Dust Tactics Legal action from Dust studios against Battlefront?

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.

**angryboy2k**

As I said on the update itself:

I wrote:
There shouldn’t be a need for you to see the list of products that have been manufactured. It’s all backwards; if backers were funding production of new miniatures as the Kickstarter claimed, you should have forwarded a purchase order that listed what you NEEDED to Dust Studios, who would then have invoiced you accordingly and produced to meet that list.
The fact that they wouldn’t ship out until you’d paid in advance also speaks volumes. No business relationship I’ve ever been involved in required payment in advance beyond the first transaction or two. You should have been on terms like Net 30 Days with DS and the only reason you wouldn’t be after this length of time in partnership would be if you consistently failed to pay invoices on time. Why the hell did you leave W9.1-3 outstanding for so long?
Assuming people want cash refunds, what will happen once you run out of the $115,330?
The offer of stock credit is very generous but also very ironic, given that a large number of backers (myself and my good friend included) are still actually owed items from the Wave One inventory. You’re basically offering me three starter sets when you could have just sent me one months ago instead of shipping them off to stores or having them sit in your warehouses. This is yet another business decision that makes no sense unless one considers your motivations to be less than honorable.
Other than that, congratulations on the best and most balanced update you’ve ever provided. It’s too bad things reached this point before you felt that you needed to treat the backers like they weren’t morons, and it’s too bad that your customer service and overall responsiveness is still practically non-existent. I’ve written a number of times about a partial refund and the only thing your people did quickly was to send PayPal documents to contest my chargeback.

This update also confirms that Battlefront used the funds to pay off previous debt (regardless of who requested it). This implies they didn't have the cash to pay for it outside of this KS, and furthermore it has been deducted from the "cash available" total that John-Paul Brisigotti has posted in his update. I certainly hope he doesn't plan to limit refunds to this smaller sum of $115,330 - we didn't sign up to pay off his past debt.

EDIT: In actual fact, reading the update again it's pretty clear that the intent is to limit refunds to that number of $115,330. The contract I've seen says that Battlefront owed $220,009 - this number needs to be added back into the available pot for refunds.

Additionally, there's no actual offer of refund or store credit on the table yet. Battlefront is requesting backers hound Dust for the information they've requested, and they've not set an end date for this action to be judged a failure.

**Duncan_Idaho**

Could you please stop with you nonsense? Unless you have the full paperwork there is no base for your claims.

The answer bei BF is very telling and explains a lot. Also it is very credible cause it is in line with the usual practices.

**angryboy2k**

Duncan_Idaho wrote:
Could you please stop with you nonsense? Unless you have the full paperwork there is no base for your claims.

The answer bei BF is very telling and explains a lot. Also it is very credible cause it is in line with the usual practices.

Could you perhaps tell me which bits you disagree with (especially where you think I've made "claims")? BF's request for an inventory list is NOT in line with usual practices. Usual practice would be to send out a purchase order, and perhaps visit the manufacturer to verify production.

The paperwork Paolo published showed a debt of $220,009 for Waves 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3. John-Paul said this debt had been paid off as part of the $378,000 paid to Dust (a number he later referred to as $360,000 for which I'll give him a bye and assume it was an error).

Are you saying that using Kickstarter backers' money to pay for existing debt is "in line with the usual practices"?

**Duncan_Idaho**

BF and DS being that far apart this is quite normal to ask for an inventory. Visits you normally make when you think something is not in order. That much trust there should be between partners.

And to your big surprise, between companies there are always some kinds of debts that have to be payed... That´s fully normal. Only when debts are not payed there is a problem and then you first have to look why they are not payed. And the reasons given bei BF are quite believable.

**angryboy2k**

Duncan_Idaho wrote:
BF and DS being that far apart this is quite normal to ask for an inventory. Visits you normally make when you think something is not in order. That much trust there should be between partners.

Visits are standard practice. I'm a procurement director; we visit our suppliers regularly.

Duncan_Idaho wrote:

And to your big surprise, between companies there are always some kinds of debts that have to be payed... That´s fully normal. Only when debts are not payed there is a problem and then you first have to look why they are not payed. And the reasons given bei BF are quite believable.

Actually, there are some companies that regularly delay payments to their suppliers. Not all. In this case, using the KS money to pay off debt and further deducting it from the pot available to backers indicates either cashflow problems or intent to limit liability deliberately (perhaps in preparation for dismantling Battlefront <--- pure conjecture on my part).

