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.

What lobbyists finally got his mitts into keeping publishers relevant?

As far as I can see , this wont effect Kickstarter in any way, as it is talking about equity.

from this page on KS (https://www.kickstarter.com/help/prohibited)

"Creators cannot offer equity or financial incentives (ownership, share of profits, repayment/loans, cash-value equivalents, etc)."


also, that guardian link says the same thing
"The rule change will not affect some of the better known sites such as Kickstarter and Indiegogo, which do not offer shares in ventures but instead ask for donations."


So, in a nutshell, I cant see this making any difference to almost all of the wargaming/miniature market. None I have ever seen offered anything other than product.

I'm sorry, but is this not evident to everyone that this is an attempt by the traditional publishing industry to destroy crowdfunding as a viable business model within Britain?

Do you have to be confused about the language of the new regulation? Ask yourself this, what is not working about the present legal system with regards to Kickstarter et al and why is this legislation necessary?

Reading
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/06/crowdfunding-regulator-10-percent-rule

I could only focus on this:

From 1 April, investment in companies who raise funds on sites such Crowdcube by offering shares...

April first..

I do find it funny/sad that the first kind of regulation we see into Crowd funding since its booming popularity is not investor protection from scams or projects that don't deliver. But rather ways to limit investors using methods that go outside the traditonal, get a loan/work with publisher.

Having reviewed the document directly, it only affects investments made (peer to peer loans, investment in shares etc) wont affect the gaming community at all.

 Shandara wrote:

From 1 April, investment in companies who raise funds on sites such Crowdcube by offering shares...

April first..

If only a huge amount of UK business didn't use 6th of April as the start of their financial year.
Lots more use 1st of April, for a clean calendar month.

Not that that stops anyone doing this kind of thing at any time they like . . . :(

Ye, this will make no difference at all to crowd funding like KS. This is something aimed squarely at non traditional financial investments, like businesses getting money by selling shares/equity in their company with little to no backup and avoiding the traditional requirements of investment. Exactly where regulation is needed. It's to stop people sinking large chunks of their income in to dodge investments on the promise of large returns when they have no idea what they are doing.

IMO it is a needed bit of regulation and has come at the right time to stop allot of people loosing allot of money and despite what some people are saying this is not the banks trying to control the Internet and berrying their heads, but the regulators recognizing the emergence of new investment platforms and novel investments and bringing them in line with other investments.

But, as normal, on the Internet, the sky is falling.

I figured I'd put this here rather than start a new thread (maybe a MOD can update the thread ttile?), Paypal has changed it's policies regarding funds raised by crowdfunding while this affects creators more than backers and actually gives backers more protection. It looks like more changes are going on in relation to crowd funding.

This won't affect kickstarter but may affect things like after campaign PMs paid through Paypal and seperate pledge sites that allow backing outside/along side a crowdfunding campaign.

Here's the link
https://www.paypal-businesscenter.com/content/crowdfunding-help-successful-campaign

In short Paypal will not release all funds to creators and will retain some if they feel there is a risk as follows:

High likelihood of negative customer experiences from chargebacks, refunds, or fraud.

Non-compliance with our Anti-Money Laundering Policy.

Negative publicity about a campaign causing donors to ask for their money back.

Accepting payments unrelated to the campaign for a high risk business through the same account.

They also mention about getting products within agreed timelines which means project creators will be more accountable for late delivery and goes on to discuss preselling:

Examples of Preselling associated with crowdfunding are:

During an active campaign fundraisers are also accepting pre-orders for the campaign product or service on their website.

After a campaign has closed fundraisers are accepting pre-orders for the product or service on their website.

Very interesting... may put a kink in campaigns that are pushing for people to add after the fact instead of pledging full amounts during the campaign.

Good to see at least one company looking to create some accountability in the process... but I don't think this would work for the normal funds raised (which it doesn't seem to apply to) since creators would need those released to complete the project, seemingly.

Well I fear Indiegogo may take a big hit from this since they rely on paypal for their payments

eg the Otherworld Indiegogo page was temporarily pulled from the site even though it had been funded a year or more ago as they were getting so many complaints from backers over the non-delivery of product

and I agree it may (potentially) bork the use of paypal running as an alternative payment source for those with no CC alongside KS campaigns

(although a big project might not care that a small percentage of their funds would be held until the product was either in hand or delivered as they have enough buffer room, small projects would have a hard time with it though)

Just to put my tuppence in..

I work in procurement (for local government) so I have to get clued up on crap like this all the time.

Right now there's a consultation going on to see whether the crowd sourcing market needs further regulation, given there have been some 'investment' type CS's that have gone belly up, leaving some out of pocket. Given that they inherently appeal to the small investor, the risk of defaults causing a financial burden that the government would then, possibly, need to compensate, the FCA decided to regulate, to make sure no one would be hit by a 'virtual run'.
As the regulation stands (as written) it does NOT affect:
'Rewards' or 'Donations' - given that pretty much all gaming CS's are 'reward' based, they're in the clear, they can carry on as normal.
As for it being a way for the old school to keep control - I'd disagree. It's designed to protect the small investor from bad deals - something that until recently the Uk had very little of (hence the bank crashes).
We're all good - the consultation documents I've seen and read point towards rewards and donations being left well alone, as they play to the HMGov's 'small business strategy' - and they're not about to affect that in an election year....