Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Azreal13 wrote:
...you're assuming that their turnover translates into significant liquidity, which simply isn't true.

I'm not assuming anything.

I'm basing my opinion solely on the numbers in the above article (FACT) and my many years of experience in the business world. A company that has that kind of revenue stream and investment portfolio has no business "crowd funding". It's shameful.

Furthermore, if a company that large is looking to "crowd funding" for liquidity, they are doing something very wrong and need a much better business plan or Executive Officer. Something just doesn't add up if that is the case. Not by a long shot.

I think I've said what I have to say, really. Very interesting conversation, though. Thanks. They will certainly go on to be very fruitful whether I support them or not.

Mdlbuildr wrote:
The way I see it is if you are a hugely successful company, you don't need and shouldn't seek "crowd funding". My view is that "crowd funding" is for those chasing a dream and just can't get the financial backing to make it a reality.

To me it's like Apple starting a KS campaign to fund the R&D for the next iteration of the iPhone.

So how do you feel about large companies taking pre-orders for not-yet-released product?

At exactly what point in the development process is it suddenly 'ok' for any given company to ask for your money?

Mdlbuildr wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
...you're assuming that their turnover translates into significant liquidity, which simply isn't true.

I'm not assuming anything.

I'm basing my opinion solely on the numbers in the above article (FACT) and my many years of experience in the business world. A company that has that kind of revenue stream and investment portfolio has no business "crowd funding". It's shameful.

You are assuming a lot. We don't even have a gauge on their profitability for a start, let alone their overheads or liabilities.

Also, for the third time I think, KS brings marketing advantages completely separated from the very efficient cash generation, but the efficient cash generation alone should be enough to make any company in a position to use it to consider it.

Furthermore, if a company that large is looking to "crowd funding" for liquidity, they are doing something very wrong and need a much better business plan or Executive Officer. Something just doesn't add up if that is the case. Not by a long shot.

Something like having large amounts of capital tied up in inventory, capital investments etc to try and keep pace with explosive growth?

Nothing unusual or suspicious in that.

I think I've said what I have to say, really. Very interesting conversation, though. Thanks. They will certainly go on to be very fruitful whether I support them or not.

Fair enough, you've not really presented any logical counter argument, but you're entitled to feel how you do and act accordingly.

 insaniak wrote:

So how do you feel about large companies taking pre-orders for not-yet-released product?

You are talking apples and oranges. With KS, you aren't guaranteed anything. Effectively, the company can take your money, and not deliver anything and you as the the consumer are SOL.

With pre-orders, you are essentially guaranteed something as soon as it is released or you get your money back. There are also legal ramifications if you pre-order something and the company screws you. This has bit some software people in the behind before.

I think pre-orders are a bad idea as a consumer. I'm at the age where I don't need anything the day it comes out or to be guaranteed a copy of whatever. I'm a wait and see kind of guy. This is especially hot with the gaming world and I prefer to let other effectively beta test new software before anyone gets a dime from me. Nothing to me is urgent enough to give anyone my hard earned cash before I can have a product in hand. Believe it or not, I learned that lesson as a Beta Tester for several MMORPGs. That's just me.

If you absolutely have to have it at the stroke of midnight and be the first on your block to have it, well, it's your money, not mine. Who am I to say?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Mdlbuildr wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
...you're assuming that their turnover translates into significant liquidity, which simply isn't true.

I'm not assuming anything.

I'm basing my opinion solely on the numbers in the above article (FACT) and my many years of experience in the business world. A company that has that kind of revenue stream and investment portfolio has no business "crowd funding". It's shameful.

You are assuming a lot. We don't even have a gauge on their profitability for a start, let alone their overheads or liabilities.

Also, for the third time I think, KS brings marketing advantages completely separated from the very efficient cash generation, but the efficient cash generation alone should be enough to make any company in a position to use it to consider it.

Furthermore, if a company that large is looking to "crowd funding" for liquidity, they are doing something very wrong and need a much better business plan or Executive Officer. Something just doesn't add up if that is the case. Not by a long shot.

Something like having large amounts of capital tied up in inventory, capital investments etc to try and keep pace with explosive growth?

Nothing unusual or suspicious in that.

