Karsten Wenzlaff, Advisor
August 26th, 2025
ITBusiness.ca | Gerard Buckley @jaguarcapital | April 17, 2014
Yesterday I had the distinct pleasure of being invited by the National Crowdfunding Association of Canada to be a panelist at their breakfast briefing “Igniting Entrepreneurship and Capital Flow in Ontario.”
The other distinguished panelists that I spoke alongside of were James Turner, vice chair of the Ontario Securities Commission, who gave an overview of the Ontario Securities Commission regulatory framework; John Wires of Wires Law who gave the legal overview; Jos Schmitt of Aequitas who spoke of structuring a portal and building an exchange for private securities and how that may be affected by crowdfunding; and yours truly, sharing my views as an investor. We spoke to a sold out audience led by Craig Asano, founder of NCFA and Murray McKercher, NCFA board advisor.
The timing of this briefing coincided to the “Introduction of Proposed Prospectus Exemptions and Proposed Reports of Exempt Distribution in Ontario” on March 20, 2014 and is open for comments for 90 days. This release of proposed amendments to ‘Prospectus and Registration Exemptions” include an Offering Memorandum (OM) Prospectus Exemption, a Family, Friends, and Business Associates Prospective Exemption (FFBA), a prospectus exemption for distributions by a reporting issuer to it’s existing shareholders and the Crowdfunding Prospectus Exemption and regulatory requirements applicable to a Crowdfunding Portal which we addressed in the presentation.
I would be the first to admit that two years ago I was skeptical of crowdfunding and did not feel that that it would provide a viable alternative for capital formation. Today I believe it is required for me and others to be part of the discussion so that entrepreneurs are well informed on crowdfunding and if they take advantage of this Prospectus Exemption they will continue to be positioned for future capital fundraising for their company. It is my view that crowdfunding will be introduced in most provincial jurisdictions in Canada later this year or early next year as both regulators and government would like to ensure the environment for capital formation for seed and early stage innovation is robust and the introduction of crowdfunding will have low budgetary impact for provincial governments.
My comments here within are divided among three distinct groups of investors, some concerns of regulators , the unintended consequences of crowdfunding and my attempt to be futuristic about how crowdfunding may be viewed several years after implementation.
Everyone is speaking of the democratization of investment opportunity in early and growth stage private companies. I see no evidence that most investors that currently invest in mutual funds, ETFs, GIC’s etc. are lining up to invest monies in equities of seed and early stage companies. These changes in prospectus exemptions will be no panacea for the investee companies. Currently less that 10% of Canadians hold equities on a direct basis. As a result of the introduction of crowdfunding I don’t see that number rising substantially in the coming years. Most investors that I speak to are concerned that the gestation period for an ROI (Return on Investment) from crowdfunded Investments will be long and they will take a wait and see approach.
Like it or not investment in early stage companies is a high risk investment. I commented in Money Sense Magazine in May of last year that this asset class should be considered part of an investor’s total portfolio where alternative investments including commodities, speculative ventures, derivatives, early stage companies, etc. should be no more that 5 to 10% of the investor’s portfolio. Any prudent financial adviser or portfolio manager would follow this theory.
During the Q&A I was specifically asked if RSP’s and Registered Savings Plan assets could be used to invest via the crowdfunding exemption in early stage companies. The legislative intention is that these savings plans be used for the longer term liabilities of retirement and therefore from a asset management perspective be matched with longer term assets. A equity investment in a high risk seed or early stage company does not align with the longer term nature of the assets of a registered savings plan.
Accredited investors who include our members at Maple Leaf Angels don’t require legislative change to invest in seed or early stage companies. This is the group that is most blase about crowdfunding as they already have the opportunity to invest in private companies. However, I believe it is this group that in the fullness of time will adopt to investing through portals such as Funders Club or Angel List.
