The Flying Lily Camera Drone is Dead, Buyers Will Be Refunded (mashable.com) 88
The Lily Camera drone, which could begin recording as soon as you threw it into the air and would follow your movements automatically, has failed to materialize. The startup, which took pre-orders worth more than $34 million for its drone camera said Thursday they are shutting down the company and will issue refunds. From a report: The Lily company faced "many ups and downs" last year, the company said, adding that they couldn't secure financing for manufacturing and shipping the first batch of units. The Lily cameras were originally started to begin shipping in February 2016, but the co-founders said "software issues" resulted in a delay in the shipment. Later in October, the team gave people another chance to purchase the device, adding that stores will re-open in 2017. As of last month, the company hadn't shipped a single unit.
this gives me an idea (Score:2)
Re:this gives me an idea (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Because they're not a sociopath.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, good luck getting any interest that matters from a bank account with less than a billion dollars. Try this in some parts of the world and you'll actually lose money.
Re: (Score:2)
And send all the refunds in the form of checks from a company with a really suggestive offensive name and see if anyone dares cash it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
(might not be appropriate for workplace viewing - clip from Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels)
Well better than some other startups. (Score:2, Insightful)
Despite them not succeeding, you have to give them credit for at least refunding folks compared to other epic failures on Kickstarter. In the last year, we've also seen the number of consumer drones skyrocket leading to more "accidents" so maybe the market is starting to saturate.
Re:Well better than some other startups. (Score:4, Informative)
Despite them not succeeding, you have to give them credit for at least refunding folks compared to other epic failures on Kickstarter. In the last year, we've also seen the number of consumer drones skyrocket leading to more "accidents" so maybe the market is starting to saturate.
This is why, in my opinion, Kickstarter, et al., should be investment based (i.e. shares). At least then you could write off losses due to failure on your tax return. What they could do is issue you shares and then provide an option to turn in those shares for the product when it ships or keep them in case the company succeeds. Of course, doing it this way would incur all kinds of legal costs, force them to make the books public, and complicate things. Which is probably why they don't do it.
Re: (Score:3)
Recent regulation was changed to allow for "crowdfunding" startups this way, where you can actually get shares of the business this way. I haven't heard of anyone doing this yet, though I understand the option is legally available now.
Re: (Score:2)
All the constraints the SEC put on it preclude it from being of much use - https://www.sec.gov/info/small... [sec.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://equity.indiegogo.com/ [indiegogo.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I think Sondors might be following this model for their e-car startup:
https://www.startengine.com/st... [startengine.com]
The founder has basically declared that his idea, name and expertise is worth $36M and he's asking the world to please give him an initial round of $1M cash to start development, in exchange for shares.
Re: (Score:2)
Only the rich are allowed to do private investments outside of the stockmarket, peons not allowed.
Re: (Score:2)
Despite them not succeeding, you have to give them credit for at least refunding folks
Once they have actually refunded folks, they can have credit for it. So far they've just taken some people's names, and said they would refund them.
I wonder if the TextBlade is next (Score:2)
I've had it with these "Revolutionary" companies & their vaporware.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why people should be very wary of crowdfunding because so many of the crowdfund campaigns are exactly that. So much bullshit. There's quite a few legit companies that do get started this way but enough failures that people shouldn't be backing projects as carelessly as they do.
Re: (Score:2)
One of the problems is that people believe they are buying stuff, placing an advance order due at order time. What they do is backing an idea that may or may not pan out. Many of us are fine with that concept, but some have a hard time accepting it.
It could have turned out better (good product), or it could have turned out worse (no refunds). Contributing should imply that you are aware of and truly accept all those eventualities.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm on board with that just as soon as money for a forensic accountant is sequestered from the initial funding in case it fails. With Kickstarter taking on partial liability and prosecute on our behalf if the accountant finds malfeasance on a failed project. Until that time the only way to play it is to see kickstarting as entering into a contract to deliver a product, so there is at least some stick to beat them with if they are scammers.
