UnitedCardists.com - The forum for Cardistry, Magic, Custom Decks and All Things Playing Cards. Sponsored by Mike Ratledge and 'Friends of UC'

I was just going over my list of campaigns for which I have not received rewards (Shane Tyree, Dale Mathis, Japanese the Game, Tokaido, ...) and I realized that I got this all wrong.

Most of these campaigns have used BackerKit or PledgeMaster to supplement their income (and maybe avoid KS fees).

Why not just make a minimal pledge during the Kickstarter, and then order bricks, frames, whatever using BackerKit/Pledgemaster?

Then when it becomes apparent that you're going to be kept Writhing in the Dark, or left out of the Frame, call your credit card company and tell them you didn't get your stuff. No KS 'its a pledge, not a pre-order' bullshit to deal with.

Thoughts?

/bama

Yes, it's not a bad idea - when you know that a less trusted creator is going to use one of these systems AND there aren't any limited edition pledges that you're interested in.

Unfortunately, many creators don't announce they're going to use BackerKit (or PM) until well into the campaign (or at all). Then it can become a bit of a gamble. Quite a few of the better decks don't use them - Mana being a recent example.

And then if you're interested in limited editions (which includes most of us collectors) then you're usually stuck will pledging for them (of course, there is often a bit of a lottery as to whether they are all pledged for in the less desired decks).

bamabenz wrote:I was just going over my list of campaigns for which I have not received rewards (Shane Tyree, Dale Mathis, Japanese the Game, Tokaido, ...) and I realized that I got this all wrong.

Most of these campaigns have used BackerKit or PledgeMaster to supplement their income (and maybe avoid KS fees).

Thoughts?

/bama

I used BackerKit to help backers inform me of add-on specifics and remind them to pay for shipping if they forgot. Backers are welcome to not use BackerKit.
I am sure that by using BackerKit you still indeed MUST pay KS fees as a creator.
What would make you think that someone could avoid KS fees?

Rose wrote:

bamabenz wrote:I was just going over my list of campaigns for which I have not received rewards (Shane Tyree, Dale Mathis, Japanese the Game, Tokaido, ...) and I realized that I got this all wrong.

Most of these campaigns have used BackerKit or PledgeMaster to supplement their income (and maybe avoid KS fees).

Thoughts?

/bama

I used BackerKit to help backers inform me of add-on specifics and remind them to pay for shipping if they forgot. Backers are welcome to not use BackerKit.
I am sure that by using BackerKit you still indeed MUST pay KS fees as a creator.
What would make you think that someone could avoid KS fees?

By only pledging $1 on the KS campaign and adding everything he wants on BackerKit and paying then. I'm not 100% sure, but I doubt anything added on through BK/PM goes through KS.

MagikFingerz wrote:

Rose wrote:

bamabenz wrote:I was just going over my list of campaigns for which I have not received rewards (Shane Tyree, Dale Mathis, Japanese the Game, Tokaido, ...) and I realized that I got this all wrong.

Most of these campaigns have used BackerKit or PledgeMaster to supplement their income (and maybe avoid KS fees).

Thoughts?

/bama

I used BackerKit to help backers inform me of add-on specifics and remind them to pay for shipping if they forgot. Backers are welcome to not use BackerKit.
I am sure that by using BackerKit you still indeed MUST pay KS fees as a creator.
What would make you think that someone could avoid KS fees?

By only pledging $1 on the KS campaign and adding everything he wants on BackerKit and paying then. I'm not 100% sure, but I doubt anything added on through BK/PM goes through KS.

Oh, okay, I misunderstood. Thanks for the explanation!

Gareth wrote:Yes, it's not a bad idea - when you know that a less trusted creator is going to use one of these systems AND there aren't any limited edition pledges that you're interested in.

Unfortunately, many creators don't announce they're going to use BackerKit (or PM) until well into the campaign (or at all). Then it can become a bit of a gamble. Quite a few of the better decks don't use them - Mana being a recent example.

