Crowdfunding and Brand Differentiation Has Not Yet Been Investigated, Leading to a Knowledge-Gap in Academic Literature

Brand differentiation development and successful crowdfunding

Name Malcolm Healey Student number 911012314030 Marketing and Consumer Studies Major Consumer Specialization Management, Economic, and Consumer Studies Chair Group Marketing and Consumer Studies (MCB) Supervisors Andres Trujillo-Barrera, Frans Verhees University Wageningen University and Research Centre Course code MCB-80433 Submitted date 2015 Acknowledgements This research was supported by Wageningen University and Research Centre. I thank our colleagues from the Marketing and Consumer behaviour group who provided insight and expertise that greatly assisted the research, although they may not agree with all of the interpretations/conclusions of this paper.

I thank Andres Trujillo-Barrera for his supervision and feedback with regards to approaching, the topics discussed and in particular with regards to crowdfunding research, as well as improving the overall quality of the paper. I also thank Frans Verhees for comments that greatly improved the scope and direction of the paper, as well as his contributions on marketing theory.

I would also like to show our gratitude to the following interviewees: Martijn Haasbeek, Thomas Vles, Monique Jonkman, Sam van Tol, Mark Kulsdom, Sivan Breemhaar, Jasper Gabrielse, Peter van Akkeren, Jasper Deelen and Alexis Ramel for sharing their pearls of wisdom with me during the course of this research.

Contents Acknowledgements ...... ii Table of figures ...... iv Table of charts ...... iv Definition of key concepts ...... v 1. Introduction ...... 1 2. Literature Review ...... 3 2.1 Branding ...... 3 2.2 Differentiation ...... 4 2.3 Crowdfunding ...... 8 3. Conceptual model and research hypotheses ...... 10 3.1 Conceptual model ...... 10 3.2 Research Hypotheses ...... 11 4. Methodology ...... 12 4.1 Research purposes ...... 12 4.2 Research Strategies ...... 12 4.2.1 Theoretical Base and Literature Background ...... 13 4.3 Selection of Data Sources ...... 13 4.4 Data Collection ...... 14 4.5 Interview guide ...... 15 4.6 Data Analysis ...... 18 Sampling ...... 18 Interview setting ...... 18 Interview coding ...... 18 5. Case analysis ...... 20 Saint Basics ...... 20 VOF Afriek ...... 21 Spiazzo ...... 21 Poopypets ...... 22 The Dutch Weedburger ...... 22 Seepje ...... 23 Correctbook ...... 23 Haasbeek Herenhof ...... 24 Mamamo ...... 24 Retro Lindo ...... 24 6. Discussion ...... 26

iii

6.1 Theory vs Reality ...... 26 6.1.1 Branding ...... 26 6.1.2 Differentiation ...... 26 6.1.3 Crowdfunding ...... 27 6.2 Research questions...... 28 6.3 Comprehensive findings ...... 30 7. Conclusion ...... 32 7.1 Recommendations...... 32 7.2 Research perspective ...... 33 7.3 Limitations ...... 33 8. Bibliography ...... 35 9. Annex ...... 41 Annex 1 Interview transcripts ...... 41 Saint Basics ...... 41 Vof Afriek ...... 44 Spiazzo ...... 49 Poopypets ...... 55 Seepje ...... 61 The Dutch Weedburger ...... 67 Correctbook ...... 71 Haasbeek ...... 75 Mamamo ...... 79 Retro Lindo ...... 86 Annex 2 General comparison chart ...... 93

Table of figures Figure 1 Key concepts ...... v Figure 2 A-priori model Sources of brand differentiation of successful crowdfunding campaigns ...... 11 Figure 3 Interview guide ...... 15 Figure 4 Interview variables ...... 16 Figure 5 Platform types ...... 28

Table of charts Chart 1 Simplified comparison chart ...... 31 Chart 2 General comparison chart ...... 94

Definition of key concepts Brand elements Logos, symbols, packaging and slogans Brand equity The value of a brand, comprised of: perceived quality, brand loyalty, brand awareness and brand association Brand identity A way to differentiate the brand from the competitors and to make a promise to the customers (Aaker & Joachimsthaler, 2002; Ghodeswar, 2008) Brand symbolism Symbols and images used to identify the brand Company How the company is seen by competing companies and customers perception Competitive A condition or circumstance that puts a company in a favourable or advantage superior business position Contributors Participants in a crowdfunding campaign who donate, invest or pre-order Crowdfunding Funding a project or venture by raising many small amounts of money from a large number of people, typically via the Internet Differentiation The action of showing the differences between two comparable companies Direct Communication between a member of staff from the company and a communication customer of the company, with no intermediaries Essential product The attributes on which direct comparisons are based between products, attributes which influence product performance Intangible brand A common means by which marketers differentiate their brands with elements consumers (Park et al. 1986) and transcend physical products (Kotler and Keller 2006) Internal resources Resources over which the company has direct and full control within its structures Investors someone who provides (or invests) money or resources for an enterprise, such as a corporation, with the expectation of financial or other gain (Non-trivial) Characteristics of a raw material or finished good which make it distinct Product attributes from other products SME Small and Medium Enterprises with: - between 1 and 100 employees - SME has an annual turnover of less than 23 million Euro’s

Tangible brand Physical or concrete attributes or benefits elements Trivial product Attributes that "appear valuable but, on closer examination, is irrelevant attributes or trivial to creating the implied benefit Figure 1 Key concepts

1. Introduction Modern alternative finance platforms such as crowdfunding represent a growing market on an increasingly global scale, both with American platforms such as Kickstarter going international, as well as the creation of local variants the world over. Crowdfunding platforms can be a viable alternative source of funding for Small and Medium Entrepreneurs to grow their business. An example noted by Agrawal, Catalini, & Goldfarb (2013) is the “Pebble watch” raised over 10 million dollars, far beyond the desired 100 thousand dollar goal. As crowdfunding’s market share of business finance grows, so does their importance in further study in academic literature.

Studies of the campaign processes themselves are already becoming more commonplace. Giudici & Rossi-Lamastra (2013) find that “individual social capital has a significant positive effect on the probability to reach the target fund, while geo-localized capital has no significant effect”. Predicting the success of an ongoing campaign is also an area of interest. Etter et al. (2013) use Support Vector Machines to model Twitter interaction, as well as backer metrics, to predict within 76% probability of the success of a campaign within the first four hours. Mollick (2013) argues that both project quality and social network connections may be linked to campaign success.

Other aspects of crowdfunding and the consequences thereof have not yet been explored. The timeframe following the successful completion of a crowdfunding campaign is a good example where further research is needed. One as of yet unanswered question is, whether the act of successfully completing a crowdfunding campaign positively contributes to the brand differentiation of Small and Medium Enterprises (SME’s). This follows from the split in branding strategy literature between SME’s and larger organisations.

Branding is an important component of the competitive advantage required by SME’s to survive. If the branding processes of one company are inherently superior to a competitors branding abilities, it may even be an advantage in itself. Companies communicate their advantage to their customers as well as potential investors, through branding. According to Anselmsson, Bondesson, & Johansson, (2014) company and product branding can be viable competitive advantages which warrant a price premium for heterogeneous products in a market. Aaker (1996); Netemeyer et al., (2004) and Keller (2001) support this, adding that “Examples of general brand strengths and outcomes of brand image are price premiums, loyalty and satisfaction”. According to Aaker (1996, p. 107), “price premium may be the best single measure of brand equity available”.

Urde (1999) argues that brand orientation helps to create lasting competitive advantage, through an ongoing interaction with the customers. Sethuraman (2000, 2003) notes that sustaining a competitive advantage based solely on product quality can be difficult. Romanelli (1989) suggests that aggressive pursuit of competitive advantage, as opposed to slow and steady growth, increases SME survival chances. Quickly obtaining the limited resources can help withstand competitive pressures and assure growth.

Cetti and Corso (2014) coin the term “co-creation of value” in an SME context, including crowdfunding and branding as key assets to this goal. The notion that a brand-community is marked by a shared consciousness, rituals and traditions and a sense of moral responsibility, is interesting as it may be an extension or even consequence of a crowdfunding campaign. Muniz and O’Guin (2001) demonstrate that brand community affects brand equity. Brand equity can be divided into four components: perceived quality, brand loyalty, brand awareness and brand association (Aaker, 2014).

The overlap between crowdfunding and brand differentiation has not yet been investigated, leading to a knowledge-gap in academic literature. In theory, branding could make or break a crowdfunding

campaign, and the power of the crowd to fund a campaign may also influence the process of branding. By identifying the processes at play, the influence of crowdfunding on the branding processes the first steps to correct this knowledge gap are taken.

To bridge the knowledge gap for a new phenomenon, I use a qualitative approach to establish new ideas, concepts and their interrelations. To that end, it is necessary to approach those most knowledgeable on the topics of branding in Small and Medium Enterprises, and how to organize a crowdfunding campaign. As such, the owners of SME’s or the relevant brand managers are most appropriate to interview, in a semi-structured format. The topics covered are explained further in the methodology section.

The significance of this study primarily pertains to SME owners and/or brand managers who are considering utilising crowdfunding to grow their business. The possible consequences of involving a larger community in the financial affairs of a business, as well as its vision and direction should be known in order to make a cost/benefits analysis of whether to actually pursue a crowdfunding campaign.

The main question to be answered in order to bridge the knowledge gap is as follows: What influence does the completion of a successful crowdfunding campaign have on the brand differentiation of SMEs?

In order to fully answer this, it is necessary to deconstruct it into sub-questions, which focus on different aspects and concepts. The following sub-questions must be answered:

 Which crowdfunding platforms can be used and what are their characteristics?  How can SMEs differentiate their brands from competitors through crowdfunding?  How can the sources of differentiation be defined and measured according to managers?  Did SME managers notice changes to how their brand is differentiated after crowdfunding success?  Which aspects of brand differentiation were improved by crowdfunding in SMEs?  Did the crowdfunding campaign inspire or reveal new sources of differentiation for SMEs?  Following a successful crowdfunding campaign, can SMEs apply noted differentiators?

Therefore, the focus is on creating a model to illustrate which effects a Crowdfunding campaign has on the sources of brand differentiation. The a-priori model, is shown and elaborated upon in its own section of the Methodology. In investigating this proposed model, a series of semi-structured interviews were conducted with managers or representatives of SME’s that have successfully completed crowdfunding campaigns in the past 5 years. These expert opinions will then form the foundation of future research further exploring and deepening this new aspect of SME research.

2. Literature Review The literature review has been split into branding, differentiation and crowdfunding to illustrate the different disciplines being studied, and to identify their potential overlap. In each section the relevant constructs used as the foundation of the study are elaborated upon. Following this, the general body of literature on each of the three main concepts is shown to explain the context in which the constructs were chosen. 2.1 Branding Branding refers to creating an organization’s unique characteristics, for example corporate branding is the total sum of organizational signs that are being transferred to its various audiences. Rode & Vallaster (2005) found these to be the core organisational values, the behaviour of employees, all sets of symbolic representations regarding graphic designs and finally, all corporate communication towards internal and external stakeholders of the company.

Steiner (2003) found the factors vision, aesthetics, charisma, play and trust may influence “early corporate identity”. SME’s have a fundamental need to create reputation. This can be either generalized or local. A generalized reputation could be developed through symbolic activities as well as investing in both human and social capital. Petkova, Rindova, & Gupta (2008) note that forging positive relations with customers helps build a local reputation, as does investment in product quality. Bresciani & Eppler (2010) argue that brands have functional and symbolic value, while mentioning that a branding strategy can either be product-based or market- based.

Branding is therefore how an organization can build and project its identity to potential customers. It is composed of many different factors, some of which are under the company’s control, some of which are not. Brand as a construct, represents the fundamental undercurrent of this research. It is also a complex combination of factors, created and influenced by the company, warranting further study to determine its effects on and usefulness for SME’s. Firstly, the academic context in which branding has been established is explained, after which the focus shifts towards the applications of branding for SME’s.

Branding can be a resource to attain differentiation and increase market share. Bhide (1994) argues that brands can be utilised as a strategic resource to deter imitation. Brands and branding are noted as a proprietary asset that contributes towards competitive ability. Hunt (1999) and Weinzimmer (2000) posit that aspects of the company, attributed to brand in later literature, constitute strategic resources or even sources for growth. Interestingly, Hunt notes that a trademark is of value based on its brand equity, potentially becoming a sustainable competitive advantage.

Branding is not always its own purpose, sometimes it is the result of other company activities. Carson and Gilmore (2000) focus on branding, claiming that the activities and intentional directions set out by managers constitute a marketing resource. Furthermore, they note that competencies are dynamic concepts. On the other hand, Douglas et al (2001) address corporate branding and product branding by larger companies with the capacity to do so. While they focus on larger companies it adds avenues in further expansion of the literature both for large and small companies, as well as follow-up research into differences between SME’s and larger international competitors.

The processes behind brand building and brand growth are also of academic interest. Baldinger et al (2002) focus on a key component of branding literature: customer loyalty. Customer loyalty’s influence on brand value is indirectly measured through another concept, specifically its relation to market penetration. Boyle (2003) on the other hand, concentrates on deepening the understanding of brand as a concept. Linking societal values through common mythology to the development of brand

proposing further questions as to the implications of behavioural sciences on brand building. Interestingly, Boyle suggests that the brand image overtaking and even replacing the corporate or company image in entrepreneurial ventures may be beneficial, which opens up interesting questions considering the growth in publicity for some small and medium firms from 2010 onwards.

Branding used to be seen as a consequence of corporate strategy, but was gradually acknowledged as an important contributor to it. Krake (2005) reasons that underlying factors can influence how the brand is managed internally. Branding in this context is noted as an independent process, in a larger framework of corporate strategy. Following the implications for corporate strategy, Abimbola et al (2007) compare whether SMEs and larger companies had differing brand and reputation-based factors in order to differentiate themselves from their competitors. Bethon et al (2008) focus on brand management practices in SME’s and whether their implementation directly affects the SME’s performance. As opposed to Abimbola et al (2007), this narrows the field of vision to the implementation of Brand Management Practices, somewhat extending Krake's (2005) work.

Branding practices in small and medium enterprises may differ from those in larger companies according to current research. Burman et al (2009) for example investigate SME internal brand management practices, instead of comparing them to familiar models drawn from larger organisations. These findings show a simplified model of internal brand management, as well as a reduction in the number of factors that contribute to the parts in brand management. While this was interesting for existing firms, newly created firms have not been subject to many studies. Bresciani and Eppler (2010) find that young companies should use alternative methods to branding compared to those performed by larger companies, because of their comparative lack of resources and time-frame. Specifically, they recommend that young ventures should focus on their brand creation sequence and branding orientation classification as part of a two-step process towards establishing a new brand.

Beyond the literature of how companies specifically execute their own strategies, it is interesting to investigate how brands develop under the influence of specific individuals within companies. Centeno et al (2012) ask how brands grow, and who contributes the most to growth in SMEs. Following from earlier literature, they highlight the concepts of brand identity and brand differentiation as factors in SME brand growth. Brand identity and brand differentiation are noted as separate concepts, not as derived from other concepts, as noted by Abimbola (2007) and Hunt (1999). Specific attention is paid to the influence exerted by an owner/manager on brand budget for brand activities such as sales, brand communications and new product development. Carson and Gilmore (2000) focus on what managers learn after using their influence, as opposed their expectations of future activities. The findings suggest that brand owner/managers instil some of their personality traits into their brands. The sequential process of brand-building, may not be as straight-forward as previously thought, as SME brands are found to go through several hiatus/exploratory phases. Scott and Bruce (1987) and Mount et al (1993) argue that there are periods of instability in SMEs as they go through a growth process while learning new competencies

2.2 Differentiation This section first focuses on brand elements and communication as potential sources of direct differentiation. Then product attributes and internal resources are introduced as indirect sources of differentiation, after which the context in which these definitions have been made in literature is explained. In modelling the elements constituting a brand, Chernatony and Riley (1998), note a divide between tangible/visible elements and intangible elements which inspired the direct and indirect sources of differentiation as shown in the a-priori model in section 3.1.

Two main strategies for differentiation are aggressive pursuit of low-cost strategies by decreasing cost base relative to competitors or offering a product or service perceived as unique by consumers.

Weinzimmer (2000) notes that differentiation strategy can be an important weapon in resource advantage theory and branding as an aspect of marketing. Feeser and Willard (1990) state that competitive advantages can exist in the forms of increased customer awareness and brand loyalty. Weinzimmer specifically mentions that “Romanelli (1989) suggested that aggressive organizations had a better chance of surviving, because aggressive firms will acquire the resources necessary to withstand competitive pressures and achieve growth. Thus, aggressive strategies should lead to increased growth”.

Brand elements Definitions of brand elements differ among academics, yet ideas are consistent, in that they contribute to extra perceived value of the company by association with the brand. For example, Bailey and Schechter (1994) argue that name, logo, colours, brand-mark, plus advertising slogan are part of the brand. These are the most prominent examples of tangible elements of a brand. Keller and Lehman (2004) support this, stating that brand elements such as logos, symbols, packaging and slogans play an important branding role. They note that brand elements which contribute to brand equity must have memorability, meaningfulness, aesthetic appeal, transferability, adaptability and flexibility over time, as well as legal and competitive predictability and defensibility.

Superior performance by firms enables companies to create proactive and reactive innovations to increase performance. An example is a trademark, which can secure the value of association with an established company or product brand, for one company. Hunt (1999) notes: “A trademark is a resource when its brand equity promotes effectiveness by providing consumers more value”.

Brand elements can be abstract, as noted by Vranesevic & Stancec (2003). They define market brand value as linked to the consumers’ memory, therefore a more positive reaction to the elements of one marketing mix, compared to those of another mean higher market value. The brand value noted here consists of brand name and/or logo, as well as other elements designed to communicate uniqueness of the product.

In addition, a brand is not a static concept, instead developing over time. During these brand building processes, different phases can exert different kinds influence, depending on the external circumstances. For example, Centeno et al (2012) note that the exploratory phases of brand building usually involve experimentation as well as trial and error activity in a quest to learn. Such phases help SMEs to develop new skills and knowledge, potentially for marketing purposes which in turn help them move on to the next brand- building phase.

Communication Communication in and of itself can represent a source of differentiation. This depends on the medium of communication being utilised, such as digital or traditional media, as well as the organisational views on how to communicate. Centeno et al (2012) note open communication as a key value among SME’s. Both Lechner (2002) and Drumm (2002) argue that start-ups are characterized by an unstructured communication infrastructure, a small business network and a strong personal influence of the founder himself. Payne et al (2007) note that, frequently, it is the customer who is willing to open the communication with the firm. For obtaining more information about the product/service, or for giving feedback and increasing the ‘collective knowledge’.

While larger organisations have many resources available to review whether their branding campaigns cultivate the right effects among their target audience, SME’s often do not have this luxury. Therefore, they must make choices as to how important actively seeking out feedback from their customers is. Mitchell, Hutchinson, & Bishop (2012) argue that it is important for owner managers to proactively

seek to assess customer interpretation of brand meaning, in order to maximise the effectiveness of SME brand resources in general. Louro and Cunhan (2001) recommend that owner managers adopt principles of wider large organisational branding, such as focus on the consumer, because ultimately, consumers interpret brand meaning.

Marketing for smaller firms is inherently different from that of larger companies. Previous literature assumes that SME’s show the same marketing behaviours, but to a lesser degree because of financial restrictions. Coviello et al (2000) found that smaller firms tend to be more relational, emphasising direct relationships with specific customers. The distinction in levels of formality is noteworthy, with smaller firms being much more informal. In addition, smaller firms are much more dependent on their networks. Gilmore et al (2006) define SME marketing as an extension of networking activities of managers, which can help raise the competitiveness of SME’s in crowded markets.

A crowdfunding campaign in and of itself is in fact one giant communication exercise. This potential large scale exposure, as well as how the company reacts to it is by definition a differentiator from competitors who have not engaged in a similar campaign. Moreover, Härkönen (2014) shows that the crowdfunding campaign can be a source of valuable lessons and increased visibility for future marketing. Successful completion of a campaign may not lead to factually reaching the intended target group outside of the campaign. The first step in post-campaign marketing can be seen as fulfilling the promises made and how this is done, which is especially relevant for pre-selling funding models. If the raised amount is far above the requested amount, this may create extra pressure on the company. Possible consequences for failing to deliver on promises could be legal action. Maintaining contact with the funders post-campaign can be an important asset. Communities can be formed around the final product.

Product attributes Naturally, one of the most important aspects of differentiation is the comparison of product attributes between two competing products. This can comprise physical product attributes such as, touch, feel, weight, but also subjective, non-rational ideas. Centeno, Hart and Dinnie (2012) for example, note that brand differentiation is based on product differentiation following from interviews in which brand owners attributed brand differentiation to product ‘newness’.

If an easily implemented trivial attribute is offered, it can help service providers gain competitive advantage over their competitors. Dalman & Min (2014) state that this can allow managers to be more creative and stay competitive in the market. This effect seems more pronounced in hedonic service categories compared to the utilitarian categories.

Entrepreneurs constantly need to formulate superior strategies, as well as identify new business opportunities. Crowdfunding may be a new avenue for information acquisition and utilization thereof should not be a one-time event. Keh et al (2007) note that utilisation of this information should be an ongoing process through day-to-day interactions with customers, suppliers, and other business associates. Keh et al (2007) and Weinzimmer (2000) agree that entrepreneurial willingness to dominate competitors through a combination of proactive and aggressive moves, can be more effectively realized by acquiring and using information about customers and competitors. Crowdfunding presents an opportunity to test newly acquired information and market opportunities while minimizing business risk.

Internal resources In order to compete in an existing and possibly saturated marketplace, companies must offer different value propositions, to entice customers. Competitive advantage is one of the core tenets of offering a

different value proposition, in essence, the ability to do something better for the same price, or at the same quality for a cheaper price. Hunt (1995) argues that competitive advantages lead to superior efficiency meaning that privately-owned firms are dependent on superior efficiency in resource allotments.

An example of a competitive advantage is relationship marketing towards customers. This behaviour can be learned by other SME’s; therefore, entrepreneurial thinking is not a lasting source of sustainable competitive advantage. Day, et al (1998) links successful and growing SME’s to entrepreneurial thinking for SME’s, which can be shorthand for a competitive advantage. Furthermore, they conclude that relationship marketing must be complemented with a creative, innovative and entrepreneurial management culture to obtain competitive difference.

Internal resources can also comprise company specific capabilities, which can only be leveraged by employees or specific business methods. Hadjimanolis (2000) defines such capabilities as: features of the firm and managerial skills forming organizational routines which lead to competitive advantage. In addition, the concept of competencies is noted as focused combinations of resources which enable firms to differentiate themselves from their competitors. Uniqueness, complementarity resources, inimitability, time dimension of resource accumulation, learning aspect and the interaction between resources represent descriptors that can be attributed to brands.

These company specific capabilities can also be derived from creative use of existing or unexplored resources. Effectively utilizing resources that competitors have no knowledge of, or insufficient capacity to properly utilize, can lead to differences in product or company quality. Drucker (2011) for example, notes that competitive advantage can be created through utilising demographics, changes in perception and new knowledge. Paying attention to leads that come before likely demographic shifts, can lay the foundations for future advantageous positions. Utilising new knowledge comes from careful analysis of all necessary factors, then selecting a clear focus for strategic position and finally managing the risk involved. Gassmann & Keupp (2007) posit that, SMEs are advised to use social networks in order to utilise their potentially specialised knowledge, in order to realise performance gains.

Another major implication is that the crowd can be utilised after the initial campaign, either for further financial contributions, or giving further direction and ideas to the company. Finally, crowdfunding can be the springboard for further financing from institutions that previously took little or no notice of the development of the company. This in itself can be a complicating factor. Marketing by the crowd can be an interesting possibility: Buysere (2012) believes crowdfunding turns the investors into brand ambassadors. Di Pietrantonio (2014) argues that investors who may not directly contribute to the company's operations can be a great asset for marketing purposes, visibility and product endorsement.

2.3 Crowdfunding Literature on crowdfunding is fairly recent in nature, since the platforms began taking off in 2010. Trends are beginning to develop in the literature, as the body of research continues to grow monthly with the rise of crowdfunding platforms.

While in the early stages of research, significant attention has been given to the monetary aspects of crowdfunding. Naturally there are more areas of research to be explored in crowdfunding campaigns, besides the obvious amounts of money donated on average, and the total sum of money to be raised. Certain signals given off during a campaign are shown to encourage funding. For example, Ahlers et al (2012) note that signalling in equity crowdfunding shows that measurable phenomena can be isolated through quantitative means on crowdfunding platforms. Giudici & Rossi-Lamastra (2013) show that individual and territorial social capital may be determinants of success, illustrating the complex nature of predicting crowdfunding success. Mollick (2014) shows social capital and preparedness are the first factors to show a positive correlation with project success. These “quality signals” play a role in project outcomes. Another notable finding is the geographical proximity of the average donation; further distances show more chance of success.

The type of platform on which the crowdfunding is conducted also exerts an influence on its potential success and perception, however this field of research is not extensive yet. Ga (2013) notes the case of CircleUp, where he found that investors with experience in building and marketing consumer brands can become informal advisers to business owners. Through partnerships with corporations such as General Mills, companies may attract larger investors or even potential mergers earlier than before. Also, businesses that raise money on crowdfunding portals must disclose relevant financial information; for companies seeking more than $500,000, that includes audited figures.

Crowdfunding in and of itself, may have greater repercussions for business than initially assumed. One would assume the monetary impact is the first and foremost effect that crowdfunding will have, but depending on the platform utilised, greater changes may take place, such as in the structure of the business. For example, Stemler (2013) noted that companies may need to amend their articles of incorporation, bylaws, or operating agreement, or change their business’ corporate form completely. “For example, if a business is classed as an S-corporation, no more than 100 shareholders are permitted; therefore, the corporation must be reorganized to form either a C-corporation or a limited liability company (LLC)”. Any changes to company structures may have tax consequences which must be explored.

The crowdfunding campaign can also represent the start of a series of changes in company policy. Lessons learned and feedback given during or after the campaign can provide interesting prospective future directions. For example, Cetti & Corso (2014) investigate the crowdfunding campaign as a tool to implement the ‘co-creation of value’ theory and to increase the customer loyalty to the brand. This can mean the creation of a brand community through two-way communication with the customers, for information sharing and integration of stakeholders/customers based on competences in the development of the product/service. The investigated campaigns succeeded in enhancing the loyalty and trust of the investors that also became ‘ambassadors’ of the brand. Implementing a combined crowdfunding campaign with crowdsourcing ideas may be more suitable for applying the co-creation of value.

The influence of social media is not to be underestimated for crowdfunding, both its success and future influence. Moisseyev (2013) coined the term “social media index of approval” by utilising signalling and prediction models to quantitatively link the success of a crowdfunding project to the number of Facebook likes. This appears to confirm that the influence of social media is measurable and quantifiable according to Etter et al (2013). Through these likes, continuing bonds may be established

between the follower and the project manager/owner as likes do not disappear after a certain time. Mollick (2014) argues that Crowdfunding can be a way to study online communities’ influence on the creation of new ventures, as well as a tool for the study of nascent entrepreneurial ventures. This is because both failed and successful projects can be studied on the same platform. Crowdfunding provides an empirical setting where a wide range of nascent ventures are more easily compared, and thus can serve as a fruitful way of testing and extending existing theory.

Changes may even be occurring in the structure of the markets by changing the nature of differentiation between companies. Belleflamme et al (2014) argue that crowdfunding can generate advantages over traditional funding because of price discrimination, which results in expansion of the market. On the one hand, crowdfunding can be advantageous in offering an enhanced experience to some consumers and, thereby, allowing the entrepreneur to practice a form of behaviour-based price discrimination, which can increase profits by extracting a larger share of consumer surplus. On the other hand, the disadvantage is that the entrepreneur is limited at first, by the amount of capital required to be raised. This may have a distorting effect on the entrepreneur's price discrimination strategy. Miller et al (2009) show that firms can benefit by making some individuals promoters of their new products. Belleflame et al (2014) argue this to be the case, if the crowd shares profits with the entrepreneur.

