Is Kickstarter getting too big?

[LA Rabbit]

No problem with larger name people using Kickstarter because as noted it has the potential to bring more new people to kickstarter and hopefully if they are professionals they are more likely to deliver.  Like Wood, I have had mixed success from very happy to complete failure to deliver on projects I have backed.  Kickstarter is not an escrow company and it is a complete crapshoot about what you will get, if anything.  I go into the funding eyes wide open but don't blame anyone who feels it is too risky or who was burned by it¹.  I also am encouraged by similar sites like Chipin which I hope create good competition and keep the best deals for creators.  As far as I know this is new stuff here so I am sure the process will evolve over time.  Project funding for me depends not only on the project but on the rewards offered.  Having grown up with PBS pledge drives, I only back the ones where I like the rewards as well.  There have been several projects that I liked but the reward levels just didn't give me what I wanted at the price I wanted to pay. 

On a side note, my wife bought the book from him at Wondercon.  It looks nice but she has not read it yet (neither have i)     Maybe I will get around to it and give people a quick review if they are interested. 





¹I also imagine that at some point if I continue to have such experiences I will stop funding projects on kickstarter.

[Kenney]

I have absolutely no problem with big names using this to fund projects. I think there would have been a time when I would have, but now? It's all gravy. Because in the end all of this is optional, and what matters at the end of the day is the work and the project, and if a person feels it's worth it -- it's worth it.

[Andrew Tom]

A lot of great discussion guys...

Actually, I saw a tweet about FairyQuest this morning, but it got me to thinking, "What if someone huge was using it instead of financing it themself".  Cause Ramos and Jenkins are pretty big names already.  

It was more of a generalized question than directed solely at that project.  For example... would everyone be OK with it, if it were Robert Kirkman (whom we assume is swimming in loot like Scrooge McDuck)?

My personal opinion is that I really don't have a problem with it unless it ends up getting to the point where guys like Steve and Green Skeleton get pushed to the wayside and don't really get the opportunity to produce their books.  I feel that there should always be room for these types of projects (isn't that why it was started to begin with?).

Maybe I'm being a hypocrite here, but I'll admit that I'd probably roll my eyes if Kirkman financed a new Walking Dead spin-off book on KickStarter, but for the most part, the concept of guys like Jimmy Palmiotti doing his Queen Crab book through it is completely fine (in fact I really enjoyed that book).

A

[Dean S.]

I've got no problems with bigger names joining in.  That's just how the world works....  Now, I wouldn't mind Kickstarter coming up with a slightly better organization system that made it a little easier to sort into "professional" and "amateur".  

[LA Rabbit]

I've got no problems with bigger names joining in.  That's just how the world works....  Now, I wouldn't mind Kickstarter coming up with a slightly better organization system that made it a little easier to sort into "professional" and "amateur".  

Just type "amateur" into Google and I am sure that will straighten you out.     I don't know how Kickstarter would figure that out on their own. 

[ryan]

Vinyl.  

Red is hawt.  

pvc statue

[VinceB]

pvc statue

 

I think I'll pass on the statue.

Thanks for the pic, Ryan. Karma! 

[GrimlocksPS]

I for one have no problems with "big name creators" doing a kickstarter to fund a Creator Owned project. Steve Bryant put it better than I ever could.

EDIT: I did disagree with a certain KS campaign but the more I thought about the less I cared. I wasn't going to back it so why get bent out of shape?

[Wood]

I think I'll pass on the statue.

Thanks for the pic, Ryan. Karma! 

Told you. But don't listen to me, listen to Ryyyyyyyyyyyan. 

 

[GreenSkeletonII]

My personal opinion is that I really don't have a problem with it unless it ends up getting to the point where guys like Steve and Green Skeleton get pushed to the wayside and don't really get the opportunity to produce their books.  I feel that there should always be room for these types of projects (isn't that why it was started to begin with?).

I think this is where the strength of the project comes into play.  If your project looks cooler than Jenkins and Ramos, you'll get pledges. 

But I think Kickstarter is big enough where both projects can be funded without people choosing either/or.

[Wood]

To Andrew's Kirkman example, I certainly wouldn't fund a Kirkman project IF the proceeds were simply to create a book for he and his partners. Now if Kirkman was doing a project where the proceeds went to a charity or something? Sure.

Last year we had a similar discussion when Tony Harris tried using Kickstarter to fund his income for a few months to create an OGN, and a lot of us said that was B.S. and would never back that sort of thing. IIRC, his campaign never got funding.