And then if you're interested in limited editions (which includes most of us collectors) then you're usually stuck will pledging for them (of course, there is often a bit of a lottery as to whether they are all pledged for in the less desired decks).

I would not use this strategy for Mana, Chin, Jackson, etc. They are proven and reliable.

And I don't back campaigns from folks who have proven sketchy (I can't believe anyone would, but Shane raised 10+K on his second campaign, and the Japanese Language campaign raised over 50K), even when I really like what they've got.

But for someone's first campaign? When they have multiple, complicated rewards -- which is a real red flag?

Then I think its definitely the way to go.

/bama

bamabenz wrote:

Gareth wrote:Yes, it's not a bad idea - when you know that a less trusted creator is going to use one of these systems AND there aren't any limited edition pledges that you're interested in.

Unfortunately, many creators don't announce they're going to use BackerKit (or PM) until well into the campaign (or at all). Then it can become a bit of a gamble. Quite a few of the better decks don't use them - Mana being a recent example.

And then if you're interested in limited editions (which includes most of us collectors) then you're usually stuck will pledging for them (of course, there is often a bit of a lottery as to whether they are all pledged for in the less desired decks).

I would not use this strategy for Mana, Chin, Jackson, etc. They are proven and reliable.

And I don't back campaigns from folks who have proven sketchy (I can't believe anyone would, but Shane raised 10+K on his second campaign, and the Japanese Language campaign raised over 50K), even when I really like what they've got.

But for someone's first campaign? When they have multiple, complicated rewards -- which is a real red flag?

Then I think its definitely the way to go.

/bama

The problem is that the better we get with a list of red flags the better they get at doing something novel. Some of the people read here, which is why you don't see it available as a download. We have a lot of lurkers, frankly - always have. Typically we have as many or more 'guests' (not logged in) readers as we have registered members.

bamabenz wrote:I was just going over my list of campaigns for which I have not received rewards (Shane Tyree, Dale Mathis, Japanese the Game, Tokaido, ...) and I realized that I got this all wrong.

Most of these campaigns have used BackerKit or PledgeMaster to supplement their income (and maybe avoid KS fees).

Why not just make a minimal pledge during the Kickstarter, and then order bricks, frames, whatever using BackerKit/Pledgemaster?

Then when it becomes apparent that you're going to be kept Writhing in the Dark, or left out of the Frame, call your credit card company and tell them you didn't get your stuff. No KS 'its a pledge, not a pre-order' bullshit to deal with.

Thoughts?

/bama

Interesting concept. How about only selling cards on Kickstart and save all the "Fluff" items and extra decks for BackerKit? Yea, Shane Tyree needs to do something quick. I sense the natives are getting restless for something before Christmas. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/77 ... n/comments

Another thing to keep in mind is that most of these project creators didn't intend to stiff anybody. I'd be shocked if Shane pursued his projects as a money-grab. That makes no sense. So, being paranoid about giving "them" ideas about setting off our red flags is a bit of a red herring. Rather, if anything, hopefully new or newish project creators who see our lists of red flag markers will ask themselves the hard questions: am I doing these things? Am I setting myself up to fail?

My rules, in general, are so far not particularly sophisticated. I will generally not back a project if the project creator has another project that has not yet shipped, unless the project creator has a bullet-proof reputation. (I've made two exceptions to this rule: Jackson Robinson when he started out, because I had a good feeling about him and I really liked the designs, and another project creator who I will not mention yet until I see how fulfillment goes on the second project, but I will note that the first project I backed has, indeed, shipped.)

I will also generally not back first-timers who have the red flags mentioned above, although I've made a couple exceptions in those cases, as well. I must admit I really, really, really wanted to back the metal mechanical frame with corresponding deck -- I would *love* to have that hanging on my wall. But despite his solid reputation as an artist and the many people with solid reputations who talked him up, I was concerned that he was biting off way more than he could chew with that project. Frankly, I'd been hoping to buy one of the frames on the aftermarket, but he still has to fulfill his orders before there even is an aftermarket.

