EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
EEVblog => EEVblog Specific => Topic started by: EEVblog on September 12, 2018, 04:48:00 am
-
Who saw it coming?, Fontus have filed for bankruptcy!
The infamous "self-filling water bottle" that raised $340k on Indiegogo has gone bankrupt and delivered nothing.
You 'canna beat the laws of physics Captain!
https://www.ksv.at/insolvenzfaelle/insolvenz-fontus-water-technology-gmbh-1030-wien (https://www.ksv.at/insolvenzfaelle/insolvenz-fontus-water-technology-gmbh-1030-wien)
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/fontus-the-self-filling-water-bottles#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/fontus-the-self-filling-water-bottles#/)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z32_MYxYhc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z32_MYxYhc)
-
It looks like Fontus got reality and is available to buy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiOzhhKiquo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiOzhhKiquo)
Sorry, I couldn't find the english version of the comercial.
It's an battery powered watering can.
In my opinion needless like a struma but hey, it looks like some people are buying this expensive plastic bucket.
-
Ahhh, another win for (gullible) consumers. :-+
-
Wow. The Universität für Angewandte Kunst (i.e. the University of Applied Arts) is exactly that - it's an art and design college. Lots of eminent alumni like Klimt and Vivienne Westwood, but none of them exactly famous for their engineering skills.
So yeah, people funded an art school project to do as yet unproven and impractical engineering. Nice work. It's amazing how many of these projects start out as some design student's final year project that ends up being way overhyped and impossible to realise from an engineering point of view - remember the person who designed a folding UK mains plug which was really neat other than the minor problem that it was flimsy and completely unable to comply with BS1363, so legally unable to be sold as a mains plug? There was a massive hoohah about that which went on for years, and mostly took the form of "Look how foolish and backwards these standards people are for being so against our folding mains plug! It's our right to choose to be electrocuted by poorly-designed connectors!".
-
At least Fontus was a GmbH (similar to a Ltd). They received 300K and have 60K left in their pocket, thus if you founded that project you will receive approx. 20% of your money back. Better than nothing.
The link gives you all information (though in German): https://www.ksv.at/insolvenzfaelle/insolvenz-fontus-water-technology-gmbh-1030-wien (https://www.ksv.at/insolvenzfaelle/insolvenz-fontus-water-technology-gmbh-1030-wien)
-
You knew it was a scam. TF knew it was a scam. We knew it too. And there was no way to stop it?
-
You knew it was a scam. TF knew it was a scam. We knew it too. And there was no way to stop it?
Places like Go Fund Me THRIVE on deals like this. They take 10% off the top of all of the money raised and could care less if the product is a complete farce.
-
Wow. The Universität für Angewandte Kunst (i.e. the University of Applied Arts) is exactly that - it's an art and design college. Lots of eminent alumni like Klimt and Vivienne Westwood, but none of them exactly famous for their engineering skills.
So yeah, people funded an art school project to do as yet unproven and impractical engineering. Nice work. It's amazing how many of these projects start out as some design student's final year project that ends up being way overhyped and impossible to realise from an engineering point of view - remember the person who designed a folding UK mains plug which was really neat other than the minor problem that it was flimsy and completely unable to comply with BS1363, so legally unable to be sold as a mains plug? There was a massive hoohah about that which went on for years, and mostly took the form of "Look how foolish and backwards these standards people are for being so against our folding mains plug! It's our right to choose to be electrocuted by poorly-designed connectors!".
Was that the Flip plug?
-
Fontus burned also some Austrian tax money they got as financial support from the state-run Austria Wirtschaftsservice (AWS). The AWS didn't disclose the sum unfortunately.
-
A big company i used to work for had a "Innovation support" program, which was basically a bucket of money to burn without any return. Do not know what that gave them other than a image in the press. Maybe the Government gave them some incentives for having it, do not know bust still must had been a reason (i hope) to have it.
-
That's my favorite EEVblog video thumbnail thus far. :-+
-
I have a way of getting free water from the air here in the UK. It is called a bucket.
-
Wow. The Universität für Angewandte Kunst (i.e. the University of Applied Arts) is exactly that - it's an art and design college. Lots of eminent alumni like Klimt and Vivienne Westwood, but none of them exactly famous for their engineering skills.
So yeah, people funded an art school project to do as yet unproven and impractical engineering. Nice work. It's amazing how many of these projects start out as some design student's final year project that ends up being way overhyped and impossible to realise from an engineering point of view - remember the person who designed a folding UK mains plug which was really neat other than the minor problem that it was flimsy and completely unable to comply with BS1363, so legally unable to be sold as a mains plug? There was a massive hoohah about that which went on for years, and mostly took the form of "Look how foolish and backwards these standards people are for being so against our folding mains plug! It's our right to choose to be electrocuted by poorly-designed connectors!".
Was that the Flip plug?
