Charge Back and Refunds

mr1602

Armendius said:

A pledge is in its nature the same as "shares"

Its a risk purchase, can you charge back shares when a company failed?.

I suggest you read up on some of these terms before you use them as your post made no sense.
Shares actually have power in the corporate world while a pledge doesn't.

Erillion

Armendius said:

A pledge is in its nature the same as "shares"

Its a risk purchase, can you charge back shares when a company failed?.

The word "share" did NOT occur in ANY way, shape or form at any time during this crowdfunding campaign.

As a backer i am sure i have nothing that is anything like a "share" in anything.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/shares.asp

I do not own any share of a corporation, do not have stocks, do not have bonds etc.


Have fun

Armendius

mr1602 said:

Armendius said:

A pledge is in its nature the same as "shares"

Its a risk purchase, can you charge back shares when a company failed?.

I suggest you read up on some of these terms before you use them as your post made no sense.
Shares actually have power in the corporate world while a pledge doesn't.

I was expecting this.

But the pledge, support resource empowers a company to can perform the project you pledged.

Erillion

Armendius said:

But the pledge, support resource empowers a company to can perform the project you pledged.

I am not a native english speaker ... does that sentence make ANY sense to a native speaker ?

Or @Armendius ; can you rephrase that sentence ?


Have fun

Armendius

Erillion said:

Armendius said:

But the pledge, support resource empowers a company to can perform the project you pledged.

I am not a native english speaker ... does that sentence make ANY sense to a native speaker ?

Or @Armendius ; can you rephrase that sentence ?


Have fun

I can try.

A pledge is an amount of money you choose to spend into a project.
That money (resource) make a company to can perform something.

With shares, you invest in a company but have a possibility to receive more money or less.

From the Kickstarter you get only the reward for the share you invested into the project when it succeed, but still is a risk.

Distopia

SpottyGekko said:

Distopia said:

...

A failure in this regard opens them up to legal actions on behalf of those that have pledged, which I would assume includes backers using legally available options to recoup losses ( Charge-back is a legal means of action in this scenario as plans outlined have not been met, as well as could be argued not communicated properly)... 

I always smile when I read these very righteous assertions.

Where does anyone think the refund money will come from in the event that a Kickstarter project fails ?  

The KS pledges are intended to fund the expenses of the project. That money is not kept in escrow so that it can be given back in the event of failure. It is spent on an ongoing basis to pay project costs.

If the planning was done correctly, there should be no money left when the project is completed !

That wasn't exactly my assertion, that was based on this


"If a creator is unable to complete their project and fulfill rewards, they’ve failed to live up to the basic obligations of this agreement. To right this, they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to the best possible conclusion for backers. A creator in this position has only remedied the situation and met their obligations to backers if:

• they post an update that explains what work has been done, how funds were used, and what prevents them from finishing the project as planned;
• they work diligently and in good faith to bring the project to the best possible conclusion in a timeframe that’s communicated to backers;
• they’re able to demonstrate that they’ve used funds appropriately and made every reasonable effort to complete the project as promised;
• they’ve been honest, and have made no material misrepresentations in their communication to backers; and
• they offer to return any remaining funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form.

The creator is solely responsible for fulfilling the promises made in their project. If they’re unable to satisfy the terms of this agreement, they may be subject to legal action by backers."

and this:

If the problems are severe enough that the creator can't fulfill their project, creators need to find a resolution. Steps should include offering refunds, detailing exactly how funds were used, and other actions to satisfy backers. For more information, see Section 4 of our Terms of Use.

Erillion

Armendius said:

I can try.

A pledge is an amount of money you choose to spend into a project.
That money (resource) make a company to can perform something.

With shares, you invest in a company but have a possibility to receive more money or less.

From the Kickstarter you get only the reward for the share you invested into the project.

I can say with confidence ... none of the Star Citizen crowdfunding backers got any "shares" with their pledge. If we are speaking about "shares" in the economic and legal sense.

I think you are mistaken.


Have fun

Armendius

Erillion said:

Armendius said:

I can try.