Crowdfunding is increasingly being researched as its value in global markets increases at a rapid pace. The study of the consequences of crowdfunding however, have so far lagged behind. Stemler (2013) and Ga (2013), so far have provided the most concrete conclusions as to post-campaign effects on the companies that undertake them, even though these are focussed mainly on the legal ramifications. The most notable study into post-campaign effects studies the broader implications for company processes, notably the co-creation of value, as a response to crowdfunding success (Cetti & Corso, 2014).

3. Conceptual model and research hypotheses The proposed model was inspired by commonalities and shared concepts of the five phases of brand building, the atomic model of the brand and the conceptual model of small business brand orientation models constructed by Centeno, Hart, & Dinnie (2012); de Chernatony (2001) and Hirvonen & Laukkanen (2014) respectively. Their models focus on the growth and development of brand equity, of which brand orientation and identity are core concepts. The model noted later in this section is proposed as supplementary to those models, indicating possible influences a successful crowdfunding campaign could exert.

Brand orientation is noted as the process in which steps are taken to build brand identity as noted by Hirvonen & Laukkanen (2014); Baumgarth (2010) and Merrilees (2008). Brand orientation, then represents an ongoing process which is evaluated and reengaged when the brand identity is investigated. This sequential process of brand-building, did not appear to be straightforward as SME brands went through hiatus / exploratory phases according to Centeno et al (2012). 3.1 Conceptual model The a-priori model suggests that successful completion of a crowdfunding campaign may contribute to a company’s ability to differentiate. Differentiation is necessary to obtain competitive advantage, for example by utilising changes both within an industry or sector and outside of the industry as stated by Drucker (2011). Differentiation can occur directly and indirectly. In a direct sense, two sources of differentiation are proposed: Brand elements and communication with customers. The indirect sources of differentiation are Product/service attributes and internal resources.

Communication, brand elements, product attributes and internal resources are may be mediators for the expression of an increase in perceived brand differentiation. From the outset, it is inherently difficult to attribute causality, based on the subject matter as well as the interview methodology, the paper better resembles an investigation of the different sources of differentiation of successful crowdfunding campaigns.

The possibilities of change in brand differentiation are shown, but it is conceivable that not all sources of differentiation will develop in a positive sense. Therefore, the sum of seemingly positive change in sources of brand differentiation should be greater than the amount of sources that remain constant or even decline for the successful campaign to result in a perceived net-benefit of brand differentiation. The sum of positive change in this model cannot be directly quantified due to the qualitative nature of research, therefore it is assumed during the interviews that noted “increases or improvements” represent a net gain, per topic. Managers and owners can then evaluate which sources of differentiation may change, and align their strategy to maximize the possible changes in sources of differentiation.

It may also help owners reflect on which aspects of differentiation they already recognize and acknowledge as working to their advantage, as well as help them identify sources of differentiation which had not previously been thought of. This can help them build and sustain market share in a limited and often crowded market.

Brand elements such as logos and symbols (Nike's swoosh and McDonalds' golden arches), packaging (Coke's contour bottle and Kodak's yellow and black film box), and slogans (BMW's "Ultimate Driving Machine" and VISA's "It's Everywhere You Want to Be") play an important branding role as noted by Keller & Lehmann (2004). These help contribute to the consistency of the marketing message, which is communicated to customers and partners.

Figure 2 A-priori model Sources of brand differentiation of successful crowdfunding campaigns

Bearing in mind that this research is of a qualitative nature, the supposed model relies to a degree on the assumption that the factors noted are endogenous to the model. Based on the answers of the managers and owners, the factors were evaluated as to whether they are endogenous to the model, or whether they are in fact exogenous and not as strongly linked as thought. To that end, follow-up research could attempt to quantitatively establish the degree of interrelation between the factors. 3.2 Research Hypotheses Due to the descriptive and exploratory nature of this research, the approach of setting out a hypothesis to test is somewhat contrary to the purposes of exploring the connections between concepts. As such the focus in the model is then on the arrows, which represent the possibility of a connection. To be established by owners and managers.

To better distinguish these suspected effects, brand differentiation has been separated into indirect and direct sources of differentiation. Direct sources of differentiation are tangible, visual elements of the name, logo, and product design as the components of a brand, without much discussion of deeper relationships in the structure of the brand system. Indirect sources of differentiation are intangible to consumers and contribute to the beliefs and meanings created in the minds of consumers, according to de Chernatony & Riley (1998).

4. Methodology This chapter establishes the fundamental elements which comprise the research design, as well as explaining the scientific method utilised for the eventual analysis and discussion.

4.1 Research purposes This research has 3 main purposes:

- To explore how brand differentiation in Small and Medium Enterprises is developed from successful crowdfunding campaigns. This will be valuable for companies considering a crowdfunding campaign, or establishing ways to differentiate their brand. Mcgivern (2009) posits that exploratory research “can be used to develop propositions and hypotheses for further research, to look for new insights or to reach a greater understanding of an issue”. Developing propositions and hypotheses to explain the relatively unknown concepts which impact crowdfunding and branding is why an exploratory method was chosen. Examples of concepts which impact the crowdfunding-branding connection are post-campaign customer loyalty, interaction with contributors during and after the campaign, and post-campaign company initiatives.

- To evaluate managers’ interpretation of the impact of a crowdfunding campaign on the aspects of brand differentiation of Small and Medium Enterprises. The managers’ interpretation of the impact is based on the questions posed during the interview, on the notable changes that were implemented by the company. In asking these questions directly to managers, Centeno et al (2012) argue that it is possible to identify whether common factors suffice according to literature, or if new insights can expand on existing models which note the importance of brand differentiation.

- To evaluate managers’ opinions of whether sources of differentiation are affected positively or negatively by successful completion of a crowdfunding campaign. Managers can then better anticipate in which ways the differentiation of their brand may change in future, perhaps beyond their concrete plans. They can then evaluate whether these perceived effects are worth the trade-off of completing a crowdfunding campaign.

4.2 Research Strategies The goal of this chapter is to expand upon the reasoning behind the approach taken and the procedures thereof to answer the research questions. Furthermore, the validity and reliability of these methods and their bearing on the overall research is discussed.

A deductive procedure was followed. Katz (1983) notes that “in a deductive approach we speculate up front, in advance of fieldwork, about what it is we think we will find and we set out in the research to test this theory or hypothesis or idea.” The hypothesis is that a successfully completed Crowdfunding campaign may positively increase the amount of brand differentiation in SME’s, by contributing to increases or decreases of sources of differentiation as noted in literature. This is based on a-priori reasoning, as opposed to first noticing a measurable phenomenon and quantifying it. Following Katz’ reasoning, the research and approach to the analysis have been designed to verify whether this a- priori reasoning has any merits. In doing so, we move from the general to the specific in deductive reasoning. This means moving from an idea, general hypothesis or theory on what may occur, to specific observations to verify whether expectations are fulfilled according to Katz (1983). McGivern (2009) states that this approach is common in quantitative research and among some qualitative who refer to it as analytical induction.

There are no current quantifiable frameworks with which to measure this relatively unknown combination of concepts. Therefore, it is first necessary to identify what can be quantitatively measured later on. At this stage a quantitative research on the proposed topic “may fail to meet most quantitative requirements for representativeness and sufficiency of sample size to allow statistically meaningful results” according to Berg & Lune (2012). 4.2.1 Theoretical Base and Literature Background Firstly, the theoretical base is addressed. In a qualitative research perspective, Hagan (2006) and Silverman (2006) argue that a theory can be “a general and more or less comprehensive set of statements that describe different aspects of some phenomenon”. The phenomenon being described is the perception of brand differentiation in Small and Medium Enterprises. The theory being posited is that an influence is being exerted on the aforementioned phenomenon by the external factor Crowdfunding. To test whether that is the case, the theory must first be analysed based on the parts of which it consists. Berg & Lune (2012) specify that the parts of a theory are known as concepts; the symbolic, or abstract elements representing objects, properties or features of objects processes or phenomenon.

In order to come to a concise definition of the theory being discussed, it is vital to define the concepts which contribute to it. To that end each concept is subject to conceptual ordering, from abstract to the concrete. These concepts were utilised from existing literature where possible, for example, Keller & Lehmann (2004) define “brand elements” as: logos and symbols (Nike's swoosh and McDonalds' golden arches), packaging (Coke's contour bottle and Kodak's yellow and black film box), and slogans (BMW's "Ultimate Driving Machine" and VISA's "It's Everywhere You Want to Be") play an important branding role .

Brand differentiation in Small and Medium Enterprises constitutes a body of work that is largely seen as a separate entity, compared to the study of brand differentiation in larger companies, as of the last 15 years. The growing body of work necessitates qualitative studies to introduce new theories and hypotheses, as well as research methods, in order to develop a deeper understanding of the field. These can then be quantitatively tested to verify their validity.

4.3 Selection of Data Sources Due to the qualitative nature of this research, the sources from which to collect data were limited. Therefore, the majority of data was collected from a multi-case study, given in the form of semi- structured interviews with SME managers, as well as a literature review for further proof of concepts and new insights. The literature review was conducted both digitally, through the use of search engines such as Google Scholar, LexisNexis and Scopus, whereas the analogue literature review shall largely be conducted through the WUR-library (specifically the Leeuwenborch and Forum buildings).

Semi-standardized interviews involve the implementation of a number of predetermined questions and special topics. These questions are typically asked of each interviewee in a systematic and consistent order, but the interviewers are allowed the freedom to digress according to Berg & Lune (2012). Gubrium & Holstein (2003) note that due to the relatively small amount of interview candidates, as well as their specialised knowledge, the questions of the interview must be standardised towards the context of the interview, in order to reflect the awareness that individuals understand the world in varying ways. As opposed to a questionnaire, interviews are practical when answers require explanation, or when the wording of the answers cannot be determined beforehand. Emans (2004) remarks that the interview provides a way of circumventing these issues, with its options of probing and unstructured follow-up questions. In this context, the specific ways in which company or brand managers understand the world of brand building must be put into context, so as to extract the most relevant information. Another motivation to choose an interview in favour of a questionnaire, is that

the burden of work is better alleviated from the respondent, due to just answering orally, as opposed to having to fill out multiple open questions according to Emans (2004).

The flexibility of semi-structured interviews permits the posing of a series of regularly structured questions on the one hand, argue Berg & Lune (2012), which allows comparisons across interviews, while simultaneously pursuing ideas spontaneously initiated by the interviewee.

In order to maximise the validity of the proposed interviews, the data selection was limited to try to capture as much appropriate data as possible. The Dutch definition of SME’s was used, with additional conditions pertaining to crowdfunding:  SME’s must have between 1 and 100 employees  SME has an annual turnover of less than 23 million Euro’s  SME’s must have successfully completed their crowdfunding campaign on a Dutch platform, or otherwise international platform accessible to Dutch businesses.  Interview held with Owner, overall manager of SME or SME brand manager  Companies active/based in the Dutch market These specific requirements are meant to ensure that the collected data represents common aspects present in the Dutch crowdfunding markets for SME’s.

4.4 Data Collection The specific data collected in this research is as follows:  primary data, directly collected by the researcher composed of: o semi-structured interview with the overall manager or brand manager within the company. (A semi-structured interview was chosen to be able to focus on the direct and indirect sources of differentiation, as well as leaving room for the managers to bring their own insights). Answers of the interviewees are not bound to a specific length of time, or content. Interviews are conducted preferably by Skype/phone call.

 Secondary data, collected by another party and used directly/without alterations (definition). Examples of secondary data may be: o Internal company data showing growth, revenues or brand values as communicated to the researcher during the interview. o Data collected in other research projects, which may be referred to in the context of this research project, with no further interpretation. o Company presence on the crowdfunding platforms, such as quotes or reports, used as direct citations.

 Tertiary data, which is secondary data as interpreted and expanded upon by other researchers o five phases of brand building Eric Centeno et al (2012) o the brand orientation model Hirvonen & Laukkanen (2014) o the atomic model of the brand Leslie de Chernatony (2001)

4.5 Interview guide The methodology described here is based on the design of an interview guide, which has been divided into 10 steps as specified by Emans (2004). The first step to establishing an interview guide which will provide the questions and overall structure for the interview is defining the required information otherwise known as the conceptual variables. These stem from the overall purpose of the research, in the form of the research questions. As stated earlier in the report the goal is to determine whether the process of successfully completing a crowdfunding campaign influences the brand differentiation of SME’s. However, such a broad goal cannot be answered directly, necessitating the need to separate it into components to better supply answers of components which contribute to a worthwhile whole. This question must therefore be broken down into its component variables. This is shown in figure 3, as the question is divided into eight variables.

Name Set of objects Set of values Small and Medium The interviewed companies - Number of company employees Enterprises - Size? Influence (Brand) Managers - Managerial position (Owner, or general manager or brand manager) Brand value Value of brand to the Company brand elements: interviewed company - Logo Consistency of message - Motto Association with company - Vision - Slogan Product Product attributes - Essential attributes differentiation - Trivial attributes Company Competitive advantages - Culture differentiation - People - Processes Crowdfunding Companies which utilised - Types of crowdfunding platforms platform use crowdfunding - Utilisation of crowdfunding Campaign process Activities considered and - Consideration of crowdfunding engaged in during the - Campaign planning crowdfunding process - Investor interaction - Promotion of company Campaign reaction Activities and perceived effects - Adaptations to activities made as a of successful completion of the direct result of the campaign campaign - Increase/decrease in company sales? - Degree of interaction with customers since campaign (Facebook, Twitter) - General noted changes - Product/company brand association Figure 3 Interview guide

At this stage the conceptual variables have been defined. These represent the information need of the interviews. Based on the information need, which has been split into both objects and values, this must now be further specified into indicators for the conceptual values. To do that, each conceptual value is assigned Indicator values which represent a part, or preferably as much as possible of the conceptual value which can be answered. For each conceptual value that could not be directly accounted for with a single indicator value, it was split into sub-variables, which together represent a composite indicator of the conceptual value. Below, the conceptual variables are numbered according to which overall

variable from figure 3 they represent, in the second column the Indicator or raw variables are specified. These raw variables may be combined in some questions, if they can be answered distinctively.

# Conceptual variable Indicator/raw variable 1. 1) Interviewed company Company employees 2. 1) Interviewed company Yearly Sales 3. 1) Interviewed company Number of product lines 4. 2) Managerial position Position of interviewee at the time of crowdfunding and at the time of the campaign 5. 3) Company brand equity Self-assigned value of brand name 6. 3) Company brand equity Self –assigned value of logo 7. 3) Company brand equity Self-assigned value of slogan/motto 8. 3) Company brand equity Believed/noted consistency of message 9. 4) Product attributes Essential product attributes 10. 4) Product attributes Trivial product attributes 11. 5) Internal competitive advantages Company culture 12. 5) Internal competitive advantages Quality/Fit of employees in company 13. 5) Internal competitive advantages Perceived efficiency of company processes 14. 6) Crowdfunding platform Types of crowdfunding platform and details of arrangement considered 15. 7) Campaign strategy Pre-determined or improvised during the campaign 16. 7) Degree of investor interaction Dedicated personnel for this task 17. 7) Degree of investor interaction How often investors were interacted with 18. 7) Promotion of company Activities specifically designed to promote the company itself 19. 7) Establishing the product Activities specifically designed to raise awareness for one specific product 20. 8) Internal reaction to campaign Adaptations to activities made as a direct result of the campaign

21. 8) Increase/decrease in company Sales differences on a quarterly basis sales? 22. 8) Interaction with customers since Degree of direct communication with customers campaign

23. 8) Product/Company brand Degree to which brand is associated more with either association the company itself, or one of its brands 24. 8) Communality with original vision Degree to which the company has changed compared to its original conception 25. 8) General noted changes Non-specific comments that do not fit into other categories Figure 4 Interview variables

As evidenced by the structuring of the information above, the information need is centred on eight conceptual variables, each of which can be divided into sub-variables. This will hopefully render the data easier to interpret and sort for further classification and comparison of the answers. After the classification and comparison between answers, eventual comparisons can be drawn, with which the original hypothesis can be compared.

In future research, after further qualitative research has been conducted to establish whether this is a worthwhile base for qualitative study. This would require a strong correlation and was interesting to see whether the results adhere to this expectation. Based on the variables list as presented before, the questions which were asked in the interview are as follows: 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? 2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? 3) How do you value the company or product brand? (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) 4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? 5) What are the most important attributes of the product/service your company sells? 6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? 7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? 8) When people think of Saint Basics, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? 9) Did how the brand was before the crowdfunding campaign show significant differences with the first idea of the brand? In what way? When combining all of the aspects of the brand, the symbolism and the company perception, was it markedly different from the first plans? 10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? 11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? 12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? 13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors? 14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? 15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? 16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? 17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign (say 6 months after)? 18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? 19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? 20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? 21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? 22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? 23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on?

4.6 Data Analysis This section of the report specifies the sampling, interview setting and the coding used for the answers given in the interviews. Sampling Studying in depth the experiences and opinions of a very select group of entrepreneurs necessitated purposive sampling as opposed to random sampling. There was a limited pool of businesses that have successfully completed projects in the Netherlands. Factoring in the fact that the majority of these businesses were still very much involved in establishing their businesses, it was a reasonable assumption that not many companies would have the time, nor motivation to want to participate in the interviews.

I specified the criteria to select participants, which included business size, time since project completion and websites on which they ran their projects. Interview setting An interview guide was utilized to enforce a certain structure on the conversational semi-structured style of interviewing. Bowen (2010) notes that “more structure eases the researcher’s task of organizing and analysing interview data. It also helps readers of the research report judge the quality of the interviewing methods and instruments used”.

The interviews were all conducted by Skype/phone with the circumstances noted for each interview. The ability to monitor and control is somewhat lessened by Skype interviews, as it is still possible to see the other party, but not all the surroundings, such as behind the webcam. Even less control is possible through phone interviews. However phone interviews have their own advantages, such as lack of interviewee-interviewer interaction, thus giving more “natural” responses (Emans, 2004). Phone interviews were chosen primarily for convenience, as the companies willing to participate were spread geographically across the company, and the travel had the potential for causing interview problems. Interview coding The specific purpose of the interviews was to relate the experiences of the interviewees during crowdfunding, to the development of their brand differentiation. To fulfil this function, their responses to the planned questions required storage in a relevant, usable, and accessible form. This can be found in Annex 2 of the report.

Definitions of Coding Categories: For the purposes of evaluating the positive or negative effects of completing a crowdfunding campaign, a simple coding categorisation was utilised. As noted in the interview guide, the coding categories were first divided into direct and indirect sources of differentiation. Direct sources of differentiation were further sub-divided into Brand elements and communication. Indirect sources of differentiation were Product/service attributes and internal resources. Each category was defined so that a concrete example should not logically be relevant to two categories at the same time.

Category symbols were established for better analysis, though due to the binary nature of the variables, this was relatively straightforward. In the general comparison chart, each individual remark pertaining to each category has been noted, as well as numbered. The nature of each remark is denoted with a colour. Green represents a positive sentiment or evaluation, whereas red represents a negative or neutral sentiment or evaluation. Each remark also includes a numerical tag, to reference the question in the interview, which lead to the remark. The simplified comparison chart, derived from

the general comparison chart in annex 2 is condensed solely to the positive and negative nature of remarks.

The interviews were divided into questions, and follow-up questions regarding the development of factors contributing to brand differentiation. The initial intent was to only specify responses given to questions on the specific factors. Due to the non-linearity of some answers, and the tendency for the interviewees to view other broader situations as contributing to the developments, some answers for a specific factor referred to other factors, by comparison or as part of a larger narrative. To that end, each entire interview was reviewed for remarks on each factor, regardless of which question they pertained to. Each noted remark on a factor is then exclusive to other remarks, so that they are not counted multiple times.

The reliability of this research is somewhat difficult to test, as the new subject being approached does not yet have any developed research tools. Therefore, the best evaluation will come from follow-up research. Reliability can be approached however through evaluating the answers given to the questions. To evaluate the reliability, it is required to review whether the answers are consistent over time and arguably an accurate representation of the total population under study. To that end, the sources of the quotes, which indicate a positive or negative association with the brand differentiators, must be compared across answers. For example, question 3 according to the interview guide, was aimed at identifying the brand elements as a brand differentiator. Therefore, over all the answers which refer to brand elements, are compared, of which an overwhelming majority should originate from question 3. Twenty-two, of Thirty-five answers originate from question 3, for brand elements, showing that it only captured approximately 63% of possible associations, through the formulation of the question. (To be expanded for each individual differentiator, if the reasoning is sound).

Evaluation of validity is necessary to identify whether the results of an experiment really do measure the tested concept. To establish validity in this research it is necessary to decompose it in two components, external and content validity.

External validity is the extent to which the results of a study can be generalized from a sample to a population. This begs the question as to whether the interviewees are representative of SME’s in the Netherlands. Unfortunately, this aspect cannot be evaluated in great detail, due to the low response rate of SME’s. It is fair to say that while the sampling is diverse, such a small sample size cannot possibly incorporate all the different sectors that operate within the Netherlands. Unfortunately, there were not enough respondents within a specific sector to concentrate solely on extrapolating the findings for that sector reliably, leaving this hybrid concept as an establishing ground for future research. Noting the diversity within the sample, does aid the case of generalizing, especially when noting that brand differentiators showed concrete positive, or negative relations.

Content validity refers to the appropriateness of the content of an instrument. Based on the quality of the answers received, and post-research evaluation, the content validity was somewhat lacking, in regards to specifically asking whether the developments were a direct consequence of the crowdfunding campaign success. While this was corrected in follow-up questions, during the natural flow of the semi-structured interviews, having a more solid foundation for the questions may have helped narrow down the answers for analysis.

As somewhat noted in the paragraph on reliability, the newness of the developed instrument, in the form of an interview guide is open to debate with regards to its accuracy. In this specific context, follow-up research is necessary to gauge the accuracy, as at present the only comparison that can be drawn is, whether the constructed interview guide adheres to the principles of an interview guide, as established in previous literature.

5. Case analysis The following analysis is divided into two parts. First, some background on the company interviewed and the marketplace in which it operates, obtained from secondary sources, are given. The reason for the relatively short sections is the limited existence of each company up until its crowdfunding campaign. Often these companies start actually existing from the moment that the campaign is completed, after which they can begin selling their products and services, such as VOF Afriek and Spiazzo.

The second section shall give a summary of the interviews and their implications per company, followed by the noted changes in sources of differentiation of each company. The interpretation and analysis of all interviews relative to each other are explained in the discussion, chapter 5. The discussion will then be utilised for evaluating whether the theory has been supported or rejected by the research results. Saint Basics Following its company launch in 2010, Saint Basics had been growing slowly and steadily. From the outset, the idea behind the company was to offer clothing, not just greener in name, but in production and sourcing. The key idea was avoiding the pitfalls of modern production, such as outsourcing to the cheapest and quickest production centres, with no regard for the labourers. In doing so, the company had to establish itself as a premium brand. Over time the branding has been adapted to better reflect this, as the earliest iterations, implies “clean clothing” were noted to evoke association with detergent, or how to keep the clothing itself clean, as opposed to the underlying production. At present the message is being shifted towards being a “Saint”, to further push the message that in buying the product, a customer is performing a good deed, for themselves as well as the labourers in the value chain. Another important aspect of their current branding is their focus on style and being stylish, as opposed to the functionality that is generally associated with underwear.

The company decided to utilise crowdfunding as a way to further involve their customers while simultaneously expanding their product lines on offer. T-shirts and colour collections are now also on sale. The choice for the crowdfunding platform Symbid, was made based on the condition that investors also become co-owners of the company. This was one of their main promotional aspects. The investors and customers also gave suggestions as to further product lines, which the company is thankful for and seriously considering implementing. The original three founders of the company remain in possession of the controlling majority of the company.

Crowdfunding has offered the company new perspectives on future endeavours. Relative to brand differentiation, the company has not experienced many insights or changes in perception, with the exception of better utilising product attributes. Notably, brand elements, communication and company differentiation are viewed as developing organically within the company, as opposed to sudden changes attributed to the success of crowdfunding. The academic interpretation of internal resources itself was seen as a rather novel concept, as the company is constructed in such a way that it is not very comparable to competitors, let alone weighing the possible relative advantages.

VOF Afriek The company was launched in January 2014 after the successful completion of its first crowdfunding campaign to obtain sufficient start-up capital. The company has a very lean structure, in that only the two owners are official employees of the company. The activities such as production, transport and public relations are largely outsourced to freelancers in both the Netherlands and Rwanda. The original product line, consisted of hand-tailored blazers and shirts for men. Due to feedback they have expanded to include ties and bowties, with future expansions into women’s clothing and more product designs being considered. The company has made approximately 40.000€ revenue in its first year, and is anticipating a second round of crowdfunding to finance their broadening product offerings.

The crowdfunding campaign, performed on the oneplanetcrowd platform, has seen many benefits for the company. Though they are wary to attribute eventual changes exclusively to the campaign, it is acknowledged that positive effects have been seen. Arguably the most credible changes that can be attributed in part to crowdfunding are in communication and essential product attributes. Communication itself has not increased significantly, yet the crowdfunding platform itself represented a new layer of communications with which to further spread their message, and the methods of communication have been slightly altered, for example to utilise more audio-visual materials such as videos and photos on their website. Essential product attributes, saw positive feedback, especially with regards to their t-shirt offering, which encouraged expansion of the t-shirt line as well as formed a proof of concept for present activities. Brand elements and company differentiation were noted to have seen positive effects after crowdfunding, but this may be in combination with other factors. Crowdfunding was utilised as a vehicle to further elaborate company differentiation, as opposed to inspire further activities to differentiate the company. Notably the decision to hire a PR-firm was taken because of the success of the campaign. Finally, among the positive effects of crowdfunding, the company was appreciative of the received feedback on their brand elements, though they view the value of logo, mission and slogan as a combination instead of separate parts.

Internal resources and trivial product attributes did not experience positive changes or associations due to crowdfunding, instead remaining consistent, or otherwise showing no discernible change. During the interview however, interest for these two points were expressed, with possible applications and ideas further down the road. Spiazzo Spiazzo represents the launch of a new concept for an existing company. The first iteration was run as a lunchroom, in the same building, which was run by two partners who themselves manned the kitchen. The new concept is the brainchild of the original 2 owners, and a new third partner. A lunchroom focused on attracting business clients by day, and a restaurant focused on attracting local parents and their children by night. Estimates for first year are on track for revenues between 360.000€ and 500.000€. The new concept was launched, as of May 2015, following the renovations made possible by the successful crowdfunding, completed in January 2015.

Following the successful completion of their campaign, they were very enthusiastic about their findings and results. The most valuable result for the company was definitely the multiple aspects of improving internal resources of the company. Being able to operate with little to no debt from the outset, coupled with the new sources of information and advice at their disposal, gave significant perceived advantage over their competitors. Moreover, their increased press exposure, as well as the efforts of investors to act as brand ambassadors are clearly recognized as having contributed to a positive development of communication as a source of brand differentiation. Finally, essential service attributes are recognized as a potential source of differentiating, the most promising of these are partnerships with other businesses, which are already on the agenda for future rollouts. In recognising that their focus unique

selling points has been a major contributor to their current success, plans are being drawn up to further strengthen their focus and promotion.

