Thread: Re: Traveller^5 Kickstarter raises over $260, 000 in 30 days

17 posts.

Since it appears that you've been getting the series of frequent e-mails
from the COTI distro list, you are aware that they are all addressed to,
and entitled, "Fellow Travellers."

So Marc is targeting his campaign to Communists and Communist
sympathizers, who have given him $260K in 30 days.

It seems like he knows what he's doing, keep marketing to Communists.

> Here's a discussion topic: what has changed (if anything), and how would
> you continue to market the thing from this point on?
>



--- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
> So Marc is targeting his campaign to Communists and Communist
> sympathizers, who have given him $260K in 30 days.
>
> It seems like he knows what he's doing, keep marketing to Communists.

I'll tell you one thing, this shows that there really are people out there who'd buy anything with Marc Miller's name on it. Marc is well aware of that, and he's been milking those suckers for all they're worth.

Whatever you want to call them, the point is there is a reason that T5
broke all of the kickstart records. If you look at the list in a recent
Fellow Travellers message, it shows the list of previous record-holders.
All of them are Johnny-come-latelies, I've not heard of any of them (not
like I'm the best witness, but they weren't around in 1995). T5 on the
other hand, has been around for 35 years in at least 8 editions (CT came
in at least 3 or 4 editions, depending on how you count them), so has
built up a lot of awareness, following, nostalgia. The same way the
wargames market experienced a renaissance starting in the 90s due to the
aging demographic cohort getting more affluent (without really growing in
numbers), T5 can tap into that same group of 40-50 year-olds who have fond
memories and money. And nothing causes people to spend money like
nostalgia, recapturing youth, etc.

So the moral is, if you want to be successful kickstarting something,
don't kickstart something brand-new, "kick re-start" something that's
already been around for a long time.

> --- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>> So Marc is targeting his campaign to Communists and Communist
>> sympathizers, who have given him $260K in 30 days.
>> It seems like he knows what he's doing, keep marketing to Communists.
>
> I'll tell you one thing, this shows that there really are people out
there
> who'd buy anything with Marc Miller's name on it. Marc is well aware of
that, and he's been milking those suckers for all they're worth.
>
>

I will not bash T5, it is just not to my taste. I wish them all the luck in
the world. My fear is that this will probably be the only product that get
produced. and as far as I can tell the life of a RPG company is production
of new products, and with a 600 page starter book following it up might
be difficult considering the amount of time it took to produce this one.
I'll get a copy as I bought mine 5 years ago. But I kinda know what I am
getting.

On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:43 AM, <> wrote:

> Whatever you want to call them, the point is there is a reason that T5
> broke all of the kickstart records.

Compared to Steve Jackson's OGRE at nearly 5000% T5 is a measly 1500%... 8-)

>
> So the moral is, if you want to be successful kickstarting something,
> don't kickstart something brand-new, "kick re-start" something that's
> already been around for a long time.

Yep.... As my earlier example....
--
Evyn
--- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>
> Whatever you want to call them, the point is there is a reason that
> T5 broke all of the kickstart records. If you look at the list in a
> recent Fellow Travellers message, it shows the list of previous
> record-holders.

But why does that matter? Kickstarter isn't some giant cock-waving exercise, it's a means to raise money for a project. T5 was completely funded within a few days - the other $200,000+ was raised just by people throwing more money than was actually necessary at it (and I really don't think that a few colour plates and deckplans is really worthy of $200,000 - they could do the whole damn book in full colour with professional-level artwork and deckplans and still have money leftover).

> So the moral is, if you want to be successful kickstarting something,
> don't kickstart something brand-new, "kick re-start" something that's
> already been around for a long time.

I'm not sure that's the moral I take from this, or the moral that we should take from it. The moral I get from it is "if you can rely entirely on 'goodwill and nostalgia' then you don't need to make any actual effort to *sell* your product because you'll have people throwing money at you in their droves regardless of its quality". Because that's what's happened here.