I think I've said what I have to say, really. Very interesting conversation, though. Thanks. They will certainly go on to be very fruitful whether I support them or not.

Fair enough, you've not really presented any logical counter argument, but you're entitled to feel how you do and act accordingly.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I find your argument just as devoid of logic as you find mind. Best to you.

A company can, and has, go out of business between taking a pre order and supplying the product.

It's exactly the same process, it's just the consumer's cash enters the equation later in the process with conventional pre order.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Please, explain to me how a company using the most efficient, legal, method available to it to generate the cash needed to expand its product portfolio is in any way illogical?

 Azreal13 wrote:
A company can, and has, go out of business between taking a pre order and supplying the product.

It's exactly the same process, it's just the consumer's cash enters the equation later in the process with conventional pre order.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Please, explain to me how a company using the most efficient, legal, method available to it to generate the cash needed to expand its product portfolio is in any way illogical?

As I've said, we're on opposite ends of the spectrum. I've also said that I have nothing else to add. I'm not interested in trying to convince you of my ideology as I think I've given my viewpoint and you don't agree. Nothing I will say will make you understand my viewpoint and I don't think you will convince me of your viewpoint as I don't agree with it. That's okay.

No, I understand your viewpoint, but your viewpoint doesn't stand up to scrutiny, as it's based on an emotional reaction that you cannot possibly justify in the context of finance and corporate decision making.

You think it's "wrong" for CMON to use crowdfunding because you've arbitrarily drawn a line in the financial sand where a company becomes too big to be allowed to and you've drawn that arbitrary line based on incomplete information of the company's financial situation.

I've offered what I feel are solid reasons why a company would choose KS, even if funding were available elsewhere, and you've offered nothing but this "wrongness" with nothing to back it up.

There's plenty of scope, if you've been in business for as long as you claim, perhaps offer some upsides to the more traditional methods of generating a cash injection? Explain your own decision making in a similar situation?

The fact that CMON have done so well inside and outside of the Kickstarter environment suggests that few share your opinion, which doesn't invalidate it, but it does perhaps place extra pressure on you justifying it.

 Azreal13 wrote:
No, I understand your viewpoint, but your viewpoint doesn't stand up to scrutiny, as it's based on an emotional reaction that you cannot possibly justify in the context of finance and corporate decision making.

You think it's "wrong" for CMON to use crowdfunding because you've arbitrarily drawn a line in the financial sand where a company becomes too big to be allowed to and you've drawn that arbitrary line based on incomplete information of the company's financial situation.

I've offered what I feel are solid reasons why a company would choose KS, even if funding were available elsewhere, and you've offered nothing but this "wrongness" with nothing to back it up.

There's plenty of scope, if you've been in business for as long as you claim, perhaps offer some upsides to the more traditional methods of generating a cash injection? Explain your own decision making in a similar situation?

The fact that CMON have done so well inside and outside of the Kickstarter environment suggests that few share your opinion, which doesn't invalidate it, but it does perhaps place extra pressure on you justifying it.

Okay, I''ll bite.

A company with that kind of portfolio can drum up MAJOR cash if they look in the right place for it. Something they can get immediately, cash in hand, and if they are wise and pay it back properly, they will not have to worry about the interest paid as there are tax structures to shelter money that is being paid for interest wise.

KS is peanuts. There is no guarantee on the amount of money you get and it can hold up your production line almost indefinitely if you are relying on it. If you are waiting for crowd funding cash to support the production and distribution of your product in a $20M company, you are lying about your revenue and investment portfolio. Either that or you have no earthly clue how to run an efficient business. There are so many ways to get money that are far superior than hoping for online browsers to back you. Not only that, but you can get a lot more of it and do a lot more with it in the same time frame as you would be waiting for your "crowd funding" to come through.

If you are having inventory problems, and your overhead is high, you should be factoring that into your investment portfolio. You can claim revenue stream and your investment portfolio all you want, but if you are saying you are a $20M company but are at risk for going bankrupt to deliver a product and stock what you have in a warehouse, you are doing something very wrong.

Again, with that kind of revenue stream and investment portfolio, there are much more efficient and beneficial ways for your company to get the revenue you need for new product production.

The fact that CMON did well in the KS environment means either that they did deliver what they said they would or there are a lot of gullible people or a combination of both.