The other sources of differentiation were noted to not be a top priority at present, due to being in the early stages of operation. It was specifically noted that the value of patents and trademarking of the name and logo are valued, but they have not been able to implement this so far. Trivial service attributes and specific activities to differentiate the company itself had not been considered or were found to be relevant at present. Poopypets Started in 2012 as a one-man company, to conceptualize in the idea for a disposable cat litter box. In February 2013 Thomas teamed up with Rick and together they developed a foldable construction for the Poopy Cat. Thomas and Rick agreed that a condition for any new product in today´s world should be sustainability. By utilising recycled cardboard and waste wood a sustainable, disposable cat litter box was created. The Poopy Cat was designed, patented and tested successfully during the summer of 2013.

The company established itself and began selling its own products. In 2014, however they saw an opportunity in crowdfunding as a promotional tool in and of itself. They utilised campaigns on both Kickstarter (USA) and KissKissBangBang (France) to introduce their products to a large market as quickly as possible, as well as to create a reverse cash-flow. This reverse cash-flow was deemed significant in the development of the company, as they received their revenue before having to actually produce the product, whereas typically, companies go sometimes months between making the products and receiving their payment. Contrary to the typical internet start-up that first requires funds before it can begin operations, Thomas and Rick had established Poopypets as a functioning and self- sustaining company before setting their sights on further expansion.

Following the completion of their campaigns, they have taken comments and feedback on board to attempt to expand their offering to include solutions for larger cats, as well as expand their product range. They have a somewhat different structure as they are already operating internationally, with each different country handling its own marketing and branding independent of the “main” brand in the Netherlands. The Dutch Weedburger The concept itself started as a documentary on changing food habits for a sustainable future. Due to the success of their documentary, co-founders Mark Kulsdom and Lisette Kreischer began developing a fully-fledged product. Having developed a working product, they first focussed on the markets, firstly they created their own market by using a food truck and travelling around selling their own product. Later they targeted festivals and eventually restaurants. Due to the upscaling, they had to adapt the product and experimented with changing and deconstructing the concept, but eventually decided that the complete burger concept was the best solution.

Following this, they decided to launch a crowdfunding campaign, primarily for a food-truck so that they could continue their selling and educational activities, but also partially for the attention. They noted that the company survival was not contingent on the success of the crowdfunding campaign, but that it would help spread the message.

The success of the crowdfunding campaign enabled them to upgrade their food truck far beyond original expectations, encouraging them to utilise it as the main point of marketing and promotion as they travel around the country. The hold regular workshops on sustainable foods and utilizing renewable resources, while still promoting and selling their burgers for use at festivals. Their main

takeaway from the crowdfunding campaign is the amount of personal effort that needs to be leveraged in order to establish a successful campaign. Personal networks and efficient utilisation thereof are key, to drawing in other potential investors. Seepje The company launched with a very specific vision in mind, creating positive value through their products, both in their use and through their own value chain. To that end they have utilised natural sustainable resources to develop laundry products. They first established the company and successfully sold their products on their own. After creating a working concept and establishing a customer base, they launched a campaign with the goal of developing and selling a liquid detergent product alternative to their already successful “shell” detergent product, which served as a replacement for traditional washing powder.

Their sustainable take on product development, as well as their aim to create positive social value throughout their value chain has proven to be a successful concept with their target audience. Useful feedback given during the campaign has been taken on board as well, such as reducing the number of laundry bags provided with their detergent products, and completely rethinking their product packaging at the insistence of their customer base.

They noted that the crowdfunding campaign in itself can provide extra positive media attention if the campaign itself is newsworthy. This could then contribute to the brand recognition as well as product accessibility, as mentioning the site where it can be bought may drive extra sales. Contrary to the thoughts of this research, they did not experience significant positive changes to their branding, besides the aforementioned changes to product attributes. Instead, they interpreted their success as confirmation of their goals and strategy and chose not to make specific changes. While they do recognize that some influence may have been exerted because of crowdfunding, they were hesitant to point out specific aspects that they could determine. Correctbook Correctbook is a one-man company, which outsources most of its production and design activities. Before the campaign, the owner had a specific idea of a small business, primarily operating out of a web shop format with a charitable aspect to every product sold. When the project was launched however, a large part of support came from the own personal network, in the form of business contacts, family and friends. The remaining investors/pre-orders gave him ideas which took his company in a different direction than expected. For example, expanding on the product range with supplementary accessories, to improve upon shortcomings of the previously sold products.

Another significant conclusion from the campaign was a refocus of target markets. Instead of the previous goal of individuals through the web shop, the business markets seem much more promising, not only for the volume of products sold, but the personal and engaged selling of the product, as opposed to passive activity online.

An important experience from the crowdfunding campaign was the involvement of the media. If the communications are not tightly maintained, to preserve a clear message, the media may misrepresent the company. This was the case where a newspaper or TV news item misinterpreted the goals of the company to donate products to education programmes in Africa. They mistakenly reported the company instead donating money to Africa, which to this day still leads to questions from customers and interested partners as to what happens to the money, when the company has never made a monetary donation.

Haasbeek Herenhof Perhaps the most interesting and arguably outlier case of this study, Haasbeek Herenhof was in fact a well-established company with dedicated clientele and long-standing reputation. Their campaign was not born from a desire to launch a new product or expand their current business. It was in fact to salvage it from a fire which had destroyed the business. Befitting of the different nature of the crowdfunding campaign, so too was the composition of the donors vastly different from the other interviewees. All donors were known customers of the business, not only that the desired amount was raised within two weeks, as well as having the option to double their campaign also fulfilled by their loyal customers.

Contrary to other companies, Haasbeek saw many improvements but primarily among its existing customers, as opposed to new or interesting developments from new clients and markets. This illustrated the nature of the campaign, which was very much focussed on the local community and known supporters, echoing the findings of Giudici and Rossi-Lamstra (2013) that individual and territorial social capital are essential for crowdfunding success. Haasbeek illustrated that having sufficient territorial social capital can prove a powerful tool to leverage. Mamamo The company launched last May, providing an interesting research case as the very existence of the company depended on the success of its crowdfunding campaign. Before the campaign was complete there were no contracts or agreements. The campaign was the sole opportunity for the company to establish itself at the time. That being said, the two partners had very well thought-out ideas on branding, and the different branding elements. They were much more aware of the importance of each individual factor, and focussed on very strongly establishing it before and during the campaign.

Interestingly, because of the lack of contracts and agreements, they could not show exactly which products they would sell, but could only give hints and indications instead. In spite of not being able to concretely show their intentions, the concept alone was enough to ensure crowdfunding success. In spite of the concept of combining a lunchroom or afternoon drink, with a toy shop being relatively unknown in the Netherlands. Especially the combination of focussing on attracting parents with their young children and the area in which they set up their business seems to form a winning combination.

Overall the evaluation of the effects of crowdfunding beyond they exposure and financial benefits were only slightly positive. Only one more positive comment was given compared to neutral or negative comments. Even then, it is still rather uncertain as to whether all of the positive aspects can be attributed directly to the crowdfunding success, as the relatively short time span which they have been open has already seen significant adaptations to the realities of maintaining a business and adapting to unforeseen circumstances. Retro Lindo Retro Lindo is a one-man company that has went through an interesting development cycle. The exception to this study, it is the only company that produces consumer technology, more specifically a gaming console/emulator. Interestingly the company has changed direction significantly several times during its existence, moving from a one-person company, to a partnership and back. The crowdfunding campaign itself, was typical of start-ups in that the product did not yet exist, and the campaign was necessary to realize it and create the first batch of products. To that end the pre-order model of Kickstarter was chosen, as well as for the fact that it is the largest and most well-known crowdfunding platform internationally.

The outlier of this study, the company actually stopped producing its products after its obligations from crowdfunding success were fulfilled, as the owner plans on significantly reworking and building the next version of the product. While the lessons learned from the campaign were interesting for this research, the implications of creating a one-off amount of products for sale in a crowdfunding had not occurred to this research nor has it been often reported in media. The implications for a new utilisation of crowdfunding in and of itself pose interesting questions for future research on further uses of crowdfunding.

As the aftermath of this campaign presents such a drastic change compared to the other campaigns in this research, it proves that the implications of success are not as uniform as previously assumed.

6. Discussion 6.1 Theory vs Reality This section considers the analysis of the interviews in relation to the theory expressed in the literature review. In doing so, the merit of the hypothesis based on the main research question and its sub- questions is evaluated. The structure followed, begins with a comparison between the theory and findings, which is divided into subsections based on the literature of branding, differentiation and crowdfunding respectively.

Then follows a comprehensive summary of the answers given during the interviews in table format, with which the research questions are answered. Each research question is addressed in its own paragraph, for purposes of clarity, though some necessarily refer to each other based on the observations during the interviews.

Based on the interviews, managers’ perceived influence of a successful crowdfunding campaign on brand differentiation of SME’s is evaluated, however, they were hesitant to expand on this or ascribe effects solely to crowdfunding success. The theory, while somewhat lacking on this topic, assumes well-informed and planned out actions from business owner/managers, in contrast to practice in SME’s. Terms and definitions held commonly in literature, while referring to larger businesses are not readily thought of by SME owner/managers. Only after specifically noting and defining the concepts, do owners recognize and recall their application of the concepts. 6.1.1 Branding Contrary to literature, interviewed managers and owners did not immediately recognize and acknowledge the different aspects of branding and brand-building activities. For example, when thinking of brands, the components of a brand were generally not considered until specifically pointed out and further investigated. When the topic of brand elements was introduced however, managers do recognize and expand on their own interpretations and applications thereof, with some seeing it as an activity to partake in after establishing initial success. Others worked from the premise that without aiming to construct a strong brand from day one, they could not operate their business to its potential. In spite of the differing views, the managers seemed to recognize that the crowdfunding campaign had a positive effect on their views of how they compose and express their brand, similar to Centeno et al’s (2012) findings on the exploratory phase of brand building.

Many findings from academic literature were echoed to some degree during the interviews. The most notable was that branding was perceived as product-based; most companies referred to product attributes as first differentiators from their competition, echoing the findings of Bresciani & Eppler (2010). Post-crowdfunding success was mentioned as a period of instability in SMEs, supporting Scott and Bruce (1987); Mount et al (1993) in noting that companies go through a growth process while learning new competencies. 6.1.2 Differentiation Following the interviews, it seems that there is a substantial divide between the academic understanding of differentiation and the practical application thereof by managers and owners. Sources of differentiation found in literature, do not correspond with managers’ first thoughts in a practical context. The divide seems to occur in the interpretation of which activities are the priority of the company. Bailey & Schechter (1994) and Keller & Lehmann's (2004) indications that logos, symbols, packaging and slogans provide substantial contributions to building brand value, were not volunteered but acknowledged after the fact. The answers implied that the brand elements were a result of other company activities, whereas research findings would suggest that first brand elements

are specifically designed for maximum results in promotional and company activities. This discrepancy could be explained by the fact that these companies are still relatively young and going through their trial and error phases, which Centeno et al (2012) suggest will result in the development of new skills and knowledge.

The findings on communication seem follow literature findings fairly closely. The interviewed parties almost unanimously agree that their open and dedicated communication represents an important source of differentiation in accordance with the findings of Centeno et al (2012), Lechner (2002) and Drumm (2002). It should be noted that this applies to direct communication with customers, either on questions about products bought, or people who contributed to the campaign and left feedback. When taking the marketing communication into account, the assumption that SME’s tend to be more informal as indicated by Coviello, Brodie & Munro (2000) was neither supported nor overtly disproved. Gilmore, Carson & Rocks's (2006) findings on the importance of networking seems to be a recurring aspect, with some managers attributing most of the campaign donations to the immediate company networks (notably Saint Basics, VOF Afriek, Haasbeek, Correctbook mentioned this). Härkönen's (2014) findings that successful crowdfunding can lead to the creation of brand ambassadors from satisfied customers and investors was enthusiastically echoed by the owners of Spiazzo and Haasbeek, and was even implied in the crowdfunding process of Saint Basics, suggesting further research may be worthwhile.

Product attributes seem to be the main source of differentiation, according to all interviewees, as well as product newness which was suggested to have an effect on the performance of the companies, as in the findings of Centeno et al (2012). Surprisingly, no note was made of focus on trivial attributes, which should give a creative and competitive edge at a low cost to owners according to Dalman & Min (2014). This seemed to be far from companies’ priorities at the time of interviews. Analysis and utilisation of buying behaviours and psychological profiles to better capture competitive advantage following from Keh et al (2007) was indicated to be a potential future endeavour, yet had seemingly not been indicated as an important activity during the interviews.

Internal resources as applied sources of differentiation were far from the norm. Features of the firm and managerial skills forming organizational routines suggested by Hadjimanolis (2000), as well as the utilisation of demographic trends to predict future shifts implied by Drucker (2011) did not occur in conversation, and were met with surprise upon introduction. Buysere's (2012) idea that crowdfunding turns the investors into brand ambassadors was very much echoed by Spiazzo, who even added that investors provide a new source of specialized knowledge which may prove beneficial further down the line. 6.1.3 Crowdfunding Giudici and Rossi-Lamstra’s (2013) findings that individual and territorial social capital are essential for success was seemingly echoed in interviews. The campaign itself hinged on having enough support from the network of the company or business owners, before taking it public. Interestingly this may suggest a positive effect between individual social capital and campaign success for all types of crowdfunding platform; equity based, gift/equity based combination, loan based as well as pre-order based.

The potential of investors to become informal advisors according to Ga (2013) was echoed and further supports existing literature by extending the findings to another crowdfunding platform. The possible necessity of changing the legal status of the company, following a crowdfunding campaign as suggested by Stemler (2013) has already been implemented as part of the equity-based platform Symbid, as noted by Spiazzo.

Cetti & Corso's (2014) findings on enhancing the loyalty and trust of investors to the point that they become ‘ambassadors’ of the brand was seemingly supported. This also seems to be the case for sharing information and integration of stakeholders/customers based on competences in the development of the brand, especially by Spiazzo, Saint Basics, Poopypets, Mamamo and Seepje. 6.2 Research questions This section attempts to answers the research questions based on the outcomes of the interviews. Firstly, the sub-questions will be reviewed and answered, so as to provide the best comprehensive answer to the main research question. Each question is addressed in its own paragraph.

Which crowdfunding platforms can be used and what are their characteristics? Four different crowdfunding platforms were utilised, and differed mainly in their structure as seen below in figure 5. Only one platform, Kickstarter, was not of Dutch origin.

The main considerations in choosing a platform varied depending on the needs of the business. The three main factors were country of origin of platform, financing type of the platform and the focus on sustainability. The country of origin, seems to be especially important to start-ups dependent on financing to be able to begin their business. This further implies that established companies, with intentions to expand to international markets may seek to utilize international platforms. This was echoed in remarks indicating a desire to utilise the largest, most well-known crowdfunding platform(s). The financing type of the platform was of particular interest, depending on the company structure, whether they wanted to begin the business based on pre-orders, or a loan that would be paid back to investors, or even selling a stake in the company to investors. Oneplanetcrowd in particular offered many different choices, whereas Symbid was specifically focussed on appealing to professional investors. For sustainable businesses, choosing a sustainable platform was both beneficial to their reputation and exposure to their target audience.

Platform Country of Origin Financing type Sustainability focus (Y/N) Crowdaboutnow NL Loan Y Symbid NL Equity sale / Company N restructuring Oneplanetcrowd NL Loan/Donation/Equity Sale/ Y Pre-order Kickstarter US Donation/Pre-order N Figure 5 Platform types

How can SMEs differentiate their brands from competitors through crowdfunding? In modelling the elements constituting a brand, Chernatony and Riley (1998), note a divide between tangible/visible elements and intangible elements which inspired the direct and indirect sources of differentiation as shown in the a-priori model in section 3.1. The interviews imply that the most common differentiators according to managers are brand elements (logos, symbols, packaging and slogans), the non-trivial product attributes (Characteristics of a raw material or finished good which make it distinct from other products), direct communication (Communication between a member of staff from the company and a customer of the company, with no intermediaries), and internal resources.

At the same time, SME interviewees imply being in possession of a set of unique organisational values driven by the personal values and vision of the brand owners as suggested by de Chernatony (2001). This sentiment was not echoed uniformly, as the owners and managers were divided on whether their

organisational values are an important component of hiring staff. Other original ideas or interpretations hereof were not volunteered by managers.

Aggressive pursuit of low-cost strategies by decreasing cost base relative to competitors, while offering a product or service perceived as unique by consumers as noted by Weinzimmer (2000), was only partially supported. The companies did not focus on obtaining lower cost bases, instead on better representing and utilizing their unique selling points.

Managers did not appear to agree with the value or interpretation of implemented trivial attributes in their brands, as suggested by literature. They denied trivial attributes as potential sources of competitive advantage over their competitors, contrary to the findings of Dalman & Min (2014).

How can the sources of differentiation be defined and measured according to managers? Company attributes and perceptions were seemingly of the highest importance to companies. They aim to influence this to a degree by their branding practices when specifically asked. They reference concepts which they believe their companies represent, for example: honesty and coolness (poopypets), transparency (Saint Basics). Sustainability was a common theme among the interviewed SME’s as well as participation of customers, location, innovativeness, “Underdog” status, lean company structure, ability to change direction quickly, customisation of products and range of article.

Ways of measuring differentiation, defined by interviewees were: recognition by customers, business success, word-of-mouth, crowdfunding campaign success, social media feedback, product/service attributes number and usefulness thereof.

Did SME managers notice changes to how their brand is differentiated after crowdfunding success? When asked directly, the overall opinion indicates that it is not specifically attributable to the campaign success itself. They do recognize that it can and probably does play a part, but are hesitant to put a number or measurement on it, especially as it has not been high on their list of evaluations. Looking at the number of statements on the whole however suggests their recognition of brand elements and non-trivial product attributes increasing in the post-campaign success time period.

More specific research may be required to identify the degree of change over an allocated time period, as the time between campaign success and interview varied considerably.

Which aspects of brand differentiation were improved by crowdfunding in SMEs? The most notable improvements seem to be in in brand elements and non-trivial product/service attributes. Companies apparently recognize that their current formula is a success because of their continued survival or the proof of concept aspect of campaign success, and therefore attempt to improve upon these further. Adding more beneficial attributes, or expanding upon their use of brand elements, can be seen as a way of continuing or increasing the magnitude of their successes. It seems as if they focus on differentiating establishing their products first, and later extending those activities to the company perception.

Managers mention communication in both positive and neutral/negative ways in equal measure, thus giving no significant suggestion as to whether there was a change or not. Trivial product/service attributes seemed to have either a negative or neutral response overall, suggesting no positive link with crowdfunding campaign success. This may be explained, by the notion in literature that trivial attributes can be a deciding factor in product/service selection, when all other factors for comparison are the same. This implies an extra effort being taken beyond the expected product attributes, which for SMB’s in the study is apparently not a readily available luxury. This perception stems from the prevalence of remarks on fighting to survive and establish themselves, first and foremost.

Did the crowdfunding campaign inspire or reveal new sources for differentiation for SMEs? Crowdfunding itself can be a source of differentiation. By encouraging and even creating a narrative of being the underdog start-up against the big corporate interests, SMB’s can attract more customers to their message. Furthermore, the crowdfunding platform has the potential for a much greater media and commercial exposure for the project, allowing companies to build a reputation much faster than through conventional means. Crowdfunding also offers an alternative to established sources of funding for start-ups (depending on the platform), which can give a significant behind the scenes advantage over competitors who may be exposed to large debt for a long period of time. Smaller crowdfunded companies can potentially begin operating their business with a fraction of the regular debt expected for start-ups in their sector. Crowdfunding through a pre-order model can even introduce a reverse cash-flow for companies, where they receive their funding up front, before buying materials, constructing products and sending them for delivery, contrary to normal business practice. This relieves the earliest financial pressures of a company by guaranteeing them funds up front for their products, as opposed to producing on the promise of future purchases, providing the campaign is successful of course.

Following a successful crowdfunding campaign, can SMEs apply noted differentiators? There were a few examples of characteristics derived directly from the crowdfunding campaign, for example, Seepje changing their stance on using a plastic bottle because of feedback. While this may not be the norm for all companies participating in in crowdfunding, there is a real possibility that feedback provided could be suitably useful to incorporate in future company planning. Examples are expanding on different clothing lines (Saint Basics, VOF Afriek), focussing on an entirely new target audience (Correctbook), or completely rebuilding the product for a next iteration (Retro Lindo).

Much of the feedback given to companies is apparently sought to be allocated within existing plans. For example, feedback that supports the intended direction is seemingly taken on board as proof that it is the correct direction. Entirely new feedback was evaluated against current plans, in the case of Seepje, it was taken on board primarily because it added such value to their value proposition as well as resulted in enormous feedback during the campaign. 6.3 Comprehensive findings The following chart is a comprehensive summary of the discussion. The interview and the analysis were both formulated in relation to the main fundamental topics discussed in the literature review and contributed to the a-priori framework. This summarizes the main outcomes of the analysis in relation to them.

Chart 1 highlights the suggested positive sentiment towards the sources of differentiation for SME’s following crowdfunding. Most interesting is that in one instance an apparently negative outcome was noted, contrary to expectations. This implies that the overall sentiment was that either nothing changed, or there was even a perceived negative change for that concept. All companies seemingly experienced a self-reported positive effect. Essential product/service attributes were the only source of differentiation that seemed to have a positive increase in all companies.

Tally of remark types Saint Vof Afriek Spiazzo Poopypets Seepje Dutch correctbook haasbeek mamamo Retro Summed Basics Weedburger lindo total Brand elements -++- +++++ +--- ++-- ++ ++-- ++- ++- +++ -+- 9+ (of 39) Communication --+ +-+ +++ -- ---+ -- +-+ ++++ --++ --- 0 (of 31) Product/service 14+ (of 26) attributes --+ ++ +++ -++ - ++-+ +++ ++ +- +++ (Non-trivial) Product/service -8 (of 18) attributes - - - +- - -++ + -- -+- --- (Trivial) Company 3+ (of 25) differentiation + -+-+ -++ +++- +- - ++ --+ -+- -+ Internal 3+ (of 21) Resources -- -+ -+++ +++ - - - ++ ++- +- Special notes + + + +- + - - + - +- 2+ (of 12) + = Positive remark - = Negative or neutral remark Chart 1 Simplified comparison chart

7. Conclusion Based on the experiences of SME managers and owners, a perceived influence of a successful crowdfunding campaign on company brand differentiation has been observed. Other companies who are considering utilising a crowdfunding platform for their company would do well to evaluate the implications of this report. By being aware of the potential additional outcomes of a successful crowdfunding campaign beyond the monetary, and therefore positioning the company to better utilise them should they occur, the managers and owners can enhance the differentiation of their brand.

Brand elements and non-trivial product attributes showed the most positive sentiment, since the completion of the crowdfunding campaign. While there were remarks to indicate negative and/or no development, these were outweighed by the amount of remarks indicating a positive development.

The non-trivial product/service attributes as brand differentiators seem to be the most positively affected. Trivial product/service attributes can provide extra incentive when the marketplace is homogenous or the market offerings are largely the same, therefore present a distinctive element in decision making. Internal resources should in theory be a larger part of company reasoning, as smaller companies could be focussing on their internal capabilities to offer better value propositions than their larger more financially able competitors. The company response that the crowdfunding campaign caused a neutral or negative development, is puzzling and may require further research. Company communication overall seemingly showing no development is rather surprising, considering that the crowdfunding campaign itself is a massive communication effort. This should in theory, create a greater connection between company and consumers, thus improving over pre-campaign conditions.

Managers seem to focus and improve upon differentiation stemming from their product attributes and unique selling points. Differentiation between brands and companies usually only occurred after specific questioning, showing the relative difference in importance in manager’s minds. Brand elements however seem to be important after specifically giving managers time to consider this proposition. Better consideration of these concepts could provide an improved competitive position.

New potential sources of differentiation were identified. In particular, the crowdfunding campaign as a marketing tool in itself, with which to establish the company as the “underdog” was noted by Poopypets, and to a lesser degree Mamamo. The potential for the crowdfunding campaign to create a unique financial advantage for business owners was particularly interesting, as the potential “reverse cash-flow” and lack of debt could give the companies far greater financial freedom with which to establish themselves, compared to the typical trajectory of a start-up. 7.1 Recommendations For managers considering utilising crowdfunding, it is crucial to establish their needs beyond the required capital. This can lead to the selection of a crowdfunding platform which can best fulfil those extra needs. Utilising the platform that presents the best fit for those needs may deliver unintended benefits to compound the expected positive effects. The main difference between platforms in this paper has been the structure ranging from an equity-based platform such as Symbid, to pre-order platforms such as Kickstarter and even hybrid models such as Oneplanetcrowd. Each of these platforms requires different efforts from the managers, as well as provides different potential advantages relative to the other platforms. In addition, managers should first attempt to understand where the sources of their differentiation lie. These factors, that form the foundation of unique selling points (USPs), can be better leveraged when separated and analysed individually. Recognizing the sources of differentiation, while improving or expanding upon them can help capture and sustain competitive

advantage. The campaign may provide novel ideas or expansions on the current differentiators, thus assisting managers in plotting the course of the company.

For scholars and policy-makers, it is important to recognize that crowdfunding campaigns can have far greater and further reaching implications beyond the initial capital injection. The first step in expanding upon these implications should be investigating the experiences of those closest to and most affected by a crowdfunding campaign, and then quantifying these findings through further study. 7.2 Research perspective The goals set in the beginning of this research have been attained. Answers to the sub-questions posed have been found, contributing to the answering of the main research question. The literature review has shown the relative newness of crowdfunding and its limited impact in academic literature at present, hence the need for more exploratory research. While addressing the need for some exploratory research, this paper shows the need for further exploratory research with regards to not only the impact of crowdfunding in the Netherlands on companies, but also the types of platforms. The insights shown in both the methodology section and case analysis should provide inspiration for previously unconsidered questions.

The literature review section of this paper has attempted to establish the overlapping areas between existing literature on branding and differentiation, and the relatively new research area of crowdfunding in and of itself. This overlap was further expanded upon by expert interviews, to test the theories of academia against real-world business experience. While this should provide inspiration for topics in an academic sense, business managers considering utilising crowdfunding may gain new insights.

For follow-up or future topics, it would be interesting to view the impact of each specific type of platform on the branding of SME’s. Another avenue would be whether specific types of businesses find more success in crowdfunding in general or per platform. Another interesting aspect would be to investigate whether companies that failed in their crowdfunding attempts took away important lessons on branding that they would consider utilising in future crowdfunding attempts or projects in general. 7.3 Limitations Crowdfunding is a relatively new concept, thereby inherently restricting the available research available on it. The influence of crowdfunding on other fields of academia even more so. This, coupled with the fact that the decision was made to focus on Dutch business limited the available material and potential interview candidates, yet did provide for very current and relevant findings.

Due to the non-existence of scales with which to measure the research topic, the method of measurement necessitated a qualitative approach according to McGivern (2009). The proposed model was created by the author, while inspired by other models in different research fields. The format of the interviews could also have contributed to different insights, as touched on in the methodology section. Even a slight change, from telephone interviews to face to face interviews with exactly the same delivery of questions and mannerisms may influence the answers given. The semi-structured format cannot be easily generalized, or even converted into a scale at present, necessitating the need for quantitative study at a later date.

Unfortunately, the applicable pool of potential interviewees was rather small, and thus led to a rather low number of actual respondents. However, in the case of qualitative research, there are no hard guidelines on how many interviews should be taken as a minimum threshold. Recommendations on numbers vary, yet one consistent conclusion is that the saturation point has been reached, when no

further novel information can be extracted. In general, the recommendation is 10 interviewees or above. Interview sample size should be approximately 4–5 interviewees when participants having high level of knowledge and expertise in relation to topic of inquiry according to Romney, Weller & Batchelder (1986). Baker & Edwards (2012), on the other hand, posit that 15 interviewees are required when participants are ‘information rich’ in relation to topic of inquiry. Guest, Bunce & Johnson (2006) argue for 6–12 interviewees for a narrow research scope and homogenous target audience. In this context, given the specialized pool of interviewees needed, as well as their personal experience in crowdfunding (sometimes even in several campaigns) the 10 interviews provide a somewhat acceptable sample size, given the limited scope and resources of the research. The lack of generalizability is especially compounded due to the diversity of products and services produced among the interviewees.

