much of am impact this made on the decision to shutter the company.
I particularly liked the part where he tells the engineer "you're not understanding me, I don't care why it doesn't work, I'm just telling you that it doesn't work. I'm a consumer and these are $300 earphones and they can't send a signal from my ears to my ass" [1]
Reminds me of so many people I've worked with who think it matters to consumers/users why something doesn't work. Like they can justify it, and it's not that big a deal.
From the video, they're wireless headphones, connected to his phone and his phone was in one of his back pockets and couldn't stay connected for more than '10-12 seconds'.
That's actually pretty typical; every Bluetooth earbud I've tried has tended to cut out when I move so that my body's blocking the signal path. Low-power, high-frequency signals like these really don't penetrate human tissue well, so when there's a large cross-section between the transmitter and receiver, not enough signal gets through for the decoder to produce audio. And the earbud form factor imposes a significant additional challenge, in that the antenna is already mostly surrounded by insulation.
I mostly solve this by carrying my phone in a side rather than a back pocket. But it still cuts out if I turn my head far enough to the side, as when checking traffic in a road I'm about to cross. Them's the breaks - if you want to wear a radio receiver in your ear and carry the transmitter in your pocket, there's some physics you pretty much just have to deal with.
Don't get me wrong - I totally get being upset with $150 earbuds that don't work reliably, especially when they're sold startup-style as the best thing since sliced bread and the cure for all the world's mobile-audio-related ills. But if that's your budget and solid signal in all circumstances is your major criterion, you might be better served by something that goes beyond the pure earbud form factor, like Apple's ones that have the antenna in an extension that puts it outside the pinna.
I have some very basic £14 headphones by Anker that I use and I can have my phone in my back pocket and they don't miss a beat. The headphones that he's reviewing retail at $300.
I'm not sure if that's truly normal and if it is, it shouldn't be. My first and only pair of Bluetooth headsets are the Beats X. I chose them because, unlike the AirPods, they stay in my ear and the ease of switching between my devices as the source. Never once had it cut out on me when I'm near my source. It only starts occasionally dropping when I'm 25+ feet away and with a wall in between. I'm not trying to say that Apple's are the best but rather am wondering if there's really that many headsets out there that perform so poorly.
As with the Anker set mentioned by someone else here, the Beats X doesn't suffer the same limitation of size and antenna placement - the RF hardware is on the cord that goes around your neck, and not in your actual ear. That's a vastly more hospitable environment for an antenna intended to pick up a Bluetooth signal. The AirPods similarly include a design feature that places the antenna mostly in free air. The Kanoa earbuds do not.
For comparison, my Rowkin Mini does fine anywhere in my apartment when my phone's sitting on the shelf by the door - but only if I happen to be oriented such that my head isn't between the earbud and the phone. If I turn to face the opposite direction, it cuts out and stays out unless I'm within about six feet. So the problem doesn't lie with the receiver per se, but with the thick layer of RF insulation that a human body can put between the receiver and the signal it's meant to pick up.
I don't think it's a totally insoluble problem. But it is a very hard one. As I said before, I get the dissatisfaction with $300 earbuds that don't perform up to the claimed spec. But, to the best of my knowledge, there is no fully in-ear Bluetooth earbud available for any price which won't exhibit the same behavior to a greater or lesser degree.
> It only starts occasionally dropping when I'm 25+ feet away and with a wall in between
The issue is water, not walls. I had a pair of bluetooth earbuds that I could set on a table and walk all around my apartment between rooms no problem, but using in a pocket in my cargo pants they'd cut out due to my body (what is it, 60% water?) covering the line of sight between the buds and my phone.
That said form follows function. If you've designed earbuds that fail to defy the laws of physics you shouldn't sell them.
The inexpensive wireless headphones I have have controls on the headphones which allow me to control my device my touching the headphones (which actually works really well - much easier to press the button on the headphones than get my phone out of a pocket or bag).
I get that a lot at work. I'm on the product team and all engineering I do is in service of a user in mind. I have colleagues on an engineering team who are sometimes more interested in the novelties of the technology itself. It's been very interesting to experience. I don't yet have any solutions.
Based on the symptoms Kanoa was an amateur shop that burnt through a lot of money and was on the final notice from their investors to start shipping. They tried that. It didn't work. The end.
But at least they got a colorful review to show for their journey.
I sold but, from my perspective, unless there is malfeasance it is all good. I know they probably worked hard and learned a lot along the way. I'd also not be hiring them to fill a position where they directed the company. I'd be open to them maturing to a leadership position, however.
"Our founder invested the initial capital in KANOA, which went primarily into market research and a feasibility study designed by a large engineering firm hired to develop the product."
Founder immediately outsourced basic research and development - suspect at best. Working with an established engineering firm may be a good choice at some point, but my guess is that costs were 10x what they should have been, especially in the early stages where the product was going through iterations, bug fixes, etc.
I don't see how Kickstarter or Indiegogo have much a future when many high-profile campaigns fail so spectacularly. The CEO of both those companies must know that "buyer beware" doesn't cut it and their namebrands are being tarnished by letting backers be swindled like this. They need a way to protect backers from complete losses of money, by delivering money in tranches after hitting milestones, or doing a complete demo in real life at the headquarters, once it reaches a certain level of funding.
