Back to back Kickstarter Releases

[4pmdesigner]

Ok so as a designer and kickstarter something has been bothering me about recent KS deck releases, no not the pricing debates going on. I would like some validation to my concern. Does anybody else out there find something troubling about new creators/designers coming out with new KS decks before they even fulfill the decks on their last campaign? I mean, there's even a few KS campaigns going on where the previous decks haven't even been printed. Some haven't even delivered on their FIRST decks and are already launching new decks. When I got into this, sure I designed multiple decks, but I thought it would be smart business to fulfill my last deck, before rushing into a new one. What if problems arise with my previous deck? What if I start the process of shipping and didn't have enough funds because I was horrible at math? What if I'm just plain out in over my head with shipping since Ive had no experience before? But more importantly, would it be in bad taste? Personally I think people would think I'm just trying to cash in as fast as possible before the trend dies out. I know I can't be the ONLY one that thinks this way. It feels like it's the elephant in the room no one has been willing to address.

Thoughts?

[Encarded]

I agree with you, and honestly think that the Kickstarter card market is darn near out of control at the moment. It was not very long ago that I did Tendril, and at the time there were about 5 card projects available, with only a few of those being "serious." Now, there are dozens and unfortunately many of them are clearly not thought out very well, or are subpar art that should have much more thought and effort put into them before taking it to the public.

It is patently absurd that someone would launch a new project when the first hasn't been printed, isn't in the hands of customers, hasn't been reviewed, etc. That borders on negligent, IMO.



Now, my personal opinion on a general aspect of Kickstarter. Feel free to disagree:

I think that Kickstarter is great, and it actually did work and Kickstart my company like it was meant to, but as the people at Kickstarter have said many times it is NOT a store meant to pump out product after product. If more people really planned out their projects, got all their "ducks in a row" first, priced things smartly to make some money, then their next deck shouldn't have to rely solely on Kickstarter for exposure and funding. I wish that the platform was used more for it's intent, to help someone start a new enterprise and move on. KS is starting to be a crutch, a byproduct of the "avoid risk at all costs" mentality pervasive in our culture and shows lack of dedication to your dream.

Now I'm not denying the power of Kickstarter and I know that it gets stuff in front of many more people. I did a very limited "secret release" on there for Aurum and even without a single mention anywhere all that sold out in a few hours. I will probably use KS again for Deco in a very limited fashion purely as one piece of overall marketing strategy, but the key is that I am not going to rely on it. If it's get me a few more eyeballs and customers, fantastic, but I really want to do things the normal way so that I understand my costs, risks, the market potential, profit margins, shipping and fulfillment processes, etc. Kickstarter gives a warped view of many of those things and as we've seen, can cause project creators and their customers some serious problems.

Again, this is just my personal feeling. I know that you guys at 4PM, Russell, Lance, etc have used Kickstarter repeatedly and have done extremely well and that's great. I just wish a few more of the success stories would branch off and do it "for real." It's admittedly harder, but card collectors existed long before Kickstarter and when the KS trend dies the playing card collectors will still be there. Then what will you do?

It's a pretty complex topic, really. One that I think a lot more people starting projects would be wise to think about.

[BMPokerworld]

I have to agree wholeheartedly with Paul and 4PM designs here. I have stated this exact same thing to many people since this whole Kickstarter phenomenon began. While I agree with Russell's comments a little while ago, that Kickstarter brings extra eyeballs and is great for advertizing your brand to people who might not be aware you, it shouldn't go on forever. Paul is right, that is not what Kickstarter was designed for. Kickstarter was designed to help people get their business dream up and running.

Being an established business and after spending about $35,000 of my own money to get Bmpokerworld up and running, I do feel Kickstarter creates a lack of ownership and responsibility that you would have if you had your own skin in the game (That means your own money). When you don't, you could just use a pen name such as Alex did and basically walk away from the problems because you really have no investment or personal bond to the business and you have risked nothing to create the business. You basically got it for free when compared to the normal start-up costs you would face if you weren't relying on crowdsourcing for your money. I believe that is the reason a high percentage of Kickstarter projects across all industries have not delivered the pledged items to their backers either at all or in a timely manner. There really is no penalty if you don't.


Would I ever do a Kickstarter campaign? Perhaps. If I did though, it would be strictly to raise awareness about my brand and I would not rely on it on a regular basis.

Thanks!