Personally I suspect that when people finally get what they spent a lot of cash for months down the line, they'll realise in the cold light of day that it actually wasn't worth the money. For crying out loud, there's a significant number of people have spent over *$500* on this thing. It's mindboggling to me.

Yeah, Evyn, that's another perfect example.

If kickstart had existed in 1995 GDW might still be around. I could have
at least raised enough money to pay my rent so I didn't have to leave to
take another job.

But at some point it kind of reminds me of the old National Lampoon cover,
"Buy this magazine or we'll shoot this dog."

Dave

>> Whatever you want to call them, the point is there is a reason that T5
>> broke all of the kickstart records.
>
> Compared to Steve Jackson's OGRE at nearly 5000% T5 is a measly 1500%...
> 8-)
>
>>
>> So the moral is, if you want to be successful kickstarting something,
>> don't kickstart something brand-new, "kick re-start" something that's
>> already been around for a long time.
>
> Yep.... As my earlier example....
> --
> Evyn
>

I hear what you're saying, Consty.

But for me, it comes down to a couple things. First, the Traveller IP is
Marc's and he has every right to handle it the way he wants. Traveller
fans have for a long time tended to think of it as a public trust, but
it's private IP, and someone owns it and gets to decide what to do with
it. And the other is that this kickstarter direct capitalization is a
reality, so people are going to use it, and good for them for using the
tools that are out there. Like I said to Evyn, had it been around in 1995,
GDW should have sure tried to use it to say, "Hey, if we can make sure
Dave doesn't get evicted, we can finish RSG and Armor 21, and oh, by the
way, those of you who never saw RSB and RCVG in your local gameshoppe,
they are in stock and available for direct order as paper or PDF
download."

The thing that makes my brain churn are things like--and I am not talking
about Marc here, just wondering in general, "what is the mechanism to
ensure that the commitments kickstarter paid for get carried out, and who
pays you back if it doesn't happen?" It's definitely a very different
wrinkle from the way things were done before. In traditional
capitalization investors get shares in the venture, so have an expectation
of control how their money is spent. In crowdsourced capitalization you
get swag. I got the impression from Marc's "Dear Communists" messages (I
just find that humorous, raising money for a capitalist venture from
communists, and Marc is a smart guy, he knows what "Fellow Travellers" has
meant historically, so he has to have his tongue in his cheek each time he
types that) that he is saying there will be more follow-on in 2013,
although the only thing kickstart investors are guaranteed to get is the
swag. As someone who has had to write a business plan, that is quite a
switch. If you're raising start-up capital, how far does it take you? When
do profits kick in to fund the follow-on releases? And kickstarter appears
to be more vague in that area, but I'm no expert.

And someday I'll be dead. That's the only guarantee I've ever gotten, and
some days, grateful for it.

Dave

> --- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>>
>> Whatever you want to call them, the point is there is a reason that
>> T5 broke all of the kickstart records. If you look at the list in a
>> recent Fellow Travellers message, it shows the list of previous
>> record-holders.
>
> But why does that matter? Kickstarter isn't some giant cock-waving
> exercise, it's a means to raise money for a project. T5 was completely
> funded within a few days - the other $200,000+ was raised just by people
> throwing more money than was actually necessary at it (and I really don't
> think that a few colour plates and deckplans is really worthy of $200,000
> - they could do the whole damn book in full colour with professional-level
> artwork and deckplans and still have money leftover).
>
>> So the moral is, if you want to be successful kickstarting something,
>> don't kickstart something brand-new, "kick re-start" something that's
>> already been around for a long time.
>
> I'm not sure that's the moral I take from this, or the moral that we
> should take from it. The moral I get from it is "if you can rely entirely
> on 'goodwill and nostalgia' then you don't need to make any actual effort
> to *sell* your product because you'll have people throwing money at you in
> their droves regardless of its quality". Because that's what's happened
> here.
>
> Personally I suspect that when people finally get what they spent a lot of
> cash for months down the line, they'll realise in the cold light of day
> that it actually wasn't worth the money. For crying out loud, there's a
> significant number of people have spent over *$500* on this thing. It's
> mindboggling to me.


--- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>
> The thing that makes my brain churn are things like--and I am not talking
> about Marc here, just wondering in general, "what is the mechanism to
> ensure that the commitments kickstarter paid for get carried out, and who
> pays you back if it doesn't happen?"

There is NO such mechanism. And no, you don't get paid back if it doesn't happen.

Excerpts from Kickstarter's website:

http://www.kickstarter.com/help

Who is responsible for fulfilling the promises of a project?

It is the responsibility of the project creator to fulfill the promises of their project. Kickstarter reviews projects to ensure they do not violate the Project Guidelines, however Kickstarter does not investigate a creator's ability to complete their project.

Creators are encouraged to share links to any websites that show work related to the project, or past projects. It's up to them to make the case for their project and their ability to complete it. Because projects are usually funded by the friends, fans, and communities around its creator, there are powerful social forces that keep creators accountable.

The web is an excellent resource for learning about someone's prior experience. If someone has no demonstrable prior history of doing something like their project, or is unwilling to share information, backers should consider that when weighing a pledge. If something sounds too good to be true, it very well may be.

Can a project be edited after launching?

Yes, you can edit the following content after launching:

• Project description

• Video and image

• Rewards (add new ones or edit those not yet backed)

• Your profile

• Project FAQs

The only things that cannot be edited after launch are:

• The funding goal*

• The project deadline

• Rewards that have already been selected by a backer

*While pleas for more money went out, the actual funding goal was never changed.

\_/
DED
TNE @ Yahoo ml Admin

Kickstarter can be a useful tool. I look at it mostly and go wow that is cool.
The Stuff Marc is "giving" for the levels is nifty.
I just hope everyone who pledged gives what they promised.It should be like the
P500 system most companies use now. Is it? Where you have to give your payment
information and sometimes they take a small amount as a deposit then you get
notified 2-4 weeks before you are charged the full amount?If not then it is a
very risky situation. I will not even go off on a Rant about the Steve Jackson
Ogre rant.

Thanks, David/Dave, for illuminating that.

That's what I suspected, and it shows how much "standard business
practices" have morphed with the rise of the commerce Web. And while I
understand how they base their assumptions of "caveat emptor" on the fact
that you can do a lot of due diligence research on the Web nowadays, it is
in fact a dramatic difference from traditional venture capitalism.

Obviously kickstarter takes a slice of the action. Bottom line, agree with
their methods or not, they are making their money, and that's why they're
doing it. One more dose of "caveat emptor."

Strange new world. Sometimes I yearn for the days when only the porn sites
were making money off the Web. At least that was honest money.

Dave

> --- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>> The thing that makes my brain churn are things like--and I am not talking
>> about Marc here, just wondering in general, "what is the mechanism to
ensure that the commitments kickstarter paid for get carried out, and
who
>> pays you back if it doesn't happen?"
>
>
> There is NO such mechanism. And no, you don't get paid back if it
doesn't
> happen.
>
> Excerpts from Kickstarter's website:
>
> http://www.kickstarter.com/help
>
> Who is responsible for fulfilling the promises of a project?
>
> It is the responsibility of the project creator to fulfill the promises
of
> their project. Kickstarter reviews projects to ensure they do not
violate
> the Project Guidelines, however Kickstarter does not investigate a
creator's ability to complete their project.
>
> Creators are encouraged to share links to any websites that show work
related to the project, or past projects. It's up to them to make the
case
> for their project and their ability to complete it. Because projects are
usually funded by the friends, fans, and communities around its creator,
there are powerful social forces that keep creators accountable.
>
> The web is an excellent resource for learning about someone's prior
experience. If someone has no demonstrable prior history of doing
something like their project, or is unwilling to share information,
backers should consider that when weighing a pledge. If something sounds
too good to be true, it very well may be.
>
>
> Can a project be edited after launching?
>
> Yes, you can edit the following content after launching:
>
> • Project description
>
> • Video and image
>
> • Rewards (add new ones or edit those not yet backed)
>
> • Your profile
>
> • Project FAQs
>
> The only things that cannot be edited after launch are:
>
> • The funding goal*
>
> • The project deadline
>
> • Rewards that have already been selected by a backer
>
> *While pleas for more money went out, the actual funding goal was never
changed.
>
> \_/
> DED
> TNE @ Yahoo ml Admin
>
>