Other than the Founders deck, which KS project for playing cards was likely an outright scam from the beginning? I got stiffed by Adam Clarkson on the Green Army Deck, and Ed Nash on the Asylum Deck, but I don't think either of those *started out* as scams (even though they eventually became scams, insofar as neither has shown any intention of paying back the backers who spent their money in good faith on product that would never be forthcoming.) And, let's face it: Founders looked totally legit at the beginning. Who could have seen that one coming? It didn't even trigger any of the red flags mentioned above. (Asylum did, with it's crazy add-ons, but Asylum is... yeah....)

I like the idea of hedging one's bets by doing the bulk of one's betting via backerkit or pledgemanager or the like. But, as noted above, that's not always an option. Alas.

One possible drawback: The deck needs to meet its pledge goal or it won't get made. If a lot of people only pledge $1 thinking "I'll backerkit the rest", it might not make its pledge goal...

For this strategy of pledging later on Backerkit and PledgeMangaer, I think it would matter most to the popular and overly successful projects like Dale's and Shane' because 1) funding goal is reached quickly so no worries about failing to meet the funding if you pledge only the minimum, and 2) projects with many obvious red flags don't usually fund because backers are more cautious now.

So following this premise that only legitimate looking projects are what we can worry about (since you wouldn't pledge for a project that is sketchy with many red flags), I think for me, it would be difficult to decide when to pledge on KS or pledge later on BackerKit/PM. The two projects you mentioned as an example (Dale and Shane), are from people with a high reputation and there was no reason for people to doubt their ability to deliver at the time the KS was running. It's only in hindsight when waiting for rewards that you'd be able to realize that it would have been good to pledge minimally on KS and pledge for the rest in Backerkit.

But I guess you can pledge later by default on all projects, even if they look legitimate. Like mentioned before, you risk losing out on maybe some LEs.

Disclaimer: I'm not saying Dale or Shane are scammers or anything, but the customer service and delay in delivery as experienced by some people are definitely disappointing, considering their high reputation.

rousselle wrote:Another thing to keep in mind is that most of these project creators didn't intend to stiff anybody.
...

I guess that's the gotcha here: both Shane and Dale definitely "bit off more than they could chew" in the fact that those two projects went way beyond what they anticipated.

I'm not making excuses, just saying. They both could handle it better, I don't think that's questionable, either.

Mike Ratledge wrote:

rousselle wrote:Another thing to keep in mind is that most of these project creators didn't intend to stiff anybody.
...

I guess that's the gotcha here: both Shane and Dale definitely "bit off more than they could chew" in the fact that those two projects went way beyond what they anticipated.

I'm not making excuses, just saying. They both could handle it better, I don't think that's questionable, either.

Indeed. One of the biggest mistakes many companies make is not planning for success.

Mike Ratledge wrote:I guess that's the gotcha here: both Shane and Dale definitely "bit off more than they could chew" in the fact that those two projects went way beyond what they anticipated.

I'm not making excuses, just saying. They both could handle it better, I don't think that's questionable, either.

I agree that Dale may have got overwhelmed. Its his going dark the last 3 weeks that is troubling.

The Shane story is just crazy. After working on other's campaigns he runs his first one and raises $116,213 on KS. And then he stops working on the decks instead of fulfilling his obligations, and making a go at it as an independent playing card guy. What turns the story into something worse is the 'Extended Edition' second campaign for the same decks that he launched in May, with a delivery date in August, for which he raised $15K.

That's not just 'biting off more than you can chew'.

/bama

bamabenz wrote:

Mike Ratledge wrote:I guess that's the gotcha here: both Shane and Dale definitely "bit off more than they could chew" in the fact that those two projects went way beyond what they anticipated.

I'm not making excuses, just saying. They both could handle it better, I don't think that's questionable, either.

I agree that Dale may have got overwhelmed. Its his going dark the last 3 weeks that is troubling.