We collected $571,937 in total, from the Kickstarter campaign and the Pledge Manager. $50,647 went in fees to Kickstarter and PayPal. We have paid Dust Studio 72.5% of the remaining money, $378,007, and spent another $27,653 on the first wave of shipping. This leaves $115,330, which is then enough to pay for the remaining ‘Wave Two’ stock, assuming it is made.

You will get a portion of this remaining balance, depending on what rewards you have already received in ‘Wave 1’.

Do you see? If claims exceed this remaining balance (and they should), backers will probably be out of luck.

**cincydooley**

Dust Studio has made vague public promises that production was continuing, but has been evasive about the details.
If ‘Wave Two’ products really have been produced, we need to see a list so we can pay for the agreed stock and arrange for it to be collected from Dust Studio and distributed to you, the backers.

Nothing really vague about the multiple photos of produced items that Dust Studios has sitting in their warehouse.

Our reputation and choices we have made along the way have not always been perfect, but our responsibility and drive to satisfy our customers is unparalleled. We are the company who give away each new edition of the Flames Of War rules when it changes so people don’t have to buy it. We are the company who make our relationship with our stores the first order of business. We are the company who manages multiple relationships with some of the biggest licensing companies in the world, and we are the company who, when we get something wrong, we admit it. We admit our part in not managing the relationship with Dust Studio better, and we have learnt the hard way that trust is earned, not given freely.

You for got, "we are the company that many US distributors don't want to work with due to your low margins and difficult attitudes."

Also -- What again is Ducan's connection to BF? He work for them? Contracts for them? What?

**mrondeau**

angryboy2k wrote:
In this case, using the KS money to pay off debt and further deducting it from the pot available to backers indicates either cashflow problems or intent to limit liability deliberately (perhaps in preparation for dismantling Battlefront <--- pure conjecture on my part).

Hum, as far as I can see, that debt was for the product used to fulfill the KS. That was not a pre-existing debt.

**em_en_oh_pee**

cincydooley wrote:

Also -- What again is Ducan's connection to BF? He work for them? Contracts for them? What?

From what I recall hearing, he does some translation work freelance or something and has worked with Paolo and/or FFG at some point on Dust. Not sure what else.

As for the statement... how hard was that to issue? Sheesh. Backers deserved that at least 6+ months ago. This whole thing has been like pulling teeth from both sides.

Even if they deliver now, I feel like the damage is done to the brand. Only a few diehards will drag Dust out, keeping it alive like people did with AT-43.

**angryboy2k**

mrondeau wrote:
angryboy2k wrote:
In this case, using the KS money to pay off debt and further deducting it from the pot available to backers indicates either cashflow problems or intent to limit liability deliberately (perhaps in preparation for dismantling Battlefront <--- pure conjecture on my part).

Hum, as far as I can see, that debt was for the product used to fulfill the KS. That was not a pre-existing debt.

John-Paul Brisigotti wrote:
3. Payment. On the 21st June I emailed Paolo and William to tell them the good news: the Kickstarter was a hit and had raised enough funds to pay for everything, including the pre-agreed W9.1, W9.2 and W9.3 payment.

Wave 9 was Achilles product. The release prior to Operation Babylon.

Also referred to in the contract that Paolo spilled which I'll try and upload (making DS complicit in the misuse of funds as well, as far as I'm concerned).

**Alpharius**

cincydooley wrote:

Also -- What again is Ducan's connection to BF? He work for them? Contracts for them? What?

Good question!

I think he's a freelance writer or rules and such, so maybe that's the connection here?

**f2k**

Alpharius wrote:
d-usa wrote:
KS shouldn't require to reimburse backers if a Kickstarter fails just because backers can't be bothered to actually read that they back at their own risk with nothing guaranteed.

That's not actually what Kickstarter says in regards to project creators and their responsibilities.

And as much as Kickstarter would love to continue to be 'protected' in terms of stuff like this, it remains to be seen how long they are able to maintain this position.

Agreed.

The problem with Kickstarter is that a lot of people seems to believe that it's a simply store for preorders when it's not.

It's not a store. Nor are you a customer. You're an investor, and if your investments goes belly up there isn't much you can do about it.

Sooner or later, something is bound to happen. Something that will generate a backlash big enough to drag Kickstarter itself into the mess. Perhaps then we can finally figure out exactly where we stand when backing a campaign. But I honestly don't think it's this. Angry as the backers might be, this particular campaign wasn't big enough to really bite Kickstarter.