To treat project starters as you suggest in the current system is she
Re: (Score:2)
To treat project starters as you suggest in the current system is sheer madness and an invitation to scammers.
So? Let the scammers come. Do a little research before you donate, so you don't give to scammers.
If they do anything illegal, the law is the right venue.
Re: (Score:2)
my GF and I were wary but split the early preorder price of $500 to get in on this. we were just barely willing to lose 250 each if they bailed on the project.
considering the last update we had was an address confirmation and a blurb that they planned to ship december 2016/jan 2017 we were hopefuly that wed have a unit in this week or next, not a cancellation email :-/
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I assume that you're intentionally begging the question to demonstrate the absurdity of the situation, but to answer the question anyway, flat-out, 3d printing does not offer the materials properties or speed and low-cost needed to mass-produce. It's simply inefficient to use 3d printing for volume, and the kinds of things that can be made are limited in scope. It's cheaper and the results are better to produce 100,000 plastic parts using a metal mold and injection process than it is to 3d print
Too long, too late (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Too long, too late (Score:5, Funny)
Best Buy is filled with drones that will follow you around automatically.
Oh. You mean the flying ones, not the meat flesh ones.
Nevermind. Carry on.
Re: (Score:3)
I can walk into a Best Buy and buy a drone that can follow and film me today.
Even iNav can follow you [ez-gui.com] today, all they had to implement was aiming the gimbal. As such jobs go, it was trivial.
lolz (Score:2)
"they couldn't secure financing for manufacturing and shipping the first batch of units"
If only we had a way to provide funding for products? We could set up websites that enabled people to post commercially unviable ideas, collect sales in advance, and then bullshit for two years about why they haven't shipped, promised features have been removed, etc.
Re:lolz (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So what exactly did they do with the $34 million dollars?
If they're actually refunding people, then they still have the money, and the answer is "fuck all".
If people don't actually get their refunds, the answer lies somewhere betweeen "aeron chairs" and "hookers and blow".
Re: (Score:2)
So what exactly did they do with the $34 million dollars? That seems like a substantial amount of funding just to ship a first round of a basic electronics product.
Well first of all it said $34 million worth of preorders, doesn't mean they made a full deposit like say for the Tesla Model 3 there's a $1000 depoit for a $35000 car. And even so it's not a Kickstarter, they're not supposed to use this for R&D and say whoops sorry, we used up the money but it didn't work out. They probably took preorders to gauge interest and get investors, for whatever reason it didn't work out - that they couldn't get funding is a red herring, if you got a product and customer ready
nice (Score:2)
Oh please (Score:5, Insightful)
"The startup, which took pre-orders worth more than $34 million..."
FFS, you had $34 million dollars in your pocket and couldn't ship one fucking product?
They should rename themselves, "Hopeless Lamers Inc" and their company motto should be, "We Can't Do Shit".
Re: (Score:2)
FFS, you had $34 million dollars in your pocket and couldn't ship one fucking product?
They could either arrive late with a crappy product or give people (some?) money back so they could just buy a Mavic like everyone else. Which would you choose?
Re: (Score:3)
They could either arrive late with a crappy product or give people (some?) money back so they could just buy a Mavic like everyone else. Which would you choose?
For starters I'd choose not to plow my money into anything they ever did again.
Bottom line: Give me $34 million dollars and I'll ship a working product. FFS, they could have bought COTS gear and added their own special sauce to make it work.
I don't know the first fucking thing about making a drone that follows you around but give me $34 million dollars and I could fucking well make it happen. This is NOT a $34 million dollar problem; this is maybe a $1 million dollar problem, and that includes the hookers a
Re: (Score:2)
Bottom line: Give me $34 million dollars and I'll ship a working product. FFS, they could have bought COTS gear and added their own special sauce to make it work.
I don't know the first fucking thing about making a drone that follows you around but give me $34 million dollars and I could fucking well make it happen. This is NOT a $34 million dollar problem; this is maybe a $1 million dollar problem, and that includes the hookers and blow.