That'd be the one mentioned here:
https://www.quora.com/What-happened-to-the-improved-UK-plug (https://www.quora.com/What-happened-to-the-improved-UK-plug)
-
The TÜV thing was made at 95% humidity LOL
-
Official response
-
Not happy Fontus campers.
But bonus guy who thinks he invested in "scientific research" :-DD
-
But bonus guy who thinks he invested in "scientific research" :-DD
But just for a moment imagine if we could somehow invent things that didn't require compliance with well-established physics. Oh thats what they did.
I was just trying to figure out what level of Science education you needed to figure out this was a non flyer? PHY101 at University? year 10 at highschool?
Did any EEVBLog forum members sign up? Come on, if you did, promise not to laugh at you.
Do you think if you packaged and marketed it right you could make a backwards resistor? One that if you heated it up in the sun, currnet flowed? I mean, if you put current through a resistor, it gets warm.. So this must be true.
How about a postive gain battery? one where you get more energy out that you put in.
And my favourite.. A ZeroGravity Upgright Posture Cushion. ( SERIOUSLY, this is an indigogo ).. Curious how a $59 cushion creates zero gravity. Nasa failed obviously, with the Saturn V rockets to overcome gravity on the cheap. Cost them severla billion dollars and that was in 1960s!
-
I was just trying to figure out what level of Science education you needed to figure out this was a non flyer? PHY101 at University? year 10 at highschool?
It just requires the slightest skepticism to think "Sound cool, but why hasn't someone done it before?, I'll Google Fontus and see if anyone has critiqued it."
This is where something like Rbutr comes in, a friend of mine developed that and it's a browser plugin that crowd sources critical opinion of the webpage you are visiting.
Skepticism is the key, not the ability to technical analyse something. PHY101 is no good to you if you don't have skepticism and the inclination to ask questions.
-
I like the guy who tells Fontus to do their research before starting any more campaigns.
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-1121-fontus-goes-bankrupt!/?action=dlattach;attach=522926;image)
-
You guys dont get it. The reason for the failure was not enough money for "tooling for the bottle". Get it? Not that energy/technology rubbish, just could not make bottles out of aluminum stock ::)
-
I like the guy who tells Fontus to do their research before starting any more campaigns.
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-1121-fontus-goes-bankrupt!/?action=dlattach;attach=522926;image)
These people just heard they got scammed out of their money and still don't seem to understand. The unscrupulous must love this age.
-
You guys dont get it. The reason for the failure was not enough money for "tooling for the bottle". Get it? Not that energy/technology rubbish, just could not make bottles out of aluminum stock ::)
Classic Dunning–Kruger effect >:D
-
As PT Barnum famously said:
There is a sucker born every minute.
My take on this is simpler: pure greed. The investors are deluded that they are funding the next Apple or Google.
-
It just requires the slightest skepticism to think "Sound cool, but why hasn't someone done it before?, I'll Google Fontus and see if anyone has critiqued it."
Skepticism is the key, not the ability to technical analyse something. PHY101 is no good to you if you don't have skepticism and the inclination to ask questions.
The problems is that the internet is full of self proclaimed 'experts' so without a solid understanding of phsysics it just comes down to who someone believes. For some science is no different than religion. Or put differently: absolute truth no longer exists.
-
It just requires the slightest scepticism to think "Sound cool, but why hasn't someone done it before?, I'll Google Fontus and see if anyone has critiqued it."
Scepticism is the key, not the ability to technical analyse something. PHY101 is no good to you if you don't have scepticism and the inclination to ask questions.
This is where it gets interesting. As someone who created several things and turned them around into products that people buy, which are unique ( well were unique and have been copied ), If i had said " nobody has done this before, so it can't be done", I would have not done it. Before the Manhattan project, Nuclear power probably looked impossible too, and putting a man into space..
We need to encourage inventive thinking to solve new problems, but it has to be done in a way that lets things happen sensibly.
-
I think the point of Dave's "...why hasn't someone done it before?" is as a flag that you should think more deeply about the problem and the proposed solution rather than as a "this is a scam" filter.
TonyG
-
This is where it gets interesting. As someone who created several things and turned them around into products that people buy, which are unique ( well were unique and have been copied ), If i had said " nobody has done this before, so it can't be done", I would have not done it. Before the Manhattan project, Nuclear power probably looked impossible too, and putting a man into space..
We need to encourage inventive thinking to solve new problems, but it has to be done in a way that lets things happen sensibly.
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer
-
It just requires the slightest skepticism to think "Sound cool, but why hasn't someone done it before?, I'll Google Fontus and see if anyone has critiqued it."
Skepticism is the key, not the ability to technical analyse something. PHY101 is no good to you if you don't have skepticism and the inclination to ask questions.
The problems is that the internet is full of self proclaimed 'experts' so without a solid understanding of phsysics it just comes down to who someone believes. For some science is no different than religion. Or put differently: absolute truth no longer exists.
[/quote]
But it's not hard to get "the vibe" when one of these "self proclaimed experts" is just waffling on, or that they might know something about what they are talking about.
