They must have not gotten the "Kickstarter is not a store" memo. They appear to be ready to pull the trigger on their manufacturing partners, so this is sort of a "how big should we make the first run?" type of kickstarter rather than a "let's create something awesome".
• Stereolithography printer (laser, not extruder)
• Much nicer than extruder style printers
• $2300-2700 for the machine depending on your precedence
• $140/liter for liquid resin
What most entrepreneurs spend their time between getting funded and beginning shipment is finding the right manufacturer who can allocate runtime on their lines. The manufacturers lose money when the lines aren't running. The entrepreneurs get delayed when the lines are busy. This is a very complex B2B market that has no current solution. If someone solves this problem, we can have significantly better fulfillment of Kickstarter orders.
Such a site would have manufacturers periodically uploading capacities and capabilities of their equipment, warehouse/distribution resources, and costs associated with each line/product-type by time/quality. The entrepreneurs would be able to book the best-fit manufacturer (be it in US, China, or Norway) and pay a reservation-fee to the manufacturer which sits in escrow pending successful contract. The reservation-fee would be high enough to deter fake orders and be credited towards the actual product order. The site could fund itself by collecting interest on the escrow or charging per new B2B relation.
When he installs new equipment, there's a sub-day shutdown usually, to install
massive lines of equipment into a warehouse. He's always busy on, say,
Christmas, because a warehouse can typically just barely manage to afford to
shut down for 16 hours on that day (or other holidays) since the warehouse
employees want to be at home with their families. If there are problems with
the installation (and there always are, because tolerances on everything are so
tight) then they have to be resolved right there in a crazy short timeframe.
I wrote some PLC software for him back right out of high school, to manage a
heat element for a shrink wrapping portion of a particular line. We got a
certain input from the other components in the line (so the spec said) to
specify how long we needed to run before cutting, in milliseconds. Their specs
lied, and they weren't sending us anything remotely like a serial data stream
specifying the time before cutting, so while everyone was installing the
hardware I had to derive from the data stream we could see what the timing
needed to be and 'test' it (more 'run some plastic and cut it and measure it'
tests than unit tests, yes?). It was super stressful, but it was also insanely
fun. Once the install was done (16 hours on the dot, loaded the code as the
timer ran out) the machinery started and has run uninterrupted for on the order
of 12 years now. Most people aren't aware that this is the sort of thing that
goes into modern manufacturing :)
I'm sure that many DIYers, hackerspaces, etc., have the ability to manufacture small batches of a wide variety of products; QA and final assembly could be done further up the chain, as a component of distribution.
In every post-mortem of a Kickstarter project I hear the project owners lamenting how much more time and effort it took to handle sending rewards out than they had anticipated.
I mean seriously, there are a lot of people using Kickstarter for this and now they've explicitly said that's not what it's for. So, Entrepreneurial Opportunity. There's obviously a lot of people who need this kind of "pre-order aggregator" service. So when will a motivated HN'er build it and rake in the bucks :-)
Saying one thing and acting another way can only last for so long... It would be a different thing if you could purchase an actual 'stake' in the company for your fee, however unfortunately US law doesnt allow this at the moment (or so I am told)- however it seems like the only way to make this fantastic concept (crowd sourced funding) a viable long term solution to a glaring problem is by making it more accountable and transparent in that sort of manner
There is always a risk of unforeseen delays or even failure of the project, but that isn't unique to Kickstarter. Any tiny company that funds purchasing with pre-orders is offering the same dynamic, except they will go bankrupt instead of just sort of dissolve.
Eventually someone may have a large fraudulent project and flee with the money, but again, that isn't special. It happens in traditional companies too.
Perhaps eventually Kickstarter will need to have graduated oversight. If your project goes over six figures you must convince someone at Kickstarter that you aren't blowing smoke. If it goes over seven figures you have to pay for a Kickstarter supplied auditor to whom you must show progress for incremental payment releases.
The new rule is: "Offering multiple quantities of a reward is prohibited. Hardware and Product Design projects can only offer rewards in single quantities or a sensible set (some items only make sense as a pair or as a kit of several items, for instance). The development of new products can be especially complex for creators and offering multiple quantities feels premature, and can imply that products are shrink-wrapped and ready to ship."
It explicitly says that you can offer a reward of one of the item in question (or whatever the most useful set of them is). You cannot, however, have all of your reward levels be different quantities of the item.
While this may not be within the stated KS rules, as an idea this sounds useful.
The main obstacle with many overseas factory-made cheap electronics projects is indeed "how big should we make the first run?"
Is this not a problem we need to solve? Look at the Raspberry Pi.
For the entrepreneur, maybe "let's manufacture something awesome" requires pre-orders. Maybe it requires committments.
We need some better way to connect consumers, entrepreneurs and factories.
Maybe KS is not it, but isn't it something we should look toward?
As it was explained to me by objet, the X/Y resolution is the size of the individual droplets of resin that can be laid down by the Connex's digital print heads. They are larger than the thickness of each layer, therefore the resolution is better in the Z-axis than in the X & Y.
In Formlabs case, I would imagine this is the 'width' or diameter of their laser. The way I read it, the smallest cured point they can produce in a layer is 300 microns, or 0.3mm.
The Formlabs printer does look well polished, but I don't think it is 'disrupting 3D printing'. the B9 Creator* is in the same price range with higher resolution, and may have the ability to include multi-material printing eventually. I believe resin may be cheaper for the B9, too.
[EDIT] include link to B9
When we talk about minimum feature size, we are giving a rough guide for the finest pillars or walls that you can print (see the fingers of the Neptune figurine in our photos). By this metric, the Form 1 is comparable to the best high end SLA and inkjet machines, and well beyond any FDM machine.
I've never understood why anyone would give anything via kickstarter. A "donate now" paypal button would probably be less scammy.
For something that is ready to enter manufacturing I think a pre-order model is appropriate. I'd be alarmed if someone used those words on an idea or something in the middle of the prototyping process.
A "donate now" button for a commercial venture is an instant and permanent red flag for me.
Do you have proof this is the case?
The last 10% takes 90% of the time is true in hardware manufacturing just as much or more as it is in software.