In this research format, it is unfortunate that in-depth analysis of specific subsections of small businesses or of crowdfunding platforms was not attainable, and that the choice for a broader perspective was one of necessity. In obtaining interviews of companies in different sectors a tentative step has been made towards generalizable statements, though this definitely requires further research. The results given now may be somewhat generalizable to SME’s as a whole, but when comparing SME’s within a specific sector these assumptions may change considerably.

8. Bibliography

A Contemporary Study of Brand-Orientation in Regional SMEs | Muhammad Azam Roomi - Academia.edu. (n.d.). Retrieved June 25, 2015, from http://www.academia.edu/3808264/A_Contemporary_Study_of_Brand- Orientation_in_Regional_SMEs

Aaker, D. (2014). The First Step in Building a Brand. Marketing News TM, 2. Retrieved from http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=11635&sr=HEADLINE( The+First+Step+in+Building+a+Brand)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B2014

Aaker, D. A., & Jacobson, R. (2001). The Value Relevance of Brand Attitude in High- Technology Markets. Journal of Marketing Research. Retrieved March 17, 2015, from http://journals.ama.org/doi/pdf/10.1509/jmkr.38.4.485.18905

Abimbola, T., & Kocak, A. (2007). Brand, organization identity and reputation: SMEs as expressive organizations: A resources-based perspective. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 10(4), 416–430. doi:10.1108/13522750710819748

Agrawal, A. K., Catalini, C., & Goldfarb, A. (2013). Some Simple Economics of Crowdfunding. National Bureau of Economic Research, Some Simple Economics of Crowdfunding. doi:10.3386/w19133

Ahlers, G. K. C., Cumming, D. J., Guenther, C., & Schweizer, D. (2012). Signaling in Equity Crowdfunding. SSRN Electronic Journal, 49. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2161587

Anselmsson, J., Bondesson, N. V., & Johansson, U. (2014). Brand image and customers’ willingness to pay a price premium for food brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 23(2), 90–102. doi:10.1108/JPBM-10-2013-0414

Baldinger, A., Blair, E., & Echambadi, R. (2002). Why brands grow. Journal of Advertising Research. Retrieved from http://defeodesign.com/websites/BaldingerSolomon/published/why_brands_grow.pdf

Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2014). Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. Journal of Business Venturing, 29, 585–609. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.07.003

Berg, B. L., & Lune, H. (2012). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Pearson. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=ldlPXwAACAAJ&pgis=1

Bhide, A. (1994). How Entrepreneurs Craft Strategies that Work. Harvard Business Review, (March-April), 150–161. doi:Article

Borg, E. a. (2013). Collective Brand Strategy, Entrepreneurship, and Regional Growth: The Role of a Protected Designation of Origin (PDO). Journal of World Economic Research, 2, 26. doi:10.11648/j.jwer.20130203.11

Boyle, E. (2003). A study of entrepreneurial brand building in the manufacturing sector in the. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 12(2), 79 – 93. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/10610420310469779

Bowen, G. (2010). From Qualitative Dissertation to Quality Articles: Seven Lessons Learned. The Qualitative Report. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol15/iss4/6

Bresciani, S., & Eppler, M. J. (2010). Brand new ventures? Insights on start-ups’ branding practices. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 19, 356–366. doi:10.1108/10610421011068595

Burmann, C., Zeplin, S., & Riley, N. (2009). Key determinants of internal brand management success: An exploratory empirical analysis. Journal of Brand Management, 16(4), 264–284. doi:10.1057/bm.2008.6

Buysere, K. De. (2012). A framework for european crowdfunding. … Crowdfunding …. Retrieved from https://d21buns5ku92am.cloudfront.net/26522/documents/17930- 1351284179-FRAMEWORK_EU_CROWDFUNDING.pdf

Carson, D. (1990). Some Exploratory Models for Assessing Small Firms Marketing Performance. European Journal of Marketing. Retrieved March 11, 2015, from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/03090569010006056

Carson, D., & Gilmore, A. (2000). SME marketing management competencies. International Business Review, 9, 363–382. Retrieved from http://ac.els- cdn.com/S0969593100000068/1-s2.0-S0969593100000068-main.pdf?_tid=86764c70- c83d-11e4-a14a- 00000aacb361&acdnat=1426112910_fbb4178b0cf83626d3e4da4bc439323b

Centeno, E., Hart, S., & Dinnie, K. (2012). The five phases of SME brand-building. Journal of Brand Management, 20(September), 445–457. doi:10.1057/bm.2012.49

Cetti, M., & Corso, M.-E. (2014). Crowdfunding - A tool to reframe trust and loyalty. Copenhagen Business School.

Coviello, N., Brodie, R., & Munro, H. (2000). An investigation of marketing practice by firm size. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 523–545. Retrieved from http://ac.els- cdn.com/S0883902698000354/1-s2.0-S0883902698000354-main.pdf?_tid=ecd36792- c83c-11e4-af8a- 00000aacb35d&acdnat=1426112652_4a1161de5d2ac61740583a566b9ba31e

Dalman, M. D., & Min, J. (2014). Marketing Strategy for Unusual Brand Differentiation: Trivial Attribute Effect. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 6(5), p63. doi:10.5539/ijms.v6n5p63

Davidsson, P. (1991). Continued entrepreneurship: Ability, need, and opportunity as determinants of small firm growth. Journal of Business Venturing, 6, 405–429. doi:10.1016/0883-9026(91)90028-C

Davidsson, P., Achtenhagen, L., & Naldi, L. (2005). Research on small firm growth: A review. In European Institute of Small Business (pp. 1–27).

Day, J., Dean, A. A., & Reynolds, P. (1998). Relationship Marketing: Its Key Role in Entrepreneurship. Long Range Planning, 31(6), 828–837. Retrieved from http://ac.els- cdn.com/S0024630198800198/1-s2.0-S0024630198800198-main.pdf?_tid=18e30928- c83d-11e4-8c7d- 00000aab0f01&acdnat=1426112726_df6f13f5c7339bcd58e079541f8ab604

De Chernatony, L. (2001). A model for strategically building brands . Retrieved from https://notendur.hi.is/~rin/Marka%C3%B0sfr%C3%A6%C3%B0i_4/model for strategically building brands.pdf

De Chernatony, L., & Riley, F. (1998). Modelling the components of the brand. European Journal of Marketing, 32(11/12), 1074–1090. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/03090569810243721

Drucker, P. F. (2011). INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP, 20(8), 1–20.

Emans, B. (2004). Interviewing: Theory, Techniques and Training. Retrieved from http://books.google.nl/books/about/Interviewing.html?id=jKIqAAAACAAJ&pgis=1

Etter, V., Grossglauser, M., & Thiran, P. (2013). Launch hard or go home! Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Online Social Networks - COSN ’13, 177–182. doi:10.1145/2512938.2512957

European alternative finance market could top €7 billion in 2015 | University of Cambridge. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/european- alternative-finance-market-could-top-eu7-billion-in-2015

Feeser, H. R., & Willard, G. E. (1990). Founding strategy and performance: A comparison of high and low growth high tech firms. Strategic Management Journal, 11(2), 87–98. doi:10.1002/smj.4250110202

Ga, N. (2013). The Crowdfunding Crowd Is Anxious, 1–8.

Gassmann, O., & Keupp, M. M. (2007). The competitive advantage of early and rapidly internationalising SMEs in the biotechnology industry: A knowledge-based view. Journal of World Business, 42, 350–366. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2007.04.006

Gilmore, A., Carson, D., Grant, K., (2011). SME marketing in practice. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/02634500110363583

Gilmore, A., Carson, D., & Rocks, S. (2006). Networking in SMEs: Evaluating its contribution to marketing activity. International Business Review, 15, 278–293. Retrieved from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0969593106000382/1-s2.0-S0969593106000382- main.pdf?_tid=3c837ca0-c83d-11e4-a039- 00000aab0f26&acdnat=1426112786_b4d0e2120137979eb52ad4846d6fe7fc

Giudici, G., & Rossi-Lamastra, C. (2013). Why Crowdfunding Projects can Succeed : The Role of Proponents ’ Individual and Territorial Social Capital. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2255944

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field methods, 18(1), 59-82. doi: 10.1177/1525822X05279903

Hadjimanolis, A. (2000). A Resource-based View of Innovativeness in Small Firms. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 12(2), 263–281. doi:10.1080/713698465

Härkönen, J. (2014). Crowdfunding and its utilization for startup finance in Finland – Factors of a successful campaign. Retrieved from http://www.doria.fi/handle/10024/96798

Hirvonen, S., & Laukkanen, T. (2014). Brand Orientation in Small Firms: An Empirical Test of The Impact on Brand performance. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 22(March 2015), 41–58. doi:10.1080/0965254X.2013.819372

Hunt. (1995). The Resource-Advantage Theory of Competition. Journal of Management Inquiry, 4(4).

Hunt, S. D. (1999). The Strategic Imperative and Sustainable Competitive Advantage: Public Policy Implications of Resource-Advantage Theory. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27, 144–159. doi:10.1177/0092070399272003

Hunt, S. D. (2012). Trust, Personal Moral Codes, and the Resource-Advantage Theory of Competition: Explaining Productivity, Economic Growth, and Wealth Creation. Contemporary Economics, 6(2), 4–19. doi:10.5709/ce.1897-9254.38

Douglas, S. P., Craig, C. S., & Nijssen, E. J. (2001). Executive Insights : Integrating Branding Strategy Across Markets :, 9(2), 97–114.

Katz, J. (1983). Qualitative methods. In Contemporary Field Research (pp. 127 – 148). Little, Brown and Company. Retrieved from http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/katz/pubs/ATheoryofQualitativeMethodology83R ME1st_ed.pdf

Keh, H., Nguyen, T. T., & Ping Ng, H. (2007). The effects of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing information on the performance of SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 22, 592–611. Retrieved from http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0883902606000498/1-s2.0- S0883902606000498-main.pdf?_tid=9913a206-c83d-11e4-8ecf- 00000aab0f27&acdnat=1426112941_94d9e710299994d6bd44439ab7c2fdfc

Keller, K. L., & Aaker, D. A.. (1992). The Effects of Sequential Introduction of Brand Extensions.Journal of Marketing Research, 29(1), 35–50. http://doi.org/10.2307/3172491

Keller, K. L.. (1993). Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22. http://doi.org/10.2307/1252054

Keller, K. L., & Lehmann, D. R. (2004). Brands and branding. Marketing Science, 25(6), 740–759. doi:10.1287/mksc.l050.0153

Keller, K. L. (2014). The Brand report Card. In JWI 518: Marketing in The Global Envirronment Spring 2014 (pp. 47–58). Retrieved from http://www.homeworkmarket.com/sites/default/files/q5/25/10/all_case_pack.pdf#page=53

Krake, F. (2005). Successful brand management in SMEs: A new theory and practical hints. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 14(4), 228–238. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/10610420510609230

Louro, M. and Cunha, P. (2001), “Brand management paradigms”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 17 Nos 7/8, pp. 849-75.

McGivern, Y. (2009). The Practice of Market Research: An Introduction. Prentice Hall/Financial Times. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=vdR- cOvKOSEC&pgis=1

Mitchell, R., Hutchinson, K., & Bishop, S. (2012). Interpretation of the retail brand: an SME perspective. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 40(2), 157– 175. doi:10.1108/09590551211201883

Moisseyev, A. (2013). Effect of social media on crowdfunding project results.

Mollick, E. (2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1–16. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.06.005

Hupkens, J. (2014). Neemt Kickstarter crowdfunding in Nederland over? NRCQ.nl. Retrieved April 6, 2015, from http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2014/04/29/neemt-kickstarter- crowdfunding-in-nederland-over/

Payne A. F., Storbacka K., & Frow P. (2007). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 83–96.

Petkova, A.P., Rindova, V.P. and Gupta, A.K. (2008), “How can new ventures build reputation ? An exploratory study”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 320- 34.

Rode, V., & Vallaster, C. (2005). Corporate Branding for Start-ups: The Crucial Role of Entrepreneurs. Corporate Reputation Review, 8(2). Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Christine_Vallaster/publication/233713802_Corporat e_Branding_for_Start- ups_The_Crucial_Role_of_Entrepreneurs/links/54ac424e0cf21c477139bcae.pdf

Romney, A. K., Weller, S. C., & Batchelder, W. H. (1986). Culture as consensus: A theory of culture and informant accuracy. American anthropologist, 88(2), 313-338.

Stemler, A. R. (2013). The JOBS Act and crowdfunding: Harnessing the power-and money-of the masses. Business Horizons, 56(3), 271–275. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2013.01.007

Vranesevic, T., & Stancec, R. (2003). The effect of the brand on perceived quality of food products. British Food Journal, Vol. 105. Retrieved February 25, 2015, from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/00070700310511609

Weinzimmer, L. G. (2000). A Replication and Extension of Organizational Growth Determinants. Journal of Business Research, 48(98), 35–41. doi:10.1016/S0148- 2963(98)00073-3

9. Annex Annex 1 Interview transcripts Saint Basics 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? We are a small company; we have 3 people. We don’t give specific details about annual sales, but it’s about say between 150,000 and 400,000. Number of products: Black and white T-shirts and underwear. Possible colour collections, and extensions in the future.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? General Director (Peter Van Akkeren), Business Strategy and Marketing. We are a small company, but a network company. So we have a lot of partners to fill in the specific details.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) As very important. Do you mean Branding is important? Basics is a huge volume market, we have to compete on price and functionality. There is a lot of competition, so we have to make a difference of identity. So the main question is who are you as a brand?

Are there different aspects to the brand? The emotional aspects are: beauty, honesty, purity, fairness and functional aspects are softness, comfort, good fit, good design.

Branding is composed of brand name, logo and slogan? The logo is quite distinctive, it is important to us, and people are starting to recognize it. The slogan has undergone some changes since the start. We started out with positioning it as cleaner underwear, for example the “shit” associated with normal underwear like child labour and sweatshops and pesticides is not in our stuff. But some people associated it with detergent, so how to get it clean. At the moment we are saying basics reinvented so more the style, but we are leaving that now and moving towards a feeling. The site now says it feels good to be a saint, the saints are of course our clients who put the underwear on, because in doing so they do something nice for themselves and for the world.

Have any of these changes happened because of the crowdfunding campaign? No, it has nothing to do with it. We are developing our brand all the time. But the crowdfunding campaign gave us some eye-openers. The link I sent you is called the eye openers of the crowdfunding campaign; it gave us some eye-openers into the relationship with our clients. We did not expect so many people to come forward. We expected more or less our clients to contribute a little bit to crowdfunding but not too much. We raised 150K euros, and more than 75% of that came from our clients. So apparently people are happy with us, they trust us, they wish us all the best, they give us their money and opinions about what we should develop. We listen to that because if crowdfunding has changed something it is that it has made us move away from being a sender as a brand. Let us say we design stuff, buy it from us take it or leave it. It is moving to a brand owned by people because now our clients own almost 10% of our shares. That is a nice thing to know. Partly owned by clients. It is by the clients also, people have a voice in the new stuff/collection and we also hope that they want to be our ambassadors. And it helps then that you are partly owner, it makes it easier to recommend it to others, because you own it.

5) What are the most important attributes of the product your company sells? Softness, Good sourcing of materials, Durability, Stylish as well as Eco-friendly Cotton  Complements on comfort and durability

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? Recyclable packaging. Differentiating aspect is transparency. Openness, Sketches published Online before actually making it. Service: contact and quick response

7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? High Service, Ethical values, Greenest Basics brand in the Netherlands according to “Rankabrand”. That is just because they add up all these things, like we are certified for organic production and social policies, and transparency, so the whole combination makes us the greenest clothing brand in the Netherlands. If you look at Rankabrand.org in the category fashion clothing and shoes, you see saint basics at the top. We are very proud of that, it was also our pitch. Because we said become a co-owner of the greenest clothing brand in the Netherlands, because we were selling shares and we are the greenest according to rankabrand.

8) When people think of Saint Basics, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? I think they start with the products. Is there a notable difference between the products and the company itself? I’m not sure. I think that’s more or less in line.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? (Platforms as well as types). We looked at different platforms crowdaboutnow, oneplanetcrowd, burga.nl (?) carmen.nl (?), Symbid.

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? We chose Symbid because at the time, they were the only ones doing shares. And we thought it was a nice idea to become co-owner of our brand. So that’s why we did that.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? We had a timeline: So start with our own network, client base and then do social media, then on the symbid platform, try to get interest from investors there and do a press release. But a lot of that we didn’t even do. (How much was done before reaching funding goal?) I think what we did was our own network and newsletters to clients and that was basically, but we did some stuff on social media. We got picked up by other people as well. Our main lead generator

was newsletters. So that means you have to have addresses, you can email and we had that in our database.

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors? I did most of the campaign, wrote all of the newsletters during the campaign. (How often did you interact with potential investors?) Not often, there were certain Q&A’s on financial, and some stuff about the company so the stuff I could answer directly I did. That stuff is on the symbid page, under the Q&A part, and other stuff sometimes I had to confer with symbid on what would be the procedure. Or with my accountant, so what will we put in the shareholder agreement. Most of the things I did myself.

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? Of course you have to say that too, such as the forecast.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? We focussed on the products because we were going to make a new colour collection. Our line was: We want to add colour to our lives and you can be proud of that, it is a good investment opportunity, we expect a good return on investment and also you are doing something good for the world. These two things are almost always important for people, I think as far as our clients were concerned the most questions we got were not financial or not about return on investment but about what are we going to do, how we are going to grow, what we were going to plan in designs and that kind of stuff.

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? Yeah, I think we put more emphasis on the participation of our clients and I think we want to do more with that in the future. So for instance, we want to do crowdsourcing with our collection, so that we can develop a new style of boxer short or t-shirt and ask people to come up with ideas and upload their favourite photos from nature and we will take the pattern and sample the photos and put it on a boxer short. And if we take your pattern from your photo, then you get a percentage royalty in the boxer short. So you are a co-owner of the boxer. (So a decisive move towards inclusion of the crowd?) Absolutely

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign (say 6 months after)? Maybe it went up a little bit, but I don’t think it’s significant. (So it didn’t jump for example by 10% and stay at that new point?) No I don’t think so.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? Also not. (So you were already quite heavy on the communications?) We were quite communicative, people do ask us questions and we do answer them, but it’s not more than before.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? Question no deemed relevant by interviewee due to company existence being dependent on success of crowdfunding.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? Yes, people asked us for specific colours. It is also what we asked them of course. So “if we do a colour collection please tell us what you hope that we will do?” We got quite a lot of response from that and used that in designing the new collection? (Was there any unsolicited advice?) There is always unsolicited advice, but we take that seriously and appreciate their suggestions. If it’s a good one, we use it, no problem. (Do you have any examples?) One of the colours we hadn’t planned to do was a dark blue boxer short, now we have it in our new collection. Also a small example is that people ask us for different things like yoga pants or house pants, stuff that we don’t have yet but may very well do in future.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? Yes, always. I think it is much easier to work from one vision, so that is very important. Yes, everyone shares the same message.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? I don’t think so. No our aim is to be very small as a company, have a small core. We have partners for logistics and distribution, we have partners for design, partners for communication and manufacturing. Lots of different things and we are very much a skype company. That’s how we operate. I don’t think our “skype company” aspect is an advantage. I think it is sometimes easier when everyone is in the same building. So you can share the same goals and ideas and feeling but on the other hand it is very efficient and a lot of freedom not to be bound to one place. (Is the “skype company” aspect communicated to customers?) Hopefully they don’t notice.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on? I must say no. I think the core and goal is still the same, the people are the same. Just we have more money to do what we want now. And that is develop the collection and make a step forward in branding and communications.

(Have you noticed any uptake in feedback (letters, emails))? It is still the same. We send out newsletters every two weeks to clients, to keep them updated on what we do and how far we are on development stuff. People respond to that so we respond to them. We have quite an open line of communications, maybe that is why they were son generous. (Has social media changed?) Yes, I think we gained a lot of followers and retweets. We went fairs in Amsterdam and Berlin and we met people who knew us from that, saw the campaign or even invested. Or were wearing our stuff. Vof Afriek 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? 2 employees. We are working with tailors in Rwanda, let’s say 5, but they are working on a freelance basis. And also some freelancers in the Netherlands. Last year 40000 euros revenue. Menswear collection, T-shirt collection Making a 7-piece women’s collection. Crowdfunding campaign planned for August.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? Co-founder. My business partner does more the financial side, so I am doing sales and the creative side, like branding. Coordination all sorts of things. Direct sales, presentations, strategy, like everything.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) Everything is important, but P.R. is the most important. We get a lot of compliments on the branding, I think our company is being sustainable is very important to be sustainable in some way. But we want to be a high end label, so it is important to have the right branding. I think we put a lot of time into building and sustaining the brand, so this guy who is helping us with it. He is a professional, so he is also pushing it. I got an offer from two girls at Ansie, who had some work experience, but then they decided to do more rebranding, you know? Like adding the fashion branding to it. So it is concentrated a lot I think.

4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? We get a lot of feedback, which I think is mainly positive, the logo to the branding to the way we communicate, but it can always be more. We have a lot of things to tell about how the products are made, and there is a lot of opportunities for branded content. I have so many ideas, so we want to do way more and build on it. I think it is very important, so that is what we are trying to do, but I don’t know if it is working. I think the strategy for that is not very fine-tuned yet. Because you know for example on the website you see a lot of colours behind it, but on Instagram or Facebook not. So there should be a clearer strategy behind it.

5) What are the most important attributes of the product your company sells? They Unique selling points you mean? Well the unique colours are one, the designs which are very western (so the colours with western design), and then the fact that it’s handmade and the story label that is inside. It tells the name of the tailor, that they are limited editions, so those things are the main selling points.

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? The logo, story label.

7) What makes your product different from the competition? We are rather unique, there are not so many brands doing the same. I think the story labels are important and the colours. It depends on who you are comparing it with. If you compare with sustainable brands, there is a view that they approach us to tell us about sustainability, so our branding is different than those.

8) When people think of Afriek, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? I actually don’t know. I think it would be the colours, like Afriek the colourful blazers. So first the products. I think what is really strong about our products and about our way as a company is the transparency, so the story label and the website. Like if people also ask us questions.

I don’t think so, because what we wanted to do in the beginning is show a different of Africa. And that is still what we are doing and showing. You know you have to approach it in maybe a different way. Many things have changed, but the vision and the motivation why it started have stayed the same.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? I think it was just investing money in the company or pre-ordering. Like buying something and getting it later. We were not really informed, so we did a lot of research. So I remember a colleague of mine told me about it in a bar, and I checked it out.

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? I was looking for a website where we could do the combination of loans and pre-ordering so then we chose oneplanetcrowd. I think at the time, also there was one where you had to build your own platform, so it wasn’t on the website. So we chose for oneplanetcrowd, because we didn’t have to build anything else, it wasn’t too expensive and had those options of pre-ordering and loans.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? It took us a long time, I think we talked to them already in the beginning and it took us a long time to start. We actually started it way later than we wanted to. I think that was part of starting up a company, and not knowing a lot of details. (Did you plan who you would approach, what commercials you would send out or a social media campaign for crowdfunding?) No we didn’t, not so well. Also I wanted to send a press-release, but we didn’t do it. Now thinking back, it wouldn’t have made results. If you are unknown, nobody will pay attention, but now it would make sense. What we did do in combination with sending out mails to all our friends and family and tracking who would invest, how they would invest and what they would like. That’s how in 5 days we had the full 10 thousand euros. Because we checked with everyone, and we had confirmed 5000, some friends had not confirmed and we had the loans too. After we thought we could have done a lot extra, but we didn’t do it.

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors? I think it was just me. I was also in Rwanda at the time, but I think I did more, from what we did together. I guess we sent 2 or 3 emails before we started, and then during we sent another email, like can you send this to your friends. We also sent some reactions and thank you messages, as well as a big thank you message at the end.

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? No.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? We made a film, we made pictures. Yes, actually, my boyfriend made a little movie about how the bag was made while we were in Rwanda

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? Yes, we are working together with a PR agency now. We joined the Impacthub for scores on a 60-day

challenge about business plans. Last time I was in Rwanda, I looked into working together with a local designer. To produce in her atelier, and with another girl who could work locally with us to check everything to save costs on us going there. I think everything is changing the whole time, we built a new website which is nice. We did a professional photo-shoot, so everything is growing all the time. For example, we did a pop-up shop and we did markets to sell our products. First we were in like 10 shops, then we went down to 5, because we realized in some shops it doesn’t work, and makes no sense to be there.

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign (say 6 months after)? The first sales actually happened after the crowdfunding. I think the crowdfunding really was more a change in the sense, that we had the ability to tell our story in a clear way and in a way that people were interested to listen to it, because we made a movie. Before that we were busy with something that people understood or that maybe they didn’t really understand or appreciate the way they did it afterwards. Because now they understand it better, so it was really better for them to understand it better.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? No because there weren’t sales before crowdfunding. The emails stay the same and are personal. I couldn’t really say a before and after.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? What changed was that we saw that the t-shirts were a big success, and they were very easy to make. So we started adding t-shirts to our collections. (So before it was mainly focused on the blazers?) Yes, it was making the blazers and producing clothing in Rwanda with African fabrics. Which is still a dilemma, because the T-shirts are not as High quality as we would like our company to be, our brand. Also, now for example people ask for things that are not completely printed, but with details and printed. Which is interesting, but we want to make a statement, so we don’t want to compromise on the design and prints. But commercially it would be interesting, so that is something we would have to look into.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? We added bowties and ties. A lot of people asked for the bags, but we don’t make them anymore. In many things, for example we did skirts for women, and everyone was like make more women’s clothing. So that is what we will focus on in the next crowdfunding. Also we learned that we offered blazers for 500€, that were made to measure, in a chosen print, so it would be a unique piece. We tried it and it didn’t work. Luckily it was only for family. All the blazers had to be made twice, because of errors with measuring, so we decided to never do it again unless we have a sample.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? Not relevant question, only 2 owners, rest of structure is with partners.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? I don’t know. I think our branding is strong. Because we are not from fashion, that’s a disadvantage. But we know how to work in Africa, which is an advantage. If someone starts something like we are doing, then mistakes could be made in Africa so that is difficult. It is also difficult to brand such a print company, because it would become like “wereldwinkel”, so like a brand that is helping Africans,

and we don’t want to be like that at all (low value). (So it’s more that you have a specialized working knowledge and you are against working in the trend of working to improve Africa such as the charities do?) What I would like to say is, it is expensive to do what we are doing, so the clothing is expensive and the branding has to fit the price range. This is difficult to do with the African fabrics. We very much like to focus on the quality of the products. It has to be checked and we go there all the time to check production, it may be commercially not smart, but for now, together with the branding it’s good. I think it can always be more, there is more possibilities and so much space to do so. That’s a matter of time and money and priorities. For example, we had a pop-up shop in April, now it’s July and we are finally getting a movie that tells the concept of the shop and we put Polaroid pictures of the makers in the pocket of the clothing, so while making the clothing that you are holding. We know this is a way to tell how we are working and there should be more of those things.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on? I think everything has changed expect vision maybe. It is difficult because you are connecting to the crowdfunding, but the crowdfunding was just the very beginning. I don’t know if it’s very connected. We had more money to spend, so what we did was the photoshoot with Esther and that was possible because the crowdfunding went so well and that went very well. Establishing the brand since then yes. I think it also attracted other investors. It was still family but it gets more credibility if more people invest.