It is accredited investors that will be investing the largest amounts as they adopt the technology and become comfortable with the investee companies. I believe in the early evolution of crowdfunding, cannibalization of investment from this group through private placement or offering memorandum will be disguised as crowdfunding to demonstrate the success and adoption rate of crowdfunding. It is generally understood that currently a Crowdfunding Campaign requires 30 per cent or more of the raise to be pre sold and with equity crowdfunding I don’t see that number changing substantially. It will be through traditional methods of pitch and present to accredited investors where this pre selling will occur.
This investor currently is not permitted to invest due to not being an Accredited Investor. When referring to the democratization of investment opportunity it is this investor that is being most referred to. They will be the early adopters investing via a portal for both Offering Memorandum and Crowdfunding Exemptions. They are the friends and associates of the founders of the seed and early stage companies we speak of. They will most likely have exited their own startups and will have investable capital of between 200k and 1mm and come from the millennial generation. They understand the space, participate in the ecosystem, went to school with the founders and I believe will be the most active new investors under the Crowdfunding Exemption. However as a result of the Crowdfunding limits the Offering Memorandum Exemption may become the exemption of choice for this investor.
You can not expect that in this day and age that the regulators will give cause for a condition to exist where individual investors are not being protected. It is also highly unlikely that they will discharge this responsibility to a third party such as a SRO (self regulated Organization). Selling unsuitable investments to seniors is a significant concern for regulators as selling unsuitable investments represented >40% of IIROC’s disciplinary actions last year and too many of these actions had seniors as victims.
I feel that credit must be given to the OSC for the pace in which they brought these four Prospectus Exemptions to the marketplace. Having just attended the Angel Capital Association’s Annual Summit in Washington the buzz is, Canada is further advanced than the USA on it’s initiatives for capital formation for seed and early stage companies siteing such programs as Start-Up Visa, FEDDEV’s IBI program and Province of Ontario’s ANP (Angel Network Program) as examples.
Forbes | Jessica Stillman | March 17, 2014
Is crowdfunding the secret to creating more Silicon Valley-like tech hubs around the world? Crowdfunder CEO Chance Barnett argues yes.Talent, we all know, knows no geography. Great brains and big ambitions can be born anywhere. The sorts of ecosystems that nurture this talent and accelerate innovation are far rarer.
History, government policy and culture all play a role in determining where a cluster will (and will not) develop, but so, of course, does the access to capital to grow ideas into big businesses. Is equity crowdfunding the solution to this piece of the puzzle and a key to accelerating the growth of international clusters?
That’s what Crowdfunder CEO Chance Barnett recently wrote on the Unreasonable Institute blog. He argues that crowdfunding platforms will facilitate the connection of local players and speed clustering, as well as accelerate access to capital and attract the attention of more traditional investors, advisors and partners. Forbes got in touch to ask him for more details on how crowdfunding can help nurture ecosystems around the globe and the obstacles that still stand in the way of its greater use.
I believe that both are necessary — and that one without the other is relatively ineffective. Top down initiatives generally mean capital or resources given to those in the ecosystem (investors, companies, working spaces) by the government. These can have a short-term impact but have a lesser long-term effect on the level of talent, experience, diversity, and successful outcomes when done in isolation. It is hard for investors and the free market to pick winners and effectively allocate capital. It is more difficult for government to do this adequately, though there is a place for it in building capacity and helping jumpstart an ecosystem locally.
Bottom up methods are more about small groups collaborating, sharing knowledge, sharing resources, sharing capital. They complement the top down by building interactions and networks where good ideas and skills spread more effectively. Crowdfunding and equity crowdfunding are a kind of “meeting place” of ideas and companies.
There is a significant global entrepreneurship movement. Entrepreneurs are building incredibly innovate products and services in places as difficult as central Africa, and solving hard and meaningful problems.
Equity crowdfunding is and will scale faster in more mature ecosystems like the early-stage investment market in the US. There are larger existing flows of investment capital and risk appetite that are moving increasingly online in the US. That said, the lesser developed countries and regions have the opportunity to effectively speed their development of an entrepreneurship and investing culture and “leap-frog” a few of the development phases that other markets have had to slowly grow through.