A pledge is an amount of money you choose to spend into a project.
That money (resource) make a company to can perform something.

With shares, you invest in a company but have a possibility to receive more money or less.

From the Kickstarter you get only the reward for the share you invested into the project.

I can say with confidence ... none of the Star Citizen crowdfunding backers got any "shares" with their pledge. If we are speaking about "shares" in the economic and legal sense.

I think you are mistaken.


Have fun

You are mistaken my intention.

The nature and risk in it is the same.
For example a Kickstarter project can also not meet their goal, then it would be not finished.


I really try my best to explain.

When you create something like a Kickstarter.
You must encourage a person to want to invest into your project.
To do so you give them a reward that they would feel valueble to the amount they are going to invest into your project.

For example you could give a cookie to someone that pledge 300 dollar, but then no one feels happy to invest that amount.
Thats why they construct these packages that feel valuable to invest in a project as a reward.

You want the pledger to invest the most they can.

SpottyGekko

Distopia said:

SpottyGekko said:

Distopia said:

...

A failure in this regard opens them up to legal actions on behalf of those that have pledged, which I would assume includes backers using legally available options to recoup losses ( Charge-back is a legal means of action in this scenario as plans outlined have not been met, as well as could be argued not communicated properly)... 

I always smile when I read these very righteous assertions.

Where does anyone think the refund money will come from in the event that a Kickstarter project fails ?  

The KS pledges are intended to fund the expenses of the project. That money is not kept in escrow so that it can be given back in the event of failure. It is spent on an ongoing basis to pay project costs.

If the planning was done correctly, there should be no money left when the project is completed !

That wasn't exactly my assertion, that was based on this

<KS references>

.

Yes, I do realize that you're only quoting the KS legal mumbo-jumbo, but that is the source of my amusement.

KS provides a whole list of assurances and suggested "remedies" that are all designed to make pledgers feel better about parting with their money. Most of it is window-dressing.

If the project fails, the money is gone.

If malice can be proven, then there may be a chance of some punishment for the project managers, but the money is in all likelihood still gone. And going to the effort of proving malice/fraud in a legal court will most likely require additional time and money from those that have already lost their pledges.

The vast majority of KS failures will be due to ineptitude, mismanagement or unrealistic goals, not intentional fraud. None of those factors are punishable by law.

Perhaps the government should guarantee the safety of all KS pledges...  

DKLond

I certainly think taking a chance with the mindset of buying a "sure thing delivered on time" is pretty naive, at best.

mr1602

The 'last one holding the bag' is a valid concern for all things really, not just KS. When THQ went bust, the last one holding those shares lost a lot of money.

In Star Citizen's case, the KS is a tiny amount compared to the amount they claim to have raised. 2.1million on KS while they have raised $112 million in total.

Distopia

SpottyGekko said:

Distopia said:

SpottyGekko said:

Distopia said:

...

A failure in this regard opens them up to legal actions on behalf of those that have pledged, which I would assume includes backers using legally available options to recoup losses ( Charge-back is a legal means of action in this scenario as plans outlined have not been met, as well as could be argued not communicated properly)... 

I always smile when I read these very righteous assertions.

Where does anyone think the refund money will come from in the event that a Kickstarter project fails ?  

The KS pledges are intended to fund the expenses of the project. That money is not kept in escrow so that it can be given back in the event of failure. It is spent on an ongoing basis to pay project costs.

If the planning was done correctly, there should be no money left when the project is completed !

That wasn't exactly my assertion, that was based on this

<KS references>

.

Yes, I do realize that you're only quoting the KS legal mumbo-jumbo, but that is the source of my amusement.

KS provides a whole list of assurances and suggested "remedies" that are all designed to make pledgers feel better about parting with their money. Most of it is window-dressing.

If the project fails, the money is gone.

If malice can be proven, then there may be a chance of some punishment for the project managers, but the money is in all likelihood still gone. And going to the effort of proving malice/fraud in a legal court will most likely require additional time and money from those that have already lost their pledges.