[MagikFingerz]

No, you're not the only one who thinks that way, but there are obviously lots of people who don't, unfortunately. I do think kickstarter should have more fail-safes built in, at the very least some kind of rating system similar to ebay.

I also agree with Paul's personal opinion.

[GBAllison]

I can't disagree with concern over project creators who start a project before finishing another. Especially if they have a poor track record.
But I also have concerns over project creators who use unrealistic printers, or promise ridiculous schedules, or clearly have no clue what they're doing.

Is one worse than another?
Personally, this is what I think the Comments sections are for.
And I think it's up to *US* (and by that I mean anyone who is knowledgeable about the industry or the participants) to raise those concerns in the Comments. Not in a personal or unprofessional way, but in a respectful way. But I think people who know the industry should speak up. And if the project creator has an answer, then let them speak up.

By the way, I also *like* seeing people use Kickstarter instead of doing it "for real." Kickstarter gives the successful project creator a little more certainty with the popularity level, gives them a better sense of whether their project will attract enough funding to spring for extras, gives the customers an opportunity to provide feedback ... and honestly the give-and-take on KS projects seems to be MUCH more robust than what I see on projects that are being done "for real." Maybe there's an active and robust community of people who email comments and suggestions back and forth on the "for real" projects, but it's largely invisible to the rest of the world. I love the transparency in that part of the process on a KS project. Even from an established vendor.

Just my two cents.

I believe that is the reason a high percentage of Kickstarter projects across all industries have not delivered the pledged items to their backers either at all or in a timely manner. There really is no penalty if you don't.

Now that surprises me. I thought that the vast majority or projects did deliver their promised items. Maybe not always on schedule, but all the people I know have had success with projects they backed. Maybe they've been super-lucky. I had no idea that a "high percentage" didn't deliver.

[BMPokerworld]

Now that surprises me. I thought that the vast majority or projects did deliver their promised items. Maybe not always on schedule, but all the people I know have had success with projects they backed. Maybe they've been super-lucky. I had no idea that a "high percentage" didn't deliver.

GBallison, great post by the way!

GBallison, I think you might have misunderstood what I meant. It was a combination of both, delivery delays and no product at all, that I believe would be considered a fail if a business did that and customers could actually get refunds. If an item is received by the creator and doesn't get delivered for very long periods of time, like the Vortex deck or Beta17 deck, then those are both fails in my book. In the case of the Vortex deck, it has been almost a year since he received the decks and there are still people, some of which are members of this forum, that have not received their decks yet. Make no mistake, despite what the project creator tells you, it is almost always because they spent the money and no longer have the funds on hand to ship the product.

I do 100% agree with you that people need to inform pledgers via the comments section on Kickstarter as well. Unfortunately it seems to be to no avail most of the time. One minute a backer who has waited 6 months for the product to be delivered to them after the creator receives the item, will be ready to kill them and the next minute, when they finally get the item, the creator now becomes the exalted one and is urged to do another campaign. It's very difficult.

I think all anyone can do is what you recommended. Inform people of the pitfalls of dealing with a certain individual and hope the learn from your mistakes.
Thanks!

EDIT: There have been numerous articles in The Wall Street Journal about Kickstarter and the lack of fulfillment by the campaign creators.

[DukeBoy]

That is part of the reason I have stayed away from atleast 2 KS projects. The 1st on I stayed away from was the designer's 1st deck and it had not even been sent out yet at the time the second deck started and I would not back the second until I know they would alteast deliver the 1st deck. The second was the designers 3rd deck and it popped up about a month after the designers 2nd ended so they would have barely gotten the money from the project before startinf the next deck plus they had other non-deck projects going too.

[alric]

I think MOST projects do not deliver their products on the original schedule as advertised and are late. However, I don't think there are many who fail to deliver anything at all.

KickStarter is necessary for most deck designers because there's no other way to get as much exposure and reach as broad of a range of potential customer. Pumping out project after project without waiting for previous projects to complete could be POTENTIALLY irresponsible, but if they are close to their delivery schedule and eventually fulfill all the orders in a timely manner for each project, then congrats to them and there's no actual harm. Unfortunately, some of these people who are managing multiple releases probably are in over their heads and all their backers are in for a cluster f@ck when the sh!t hits the fan. The problem is that a lot of the pledgers who back second projects don't even realize that there is a prior unfulfilled project out there so they aren't aware of the risk.