And engineering or science Youtube channel for example doesn't usually get very far unless they have at least some technical credibility.
Running the numbers for example is a good first step, as most "self proclaimed experts" won't bother (or aren't able) to do that. You don't have to necessarily understand the numbers in order to get a feel that person may have a clue. Or at the very least is worth listening to more than someone else who is just waffling. Then there are the comments etc.
In any case, we are talking about just critical doubt here. You don't have to know and understand the numbers for sure to be able to think "Gee, this Fontus thing sounds a bit fishy, so it's probably not side to back it".
I know there are countless examples of "self proclaimed experts" on Facebook etc with millions of followers etc, but these people almost always promote stuff instead of critically analyse stuff. It's almost a self filtering mechanism in science and engineering that those with the knowledge and skills will tend to criticise/run the numbers etc rather than promote.
-
I think the point of Dave's "...why hasn't someone done it before?" is as a flag that you should think more deeply about the problem and the proposed solution rather than as a "this is a scam" filter.
Correct, it's just a flag that means you should maybe (if you don't have the skills yourself) do a basic search and see what people are saying about it. And yes, that means deliberately seeking out "negative opinion" and seeing what they have to say.
-
it won't be the first time people are led astray by they own new age collective feelings.
if it involves earth , wind and fire or more like solar,wind or water.
it becomes magical, common sense is no longer common anymore.
new age cosmic fluffy logic has made fools of many. :clap:
-
You knew it was a scam. TF knew it was a scam. We knew it too. And there was no way to stop it?
Well, the moment a government would forcefully shut down something like this, they'd just milk it, say that some lobby was behind the shut down and claim a conspiracy. Imagine if someone had sued and shut down Batterizer. Heck, even Dave was accused of working for Big Battery companies if I remember correctly...
-
It just requires the slightest skepticism to think "Sound cool, but why hasn't someone done it before?, I'll Google Fontus and see if anyone has critiqued it."
This is where something like Rbutr comes in, a friend of mine developed that and it's a browser plugin that crowd sources critical opinion of the webpage you are visiting.
It is surely a good tool, but for people that already do possess the required skepticism to see the need for it.
Skepticism is the key, not the ability to technical analyse something. PHY101 is no good to you if you don't have skepticism and the inclination to ask questions.
People die of thirst and probably not in regions at 95% humidity where there are simplier methods of condensing water.
I mean... going to the electric kettle and check how much power it has (lets say ~2kW). Check how long it takes to boil a kilo of water and check how long it then takes to convert all of it to steam while monitoring energy use (practically what thunderf00t showed). Not that big of a deal to make - compared to hundreds of dollars of an investment.
Maybe it mentally blocks people that the heat pump is operated backwards. Maybe they overestimate the power a solar cell can deliver.
But probably this is just another case of group psychology surpassing logical thinking. Lots of wishful thinking is happening and assumptions are made and stated as facts. The internet with its fast communication capabilities amplifies not only the good things, but also the bad things.
I would´t have thought that those guys actually get that far with it, on the other hand scammers always build on trust and are able to scam millions out of their victims. I don´t really buy the "oops, we got that part of physics wrong".
-
i thought i just put this 1 here for reference
has indiegogo ALWAYS been a scammer/problem itself from the start?
this guy got stuck in it ... :-//
funders have to complain to indiegogo themselves?
LOL flexible goal ;) To me he seems like scammer himself. Most likely he is just reselling ink available from multiple sources, like this:
http://www.creativematerials.com/products/carbon-inks/ (http://www.creativematerials.com/products/carbon-inks/)
-
In regards to the Fontus thing, if the backers got skinned then that's their bad luck for not using due diligence or having any common sense. Surely a product of this nature is thoroughly field tested prior to any promotion or marketing campaign so it's those poor beta testers that I have the gravest concerns for.
-
LOL flexible goal ;) To me he seems like scammer himself.
He talks loads of bollocks, I tell ya.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WopuF9vD7KE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WopuF9vD7KE)
Somebody needs to pedal a fake one of these water collectors (tank and blinky lights) to the mainstream media. You say it's full of secret stuff so you can't show them and when it gets popular enough you finally open it and besides just a tank and pump there's just a big blinking sign that insults your intelligence and provides its own debunking info with included paperwork. I bet you could seriously pull it off given how stupid media outlets are. >:D
-
Too bad we couldn't purchase shorts, like when you bet against stocks where you make money as the stock falls and dies, for these crowd funded projects. Us better engineers could make a ton of money on many of these guaranteed doomed to failure projects, collecting on the investment everybody else is making.
Damn, too late, I could have created a new crowd funding web site with the added feature, on top of normal investment, the ability for of additional investors who can bet on projects flopping within 2 years... I wonder how we could economically make that work...
-
The correct skeptical question wouldn't be "Why hasn't anyone ever done this before?"
The correct skeptical quiston would be "Hasn't this been done before? Google: Dehumidifiers"