Board Game Kickstarter Canceled Amidst Claims of Malfeasance

[mattaui]

You've just got to be realistic when you pledge money for these things, and if it's something that looks overly ambitious or fly by night, don't risk more than you can afford to lose.

The Kickstarters I've paid larger amounts into have all been with established individuals with long track records. A couple of them might have been later than promised, but I was in it for the products and got what I was after (like with Reaper and with SJG's Ogre).

The one 'help me start a company to make miniature tokens' guy I threw $5 at seems to have totally dropped the ball with producing orders for the people who backed his company, and instead is now just selling stuff at conventions, just to pick the only one (out of a dozen) that I've backed that has pretty much failed to deliver to the backers.

 

[Abomination]

The guy who said the project was beyond his capabilities was Erik Chevalier, the founder of The Forking Path. The guy who said he wasn't involved with the decision and never saw any money was Keith Baker, the designer of the game. There's still some sorting out to be done but with Baker's post, it sounds like Chevalier founded the company with the intent to publish Baker's game, and then left him hanging along with everyone else.

sounds like the actual game designer was screwed on top of the backers

I thought the Kickstarter concept was supposed to stop this exact same thing from happening.

Essentially this Chevalier fellow used Kickstarter as his own personal bank loan for his business.

 

[1337mokro]

A freeloading asshole that saw money and dipped his greasy fingers DEEP into the money jar and took whatever stuck to it and spent it on blowjobs, booze and bling. He basically stiffed the two guys that made the game for him and ran with their work all the while promising he'd pay them next week.

Of course I am interpreting this the worst way possible but I can't really see it going any other way when basically 2/3rd's of the supposed team working on this come out and say "We didn't know shit about the way he pissed the money away."

I think we can safely call this the first official Kickstarter bomb.

 

[Abomination]

I think we can safely call this the first official Kickstarter bomb.

The word you're looking for is "fraud".

This appears to be nothing short of it.

 

[Roander]

I'm not entirely sure Kickstarter projects that fail can be legally challenged, despite all manner of different words people use to describe projects on KS and the act of backing all seem to have the same common misconception. You did not pay for a product nor service, and you did not invest so no protection there either.

Kickstarter projects are fund raisers, you donate to a fund raiser, Kickstarter in it's own terms says exactly that, fund raising.

You can't sue a cancer charity when it fails to develop the cure for cancer with that $20 you donated last year so I highly doubt the law will offer any protection here either. No goods or services were explicity offered or paid for and as such no legally bound transaction took place.

I am starting to suspect Kickstarter's success has reached critical mass with too many people walking in thinking that backing a project is no different from placing a preorder or reservation on a normal product which is horribly incorrect thinking.

Continuing your own example, if you donate money to a cancer charity and they don't make a good faith attempt to use the money to develop a cure for cancer, help cancer patients, or whatever else they indicated they would do, then I believe you can sue them for fraud. I don't know whether what Chevalier did quite falls into that category but the fact that the people who actually produced something saw none of the money while he had full access to it and produced nothing makes for a good argument against him. He at least seems to have a plan to pay people back; if it weren't for the apparent deception regarding what the initial kick starter was supposed to support I might feel sorry for him.

 

[wgar]

I don't even look at kickstarter projects.

Sure some of these things can fail, you take your chances there. But situations like this are even worse. In a normal situation like this where you invested in a company and it not only failed, but where the money might not even have been spent on the agreed project you could probably sue or charge embezzlement. But I don't think you have any recourse at all with kickstarter projects.

Even when the project succeeds I don't like kickstarter. Take all those video games that are being funded. If a one of them becomes a massive success the backers don't share in the profits. Kickstarter is just a way to transfer all the risk to other people who you have no legal responsibilities too.

I agree completely.

All risk is always in the investors.

That risk is transferred to us if we use Kickstarter. It also means developers are willing to try much riskier games than what regular investors would want who may've invested potentially thousands into a regular AAA company.

Now it's nice that we get games like Project Eternity that no regular publisher would pickup due to how much marketing they'd have to do it, but then there's the risk of lesser known developers getting in on the action.

 

[Jamous]

It's really disappointing to see Kickstarters go down in flames like this. It's such an interesting way of funding projects and offers us a lot, yet we really have to remember that it -is- a gamble. Even when (like in this case) it really shouldn't be.

 

[Schadrach]

You've just got to be realistic when you pledge money for these things, and if it's something that looks overly ambitious or fly by night, don't risk more than you can afford to lose.

The thing is, this was presented as "we have a board game designed, and want to get some nicer components designed and get it manufactured." That's neither obviously fly-by-night nor clearly overly ambitious.

What got left out is that the guy behind the Kickstarter wasn't the game designer, but rather a middle man who screwed both the backers and the game's designers. The game designers have hopped in the comments and offered to make a print-n-play version with the assets they have for all the disappointed backers, while people are still chasing refunds from the project creator (who apparently screwed both the game designers and the backers).

