[kenberg]

Some of you may know that I an retired from the university of Maryland, and you might also know that Sergei Brin graduated from there. The latest Forbes produced the following from a colleague:

Quote

Some of you may have seen the announcement from Forbe's magazine today that Sergei Brin has fallen to 19th richest person in the world! Sergei is worth $31.8 billion which may seem ok, but he is $400,000,000 behind his own partner Larry Page, and worse still he is even poorer than Jeff Bezos, a guy who sells books and newspapers. To top off the bad news, Technology Review came today and it says that Google is not the smartest company in the world, but 3rd smartest.

Look, Sergei hangs out with Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Larry Ellison. We don't want him to feel like the little poor boy who is out of place. We have to show our alumni that we care. I thought a fundraiser with the goal of $400,000,000 just to get him even with Larry Page would help keep his spirits up and let him hold his head high.

Please give whatever you can - $5,000,000, $10,000,000, $25,000,000. Even if you can only afford $1,000,000 - that's fine; it's the thought that counts!

Just send a check made out to me, but marking down "Sergei Brin Fund," so I'll know what the money is for. If it is cash, leave it under my door.

I thought that I would pass this on in case any of you wish to join in this worthy effort.

[masse24]

 kenberg, on 2014-March-05, 17:21, said:

Some of you may know that I an retired from the university of Maryland, and you might also know that Sergei Brin graduated from there. The latest Forbes produced the following from a colleague:



I thought that I would pass this on in case any of you wish to join in this worthy effort.

Uh huh...I'll get right on that. Top of my list of things to do.

[Endymion77]

Count me in for $10M as soon as I can afford it. But Google being 3rd smartest company in the world is bullshit.

[kenberg]

I looked at the "smartest companies" list at http://www2.technolo....com/tr50/2014/

Most of them I never heard of. Which probably says more about me than about them.

[Endymion77]

Tesla Motors is OK. Salesforce.com at number 5? That's so 1999. They're the one of the few companies on this list that definitely should be making money at the moment, and their CFO is resigning

[mike777]

 kenberg, on 2014-March-05, 18:52, said:

I looked at the "smartest companies" list at http://www2.technolo....com/tr50/2014/

Most of them I never heard of. Which probably says more about me than about them.

"Familiar names such as Apple and Facebook aren’t on this list because reputation doesn’t matter. We’re highlighting where important innovations are happening right now."


I am most surprised by a lack of definition and standard of measurement from MIT.

It kinda sounds like this is all based on reputation ...someone's reputation.


am I simply old fashion here?

[Vampyr]

I have long wondered how people who invest via Kickstarter and the like see a return on their investment.

[kenberg]

 Vampyr, on 2014-March-05, 22:10, said:

I have long wondered how people who invest via Kickstarter and the like see a return on their investment.

I first heard of Kickstarter just a few days ago. The circumstances were, from my viewpoint, weird. My granddaughter is in college and a friend of hers has an undergraduate film project. The school will help support this project if he can first get some public support via Kickstarter. By "public support" they mean that at least 150 people will contribute at least a dollar via Kickstarter. What? This is the way the school decides if a project is worthy of their support? OK, I could contribute a buck, and then another buck in Becky's name, and still be putting out a little lesss than the price of a grande at Starbucks. But then I started reading about the company and I decided that this wasn't for me. It wasn't a matter of maybe making a 25% profit, I just wasn't comfortable with them. To each his own. I suppose the getting of public support is supposed to be instructive but asking friends and family of they can spare a buck seems quite different from getting serious financial backing.

I have heard of BMW and General Electric, and I seem to vaguely recall IBM, but SpaceX and Valve are a mystery to me, along with many others. Got nothing against them, just never heard of them.

[Cyberyeti]

 Vampyr, on 2014-March-05, 22:10, said:

I have long wondered how people who invest via Kickstarter and the like see a return on their investment.

Do you mean see as in view or see as in get ?

I can contribute on this (I'm involved in a project that raised nearly $700K via KS), but need to know what you're asking.

[barmar]

 kenberg, on 2014-March-06, 06:14, said:

I have heard of BMW and General Electric, and I seem to vaguely recall IBM, but SpaceX and Valve are a mystery to me, along with many others. Got nothing against them, just never heard of them.

SpaceX has gotten quite a bit of mainstream press in the past couple of years, I'm surprised you haven't heard of them. It was founded by Elon Musk, one of the founders of PayPal. And it has achieved a number of firsts in commercial spaceflight: first to send a spacecraft to low-Earth orbit and return it, and first to dock with the International Space Station and return to Earth.

[ArtK78]

 kenberg, on 2014-March-05, 17:21, said:

I thought that I would pass this on in case any of you wish to join in this worthy effort.

Sign me up!

After I donate $10M, am I going to be bombarded with follow-up e-mails asking for an additional $10M every week?

[barmar]

 mike777, on 2014-March-05, 21:35, said:

I am most surprised by a lack of definition and standard of measurement from MIT.

It kinda sounds like this is all based on reputation ...someone's reputation.

am I simply old fashion here?

