And just to reply to Paul directly... since we all know he is still reading this.
I tell you why. My lad contributed to the first igg ORSTO x1 campaign. He was also one of the vocal contributors saying that a squarer shaped device would look a whole lot cooler than a round one.
I watched the comments religiously. Nobody was requesting a square shaped watch. The creator was moving in that direction and kept telling people that most of the contributors wanted it. Which was strange because that was not reflected in the comments.
They obviously spent time and money on building a new prototype. In reply to what folk like him had asked for.
Not true. As was shown earlier in this thread, the "prototype" was just an off-the-shelf part from China that can be bought on many sites today. It was not his design. He downgraded the specs to match the off-the-shelf watch he purchased, then denied that the specs had changed when backers called him on it.
I do know for a fact that igg gave them instructions to start a new campaign for the square device. pluswatch. I have actually seen the email from igg to ORSTO telling them that.
I have seen the email also. IGG told him that it was not really acceptable to change the original project to something else, and that if he wanted to offer a different product, it would need to be through a new campaign.
So campaign 2 starts. I also know that certain people at ORSTO company were asked about their opinion on the technical feasibility of the Kraos watch.
I do know that at some point they told igg that the krayos was a little suspect. But igg swiftly pulled their campaign overnight.
I do not believe for one second that IGG would solicit feedback from a project creator to check their opinion on another project creator. It is infinitely less likely that they would do so with the intent of tricking the first project creator into saying something bad so that they could ban them and cancel their project. Much more likely is that what IGG told you in their email is why your project was cancelled - because you outright stated you have no intention to fulfill the X1 project rewards. You told the backers in response to whether they were going to get their X1 watch (paraphrasing) "Hey, we all knew this was a risk when we started - we lost money too". In other words, you stated you intended to keep the money and not deliver the X1. IGG reminded you that you were obligated to fulfill the rewards regardless of funds raised, which you agreed to with your flexible funding campaign, and because you stated your intent not to fulfill rewards, they cancelled the project an refunded everyone.
Now whether you like it or not igg do have a reputation for being a set of big headed gits just like ks do.
That is the kind of thing I would think if I was turned down by both parties.
Now the other ins and outs I do not know much about. However, I do know that my lad got a paypal refund direct from the ORSTO paypal account. So ORSTO must have had at least some of the money. So they must have made the decision to repay contributors. That in itself in my book is commendable. Because I know of many people or companies who would never ever, ever have repaid a penny.
False. I have a copy of an email from Orsto to a backer where he states he did not ever get any money from IGG and if the backer wants a refund, he can talk to IGG.
As for igg, they ignored everyone of my lads emails and never replied to any messages on their landlines. I think that tells you something.
Since "your lad" would be the son of the project creator and is probably a fictional character, that's not surprising.