There’s a company that claims to be insuring donors against crowdfunding fraud.
It’s website says that: “If a campaign you back turns out to be fraudulent, [they] will refund each dollar you lost.”
The premium is cheap, $10 for 1 year of protection.
The website says it covers campaigns on most large crowdfunding platforms, including Kickstarter, Lending Club and Prosper.
If you are defrauded, you file your claim online. The insurer then says: “We verify the fraud claim and then pay you back each dollar you lost.”
The question that does not seem to be answered is what does it take to “verify” the fraud claim?
BTW, this company does not appear to be licensed in Maryland.
(No endorsement implied).
Posted in accredited investor, balance, Broker dealers, checkbook, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Crowd Fund Act, Crowd Fund Act of 2012, Crowd Funding At the Margins, Crowd Funding Platforms, discrepancies, fraud, Funding Portals, Investments, Jobs, Legislative Intent, review, SEC, Small Business, technology, unfair and deceptive practice
Tagged bad actor, crowd fund, Crowd Fund Act, crowdfunding, donor, fraud, guarantee, IndieGoGo, insurance, insurer, investigation, kickstarter, Lending Club, license, pay back, premium, underwriter, verify, warranty
The Wall Street Journal reports that initial coin offerings have raised more than $1 billion in what could be called crowdfunding or private placement efforts.
Although some of these offerings are trying hard not to be securities offerings, they quack like them.
One example is Tezos, a Swiss “foundation” that has created software that claims to be a “self amending cryptographic ledger” that is a blockchain that “will underpin secure, decentralized applications and smart contracts while avoiding some of the political and technological problems which earlier efforts such as Bitcoin and Ethereum have faced.”
There is no cap on the amount of bitcoins that Tezos will accept. “The fundraiser will last for a period of 2,000 Bitcoin blocks.” Or about 2 weeks.
(No endorsement implied).
Posted in accredited investor, balance, Banking, checkbook, Congress, Crowd Fund Act, Crowd Fund Act of 2012, Crowd Funding At the Margins, Crowd Funding Platforms, deposits, Funding Portals, Investments, Jobs, Legislative Intent, review, SEC, technology, VC, Venture Capital, Wall Street
Tagged bitcoin, block.one, blockchain, crowd fund, crowdfunding, crypto currency, cryptographic, Dynamic Ledger, Ethereum, fundraiser, ICO, initial coin offering, internet, ledger, science, smart contracts, technology, Tezos, venture capital
The Smithsonian Museum in Washington, D.C. is a very happy crowdfunder and has shared its crowdfunding statistics with the public.
The Museum, with the help of Kickstarter, crowdfunded two campaigns, one to save Neil Armstrong’s (first moon walker) space suit and the other to save Dorothy’s ruby red shoes.
9, 477 people donated to the suit, 6,451 donated to the shoes, while 461 gave to both.
And about 45.5% of the donors gave between $25 -$99 while 11% gave between $100-$10,000.
Posted in accredited investor, balance, Charity, checkbook, Congress, Crowd Fund Act, Crowd Fund Act of 2012, Crowd Funding At the Margins, Crowd Funding Platforms, Film, Funding Portals, Investments, Jobs, Legislative Intent, review
Tagged 501(c)(3), campaign, charity, Crowd Fund Act, crowdfund, crowdfunding, donation, donor, Dorothy, giving, IndieGoGo, kickstarter, moon, museum, NASA, Neil Armstrong, proceeds, ruby red slippers, Smithsonian, Wizard of Oz
Can you earn a living through crowdfunding?
It appears that at least Professor Jordan Peterson can.
The controversial University of Toronto academic is apparently earning about C$50,000 per MONTH through crowdfunding his YouTube videos.
Peterson made headlines last fall when he publicly refused to use gender neutral pronouns in his lectures , one titled ” Professor against political correctness: Part I” where he decried legislation which sought “to amend the Canadian Human Right Act and Criminal Code to include protection for gender identity or expression.”
Posted in balance, Charity, checkbook, Congress, Crowd Fund Act, Crowd Fund Act of 2012, Crowd Funding At the Margins, Crowd Funding Platforms, Film, Funding Portals, Investments, Jobs, Legislative Intent, review
Tagged academia, bathrooms, bisexual, Canada, charity, criminal code, crowd fund, crowdfunding, donor, freedom of speech, gender identity, gender neutral, human rights, Human Rights Act, income, LGBT, Patreon, professor, trans gender
Matilda “Tilly” Gifford is crowdfunding a legal challenge of the United Kingdom’s government’s decision to exclude Scotland from the official inquiry of “spy cops.”
Over a dozen police officers have been identified as those who adopted the names of dead children and spied on, among others, left-wing politicians like Jeremy Corbyn and the Green Party MP Jenny Jones while sleeping with some victims and shredding files to cover it up.
The public inquiry has been limited to England, excluding Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Tilly is suing to expand it.
Posted in Charity, checkbook, Congress, Crowd Fund Act, Crowd Fund Act of 2012, Crowd Funding At the Margins, Crowd Funding Platforms, discrepancies, Funding Portals, Legislative Intent, review
Tagged Crowd Fund Act, crowdfund, crowdfunding, Green Party, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary Scotland, HMIC, inquiry, Jeremy Corbyn, justice, Labour Party, politician, Prime Minister, public inquiry, Scotland, spy cops, Theresa May, UK, United Kingdom
Remember the wise words of Ben Franklin who said:
“We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately. ”
Advertising a Regulation Crowd Funding offering is limited under Rule 204(b) to just the “terms of the offering, ” which is defined to include “the amount of securities offered, the nature of the securities, the price of the securities and the closing date of the offering period.”
Here’s an example of how one company has advertised its Regulation Crowd Funding offering (not an endorsement of this offering):