Kickstarter - Maybe Not As Good As We Think?

I've been thinking about Kickstarter for a while now. More specifically, what it means for artists, for fans, and what its impact will be on society as a whole. Make no mistake, the advent of Kickstarter and similar model websites is huge, but time will tell who benefits the most. I'm banking on big corporations, but hey, you know me.

I first heard about Kickstarter about a year ago. Somebody was telling me about this website that allows artists to raise money for their projects. Of course, I was skeptical at first. "Oh, right,"  I thought,  "A website where everyone just gives you free money to achieve your dreams. Sounds legit." However, I researched it a bit more and found that as long as people kept their fundraising goals reasonable, many projects were actually being fully backed. So then, when it came time for my band to record a new CD (having no money as we'd been minus a guitarist for a while and unable to play shows), I thought, what the hell? Let's give it a shot.

So, we got a few friends together, spent about $60, and made an hilariously awesome video: High Council Kickstarter Video . A good time was had by all, but also, it worked! Family, friends, acquaintances, and some guy from France all pledged to the project, and we were able to raise enough money to get it off the ground. I even went on to donate to a friend's band's recording. I thought that this was really going to revolutionize the way that musicians make money, and that it was a very positive thing. I've even heard that Kickstarter projects raised more money last year than the National Endowment for the Arts (but I haven't researched the validity of this).

However, by virtue of the fact that I work at a comic store, I started hearing about companies that already exist running Kickstarter projects, like this one: Reaper Miniatures . The first thing to note about this project is that out of a $30,000 goal, the project raised $3,400,000. This company already has brand name recognition, and by offering an insane rewards package (if you're into the model thing), they secured what I'm willing to bet is the biggest one-time influx of cash that they've ever received in the history of their company. Sounds pretty good, right? I'm not so sure. For the moment, lets overlook the fact that this shit is for nerds. What this company has done in order to fund a new product line is to effectively pre-sell their merchandise directly to customers at pennies on the dollar. Furthermore, because of the sheer quantity of rewards they gave out at such low prices, its highly unlikely that these customers will a) need/want more of it any time soon, or b) ever be willing to pay full retail price at any point in the future when such a glut has been produced (hello Ebay!).

Now, whether intentional or not, this project has most likely cut retail stores like mine out of the equation for the foreseeable future. Why would anyone want to carry this product line when anyone who could possibly have wanted to buy it will already have more than they could ever use upon the moment of its release? Perhaps now this company has unwittingly transformed into an online, direct-to-customers outlet. Or, perhaps they've priced themselves out of their own market, and what really seems like a 3.4 million dollar blessing has burned all of their bridges in the retail world and led the company to die a slow death. Its hard to say, and time will tell.

What this project and others like it further tell us is that Kickstarter seems to have no qualms about letting pre-existing companies create projects. Is developing a new miniature model line an artistic project? Uuuhhh... I guess. I mean, you do need an artist to make that kind of thing. But where is the line drawn? How long will it be before Pepsi runs a Kickstarter to fund a new logo for their 20 oz bottles? That's technically artwork, and it will make Kickstarter an enormous dump-ton of money, so I can see no reason why they wouldn't allow it. Pepsi could then just reward donors with unending gallons of slightly discounted Pepsi, effectively just giving a new venue to just sell the same old stuff. On that line of reasoning, what's stopping political candidates from starting a project to design a new campaign banner, or record a self-congratulatory campaign song? Surely we'll all be rewarded with plenty of bumper stickers, pamphlets, buttons, lawn signs, and all manner of propaganda decorated with the new logo we donated to create. How long will it be before the front page of Kickstarter.com is simply loaded with pet projects from the advertising branch of every major corporation in the world?

New mascot for McDonalds? Funded! Thanks for the Big Mac coupons. New logo for Shell Oil? Funded! Thanks for the mesh-backed baseball cap. Mitt Romney's Autobiography? Funded! Thanks for the autographed copy that someone else signed. New fuckin raincoat for the Long John Silver's guy? Funded! Thanks for the six piece fish n' chips meal. Isn't art wonderful?

Let's get back to music for a minute before I bring this home, as this is the aspect I care about most. It may seem like I'm kicking a gift horse in face by examining all the negative potentialities of the website that's been very good to me, but its important to understand here that I don't matter. As a musician, I never have and probably never will make any money. I'm looking at the big picture here, the real American dollars. Back in the day, it worked like this:

1. Record label signs you.
2. Record label lends you enough money to record an album.
3. Record gets released and they promote it. You hope it sells enough copies to pay them back with some money left over for yourself.
4. You go tour to promote the album to help it sell enough copies to pay back the record label, and hopefully make some money for yourself.

That was how rock stars were made. The ones that made the company money were the ones who lived the life. These days, with the advent of Kickstarter, it might look something like this:

1. You make a Kickstarter to fund your album.
2. You hit your goal and get the money. Hooray!
3. You use all the money to record the album and create/ship all your rewards to the donors.
4. There's no record company to pay back. From here on out, it's all profit, baby!

Or is it? Even if you are a recognized musician or band, chances are that your Kickstarter goal didn't include funding for a national scale promotion campaign. Are you ever really going to be able to reach as many people as you could have with the record labels? In addition, what's the post-Kickstarter incentive for people to buy your album? If you're a real fan, you probably already donated and received the album plus some kind of bonus track, live recording, T-Shirt, etc, etc that the band offered as a reward. At this point, the only people left are probably the ones who are just going to pirate the album anyway. Its true that you're not in debt to anyone, and don't get me wrong, that's great, but the opportunities for you to actually make a living off of that album might be greatly reduced. Musicians might have to start adding personal compensation to the total dollar amount of the goals they set on Kickstarter, and that could make some of the goals unreachable.

In any case, Kickstarter is still very young, and its too early to gauge the long term effects it will have on music and the economy in general. However, once it gets big enough to show up on Corporate America's radar, you can be sure that things will change. I believe this site was started with good intentions, and in practice it has raised a lot of money for legitimate artistic projects. It has also produced a lot of shocking, million-dollar grand slams that can't help but raise the eyebrows of those who are keenly aware of how to profitably exploit such things. Yes, Kickstarter may have hatched as an indie, artist friendly hub to fuel our imaginations, but by the time its fully grown we could be looking at a website full of commercials that's just another place to do our online shopping.