>
> Personally I suspect that when people finally get what they spent a lot of cash for months down the line, they'll realise in the cold light of day that it actually wasn't worth the money. For crying out loud, there's a significant number of people have spent over *$500* on this thing. It's mindboggling to me.
>

Agreed. I co-funded it because I love Traveller and have all the other rules on my shelf. If it is any good, I may even start playing again. That having been said, I have overspent on the book by a factor of three with relation to what I thought the book would be priced at on the market compared to similarly sized b/w rulebooks. Admittedly, 40USD of that is postage (which is ridiculous in itself: Is mail still delivered by coaches in the US?), and I threw in for a few extra Traveller dice (as you can never have enough dice), but it was worth that much to me (and yes, I also paid for the T5 Beta CD way back when). Why did I overpay? Because I love Traveller and want it to succeed. I wanted to contribute to the relaunch instead of just waiting for the book to come out (or not)...

If it were to be delayed as much as the beta, I'd probably be annoyed and disappointed in Marc, but right now I trust him to pull this off and use the momentum to at least also give us the announced Galaxiad campaign after that.

--- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:

> The thing that makes my brain churn are things like--and I am not talking
> about Marc here, just wondering in general, "what is the mechanism to
> ensure that the commitments kickstarter paid for get carried out, and who
> pays you back if it doesn't happen?"

AFAIK, there isn't such a mechanism - it's based on trust. There are a few projects that I am aware of that are well past their stated delivery deadlines (e20 being one of them) and all the patrons have received so far from the authors are excuses. IIRC the author actually said that he was working on other freelance projects that were "more important" or "higher priority", completely missing the point that *he had already been funded to complete the kickstarter project" and therefore that should have taken priority over any other projects that came afterwards.

That said, if you don't provide the goods on time then your reputation goes down the pan, so authors are aware of the need to provide what they said they'd supply on time. I've funded a few kickstarters and not had any trouble. I still feel more comfortable funding a kickstarter than putting in a standard pre-order with a publisher (last time I did that, I got burned badly - that was when QLI was supposedly going to publish 1248).

The pledges are taken if (and only if) the base funding target is reached, and I think they're taken when the kickstarter expires. If the target isn't reached, no money is exchanged at all and the project isn't funded.

That means that anyone who has doubts can cancel or change their pledge before the final deadline, but after that they're committed. This makes some kickstarters that have huge pledge rewards a bit nervous since someone pledging $1000 can be enough to push it over the funding target, but could potentially pull out before the end and drop the total to below the level at which funding is secure - which means that the whole project doesn't get funded at all.

Personally I think they should take the money from pledgers as soon as the base funding target is reached (if it is reached), and if there's any more funding pledged after that but before the end of the deadline then that money should be taken at when the deadline is reached. That way the base funding is secure no matter what.

--- In , Charles Popp <chaspopp34@...> wrote:

> I just hope everyone who pledged gives what they promised.It should be like the
> P500 system most companies use now. Is it? Where you have to give your payment
> information and sometimes they take a small amount as a deposit then you get
> notified 2-4 weeks before you are charged the full amount?If not then it is a
> very risky situation.

Well, thank God the people that run kickstarter are getting paid for
putting more crack cocaine in front of us to spend our money on. God knows
the economy needs more schemes that no one understands to keep the wheels
of commerce turning.

