Kickstarter has nil to do with investment and a lot to do with generating interest. You definitely need to have a compelling idea/product in the first place but some projects generate a lot of interest through Kickstarter.
In any case, it's better to get the scoop straight from the source: "Kickstarter is a new form of commerce and patronage."
Many of the the Kickstarter projects are projects that could not get funding outside Kickstarter. For example the DoubleFine project had repeatedly tried to get funding from publishers but failed.
I do wonder what impact a failed Kickstarter has for venture funded projects like Pixate. Does it kill any chance of future funding by proving that customers aren't that willing to pay?
I ran a Kickstarter for OpenPhoto. But it had a few unique properties, mainly being open source. We raised a modest $25k which paid for my time since I already quit my job to do this. So, I needed the funds to complete the work.
I'm considering running a second Kickstarter for a set of large features to the product. Thankfully, I'm not in a position where I need VC funds so shooting myself in the foot there doesn't matter.
Also, I'd be Kickstarting for features that aren't already planned in the main roadmap (which I'm going to rely on for revenue). If the Kickstarter fails then those features don't get added in but the product still remains viable without losing face.
Yep...there are a lot of questionable kickstarter projects...even ones that have done incredibly well despite having no real product to show. The bigger problem, in my view, is how your actions affect the rest of the Kickstarter community. As soon as people start failing on delivering and running out of money (which has already happened), people will begin to lose faith in Kickstarter, and this hurts people who want to launch legitimate, rational, and honest fund-raising efforts.
This is my worry, that the Kickstarter brand will suffer some large blows because of the lack of foresight from its users -- both the listers who use it as their initial means to market a concept and the contributors who don't understand the risks if it meets goal but doesn't meet schedules or ship at all.
I am aware of the socratic method that's why I wrote "an attempt at a cutesy nod". The article does not read like any of Plato's dialogues that I have read, especially the last paragraph.
13 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 47.4 ms ] threadIn any case, it's better to get the scoop straight from the source: "Kickstarter is a new form of commerce and patronage."
I ran a Kickstarter for OpenPhoto. But it had a few unique properties, mainly being open source. We raised a modest $25k which paid for my time since I already quit my job to do this. So, I needed the funds to complete the work.
I'm considering running a second Kickstarter for a set of large features to the product. Thankfully, I'm not in a position where I need VC funds so shooting myself in the foot there doesn't matter.
Also, I'd be Kickstarting for features that aren't already planned in the main roadmap (which I'm going to rely on for revenue). If the Kickstarter fails then those features don't get added in but the product still remains viable without losing face.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/jmathai/openphoto-a-phot...
That's not a strong case against trying it... just against relying too much on it, to the exclusion of other customer-acquisition efforts.