There are other publications that produce more objective lists, like basing them on the number of patents, journal articles, etc. But these types of lists don't reflect that not all patents or articles are equal. TR's list is more subjective, because it's trying to list the most important innovators. If you're willing to wait 5 or 10 years, you can determine who was the smartest (Apple at the time they developed the iPhone might be on that list), but if you want to know who is the smartest you need value judgements and intuitive predictions. There's no objective metric for this.

[Vampyr]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-March-06, 06:24, said:

Do you mean see as in view or see as in get ?

I can contribute on this (I'm involved in a project that raised nearly $700K via KS), but need to know what you're asking.

Well, I can't view it unless it is in my hand.

[Cyberyeti]

 Vampyr, on 2014-March-06, 18:38, said:

Well, I can't view it unless it is in my hand.

OK, I'm going to have to explain this more simply. Your question can mean two very different things.

Are you asking "What view do people who invest in KS take of that investment and the returns ?" or are you asking "What form does the return on that investment take and how is it delivered ?" (or indeed something else), clarify, and I'll answer, but I'm not going to compose what will be complicated answers to both.

[Vampyr]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-March-06, 18:54, said:

"What form does the return on that investment take and how is it delivered ?"

This. Sorry, I thought it was obvious.

[onoway]

"Investing" in a kickstarter campaign seemingly doesn't have a lot in common with the term as it's usually meant, with a view to making a monetary profit. It's usually more to do with giving people some money who have (in the "investor's " eyes), a worthwhile project which deserves some support. What's worthwhile, is of course, a totally subjective thing.

It's actually quite amazing what results it can have, I know of one project which raised over $250,000 from contributors in the first campaign, and supposedly almost half as much in the second. Now they are running a third...and the contributors will never see a solitary penny back for any of it. The 'return" for large contributors in the first campaign was a set of videos which now sell for around $100, and in the second one specially designed playing cards which now sell for $20 a deck.

I suspect that by far the majority of campaigns are looking for only a fraction of that amount of money and are much smaller in scale.

Generally it seems as though unless you give at least $25 what you get is basically a thank you card with some sort of reference to the project, but it's all made abundantly clear in the project proposal. Projects which don't reach funding goals have the money returned to the donors. Projects which reach or exceed the goals pay a small % to the kickstarter people.

[barmar]

I gave to the Kickstarter campaign to make the Veronica Mars movie, which was one of their most successful projects (makes me feel like such a lemming). I think I'm going to get a T-shirt and DVD in return, but I don't really remember. I didn't do it for the gifts, I did it because I thought it was a worthwhile project and it felt "cool" to be part of making it happen. And I also happen to have plenty of disposable income, so it was no big deal to me.

[Cyberyeti]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-March-06, 18:54, said:

"What form does the return on that investment take and how is it delivered ?"

 Vampyr, on 2014-March-06, 19:26, said:

This. Sorry, I thought it was obvious.

OK, I'll answer from the point of view of the one I'm involved with, which is to write a computer game.

Kickstarter was active October/November 2013 https://www.kickstar...titans?ref=live

The returns on investment take two basic forms.

Physical stuff like T-shirts which will be sent out shortly
In-game stuff which will be awarded when the game launches, probably late 2015

The pledge packages are basically for in-game stuff, with the physical and some more in-game stuff as add-ons (so you pledge say $125 for the dynamic duo package, but a total amount of $150 if you want a T-shirt as well). A survey was sent out at the end of the KS for people to detail their add-ons with things like T-shirt size.

We use a company (Teelaunch) that prints and distributes T-shirts etc to do this.

As launch gets a bit closer, another survey will be sent out to cover the in-game item pledges that need further description.

What you get for the pledges is detailed in them on the KS site, but for $125 for example, you get two accounts with 3 months of subscription paid, access to the headstart (a few days play before the proper release) and beta testing, the ability to reserve your in-game identity and various cosmetic in-game perks.

People are kept updated via our website and forums, but also via the many updates that get put on the Kickstarter page itself (71 and counting atm).

Kickstarter has some fairly restrictive rules as to what you're allowed to offer, no lifetime subscriptions was one that hurt us, but I can see why they block those.

[Vampyr]

So it is giving to charity, except the "charity" goes on to make a profit. LOL

[Trinidad]

 Vampyr, on 2014-March-07, 03:11, said:

So it is giving to charity, except the "charity" goes on to make a profit. LOL

That is the short version, yes.

BUT... there is no foundation for the "LOL"

People are allowed to pick their own charities. You can donate your money to the Red Cross or the church or UNICEF, or whatever. If people think it is a good idea to help to make a young company profitable, or to help develop a product, which may lead to new employment and economic growth then people can do that.

And let's face it, in comparison to helping unemployed people, this is a typical case of teaching them to fish (or giving them a fishing rod), rather than giving them a fish. So, from that perspective, I would rather donate my money to a startup company that is short on short term cash than to a food bank.

The other thing is that you can be picky about the type of products/services you are helping. I doubt that a young company that wants to develop and market a new type of WMD will raise much funding through these channels... So, by voting with their feet, contributors can participate in "shaping the future". I would consider that a valuable return.

So, yes, it is a donation to charity, but a very conscious one. And in terms of "return to society" these types of charities score well compared to traditional charities.

Rik