Spiazzo 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? We are a café/restaurant, open 6 days a week so we do lunch, we have a bar and a restaurant function. We employ 16 people part time. The annual sales/revenue at the moment is hard to say because we just opened two months ago and it’s private what we have made so far, but the goal and estimated sales we want to do at the end of the year, or in one year in total is between 360K and 500K. (Are the estimates on course?) At the moment we are on course, so we are not going really well but as expected.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? We have three partners, so me and my 2 partners and because we are just a starting company we are just have to work on the floor or the service every day. But before that or after that we also have the financial and marketing and staff issues to deal with so I do the numbers and statements. My other partners (Suzanne de Ruijter) she is doing the staff, Niels Wijtman is doing everything to do with beverages and food, kitchen menus and that sort of stuff.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) Well that is hard to say because we have just started 2 months ago, so there is not a lot of value. We haven’t put a patent, or secured the name yet. It isn’t trademarked yet, so that’s a smart thing to do in the next couple of months. Our first thing to do is set up four companies in the next ten years, with or without crowdfunding. All the other companies are not going to be named spiazzo. So in that case it is not really important that we will use the trademark of spiazzo. Is that the kind of answer you are looking for?

4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? I don’t understand the questions really, but no I don’t think so. My guests are coming into Spiazzo; they don’t see that it is crowdfunded. They just see a normal company that is serving bread, juices and coffee. So the customers don’t have any involvement that the company is financed through crowdfunding.

(To rephrase the question, you advertise the company in newspapers I presume, on websites on the symbid platform as well, have you heard any reactions on differences between them?) You mean newspapers writing about us, or when we place an ad about Spiazzo?

(Yes, in your own commissioned ads) No we don’t say anything about that, in our ads that we put somewhere For example the parool newspaper did an article on us and they mentioned it [the crowdfunding campaign] in the article. And about three weeks ago, there was an article about “A-locations” and I think they also mentioned it that this place is crowdfunded. But for us it’s not a Unique Selling Point. That’s not really important for us to tell the outside world.

5) What are the most important attributes of the product/service your company sells? I am not sure if you are familiar with steigereiland in Ijburg, but it is the first island of Ijburg and here is the most density of parents with children. I think it’s between 36 and 38% of all the people who live here that have children. I have heard, but haven’t checked it on the internet, but that’s the densest area of parents with children in all of Europe. I have heard it a couple of times, I am not sure it is fact, but even though there are a lot of children. But here there wasn’t any place, where it was easy for parents to go out with two or three children because it’s such a hassle to bring children. So we made

a big child’s corner, with toys and stuff so children can play while the parents eat and have their rest and the child’s corner is also away from the restaurant. So that USP attracted a lot of people, and it’s to that we love children that much, but they attract parents, and they have the money to spend here, instead of somewhere else. The other USP is that we have our own driving spaces, so 35 people can park their cars there, next to the water instead of next to the road. We are on a field next to the water so children can play outside and play football and whatever they want to do, without being interrupted by someone else. So that’s the thing about children that we are pointing our interest in. And next to that, we are trying to find the middle line. We have 5 offices next door, so during the day we have people coming here on business lunches, so we have to find a combination and so far it is looking really good for doing so. They don’t want to have children around and like the quiet lunch and then in the evening time the people from the office they are gone and the parents with the children come. But we are not a restaurant, we are a café but with a dining character, so it looks all fancy with designer chairs, and features. It looks very modern and very classy but we are still walking around in trousers and sneakers. It is not easy to do that, because normally you have to do your pizzeria or your bar or you are focussed on children so you sell pancakes, but we are trying to sell fruits de mer or a good bowl of chary, or parents come in and have fries with a French croquette. It is difficult to find a combination, but we don’t have any competition on the whole island so we are the only one, so to get all the consuming guests, you have to make them happy, all of them. Parents and Business, so we have the meal of the day, but also lobster dishes.

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? Because we are not on the road, we are on a dead point in the island where traffic is very far away it is very hard to find us. So when they get here we have to provide good service, which is the reason why they are coming back. This questions doesn’t really apply to us, is the easiest answer because we don’t sell biological or we are not a fish restaurant. We are a Burgundian restaurant, so good food. And we are changing our menu every two months. We change our menu 6 times a year, just with the season. So we just make what we want to make, and say hey this is nice for this time of year, for example asparagus with ham. People don’t come here for a special type of food, because it is a surprise every time they walk in. We don’t have a name like biological or a fish restaurant, so we sell what we want to sell. (Have you had feedback on changing the menu?) Here on the island, it is Amsterdam, but also a village, so everyone who lives here stays here and you have to change the menu frequently to get the people back, because there are say four thousand houses here and you want them in your company twice a week. Say if you change the menu every 2 months, they have to come here eight times. And if you have 6 main courses on the menu, they have to choose everything on the menu and in the last two weeks they have to choose something double. We would rather change the menu every four weeks, but it is too much work for the kitchen so we do it every two months. But all the other companies do it, but every six months. Or every year, so that makes us more special. So if they say “let’s go to spiazzo, but say they went there last month”, it’s ok because we have a new menu! So that’s the main reason we attract more people.

7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? Like I said before, there are no closest restaurants, well there is one, as well as fifteen total on the whole Ijburg. The Ijburg counts about 20.000 people. Like I said before the children, changing the menu, we are on the waterfront with the deck chairs, we are not on the road and we have our own parking spot. The only restaurant in the Ring of Amsterdam, so 140.000 people pass by car, we are the only restaurant that is visible from the ring/highway. That’s a good marketing tool for us. Ijburg had a bit of a bad reputation for the last couple of years, because a lot of things went wrong and expectations were really high. The things didn’t happen, so people didn’t want to come, but now we are on the front row of Amsterdam so the highway can see our pictures and work chairs a lot of people sitting and dining there so we are a kind of business card of Ijburg.

8) When people think of Saint Basics, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? Well now at the moment, because we haven’t had time to build a reputation yet, so probably the food. 99% of the people who came here thought the food was fantastic, so that’s no problem. The thing that really impressed them, was the view, from the highway over the water and the sun goes under in the evening when you are on the terrace. I think the spot we are sitting is very unique. It is a very beautiful place to stay in the evening, but also during the day. If you have been here they saw, wow this is a weird place for a restaurant and they sit there, then the food and service is good so the first thing they would remember is the view, that it’s there. Second of all is the food and the service.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? In our experience, there were only 2 ways of crowdfunding, so the lending, where you borrow the money and you still have a debt of 60 – 80 thousand euros. The other was to sell a part of your company, say 20% but then you don’t have any debt if something goes wrong. But then you don’t own 100% of the company, but 80. So to answer your question, loaning or selling part of the company. And the last option was better for us.

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? Well that’s a very easy question, because in our eyes there was only one platform who did this [selling shares], and that was symbid. They were the only one to say start a “Besloten Vennootschap” [Private company limited by shares Ltd.], and start selling your stock/shares or equity. If you are a different form of company you do not have shares and cannot sell those shares, like in an Ltd. That was the only reason we went with symbid. The second reason was that we had a regular customer, which may be interesting for you to know Spiazzo exists for five years as a lunchroom inside the same building [before the crowdfunding campaign]. After that I became the third owner, and we started the crowdfunding, when we moved to the other side of the building and started a restaurant to be able to sell in the evening. So to come back to the story, a guy came in and he was a small shareholder of symbid and said use this. He gave us a little discount, so we didn’t have to pay the commission fee and it was very easy to say let’s use symbid.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? 100% pre-planned. When we put the plan on symbid, it was 100% planned, is that what you mean? (Did the campaign go how you envisioned it?) Like the expectations they came true. We raised our goal amount [60.000€] within five weeks. We expected it to happen in 2 or 3 months which was really good. We expected 70-80% of investors would be friends, family and people in the neighbourhood. It was weird that only 30% was from friends’ family and the neighbourhood and 70% were people from everywhere in Holland, for example an investment company in Groningen or a rich guy in Maastricht. Also the amount, with ~50 investors and 60.000 euros, which meant an average of around 1100 euros or a bit higher per person. That is quite a high amount, when we expected like 300 people with smaller amounts, instead of fewer people with bigger amounts.

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors?

Well for us we didn’t have to do much of anything, we put it on Facebook and such, but Symbid did most of the work. They have a big following of investors behind them, so they just put it on the website and it happened automatically from there. It’s not like we had to do the raising ourselves, the hardest part we had to do was make the business plan and financial part and such to make it solid. So that it sounds like a good story to sell and is a good company on paper. That was most of the work, and when it was on we had a holiday, we just checked every day to see the counter going up. (So you didn’t have to interact with the funders during the campaign?) I’m just thinking if that was possible because most of the investors were anonymous, so there wasn’t much opportunity to communicate with them while the campaign was still going. So when the campaign was finished, we received a list of shareholders and their email addresses, so now we are communicating our thank you very much and keeping them up to date every month. For example, this month we are starting the renovation and everything, month 2 etc. Even now that we have been open for 2 months, I am going to send an email in 2 or 3 days, I don’t have to do it, but it is nice to keep our investors up to date.

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? No.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? Well not special measures to promote them. I’m not sure these questions apply to Spiazzo or this crowdfunding campaign because our plan was on the internet Of course we told our unique selling points and explained them on symbid, but it’s not like we took special measures to promote these USPs for the food. It was more the total plan, and this is the amount of money in dividends to be paid out at the end of the year.

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? No, the plan we put down on symbid, so the business plan, we haven’t changed anything since that.

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign (say 6 months after)? The sales have gone as expected, so not less and not more. So we are breaking even almost every day because it’s holiday now on the island, so 80% of the people from here [inhabitants] are on holiday. Now we feel it, so the revenue is a bit less, but in general it is the same as we planned. (Was it planned to open during/just before the holiday season?) No we were planning on opening in January, because we had the total finance at end of December. So we planned on the renovation in February but we had a lot of difficulties and issues with permits, from the establishment itself [Stadsdeel Oost] so it took us three months. It was a pain to work with, because we really wanted to begin and we had the finance, the investors were waiting but we didn’t have time to get the permits in on time. There were troubles in the neighbourhood, because people were complaining about not wanting a restaurant there, so that’s why we finally started May 7th. It was maybe bad planning, but we were unable to do anything about that, so we were happy to finally open the doors.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? (This is more comparing between Spiazzo 1 and 2) Well my 2 partners hadn’t done any marketing for the past 5 years, so after 5 years nobody actually knew they were sitting there. They just did lunch and were sitting at a revenue of about 60-70.000 per year, which was nothing for 2 people to work with. So then they asked me, because I had a bit more experience with marketing, I had worked at Madame Tussauds, for years in the marketing department. At the moment we are open for 2 months and the communications to all the guests is way better. So we are doing a lot more marketing now, brochures, flyers and we have been in the paper twice, so that had a bigger impact for us.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? Well in Spiazzo 1, the two partners were doing it, so one was at the counter and one was in the kitchen. Then the food was 100% because they knew what they wanted to make so their passion was in there 6 days a week. Now it’s a bigger company with 7 in the kitchen and we have to train 16 people at the same time. So we have to tell the people, you have to make this sandwich in this way and not that way. This was the hardest thing to do, to keep the same service and quality as it was in Spiazzo 1. So there it was 100%, and now it is around 90-95% and we want to boost it towards 100% again.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? Maybe more like a cooperation, before in Spiazzo 1 it was not possible to do anything with big groups, or as a wedding location (yet), or do big BBQ’s in the evening, or the big drink on Friday. So you can think on a lot of things that we can do now, that weren’t possible in Spiazzo 1. Now a lot of people from the outside are now saying can you do this or is it possible to do a high tea for 30 people. That is possible now, and it means we are picking up and creating extra long-term revenue. (So you are working with and implementing suggestions you received during and after the crowdfunding campaign?) Yes, and before that it wasn’t possible. During the crowdfunding campaign, a few people came to us and said is it possible we can do a cooperation with a boat company, or an architecture company said “I need a place for lunch with big groups” would it be possible to do with you now? That was part of the plan, but we haven’t put any energy into it. That is what we are going to do right now. One of the plans was, we do fruits de mer right now, but only on request. Because we are struggling with the “chicken and the egg” argument, because for the idea you need the customers, money and revenue to implement those ideas. It was a thing we were very enthusiastic about in the beginning, but then we realized we need revenue X to do plan A, and revenue Y to do plan B. So we have to build up step by step and every three months we have an idea and we are going to do it.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? We just hire them because we need them. Not for the company or to sell the products. Just hired as needed.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? Not really, the last 2,5 months were like crazy. It was really busy, and then trying to keep quality high. Trying to make everyone happy, food on time, high quality, service has to be good. Most of our time has to be spent on doing those kinds of things and when the machine is going well, and fluently, then we are going to put a system in things. At the moment it is just trying to survive. It’s a new company and everyone has to be trained, everything has to be done, such as small repairs, making things or doing things, print or relations also a little bit of sales and marketing there is so much work to do that there is not time to create a system such as you are referring to. We don’t have time for it yet.

The changing of the menu is more of a USP. That makes us different from the rest. Here we listen to the people on the island, like what they need instead of what we want to do. Like having dinner with children, then the food needs to come quickly and the service has to be great in a nice environment and those are the things we are trying to keep high. Last Monday we had the first staff meeting, which was good to have the whole staff together and we told them our vision of the company so what is spiazzo, what we want to do, how we connect with the guests. That type of a system, it was the first time it happened last week when I am doing something else or I am not working, that I can be 10%

sure that my staff is doing the exact same work I would be doing if I was here. So the first two months are for surviving and that somebody was there and was able to make coffee. Now we have discussed it with the team, that there is some kind of a system that has to improve in a couple of months and years.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on? Not necessarily. I think I have told you everything that I know. For us it is really good to have the 50 investors behind us, because they are not only people buying shares in the company, they also have the heart of the company. They are also a source of counselling from 50 people, for example there is a lawyer in there and that brings extra knowledge. So if you need something or have a problem you need a solution for, you can still reach out to those investors and ask for their advice. They are an extra helpline. If we want to start a second company for example, we don’t have to go through symbid anymore. If we make them happy in the first years with X percent of dividend, they may be interested because it was a good investment and ask what we will do next. With Spiazzo 2, we can create our own revenue, so we can create our own finance. The first thing was the hardest to do. So now it is easy to make the second and third steps. If you go to a bank, it is also a resource of knowledge. But it is a big company, these are 50 investors. It works differently. When the investors come in, they are proud they can say to their friends “this is also my restaurant” even if it’s 1%. So when those people come here, they bring more people and do mouth to mouth marketing. If you go to a bank for a loan, then they come in and they are someone you owe money to. My current investors are also ambassadors for the restaurant.

(Have you noticed if all the investors have visited or brought extra people with them?) We expected that more of them would already visit, but I think half of them have visited. The other group retweet and share on social media, the posts we send out so we don’t have to work by ourselves. Even if they haven’t been here yet it helps us share and do the marketing for Spiazzo. Second of all, we are debt-free. We have been operating for 2 months and are debt-free. We are one of the biggest companies on Ijburg. But our biggest competitor (NAP) took 6 years to pay off his debts and then the whole company is his. Of course we own 80% of the company, but it feels like 100% and we have no debts. That makes me sleep very well. Once we have paid off the small rest of a few thousand in debt, all the revenue can go to covering costs and wages. I think it is a good formula, way better than loans. Even if the bank loaned me the money, I would say no because the bank can say after 4/5 months of not being able to pay they will say stop it and take all of your money. With the investors that is not possible.

Poopypets 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? We are actually with 7 employees in the office. Revenues is about three hundred thousand. Blocks is expected to sell about three to three and a half thousand and litterboxes to sell fifteen to twenty thousand units. Yes, the litter boxes and houses are on sale, the add-ons are in pre-sale so not on offer yet. We have to combine the production of the products, so we are waiting a bit.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? Founder and CEO of the company. I have one partner (Rick Passenier), I basically do the financial part and general management as well as marketing and sales. Rick is more in charge of product development. It is basically all aspects of the company. We get most of the energy out of marketing and product development efforts. That’s what we are really good at. We outsource fulfilment, and we have our own helpdesk and service desk. So after sales is also quite big. Sales and after sales is what we do of course, but we are also looking into the market for partners in terms of distribution especially for our products with the focus on retail.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? It’s a major asset. Maybe even bigger than the products itself. In general terms, we have somewhere between thirty-five and forty thousand social followers right now, which are really active especially in a group compared to other brands. We believe that is also our strong point, for example we are going to explore products and categories more towards food, and also toys. We have the feeling that if we put the litterbox and blocks as high end products, we believe that if we launch the other middle and lower end products within our brand it will lead to higher conversions. So building the brand is very important to us. Are brand name, logo and slogan valued differently respectively? No poopypets is our corporate name and company name, it has a brand which is poopycat. The Poopycat name is stronger than the logo itself. But we didn’t really assess it separately, so we look at it is combined.

4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? There is not much confusion about poopycat. We are very close to that because we have a few international licences which have a local Facebook, like poopycat Poland poopycat Portugal, it is a risk for us and a bit strange, as they want to create their own crowds. Basically for the customer themselves they only deal with poopycat, most of the customer correspondence is also coming out from poopycat itself so we haven’t received any complaints or strange things. For the business customers, it needs explaining. Business partners can ask that question.

5) What are the most important attributes of the product/service your company sells? The three core values for our product and product development are: sustainability, for us it is a condition that our products are not damaging to the environment and an improvement on current products on the market. The second one is that we believe that our products should stimulate interaction between you and your cat, thus making taking care of the cat more fun. We also believe that our products need to improve a current process, we call it convenience. Basically it means that it makes a process easier. If we are going to make a product, it should be easy to handle. So those three, sustainability, fun and convenience.

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? Yes, we are actually researching it right now we have two people that are focusing on that right now. One is focussing on the online part, the other is more in the packaging for the retail. Basically the cat’s hygienic aspect is valued a lot, so the litterbox is a cleaner solution for your cat, so Veterinarians sell it on that area. What we also see, depending on the market but especially the less advanced areas or economies, they often really don’t focus on the sustainability aspect of it. So the eco part we really focus on it, but it may not be that important to our customers eventually.

7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? Basically, if you look at the pet industry in general, it’s a really booming market. If you look at Holland, the market tripled between 2009 and 2014. Tripled in size, literally. It still grows, so despite the prices people are spending more on their pets and money on pet related products and on pets themselves. If you look at the market it’s a really traditional market, there’s a low innovation level. Most of the companies don’t bring out new products, they are all kind of the same products. So in terms of marketing, cat commercials are all the same, like feeding your white cat with a cleaning- style feel to it. We as Poopypets feel we can revolutionize the pet industry by bringing products which are actually showing innovation and focusing on aspects that you can see in many industries with the trends of sustainability, getting better products and more honest products so we are at least starting to be a lifestyle brand in a pretty traditional business. So the focus on innovation and becoming a lifestyle brand are your two important differentiators? It is really important to differentiate and to be quite honest it’s important to be cool. Like we don’t really know many brands in the pet industry which are actually cool. You have been to Albert Heijn right? You have the chocolate bars of tony chocolonely? Well that is a great example of what we are doing, so you take an industry or product segment, and without doing that much differently, just being selective of what you produce, how you produce it and how you communicate it to your customers that’s already something that differentiates you from the whole industry, and nobody is doing that, in the pet industry. That’s where we come in.

8) When people think of Poopypets, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? Most of our communication is always from a poopycat perspective. So poopypets as a company is only visible on invoices and that kind of stuff. We are not really using it yet, only for our investors. For our investors we are also looking into going into poopydog and stuff. For our investors it has always been poopypets. For the customers the focus is poopycat. So I don’t think there is much feeling or recognition of that.

9) Did how the brand was before the crowdfunding campaign show significant differences with the first idea of the brand? In what way? When combining all of the aspects of the brand, the symbolism and the company perception, was it markedly different from the first plans? Well to be quite honest, crowdfunding for us was a choice. The company already existed before crowdfunding, we had already successfully placed one product in the market. The reason for us to use crowdfunding was two-fold actually, one being the fact that crowdfunding gives you a reverse cash flow, so normally you have to produce a product, you have to wait for it, to receive it, you have to sell it. You have to wait four or five months after making the product before you actually make some money on it. If you use crowdfunding, that cycle is of course reversed. Second and most important reasons for us, by presenting yourself in crowdfunding, you position yourself as an underdog which makes you very likeable for a lot of media to write about you and also customers, they like to be part of a new project. So the product was genuine, but for us it wasn’t actually necessary to have a crowdfunding campaign, but it was very convenient in terms of marketing. (When you thought up the brand, when you had the original idea, and started as a product which was successful, did you change how the branding would be to better appeal, as an underdog?) So for the crowdfunding we used the brand that was on the Facebook page, if you have a sort of

bigger following, then it is easier for customers to have the confidence that you will actually deliver. Blocks by poopycat was presented on crowdfunding with its own logo and own story, so the about page featured poopycat. The product itself was blocks by poopycat, it had its own colour scheme, its own logo and I think we really developed it for crowdfunding specifically. (I have noted that there have already been two crowdfunding campaigns, is that true?) No there have actually been many more. In a market with a large legal barrier that we were already in, for example France we did campaigns, we also did a Dutch campaign. It was not really mandatory, but for us it was another bit of revenue. In total I think we got in total 10-15 thousand euros extra crowdfunding from mirror sites. (With Kickstarter you had a successful campaign worth 23 thousand, and with Oneplanetcrowd you had 3 thousand euros?) Yes and in France we also did a campaign on KisskissBangbang. I think that was around 5 thousand euros. Were the campaigns launched simultaneously, in sequence or as necessary? We tried to launch the campaigns simultaneously, but I think the French one was a bit later. Simultaneously would be recommended to launch it. So the aspects of brand, symbolism and the company perception haven’t changed from the first plans that you had for the company, since crowdfunding? No crowdfunding didn’t really have an influence on that for us. But again the company was already growing without the campaign. So it’s a bit different if you start your company and then do the crowdfunding campaign, then if you do the crowdfunding which is the launch of your company.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? To be honest, we knew about crowdfunding but we were not experts in it. I looked in my network and I found one of the gurus on crowdfunding in Holland actually. So basically we set up a meeting with him, got a shortlist of do’s and don’ts, for us the Kickstarter was a logical choice. It was less crowded and a lot more quality of its projects. Basically we spent some time with experts, they introduced us to oneplanetcrowd and its founder so we were certain we were going to do a campaign on oneplanetcrowd. For Kickstarter we read a lot about it on the internet, we wrote our own texts, like we are pretty good at marketing. Like marketing for crowdfunding is just copyrighting, just the way of thinking and how people perceive it. Eventually we were invited by Kickstarter 6 months later to participate for a fair in Paris. So we did the fair, and it helped us establish a bit more of a relationship with one of the guys from Kickstarter which is actually responsible for one of the European projects. Which for us is of course very convenient, like if you want to do another Kickstarter campaign we now have a number to call and that is very nice for next time.

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? Basically what we did was for Kickstarter which was a logical choice for us. The alternatives were very crowded and feature a lot of projects which are just basically shit. Kickstarter sort of has a commission that checks projects to see if they are good and properly marketed, and then you are allowed on the page. So the quality is a lot higher. We didn’t look at any technical aspects. I am sure there are cheaper platforms, they are probably platforms that generate even more traffic, but Kickstarter just was qualitatively the best for its projects. Oneplanetcrowd for us was like the system was not really ideal, but we knew the founder and it was easy for us to go on. Kisskissbangbang was the largest one in France, so the best for us to go on. That one was pretty much based on volume.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? So we planned the whole PR aspect, the marketing and PR. The most important thing to do is to have people coming to visit your project. We set sort of goals for ourselves like, we need to have 20% of the goal within two days. We need this, we need that, there is a lot of data on the internet as well. You can also become a featured project on Kickstarter, which we became. We planned an email

campaign, we planned social campaigns, that kind of stuff was all planned out. We were aware of stretch goals, but we were on a really tight schedule from the beginning, so we didn’t add them up front, but we had them in our mind during development of the campaign. I would definitely recommend to anyone to have it all planned out before the campaign, because only responding to the people in the campaign during the campaign is like a full-time job.

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors? There weren’t that many people involved, so mainly I was doing the headlines, copyrighting and general ideas. We have people in the office who are more for the producing side, so they produced the pictures, like photoshopping and stuff, that kind of thing. In terms of content it was mainly me. We sort of drafted up a standard response, if somebody pledged for you, they would receive a standard email by the Kickstarter platform, written by me. That’s something for example we did. Basically all the artwork was done by the girls in the office, just designers and stuff for packaging and that kind of thing. They can produce anything you want. For drawings we used some of our product development staff.

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? No, for us again, we were already active as a company, we had an active web shop. So for us the Kickstarter campaign was to promote blocks as a product, and get it out there. Which we did, successfully.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? Yes, we did focus on getting the people who pledged to follow us on Facebook and that actually worked quite well. We did saw an increase there, and of course that’s important for the brand as well as the people who bought your product before, will do so again. That’s interesting. The e-mail addresses of all our contributors as well, that’s very valuable to us.

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? I think, of course, every campaign that you do, everything that you do helps you. It teaches you something about your market, something about your customers. I am not sure. It is difficult, I would say yes, but not in a very conscious way. I couldn’t pinpoint what it was, but every campaign, every Facebook post we learn from it. There is always an effect. Every time you see something, like this works better or that works better, that is a better timing. You can do a lot of research up front, but still it is difficult to assess that.

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign compared to expected sales (say 6 months after)? We haven’t really researched it, so we haven’t seen the effect. I would say, not significantly. It is also of course because the Kickstarter was globally, for us as a company we mainly focus our activities in north-western Europe and Asia. A lot of people outside of our activity areas were supporting us, and they weren’t really able to order products at our website.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? I would say the same as the marketing. Probably it has changed, because in every interaction we learn. But consciously I would not be able to pinpoint an exact improvement.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? Of course, the product was in the final phase of prototyping when we launched the product. There

have been significant changes to the product, but those are all related to production and that kind of stuff. So of course if you put a product in pre-production, something’s going to change due to the production methods, the limitations of the machinery you use that kind of stuff. We asked the customers for input, for example on add-ons that they would like to see. That information is stored and also used. In direct relation to the product that was launched we did not receive much feedback. So you didn’t note noticeable change in the company’s direction after the campaign? No, not like that for us it’s just a product. Of course we learn a lot from a product. It’s not really that the crowdfunding campaign itself changed it. What we did find is that after the campaign we started working with Celery. Celery is sort of a post-Kickstarter platform. Basically they prolong or lengthen your Kickstarter campaign. So after you finish your campaign, people can still pre-order from them. They have the same level of transaction fee, you can continue sales globally and add them to your Kickstarter list. In terms of logistics, the project has been a hell. Our helpdesk has been exploding. The whole operation of sending out parcels throughout the world has been terrible, even though we asked people to pay the additional shipping costs, I think in general terms the whole project has been break-even or possibly a little less because a lot of parcels have gone missing, there were so many problems, and customer interaction based on when what was happening, where is my package, this went wrong, that went wrong. Logistics companies are terrible. For example, delivering problems because of addressing.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? In terms of products? Ok so both. We have given out some refunds for bigger cats. Our products are based around small-medium sized cats for now. So some people with really large breeds, couldn’t use the product, so we gave them a refund. Of course we are developing products for larger cats. In terms of company, the next time the whole logistics puzzle will be different. We will probably ask little higher fees for customers from particular areas. We will see what the product is, but the product blocks are quite big, so it doesn’t make it easy to ship out.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? Yes, of course. People need to believe what we are doing here. We see, that we ask a lot from our people as a start-up. There are a lot of things we can give guidance for, there are a lot of things that need to be done by themselves, so we like people who are more entrepreneurial, people who like to work in an environment like this. The people are the most valuable asset of the company, because they make the products, the energy in the office is quite fragile and very important to the actual performance of the company. I would say 100%, if there is not a fit on the personal level and the company level, we would not hire somebody.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? Yes, as a small company you are agile. That is the most important factor we have right now. We are really quick in terms of processes and product development. If you take a look from a competitive perspective, we develop really innovative products, but they are also easy to copy. For a large company to order our products and copy it, any serious large company in the pet industry, it would take 1,5 – 2 years before they can be at the same level we are now. They are slow and big, we can change product packaging instantly and change our next batch, or rebrand our Facebook with one click. The whole process of making decisions is really quick and easy. We are also really young and have a better feeling of the market. We have a clearer focus on particular focus, with particular characteristics those are all things that the larger companies don’t have. If they are going to make a bio-degradable product, it will be boring, it may be in a brown bag, but it’s not going to be good branding. They’re just not good at it. For example, we work with a retail

chain in Holland now. They started to do sales for us, and we offered to help them with product development and marketing aspects in return. No, not in that way. It may be a good idea to do that.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on? No, I don’t really think so. The main thing was we were a company that is active in a particular market and due to the crowdfunding campaign, you become a more global thing which is good. But we also learned we are not really ready for it, so we need to grow in our own market, so that all the processes are under control and not too quickly.

