Feedback on Kickstarter project

[imagesoft]

Hello,

I am launching my kickstarter project Twentyeightco - Made in London bike apparel for the urban cyclist on 9th December and I was wondering if I could gain any supporters to sign up viatwentyeightco.co.uk and to also check out my kickstarter project and hand over any feedback https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1225974274/679394973?token=e70d9135

 

[obscure]

The grammar and general writing is very poor.

"....and also for gernal lesuire purposes"
"....With much positive feedback, we decided to focus on quality and style of the cycling garments rather than sports and performance."
"....ensuring that every zip, tag and thread is made to its finest."
​

The name is "Made in London" and the text states the factory is in London but you then state that you are sourcing from factories in Britain including Brighton and Scotland.

It appears that your London factory is actually more of a school filled with trainees than a factory filled with experienced workers. I would be rather worried about the impact that will have on production and quality.

​

 

[toastking]

As a Londoner myself the bigger problem isn't making the cyclists more fashionable, it is making them more visible without having those distracting flashing lights.

I've never been close to having an accident with them myself, but I see horrendous behaviour going on with cyclists believing that the rules don't apply to them and then looking mortified as drivers have the guile to go through a green light when they've been riding up the wrong way...

Anyway. In terms of your kickstarter project, the idea has appeal in some senses but you really need to have a following to make a success of crowdfunding, that or the ability to build one through telling a story that people will want to be part of. It might be an idea to try and build your following and then come back to crowdfunding.

Personally I feel the criticism of the of 'made in London' then bringing in parts from elsewhere is harsh, but then ultimately fair as if I am a consumer I'd assume the parts came from London (in a naive kind of way) and so finding out otherwise, as I probably would, would disappoint me significantly. Not a show stopper but something to be wary of.

 

[bovine]

Spell check, spell check, spell check.

And personally I would rethink the bike logo. Although you are initially aimed at cyclists, by having a logo that contains a bicycle, you could potentially be limiting the market and scope in the future. If I were you I would go with something made more directly from your company name.

 

[Karimbo]

Looks good, website design is good.

Curious as to what makes your trousers so special? Any trouser can be rolled up can't it?

 

[MrBinary]

Curious as to what makes your trousers so special? Any trouser can be rolled up can't it?

I was thinking about the same thing, the guy is just obsessed with cyclists and clothes. Nothing really new on the market.

I like your logo and wish you all the best, even though your project was cancelled. How is it going now?

 

[Karimbo]

As a Londoner myself the bigger problem isn't making the cyclists more fashionable, it is making them more visible without having those distracting flashing lights.

I've never been close to having an accident with them myself, but I see horrendous behaviour going on with cyclists believing that the rules don't apply to them and then looking mortified as drivers have the guile to go through a green light when they've been riding up the wrong way...

I'm trying hard not to make this cyclist bashing but can't avoid this as you've broached on the topic a little bit. The only reason why cyclists are as safe as they are in London is because motorists are almost held to ransom by the authorities and insurance companies because any collision between a motorist and cyclist by default will be the fault of the motorist unless the motorist can prove themselves innocent.

Cyclists always make the case that every road user should ride a bike to understand the cyclists POV. I have some [little] experience as a cyclist in London, while I partially agree with that view. On the flipside I think cyclists should be taken through a training course on the motorists point of view and understand drivers blind spots and road craft.

I've encountered so many instances where cyclists litterally appeared out of nowhere almost as they were weaving between vehicles.

One of the biggest pet peeves I have is when cyclists try to filter through on both sides, one undertaking on the inside and one overtaken on the outside at the same time. You're literally switching from looking at your left wing mirror to your right wing mirror, barely glancing at where you should be looking which is at the road in front of you.

In most London roads the road just isn't wide enough to accommodate cyclists on either side of you. So what do you do?

Training would teach cyclists the drivers POV and how this type of road craft [or cyclist craft] is dangerous for themselves. Also give them perspective of how little visibiliy drivers actually have, especially on newer car which have smaller windows and larger pillars.

 

[toastking]

I think most people, cyclists, drivers and walkers are too self absorbed in London. I do think cyclists are the worst of the bunch, but I think even if you fixed bike riders 100% then you'd be so far from resolving the madness that it would've been a wasted effort.

Whilst you make some fair points, I struggle in my head to remember a cyclist that stopped at a red light in my local area, they all just seem to believe that the lights are for pedestrians and drivers only.

But then on the other side, on Tuesday a van driver went through a red light, ran up about 200m up the wrong way against a heavy flow of traffic and then wondered why everyone around him was angry with him for causing a traffic jam. People honk at the lightest of things so you can imagine it was quite a noise.

I am far too young to be this much of a misery guts. Can you tell I've had it with London today can you tell haha?

 

[Major_Grooves]

I'm trying hard not to make this cyclist bashing but can't avoid this as you've broached on the topic a little bit. The only reason why cyclists are as safe as they are in London is because motorists are almost held to ransom by the authorities and insurance companies because any collision between a motorist and cyclist by default will be the fault of the motorist unless the motorist can prove themselves innocent.

Is that actually the case? I knew it was so in places like Denmark and the Netherlands where the car would automatically be at fault, but didn't think it applied here.