Crowdfunding the Ubuntu Edge will fail

This doesn't take into account the typical shape of crowdfunding curves, which are almost always steep at the beginning and even steeper at the end, and relatively flat in the middle. This is very well documented by a bajillion kickstarter campaigns. Here's a typical curve: http://www.sneakattackpress.com/images/KickBrokenProgress.jp...

I didn't back them for two reasons. The first is that the hardware will be late. Not their fault, but rather that hardware is always late. The hardware shouldn't be compared against what is on the market now, and not even on the purported release date, but rather a few months after that. I suspect it won't be that extraordinary.

The second is that Ubuntu have deliberately alienated me as a user. They are under no obligation to do any different - actions they have taken have been a different direction than suits me. The phone is ultimately not for a free(dom) software community, Linux community or collaborated UI community device - it is a Canonical/Ubuntu (Unity) one. In the AMA "So in this first generation Edge, no, we didn't look for open hardware specifically"

Examples of where they have gone different directions: keeping upstart versus systemd, not trying to play nice with Gnome 3, CLA, Amazon on by default, bzr, launchpad, a general preference towards writing new code versus fixing the many issues languishing in the bug tracker etc. They did do good stuff with trying to make a community, fresh software packages, PPAs etc.

If Fedora, Arch, Gentoo, SuSe, Mandrake etc users had a reason to buy the phone I'd bet it would be a lot more successful.

I'm not exactly having high hopes of edge getting the money but I seriously doubt the value of simple regression model on predicting if it's failure or success.

Anyone bookmaking? My money's on $15 million (linear + mirror flip at the end).

The key thing here is that phone-like devices replacing desktops is inevitable. It's straightforward historically-supported Christensen + Moore. Phones are already powerful enough for almost all desktop purposes, just connect keyboard/mouse/monitor.

The question is, who will "lead" this revolution? Maybe Canonical.

Mark Shuttleworth has a net worth of $500 million and has been to space. I have doubt he'll just let the project fail.

I don't see anything stopping him from jumping in at the end, getting it to the $32,000,000 mark. He has the funds.

I'm led to understand the majority of money tends to come at the start and end of fundraising efforts for these things. Though I can't recall where I heard it. Chris Taylor talking about the funraising effort for GPG I think -

http://youtu.be/5zJdMRKBbLE

- Ah, there we go, at around 3 minutes in. U shaped distribution for Proj Eternity -

[Very good interview, by the way, if you haven't seen it and don't already know a bit about game companies. Really feel sorry for the guy.]

Anyhoo. Not that I'm saying this is a U shape, but I suspect you're going to need comparison to similar products to say too much of meaning.

LOL, how about: "Actual funding hits linear projection after some days, extrapolated function can not predict future."

They need to do more international media events, interviews, articles - highlight the fact that you can reserve your very own "Formula 1" phone, plenty of non-techies will be interested by that, specifically the market with the most money who are likely to want the latest, unique, luxury item. If they were doing a TV interview on, say, Bloomberg Business about the uniquely absurd crowdfunding model and bespoke high-end possibility they would likely see another spike in sales.

I think it would've been successful at $600, for whatever storage they wanted to give at that price. But they're being very stubborn about it having 128 GB, no matter the cost (which is a quite high $830). And I think they've done a very poor job explaining why you need to get a phone with 128 GB of storage, too. They need to really "sell" that feature, so people think the price for the phone is worth it.

I do wonder about the sense in the enterprise bundle being $10,000 more for 100 phones than it is to order 50 of the $1400 2 phone deal.

Personally, none of my friends or family, have ever bought a phone outright. We've always done some 'pay over x months' type of plan.

I'm particularly hesitant to pledge a large sum (and yes, for some of us $775 is a "large sum" to drop at once) to a Kickstarter, even a Canonical Kickstarter. But, I understand and believe in the idea.

I'd be much more willing to kick in a sum in the range of $20-80, to get a reward of my name on the founder's page and a discount of the same amount once the hardware is sold to the public.

This means I can actually afford to make a contribution that is reasonable for my budget, and that if the hardware doesn't see the light of day the I'm only out a month's cell phone payment. More importantly, if there are others out there like me, it means that Canonical's Kickstarter would be getting a little bit more of a financial boost, and people like me would be buzzing about it a lot more.

That's really too early to reach such a conclusion. It just got under the median line, well, it's a median line.

And the graphic should show major marketing events and press article to be relevant : we may just be at the farest point from last event, and one new may happen soon to boost donations again.

The primary factor missing from this analysis is marketing.

When they launched, naturally contributions went through the roof. When they did the Reddit AMA, there was another noticeable spike.

I have no idea what their marketing plans are but there is no way they have exhausted their options within the first week.

From TFA: > The model used was a rather naive linear model: y \sim \beta_0 + \beta_1 x ^{1/2} + \beta_2 x^{1/3}

That is not a linear model. Also, note the dent at ~July 21, when it became possible again to buy phones in advance after the first "batch" had sold out.

What I want to know is how much Canonical is kicking in. I mean, this isn't an indie game, this is a company that while different compared to say Apple or someone in that they deal with FOSS, they DO make money.

They haven't mentioned it, but I hope they're not just relying on the Indiegogo to pay for it all, considering they stand to gain a Lot from it going forward.

Of course, they probably are. I'm guessing it takes more than 32mil to make a new phone and OS.

I surmised something similar on day 1, i.e. the interested audience will mostly be highly internet-connected early-adopter geeks. They will have heard about it very quickly, so it's not going to "go viral" and reach a much wider audience later on in the campaign.

The enthusiastic early adopters are more likely to pledge in the first few days and so a steeper than usual drop-off is likely. It's also a very ambitious target amount.

This is senior high school analytics and stating failure as a certainty with this simple model is over-reaching, not to mention, Mark Shuttleworth's money.

What's up with the ridiculous target amount?

I've always assumed that perks overload the viewer from a usability perspective. If your goal is to sell bleeding edge phones and you hide that ability with a load of miscellaneous merchandise, then you might end up losing those high value purchases.

My prediction: if it becomes clear that it won't make it, Mark Shuttleworth will cover the rest from his own pocket. What do you think?

> if nothing changes, the Ubuntu Edge will fail. Let’s hope something changes

At the very least, time will change.

Isn't this graph more typical of a successful crowdfund?