Seepje 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? We are with the four of us. Melvin and I (founders), Lennart is our first employee, and we have one intern. I think our revenues this year will be a little over 200 – 240k Euros. We have sold up until this point, around 2 million natural loads of laundry. Every product for the shell products washes 30 loads of laundry, and the liquid ones have 25 loads of laundry. For the shells we sell 3 products, neutral, morning wood and summer vacation scents. In those packages there is a little bottle with organic scents you can add to the wash. Next to that we have the liquid products, of which there are four. Two scents each for coloured and white laundry. The oneplanetcrowd campaign was to launch the liquid line of detergent products, so by May 2014 when we started the campaign, we already had a successful business in selling the shells for detergent. The campaign was to collect 10k euros to partly finance the development of the liquid detergent. It was only a part of it, as the complete development cost a lot more of course. We also found a way to extract the working soap rom the shells and use that as a basis for the liquid detergent. It was more of a marketing campaign actually for the liquid detergent.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? I am responsible for marketing and communications. Also the visible product development. Actually the roles within Seepje are not really divided strictly. So a lot of what happens goes both by me and Melvin. Most of the stuff with Nepal goes by me, but as I said much of the stuff goes by both Melvin and I.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? Well how I would identify it in our case right? I think our company brand is trying to clean the world into a better place. We try to communicate a lot about how people can clean in another way, a way that doesn’t use resources that are depletable. So that you use renewable resources. We do that in a fun way, so that you like doing the laundry and also get enthusiastic about it. We always communicate that we want to do it together, so together with our fans, the crowdfunding campaign topic. And together with partners, everybody we work with, our suppliers. Do you see the product brand as different from the company brand? Well I think you can’t completely communicate everything you are as a company in your product, so you have to make choices, but they do overlap otherwise something would be wrong. But we do communicate through our packaging and products, so we try to not communicate only our brand logo, but also on the boxes that the shells are packed in, there is also a sentence on top which says let nature do your laundry. We think that’s more important than largely showing our logo or name. It’s about the experience and experiencing doing laundry in a natural way, thereby bettering the lives of people in Nepal, preserving nature. Also helping people with a handicap that are making our products. (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) I don’t think so. I think it’s more a case that its divided over stages a customer is in. When a customer is not yet a customer, it is more important to show them the message (let nature do your laundry), that gets them curious for the brand behind that, also what we do. Not why it’s good to let nature do your laundry, but also doing that in a positive way. Using a brand that creates value for all stakeholders instead of just for its stakeholders. Thereby also including the environment, the social workplace in the Netherlands, the people in Nepal. I think it’s about different stages. Not for everyone, because some people choose to look into a brand before making a purchase, others they buy it impulsively and look into it later. For the first group the complete package is important, so for them I would not give the different components of our brand different values. But for the others, maybe the value of the “let nature do your laundry” message for us the value of the message is

higher in that case because they make a purchase based on that. I think there is a lot in between of course. Therefore, it is very hard to give value based on the different components of a brand.

4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? No, I don’t think so. At least I have never heard it. We always try to listen very carefully to the people that are interested in our products, some not yet customers, some are. I think that is something that everyone should do. So we are trying to stay in touch with the customer and getting to know what they like and what not. So when we are trying to improve our communications we simply go to the store and ask people who are interested, what do they like about this sentence or what don’t you like and how is it interpreted. That’s what we did from the beginning, we started with 4600 euros in student loans, that was the only way we could bring our product to market because we needed to know what they thought of it. We ourselves did not have the knowledge. I think you get better at estimating what a customer wants, but you should not be thinking that you know it all. So you have to reach out to the customer to know what they are thinking and how they are interpreting everything your brand communicates, both visually and in text. (So there has been no confusion or follow-up questions on something you have on the site for example?) Well, one example is during the crowdfunding campaign we showed the people a bottle to make it tangible. Because we were going to put it in a liquid form. But we weren’t at that point in the development where we had looked at which bottle we were going to use, and we were still thinking about the option of using a plastic bottle or another option that is maybe better for the environment. Which is very hard to choose between because the plastic bottle is just so much cheaper, so with the saved money you could also do some nice stuff. But when we communicated with plastic bottles, we literally got messages in CAPS LOCK stating that a plastic bottle does not fit our brand. So they made the choice for us. Because when everyone is like “you shouldn’t use a plastic bottle because it is bad for your image and brand, and people interpret that ad bad for the environment, which is not necessarily true of course, then that was how we decided to use a cardboard carton.

5) What are the most important attributes of the product/service your company sells? It cleans your clothes. That’s very important. Actually, together with the sentence we use “cleaning the world to a better place” it cleans it, so we deliver a quality rich product to the customer, we do it together. We develop together, so we also develop the positive impact together. And we make the world into a better place, so we actively create a positive effect everywhere we can in our value chain.

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? If the customers value it, it adds value in my opinion. (In this case, if it does not contribute to the fulfilment of the function of the product, does it still add value?) The looks of it (aesthetics). Right? Because the function is not influenced by the way it looks, although yes it also is because you only better the world when people buy it, and people buy it because of its looks. So I think it’s a bit double. Indirectly the looks do contribute to the function, however in a direct sense, it does not.

7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? We are the only laundry detergent actively looking for a positive impact. So there are some competitors, although we don’t really see them as competitors at this point, there are some other detergents that are using mostly renewable resources. But there is no other detergent in the Dutch market that creates social value also. That is something we are completely unique in, and also something that other companies will not be able to copy easily.

8) When people think of Seepje, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? I think they think of the company too, but that depends also on the way that the customer thinks. There is also a group of people that sees Seepje as just a detergent, and they might know what we do, but are not really looking at the company behind it. We also have customers that want to know everything about us. They follow us on Facebook, and they like seeing us doing TV shows (appearances), they want to know everything about it, and about Melvin and me. So, I think that is something that you can create using a crowdfunding campaign. (Do you think the people that follow you so closely, have a notable difference in perception between the product and the company?) I think of course there is a difference, because they know more. It is on the same lines, so they might know more.

9) Did how the brand was before the crowdfunding campaign show significant differences with the first idea of the brand? In what way? When combining all of the aspects of the brand, the symbolism and the company perception, was it markedly different from the first plans? We rebranded Seepje, that happened before the crowdfunding campaign. That was more because we started with our student loans. We didn’t have the money or network to know a lot about this. As soon as we did, we went to this company Helder Groen, in Haarlem. They do this for a living, knowing how to communicate, how to say something, how to visualize it. So we asked them together with us and our fans, to rebrand. So we did that, but that was before the campaign. We are continuously trying to improve, what we say and how we say it, also what it looks like. We are also continuously looking at the product development of the detergent itself. We are continuously looking at improving the situation in Nepal. Our second crowdfunding campaign, which was in last May, was about the earthquake which struck Nepal on April 25th. We are continuously improving or changing the way we communicate and how we bring our products to market. So there are differences since the crowdfunding campaign, but the most change that we had in mind since the crowdfunding campaign was the bottle as said before. The cardboard bottle we use now is really because of the campaign and the feedback during it.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? All of them. Melvin did his thesis about crowdfunding. A good friend of ours works at Symbid, so we were very familiar with crowdfunding. And we also led a campaign for the retail stores, Waar, which did a campaign on oneplanetcrowd. So we led that campaign, which was based on loans. We raised 3000 euros with that campaign.

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? We were already in touch with oneplanetcrowd, because of the Waar campaign. So that was pretty easy, oneplanetcrowd is mostly focused on the more sustainable consumer and investor, and we had a good experience with it. We were also approached by doorgaan, by the amersfoortse, they were a lot cheaper, but we didn’t feel confident about that platform and their way of crowdfunding. Because they are co-financing the campaign through social media so likes and shares and I think that’s pretty strange. It is easy for people running the campaign, but you want people who like your brand to invest in it, and thereby fall even more in love with it. If someone shares one of your messages, or just likes something on Facebook, it’s not the case I think. The campaign did not really move people to fall in love with the brand and product. Also they asked for 3% of the amount, Oneplanetcrowd 7%. So there was a price difference, but we used that in negotiations.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? What we did, was that the basis was planned out. Luckily we have a lot of friends at this point who

also has a nice selling product, like tony chocolonely, topper, verdraaide goed, and also waar. The campaign was 2 months, so 60 days. In the first eight weeks, every two weeks, we asked one of those companies to add one of their products to one investment option as a reward. That way, at every two weeks we got a new communication platform with a brand we were spotlighting in our campaign. That was the offer that was a bit above the average investment, so it moved the people to give a little more. That was the basics, we had planned out. Communications wise, we didn’t plan it out that well, because we didn’t have enough time. At that point we thought we would try to get enough communication to get it full. At that point (when it was full) we quit, we stopped communicating about it. At that point there were more important things to do.

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign? No, it was both of us. Maybe it would have been smarter to give one person the entire campaign in their hands. But usually both of our plates are so full, that we both have to take up parts of the responsibilities. How often did you interact with (potential) investors? Continuously, so before we started the campaign we had a list with people who wanted to invest when we started the campaign. So as soon as we started we mailed everyone on the list, as well as sending a kind request to family and friends. That way we pretty easily got to an acceptable level. Actually during the campaign, we continuously communicated in different ways until it was full. So I do sometimes speak during events, or on Facebook, through email, on our website, mailings of partners of ours (communication partners) like much, waardekaart and those type of things. Also through oneplanetcrowd, to get back to a few questions ago. One of the major reasons we were able to make a deal with them, was that we were included in a minimal amount of their emails to the crowd. That was good, because it made sure that they gave attention to our campaign, so that people who were likely to invest because oneplanetcrowd communicates with them, would invest in our campaign

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? No, actually we were lucky because there was a lot of media attention. So we did a lot of radio shows, the papers wrote about it, bloggers were writing about it. What we did do, we already had 20-35 bloggers that were writing about us and we sent them all an email, to try to make sure they would post something about the campaign.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? No, not really. It could be that there was a campaign in stores somewhere, but that was not related to the crowdfunding campaign. That’s more of a negotiation between the retailer and us. It was more of a coincidence that it maybe happened while the campaign was happening. Not that we really tried to sell more products because of the campaign. We did though, but we didn’t focus on that.

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? During the campaign we decided to look at the alternatives and we decided that we were not going to use plastic. It was after the campaign that we decided that we were going to use that bottle. Otherwise, not really. A lot of it was regarding the campaign, so the promotions, no there were no product promotions such as product discounts because of the campaign. Were there special announcements made after the campaign concerning the choice of bottle? Yes, but that’s what we do with a lot of different things. For example, the labels on the bottle. The colours of those labels they are selected by the customers. The bottle was not selected by the customers, there were not two or three types of bottle to choose from, there was only one kind of bottle that we could create the marketing value with.

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign compared to expected sales (say 6 months after)? Yes there was a noticeable difference but I don’t know the numbers. I know that the sales, especially web sales went up during the campaign. I’m not so sure after. The sales in store that is pretty hard to measure. We are getting better at it at this point. The crowdfunding campaign we did this year, also helped the sales in store. It is like what always happens when you get attention, the sales go up then it goes down again, but stays at a higher baseline level than at the start.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? I think it was confirmation to our customers that we are open and approachable about everything. I think that increased because of the campaign. Although, I’m not sure it was because of the campaign that people interact with us more. It is a way to show the customer that you are open to feedback and suggestions, not only saying, but also giving them a vote and doing something with it. I think it increased the way that people see that, and used the openness. I can’t really put a finger on that, so it may be harder for your research.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? No.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? Well, the bottle of course. I’m not sure if it was during, before or after the campaign. There are a lot of things that we have changed due to the feedback of our customers. For example, with the shell product we gave 2 cotton laundry bags. People have said that it is too much, that they buy it every month and they now have eight laundry bags and it’s too much. So that is when we decided to put only one laundry bag in the package. So I can’t really put that directly to the campaign specifically. I cannot put a timeline of when changes were implemented because of the campaign.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? Yes. It is more important than anything else. It has the most value for us, that someone feels what we are doing. For us, our vision is number one.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? Yes, we are small. It is not something to do with how we structure our company. Our competitors are very large companies like Unilever, Proctor & Gamble, Ecovers, and they are not very personal. We are small and very personal and we try to keep that. Our little structure definitely makes that an advantage in our opinion. Are there other advantages, for example your association with sieza? Of us compared to competitors you mean? At this point we have 12 people working there. They are people who are mentally or physically handicapped. We don’t do it because it is an advantage, but because we love to see that those people have a lot of fun creating value for our products. It is an advantage that consumers see that and value it also. That makes it something that they buy Seepje for. We communicate actively those 3 things: 1 is sieza, 2 is improving conditions in Nepal, 3 is preserving nature. Those three points are communicated by us often. We believe that those things create value for us in the long run. Doing something positive creates value for everybody and everything involved. We see the positivity

also as value. So we are not just looking at profit, but value because 12 people are working for sieza at this point. And value because the trees are still alive because of us, instead of chopped down for firewood. So including that value in the business model, you create more of it [value]. The value created is part of the profit actually.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on? To be honest we have talked a lot about the crowdfunding campaign in 2014, we did one recently of which I Can much better recall all that came out of it. I think it also goes for the one in 2014, but what you see is that because you get a lot of news exposure, because it is newsworthy. Then it is a very good combination, because people can see your brand and instantly on the internet buy your products and get the reward later. It’s a great combination. The exposure, for example during the last campaign we did hart van Nederland, all the papers (metro, AD, de telegraaf), all the radio stations, everything. What you see is that in general, more people know about your brand. More people know about what we are doing and how we are doing it. And that makes sure that more products are sold, our profit is bigger, and that grows the positive impact because of that.

The Dutch Weedburger 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? The number of people working are I suppose 5-6. That is, I’m a full-timer, and there a few part-timers who do 3-4 or 2 days a week and freelance jobs for us. I think in 2014 revenue was 200-210 thousand (in revenue) and this year we will grow above that figure definitely. We sell burgers to music events and we sell to restaurants. We have one product on offer, actually three, but they all belong to the same concept. Which is a chlorella bun, the omega bun we call it, due to the omega oils in it because we add micro-algae. We have a combo burger, which is like the weedburger, and we have the weedsauce. Seaweed mayonnaise, kind of.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? Co-owner/Chief Everything. I am basically the CEO so to speak. My main responsibilities are to handle of all the incoming acquisition, for catering jobs, I communicate between all the people who works for TDWB, make sure that everybody can do their thing in the best way they can. I coordinate everything of the website and communication.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) The name definitely has a large value because we use seaweed, so we are totally entitled to use the term weed. Of course it’s also a wink towards the Dutch marijuana smoking culture, which abroad, especially amongst young people, they are always interested whether it’s real. So it’s a bit naughty as well, the name, a little bit illegal and rebellious. It resonates well with a lot of people. It opens up a conversation with people about what is in the burger, why are we using seaweeds, which is good because we like to not only sell a product, but most of all spread a new mentality about our food culture. That has a very good value certainly. The burger itself has a very good taste. The slogan we often use is taste the change, although we are trying to think of a few new ones recently. They all have to do with like: “Saving the world, one bite at a time” which is what we are doing, changing the way we eat, and thus giving the planet a chance to renew its self-healing capacity, which we are destroying right now. No, we haven’t thought of the components of a brand separately. We have tried to find a new name for example, but we didn’t. We are happy with this one and we are keeping it. We tried taking the concept apart, so selling only the patty, but that didn’t really work.

4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? No, I think most people realize pretty soon, that we are not selling soft drugs in our food. Most people understand the wink. Not really confusion there. More like a smile on people’s faces.

5) What are the most important attributes of the product/service your company sells? It fulfils a craving for a certain type of comfort food, it has a chewy bite. It has a nice mouthfeel, it is a little bit greasy, there’s a good amount of sauce on it, which gives it a proper hamburger sensation.

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? Well, you know the hamburger comes with certain toppings. So we use like pickles, we use those kind of attributes that if you compose it right, they add to the flavour.

7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? Most burgers, especially if they are vegetarian, they are conceptless and nameless. So they are called veggie burger. People go for them, because by the name they know that there is no meat in there which they don’t want to eat. Like I said, it’s kind of a nameless thing. The Dutch Weedburger

obviously creates an interest in the product or the food because of the name, so you are interested in what IS in it, namely the seaweed. If you go for it, I want to have the Dutch Weedburger. It’s not a nameless thing like a veggie burger because there is no meat in there, but what is in there, people don’t bother. Because we work with seaweed, that is definitely a USP so to speak because people are interested in the story and nutrients behind it. That’s a big difference, we have created like, a new category really in comparison to the tour de France. You have the mountains ranging from category four to three, and you have this outstanding category, which is what we have done. We have created our own identity for vegetarian foods.

8) When people think of TDWB, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? I would say the burger. I don’t think that normal consumers are thinking of companies in general. We have been warned though that, there was a company called luxaflex, which made luxaflex. Now everybody is making luxaflex, so the company’s name has been used to give identity to the product, which because we make TDWB, if other people would make a seaweed burger, which is sort of happening, then people can get confused. “It must be TDWB because it’s the name we heard in the first place”. (Are you taking actions to protect yourself against that?) We are just going our own course, let them. We have reached the deep water so to speak, so let them build their own raft and try to set sail. We decided we are not bothered by that. (Did you already have a functioning business before crowdfunding or was this to launch the first product?) We already had a business, but we needed a new outlet.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? Like which websites? We did campaign on oneplanetcrowd, and the other was on cinecrowd.com. That was more a crowdfunding platform for filmmakers. We have used both successfully. (How informed were you of crowdfunding, for example different websites?) Yes, we did, these ones for example came up because they were close to our cause/philosophy/crowd.

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? I think we had doorgaan.nl, which is a platform, hosted by Amersfoortse Verzekeringen, and they say for every like on Facebook we donate 5 euros up to 10% of the amount needed, something like that. Of course I knew the Kickstarter and some international platforms, but we decided we could do it with the crowd we gathered here in the Netherlands. So that’s why we went with oneplanetcrowd.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? Not much, we basically started. We didn’t have a crowd ready to support in the first weekend and then launched, for the first 10% which helps you over the initial tipping point, from which the rest goes more easily and those kinds of theories. Some people knew about it, it was a very busy time because the summer just started, and the company just exploded because there was so much stuff to do. So we just went for it, during the period that it ran. No actually no pre-planning for content.

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors? Well about three. We had several moments, but most of them were via social media, that we posted reminders and stuff. To me crowdfunding also means family and friends and stuff, because those are the people that you lure into the campaign more easily. Because we were already a business, promoting ingredients from our stakeholders we managed to get one company to donate a larger amount and we had some unknown person donating a large amount. We just sent it out on social media, and word of mouth advertising did the rest I suppose.

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? We tried a little bit, and tried to get those companies involved, but that was a little harder than expected. We didn’t use their networks, maybe we could have. We are not really promoting the company. It’s the vehicle for the message, and we stick to the message.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? Sure, sure, ongoing.

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? Because of the result, we managed to build a new trailer, which helps us to promote our cause better. In a better looking way. It really helped in that way. It stays the same, we are a bit more confident now. We feel if we show up now, we have the proper look and feel of the outlet. In the past we have shown up at places and people always liked it, but I guess if I was them, you can expect differently, if you know the concept of food trucks. We showed up a little more improvised in the past. There are foodtrucks out there, if you look at them I know they cost fifty thousand euros, which is a crazy amount and then you know there is a lot of money behind it. While we have never intended to have a product on the market, so when we had it we had to build basically the whole organisation around it with no money in the beginning, we had to improvise a lot. Especially in the beginning.

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign compared to expected sales (say 6 months after)? No not really, pretty much it went in the same line up. Not necessarily no. It went good and kept on going good.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? No. We are now in a position to do more of these one day events, because we have the new trailer.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? No. It just strengthened it basically.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? In general, I do not recall that there was impactful feedback. Of course if someone has some value- adding feedback, we definitely implement it. Last year we changed the recipe a little bit, we’ve been selling it on the festivals, because we need to upscale the production process and we had a lot of feedback on that which is what we want, I would rather a lot of people like it, but at a certain point it’s more interesting if people say they don’t like it, maybe this and this could be added to the

flavour, that could be more interesting. Yes we have had comments to add to the flavour and have taken it on board.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? One of them is my partner in the company, another one we hired to run the production and the distribution, one we hired to run the mobile operations, and we have one who is a freelancer, who helps us out with our online strategy. Then there are a few that help us prepare burgers on location. The leading figures we hire because they support the message. Of course they have to speak on behalf of TDWB, so we need them to at least intrinsically for 70-80% feel the same way that we do about promoting us.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? Yes I guess, because they are believers in this transition that we are in, namely towards more plant- based foods, I guess there’s always an extra step that people are willing to take. For example, work in the evening, or already scouting twitter or news items, for market opportunities or things that are happening in the media that carry good information for us. It always works if you basically are off- duty and then on WhatsApp you still share the food that you eat or the new things that you discover. I guess that it definitely adds value, compared to at competitors’ people who are just doing their job and just selling a product. Well we have a beautiful office boat, that we run so the whole context that we work is like a free, very informal way of dealing with each other. We have a little bit of an anarchistic approach, with self-guiding principles which we are looking for in our employees. We are not a company that have strict tasks and tell people what to do, it’s up to people to make the best of it and create your own. There is plenty of freedom to fill in the things that you can do. If people cannot handle the freedom, and need to be told what to do, that doesn’t really work. You need to see the work that needs to be done, because you are intrinsically connected to the work that lies ahead. We want people to engage in the things that they are responsible for and if that doesn’t work in the way that we think it should work, those people shouldn’t be working for us.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on? The most important thing I think it that you should not be clouded by the thought that once you get on a platform that there are people in line waiting to donate money because your idea is so good. You really have to work it, and really have to talk to people in person, it’s a friends and family thing as well. There are a lot of projects being crowdfunded, I really like the idea that you have this central place online where everybody can g, and even if you talk to strangers, you can just mention what you are doing. Sometimes people went there and donated money, but you really have to work it, it’s not a thing that organizes itself, once you are online with your campaign. So you cannot do this too often I believe. Especially if you run a commercial business, at a certain point you have to hold up your own pants.

Correctbook 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? I do it on my own now. I have a few designers I hire. The annual sales, I have been working for half a year now and the sales are around 20000 (units). It is growing, and I’m targeting different markets now, so maybe we are growing in employees too, instead of hiring people. I only sell the correctbook at the moment yes.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? Responsible for all communications, promotion.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) I think the brand is developing in brand image. Also because it is linked to the charities, with helping people in Africa and Latin America. So I think that is good for my brand image. Also, that makes me different from other companies. Especially the brand logo, is like a whiteboard logo, it is a link to the product, so I think it’s helpful too. I think the name is the most important, because the people connect the “correct” part of the correctbook to the charity. My intention was the correcting in the book, it was not my intention, but it’s nice to hear. I do not have especially a slogan on my website, I just use whiteboard notebooks, so what the book is about. Because it is not a common product.

4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? No, I think the people understand what the product is. Most of the time, they say I did not expect that it works so well. Some of the people, do not understand the 25% rule, so I donate 25% of the proceeds in books to Africa. Some people do not understand if I send money, or if I send books. For example, a paper I was in, AD, they said that correctbook is also sending money, but I did not say anything like that ever. So that was kind of strange. That’s why that problem arose I think. Because of third parties, the message is not as clear.

5) What are the most important attributes of the product/service your company sells? That’s the paper. The paper is reusable; the markers are not that special. They are from statler, so a common company. It’s the paper that makes the product special. You have the binding, is like a smart binding. The papers can be withdrawn from the book and placed back in again.

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? On the inside of the book there is a small description of how it works, and if the people like it, then place a photo of it on social media. The people who read that can experience it too.

7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? I think I have very little competition, so it is not hard to stand out. When I stand out, it is about linking to the charities. The smart binding makes the book unique. I also make the books on demand, so I customise the book with the designer. So the companies or charities can make a whole new book with their logo on it, and I think that is my biggest market tool.

8) When people think of correctbook, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? I think most of them think only about the book. Not all the people are interested in charities and that kind of stuff. The people who are aware of the charities, think it is nice and sometimes buy the book only for that reason.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? Yeah, I researched a lot. So I know very much platforms and different strategies. I chose the donate and pre-sale. So people could buy a product, and when the project succeeded they would get a book.

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? I especially chose for OnePlanetCrowd because it is the biggest durable and socially responsible platform in Europe. I wanted to keep it small, so only in the Netherlands. So that was for me a good reason to choose them. And they also offered me the donate and pre-sale options. Biggest and most socially responsible platform in Europe, and only accept socially responsible projects.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? My strategy during the project. I had no special strategy. In the beginning, before the project, I was searching for the first 20%. So that when people come to the project, they see more than 20%, because with little, nobody is investing. Then when I started, I started with 1my advertising. I already had a community on Facebook and also very much in Facebook groups. I was invited in very much groups for studies, like bedrijfskunde 2015 for example. Then I went to the paper. That rolled out very fast because different papers came to me. Because they start from others. I started with a local paper, I came on the local television, then I came on the television of the region so RTV Rijnmond. It rolled out very fast, and that is how it went.

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors? My father has a company too, so he wanted already to buy many books for his own company. Also an uncle wanted to buy. At the beginning of the project I was stimulating my family and friends to help me. They bought a book in the beginning very much. That helped me very much through the campaign, and the beginning especially. They helped me too. For example, when I placed something on LinkedIn my father shared it with 3- 4000 people, also my friends shared on Facebook, so it could be shared to 500 people.

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? I think that’s not relevant for me.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? I think it’s a hard question. I advertised much on the innovative part of notebooks. We are digitalizing, but I think there is a part of us who always keeps writing including me. This is an improved version of the notebooks because, first of all it is durable, so less paper use, and second of all the erasing is very easy, so it’s a new writing experience, and an improved writing experience.

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? I did not exist before the campaign, so I’m not sure. (If we look at how you planned to function after the campaign, and how you operate now, whether there is a difference because of the campaign?) I think in the beginning I was thinking of giving flyers to people, and Facebook, social media. After the crowdfunding, I also came to different markets like I sell the correctbooks now to the bookstores, and to companies with custom versions. Also to a few charities. So my customer’s markets have been changed. Also the advertising strategy has changed. For example, I target them with mailing lists, that is completely different than what I though with Facebook or flyers.

