KickstarterForum.org

Not sure if anyone can help but I don't want to use paid firms as I have heard a lot of bad things with them.

I am a week in and am at 9% of my £1000 with 21 days left. Things have grinded to a halt and I don't know what to do.
I have tweeted hundreds of posts and been retweeted lots. I have over 1300 followers but not one conversion from twitter posts.
I have put updates on including an Easter greeting video.
I have changed my boring video to a nice explainer one and made it more interesting and I have posted on educational Facebook sites.

I see people saying contact blogs and magazines but I don't know where to look.
I am a struggling one man indie developer so doing this on my own.

My app is for preschool kids and it is an educational colouring game.
I have previously released software on the Amiga but have come to a stand still.

I am surprised that twitter has not got me anywhere to be honest.

I also have a free lite version of the app on Amazon and Google Play stores with links to my Kickstarter and have had around 150 downloads and around 180 views of my video explainer but stuck.

Please help if you can with advice. Thanks.


https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1516183818/paint-pot-kids-coloring-book/

Hi,

When it comes to bloggers and media, what you need to do is create a press release about your product - with all your pertinent details.

Then, do a Google search for blogs in the niche of parenting, women with new babies, educational toys, and things of that nature.

Go through every single blog and look for their contact details.

Then, send them an email saying you're running a campaign, would like to be interviewed by them, and attach your press release.

Hope this helps.

DWG

Personally, I'd get rid of the 1 pound reward while there are still 0 backers for it. It won't make much difference and it makes the campaign seem desperate and relying on mass charity rather than merit. (I'd suggest this to anyone)

Notice that nobody took the early bird for 4, but paid 7 instead. I'd get rid of that, as it is no longer early.

You have a huge gap between 50 pounds and 200. If I want to pledge 100, I'll just pledge 50 and you'll only get half my money.

Do you have in-game links that point to Kickstarter? Your current user base is probably the best audience.

Consider some reasonably-priced physical rewards, especially something exclusive to Kickstarter backers.

I have updated the prices and made them more realistic without large gaps between prices now.

Any help regarding specific areas I can get the word out.

I have been sending a lot of tweets out, put messages on blogs and also done an ad boost on a Facebook post but although I have likes and good feedback am not getting any pledges.

Any help or advice guys please.

Just to add to the discussion:
I often get suspicious when people are asking for very little money to produce an App or product. In my mind I wonder why someone who is a talented developer or designer cant come up with a thousand dollars?
Perhaps you can explain a little more about what the money will be spent on and why you need it?
If you have the lite version - what is stopping you from releasing the full version?
Hope it helps.

aknicholas wrote:Personally, I'd get rid of the 1 pound reward while there are still 0 backers for it. It won't make much difference and it makes the campaign seem desperate and relying on mass charity rather than merit. (I'd suggest this to anyone)

The problem is NOT that there is a 1 pound pledge tier. The by-now-infamous potato salad Kickstarter of Zack Brown had over two thousand people pledge at his $1 tier level.

SOURCE: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/32 ... escription

If the objective is to grow a crowd, rather than to shrink it, then lower tier levels make pledging to a given project more inviting. The "desperation theory" is debatable, at best. In the bid to figure out what the deficiencies of one's own crowdfunding project are, grasping at straws strikes me as an unlikely route to success. The supporting logic for the desperation theory is what? Because it is a small number, and because no one has yet pledged at that level, therefore it is de facto proof that the problem is that the level of the pledge is too small? If that is the case, then why are there so many successful Kickstarters that have used low tier levels to grow their crowds and to meet or exceed their funding goals?

Currently, your project has a total of eleven backers pledging a grand total of one hundred and five pounds. If we break the pledges down, it looks like this:

5 backers at 5 pounds
5 backers at 10 pounds
1 backer at 30 pounds

So, one hundred percent of the people backing your project have pledged at the thirty pound level or lower. Thus, you are not operating at the upper end of the funding spectrum, in any event. Yet, the solution lies in eliminating the lowest pledge level? You could try eliminating it, of course, and find out for certain if doing that saves your project.

