'Futurefon' Crowdfunded on Indiegogo Was Part Of a Multimillion-dollar Scam (theverge.com) 27
"The crowdfunded phone of the future was a multimillion-dollar scam," reports the Verge:
In 2014, Jeffrey Tschiltsch opened an email from Indiegogo and saw the future of computing. The email showed something called the "Dragonfly Futurefon," a kind of computer-phone hybrid. The Futurefon's page showed a sleek, palm-sized touchscreen that slotted into a laptop dock, then folded flat and flipped open again, revealing a second screen and a full-sized laptop keyboard. It could run both Windows and Android, and its creator, a startup called IdealFuture, promised to replace your phone, laptop, and tablet at an incredible price of $799. Dubious but intrigued, Tschiltsch put down a $200 deposit.
Five years later, Tschiltsch still wouldn't have a Futurefon. Instead, he'd be sitting in an Illinois courthouse testifying at the behest of the FBI, which claimed the device was the last step in a decade-long fraud operation that cost victims nearly $6 million. "I always thought it was ambitious," Tschiltsch says now. "It didn't occur to me that the guy had just taken the money."
Tschiltsch is just one of many angry Indiegogo backers who say Futurefon creator Jeff Batio strung them along with lies, excuses, and faked product updates. But the backers aren't just angry with Batio. They're frustrated by how easily a scammer could flourish in the high-risk world of gadget crowdfunding -- and how poorly Indiegogo was equipped to deal with it.
The Futurefon raised hundreds of thousands of dollars, the article reports, adding that Batio also apparently raised $5 million for another dual-screen project. Unfortunately, investors later found out that Batio "had been indicted on fraud charges that spanned 13 years..."
Nobody ever got a Futurefon, and "A jury convicted Batio of 12 mail and wire fraud counts, each carrying a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison."
Five years later, Tschiltsch still wouldn't have a Futurefon. Instead, he'd be sitting in an Illinois courthouse testifying at the behest of the FBI, which claimed the device was the last step in a decade-long fraud operation that cost victims nearly $6 million. "I always thought it was ambitious," Tschiltsch says now. "It didn't occur to me that the guy had just taken the money."
Tschiltsch is just one of many angry Indiegogo backers who say Futurefon creator Jeff Batio strung them along with lies, excuses, and faked product updates. But the backers aren't just angry with Batio. They're frustrated by how easily a scammer could flourish in the high-risk world of gadget crowdfunding -- and how poorly Indiegogo was equipped to deal with it.
The Futurefon raised hundreds of thousands of dollars, the article reports, adding that Batio also apparently raised $5 million for another dual-screen project. Unfortunately, investors later found out that Batio "had been indicted on fraud charges that spanned 13 years..."
Nobody ever got a Futurefon, and "A jury convicted Batio of 12 mail and wire fraud counts, each carrying a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison."
baffling (Score:2)
The overall concept is feasible and has been for a long while now. I'm baffled as to why both the public and the industry haven't had any real interest.
Re: (Score:2)
I cant speak for either the public or industry, just myself. I personally have always had an interest in things of this nature. But it's an ever evolving market, you feel like if you pick up this thing, 3 months later something ground breaking is released and you wish you had saved your money.
For me it was netbooks that caused me to jump on and buy one. A Lenovo S10, and even today to hold it in my hands the build quality combined with the size still kind of gives me goosebumps. You know, it was mobile,
feasible (Score:3)
the overall "smartphone as a workstation" might work.
the specific "dual boot Windows and Android" is total bullcrap due to giant bagage of binary backward compatibility that is dragged in by both:
- either you're considering some x86-based platform (e.g.: Intel Atom), and you're then looking at a very power-hungry average smartphone that isn't exactly compatible with 100% of Android apps (only those either pure bytecode, or those whose library are also compiled for x86).
- or your're aiming for a very high ra
Re: (Score:2)
the overall "smartphone as a workstation" might work.
Depends on the work. In my current job, laptop-as-a-workstation doesn't really work either which is why my main computer is a fast desktop with a lot of RAM, lots of cores, lots of storage and a beefy GPU. My previous job which was a while ago, I could and did do on a decent laptop.
Main problem with phones is cooling. Laptops, even small ones, can still spin up fans when they're doing a lot. Phones simply don't have the heat dissipation capacity that can
Re: feasible (Score:1)
It's not possible to trust, so be careful (Score:3)
The only thing I've backed was Veronica Mars, and for about twice the costs of the DVD, I helped get the movie made. I would have bought the DVD if the movie came out and I hadn't backed it. It wasn't a great risk, and I knew that I could have lost everything, which wasn't much.
I can't understand why people hand over larger amounts of money to people they don't know for something that may never exist.
All of these people that lost out - it's a pity, but if you play with fire, you may get burnt.
Re: (Score:1)
I've backed something similar, I won't drop names though.
I can't understand why people hand over larger amounts of money to people they don't know for something that may never exist.
Some people actually think that crowdfunding has protection/guarantees.
Others think the Earth is flat and that religion is real.
All of these people that lost out - it's a pity, but if you play with fire, you may get burnt.