Until that happens, people should see Kickstarter campaigns the same way as any other risky investment, be it in a company or in stocks. Never invest more than you can afford to lose.

**Shotgun**

Backers may not have known they signed up to pay off either company's past debt, but the contract and the explanation are pretty clear that was known by both parties and that both parties were aware that it was paid out of order.

The only way it seems that backers receive diminished funds is if they demand cash repayment of a failed kickstarter. DS sends the list, BF pays, backers get their promised rewards.

**CaulynDarr**

3. Payment. On the 21st June I emailed Paolo and William to tell them the good news: the Kickstarter was a hit and had raised enough funds to pay for everything, including the pre-agreed W9.1, W9.2 and W9.3 payment. At this point things are all good and we are just starting to realise how much more work we have to do and we accepted that we would need to do two shipments as the orders were simply too big for Dust Studio to make in one go.
The funds for the first shipment, which we have taken to calling ‘Wave 1’, were wired over as quickly as possible after the Kickstarter ended. At that time, William asked if we could pay the agreed W9.1-3 payment out of order. Seeing no harm in this, as we had sufficient funds to pay for all the stock, we sent the money. So DUST had been paid $360,000 within three weeks of the Kickstarter ending. This payment five months before the issue should not have been sent at that time, but our trust and belief that we had agreed about the free items meant this was okay to do. This has only worked against us as the money paid left us only with the 'Wave 2' stock money left to pay, and no leverage to try and get a resolution.

DS asked BF to pay the bank loans out of order from the contractual agreement. That was like the one contractual point DS really had going for them in this whole cluster

BOOM! Mic drop!

**cincydooley**

f2k wrote:

Sooner or later, something is bound to happen. Something that will generate a backlash big enough to drag Kickstarter itself into the mess. Perhaps then we can finally figure out exactly where we stand when backing a campaign. But I honestly don't think it's this. Angry as the backers might be, this particular campaign wasn't big enough to really bite Kickstarter.
.

Well, the SEC did propose regulations back in 2013, a short year after the JOBS act was introduced. They were finally approved (after a lot of changes) In April.

http://www.wallstreetdaily.com/2015/04/08/crowdfunding-regulation-a-plus/

Now...these are specifically for equity crowdfunding investments, Some of the provisions could potentially apply to this type of crowdfunding, but I don't think we're that close to it.

**timetowaste85**

I'm not defending BF here, but I want to clear up a reading error:
They said backers will get a portion of the remaining $115,000ish-whatever sum, based on the rewards they've already received. A couple people seem to have read that backers in total are receiving a portion of that $115,000. That's not how it actually reads. Each individual person will get a part of that $115,000, depending on the amount of their pledge that they've already received. If you paid $200 and $100 was towards a value you've already received, the wording states you should be getting back about $100: which is a portion of that $115,000. So the wording is fine and not sinister.

As for whatever debt they paid with funds from the KS, I have no idea. I only wanted to clear up the way the wording was misunderstood. BF and Dust are both in hot water over this. But that wording shouldn't be part of it.

**angryboy2k**

timetowaste85 wrote:
I'm not defending BF here, but I want to clear up a reading error:
They said backers will get a portion of the remaining $115,000ish-whatever sum, based on the rewards they've already received. A couple people seem to have read that backers in total are receiving a portion of that $115,000. That's not how it actually reads. Each individual person will get a part of that $115,000, depending on the amount of their pledge that they've already received. If you paid $200 and $100 was towards a value you've already received, the wording states you should be getting back about $100: which is a portion of that $115,000. So the wording is fine and not sinister.

I thought that at first, but look again at the wording:

We collected $571,937 in total, from the Kickstarter campaign and the Pledge Manager. $50,647 went in fees to Kickstarter and PayPal. We have paid Dust Studio 72.5% of the remaining money, $378,007, and spent another $27,653 on the first wave of shipping. This leaves $115,330, which is then enough to pay for the remaining ‘Wave Two’ stock, assuming it is made.

You will get a portion of this remaining balance, depending on what rewards you have already received in ‘Wave 1’.

If the balance isn't sufficient to cover the refunds, what then?
(Assuming of course refunds happen. There's still no timeline for that in this update).

**CaulynDarr**

It's probably a percentage of the available money based how much you are owed. So if you are owed 100 dollars in product and that's 0.024 % of the refunds due, you'll get 0.024% of that reserve cash.

