Hacker News Reader

Comment by zan2434 | Hacker News Reader

This looks like a funded, experienced, hardware team with an already finished product. Are they only using Kickstarter for exposure? If they're looking for validation/upfront manufacturing costs they should be doing pre-orders instead of "crowdfunding"

View on HN

Please define the difference in this context, especially looking at the funding rewards.

Pre-Order gives you a right to obtain the product or at least get some money back in case the company folds and there are assets left, usually even before the investors see any money. You're a customer. Kickstarter gives you "you're a backer" and in case the company folds you get nothing.

That might be an argument against Kickstarter in general, but it isn't a good criticism of any particular use of Kickstarter, especially of one like this which appears highly likely to succeed in producing the promised product.

I think it's even a better criticism of this particular case: If this kickstarter really has such a low risk of failure, why don't the investors bear that risk and go for preorders?

As a consumer I would rather the investors expose me to a tiny risk than a huge risk. Would you really prefer the converse?

Except in this case, if the company folds, there are likely to be no assets left, as the majority of the funds will be going to pay for manufacturing and the inventory needed to drive it. I would contend that your risk profile is almost, if not completely, identical, and it's the risk of doing early business with a very young company.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com