If you don't mind sub-par call quality, the Bragi "The Headphone" headphones (yeah...) are absolutely incredible and are a worthy alternative to Apple AirPods while providing passive noise isolation. Great range, good sound quality (not as much bass as the AirPods), super duper comfortable, and looks amazing in your ears.
The Dash Pro is the more advanced version of these headphones but reviews are mixed and $350 is a lot of money to gamble on headphones (for most of us).
By "sub-par", I mean "people can hear you, mostly, until they start talking or you step outside/out of range."
If that wasn't a problem, I'd still be wearing mine. Absolutely loved the product.
Some monitors just have bad backlight. I had old one where maximizing terminal(which is mostly black) window caused taskbar and window handle also to turn almost black.
Basically trying to save face after making inexcusable and amateur mistakes. They should just fess up and say, hey we suck at fucking everything, but we wanted to take your money anyway, now we cant even do that. boo hoo.
52 comments
[ 1.9 ms ] story [ 120 ms ] threadIf you put any URL in, it redirects to /password.
Wow, you are right. https://getkanoa.com/wescrewedupbigtime
With that note, I have a question!
>Most significantly and to our unpleasant surprise, our investors recently backed out of our funding round.
I don't understand something about this.
I mean, yes, it is very un-specific, but I am wondering, when is the 'point of no return' for something like this? Is it possible for a VC firm to go through all the motions, and say all the right things, and then back out 10 seconds before wiring payment for whatever reason they want?
Of course, I don't know if that happened here. It just seems to me like stories regularly appear of a VC backing out at the last minute.
Furthermore funding is often not a one time payment but is paid in installments with preset milestones which means that the investor can still pull out at any time.
For the most part the investors hold all the cards, sure you can potentially draft a contract that would lock investors but no one would commit to those terms.
These people tend to exaggerate their funding prospective, saying things like "they backed out". Ultimately VCs don't owe anybody money and startups are not entitled with funding.
Investing is just like any other purchase, and as a VC if you believe that a company is not worthwhile to invest then you should be ready to say no no matter what stage the conversation is in.
Ironically the fact that the company couldn't raise another round / continue without finding is a sign that VCs did make a right choice.
I'd be surprised if there wasn't some sort of cool off period in the contracts.
The video review link is here - I've updated the timestamp directly to the bribe claim. Worth noting that the video title seems to have been updated in the last 24 hours too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36Gw3tErUSM&t=24m40s
1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36Gw3tErUSM
Reminds me of so many people I've worked with who think it matters to consumers/users why something doesn't work. Like they can justify it, and it's not that big a deal.
1. https://youtu.be/36Gw3tErUSM?t=16m20s
To be fair, that's not the intended function of earphones.
I mostly solve this by carrying my phone in a side rather than a back pocket. But it still cuts out if I turn my head far enough to the side, as when checking traffic in a road I'm about to cross. Them's the breaks - if you want to wear a radio receiver in your ear and carry the transmitter in your pocket, there's some physics you pretty much just have to deal with.
Don't get me wrong - I totally get being upset with $150 earbuds that don't work reliably, especially when they're sold startup-style as the best thing since sliced bread and the cure for all the world's mobile-audio-related ills. But if that's your budget and solid signal in all circumstances is your major criterion, you might be better served by something that goes beyond the pure earbud form factor, like Apple's ones that have the antenna in an extension that puts it outside the pinna.
I was just trying to indicate that what he was saying wasn't just a hyperbolic/flippant statement, but a use-case not fulfilled by the product.
I guess there's no easy way round the fact that we're ugly giant bags of mostly water :-)
For comparison, my Rowkin Mini does fine anywhere in my apartment when my phone's sitting on the shelf by the door - but only if I happen to be oriented such that my head isn't between the earbud and the phone. If I turn to face the opposite direction, it cuts out and stays out unless I'm within about six feet. So the problem doesn't lie with the receiver per se, but with the thick layer of RF insulation that a human body can put between the receiver and the signal it's meant to pick up.
I don't think it's a totally insoluble problem. But it is a very hard one. As I said before, I get the dissatisfaction with $300 earbuds that don't perform up to the claimed spec. But, to the best of my knowledge, there is no fully in-ear Bluetooth earbud available for any price which won't exhibit the same behavior to a greater or lesser degree.
The issue is water, not walls. I had a pair of bluetooth earbuds that I could set on a table and walk all around my apartment between rooms no problem, but using in a pocket in my cargo pants they'd cut out due to my body (what is it, 60% water?) covering the line of sight between the buds and my phone.
That said form follows function. If you've designed earbuds that fail to defy the laws of physics you shouldn't sell them.
But at least they got a colorful review to show for their journey.
Founder immediately outsourced basic research and development - suspect at best. Working with an established engineering firm may be a good choice at some point, but my guess is that costs were 10x what they should have been, especially in the early stages where the product was going through iterations, bug fixes, etc.
https://www.revols.com/
But they haven't yet launched to backers so, It's a risk.
How can they be "the best on the market" without having launched?
The Dash Pro is the more advanced version of these headphones but reviews are mixed and $350 is a lot of money to gamble on headphones (for most of us).
By "sub-par", I mean "people can hear you, mostly, until they start talking or you step outside/out of range."
If that wasn't a problem, I'd still be wearing mine. Absolutely loved the product.
I don't think it's the webpage's fault, but something on pages like it is triggering it. Anyone know what the fix is?
//edit// Firefox 54.0.1 (32-bit) as well.