Sorry man, but business wise, CMON can and should be doing a lot better than relying on KS, IF what they say about how their business is doing is indeed factual. The fact that they got a $5M investment (if I read the statement correctly) means they shouldn't need KS at all and can continue to expand exponentially. And in a much more efficient manner than waiting for KS.

You do realize that money from KS is actually income (unlike their warehouse stock) and not money they can write off or use as a tax shelter because of interest rates and such right? That alone means that they are funding their project with money that is taxed at a higher rate than money they borrowed. This effectively means that KS money is actually costing them more money. So unless they are crooked and not delivering a product based on the shelter that KS gives them to not deliver on their product, KS money can actually hurt them. Unsold stock is considered a loss tax wise. Cash generated isn't.

Oh, all that AND I think it is piggish and unethical to ask other people to pay for something your should be able to afford easily with that portfolio.

Well if you go to the bank you only get money, and you need to have a business plan ready to convince the back manager to lend you money.
Kickstarter generates money as well as instant market research on your clients and direct feedback from those pledgers.
And CMON have found a way to use it successfully, even if they grow more, it has proven to be profitable with less risk.
And as far as i know their customers do not mind, if GW had used Kickstarter to gauge interest of specialists games maybe they would have returned to it sooner

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Well if you go to the bank you only get money, and you need to have a business plan ready to convince the back manager to lend you money.

If a $20M company has to do that, they have no idea what they're doing and aren't really in the $20M realm at all. With that portfolio, you aren't dealing with the Bank Manager. You're dealing with the President of the bank.

I also think many of you seriously over estimate just how much information someone can glean from KS.

You know, let's take this a step further. You borrow money from the bank. This gives a you negative cash flow as far as your taxes as a company is concerned. This a major advantage when you file your business tax return. If you claim income, like KS money, that means positive cash flow which is bad in the business world for tax purposes. So yes, for business purposes borrowing money is GOOD! It gives you perks as a company you won't enjoy from "crowd funding". Imagine that!! Don't forget, too, you aren't a public company so you don't have many shareholders to answer to. In CMON there are a grand total of three. THREE.

A company with 33 employees and a $20M portfolio should be looking to get as much negative cash flow as possible. This means less money gets taken away by Uncle Sam. If it is done wisely, it can make your company actually more successful. You see, peanuts like KS isn't going to make your company successful. Big loans with low interest rates, paid back wisely is what makes companies money.

I don't think anybody was saying CMON was relying on KS?

In fact, I suggested that they were actively choosing it as an option rather than being forced to it.

CMON's last 5 projects raised $8m. So, yeah, peanuts.

$8m with no loss of equity, no collateral at risk, no interest or loan repayments to cover, a powerful marketing platform (for free) and immediate payment on completion of the project.

Income or no, there's about a million different ways that money can be offset against tax, so that really isn't an issue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and it's unethical to ask people to pay for your product? Because that's all they're doing, the timing's just a bit different from standard.

 Azreal13 wrote:
I don't think anybody was saying CMON was relying on KS?

In fact, I suggested that they were actively choosing it as an option rather than being forced to it.

CMON's last 5 projects raised $8m. So, yeah, peanuts.

$8m with no loss of equity, no collateral at risk, no interest or loan repayments to cover, a powerful marketing platform (for free) and immediate payment on completion of the project.

Income or no, there's about a million different ways that money can be offset against tax, so that really isn't an issue.

No there aren't, without risking your investment very unwisely. The only thing you can use tax wise to offset that money is inventory or hard goods. If you used most of it for that, it would leave you with no capitol. Come on, man. Give me a break. A million different ways? LOL. How about you list a hundred. One way or another, a gak ton of that $8M is not being used for what you need it to without major risk.

No loss of equity? This isn't a house buddy. Hard goods don't have the kind of equity you think. Did you buy land with this money? THAT'S major equity. Little resin miniatures and a website and some hard goods is not equity. You have to own something of significant value to gather equity. You don't offer shares as you're not a public company so where is the Equity? Who is going to give you the money back for this equity you say you have?