The vast majority of KS failures will be due to ineptitude, mismanagement or unrealistic goals, not intentional fraud. None of those factors are punishable by law.

Perhaps the government should guarantee the safety of all KS pledges...  

All of that is true for the most part, as there's plenty in there to back that up as well. It still basically allows for charge-backs though, at least at this point for OG KS backers. They were most likely eligible for refunds anyway though. Especially after they breached 100mil+, 2 mil is nothing from that really. 

Armendius

I would not see a campaign to entitle someone to can withdraw based on an amount of funding.

Why would you pledged to withdraw and say "but now you have enough money, I want it back"

Phaserlight

Octagon7711 said:

I still think it's a sale.  No different from buying something off Amazon.  I can say I'm buying it from Amazon to support the company because I like them, but everyone knows it's a business.  You pay for something.  You get something in return.  You get a receipt.  If you don't like the product there's a return policy.

I very much agree. We can argue the legalities of it all day, but I think the reason for it is very simple: you aren't allowed to "sell" things on Kickstarter. This project began on Kickstarter. Everything thereafter is an evolutionary spandrel.

Distopia

Armendius said:

I would not see a campaign to entitle someone to can withdraw based on an amount of funding.

Why would you pledged to withdraw and say "but now you have enough money, I want it back"

I can't see why it would be a fraudulent charge-back if you have grounds to argue that what you pledged to was not delivered as was stated. WHich it wasn't for KS backers, which is why I'd assume they were allowed refunds. 

Erillion

Phaserlight said:

I very much agree. We can argue the legalities of it all day, but I think the reason for it is very simple: you aren't allowed to "sell" things on Kickstarter. This project began on Kickstarter. Everything thereafter is an evolutionary spandrel.

Incorrect.

This project did not start on Kickstarter.

"In October 2012, the developers of the game started a crowdfunding campaign on their own website using IgnitionDeck, a crowdfunding plugin for WordPress.[60][61] Just over a week into the campaign, they also started raising funds via a supplemental Kickstarter campaign.[62]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Citizen


Have fun

Phaserlight

Erillion said:

Phaserlight said:

I very much agree. We can argue the legalities of it all day, but I think the reason for it is very simple: you aren't allowed to "sell" things on Kickstarter. This project began on Kickstarter. Everything thereafter is an evolutionary spandrel.

Incorrect.

This project did not start on Kickstarter.

"In October 2012, the developers of the game started a crowdfunding campaign on their own website using IgnitionDeck, a crowdfunding plugin for WordPress.[60][61] Just over a week into the campaign, they also started raising funds via a supplemental Kickstarter campaign.[62]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Citizen


Have fun

Reaaaallly splitting hairs there, but fine. My point still stands; Kickstarter was formative in getting Star Citizen off the ground.  I don't think the project would have gained traction without it, although it's impossible to say for certain.

Armendius

Distopia said:

Armendius said:

I would not see a campaign to entitle someone to can withdraw based on an amount of funding.

Why would you pledged to withdraw and say "but now you have enough money, I want it back"

I can't see why it would be a fraudulent charge-back if you have grounds to argue that what you pledged to was not delivered as was stated. WHich it wasn't for KS backers, which is why I'd assume they were allowed refunds. 

This is what you misunderstand, you did not order.
You receive a reward for an investment that the campaign assign to an amount (value) of pledge

Wether that can become misleading is up to a courts decision.

At the same time is the reason why the current website should not use the term Pledge because it is a direct store.
Digital products such as a virtual ship is a digital container you purchase.
They should not call that a pledge to the project anymore.
As it is now compared to a kickstarter an order.

Erillion

My opinion: 

Project would have broken the same records even if Kickstarter had no part in it. May have taken 1-2 weeks longer to upgrade the website to be able to handle the mass of interested backers. CIG used Kickstarter because their website crowdfunding tool was completely overwhelmed by the multitude of fans.

Kickstarter contribution  amounts to less than 5 % of the campaign these days (113 M$ milestone coming up, most likely tomorrow). 