I believe equity crowdfunding will be a key growth driver of entrepreneurship and innovation in Latin America, Southeast Asia, and parts of Africa. We are the first and largest investment network now in Mexico, and are expanding into other countries in Latin America.
Huffington Post by Mark Fidelman | January 29, 2014
If politicians were awarded Olympic medals, then Congressman Patrick McHenry (R-NC) and U.S. Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) would each be given gold in the crowdfunding biathlon for their sheer endurance and fortitude in helping create and deliver on a reasonable bill to allow any business to raise money via private markets. Instead of caving to special interests and Washington bureaucrats, both backed a bill that marks the beginning of a new era in finance.
The recognition that they and 98 other crowdfunding experts received last week for supporting what was previously seen as an impossible dream will help usher in a new wave of innovation and jobs.
But as with anything political, the fight continues. Most of the experts I talked to on the list acknowledged that the new Jobs act is imperfect and will need revisions if it is to be a real force in the future. But most also cited that using social networks and crowdsourcing support for these changes was a sure path to victory.
Looking forward, I asked each of them for their thoughts on the path forward, here's what they told me:
1. Slava Rubin, CEO of Indiegogo (#3)
"Since its inception in 2008, crowdfunding remains an emerging industry and largely unknown in many parts of the world. As such, those in leadership positions in the space have a responsibility to collaborate, educate, and share with the public and one another on how best to move forward and revolutionize funding for good. Active engagement of community leaders, whether they're based in the government, the media, or the platforms themselves, is imperative to the evolution and future of crowdfunding."
2. Tim Draper, Venture capitalist; Founder of Draper University (#6)
"If you want to be a thought leader, you need a following. To be followed today, you need a social network. The world has great systems now to have the best ideas reach the most people."
3. Sen. Warner (#8)
"We're still waiting on final SEC rules, but I think there may be some interesting issues that will come up and will need to be resolved over time. We need to get a sense of how equity CF is going to work in the real world. There are a lot of variables."
4. Renaud LePlanche, Co-founder and CEO of Lending Club (#10)
"We're looking forward to watching equity crowdfunding develop -- and
seeing how the players solve the challenges of higher risk endeavors evaluated through unstructured data. Part of what made us successful is the ability to identify quality loans and get to scale (we originated $2 billion last year) so that a greater diversification can be offered to investors and performance becomes more predictable."
"How do you ensure the success and education of investors, absent industry standard metrics to evaluate risk, and how do you provide diversification across thousands or tens of thousands of projects? These are some of the challenges facing equity crowdfunding."
5. Sherwood (Woodie) Neiss, Partner at Crowdfund Capital Advisors (#12)
"The media will have a heyday when equity crowdfunding kicks off. They will tout this as 'Web 3.0' where the business case for the social network has finally arrived. They will try to identify the next Facebook which will really help bring exposure to the industry."
"However, given the caps that exist for companies (e.g., can only raise up to $1 million in 12 months) and investors (e.g., majority will be limited to five percent of their income or net worth), there won't be many herd mentality stories. This will come as a surprise to entrepreneurs who wish to seek funds via crowdfunding and face the harsh reality that although the process of raising capital has been streamlined via technology, raising money is still incredibly hard. There will be many companies (over 80 percent) that never hit their funding target."
6. Congressman Henry (#13)
"My hope is that equity crowdfunding emerges -- at home and abroad -- as a competitive source of capital for small businesses and viable investment choice for Americans. But for that to happen, the crowdfunding community must express its opinion(s) about the SEC's crowdfunding proposal to the Commission during the current comment period."
7. Kevin Steger, Founder of Startup Report (#14)
"The SEC will be slow to adopt the proposed rules around equity crowdfunding. This is already moving at a slow pace and there is no reason to expect that the pace will quicken. We may see equity crowdfunding in 2014, we may not. After the rules are adopted, I expect to see the investment community and start‐up community to embrace equity crowdfunding -- there are a lot of prospective investors who want to play in this space who aren't allowed to do so in the current regulatory environment. The new SEC rules would change all of that."