> The pledges are taken if (and only if) the base funding target is reached,
> and I think they're taken when the kickstarter expires. If the target
> isn't reached, no money is exchanged at all and the project isn't funded.
>
> That means that anyone who has doubts can cancel or change their pledge
> before the final deadline, but after that they're committed. This makes
> some kickstarters that have huge pledge rewards a bit nervous since
> someone pledging $1000 can be enough to push it over the funding target,
> but could potentially pull out before the end and drop the total to below
> the level at which funding is secure - which means that the whole project
> doesn't get funded at all.
>
> Personally I think they should take the money from pledgers as soon as the
> base funding target is reached (if it is reached), and if there's any more
> funding pledged after that but before the end of the deadline then that
> money should be taken at when the deadline is reached. That way the base
> funding is secure no matter what.
>
>
> --- In , Charles Popp <chaspopp34@...> wrote:
>
>> I just hope everyone who pledged gives what they promised.It should be
>> like the
>> P500 system most companies use now. Is it? Where you have to give your
>> payment
>> information and sometimes they take a small amount as a deposit then you
>> get
>> notified 2-4 weeks before you are charged the full amount?If not then it
>> is a
>> very risky situation.
>
>

It's not really *that* incomprehensible...

You pledge money:

- If the base target is reached by the deadline, they take the money that you pledged when the deadline is reached, and you (eventually, hopefully) receive the product you paid for.
- If the base target is not reached by the deadline, no money is taken from anybody and the project is not funded.

That's it really. IIRC Kickstarter and Amazon take a cut of the total funding but that's it.

--- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>
> Well, thank God the people that run kickstarter are getting paid for
> putting more crack cocaine in front of us to spend our money on. God knows
> the economy needs more schemes that no one understands to keep the wheels
> of commerce turning.

I'm just being snarky and pointing out that services like kickstarter only
exist because they allow money to be made by the people that provide the
service, whether the service works out or not. Like inventing SCORM.
Middlemen live on, with or without the people they propose to connect.

Dickhead Dave

> It's not really *that* incomprehensible...
>
> You pledge money:
>
> - If the base target is reached by the deadline, they take the money that
> you pledged when the deadline is reached, and you (eventually, hopefully)
> receive the product you paid for.
> - If the base target is not reached by the deadline, no money is taken
> from anybody and the project is not funded.
>
> That's it really. IIRC Kickstarter and Amazon take a cut of the total
> funding but that's it.
>
> --- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>>
>> Well, thank God the people that run kickstarter are getting paid for
>> putting more crack cocaine in front of us to spend our money on. God
>> knows
>> the economy needs more schemes that no one understands to keep the
>> wheels
>> of commerce turning.
>
>
>

You could say the same about Ebay too really. They have to make their money somehow I guess - if they don't make money then they won't last long!

--- In , dcndcn13@... wrote:
>
> I'm just being snarky and pointing out that services like kickstarter only
> exist because they allow money to be made by the people that provide the
> service, whether the service works out or not. Like inventing SCORM.
> Middlemen live on, with or without the people they propose to connect.
>
> Dickhead Dave
>
> > It's not really *that* incomprehensible...
> >
> > You pledge money:
> >
> > - If the base target is reached by the deadline, they take the money that
> > you pledged when the deadline is reached, and you (eventually, hopefully)
> > receive the product you paid for.
> > - If the base target is not reached by the deadline, no money is taken
> > from anybody and the project is not funded.
> >
> > That's it really. IIRC Kickstarter and Amazon take a cut of the total
> > funding but that's it.
> >
> > --- In , dcndcn13@ wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, thank God the people that run kickstarter are getting paid for
> >> putting more crack cocaine in front of us to spend our money on. God
> >> knows
> >> the economy needs more schemes that no one understands to keep the
> >> wheels
> >> of commerce turning.
> >
> >
> >
>