The bottom line is it's not a problem of designing a $34 million quadcopter. It's a problem of designing a quadcopter and then manufacturing and fulfilling $34 million worth of orders.
Re: (Score:2)
The bottom line is it's not a problem of designing a $34 million quadcopter. It's a problem of designing a quadcopter and then manufacturing and fulfilling $34 million worth of orders.
Bottom line: Give me $34 million dollars and I'll design, manufacture, and fulfill $34 million worth of "follow-me" quadcopter orders. And I'll do it in less than a year with a price of about $400 per quadcopter instead of $800.
Re: (Score:2)
Occasionally I will pre-order a game, depending on the service I am sometimes not charged until the product actually ships. I've seen other areas where you only put a deposit down on the pre-order and pay the balance when it ships.
Pre-orders can sometimes just be a reservation. The company could have tried using the pre-order figure to help get someone to make the product. Maybe the manufacturers/other investors did not trust their figures.
Re: (Score:3)
Did they actually get the full money from the pre-order?
I don't know, but the headline said "...Buyers Will Be Refunded" and the story stated, "they are shutting down the company and will issue refunds", so I'm thinking they took the money upfront.
It sounds like a colossal clusterfuck of epic proportions. I mean, this thing is a fucking toy, it doesn't have to fly to space, survive reentry, or work under battlefield conditions. It's a fucking plastic drone that follows you around.
It was supposed to cost $799. Tell ya what- you give me just $20 million dollars in
Re:Oh please (Score:4, Informative)
IIRC there are legal limits on when you take that money out of (what is essentially) escrow. That is, the $34 million wasn't actually in their pocket and they (legally) couldn't put it in their pocket until they had a product to ship. That's one of the reasons why Kickstarter brands products to be delivered in the future as 'rewards' rather than 'pre-orders'. (Which doesn't stop people from seeing or using those rewards as pre-orders though.)
Re: (Score:2)
But you can get financing on the basis of the income stream you can show you are going to have on the basis of the pre-orders.
Re: (Score:2)
And if you can convince prospective lenders you can actually produce them at a cost where you'll have sufficient profit to repay them when you do receive the income. And convince the lenders that you're competent enough to do so. Etc... etc...
Re: (Score:2)
Which underscores the point that the problem wasn't a lack of financing per se but a lack of a business case.
Thirty four MILLION? (Score:2)
What was their R&D procedure?
Build a model, then a week of hookers and blow?
Fuck!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If they are going to refund everyone they must still access to $34m, so why couldn't they use that to finance the manufacturing and shipping?
When all logic fails, your assumptions must be incorrect. They are not going to refund everyone. I'd be surprised if more than 10% of that money was refunded.
Ups and downs (Score:3)
The Lily company faced "many ups and downs" last year
Well... you'd hope so, really, when you're developing a drone.
Happy Failed Startup from the Golden Girls (Score:2)
Thank you for being a friend
Traveled down the road and back again
Your heart is true, you're a pal and a cosmonaut.
And if you threw a party
Invited everyone you ever knew
You would see the biggest gift would be from me
And the card attached would say, thank you for being a friend.
couldn't find money (Score:1)
Producing at scale (Score:2)
I *almost* bought into this (Score:2)
I almost bought into this. Sounded like just the tool to record form and technique for later analysis without the need to have someone film you -- and from a higher POV.
My instinct said "Wail until shipment." Glad I listened.
Re: (Score:2)
I *tried* to buy into this, but their lame web site didn't let me. I inquired via their "contact me" link, and got nothing in return. Given those two bad signs, I gave up.
If you are a technology company that can't build a web site and can't monitor an email address, your inability to ship a product is hardly surprising.
"Investors" Had No Clue What Is Possible TODAY (Score:2)
When I saw the advertisement for this drone, my immediate thought was, "No. They don't have something that can do that. And they won't deliver something that can do that in a year." I'm not a pessimist. I just understand, like most Slashadotters, what is possible today vs. what is possible with Google's money vs. what is pos
Partial refund (Score:2)