8. Devin Thorpe, Social entrepreneurship blogger for Forbes (#16)
"As investment crowdfunding blossoms over the next few years, stories of business failures will inevitably emerge. We all need to remember that starting a business has always been and will always be a challenge. Crowdfunding helps to close the funding gaps that entrepreneurs experience, but it generally can't solve operational problems. Let's remember not to panic when we hear the first horror stories. The stories of huge investor wins will not be far behind."
9. Kendell Americo, Founder and CEO of Fund Hub (#17)
"Equity crowdfunding will have a slower start than most people want or hope for, primarily because of the compliance and due diligence requirements the SEC has created. There are alot of hoops to jump through. Once people understand that equity crowdfunding is not as easy as creating a campaign on Kickstarter, but is actually raising money to start a real business and takes planning and an investment of time and money, then the real boom will begin."
10. Josh Constine, Technology journalist for TechCrunch (#23)
"In 2014, mediocre venture capital firms and angels will start to feel the burn of competition from equity crowdfunding competi. If these investors can't add value beyond providing cash, startup may prefer to raise money from the crowd to get an army of evangelists and recruiters."
The National Crowdfunding Association of Canada (NCFA Canada) is a cross-Canada crowdfunding hub providing education, advocacy and networking opportunities in the rapidly evolving crowdfunding industry. NCFA Canada is a community-based, membership-driven entity that was formed at the grass roots level to fill a national need in the market place. Join our growing network of industry stakeholders, fundraisers and investors. Increase your organization’s profile and gain access to a dynamic group of industry front runners. Learn more eBrochure | Prezi or contact us at casano@ncfacanada.org.
CNBC by Cadie Thompson | January 24, 2014
Looking to put your life savings into an unproven start-up, and hopefully cash out when it hits big?
Rules under consideration by the Securities and Exchange Commission would allow start-ups to "crowdfund" their businesses, raising capital from people who have traditionally been barred from making such risky investments.
But while the crowdfunding phenomenon (essentially raising small amounts of money from a large pool of investors) has worked for companies like Kickstarter and Indiegogo—which fund specific projects like films and music, trying to fund start-ups this way could prove disastrous for many people, experts say.
"In its infinite stupidity, Congress told the SEC you have to allow this kind of crowdfunding. What they didn't say is that we will turn it around if you don't put the right guards around it," said Lynn Turner, a former SEC chief accountant.
In October, the SEC proposed rules to address Title III of the 2012 Jumpstart Our Business Start-Ups (JOBS) Act. Title III is the section of the legislation that will allow equity crowdfunding from nonaccredited investors: people worth less than $1 million and annual incomes below $200,000. The SEC rules and regulations that will govern this new system are expected to pass next month.
The change could potentially be a goldmine for start-ups, allowing them to forgo expensive venture capital money and fund their businesses via the vast pool of mom-and-pop investors.
"There's a danger for everyone involved," Turner said. "Unless you have the expertise to do the necessary homework for this type of investment, you are doing nothing different than making a bet at the craps table in Vegas, and the outcome in Vegas may very well be better."
For one thing, a start-up that finances this way may not have transparent disclosures or solid financial statements, making it hard to gauge the company's value or riskiness, Turner said. Low-net worth investors are unlikely to have the necessary expertise to figure that out, he said.
Another concern: How do you sell your stake if you want to get out? Hard to tell, said Barry Silbert, founder and CEO at Secondmarket.
When VCs invest in start-ups they always include in the deal that the company has to buy back its investment or sell itself to get a return, Turner said. But on crowdfunding deals, there is no requirement whatsoever that these little companies will have to go public or sell themselves.
"You are basically giving your money to a management team, and they can do whatever they want. Most Americans will never realize that they need those cash provision agreements," Turner said.
