I backed this project, way back when, some 5-6 years ago. So I've been following the drama more closely than most. I also tend to be more forgiving of crowdfunded projects than most. Too many...
I backed this project, way back when, some 5-6 years ago. So I've been following the drama more closely than most.
I also tend to be more forgiving of crowdfunded projects than most. Too many people seem to think "crowdfunding" == "preordering", and lose their minds when they don't get exactly what they were promised, exactly when they were promised it.
And I haven't really decided how I feel about this project yet. Projects fail, it happens. But tentatively, I think I might have a real issue with this one.
The CEO is claiming extenuating circumstances, and it certainly has had more than its share of challenges.
Nevertheless, they have announced that they are continuing to sell Mycroft devices commercially, but that they are not going to honor any more of their kickstarter obligations ... simply because it's too expensive to do so.
And I think I have an issue with that. If you can afford to keep running your company, you should be able to fulfill your promises to the people that made the existence of the company possible.
I'm not even sure what the legal implications are. Maybe I can demand my investment returned, maybe I'm just SOL.
The product has gotten many bad reviews, or at least underwhelming reviews, and the CEO blames that on insufficient software (it works, but there isn't much it can do), but notes that all the bad press means lousy sales, another reason they cannot (will not?) fulfill their kickstarter obligations.
It seems like stabbing your original investors in the back is a great way to get even more bad press, and possibly even more lawsuits.
For now, I'll continue to wait and see how it goes.
On one hand, I get how a new retail sale is self-funding, whilst a kickstarter handout at a severe loss when cash strapped can send you in a nasty spiral quick. There has to be a happy middle...
On one hand, I get how a new retail sale is self-funding, whilst a kickstarter handout at a severe loss when cash strapped can send you in a nasty spiral quick.
There has to be a happy middle ground, and I think a reasonable one would be allowing backers to make at-cost sales. Show the initial projected cost and current cost and let them opt-in to getting a discount over potentially nothing.
I wasn't an original kickstarter backer, but i did do their startengine campaign in 2021, which was a pretty solid cash influx which makes me think they need to be showing the books IMO.
They originally hoped to be in production by 2018. Then setback after setback. The current product bears only a vague resemblance to the original prototypes. And it's 4x more expensive (and,...
They originally hoped to be in production by 2018.
Then setback after setback.
The current product bears only a vague resemblance to the original prototypes.
And it's 4x more expensive (and, bluntly, not worth that much) ... so I don't think it's reasonable to expect a $500 item that I invested $129 in.
But still ... maybe a simple $129 discount on the current device? IDK ... it's a hard situation. Either they screw over us original investors or, probably, go out of business trying to honor that debt.
And yeah, one way or another, bad management probably plays a role in this.
I remember reading about Mycroft's decision to fight back against the patent trolls instead of allowing themselves to be extorted. It's part of why I wanted to support them and bought a Mark II. I...
The single most expensive item that I could not predict was our ongoing litigation against the non-practicing patent entity that has never stopped trying to destroy us.
I remember reading about Mycroft's decision to fight back against the patent trolls instead of allowing themselves to be extorted. It's part of why I wanted to support them and bought a Mark II. I guess in the end they're saying it wasn't worth it though, which ultimately feels like a win for the trolls.
I backed this project, way back when, some 5-6 years ago. So I've been following the drama more closely than most.
I also tend to be more forgiving of crowdfunded projects than most. Too many people seem to think "crowdfunding" == "preordering", and lose their minds when they don't get exactly what they were promised, exactly when they were promised it.
And I haven't really decided how I feel about this project yet. Projects fail, it happens. But tentatively, I think I might have a real issue with this one.
The CEO is claiming extenuating circumstances, and it certainly has had more than its share of challenges.
Nevertheless, they have announced that they are continuing to sell Mycroft devices commercially, but that they are not going to honor any more of their kickstarter obligations ... simply because it's too expensive to do so.
And I think I have an issue with that. If you can afford to keep running your company, you should be able to fulfill your promises to the people that made the existence of the company possible.
I'm not even sure what the legal implications are. Maybe I can demand my investment returned, maybe I'm just SOL.
The product has gotten many bad reviews, or at least underwhelming reviews, and the CEO blames that on insufficient software (it works, but there isn't much it can do), but notes that all the bad press means lousy sales, another reason they cannot (will not?) fulfill their kickstarter obligations.
It seems like stabbing your original investors in the back is a great way to get even more bad press, and possibly even more lawsuits.
For now, I'll continue to wait and see how it goes.
On one hand, I get how a new retail sale is self-funding, whilst a kickstarter handout at a severe loss when cash strapped can send you in a nasty spiral quick.
There has to be a happy middle ground, and I think a reasonable one would be allowing backers to make at-cost sales. Show the initial projected cost and current cost and let them opt-in to getting a discount over potentially nothing.
I wasn't an original kickstarter backer, but i did do their startengine campaign in 2021, which was a pretty solid cash influx which makes me think they need to be showing the books IMO.
They originally hoped to be in production by 2018.
Then setback after setback.
The current product bears only a vague resemblance to the original prototypes.
And it's 4x more expensive (and, bluntly, not worth that much) ... so I don't think it's reasonable to expect a $500 item that I invested $129 in.
But still ... maybe a simple $129 discount on the current device? IDK ... it's a hard situation. Either they screw over us original investors or, probably, go out of business trying to honor that debt.
And yeah, one way or another, bad management probably plays a role in this.
I remember reading about Mycroft's decision to fight back against the patent trolls instead of allowing themselves to be extorted. It's part of why I wanted to support them and bought a Mark II. I guess in the end they're saying it wasn't worth it though, which ultimately feels like a win for the trolls.