The Shane story is just crazy. After working on other's campaigns he runs his first one and raises $116,213 on KS. And then he stops working on the decks instead of fulfilling his obligations, and making a go at it as an independent playing card guy. What turns the story into something worse is the 'Extended Edition' second campaign for the same decks that he launched in May, with a delivery date in August, for which he raised $15K.

That's not just 'biting off more than you can chew'.

/bama

I can't argue that one either, Bama! "Let's take another bite and see if I can chew (yet)"... Fortunately, despite the problems, I am fairly certain that both of these will be delivered - obviously not timely per the original "Delivery Estimate", of course!

I must be missing something here...

I don't see why it's better to give your credit card to Backerkit than to Amazon.

Don't you usually have to make your BK selections within a few weeks of the KS completion?
By the time you finally realize (usually at least 6 months later) that the KS project is a dud, do you have a better chance of contesting the charge on your credit card if it's with BK rather than Amazon?
Or does BK offer buyer protections that I am unaware of?

Not seeing any benefit here for protecting yourself from deadbeats...

I will totally admit, however, that I HAVE at times waited to buy any extras until the KS campaign was over. But that was when I thought the campaign was adding too many freaking variations, and i did NOT want them to hit any more stretch goals....

As a project creator I would actually prefer backers to hold off on add-ons until after the campaign if we were using PledgeManager. It would help avoid the additional 10% hit from Amazon and Kickstarter fees.

The downside is that it makes the project look less successful, but I'm over that at this point given how hard it is just to fund any more.

From a backer perspective, it doesn't seem like it would make much difference UNLESS the creator sent everyone to PledgeManager within 60 days of shipping. After that 60 day period you're usually going to have a hard time talking to your credit card company no matter who charged it.

albinodragon wrote:... given how hard it is just to fund any more.

And it is only going to get harder from this point on. The KS model allows (almost encourages) over-saturation of projects, and as long as some fund that can be highlighted to the masses, there will be a long line of creators with projects that eventually fail... imho.

That's true, I don't feel like Kickstarter cares if $100,000 comes from one project or if it's broken up into ten projects, they get their cut either way. Some of the purists there probably prefer the ten projects because it allows more individuals a piece of the pie.

What it's looking like to me right now is the market is self-correcting. A lot of people looked at high grossing projects and said, "I can do that." Now they aren't getting the same return on their investment with lower goals being hit in the single and low double digits. Many of these will fall off because it probably isn't worth all that time and energy to net such a low amount and have a bunch of extra decks in the garage. They'll have to really love doing it for the sake of putting their product out into the world.

You also have the 'good artist' but 'bad business sense' types who shoot themselves in the foot before the project is even launched with unrealistic shipping calculations, inexperience with true printing cost (ie. the signed contract not the initial email quote), and other KS black holes like not being easily found/searchable because of project wording and duration times.

My first couple of KS projects which were art related but not card related failed, but gave me the insight needed to produce a few more successful art projects. The first couple of winners educated me as to the shipping (especially Internationally) thingie so by the time I did my card project the numbers were dialed in so that backers and creator felt the nice warm and fuzzy.

I think what a lot of new project creators fail to understand is that a 100K project might only yield a 1K to 5K profit for the creator after 100s of hours of work and frustration.

Today I got my Pairs decks delivered. Pairs funded on March 14. The Writhing Dark funded on December 9. What makes that interesting is that Shane Tyree designed two different Pairs decks.

And...I got a FedEx delivery notice from Dale Mathis. He says that out of 1,226 backers I'm in the last batch of 26.

/bama

I still haven't recieved my bicycle steel package. The shipping label had been printed for over a week before it finally moved. It should be there waiting for me when I get home in four weeks.

bamabenz wrote:And...I got a FedEx delivery notice from Dale Mathis. He says that out of 1,226 backers I'm in the last batch of 26.

/bama

Was your order unusual in any way, Bama? Just curious. He stated that he was doing the "hard ones" last.