Wait a sec. If they generated $8M from KS, that pretty much means they relied on it for start up equity didn't they?? Then that equity pretty much disappeared when they got their warehouse stock, developed a website, etc. No? Every penny they spend is loss of equity. That's the difference between KS and a loan. KS money disappears, equity is GONE. Bank loan is repaid, equity goes UP. See how that works?

Hmmmm, I wonder what Mark Cuban would say, LOL?

Keep poking holes, buddy. Or just let it go and let's agree to disagree.

Mdlbuildr wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

So how do you feel about large companies taking pre-orders for not-yet-released product?

You are talking apples and oranges. With KS, you aren't guaranteed anything. Effectively, the company can take your money, and not deliver anything and you as the the consumer are SOL.

With pre-orders, you are essentially guaranteed something as soon as it is released or you get your money back. There are also legal ramifications if you pre-order something and the company screws you. This has bit some software people in the behind before..

You have deftly side-stepped the point.

The point I was responding to was your claim that established companies shouldn't be using Kickstarter because they don't 'need' to.

So I was trying to establish at what point before the release of a product you feel that it is acceptable for a company to take your money.


While they have some legal differences, ultimately the purpose of a Kickstarter and the purpose of a pre-order are more or less the same - to offset some of the expense of production and distribution by getting money up-front. The only real difference is that a Kickstarter can be taking your money at any point in the development process (depending on how far along the project is before the Kickstarter ends), whereas pre-orders are normally for a product that is up to the actual production stage.

 insaniak wrote:

Mdlbuildr wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

So how do you feel about large companies taking pre-orders for not-yet-released product?

You are talking apples and oranges. With KS, you aren't guaranteed anything. Effectively, the company can take your money, and not deliver anything and you as the the consumer are SOL.

With pre-orders, you are essentially guaranteed something as soon as it is released or you get your money back. There are also legal ramifications if you pre-order something and the company screws you. This has bit some software people in the behind before..

You have deftly side-stepped the point.

The point I was responding to was your claim that established companies shouldn't be using Kickstarter because they don't 'need' to.

So I was trying to establish at what point before the release of a product you feel that it is acceptable for a company to take your money.


While they have some legal differences, ultimately the purpose of a Kickstarter and the purpose of a pre-order are more or less the same - to offset some of the expense of production and distribution by getting money up-front. The only real difference is that a Kickstarter can be taking your money at any point in the development process (depending on how far along the project is before the Kickstarter ends), whereas pre-orders are normally for a product that is up to the actual production stage.

Some legal differences? One has no obligation to give you anything for your money, the other does. Pretty big difference.

You are seeing this backwards, I'm afraid. With KS it is an idea being pitched with no product at all. With a pre-order the product is alive and breathing with a defined release date with the promise of an actual product in hand. No such thing on KS. No such thing at all.

In my view, as I've said, KS is for someone or an entity with an idea that needs to have financially backing which it can't get on it's own and has very little hope to in today's financial climate. KS can help an idea to fruition into a product.

When do companies offer pre-orders? Usually after the alpha stage of whatever it is they want you to order. They've already spent significant amounts of their own money in R&D. Now they have something to show and hope some people are impressed enough with it that they want it as soon as it's available. I promise you that the companies that offer pre-orders on their products do not need the money to complete the production of the product.

You really think EA Games needs money from pre-orders to finish the next Black Ops game? Or Ferrari needs the money from a pre-order to complete production on their newest super car?

I'll answer that question for you. It's absolutely no. EA Games uses pre-orders to project sales. This makes the stock holders very happy. Ferrari does it for the exclusive that can afford the latest super car.

Please name me one company that asks for pre-orders to actually finish a product because they run out of money to complete it. I wonder how many pre-orders they actually get in that instance.

Off to bed!! Have a good night everyone!!

Mdlbuildr wrote:
With KS it is an idea being pitched with no product at all.

This is very rarely the case with Kickstarters from established companies, other than right back when KS was still fairly new.

It's far more normal now for established companies to go to Kickstarter with a product that is at the very least at the end of the design stage and ready to start getting sculpts produced and printing done. Some are more advanced than that, just waiting on funding to start actual production.

And most of them also have defined release dates. Whether or not they manage to hit those dates varies, of course... but they still generally have them... and as an established brand, it's far more damaging to them if they mess up that release than it is for a small start-up, for whom punters are generally more likely to allow some leeway.