The National Crowdfunding Association of Canada (NCFA Canada) is a cross-Canada crowdfunding hub providing education, advocacy and networking opportunities in the rapidly evolving crowdfunding industry. NCFA Canada is a community-based, membership-driven entity that was formed at the grass roots level to fill a national need in the market place. Join our growing network of industry stakeholders, fundraisers and investors. Increase your organization’s profile and gain access to a dynamic group of industry front runners. Learn more eBrochure |Prezi or contact us at casano@ncfacanada.org.
NowStreetWire | Dara Albright | Jan 6, 2014
Tis the season when I sit beside the festivus pole, reflect upon another year passed, dust off my crystal ball and prognosticate the future of crowdfinance.
2013 will be remembered as a pivotal year for the crowdfinance industry. Significant achievements helped lay the necessary foundation for crowdfinance to receive wide mainstream recognition and expand dramatically in 2014.
Google led a $125 million deal to buy a stake in Lending Club from existing shareholders. The Google/Lending Club transaction valued the world’s largest p2p lending platform at $1.55 billion, nearly tripling its valuation from its last fund-raising round less than a year ago. Prosper, the nation’s second largest p2p portal, added financial behemoth, Blackrock, as a strategic investor.
Venture capital investment entered the equity side of the industry with CircleUp raising funds from Union Square Ventures and Google Ventures. The SEC officially removed the 80 year ban on general solicitation for private companies and finally proposed its rules for Title III crowdfunding. The nation’s inaugural unaccredited equities crowdfund raise was completed via the intrastate exemption. And for the first time in history, a quotation system for private offerings has been developed and made publicly available on major financial media channels to investors across the globe.
While 2013 went out with a bang, below are four predictions that will make 2014 even more remarkable than the last.
1. CAPITAL WILL BE REALLOCATED FROM TRADITIONAL FIXED INCOME PRODUCTS INTO PEER-TO-PEER (P2P) LOANS
2013 was an extraordinary year for p2p lending. The domestic market grew 177%, the global market exceeded $8B, and the industry began winning over an initially skeptical media. As the financial press increasingly draws attention to p2p’s greater and more stable returns, we should experience an exodus from bond funds into p2p. This past year, many active bond managers underperformed their benchmarks, and investors began withdrawing money from bond funds at record paces. According to Lipper US Fund Flows data, over $60B has been pulled from municipal bond funds alone in 2013 – the most since 1992. With p2p garnering mainstream attention, conventional fixed income asset classes languishing, and wealth managers becoming more knowledgeable about p2p investing, more capital is likely to find its way into a diversified portfolio of p2p loans.
2. EQUITIES CROWDFINANCE WILL GERMINATE THROUGH SELL-SIDE CHANNELS
Whereas p2p lending sprouted from the yield-hungry investing public before being chased by the institutional buy-side, the equity side of crowdfinance is more likely to germinate through sell-side channels such as boutique investment banks and small cap underwriters who possess decades of experience selling “story stocks”. In 2014 brokerage firms will quickly discover additional revenue streams emanating from corporate crowdfinance products such as PIPRs (“Private Issuers Publicly Raising) and crowdfinanced IPOs. Instead of leaving money on the table, BD’s will embrace these new products that not only contain more attractive commission structures, but mitigated compliance risk.
Forbes | Guest Post by Tom Murphy | December 12, 2013
Because it sounds good, the term “crowdfunding” is applied, sometimes confusingly, to vastly different funding models, including “donation funding,” (e.g. Kickstarter), in which no investment is involved and “backers” expect no return; “advertised” private offerings, which have only been legal since September and allow the general solicitation of investors directly by private companies seeking funding, known as “issuers”, or through intermediary sites like CircleUp, provided all investors are “accredited” (meaning wealthy); and “real” equity crowdfunding contemplated by the JOBS Act, which I describe here. This last model would allow non-public issuers to sell securities to anyone, regardless of their sophistication, net worth, or income, and no matter how risky, albeit in limited amounts and with many restrictions.