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign compared to expected sales (say 6 months after)? It is different because what I said. In the beginning I thought just targeting the individuals with the web shop and I wanted to get the same sales as in the crowdfunding or less. But now the company market and retail markets are growing, and the web shop is less growing, so less than I thought. I focus more on the companies now, because they bring more sales and that wasn’t expected. I think the web shop sales is 30% of what I thought, the company sales weren’t expected. If you compare it to the web shop, then I think the target is made.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? Yes, I talk more directly with the mail, or I have more meetings with them to talk about the book or show the designs they could want. With the individual market I thought it would be a very indirect link, only a link with the customer’s service, or with Facebook you don’t have a direct link. So I have a more direct link with the customers now.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? I think that the charities, that part of my company is lighting up. Because of OPC there are a lot of people thinking socially responsible is important, also companies are looking on that website. So I got many contacts through crowdfunding, for example I am standing on a socially responsible market in November and they also asked me because of the crowdfunding platform.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? When my crowdfunding was running, people did not have any books so they did not have an idea or physical product. After I delivered the books, I got a lot of feedback, that people lost their marker, or if lines are written for a longer time, it is harder to erase after a longer time period. So I have to solve these two problems, so I have special wipings =(cloths) and a special pen loop where you can put your pen or marker in. So that kind of feedback is very helpful.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? No, they are not standing with the philosophy. They just design the font/front for the companies. That’s it.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? Yes, I think my biggest advantage is my link to the charities. I think also the crowdfunding campaign on that platforms brings me very much. I think companies are more interested in social responsibility

now, it’s growing in this moment. I think if companies are standing behind it or not, companies will be wanting to show the world we are a good company. Also with the promotion gifts, they prefer a gift with a good story behind it, then just a promotional gift.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on? No, I think we have everything. If something comes up I will call you back or mail it.

Haasbeek 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? In store we have about, eleven thousand products. That’s mainly because every single title of book is a single product. We sell books and office supplies. We also have a post office and bank and we sell lots of gifts. Our omzet (= revenue) is about 1,8 million euros annually. We have 9 employees, not all full-time. In full-time employees, we have 6.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? I am the owner. Also I participate in daily operations. So I stand behind the cash register and all that. Also my wife is an owner, then we have all the employees. So eventually I am responsible for everything.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) We are a local store. So our brand, if you can say that, everybody knows our name (in Alphen aan de Rijn), in the region. That’s our brand. We stand for a bit more luxury, and quality than average. You pay a little more and you get a little extra. When you go to the crowdfunding. I think that people appreciate us, because we always help them now they helped us. The name has a higher value than the logo or slogan. We don’t really have a slogan.

4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? No, I think there was no confusion. So the crowdfunding campaign was the result of a fire we had. So it wasn’t a commercial action, but more of a rescue action. By your thinking, most of your contributors were already familiar with your business and that’s why they donated? Yes, I think 100% were familiar with the shop. I knew every single name on the list of contributors.

5) What are the most important attributes of the service your company sells? It is mainly in the advice. So people come to the store, and we have a little conversation so we can understand what they need. Then we try to find the best product for their needs. So when you sell a book for a special occasion, perhaps a birthday as a gift. If people tell you something about the person that is going to get it, it helps you find the right book. For office supplies, if you know a bit more about the type of pen you want to sell or a shredder, you can pick the right one. The personal contact and really understanding what the need is for the customer, then fulfilling the need. Fitting the need, we do not want to sell the thing with the highest price. We want the thing with the correct fit, and that is what we always try to do.

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? The only think I can think of next to having some entertainment is, we do a lot of gift-wrapping. We get a lot of compliments on that.

7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? Well we have quite a wide range of articles. You don’t see that everywhere anymore. If people are looking for something special, not the top 100 books or office supplies, but things you sell seldomly. We can provide that. We have that in the store. So for rarer articles, and when you need a bit more advice you come to us. That’s the difference between selling lots of books from the top 60 or top 40, and our wide range of articles.

8) When people think of Haasbeek Herenhof, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? Mostly they think of the books, I think and the creative articles. But also we have a lot of people who come regularly, and they come to the same employees, their favourites. There is definitely a sort of social relation. This also helps us because when you really understand a customer, and you have given advice that fits or doesn’t fit and you can remember that, next time you can help them even better.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? Well, I didn’t really know any crowdfunding actions, except for a website for start-ups. Kickstarter, I meant that. When we needed it we just searched for the best crowdfunding organisation, and we called some colleagues who had experience, and crowdaboutnow has experience with bookstores. You mentioned that their experience with bookstores helped you make the decision. Were there any other factors?

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? We talked with three organisations. These people seemed like professionals, and they were, so that helped. They were concrete in their ideas. We compared their ideas a bit. I really don’t remember the names of the other platforms, they were also Dutch and local, but I do not know. Crowdaboutnow had the best ideas for the bookstore.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? We hardly planned in advance, I think we did it all in a week. So I wrote some texts, I asked my daughter in law to film us, my wife made the video editing, I made the text. We gave it to crowdaboutnow and they put it on the website. Did you use social media as well? Yes of course. We had a temporary store. Because of the fire we rented a store near here and we approached all the customers in the store. We gave them a handout. We also had a laptop in store, with the website, so we could show people how it worked. So there was in-person promotion as well, with the flyers? Yes, that was the most successful promotion, the personal promotion.

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors? Well it was in-store, so it was between jobs. They were just working and everyone pointed out to the customer what was happening. So everyone was involved. The contacts with stores and my network of suppliers and friends, I did that. We used social media, which helped. The employees contacted their families so everybody was helping. Were the ideas improvised during the campaign? For example your wife had an idea, and you then later implemented it in the campaign? Yes, we did that. So you and your wife were the brains behind it, saying this is what we do and when we do it? Yes. Also, the campaign lasted only two weeks. Because then we had all we needed to. We needed

fifty thousand, and then you can double it, so we went forward until one hundred thousand. It was in two weeks so there was not a lot of improvisation anymore, because it was very successful to start.

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? We formulated our plans, and posted those on the website and in the flyers. So people knew what they were lending us the money for. So we had a lot of media coverage because of the fire, and a lot of people had to get out of their houses for the fire for a few days. The houses were above our store, so we had a lot of tv coverage and in newspapers. There we told people right from the start our plans to survive and get back, what we needed and what we needed in their help. We also told them we needed a new floor, new cash registers. Things like that. So it was really tangible. People like to think I gave a bit of this floor, it’s a bit their store now.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? I wasn’t promoting any products.

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? No, I don’t think so.

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign compared to expected sales (say 6 months after)? Yes, it was much better than expected. People were buying things, I don’t think they needed, just to help us clear the crisis. I think about 10 months afterwards it normalized.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? Yes it has changed. It’s a bit more.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? We are constantly trying to survive in our branch, so having a good social network with our customers, I think has improved. The things we sell, the concept of being good to our customers, has stayed the same. I also think the core concept, next to the social connection were important and are both still important. That is why people helped us.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? I did get some feedback, but it was because I asked a number of customers about the most important thing they wanted to have back immediately. So that’s a kind of feedback. It was immediately taken on board.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? Yes, I do. Yes, except maybe one person, who has worked really really long, and she has to adapt to our vision.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? Yes, I think it does. The advantages are in the bonding with our customers. That’s one of the things, why we still exist. Also I told you we had a lot of products. After the fire we had no products, but people gave us the time to rebuild everything. It takes time, I think it’s something I don’t see in other

stores. That people aren’t willing to wait in internet times. They want it yesterday. And now we have faithful people who think “I can wait a few days”.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on? One thing did is an incentive. We borrowed money and will pay a little interest, after a four-year period. Because Our insurance company doesn’t want to pay for insurance damages. We went to court with our lawyer for some money, and we informed our crowdfunders about the progress. Quite a big portion of them said, if you don’t get the money from the insurance company, I don’t mind if I don’t get my money back. That’s really nice of them. It’s different from other crowdfunding campaigns I think. The reason they wanted to lend us money is not to make a profit, but to help us. So that’s different from all campaigns I have seen so far. Also, we gave them a coupon for our store every year. They can get something for free with it. So it’s nice when you get a coupon because you can see, this person helped and you can be extra nice to them. It enhances the way you connect to each other, because not every person in my personnel will recognize a customer as a crowdfunder, someone who helped us. But turning in a coupon they will know. Showing the appreciation is made easier by coupons. It’s a little trick for people who want to get a better connection to their customer.

Mamamo 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? The company is owned by 2 people. Besides ourselves, we have 4 employees on limited hour contracts. We aiming towards a turnover annually of two-hundred fifty-thousand. Our business has two sides in that respect. We have a coffee-bar, like lunchroom where you can have breakfast, lunch, coffee and cake to go with that. What we do also offer is a children’s menu, so we have good quality food and drinks for the grown-ups as well as the children. The important thing for us is that as a parent you can come with your children and your children can eat something as well, which you don’t have to pay too much for and know that they will eat it, as it’s the same things they eat at home. For instance, you don’t have to order them any luxury items which you know they won’t eat, so you can order things that you know that they will appreciate. That’s the food and drinks side of our business, but we also have a toy/gift shop, which is for children as well. So it has nice, baby gifts, but also games and toys for kids age zero to about eight or nine. It varies from arts and crafts, to games they can play, some instruments. It’s all across the range. We also offer some home decoration items, and it’s clearly aimed towards the children’s rooms. So we have lamps, we have pillows, nice wall stickers, magnetic wallpaper, all kinds of things. So those are the two sides of the business that we have at the moment. (Do you have a certain split in mind, for example X percent for the food side and X percent for the toy/gift shop side?) It’s currently around 80% food and beverages and 20% toys and gifts, but we do want to expand our range of gifts part, to around the 30% mark.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? I am co-owner, together with Amanda Olijven. Together we run all sides of the business, so we deal with all sides ourselves. We also oversee the whole process, we are financially responsible, but we are also working in store. Present serving coffee, helping at the till, so everything that happens here we do as well. It’s 50/50 at the moment.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) The name we came across. It’s important that the name suits your company, it says something about who you are, but it’s also something that needs to be catchy, and also easy for people to read and say. It also has to suit the identity. That’s how we came to Mamamo because the word mama says mother in Dutch, my name is Monique, so that’s the Mo side of the name and Amanda, the first three letters of her name are in there as well. We thought that this would be a nice name as well, because we saw the possibility of having mamamo as a logo, because that would be nice and easily made into something which looks really good and really strong. It is also quite versatile to use. So that’s why we chose this name, because we aim ourselves at young families (with young children) we thought it would be good to name it mamamo. We gave a lot of thought to our logo as well, because it had to be strong, but also approachable, but still relevant to the time we are living in now, so graphic, and graphics is something we pulled through across our entire branding and promotional activities, because we feel it’s something that is near to us. There is a lot of graphic design around at the moment, in furniture and magazines, you can see it everywhere. It is so much a thing of the time and spirit now. We thought it was really important for us to have it now, we feel our logo represents that. We use two logos, actually, one where mamamo is split into three, where it is put below each other, we use that in our windows of our store because it looks like a nice image, rather than that you can read it easily. From left, to right we use that above our store, and the slogan underneath is “koffie, kroost, cadeau” so coffee. Kroost is like a Rotterdam name for children but we used it as well, because we are proud of our Rotterdam heritage, so we wanted to let the Rotterdam scene flow through our identity. Cadeau is of course gift in Dutch, because it is three, it starts with the same

letter, it is catchy, and it is something you can remember. That is how we came across the slogan as well. We definitely value them very highly. What is important to us is that our future goal is to open more stores, so we felt that we had to brand our company really strongly, so that we can copy our concept, to the next and the next, so that people can recognize by the colours or shapes that that’s Mamamo. It took us a while for us to pick the right name and logo, I think we had our graphic designer make about thirty logos or something more, so it took a while, but we are really happy with the one we have chosen now. (Do you want to move towards franchising in the future?) No we would prefer a chain of privately owned stores, but if that would work the way we planned it, we might, look at franchising as well, but first we want to oversee them ourselves. We want to spread around child-rich areas around Rotterdam first, and then other suburban areas. It might not be the best comparison, but we want people to be able to recognize Mamamo, like they recognize McDonalds.

4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? Yes there is actually, that’s probably more to do with the fact that the concept that we have chosen for is quite big abroad, but not so familiar in Holland. So the whole concept of a coffee café makes Dutch people think we are a day-care. It’s just starting to grow in the Netherlands, that children are more valued again in society, instead of more or less a nuisance, so if you can take them you will but if you can’t you won’t/ That’s turning again now, you see abroad that there are a lot of concepts like ours, but in Holland it is quite new, because people don’t really understand the link instantly between having an inspiring place and having your kids there as well, so they think it’s a day-care or something. So we still have people come in and ask us: what are you exactly? I don’t think that it is something to do with us not being clear in our communication, but it’s more the unawareness of the concept, I believe. The main thing for us, especially during the crowdfunding as well was to get people to understand what our USP is, and our USP is that we are aiming at the parents of course, but for them to have an experience in our store they can have a sit down, relax, have something nice to eat and drink and they can bring their kids along and the kids will have a nice time as well. That’s what we have tried to get across. The concept is still in its starting phases, so people have to understand it first and see it first, so you have to tell them yourselves.

5) What are the most important attributes of the product/service your company sells? The main thing we are focussing on is creating an experience that people will enjoy, and give them a moment in their busy lifestyle to relax and take a breath of air, but also have nice quality products. Around here there are a lot of concepts that have indoor play areas for children, and if they do that, the thing is aimed towards children, so they can play and there are really nice climbing jungles for children to go in. For the parents they are left at a table, on a really uncomfortable chair, listening to kids screaming for a couple of hours, and then you go home again. What we wanted to do was create a really nice inspiring atmosphere for the parents where they can have a proper lunch or real coffee, because that is one of our focus points. With good quality products, they can have a really nice experience in our shop or restaurant however you want to call it. They can bring the kids as well. The main thing is that you are welcome with your kids. What I would say, is that when you have children the need for having a nice relaxing moment, or having something nice to eat or drink doesn’t go away. What we offer is that you can still have that moment, but you can also bring your kids.

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? Definitely , I think that it still contributes though. It still enhances your experience. We do whatever we can to give that little bit extra for our guests. For instance, what we do is when you order a

coffee, we give you a piece of homemade chocolate to go with that. You are not paying for that, but we are giving it anyway, to make sure you have that right experience, and that you feel a little more appreciated than anywhere else. We also have a big table at the back of the restaurant ready for kids to do arts and crafts on. I have two kids myself and it’s always a nightmare when they want to do that at home, because it makes such a big mess. You know, glue on the table, they will go across the table with their markers. If they do that here, it’s fine, so it also accommodates them. You can do that here, it doesn’t affect us, but it’s great for the parents to have. The kids can have a creative moment in the shop and the parents can sit down and relax because they don’t have to do it themselves. Also, to go with that, we have quite a big playing area for the kids, with a big chalkboard wall, we have a big wooden cubicle where they can climb in and play, we have a play kitchen a small foosball table and a dollhouse. It’s making sure that the kids can do their own thing while you are having your own lunch or breakfast.

7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? Well I think the main thing is that the kids are welcome here. That’s the biggest difference here that we have from other lunchrooms and coffee bars around.

8) When people think of Mamamo, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? I think it’s still a mix, but at the moment they see us as a meeting place, so they use us to meet up with their friends. They all bring their kids, have a sit down and have a chat with each other and have something nice to eat and drink and they can do that here rather than at home. I think not so much the toys and gifts. That’s something that we really need to work on, and get that more out there. It’s more about having a place to sit down and relax.

9) Did how the brand was before the crowdfunding campaign show significant differences with the first idea of the brand? In what way? When combining all of the aspects of the brand, the symbolism and the company perception, was it markedly different from the first plans? No actually it didn’t. We had such strong ideas on what it should be, how it would look like, what it should feel like. We were so clear on what it needed to be so we used some pictures from Pinterest for example, what it was going to look like just to make sure that people know what they were getting into. For us also the crowdfunding campaign was essential, if it didn’t succeed, mamamo wouldn’t be realized. We really needed that money to succeed. There was nothing there yet until the crowdfunding succeeded, and we were really clear on what it was going to look like, what products we were going to sell and actually we have done all that. I’m quite proud that we stuck to that, and that should mean that the ideas that we had to begin with were the right ones, because it now seems to work all together. No, it didn’t change.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? Well not too much to be honest. We were looking at how we would get the funds that we needed, besides our own funds of course, to get to our own goal. Actually Amanda talked about crowdfunding, at first I was a bit hesitant because I don’t run my business for nothing. I want to be responsible for my own things, and raising funds through crowdfunding doesn’t release support, I felt at that point. Then I read into crowdfunding, the only part of crowdfunding I knew was the ones where people give you money, and then you do whatever you want to do with it, whatever the cause you wanted to raise funds for. Then when we started to research we saw that people can invest and then you can offer an interest as well, because you can offer a fair trade, especially at this time when the banks hardly give you any interest on your savings. It can be very interesting to invest in

crowdfunding. We thought that that would definitely suit us, and we are glad we went for raising funds through crowdfunding. We had this big marketing campaign, which was our crowdfunding campaign, which really helped us with launching mamamo, not only financially, but also in the publicity atmosphere, because everyone in the neighbourhood now knows who we are. We had heard of the pre-order, but it was not interesting for us.

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? We used crowdaboutnow, we had looked through a couple but CAN felt new and fresh. What was good for us to see was companies or people that used their platform, had certain links with our concepts, they were all new, or fresh, a bit in our target group so we felt that we would be best homed with them. Also the way that they brand themselves was quite suitable as well, which is why we chose them. We did look, but we had a conversation with one of our consultant, who is into the food and beverages and had a crowdfunding platform himself, but we didn’t feel it would suit us because it was so specific on food and beverages and we are not only that, so we felt we wouldn’t be in the right hands there. It had to be broader than that. We did consider another one, but I can’t remember the name.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? Everything. Of course we had to launch the actual campaign, which we did beforehand, there was a lot of work like shooting a video, taking a lot of pictures. We had to have a good communication to go on to the site and our Facebook. In the crowdfunding campaign, once we launched, we started looking at the media around us, the newspapers and we have been on tv so all things like that, we did when we started the crowdfunding campaign. We took it how it came, whatever was necessary we did. If we felt we needed some more exposure we sent emails to the local newspapers and to the local television stations, whatever we felt was necessary, we did. We had flyers printed, we flyered the whole neighbourhood, so all those things we did during the course of the crowdfunding. The only thing we did was the actual campaign beforehand, and then we did what felt necessary at that point. We of course knew we wanted to have flyers, but because it was our first time crowdfunding, you don’t know what is going to happen. Every week we had a meeting, about what do we need to do, what is going to happen, and when we are going to do it. So we did that weekly, because we only had 8 weeks to get it done. Also we had at that point, a business plan, we found the right space for mamamo, so we had to hurry up and really, really rushed into getting the campaign started. So we didn’t have a lot of time during the campaign. Then we prepared the campaign in about a week and afterwards we took our time and thought what are we going to do now?

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors? Well just us two. Just me and Amanda, we had friends help us with spreading the flyers and things like that, but we had no funds. Well crowdaboutnow sends requests to the crowdfunders that they already have, so that was their part in this. We tried to reach as many people around here as we could, and we did a lot of LinkedIn and Facebook, we emailed people, approached companies in the local area, to see if they were interested in investing in our campaign. All those things we tried to make it a success. We targeted areas, more so than how many companies per day. We set out certain areas we wanted to provide flyers to. So one day we would say this area is done, tomorrow we move on to the next one. We contacted previous crowdfunders to see if they could give us tips. They told us it was really hard to contact businesses up front, it was hard to get them then and there to invest, but it was hard and not very successful.

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? Yes definitely, I think that was the effort we had It was all about what the concept would be because we have so much belief in our concept. That was the main thing for us to get across to people to make sure that they understand what it is we are selling, but also what it would look like. To see how serious, it is, that we thought about the branding, that we have thought about who are we targeting and which products have to go with that. So that they could see that it’s a total concept and not just one aspect that’s that was looked into, but its everything and that whole package we needed to get across to people and that’s what we did. With the information on the flyer it was as complete as we thought that it could be, if we felt that something was not highlighted enough we could focus on that on Facebook or in other ways. So whatever we felt was necessary in actions for people around us, we addressed that. We tried to make sure that that came across properly.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? Yes, what we did, was, well it was hard of course because you cannot just go around and use brand names, if you are not already selling them. Before the crowdfunding there was nothing. We really realized after the campaign was successful. What we really did was hint for certain brands, for example we went to a fair in Paris for toys and gifts, and we published some pictures that we made there, and we showed them some brochures of brands that we did want to sell, because it’s key for us to understand our brand if they can link it to certain brands that they know. Then you can start placing it in your mind, saying where does it fit. So we hinted at that without using the actual names because we couldn’t have a contract with them yet. We did want them to know what kind of type of things we were looking at. We did that with Facebook posts, but also with promotion, like on king’s day we had a really nice tent here with big signs with kind of wooden boards, with pictures of products and how the store would look like. With that kind of way, we tried to get across to people, what kind of products we were going to sell and what we would be about. It was really hard, because you want to say we are going to sell habla, [unintelligible] and koekela, but we didn’t have them yet.

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? No, the crowdfunding was our actual first thing that we did with mamamo, so everything that we did was on the spot and that was what we were going to use. Well no, we already had that phase, because we did interview forms (questionnaires) around the neighbourhood, so a lot of things came out of that. Luckily about 80-90% of that were things that we were already thinking of. But there were still things that came out of that, that we actually used. Of course people always have tips and advice, but none of them were as fundamental to change things in our business strategy.

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign compared to expected sales (say 6 months after)? No, I can’t answer that, because of course we set out a target turnover but I think the crowdfunding added to the publicity. Because the crowdfunding was the start of the company, we had nothing to compare it with, so I wouldn’t be able to say yes or no to that. We haven’t even been open for three weeks, so it’s quite hard to say about that. It is dependent on so many things, which I cannot say this is directly because of the crowdfunding, obviously it does draw people in but because we also don’t have a counter, there is nothing for me to compare it with. It’s more something that we are aiming for to get our business profitable. It’s hard to say.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? Well definitely, because now people know who we are. We are really active on Facebook, and our

Facebook likes really started to grow once our crowdfunding campaign started. That has really contributed because people are tagging each other: “Have you seen this? Let’s go there” and that really works for us. That has definitely contributed to it. (You mentioned Facebook, have you been monitoring the developments, for example how active someone is, or how often they click on the page?) Well not yet, because we have been too busy, but that is something we are going to look into. We also offer free Wi-Fi in our store, which also people can check in with on Facebook, so that is something that will provide us with interesting and valuable information, but it is just due to the fact that we have been so busy with the opening and that’s something that we have not been able to do. It is definitely something we are going to look into yes.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? No, because our concept is quite diverse, and the thing we have focussed on first is to get the store open and make sure that we can offer the good breakfast and good lunch, coffee and nice gifts. We have done that, and last Saturday for instance we have had our first children’s birthday party. We are going to rent out the space in the evening, so all things that we have communicated in our crowdfunding, but we could not start with everything from day one. We have to take things one day at a time, and now we are starting to get a hang of the daily routine and getting those extra things in. It’s all things that we have mentioned in our campaign, for instance having workshops, having afternoons especially for the kids, we just haven’t had room to implement them yet because we have been caught up with everything to do with the opening. Now we are starting to do that, so it was actually postponed well for three weeks, but now we are starting to do more things we told people about.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? Yes definitely, I think again, regarding Facebook, it is an excellent tool for people to say what they want to. And they will. It’s very important for us to see how people react on every post that we do, for example when we launched the fact that we are going to have koekela, Facebook exploded, so we know that that has been a good decision. It’s a really good way to measure how things work. There are also some products that are not doing as well as it should, and we try to give them a boost by using social media, if it doesn’t work for example we are not getting enough reactions, we make sure it will sell out and then find something different. It did happen that someone suggested something that we took on board, but again it was something we were already thinking about, we were looking into having this brand and that was really positive of course.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? Yes, because they have to have “horeca” = (hotels, restaurant and catering) experience, but they also have to like children, because otherwise you are not in the right place if you work with us. It needs to be a good combination of both, and you need to be able to work hard of course. You definitely need to fit the concept, so if you like working in hospitality and creating good experiences with people and working with food and beverages, but also being able to relate to children and entertain them if necessary. Yes, absolutely they share the vision.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Yes, I think so. Especially, if you look at concepts similar to ours in the region, I think we are the one shop that has the best play area. One in the neighbourhood also sells books, but their play-area is a

bit small and doesn’t have as many things to do as here. I think we do sell the brands that people are really looking for. We have now brought them into one place, so that people do not have to go into the city centre any more to buy them, so they can come here instead. Also the food, because we also have people who now come to us to have a bit of koekela pie whilst they would have drove to the city centre to get them there. So geographic location is becoming an increasingly important advantage. Is this communicated to customers? Yes, definitely. We have picked our location very carefully because I think that’s key for our concept to succeed. We have picked a really local sub-urban area because that is where our target group lives, which is really important for us of course. For example, if you have taken your oldest child to school, then you can take your little one and come to us. You don’t have to go home first. So our position is definitely very important for our business, and it’s one of the biggest advantages for our business.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on? No I don’t think so. We are talking about such a short space of time, even if we had felt we had to change it, which we haven’t thankfully, then I don’t think we even would have had the time to do that. Because we started, our campaign went live in march, it’s only September now, so you see how fast these things can go. Definitely I think we have spoken about the biggest aspects about it.

Retro Lindo 1) What are the main numeric characteristics of the company, such as number of employees, annual sales and number of products on offer? It started as a one-man company. Then a friend of mine join after, as a business partner, so then it was a two-partner company 50/50. There are no employees per se, so just the two of us. Before the Kickstarter we did two other products, some kind of media centre and some kind of gaming pc. It was very low-call, we did a website and we rented a place in a shop in The Hague. We sold a few but mostly to friends. We didn’t really continue those products. The plan was to do more marketing and sell them online, but we were still trying to find the right product and what exactly we were doing. Then we thought of this one, the last one we did on Kickstarter, we could have done the same way as the other two. Just put it online and sell it online, but we thought Kickstarter will give us much more visibility and also pre-orders will help to order in volume and to keep the prices down. (Can you give me an indication of the expected annual sales you will make?) The original plan was to keep selling it after the Kickstarter. We were hoping to sell at least 30 per month, but in the meantime things have changed because we have met a few people who were willing to work with us. We realized that if we want to launch a product in retail or things like this, it needs to be much more professional. Not 3D printed or showing the Nintendo logo and things like this, so we are kind of in the middle of a big transition. So the plan to keep selling this product is cancelled because right now we are working on a new version with new branding and new design, also less focus on emulation, but still the focus on retro gaming. We want to avoid, because emulation is not everywhere legal, it is a grey area. We thought if we want to launch it big, it needs to be 100% non-infringing on Nintendo copyright for example. If we keep going with this new version, the plan will be to sell much more per month, with Kickstarter actually. We are trying to go to hire marketing and a lawyer with regulations and stuff, also to get a company to make the packaging. If we do that, the plan will be to sell at least a few thousand per year. The original plan with Kickstarter, was that we were hoping to sell 50 per month. (So at first it was intended to be a small business or extra source of income?) The idea was that we will continue to work on similar projects, to keep selling this on the side. We never intended to work 9 to 5 on Retro Lindo.

2) What is your position at the company and which responsibilities does it entail? Well, I was the owner, then with my business partner we were even. A bit before the Kickstarter started, but in the meantime he has changed his mind, so now I am alone again. As it is right now, I am still a one-man company. With the new plan for a new version for retail we will change to a “besloten vennootschap” in the Netherlands.

3) How do you value the company or product brand? (Follow-up, how valuable are brand name, logo and slogan respectively?) You mean what’s important for me in a brand? For me it will be quality, something that works as expected or advertised. It will be simplicity, because the idea of the products was to be plug and play. It will be also, respect in the sense of, we use open-source technology and we want to give back to the community. We make sure we credit all the names we use. (Have you thought for example for a new product that the name is the most important, or did you put special focus on making a logo or slogan?) No, we probably should have spent more time on that. For the logo, when we were preparing the Kickstarter campaign we were working with someone who was supposed to do the design and the communication apart. We kind of stepped out last-minute, we kept the logo he gave us but we are not designers ourselves and we did not have any plans to hire professional designers. Well we thought, but we didn’t go through with it. The logo is not something we really thought about that much. We wish we had a better one, but we didn’t spend much resources on it. Our name was called Lindobox, so all products started with lindo or had lindo in it, so we thought that was nice.