Nah. They still want their gadget so they'll back the next one that comes along.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't understand why people hand over larger amounts of money to people they don't know for something that may never exist.
A date at an expensive restaurant. Maybe they love you, maybe not?
Solution approach: Trust but verify (Score:2)
Gee, I hate to quote that faker, but even a broken watch is correct twice a day.
As so often is the case, the underlying problem is a bad economic model. The crowdfunding website has no concern with the success of the project.
Proposed solution approach: A CSB (Charity Share Brokerage) that EARNS its share of the funded by projects by providing accountability. If the CSB supports a failed project, the failure should rub off on the CSB, too.
Concretely, the CSB would check the project proposals before publishin
Re: (Score:2)
Futurefon creator Jeff Batio strung them along with lies, excuses, and faked product updates.
So a standard Indiegogo/Kickstarter pitch then?
The perils of Patreon. (Score:3)
They're frustrated by how easily a scammer could flourish in the high-risk world of gadget crowdfunding -- and how poorly Indiegogo was equipped to deal with it.
Thing is, the public in general doesn't have the experience dealing with the creation of goods and services, both good and bad. That's been hidden behind corporations that take all the risks, as well as the successes. But when the money comes out of their pocket, well here we are?
Whose fault, Indiegogo's or yours? (Score:5, Insightful)
"how poorly Indiegogo was equipped to deal with it."
Excuse me, it's Indiegogo's fault that someone was fleeced because they swallowed a fancy song-and-dance routine?
I must admit I never used Indiegogo, but I'd be shocked if they make any kind of claim, guarantee, or warrantee that the independent enterpreneurs that use their web site to seek donations and pitch their product are actually pitching a real product, and are not scammers and two-bit fleecers.
The only one who's responsible for your money is you. Indiegogo has no fiduciary obligations, whatsoever, to their donors. It's up on them to evaluate and judge the merits of each proposal or product that seeks funding on their platform.
No way to complain about scammer (Score:2)
The thing is, in situations were the scammer definitely took the money and ran away with it (as opposed as a genuine project who were over-optimistic and can't manage to deliver despite trying. Or projects where the people are shouting "scam!" just because the ridiculous amount of delays on a project that will eventually deliver), there isn't absolutely no way to do anything.
You can't flag the project as scam, so people might still pay for perks even after the point at which it is known that the owner just
Re: (Score:2)
These days, of all the crowdfunding sites out there, Indiegogo is one to avoid. Far too many scammers use them (especially with "flexible funding") and it can take a long time from reporting scams until it's actually gone.
In fact, Indiegogo is so bad, scammers often take a Kickstarter that was successful, copy the assets and put it up on Indiegogo pretending to be the project itself. One kickstarter-only campaign found 3 or 4 Indiegogo projects set up that did this on their project. Eventually managed to ge
Re: (Score:2)
I've backed a couple of projects on indiegogo. Knew all too well that there was a chance of never getting anything in return for the money. The problem with indiegogo is it that they don't act. For some projects it was clear nothing was going to be delivered: there was no communication possible, and the target delivery date had long gone. On such occasions I warned indiegogo, and I know many others did as well. But nothing happened. Not even a warning on the promotion page. Instead every other day or so som
Re: Whose fault, Indiegogo's or yours? (Score:1)
I think someone once said ... (Score:1)
A fool and his money are soon parted ...
And some other dude also noted that there is a sucker born every minute (actually, there is now probably a sucker born every second, or maybe even multiple suckers per second).
Words to live by!
Vetting? (Score:2)
That being said, I supposed it is not hard for the average scammer to come up wit
Re: (Score:2)
Does Indigogo do any kind of vetting before a product/idea pitch makes it to their page (beyond the initial application where you have to prove you are who you say you are).
Nope.
https://www.indiegogo.com/abou... [indiegogo.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I know these guys... (Score:3)
...who've got a great idea for a startup company with an amazing product: https://image.tmdb.org/t/p/ori... [tmdb.org]
As Phineas T. Barnum put it, "There's one born every minute."
Surely, we've come up with some kind of way to deal with this kid of fraud by now? Oh, yeah. It's called due diligence, especially when something sounds too good to be true.
Vetting your investment is not Indiegogo’s j (Score:2)
This sort of thing is nothing new, and is the reason why “caveat emptor” even exists as a principle. Further, as this story demonstrates, outright fraud is already illegal.
Between those two concepts, the onus cannot and should not be on the funding intermediary, any more than a bank should b
Anything good and people will take advantage (Score:1)
What's annoying me the most is that people will trust this crowdfunding less and less, although the con-men know the old adage of "One born every minute." so they know they will find "marks". I've never backed anything 'cos I'm too suspicious of people's motives, it's not a good frame of mind to have but sadly the realism of the fact that the world is full of scumbags that ruin it for everyone else, is just too strong.
Re: (Score:2)
That's OK. We need a crowdfunding platform that verifies that the money is being spent on the product. That will be crowdfunding 2.0 or whatever.
I have a "FutureFon" right now! (Score:1)
What's Old Is New Again (Score:1)
"New technology" scams have been around since the beginning of home computing. For the old timers, who remembers the World Power Systems ads in Byte magazine.