In my view, as I've said, KS is for someone or an entity with an idea that needs to have financially backing which it can't get on it's own and has very little hope to in today's financial climate. KS can help an idea to fruition into a product.

Then your view is out of step with what KS actually is.

When do companies offer pre-orders? Usually after the alpha stage of whatever it is they want you to order. They've already spent significant amounts of their own money in R&D. Now they have something to show and hope some people are impressed enough with it that they want it as soon as it's available.

You've just described every Kickstarter from Mantic. And pretty much every Kickstarter by CMoN.

I promise you that the companies that offer pre-orders on their products do not need the money to complete the production of the product.

You really think EA Games needs money from pre-orders to finish the next Black Ops game? Or Ferrari needs the money from a pre-order to complete production on their newest super car?

I'll answer that question for you. It's absolutely no. EA Games uses pre-orders to project sales. This makes the stock holders very happy. Ferrari does it for the exclusive that can afford the latest super car.

Please name me one company that asks for pre-orders to actually finish a product because they run out of money to complete it. I wonder how many pre-orders they actually get in that instance.

You're arguing a point I didn't actually make.

I didn't say that companies need pre-orders to finish product. I said that pre-orders offset the cost of production and distribution. They do so by allowing the company to gauge interest in the product before it actually goes to market, and adjust production and distribution accordingly (unless the company in question is GW, where pre-orders are offered for such a laughably short time that they really serve no purpose whatsoever).

Most of the established companies using Kickstarter are, I believe, using it for the exact same purpose as they would otherwise be using pre-orders. It just gives them the cash slightly earlier in the process.

KS offers a way to maximize the per unit profit that the standard retail channel does not.

If CMON offers a boxed game that retails for $100 they would likely sell it to a distributor for around $40. For simplicity lets say that each unit costs them $15 to produce (realistically it's probably close to $8). That means they see a $25 return per unit when it's sold through retail channels. When they offer that same item on KS for $100 they are in effect selling direct to their customer base without distribution taking out their slice. They lose $10 off the top to KS fees but they are now seeing a $75 return on each unit, which is a MASSIVE increase and which is why it's done so well to grow their revenue stream over the last several years. (an extra $35 per unit spread over 19k+ backers increases the base profit by over $600k without factoring in exclusives)

Then you add on exclusives which costs literally cost them pennies individually and it creates a unique market where those are sold individually for $10. Turning a 10-15 cent item into a $9.85 profit per unit. Assuming the average bidder picks up $50 in the exclusives (which is probably low) you're getting close to an additional million in profits beyond the $600k coming from core units. (and likely a good chunk more as most everyone I know that backed spent a $100 or more on promos) That's a huge chunk of profit to willingly walk away from, and better yet it's all money that comes in before the green light gets turned on with production.

It would be borderline stupid and irresponsible for them NOT to use KS when it increases their margins so effectively. People may disagree with the "morality" of using KS when a company is well established but from a business standpoint it's an incredibly powerful tool for maximizing your investment return which grows the company and in turn contributes to an increased ability to produce more games and put more resources into future product development.

Who takes harm from CMON using Kickstarter?

What if CMON set up their own version of Kickstarter just to do their own projects? They are probably big enough to do that, and it would save them the Kickstarter fee.

Would it be immoral for them to do that because they aren't using cash in hand or a bank loan to fund projects?

Deleted

Pledging to Kickstarter is voluntary.

Limited companies can get a loan and go bankrupt.

 insaniak wrote:

I didn't say that companies need pre-orders to finish product. I said that pre-orders offset the cost of production and distribution.

Do you see how contradictory this statement is??

If they don't have the capitol to offset the cost of production, how can they finish the project? And what you are saying is actually false. That's not what pre-orders are for big corporations. They are for sales projections.

If CMON is using KS as a "pre-order", why not just ask for pre-orders? THAT is the crux of the issue right there. KS doesn't want to take the risk, even though they can.

And as I've pointed out, there are much better ways to get capitol quickly and more efficiently than KS with a better ultimate return for a company that is claiming $20M.

Why don't CMON use them, then?

Mdlbuildr wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
I don't think anybody was saying CMON was relying on KS?

In fact, I suggested that they were actively choosing it as an option rather than being forced to it.