Or, you could simply place more thought into what is actually being presented,

I'll use myself as an example. I have looked at your project page on numerous different occasions. The bulk of the pledges that I make tend to be at the one dollar or one pound pledge levels. So, when I encounter advice that advocates the elimination of the pledge level that I use most frequently, when backing Kickstarter projects, it is advice that strikes me as inherently problematic.

What makes a one pound level problematic, but not a five pound pledge level? I ask that, based upon the projects launched by the person advocating the desperation theory in this thread.

When I visit your Paint Pot project page, what my eyes encounter are what reminds me of EGA graphics. Could it be that your project is failing to capitalize upon the visual aspect of the Kickstarter medium?

There's no human imagery on your project page, but over on your website, there's a little girl with paint all over her hands and face. That's visual pizzazz! That lame looking frog doesn't move me to want to pledge. Even the dog that is in the small circular image looks better than the crudely drawn frog. Yet, that frog of many visual shortcomings is what you chose as the visual standard bearer for your project, by virtue of your selection of it for the coveted position of project image? And you wonder why your project's funding curve is so relatively flat?

Look at the "Share this project" button on your project page. When I click it, it tells me that your project has 68 shares on Facebook. Could it be that the wholesale lack of getting the word out may be playing a role in your project's poor funding, to date? Of course, even if people visit the project page, what they are treated to - visually - is a super-sized version of bland and boring. Not the concept - the presentation of the concept.

There's little imagery on your project page, and what imagery that there is there isn't up to visual snuff.

Your project page touts Paint Pot as a kids coloring app, yet there's not a single, solitary photo of any kid actually using it or playing with it and having fun with it. The project page states, as a user review:

My 3 year old loves this app so quick and simple to use with bright funny pictures. It’s a great learning tool, I highly recommend

Yet, there's no photo to visually convey what is being said.

When I do a quick scroll down of your project page, none of your chosen images wow me or make me want to pause on them. That tells me that you really might want to reconsider how you've approached the visual angle of this crowdfunding project.

If this thing is a kid-friendly, kid-magnet kind of thing, then use photographs of kids interacting with it. A picture is worth a thousand words, it has been said. What you are doing is attempting to use low level graphics and text to sell what one good photo of a kid having fun with Paint Pot could easily achieve.

Why does your website utilize a different approach, visually speaking? The little girl with the paint all over her is adorable. Yet, she doesn't even rate a spot on your project page. Go figure!

A little further feedback for you, Paul.

Your Paint Pot Facebook page currently has 17 likes. Thus, your social media presence on that platform is tooting small numbers.

https://www.facebook.com/leapappsuk

I clicked on the project video, and as it started playing, since you weren't actually in it talking about your project, I began skipping ahead in increments, looking for you. No human interaction in the video to be found, no matter where I clicked on it at. So, why bother watching it? Why waste time watching a canned video?

Make a video with you or someone in it, someone who is excited and physically animated and enthusiastic. That way, even things like the tone of the voice can play a role in trying to persuade people. Instead of excitement, you gave the world the equivalent of dead pan.

ON April 4th, 2015, you posted the following on your Twitter account:

Get your kids drawing and name in the Google and Apple game Paint Pot here at #kickstarter https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1516183

You also want the kids' photos (and their parents, if possible, as then those very same parents have a reason to share word about your project - because their kids' drawings are associated with it, in some way, shape, or form. The drawings are one personal aspect, but the actual kids and parents are another.

When I scroll down your Twitter page, I see that you have posted photographs of people and things. Why? Because they are objects of visual interest, perhaps? Yet, for your crowdfunding project, you have adopted a very subdued approach to visual stimuli. Why?

Thanks for the feedback, I am now in the process of fixing

Would anyone be able to have another look at the project for feedback?
I have started to add some pictures etc as mentioned above and am still working on this.

I have to still update the video and add further pictures of kids playing my app yet but I think it is getting there.

Thanks.