I think we'll soon reach a saturation point in the KickStarter playing card market, and people who get burned on poorly managed projects will wise up and be more selective, and we'll get to the point only the truely excellent decks will get funded and the other "crap" will get weeded out as the excess supply in an oversaturated and competitive market.[quote][/quote]

[Encarded]

and honestly the give-and-take on KS projects seems to be MUCH more robust than what I see on projects that are being done "for real." Maybe there's an active and robust community of people who email comments and suggestions back and forth on the "for real" projects, but it's largely invisible to the rest of the world. I love the transparency in that part of the process on a KS project.

Now this is an interesting point. It is very often the case that too many cooks in the kitchen spoil the soup. Committee based design, with input from all over can often dilute many of the aspects that made the original project interesting and you start to find a rather boring medium ground that makes everyone happy. Feedback is one thing, but it's not the responsibility of your customers to educate you or tell you what to do. At that point you stop being a creative professional and start becoming an assembler.

Doing it "for real" means that you are confident in your work, understand your market and believe that your creation will succeed. You have to believe in yourself at some point and not just stick a toe in the water.

Remember that Theory11, Dan & Dave and The Blue Crown existed BEFORE Kickstarter, and they are the biggest names in our market by leaps and bounds. They did not sit around and hope people might maybe perhaps like their stuff and possibly maybe buy something. They took huge risks and own the market. If you are just starting, like I was a year and a half ago, then by all means study intently and put together a quality KS project, but think about how you can move beyond if it's truly a passion that you want to continue.

[RandyButterfield]

and honestly the give-and-take on KS projects seems to be MUCH more robust than what I see on projects that are being done "for real." Maybe there's an active and robust community of people who email comments and suggestions back and forth on the "for real" projects, but it's largely invisible to the rest of the world. I love the transparency in that part of the process on a KS project.

Now this is an interesting point. It is very often the case that too many cooks in the kitchen spoil the soup. Committee based design, with input from all over can often dilute many of the aspects that made the original project interesting and you start to find a rather boring medium ground that makes everyone happy. Feedback is one thing, but it's not the responsibility of your customers to educate you or tell you what to do. At that point you stop being a creative professional and start becoming an assembler.

Doing it "for real" means that you are confident in your work, understand your market and believe that your creation will succeed. You have to believe in yourself at some point and not just stick a toe in the water.

Remember that Theory11, Dan & Dave and The Blue Crown existed BEFORE Kickstarter, and they are the biggest names in our market by leaps and bounds. They did not sit around and hope people might maybe perhaps like their stuff and possibly maybe buy something. They took huge risks and own the market. If you are just starting, like I was a year and a half ago, then by all means study intently and put together a quality KS project, but think about how you can move beyond if it's truly a passion that you want to continue.

You said it Paul!!

Design by Committee is the worst thing for any designer!! It was the one thing that almost kept me from wanting to do the UC Deck. I knew a lot of people would have an idea of how they thought it should look. The Imperial Deck is a design where I'm getting a ton of "requests" for this/that - mostly over on the Discourse. I even went off on one guy who was talking down like I was some designer just out of high school.

It is very tough to deal with it and stay on course of your original vision! It also does help every know and then when they notice something you hadn't previously. Some good examples are the ORNATE borders (there was originally a Silver Border with the Red Faces and a Copper Border with the Black Faces) and it looks like Jackson's KS Money Deck has a completely new back based on feedback. Feedback is definitely great for first-time Deck designers. I had no idea the the different borders on the Faces would've been such a big problem!

I think that, except for the occassional annomily, the good Kickstarter Decks are successfull and the bad ones crash and burn. There are some exceptions for the bad designs with such a low goal they almost make it by default.

thanks, Randy

[Ryric]

Completely agree with most of the sentiments expressed here. I have said it before, I don't like all of the addon's and the pre-production/pre-sale/pre-order role that Kickstarter has taken in the playing card industry. I think it is kind of telling that so many of these projects have just gobs and gobs of accessories and addon's. I am not sure if Sean's recent (or soon to be second failure ) Lucent design is a failure to have broad appeal or the fact that, on Kickstarter, decks really need the addons to hit the numbers they need.

I think kickstarter could easily help verify a projects completion and verify on a users profile. For example, simply sending a survey directly from Kickstarter asking users to confirm the status of the project after the delivery date lapses they could easily display either a percent complete or use a formula to determine if the project is complete minus a few outliers.

Look at AlieN SlinK™ and AlieN InK - Same user with the same garbage. Kickstarter, doesn't care. In the long term you would think that this would really have negative impact on their community, but one entity, one username is pretty basic stuff.