I'm not entirely sure Kickstarter projects that fail can be legally challenged, despite all manner of different words people use to describe projects on KS and the act of backing all seem to have the same common misconception. You did not pay for a product nor service, and you did not invest so no protection there either.

Kickstarter projects are fund raisers, you donate to a fund raiser, Kickstarter in it's own terms says exactly that, fund raising.

Per the KS TOS, the project creator is required to provide whatever they listed as backer rewards for the pledge level, or refunds if they are unwilling or unable to do that. They aren't required necessarily to be successful in their project, but most of them list the product of a successful project as a backer reward, which kinda ties the two together. For example, if you ran a Kickstarter for a game and only listed t-shirts and other swag as backer rewards, you would be required to provide said swag, but not necessarily to finish producing the game.

To provide a comparison you might consider more valid, remember those PBS pledge drives, where if you donated over a certain amount you got a tote bag, or a coffee cup, or whatever? OK, were they obligated to provide the offered coffee cup or tote bag or whatever to people who donated over the stated amount? Other than sometimes offering things that don't exist yet, what's the difference?

 

[mirage202]

Continuing your own example, if you donate money to a cancer charity and they don't make a good faith attempt to use the money to develop a cure for cancer, help cancer patients, or whatever else they indicated they would do, then I believe you can sue them for fraud. I don't know whether what Chevalier did quite falls into that category but the fact that the people who actually produced something saw none of the money while he had full access to it and produced nothing makes for a good argument against him. He at least seems to have a plan to pay people back; if it weren't for the apparent deception regarding what the initial kick starter was supposed to support I might feel sorry for him.

You do raise a good point about fraud. It would take an immense effort to prove it, assuming that this isn't all just one story of a string of bad luck.

Still though, fraud is a criminal matter not a civil one, and the Kickstarter ToS say that nothing is guaranteed, even the rewards at different tiers are covered as a reward/bonus at the project creators discretion, nothing there legally binding once more. So at the end of the day I still believe that backers are royally screwed on this one.

One way I could see a potential avenue for people getting their money back would be if he had signed contracts with the other guys on the team. They have been screwed by this as well and could (contracts pending) sue for breach, at which point I'm sure there will be some way for something class action to worm its way in. Sadly though the only winners from those are the lawyers.

Back on the analogy, is it actually possible to sue a charity for something like that? I can't remember where but I read something that said some of the more notorious ones out there take a massive percentage of received donations and actually funnel it back in to pay for more advertising to ask for more donations. In the region of 80% iirc.

 

[Baldr]

The good news for backers, The Forking Path Co. has full liability under Erik Chevalier. He did not distinguish his personal affairs from his business affairs. That means he is fully responsible for paying all debts(example: if he lost a class-action lawsuit), that could include possible seizing of personal property by the courts and possible garnishment of future pay checks.

Had it been a Limited Liability Company or a Corporation, they could only seize assets of the company.

http://egov.sos.state.or.us/br/pkg_web_name_srch_inq.show_detl?p_be_rsn=1596226&p_srce=BR_INQ&p_print=FALSE

 

[mirage202]

Per the KS TOS, the project creator is required to provide whatever they listed as backer rewards for the pledge level, or refunds if they are unwilling or unable to do that. They aren't required necessarily to be successful in their project, but most of them list the product of a successful project as a backer reward, which kinda ties the two together. For example, if you ran a Kickstarter for a game and only listed t-shirts and other swag as backer rewards, you would be required to provide said swag, but not necessarily to finish producing the game.

To provide a comparison you might consider more valid, remember those PBS pledge drives, where if you donated over a certain amount you got a tote bag, or a coffee cup, or whatever? OK, were they obligated to provide the offered coffee cup or tote bag or whatever to people who donated over the stated amount? Other than sometimes offering things that don't exist yet, what's the difference?

Yes in this specific case as rewards were offered, he is obligated by KS to either deliver the rewards, or return all payments. I'm not sure though if this is legally binding in court. It would require a court to say yes the ToS are binding and valid, has that happened yet? Haven't personally seen anything to that effect as of yet.

My original post was more a warning in the general sense surrounding KS that more and more people are getting involved as time goes on, yet fewer are actually aware of just what they are doing. (Poor example but relevant) One look at the Steam forums is all you need to notice this trend, too many of the view that is a discounted advanced pre-ording system, and not a 50/50 gamble with their money that has equal chances of something akin to dropping good money down a drain for laughs.

 

[drummond13]

I'm a little confused; where did the money actually go? If the designer and the artist got absolutely none of it, and no actual product for the game (or for kickstarter backer bonuses) were ever produced, then what precisely was the money spent on?

 

[Kahani]

Why not just say "I want to start a business for X".

Because you're not allowed to use Kickstarter to start a business. From their guidelines [http://www.kickstarter.com/help/guidelines]:
"A project is something with a clear end, like making an album, a film, or a new game. A project will eventually be completed, and something will be produced as a result."

So yeah, this was a total scam from the start. Even if he did intend to produce the game, it's clear that he was attempting to get around Kickstarter's rules and raise funds to start a business, not simply to produce a product. While backers may not have much they can do about this, it could be worth bringing it to Kickstarter's attention since they're not likely to be happy about that sort of thing.