Ultimately if there's perceived value, it will get the money. $60,000 is a LOT of money to fund a project that's ALREADY DONE. I mean let's be clear here, this OGN by Ramos and Jenkins is IN THE CAN. So it's not even like they're asking for money to subsidize their typical income levels to create the work. They're asking for that money to print extra volumes and to pay for the extras. I really struggle with how that's justifiable.

My rule of thumb is...if it's a project I like or something by people I like, I will lean toward supporting it. BUT, I also want to believe that this project is not about creating PROFITS for the people involved, but more helping them realize the goal of making the idea a reality.

[GreenSkeletonII]

Last year we had a similar discussion when Tony Harris tried using Kickstarter to fund his income for a few months to create an OGN, and a lot of us said that was B.S. and would never back that sort of thing. IIRC, his campaign never got funding.

Tony Harris' project was funded.

[GrimlocksPS]

To Andrew's Kirkman example, I certainly wouldn't fund a Kirkman project IF the proceeds were simply to create a book for he and his partners. Now if Kirkman was doing a project where the proceeds went to a charity or something? Sure.

Last year we had a similar discussion when Tony Harris tried using Kickstarter to fund his income for a few months to create an OGN, and a lot of us said that was B.S. and would never back that sort of thing. IIRC, his campaign never got funding.

Ultimately if there's perceived value, it will get the money. $60,000 is a LOT of money to fund a project that's ALREADY DONE. I mean let's be clear here, this OGN by Ramos and Jenkins is IN THE CAN. So it's not even like they're asking for money to subsidize their typical income levels to create the work. They're asking for that money to print extra volumes and to pay for the extras. I really struggle with how that's justifiable.

My rule of thumb is...if it's a project I like or something by people I like, I will lean toward supporting it. BUT, I also want to believe that this project is not about creating PROFITS for the people involved, but more helping them realize the goal of making the idea a reality.

I think when this Kickstarter thing was new people were very wary of supporting projects that would put money in someones pocket.

Also I think people are getting wiser to how Creator Owned comics work. Paul and Humberto have set a high goal in order to pay for incentives and shipping. I think they're covering their bases. I am probably going to support this just so I can get a copy of the book.

[Wood]

Tony Harris' project was funded.

Was it? OK, well there you go. I saw no point in supporting that effort, but obviously many others disagreed.

[ryan]

Tony Harris' project was funded.

well, yes and no. he initially had it up at $60k (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/26140676/roundeye-for-love/posts) but when it only got about 6k he cancelled it and started another at $10k for what was basically a pitch or something (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/26140676/roundeye-for-love-0)

Ultimately if there's perceived value, it will get the money. $60,000 is a LOT of money to fund a project that's ALREADY DONE. I mean let's be clear here, this OGN by Ramos and Jenkins is IN THE CAN.

-emphasis mine-

is this true of FairyQuest? some of the rewards mention they are on issue #2, since the backing reward is being drawn into the story/issue

[Chris Campbell]

I believe in econonics they call this "extracting the economic rent".  


I like the patronage aspect of Kickstarter.  When I start feeling like someone is requesting Kickstarter money for something they could obviously have picked up by a publishing house, and they're providing inexpensive giveaways and pocketing the delta.  Nah son. Not for me.  Get what you can, but not from me.  

[Wood]

I believe in econonics they call this "extracting the economic rent".  


I like the patronage aspect of Kickstarter.  When I start feeling like someone is requesting Kickstarter money for something they could obviously have picked up by a publishing house, and they're providing inexpensive giveaways and pocketing the delta.  Nah son. Not for me.  Get what you can, but not from me.  

Yep, that's how I roll.

If you look at what I've funded so far, it's been projects that I a) wanted to see happen and b) I felt I was getting a decent return for my efforts.

If I can come away with a hardcover or collected edition of the work for not much more than it would cost me on the shelves? Yeah, you've got a good shot at my ducats.

[JoeyN]

No problem with people getting funding to do a project. Just because they are a big name, does not mean a publisher will back it. Though if you do a kickstarter project you better have a wide range of levels, and extras for backers.

[GreenSkeletonII]

well, yes and no. he initially had it up at $60k (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/26140676/roundeye-for-love/posts) but when it only got about 6k he cancelled it and started another at $10k for what was basically a pitch or something (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/26140676/roundeye-for-love-0)

Ah, didn't know that.  Thanks for the clarification.  But again, it makes my point that people will self-regulate the system.

[Dean S.]

Ah, didn't know that.  Thanks for the clarification.  But again, it makes my point that people will self-regulate the system.

And that's kinda the beautiful thing about Kickstarter.  It's a free and open market and people can vote with their dollars.  Economic theory is really slick and powerful stuff.  Good stuff that is well-presented will get funding.  Crummy stuff won't.  It's Darwinian and I like it.