Kickstarter researcher: Zano project was naive but not fraudulent

An investigation by tech journalist Mark Harris has revealed that the failed Kickstarter project Zano was not fraudulent. Based on interviews with the lead developer of the drone, Harris concludes that there was no malicious intent.

However, according to Harris, there was misuse of the funds raised by the Kickstarter project. The campaign for the Zano drone raised more than 2.3 million pounds, or more than three million euros. Portions of this amount may have been wasted, according to Harris, by allocating excessive salaries and purchasing extras, such as cars. The tech journalist emphasizes that there does not appear to be any intentional misuse of funds or fraudulent practices.

Kickstarter decided to determine the cause of the failure through a third-party investigation, choosing tech journalist Mark Harris. His research further shows that the Zano failed because none of the development team had the actual knowledge and skills to deliver on its promises. The project was initiated by Ivan Reedman under the Torquing Group brand. The company promised an autonomous intelligent drone, but failed to deliver. Previously, it had released a video in which it still seemed as if the drone could fulfill its promises. This video has been labeled by Harris as misleading.

One of the reasons the Zano fell short was because of the sheer amount of extra options that had to be added. This was due to the high amount raised by the campaign, which meant that stretch goals had to be developed. This corresponds to the information that the Torquing Group had previously released. He indicated that the upgrades presented additional technical challenges to an already complex design.

Harris also claims that the cause of the failure was not just the developers. Some of the problems arose because of the attention the Zano was getting from both Kickstarter itself and the media. For example, the Zano was chosen as a staff pick, so the campaign was promoted by Kickstarter. The drone was also on Engadget’s list of possible winners of the ‘Best of CES’ award. This while the drone was not even capable of a demonstration at that time.

The way the company ultimately handled the project’s failure is correct, according to Harris, but communication is said to have been unclear. It is unlikely that backers of the project will see their money back, despite the liquidation of the Torquing Group. This is consistent with previous reports from the trustee who oversaw the process. Backers do not have the same status as a creditor and Harris recommends Kickstarter to provide more clarity in the future to people who want to put their money into a Kickstarter project.

To prevent situations like this in the future, the tech journalist says it would be good if crowdfunding platforms pay more attention to the way in which large projects are handled. For example, there should be better ways to identify weak campaigns. Offering support and advice would also come in handy with new projects, Harris said.