 

[MetalMagpie]

Why not just say "I want to start a business for X".

Because perhaps its easier to hype up and get people interested in supporting game X, than it is for people to throw money to support Company Y being started and then maybe doing Game Z?

There's also the problem that Kickster's guidelines [http://www.kickstarter.com/help/guidelines] make it very clear that "Everything on Kickstarter must be a project". Setting up a business is not a project as it has no clearly defined end.

 

[Disthron]

I'm not going to comment on whether or not this guy is a scammer or just incompetent. But to those who say you should swear off Kickstarter because of this I'd ask them to point out a system that is flawless. Whenever you put money toward backing a project you run the risk of it being a failure. Say your project is a peace of hardware, if a manufacturer of a key component goes bust and you can't find an alternate that is within your budget/time frame then your project is dead. I remember there was a Vampire show in the early 90's that got canned because the lead actor got killed in a motorcycle accident. If that was a Kickstarter funded movie the producers may have already spent most of the money.

Every system has failures and scammers. Are you going to stop using e-bay or Amazon because every once in a while you hear about someone attempting a scam or releasing a crappy movie or book? If you think Kickstarter should be perfect then I think your expectations are a little high. It seems to me that the track record of Kickstarter is pretty good so fare. That may change as time goes on, but so far I'm pretty happy with the projects I've backed.

Also, Kickstarter is not an investment.

 

[MetalMagpie]

I'm a little confused; where did the money actually go? If the designer and the artist got absolutely none of it, and no actual product for the game (or for kickstarter backer bonuses) were ever produced, then what precisely was the money spent on?

He says he left his job to do this project, so presumably he's been using the Kickstarter money to pay his rent, buy food, etc.

In addition - if he was trying to get his business set up - he may have been racking up legal fees and other costs. Lawyers can really take you to the cleaners if you don't know what you're doing and have to keep sending forms back and forth! He could also have paid tooling costs (which can be very pricey indeed) to the company who was going to create the pewter figures (and/or any game pieces).

 

[MetalMagpie]

I have one little problem with what the "he said" part, first it says "it was beyond my capabilities, maybe someone more experienced would've worked better", but then it says "we were not involved in the decision to close the project nor saw any money". So... He was in charge but he wasn't? I don't really get it.

The guy who said the project was beyond his capabilities was Erik Chevalier, the founder of The Forking Path. The guy who said he wasn't involved with the decision and never saw any money was Keith Baker, the designer of the game. There's still some sorting out to be done but with Baker's post, it sounds like Chevalier founded the company with the intent to publish Baker's game, and then left him hanging along with everyone else.

Thought I'd quote you both in case Grabehn didn't see the response.

OT: Wow. I just had a look at the Kickstarter page. Three people paid $1,000 and one person paid $2,500. I sincerly hope they're wealthy enough for that not to hurt too much.

 

[NKRevan]

It's a sad situation for all involved, and it once again drives home the point that Kickstarter is a roll of the dice. Money spent backing them should be treated like money lost, and if you can't afford to lose that money, then you should probably find something better to do with it.

Source: Kickstarter [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/forkingpath/the-doom-that-came-to-atlantic-city]


Permalink

Seriously. What is is it with media sites and negativity about Kickstarter? Why does everyone focus on the negatives and acts as though nothing but trouble comes out of it? There's successful projects out there, people who have delivered on their promises (yes, in gaming, too) and they don't even get a mention.

Shadowrun Returns is launching right now. They even state in their video that the game is Kickstarter funded...and yet whenever anyone writes about it, it is, at best a footnote. Noone talks about how this is an example of KS delivering. Same goes for FTL. Same goes for Giana Sisters: Twisted Dreams. Think of the end result what you will, but those projects delivered on their promises and yet all I can read in the big news outlets is Double Fine here, failed project there, delays somewhere else.

And then you get a statement like the one above. Roll of the dice? There are PROVEN projects out there. It's called building trust. But all this (and other) news site seems to do is try to make KS seem as "dangerous" as possible.

P.S.: Yes, I was personally involved in a KS project. Yes, we succeeded. Yes, we delivered. So this kind of negative press is really irking me to no end.

 

[Clankenbeard]

Seriously. What is is it with media sites and negativity about Kickstarter? Why does everyone focus on the negatives and acts as though nothing but trouble comes out of it? There's successful projects out there, people who have delivered on their promises (yes, in gaming, too) and they don't even get a mention.

Well said. I think Kickstarter is an excellent and revolutionary way to get new products off the ground. It is immediate start-up capital and marketing feedback for your potential product. There will be incompetence and failure and pissed-of backers. Always. But, the advantages grossly outweigh the negatives.

I will own many cool things that--when people ask me where they came from--I will respond,"Oh this. You can't get it. It was a Kickstarter." Elitest Hipster Douchebaggery!

 

[hutchy27]

I thought if something like this happened you got your money back, guess not.