While the first two models work, the restrictions and requirements in the JOBS Act and the SEC’s proposal are too substantial, for this model to work efficiently in the real world. All three sets of crowdfunding players – the issuers, investors, and portals (websites that connect the other two) are likely to be disappointed.
For issuers the first problem is that, unlike private offerings, advertised or not, in which confidentiality can be generally maintained, crowdfunded enterprises will be public companies “light.” They will not be subject to all the voluminous and costly rules applicable to publicly traded companies, but several parallel unpleasantries will nonetheless apply.
For one thing, crowdfunded companies will be required make publicly available their financial statements (or, tax returns), comprehensive offering documents and specific disclosures of the risks involved, by filing with the SEC. This sensitive information will be accessible to competitors, suppliers, customers, employees and everyone else, at a time before the issuer even knows if the offering will succeed.
There will also be ongoing requirements to provide updated information publicly. This “open book” life has always been a major reason to forego or delay a public offering and should have a similar effect on those considering equity crowdfunding once they fully understand it.
A related risk, exclusive to equity crowdfunding, will be the uniquely public nature of the offering process itself. To allow the “wisdom of the crowd” (if such exits) to be tapped, portals will be required to facilitate investor commentary and communication. Anyone, even those with ulterior motives, may provide “advice” to potential investors, right on the portal website.
Crowdfunding will likely be quite expensive for the amounts raised. Offerings are limited to $1 million annually and even that drops to $500,000 if the company’s financial statements are not audited, and $100,000 if they’re not reviewed. Financial statement preparation and auditing can be expensive, especially when auditor reports will be used to sell securities.
Other expenses will include legal fees to prepare offering documents designed to achieve the delicate balance between making the investment attractive while still being sufficiently candid and cautionary to avoid liability for inaccurate or misleading statements. This is what we securities lawyers do for a living and it’s expensive to do it right.
Crowdfunded companies will have large numbers of shareholders – likely upwards of 1,000 – to whom they and their directors and officers are accountable and owe fiduciary duties. Many of those investors will be unsophisticated and unforgiving if things don’t go well. This means spending significant time and resources on investor relations, and in some cases outright “handholding,” or risking an unhappy and perhaps litigious shareholder base.
Picking the right portal will also be important. Each offering must occur through only one portal of an SEC-registered broker dealer or a “crowdfunding portal.” Neither the portal nor the issuer will be allowed to advertise a specific offering or give one offering prominence over others on the site. So issuers will not be allowed to use multiple sites or other means to increase their exposure. Only advertising of the portal itself will be allowed.
Portals will be required to register with the SEC and with either a securities exchange or FINRA. They will have expensive regulatory requirements, including reporting, record keeping, and regulatory inspections as well as specific diligence obligations regarding the issuer, like conducting background checks on its principals and confirming that it can maintain adequate records.
There will be specific portal requirements for the operation of the sites, such as holding investor funds, allowing cancellation of orders, providing investor education, and facilitating communication among investors.
Crowdfunding portals will also be prohibited from investing in their issuers or engaging in trading, advisory, or custody activities and thus will have limited income sources beyond their share of offering proceeds. Perhaps even more troubling, the SEC release accompanying the proposed rules indicates that portals will likely be subject to the same securities law liability as issuers. For all these reasons issuers can expect portals to charge a substantial percentage of the small amounts raised to compensate them for their costs and risks.
The National Crowdfunding Association of Canada (NCFA Canada) is a cross-Canada crowdfunding hub providing education, advocacy and networking opportunities in the rapidly evolving crowdfunding industry. NCFA Canada is a community-based, membership-driven entity that was formed at the grass roots level to fill a national need in the market place. Join our growing network of industry stakeholders, fundraisers and investors. Increase your organization’s profile and gain access to a dynamic group of industry front runners. Learn more eBrochure | Prezi or contact us at casano@ncfacanada.org.