I've got seven Kickstarter projects that I have backed that were intended to deliver by September or October that I haven't received yet. All of them have mentioned the troubles they are having in receiving their product or shipping, and at least one of them has begun shipping, so I'll probably see that one fairly soon.

None of these are what I would call "deadbeats," nor do I expect them to fail to deliver, but... yeah. It's still a little bit of a drag. I'm certain this is the most "back-ordered" I've been on Kickstarter projects so far.

Another seven are slated for delivery in November. So, if all of those deliver by this time next month, I'm going to have a very happy November. Wheeee!

But... yeah.

I think part of the problem with this latest batch is that nobody expected EPCC to become so backed up so quickly. In a couple cases, I think we may be seeing some business plan hiccups. Still... when is the last time a project was late enough to hit the Wall of Shame?

I feel like, even though I'm more back-ordered now than ever before, there's actually a generally higher level of reliability these days, at least in the projects I'm backing. What say y'all? Is this the same as your experience?

If we are one of those ones you're expecting in November, we're still on track so fingers crossed.

I'm sure there are at least a couple projects that are ready for the Hall of Shame at this point, although it doesn't look like that's been updated in awhile.

I am probably the only fool who pledged for Elements but.....

After calling Alien (SL)ink out during his cash grab "ninja funding" campaign for Signed Flowers decks for running another campaign when the last three hadn't been fulfilled, I got a PM calling my comment "In poor taste". Elements was funded May 21st with a promised delivery date of September. September came and went with an update at the end of the month saying shipping would start in October. With October drawing to a close I commented asking if there was another "delay". Six days later he replied that Elements would not ship until next month. IF that happens it would be 6 months from the end of the campaign. I am not holding my breath.

So to recap. The Wine deck, which funded March 6th is in fulfillment with backers still asking where their cards are. The 5th Element, a cheap metal poster funded April 5th has yet to ship and the same for the Elements deck. After chastising me for my "poor taste" Jeremiah went on to say his loyal backers know of his solid reputation, delivery and communication. Communication? It's been over six weeks since there was an update for Elements. Bah!

BTW, The recent Flowers "Infinity edition" are signed deck he printed over a year ago. An $88 goal to sign cards he already has... and raised $1911. What was that about a fool and his money?

rousselle wrote:I feel like, even though I'm more back-ordered now than ever before, there's actually a generally higher level of reliability these days, at least in the projects I'm backing. What say y'all? Is this the same as your experience?

I'm fairly sure most projects these days will fulfill, it's just gonna take longer. Seems to me that project fulfillment is approximately 6 months on average unless you're GW or CPC who have the decks basically printing while they're running projects. There are so many decks coming out these days that it's not a surprise that EPCC and USPCC are backed up.

Cbkimble wrote:

rousselle wrote:I feel like, even though I'm more back-ordered now than ever before, there's actually a generally higher level of reliability these days, at least in the projects I'm backing. What say y'all? Is this the same as your experience?

I'm fairly sure most projects these days will fulfill, it's just gonna take longer. Seems to me that project fulfillment is approximately 6 months on average unless you're GW or CPC who have the decks basically printing while they're running projects. There are so many decks coming out these days that it's not a surprise that EPCC and USPCC are backed up.

I'll agree with all that. I have no problem with six months as long as there are regular updates with real details, not just "the cards are shipping next month" and two months later post that they will ship the NEXT month.

@Mike, here's what i pledged for:

$168 - COLLECTORS EDITION 6 PACK
Aluminum Die - Blue Anodized Qty: 1 x $18.00
Aluminum Die - Red Anodized Qty: 1 x $18.00
Die Holders x 4. Qty: 1 x $17.00
Domestic Shipping for this Pledge. Qty: 1 x $50.00
Original Mechanical Frame Qty: 1 x $170.00
Metal Card Qty: 2 x $5.00
Crystals - Light Siam Qty: 6 x $10.00

/bama