Have fun

rpmcmurphy

Armendius said:

Distopia said:

Armendius said:

I would not see a campaign to entitle someone to can withdraw based on an amount of funding.

Why would you pledged to withdraw and say "but now you have enough money, I want it back"

I can't see why it would be a fraudulent charge-back if you have grounds to argue that what you pledged to was not delivered as was stated. WHich it wasn't for KS backers, which is why I'd assume they were allowed refunds. 

This is what you misunderstand, you did not order.
You receive a reward for an investment that the campaign assign to an amount (value) of pledge

Wether that can become misleading is up to a courts decision.

Technically he pre-ordered, he paid for goods advertised to be delivered at some future time agreeable to both parties. Trying to claim it is a donation with a reward attached is folly.

Once money changes hands a contract of sale has been entered into, if one side does not uphold their end, seeks to move the delivery date or change the goods to be delivered then the other party is well within their rights to seek recompense, typically in the form of a refund.

Armendius

rpmcmurphy said:

Armendius said:

Distopia said:

Armendius said:

I would not see a campaign to entitle someone to can withdraw based on an amount of funding.

Why would you pledged to withdraw and say "but now you have enough money, I want it back"

I can't see why it would be a fraudulent charge-back if you have grounds to argue that what you pledged to was not delivered as was stated. WHich it wasn't for KS backers, which is why I'd assume they were allowed refunds. 

This is what you misunderstand, you did not order.
You receive a reward for an investment that the campaign assign to an amount (value) of pledge

Wether that can become misleading is up to a courts decision.

Technically he pre-ordered, he paid for goods advertised to be delivered at some future time agreeable to both parties. Trying to claim it is a donation with a reward attached is folly.

Once money changes hands a contract of sale has been entered into, if one side does not uphold their end, seeks to move the delivery date or change the goods to be delivered then the other party is well within their rights to seek recompense, typically in the form of a refund.

If you wish to believe that, it is in your right.

It indeed has the potential to become misleading.
But it is not an order.
Its simular to encouragement to make someone invest bigger.

Phaserlight

Erillion said:

My opinion: 

Project would have broken the same records even if Kickstarter had no part in it. May have taken 1-2 weeks longer to upgrade the website to be able to handle the mass of interested backers. CIG used Kickstarter because their website crowdfunding tool was completely overwhelmed by the multitude of fans.

Kickstarter contribution  amounts to less than 5 % of the campaign these days (113 M$ milestone coming up, most likely tomorrow). 


Have fun

Less than 5% to date. What would that percentage have looked like December, 2012?

rpmcmurphy

Wishing it is something that is clearly not is something I will leave up to others.

A game is for sale, there is an option to pay for it now with the intent of receiving it at a later date, that is precisely what a pre-order is.

If people want to use terminology to pretend it isn't a pre-order or isn't a sale then they have a hard job ahead of them in convincing others.

Erillion

Phaserlight said:

Less than 5% to date. What would that percentage have looked like December, 2012?

Lemme see ... 31 Dec 2012 ... $ 7,226,318 

From Kickstarter:   $2,134,374

Thats 29,5 % from Kickstarter in December 2012 - a bit more than 1/4 th of the funds at that time.


As of today/now ... its 1,9 %      ($2,134,374  Kickstarter vs  $ 112,826,581 Overall)


Have fun

Armendius

rpmcmurphy said:

Wishing it is something that is clearly not is something I will leave up to others.

A game is for sale, there is an option to pay for it now with the intent of receiving it at a later date, that is precisely what a pre-order is.

If people want to use terminology to pretend it isn't a pre-order or isn't a sale then they have a hard job ahead of them in convincing others.

The twists is what make it hard to convince if that was a goal to do.

If you open a discussion it would be an advice to not lock on one perspective and trash the other one as not right.
Thats why this is a discussion.

No one is wishing, pretending, convinceing.

We only seem to have a different vision in this discussion.

Maybe I should just leave this discussion, as from this point on it feel like becomeing a battle.