PBS Idea Lab by Rodrigo Davies | December 4, 2013
The rise of civic crowdfunding — the use of crowdfunding to provide services to communities — has led to the emergence of several radical (and not-so-radical) visions of what the process of shaping the world around us could look like in the future.
As some of the earliest examples of civic crowdfunding on Kickstarter show, the process can be initiated entirely by individuals or for-profits. For other platforms such as Citizinvestor, projects need to be initiated by governments. But there’s a big missing piece in the public-private realm that is not adequately captured by either of these models: the organized non-profit space.
In my view, the intersection of individuals (the crowd), the public sector, the for-profit and social sectors represents the most fruitful application of civic crowdfunding — bringing together the full spectrum of actors that influence the built environment and the resources that communities share.
Successful non-profits might be wondering whether they need to devote resources to crowdfunding. As one senior fundraiser at a public library-linked non-profit asked me: “Why spend months on an intensive campaign to raise thousands when I can have one in-person meeting with the right individual and raise a million dollars?”
The need for alternative fundraising methods clearly varies a lot across organizations. But even comfortable non-profits accept that crowdfunding has the potential to deliver a deep engagement between fundraisers and backers. And, as emergent civic crowdfunding models suggest, it has the potential to produce new alliances — creating a space for for-profits, the social sector, the public sector and individuals to be at the same table, working toward a common goal.
So what are the ways that non-profits can interface with civic crowdfunding as it stands? I’d like to propose three methods.
CAMPAIGN MANAGEMENT
The first method is campaign management. The organization takes responsibility for receiving and spending the money, using an existing platform. Two platforms that allow this approach are IndieGoGo and Spacehive; Kansas City-based Neighborly allows non-profits to post projects once they’ve passed through a vetting process. This is the most conventional, v1.0 model, and has been successfully executed by several groups. In April, the Chicago Parks Foundation raised $62,113 for the expansion of the city’s Windy City Hoops basketball social program on IndieGoGo.
The benefit of the “promoter” approach is that it gives the organization complete control over the messaging associated with the campaign. The drawbacks are that the organization also bears all of the risks of failure, and organizations with large existing funding sources will need to justify carefully why they’re asking for additional money.
CURATION
The second method is curation. The organization draws attention to crowdfunding projects that support its values or benefit its community, most likely by hosting a page on an existing crowdfunding website. New York City Council was one of the first organizations to adopt this model by creating a Kickstarter page, and the neighborhood of Tottenham, North London earlier this year partnered with Spacehive to promote projects by the local community.
As a curator, the organization can leverage the best grass-roots ideas in the communities they serve. It is also presumed to have exercised some degree of due diligence on the campaigns it promotes, and so is likely to be held partly responsible if campaigns fail to reach their funding targets or to fulfill their projects.
HOSTING
The third method is hosting. The organization hosts a crowdfunding campaign on its existing site or a dedicated campaign site. This could be a single project page using a widget for a payment platform such as WePay, although the organization would need a manual solution to handle the other affordances of crowdfunding (such as rewards, match-funding and funder profiling) or miss out on them altogether. The Long Now Foundation is using this model for its Salon campaign, which has raised just over half of its $495,000 target. For organizations hoping to host multiple campaigns or projects, the platform would probably be a white-label version of an existing paid service or an open-source solution, such as Catarse. Catarse is the most robust open-source codebase that is freely accessible, and has been used by 17 platforms to date.
The National Crowdfunding Association of Canada (NCFA Canada) is a cross-Canada crowdfunding hub providing education, advocacy and networking opportunities in the rapidly evolving crowdfunding industry. NCFA Canada is a community-based, membership-driven entity that was formed at the grass roots level to fill a national need in the market place. Join our growing network of industry stakeholders, fundraisers and investors. Increase your organization’s profile and gain access to a dynamic group of industry front runners. Learn more eBrochure | Prezi or contact us at casano@ncfacanada.org.