I think a lot of this is up to Kickstarter, and they are probably happy to take their percentage and continue to give creators access to their platform and users.

[malanthrax]

Ok so as a designer and kickstarter something has been bothering me about recent KS deck releases, no not the pricing debates going on. I would like some validation to my concern. Does anybody else out there find something troubling about new creators/designers coming out with new KS decks before they even fulfill the decks on their last campaign? I mean, there's even a few KS campaigns going on where the previous decks haven't even been printed. Some haven't even delivered on their FIRST decks and are already launching new decks. When I got into this, sure I designed multiple decks, but I thought it would be smart business to fulfill my last deck, before rushing into a new one. What if problems arise with my previous deck? What if I start the process of shipping and didn't have enough funds because I was horrible at math? What if I'm just plain out in over my head with shipping since Ive had no experience before? But more importantly, would it be in bad taste? Personally I think people would think I'm just trying to cash in as fast as possible before the trend dies out. I know I can't be the ONLY one that thinks this way. It feels like it's the elephant in the room no one has been willing to address.

Thoughts?

Agreed. We are being hounded to start our next one due to not meeting our limited deck level and there is STILL no way. So I can see why perhaps some makers think its worth it but no way! Not until every single item has been shipped and then maybe a couple weeks to verify that you don't have return issues and so forth.

[GBAllison]

Design by Committee is the worst thing for any designer!!

I couldn't agree more. As a designer, you HAVE to have the courage of your convictions. You need to have a vision, and you need to know when to stick to your guns. On the other hand, we've seen quite a few projects--mostly by first-timers--who have learned TONS from feedback on the KS site and on forums like UnitedCardists and Discourse. As a designer, it's up to you to be able to separate wheat from chaff--that's what being a creative is all about.

What I'm trying to share with you though ... is that from at least *this* customer's perspective, I *like* seeing the give and take, the discussions, and the places where the designer is either learning something new or really doesn't have a preference and discusses with people the pros and cons. That's what I meant when I said I like the transparency. It's appealing to me as a buyer. And it gives me more of a story to tell when I'm showing off my cards. "See this little colored mark in the center of the backs? There was a big fight over whether that was" ... and so on.

Oh and this:

GBallison, I think you might have misunderstood what I meant. It was a combination of both, delivery delays and no product at all, that I believe would be considered a fail if a business did that and customers could actually get refunds.

Yes I did miunderstand. Yup, delays seem to actually be SOP for KS projects.

[Encarded]

I couldn't agree more. As a designer, you HAVE to have the courage of your convictions. You need to have a vision, and you need to know when to stick to your guns. On the other hand, we've seen quite a few projects--mostly by first-timers--who have learned TONS from feedback on the KS site and on forums like UnitedCardists and Discourse. As a designer, it's up to you to be able to separate wheat from chaff--that's what being a creative is all about.

Agreed, but what Kickstarter has done is make designers think they can do 25% of the work and research and then people will give them money. Those designers should be spending weeks, months on the internet figuring these things out, then design, THEN present a completed item to the public.

What I'm trying to share with you though ... is that from at least *this* customer's perspective, I *like* seeing the give and take, the discussions, and the places where the designer is either learning something new or really doesn't have a preference and discusses with people the pros and cons. That's what I meant when I said I like the transparency. It's appealing to me as a buyer. And it gives me more of a story to tell when I'm showing off my cards. "See this little colored mark in the center of the backs? There was a big fight over whether that was" ... and so on.

And we can do that without Kickstarter. http://encarded.com/deco" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Encarded]

I am not sure if Sean's recent (or soon to be second failure ) Lucent design is a failure to have broad appeal or the fact that, on Kickstarter, decks really need the addons to hit the numbers they need.

They don't need those things to be successful. It would appear they do need those things to "bust records" or bring a subpar project scraping through the finish line. Just as a personal anecdote, Tendril had one of the highest goals of any of the card projects to date, was from a complete unknown, and had just a few add on items. But it got made, and funded Aurum.

Three cheers to research and planning!

[BMPokerworld]

I am not sure if Sean's recent (or soon to be second failure ) Lucent design is a failure to have broad appeal or the fact that, on Kickstarter, decks really need the addons to hit the numbers they need.

They don't need those things to be successful. It would appear they do need those things to "bust records" or bring a subpar project scraping through the finish line. Just as a personal anecdote, Tendril had one of the highest goals of any of the card projects to date, was from a complete unknown, and had just a few add on items. But it got made, and funded Aurum.