You'll might be at a loss if you cash out, but maybe break even if you take existing stock at 300% of your refund. BF probably doesn't have the cash flow to give a better deal than that and stay in business.

**Sining**

Duncan_Idaho wrote:
BF and DS being that far apart this is quite normal to ask for an inventory. Visits you normally make when you think something is not in order. That much trust there should be between partners.

And to your big surprise, between companies there are always some kinds of debts that have to be payed... That´s fully normal. Only when debts are not payed there is a problem and then you first have to look why they are not payed. And the reasons given bei BF are quite believable.

Inventory really isn't asked for in normal export businesses. Like angryboy2k, I too work in exports and in my 10+ years of production, it's very rare for customers to ask what has been produced because in general, when we (and most factories) get an order, we produce the full order. The inventory? It's whatever the customer ordered. Asking for an inventory is very unusual unless your manufacturer is keeping stock for you (and frankly, if you are at all an organised business, you should have a rough idea of what inventory should be like).

**warboss**

f2k wrote:

It's not a store. Nor are you a customer. You're an investor, and if your investments goes belly up there isn't much you can do about it.

If you're going to "correct" people, you should probably not get it as wrong or even more wrong than the folks you're responding to. KS is NOT called an investment as that would trigger alot of regulation in the US. I challenge you to find the word "invest" or "investment" on their site; I've tried and haven't been able to and that is NOT an accident. It is according to their own very carefully chose verbage "a funding platform for creative projects".

https://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/kickstarter%20basics

I don't, however, blame you for making that mistake because it feels like that if you pledge and has the same risks as one but none of the few protections that an investment would get. For tabletop gaming items, it is instead used and feels like a discounted preorder (some more than others) with the added risk of an investment so I don't blame folks for making a mistake similar to yours. Kickstarter is purposely trying to have their cake and eat it to/get the best of both worlds/play both sides/whatever and so far no one has called them on it legally.

**CaulynDarr**

Sining wrote:
Duncan_Idaho wrote:
BF and DS being that far apart this is quite normal to ask for an inventory. Visits you normally make when you think something is not in order. That much trust there should be between partners.

And to your big surprise, between companies there are always some kinds of debts that have to be payed... That´s fully normal. Only when debts are not payed there is a problem and then you first have to look why they are not payed. And the reasons given bei BF are quite believable.

Inventory really isn't asked for in normal export businesses. Like angryboy2k, I too work in exports and in my 10+ years of production, it's very rare for customers to ask what has been produced because in general, when we (and most factories) get an order, we produce the full order. The inventory? It's whatever the customer ordered. Asking for an inventory is very unusual unless your manufacturer is keeping stock for you (and frankly, if you are at all an organised business, you should have a rough idea of what inventory should be like).

From the tone of the article it seems like BF has zero trust in anything DS says. So it seems like they don't want to wire them any money without confirmation that the goods are sitting on the loading dock ready to go as soon as the check clears.

**warboss**

CaulynDarr wrote:

From the tone of the article it seems like BF has zero trust in anything DS says. So it seems like they don't want to wire them any money without confirmation that the goods are sitting on the loading dock ready to go as soon as the check clears.

It does sound like they're a bickering married couple playing chicken. I won't send you the order or payment until you tell me what you've made but I can't make it till you send me the order and payment. DS won't ship because BF was so behind with previous payment and BF won't prepay as they're afraid that DS will just pocket the money and run. It sounds like there should be a third party to hold the money in escrow pending shipping and receiving of items.

**privateer4hire**

On topic, I think this is a huge mess and everybody (DS, BF and backers) has already at least partially lost.

On a bright side for fans, looks like at least one site is doing a major clear-out---so there's savings to be made buying Dust minis while retailers are moving this line out:

http://www.miniaturemarket.com/table-top-miniatures/dust-tactics.html

**Alpharius**

f2k wrote:
Alpharius wrote:
d-usa wrote:
KS shouldn't require to reimburse backers if a Kickstarter fails just because backers can't be bothered to actually read that they back at their own risk with nothing guaranteed.

That's not actually what Kickstarter says in regards to project creators and their responsibilities.

And as much as Kickstarter would love to continue to be 'protected' in terms of stuff like this, it remains to be seen how long they are able to maintain this position.

Agreed.

The problem with Kickstarter is that a lot of people seems to believe that it's a simply store for preorders when it's not.