CMON's last 5 projects raised $8m. So, yeah, peanuts.

$8m with no loss of equity, no collateral at risk, no interest or loan repayments to cover, a powerful marketing platform (for free) and immediate payment on completion of the project.

Income or no, there's about a million different ways that money can be offset against tax, so that really isn't an issue.

No there aren't, without risking your investment very unwisely. The only thing you can use tax wise to offset that money is inventory or hard goods. If you used most of it for that, it would leave you with no capitol. Come on, man. Give me a break. A million different ways? LOL. How about you list a hundred. One way or another, a gak ton of that $8M is not being used for what you need it to without major risk.

I'm no accountant, but I've spent enough time talking to them to know that tax avoidance is very much a thing. There's a lot of ways of offsetting the amount of tax you pay, because, as I'm sure you're aware, you pay tax on profit, not on income. Being unfamiliar with CMON's structure, not being an accountant, and that information not being a matter of public record, I can't even begin to speculate as to how they may do it, but I do know they'll have options.

No loss of equity? This isn't a house buddy. Hard goods don't have the kind of equity you think. Did you buy land with this money? THAT'S major equity. Little resin miniatures and a website and some hard goods is not equity. You have to own something of significant value to gather equity. You don't offer shares as you're not a public company so where is the Equity? Who is going to give you the money back for this equity you say you have?

Yeah...

Nothing says "I'm getting out of my depth" like not understanding a correct term used in the right context and then doubling down by using the wrong application of the term in your response.

Equity refers to ownership of the company, in this context. Normally as shareholding. Land, stock etc are assets. Completely different terms. Sure, equity in terms of property refers to the difference between purchase price and valuation, but we aren't talking about property.

Investors want something for their money. This is normally equity, which subsequently entitles them to a share of future profits. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, the money can mean you can expand your business to a point where the remaining percentage is worth more than the whole company can ever have been without it, but you're still giving up a piece of your company, and the cost of this over future years can be substantial.

Wait a sec. If they generated $8M from KS, that pretty much means they relied on it for start up equity didn't they?? Then that equity pretty much disappeared when they got their warehouse stock, developed a website, etc. No? Every penny they spend is loss of equity. That's the difference between KS and a loan. KS money disappears, equity is GONE. Bank loan is repaid, equity goes UP. See how that works?

CMON existed before they started Kickstarting projects, so no, not startup capital. Given their growth, I'm sure they originally were presented with far fewer options a few years ago with their first project, but it's self evident it's done great things for them, so why look elsewhere, especially when elsewhere has the drawbacks already covered?

Hmmmm, I wonder what Mark Cuban would say, LOL?

Probably something similar to Peter Jones.

Keep poking holes, buddy. Or just let it go and let's agree to disagree.

I'm happy to agree that you're attempting to justify an emotional response with logic when the logic dictates that the emotional response is wrong. How's that?

Deleted

It's a discussion chap, you post stuff, I respond, that's how it goes.

Nothing says "I've lost" like I'll call the other guy immature and storm off, because nobody ever admits they're wrong in the Internet though, eh?

Deleted

Wikipedia wrote:Equity
2.
the value of the shares issued by a company.
"he owns 62% of the group's equity"
synonyms: value, worth, valuation; More
ownership, rights, proprietorship, right of possession
"the builder owns 25% of the equity in the property"

Just saying.

Mdlbuildr wrote:
Do you see how contradictory this statement is??

If they don't have the capitol to offset the cost of production, how can they finish the project?

Who said they don't have the money to finish the project?

And what you are saying is actually false. That's not what pre-orders are for big corporations. They are for sales projections.

Yes... which I also mentioned.

If CMON is using KS as a "pre-order", why not just ask for pre-orders?

Because Kickstarter gets them extra exposure, and lets them plan their production volume further out from release.

Deleted

Mdlbuildr wrote:

I've addressed this in some of my previous posts. If a $20M company needs to do that, they are doing something very wrong.

So you're still approaching this from the angle that the company 'needs' to use Kickstarter, rather than that they're using it because it's a handy tool for planning and increasing sales.


If you drop your misconception that Kickstarter is only for penniless vagrants, you might find yourself butting your head against the wall a bit less.

Deleted