Three cheers to research and planning!

I agree with Paul here. Well thought out designed decks will get funded. It is the mediocre and poorly designed decks that need all the gimmicks. The tendril deck was beautifully designed and that is why it was so successful...... It deserve to be.

As far as having people offer suggestions on your deck before you go to production, I think that is a good idea providing that it is used only to make minor changes, that will not change the overall design concept of the deck. Take the UC deck for example. We learned the jokers should have a border, the stripe on the back should go from top left to bottom right and we added a subtle one way element to the back design. But the overall appearance of the deck didn't change. So if you are open to minor suggestions then I would say yes, but if you are looking for people to design a deck for you because you either have no vision or are strictly looking for them to supply you with ideas, then I would say no.

Thanks!

[4pmdesigner]

Committee based design, with input from all over can often dilute many of the aspects that made the original project interesting and you start to find a rather boring medium ground that makes everyone happy. Feedback is one thing, but it's not the responsibility of your customers to educate you or tell you what to do. At that point you stop being a creative professional and start becoming an assembler.

I can definitely agree on that but I think that would have to fall into the creator's hands on whether or not you take their feedback. It's good to have a clear vision but I completely understand the excitement caused by a designer when they are openly willing to incorporate feedback from their customers. It makes the customer feel involved and creates a sense of customer loyalty that would otherwise be difficult to obtain. You can't please everyone but being humbled enough to use your better judgement can go a long way.

When I worked on marketing the film "30 days of night" a big thing in the early stages of production was which crowd to market to. You had your vampire horror movie fans which love the "action paced" style of posters and marketing but you also had a comic book crowd to please since the material is based off of a best selling graphic novel. Two different types of "customers" but if everyone stuck to their guns, we would of had a twilight look a like marketing campaign (the marketing was originally intended to focus on the love relationship). It took a lot of people to put aside the "we know better because we're the professionals" to please the hardcore fans because in the end, they were the ones who would create the strongest customer loyalty. Which is why a lot of the artwork for the film is stylized like a comic book. Once again, it comes down to using your better judgement.

I am not sure if Sean's recent (or soon to be second failure ) Lucent design is a failure to have broad appeal or the fact that, on Kickstarter, decks really need the addons to hit the numbers they need.

They don't need those things to be successful. It would appear they do need those things to "bust records" or bring a subpar project scraping through the finish line. Just as a personal anecdote, Tendril had one of the highest goals of any of the card projects to date, was from a complete unknown, and had just a few add on items. But it got made, and funded Aurum.

Three cheers to research and planning!

Since I was in practically the same boat as you were with Tendril, I do agree that a great design doesn't need the fluff (federal 52) but it sure helps. The Add On argument that's popular now, although having valid points, is more so one sided. When I first started with THE GRID I wasn't a card designer, but a kickstarter. I utilized the theory of kickstarter "make your rewards creative" to try and make my goal. Why? Because although I was confident in the design, confidence doesn't bring a guarantee. I never had a successful KS and didn't know if it would make it so I learned what would and wouldn't work. After that I utilized what backers requested and gave them what they want and opposed to throwing in random things. This is more of a situation of designer/artist versus businessman, and the problem of people trying to be one or the other without realizing you can be both. The Lucent deck and 8-bit decks are a prime example. You have Lucent with it's creator (the artist) being confident his design will make it "on its own" as opposed to the 8-bit guys (businessman) who obviously don't know much about design and adds on everything under the sun to meet and surpass a goal. Do I think Lucent should've made it, yes, but he was so against add ons I believe he sunk his own boat. Then you have 8-bit which had to create 4 decks and a truckload of extras to reach a goal less than people like Paul, Russell and myself were able to achieve with ONE deck. I think the real problem is pride. Does it hurt when you see a horrible design and campaign get funded over your own intimate design? Absolutely! But you have to suck it up and go all in if you want your deck to be realized. You have to be "in it to win it". I personally could give a shit what other designers think of me because they're not paying by bills, my backers are. If a bunch of my backers want a plush teddy bear with the ace of spades on its chest, guess what? up it goes.

[4pmdesigner]

Well thought out designed decks will get funded. It is the mediocre and poorly designed decks that need all the gimmicks.

As far as having people offer suggestions on your deck before you go to production, I think that is a good idea providing that it is used only to make minor changes, that will not change the overall design concept of the deck.

^this