It's not a store. Nor are you a customer. You're an investor, and if your investments goes belly up there isn't much you can do about it.

Sooner or later, something is bound to happen. Something that will generate a backlash big enough to drag Kickstarter itself into the mess. Perhaps then we can finally figure out exactly where we stand when backing a campaign. But I honestly don't think it's this. Angry as the backers might be, this particular campaign wasn't big enough to really bite Kickstarter.

Until that happens, people should see Kickstarter campaigns the same way as any other risky investment, be it in a company or in stocks. Never invest more than you can afford to lose.

I don't think you're actually agreeing with me.

My point was Kickstarter itself does say that the backers have a 'contract' with the creators, so, yes, there is some recourse for everyone - with a whole lot of caveats and 'good lucks' if it goes belly up.

It remains to be seen how long "Kickstarter" itself can maintain this stance.

This case right here might be the tipping point!

warboss wrote:
f2k wrote:

It's not a store. Nor are you a customer. You're an investor, and if your investments goes belly up there isn't much you can do about it.

If you're going to "correct" people, you should probably not get it as wrong or even more wrong than the folks you're responding to. KS is NOT called an investment as that would trigger alot of regulation in the US. I challenge you to find the word "invest" or "investment" on their site; I've tried and haven't been able to and that is NOT an accident. It is according to their own very carefully chose verbage "a funding platform for creative projects".

https://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/kickstarter%20basics

I don't, however, blame you for making that mistake because it feels like that if you pledge and has the same risks as one but none of the few protections that an investment would get. For tabletop gaming items, it is instead used and feels like a discounted preorder (some more than others) with the added risk of an investment so I don't blame folks for making a mistake similar to yours. Kickstarter is purposely trying to have their cake and eat it to/get the best of both worlds/play both sides/whatever and so far no one has called them on it legally.

Agreed!

**legions_no_more**

privateer4hire wrote:
On topic, I think this is a huge mess and everybody (DS, BF and backers) has already at least partially lost.

On a bright side for fans, looks like at least one site is doing a major clear-out---so there's savings to be made buying Dust minis while retailers are moving this line out:

http://www.miniaturemarket.com/table-top-miniatures/dust-tactics.html

I really want to jump on this but...will it be a game that will be supported. I got over $200 in the cart, but hesitating.

**em_en_oh_pee**

legions_no_more wrote:
privateer4hire wrote:
On topic, I think this is a huge mess and everybody (DS, BF and backers) has already at least partially lost.

On a bright side for fans, looks like at least one site is doing a major clear-out---so there's savings to be made buying Dust minis while retailers are moving this line out:

http://www.miniaturemarket.com/table-top-miniatures/dust-tactics.html

I really want to jump on this but...will it be a game that will be supported. I got over $200 in the cart, but hesitating.

Tactics will be a niche game with some Dust Studio support. Battlefield will probably wither and die as DS and Battlefront split. Warfare is dead already...

So... yea. Buyer beware?

**legions_no_more**

Thanks, decided not to buy it. I do not want minis I will never paint, or get to play with. I probaly will be the only guy at the flgs waiting for a game of Dust that will never come

**Triple9**

I was hoping MM was going to blow out the core set. Oh well, Think I'll pick up Operation Cerberus at $13 for the terrain.

**Krinsath**

An interesting response, and confirmation of some things I already believed to be the case.

The $115K available seems a bit odd, but lacking numbers on what "Wave 2" items were ordered it's hard to say. The number seems excessively small to my uninformed eye, but it's also not completely unbelievable that more people wanted the things that were less "long-range" too (just unlikely IMO).

So now things play out further I suppose.

**Alpharius**

I hope all of the backers are eventually happy with whatever comes out of this...

I was able to pick up two boxes of Quonset huts and two boxes of the tenement buildings - thanks for the heads up!

**Stormonu**

privateer4hire wrote:
On topic, I think this is a huge mess and everybody (DS, BF and backers) has already at least partially lost.

On a bright side for fans, looks like at least one site is doing a major clear-out---so there's savings to be made buying Dust minis while retailers are moving this line out:

http://www.miniaturemarket.com/table-top-miniatures/dust-tactics.html

Pulled the trigger on this and bought a good bit. I'm not in the KS, but BF sucks. I've had an order off their website from January that I'm still waiting on an item from them, and have already had to return one previous item from the order bacause it was grossly defective.