4) Is there any confusion among your customers because of how your brand is communicated in different media (website, adverts, crowdfunding)? Have you received notable feedback on this? No, because the name Lindobox wasn’t known by anyone really before the Kickstarter. When we did the Kickstarter, we made a special one-page website, especially for the retro lindo. There was no mention of Lindobox anywhere. There was a small mention at the bottom of the page, but the brand name was not associated with Kickstarter. I am sure most people who saw the Kickstarter probably never heard of Lindobox. (Did people ask questions because they didn’t understand the concept of the product or what you were trying to achieve?) A few, some people got confused at the beginning about the games, they were curious if the games were already included or not. But that’s about it. I think most people knew what it was and what it did.

5) What are the most important attributes of the product/service your company sells? Well I think for the retro lindo, that people loved the casing and the fact that it was very small. Otherwise it was just, that it speaks for itself. People saw that it can play all the old video games in a simple way. The one main feature and one main attraction for people.

For the next version, the one we want to make some changes for, I think we will focus on the same values. Basically the same thing but more polished, better looking. For the other projects, are actually something that I will keep doing on my own. Right now we are kind of splitting, I am partnering with someone else for the new version of retro lindo, at the same time I want to keep my same independence to do side projects of my own. For my own next projects, what I want to keep is do it yourself movement, kind of open source, sharing community. The fact that people can disassemble, do something else, repair, add functionalities themselves. Very much in line of raspberry pie. (So you are building forth on your association with raspberry pie?) Yes, for the new version of the retro lindo, we are trying to work more closely with them. For my other projects I am not sure I will use. It will always be based on a version of raspberry pie. It is still an early phase but I was thinking to work more with 3D printers, with drones and I was thinking to either do things like retro lindo, so sell a few hundred units, for example a drone or something I could do a Kickstarter and put it online. I was thinking instead of trying to be a company and sell products I could try to get more into organizing workshops or events. Yes, more coaching and consulting for individuals. Like a school presentation, and show the kids or teenagers how to build a retro lindo themselves. That was my plan for now, on the one side to keep going with the commercialization of the products, partnering with other people, the other side, still do my own little inventions. Whereas it can maybe end up in a new product or be part of some event/workshop things like this.

6) Are there any attributes that don’t add value, yet are still desired? I think if people like it, it’s valuable in my opinion. I think that the media centre part is something that might sound appealing at first, but I don’t think people are actually using retro lindo for watching movies and stuff, but it’s for the games. We added an infrared receptor on the box so you can control with a remote, I think these things might have looked nice on the video but I don’t think it’s something people actually use. That is the way we tried to show it, we tried to show equally that it was both gaming and media consumption. I think everyone saw the media as side value, and that most were interested in the game aspect.

7) What makes your product/service different from the competition? There wasn’t really any competition, because there is no such product available for sale in stores or online. There are people doing their own, tinkering with 3D printers and raspberry pie and stuff.

There are people working on their own solutions, but as something available to buy there is no competition at all. We noticed when we started Kickstarter, by coincidence, one day before us, somebody launched something very similar. As far as I know there is nothing available that you can buy directly. The competition would be more like, some people wonder why would I buy this, because I can install on my pc, and play Mario on pc. The only competition is the people who would rather do it themselves. (You mentioned another product the day before you launched, what set you apart from that product?) What was clearly different was the infrared receptor, so we added something so people could use their remote. The other differences were mostly under the hood. We were planning to do our own system, so we wanted to make sure that what we advertised worked fine. We said the machine can do this and that, and we were sure it could, whereas the other product, was a guy on Kickstarter he basically took another system that was available for free to download. He kind of promised the moon, in my opinion, he had a big list of systems that could work but actually he later had to add that for legal reasons half of the system couldn’t be there for the final version. I think he kind of oversold it, and sold something it couldn’t really do. Other than that the projects were really similar actually. He was using the first generation raspberry which was less powerful, he was not using his own software, the functionalities and everything else was kind of similar.

8) When people think of Retro Lindo, do they think of the product or the company? Is there a difference in perception? Both, many of them have asked what is next. I think some people see it as a brand, and that we will release small products. Quite a few of them see Retro Lindo as a company that will do something else. I think there is more trust now, because at the very beginning of the Kickstarter campaign, some people were not sure we would release anything or some people didn’t trust if it was working or not. So at first people wanted proof that it was working first, or that we would be able to deliver. Now they received it, we have very good positive feedback. So everyone is happy with it. I think we gained a lot of trust as a brand, as a name. If we release a new product under the same branding, people won’t be as sceptic, and more looking forward.

10) Which types of crowdfunding were known to the company before the campaign, and how informed was the company of crowdfunding usage? We never really thought of using another platform. I knew by name Indiegogo. For us it was quite clear that Kickstarter was the biggest and most famous. We realized after we launched that Kickstarter is big in the US and the UK, but in France not many people knew the website. In the Netherlands, it is not very common to have a credit card, and many people couldn’t pledge to the project because for them it was not convenient. There was no easy way to pay to the Kickstarter platform.

11) Which crowdfunding platforms were considered and why was the final decision made? We were quite sure we wanted to go with Kickstarter. We know Indiegogo is growing, but for us Kickstarter is the main crowdfunding campaign. So we never really hesitated about which one we were going to use.

12) How much of the crowdfunding campaign was planned out in advance by the company? Almost everything was planned in advance, there were two things that evolved or changed during the campaign. The first was the software, I was undecided whether I would continue to do my own, or if I would work with someone else who did something kind of similar, I also discovered online after I started working on mine. I was hesitating to use his system, or keep using mine. At the end I kept mine, so it wasn’t really a change. The other was the casing. At first we thought we would order the casing from providers or something, we thought according to volumes we could order a mould. If they volumes stayed low, we would order from someone with a 3D printer to print for us. But then we were more and more into this 3D movement, so we decided to buy our own printer and do it internally. So that was two little manufacturing changes during the campaign. (Were the content updates, such as email or Facebook posts prepared in advance?) No, they weren’t prepared in advance. We had no press release or nothing done in advance. When we finished drafting the main Kickstarter campaign, that was it. We started an address book of people to contact, press, websites stuff like this. So we started making plans of how we would promote the Kickstarter once it was online, but we didn’t have anything written or ready to be released in the next weeks. We didn’t have a fixed plan like this. (So the actual content was improvised during the campaign?) Yes, we improvised. We didn’t really have phase 1, phase 2, phase 3. When the campaign was launched the only goal was to make sure it is successful and hopefully exceed the expectation, but there were not really separate phases. So when the campaign started we skipped writing to people about it because there were no real changes in the first week and the last week.

13) How many staff were dedicated to the crowdfunding campaign, and how often did they interact with (potential) investors? It was the two of us. Well with investors almost zero. We weren’t actively looking for investors. I think for crowdfunders almost on a daily basis. We started writing emails to friends and families, asking them to forward as much as possible. We started writing to forums, social media, websites about games, about raspberry pie. We would either try to write a mail, try to call or just post something on an online forum. We tried to keep the Facebook new by posting something every two or three days, to make sure it was interactive. We even paid for Facebook promoted posts. Not much, I think two times during the campaign we paid a bit to make sure what we posted on Facebook will show up on the feed of people in London interested in retro gaming. We tried also local newspapers and things like this, we were calling to everyone, writing to everyone for a month non-stop. There were no plans, or phases but just constant shooting out bits about us and the product. On the side we also organised some local events, here in The Hague we had a videogame tournament. We also went to a game expo in France. We had a small booth so people could see and play. We didn’t prepare any flyers or anything, the hope was that they will go to the website, or skype or straight to the Kickstarter and buy one if they like it that much.

14) Were special measures taken to promote only the company during the campaign? No, it was always only about the product.

15) Were special measures taken to promote only the product during the campaign? Yes, even on the Kickstarter page it doesn’t say created by Lindobox, it only says Created by Alexis Ramel & Martin Perrin. We didn’t introduce ourselves as the Lindobox company, we just introduced ourselves as two individuals.

16) Were specific company activities (such as promotion) changed as a consequence of the crowdfunding campaign? Yes and no, we basically focussed 100% on the campaign. The other activities were completely left aside. The company was still very new, except those two little products we did before, there were no daily activities per se. Our daily activities were to try to find something that works, a product that works, or a line of work that would make the company work. So when we found this and saw there was interest, we focussed on this 100%. It’s not like we had another customer base to take care of during the campaign. (As a result of the crowdfunding, was the structure of the company or activities changed as a result of the campaign?) Not really. It would have changed, but my business partner decided to leave shortly after the campaign finished. Then there was this investor that wanted to change the product. Our idea was to continue the activity, to work on an online store and work on making sure that manufacturing was smooth. Instead of struggling with cardboard at home, so we were planning on getting organized and to do those kind of things, but things have changed in the meantime. So it’s difficult to say it has changed, now it’s like this. It is still an ongoing process. What is clear is that it gave us a lot of visibility. Many people got to know our name, or lindobox, even locally in The Hague, or in different countries I sometimes meet people who have heard of this. Professionally, people want to work with us and do something bigger. That is a big change, but it is still ongoing, so I cannot tell you right now what has changed.

17) Was there a noticeable difference in sales after the campaign compared to expected sales (say 6 months after)? Yes, because we didn’t have any projections. The Kickstarter made us realize that there was a big demand for this, but after the Kickstarter, the after is still developing. The original plan was after the Kickstarter we would just deliver all the units. Then open an online store, and keep taking orders for the same product. This didn’t happen because we are doing something different, so it’s difficult to put metrics on it. I know there is many, many people, by Facebook, email or twitter asking where they can buy one. I believe if there was an online shop, at the current pace we would maybe sell 40 units per month. And that is just doing nothing more. If we continued to sell it online, we would have continued to do some marketing. Whereas as it stands now, there were no posts on Facebook for two months, no posts on twitter, we didn’t communicate any further. And still every two days we are receiving mails asking where they can buy one. (Do you still take orders, or have you stopped manufacturing?) No I have stopped. After Kickstarter maybe 5 units. Some people are asking by email. They couldn’t wait for the website or new version. It’s really case by case.

18) Has the amount of direct communication with (potential) customers changed as a result of the campaign? Yes, it has stopped completely. We wanted to continue, but if it changes, then it is better to show something before we start communicating again. The idea was, after we delivered all the units from Kickstarter communication would have been, the store is open, you can pre-order. Since the store is not open and we are not selling this unit anymore, and the next version is still in progress. That is why there is not really anything to communicate.

19) Has the company changed a lot from its original idea, specifically after the crowdfunding campaign? Well yes and no. What has changed is that, for me it was my first entrepreneur experience. So I gained the trust that I could actually build something and live off building those things. I was doing this beside my full-time job. Now I am full-time on this, and being more serious about being in business and an employee. The other big change is that people and investors are getting in touch so

we can work together on something bigger. This would have never happened if the Kickstarter didn’t work. Increased (potential) for future collaborations. The Kickstarter as a good gauge project, now the way it looks is it is going to be a company with a commercial product. This is all thanks to the success of the Kickstarter. (So Kickstarter was more a proof of concept and you are now developing the product further?) Yes.

20) Have you received feedback on particular product/company attributes during the crowdfunding campaign which you later focussed on improving or better utilizing? Some improvements for the hardware, for example the quality of the controllers was not the best. So we are trying to get better ones for the next version. Software wise I want to be more clear about what it is, what it can do, how it is built. Some people didn’t know if the games were included, others thought we were using another system, whereas it was actually our work we were using in an open source project. So we want to clarify how the system works, and the hardware, but no big changes. In a way yes, but it is always the same question. People always ask if we can add more emulators, or can I play this console or this console. They would love if we add more and more systems. Right now it is not taken on board, because we have done the best we can now. The raspberry pie is not powerful enough to add more things. Also sometime people wanted some obscure console, but we didn’t have the resources, because it was only two of us to work on something that almost no- one would use. It was more small requests.

21) Do you specifically hire employees because they share the company vision? Does everyone share the vision at present? (Would you specifically work with or hire partners that are on board with companies that agree with open source?) In terms of communication, I think it is important that they are on board. For everything else I don’t think it really applies. For example, the packaging company it doesn’t matter I think. (If your company starts expanding, would you make it an important point that employees who work directly for you, share your ideas and philosophy?) Yes, I guess it depends on which position, if it is development and design, it would be an important point.

22) Do your employees or ways of working provide advantages that your competitors do not have? Is this communicated to customers? Yes, I will say that because before we started we played it very safe. We knew what was realistic in terms of deadline and features. We knew we could be fast and work hard to make sure, because we promised very tight deadlines to make sure it was appealing. I think that was a quality we had that made the whole thing possible. That we knew exactly what we were capable of and we knew how fast we could work to get the result done. (Was that clearly communicated to your Kickstarter crowd during the campaign?) Not really no. I think something more important for us is that we didn’t actually need to mention to people that we could do it. If you announce it, normally it’s because you will end up doing it. Somehow it seems that people still need to hear that you are going to deliver. For example, someone asked us if we thought it was realistic and we thought we could do it. For us it was a strange question, because we started this and are not going to answer “No, we can’t do it”. Somehow it needed to be communicated a bit more, we should have done that maybe.

23) Have you noted any changes since the crowdfunding campaign ended, which we have not yet touched on?

No, I think except recognition and trust. Now it’s more common that people have heard about it. The online community know that we delivered and are actually satisfied with the product. I would say that there are no other changes for the product.

Annex 2 General comparison chart General comparison chart Saint Basics Vof Afriek Spiazzo Poopypets Seepje Dutch Weedburger correctbook haasbeek mamamo Retro lindo (Clothing) (Clothing) (Restaurant/Cafe) Small and 3 Owners, sales 2 employees, 5 tailors on 3 owners 2 owners, 7 2 owners, 2 5- 6 employees, 1 full- One man company 2 owners, Annual 2 owners, 4 One-man company. Medium between 150k and freelancer basis. Revenue 16 employees employees. employees and 1 timer, part-timers + Freelance revenue of 1,8 employees on Expected revenues Enterprises 400k, Black and white of 40000€ Projection of Minimum of 18k Intern. freelancers. designers. million euros. 9 limited hours’ were 60k annually, t-shirts and underwear 360k-500k€ units expected to be Revenues 200 – Revenue 2014: 200- Sales are employees, of which contract. but company has line revenue shipped (calculation 240k Euros 210k approximately 20 6 full-time. Aim for annual since refocussed. for approx revenues) 2 products on offer thousand units. turnover is 250k Position General director, Co-founder, responsible for Financial officer Founder and CEO. Marketing and CEO Owner and sole Owner, part of daily Co-owner, all Owner and sole business Strategy and branding, sales and of 3 partners. Financial, general communications Acquisition, employee. operation, responsibilities split employee. Marketing coordination. management and assignments, marketing, down the middle marketing/sales. communications communication etc. Crowdfunding symbid Oneplanetcrowd Symbid Kickstarter Oneplanetcrowd oneplanetcrowd Crowdaboutnow Crowdaboutnow Crowdaboutnow Kickstarter platform utilised (+Kisskissbangbang) Brand elements 1. The emotional 1. Everything is important, 1. We haven’t put 1. So building the 1 But we do 1. It resonates well 1. I think the brand 1. We are a local 1. We definitely 1. For the logo, when aspects are: beauty, but P.R. is the most a patent, or brand is very communicate with a lot of people. It is developing in store. So our brand, value them very we were preparing honesty, purity, important. We get a lot of secured the name important to us. Q3 through our opens up a brand image. Also if you can say that, highly. What is the Kickstarter fairness and compliments on the yet. It isn’t 2. The Poopycat packaging and conversation with because it is linked everybody knows important to us is campaign we were functional aspects are branding, I think our trademarked yet, name is stronger than products, so we try to people about what is in to the charities, our name (in Alphen that our future goal is working with softness, comfort, company is being so that’s a smart the logo itself. But not communicate the burger, why are we with helping people aan de Rijn), in the to open more stores, someone who was good fit, good design. sustainable is very thing to do in the we didn’t really only our brand logo, using seaweeds, which in Africa and Latin region. That’s our so we felt that we had supposed to do the Q3.1 important to be sustainable next couple of assess it separately, but also on the boxes is good because we America. So I think brand. Q3 to brand our design and the 2. The logo is quite in some way. Q3 months. Q3 so we look at it is that the shells are like to not only sell a that is good for my 2. When you go to company really communication distinctive, it is 2. I think we put a lot of 2. We haven’t had combined. Q3 packed in, there is product, but most of brand image.Q3 the crowdfunding. I strongly, so that we apart. We kind of important to us, and time into building and time to build a 3. It is really also a sentence on all spread a new 2. I think the name think that people can copy our stepped out last- people are starting to sustaining the brand, so this reputation yet. Q8 important to top which says let mentality about our is the most appreciate us, concept, to the next minute, we kept the recognize it. Q3.2 guy who is helping us with differentiate and to nature do your food culture. That has important, because because we always and the next, so that logo he gave us but 3. The slogan has it. He is a professional, so be quite honest it’s laundry. Q3 a very good value the people connect help them now they people can recognize we are not designers undergone some he is also pushing it. Q3 important to be cool. 2.. Because when certainly. Q3 the “correct” part of helped us. Q3 by the colours or ourselves and we did changes since the 3. We have a lot of things to Like we don’t really everyone is like “you 2. The slogan we often the correctbook to 3. No, the brand shapes that that’s not have any plans to start. We started out tell about how the products know many brands in shouldn’t use a use is taste the change, the charity. Q3 doesn’t differ. Q9 Mamamo. Q3 hire professional with positioning it as are made, and there is a lot the pet industry plastic bottle because although we are trying 3. I do not have 2. It took us a while designers. Well we cleaner underwear, of opportunities for which are actually it is bad for your to think of a few new especially a slogan for us to pick the thought, but we but some people branded content. I have so cool. Q7 image and brand, and ones recently. They all on my website, I right name and logo, didn’t go through associated it with many ideas, so we want to 4. No crowdfunding people interpret that have to do with like: just use whiteboard I think we had our with it. Q3 detergent. Q3.2 do way more and build on didn’t really have an ad bad for the “Saving the world, one notebooks, so what graphic designer 2. I think we gained 4. No, it it. Q4 influence on that environment, which bite at a time” which is the book is about. make about thirty a lot of trust as a (crowdfunding) has 4. We very much like to [brand, symbolism is not necessarily what we are doing, Q3 logos or something brand, as a name. If nothing to do with it focus on the quality of the and company true of course, then changing the way we more, so it took a we release a new (changes to brand). products. It has to be elements] for us. But that was how we eat, and thus giving while, but we are product under the Q3.3 checked and we go there all again the company decided to use a the planet a chance to really happy with the same branding, the time to check was already growing cardboard carton. Q4 renew its self-healing one we have chosen people won’t be as production, it may be without the capacity, which we are now. Q3 sceptic, and more commercially not smart, campaign. Q9 destroying right now. 3. It might not be the looking forward. Q8 but for now, together with Q3 best comparison, but 3. For retro lindo we the branding it’s good. Q22 3. We have tried to we want people to be tried to do something 5. Establishing the brand find a new name for able to recognize new, a bit better in since then [completing example, but we Mamamo, like they terms of design. It crowdfunding] yes. I think didn’t. We are happy recognize was not a change it also attracted other with this one and we McDonalds. Q3 from the past, investors. It was still family are keeping it. Q3 because there was but it gets more credibility 4. We tried taking the not really a past. Q9 if more people invest. Q23 concept apart, so selling only the patty, but that didn’t really work. Q3

Chart 2 General comparison chart

Saint Basics Vof Afriek Spiazzo Poopypets Seepje Dutch Weedburger correctbook haasbeek mamamo Retro lindo (Clothing) (Clothing) (Restaurant/Cafe)

Communication 1. A little bit (of 1. I think it is very 1. I’m just thinking if 1. There is not much 1. Is there any 1. No, I think most 1. Most of the time, 1. Yes, I think 1. Yes there is actually, 1. A few, some confusion). We did important, so that is that was possible confusion about confusion among people realize pretty they say I did not 100% [of that’s probably more to people got confused most of the what we are trying to because most of the poopycat. We are your customers soon, that we are not expect that it works contributors] were do with the fact that the at the beginning communications do, but I don’t know if it investors were very close to that because of how your selling soft drugs in so well. Q4 familiar with the concept that we have about the games, ourselves. Q4 is working. I think the anonymous, so there because we have a brand is our food. Most people 2. Some of the shop. I knew every chosen for is quite big they were curious if 2. Amount of strategy for that is not wasn’t much few international communicated in understand the wink. people, do not single name on the abroad, but not so the games were communication very fine-tuned yet. Q4 opportunity to licences which have a different media Not really confusion understand the 25% list of contributors. familiar in Holland. So already included or unchanged. Q18 2. No [the amount of communicate with local Facebook, like (website, adverts, there. More like a rule, so I donate 25% Q4 the whole concept of a not. But that’s about 3. Some direct communication them while the poopycat Poland crowdfunding)? smile on people’s of the proceeds in 2. We emphasise a coffee café makes it. Q4 communication has not changed] campaign was still poopycat Portugal, it Have you received faces. Q4 books to Africa. bit more that our Dutch people think we 2. Yes, it outsourced to because there weren’t going. Even now that is a risk for us and a notable feedback on 2. No [communication Some people do not customers helped are a day-care. Q4 [communication] partners. Q22 sales before we have been open for bit strange, as they this? has not increased]. We understand if I send us survive. Q9 2. So we still have has stopped crowdfunding. The 2 months, I am going want to create their No, I don’t think so. are now in a position money, or if I send 3. Yes it [direct people come in and ask completely. We emails stay the same to send an email in 2 own crowds. Q4 At least I have never to do more of these books. For example, communication] us: what are you wanted to continue, and are personal. I or 3 days, I don’t have 2. Probably it has heard it. Q4 one day events, a paper I was in, AD, has changed. It’s a exactly? I don’t think but if it changes, couldn’t really say a to do it, but it is nice changed, because in 2, At that point because we have the they said that bit more. Q18 that it is something to then it is better to before and after. Q18 to keep our investors every interaction we (when it was full) new trailer. Q18 correctbook is also 4. Also, we gave do with us not being show something 3. For example we had a up to date. Q13 learn. But consciously we quit, we stopped sending money, but I them a coupon for clear in our before we start pop-up shop in April, 2. At the moment we I would not be able to communicating did not say anything our store every communication, but communicating now it’s July and we are are open for 2 months pinpoint an exact about it. At that like that ever. Q4 year. They can get it’s more the again. Q18 finally getting a movie and the improvement. Q18 point there were 3. Yes, I talk more something for free unawareness of the 3. For example, that tells the concept of communications to all more important directly with the with it. So it’s nice concept, I believe. Q4 someone asked us if the shop and we put the guests is way things to do. Q12 mail, or I have more when you get a 3. The concept is still we thought it was Polaroid pictures of the better. So we are 3. Although, I’m not meetings with them coupon because in its starting phases, realistic and we makers in the pocket of doing a lot more sure it was because to talk about the you can see, this so people have to thought we could do the clothing, so while marketing now, of the campaign that book or show the person helped and understand it first and it. For us it was a making the clothing that brochures, flyers and people interact with designs they could you can be extra see it first, so you have strange question, you are holding. We we have been in the us more. Q18 want. Q18 nice to them. Q23. to tell them yourselves. because we started know this is a way to paper twice, so that 4. We communicate Q4 this and are not tell how we are working had a bigger impact actively those 3 4. We did want them to going to answer “No, and there should be for us. Q18 things: 1 is sieza, 2 know what kind of we can’t do it”. more of those things. 3. Here we listen to is improving type of things we were Somehow it needed Q22 the people on the conditions in Nepal, looking at. We did that to be communicated 4. Yes, we are working island, like what do 3 is preserving with Facebook posts, a bit more, we together with a PR they need instead of nature. Those three but also with should have done agency now. Q16 what do we want to points are promotion, like on that maybe. Q22 do. Like having communicated by king’s day we had a dinner with children, us often. We believe really nice tent here then the food needs to that those things with big signs with come quickly and the create value for us in kind of wooden service has to be great the long run. Q22 boards, with pictures in a nice environment of products and how and those are the the store would look things we are trying to like. Q15 keep high. Q22

Saint Basics Vof Afriek Spiazzo Poopypets Seepje Dutch Weedburger correctbook haasbeek mamamo Retro lindo (Clothing) (Clothing) (Restaurant/Cafe)

Product/service 1. Functional aspects 1. We added bowties 1. So we made a big 1. The three core 1. The cardboard 1. Because we work 1. The smart binding 1. The personal 1. What we wanted 1. For the next attributes are softness, and ties. Q20 child’s corner, with values for our bottle we use now is with seaweed, that is makes the book contact and really to do was create a version, the one we (Non-trivial) comfort, good fit, 2. In many things, for toys and stuff so product and product really because of the definitely a USP so unique. Q7 understanding what really nice inspiring want to make some good design. Q3.2 example we did children can play development are: campaign and the to speak because 2. I also make the the need is for the atmosphere for the changes for, I think 2. Softness, Good skirts for women, while the parents eat sustainability, fun feedback during it. people are interested books on demand, so customer, then parents where they we will focus on the sourcing of and everyone was and have their rest and convenience. Q9 in the story and I customise the book fulfilling the need. can have a proper same values. materials, like make more and the child’s Q5 nutrients behind it. with the designer. So Fitting the need, we lunch or real coffee, Basically the same Durability, Stylish as women’s clothing. corner is also away 2. We as Poopypets Q7 the companies or do not want to sell because that is one of thing but more well as Eco-friendly So that is what we from the restaurant. feel we can 2. We have charities can make a the thing with the our focus points. Q5 polished, better Q5 will focus on in the Q5 revolutionize the pet created our own whole new book with highest price. We 2. It did happen that looking. Q5 3. Yes, people asked next crowdfunding. 2. It is difficult to industry by bringing identity for their logo on it, and I want the thing with someone suggested 2. It is still an early us for specific Q20 find a combination, products which are think that is my the correct fit, and something that we phase but I was colours. One of the but we don’t have actually showing vegetarian foods. biggest market tool. that is what we took on board, but thinking to work colours we hadn’t any competition on innovation and Q7 Q7 always try to do. Q5 again it was more with 3D planned to do was a the whole island so focusing on aspects 3. We are just 3. After I delivered 2. I think, if anything something we were printers, with drones dark blue boxer we are the only one, that you can see in going our own the books, I got a lot has changed, it is that already thinking and I was thinking to short, now we have it so to get all the many industries with course, let them. of feedback, that we show more how about, we were either do things like in our new consuming guests, the trends of We have reached people lost their appreciative we are looking into having retro lindo, so sell a collection. Q20 you have to make sustainability, marker, or if lines are of their help. Q9 this brand and that few hundred units, them happy, all of getting better the deep water so written for a longer was really positive of for example a drone them. Q5 products and more to speak, so let time, it is harder to course. Q20 or something I could 3. Now a lot of honest products so them build their erase after a longer do a Kickstarter and people from the we are at least own raft and try to time period. So I put it online. Q5.1 outside are now starting to be a set sail. We have to solve these 3. Some saying can you do lifestyle brand in a decided we are two problems, so I improvements for this or is it possible pretty traditional have special wipings the hardware, for to do a high tea for business. Q7 not bothered by =(cloths) and a example the quality 30 people. That is 2. Our products are that. Q8 special pen loop of the controllers possible now, and it based around small- 4. Yes we have where you can put was not the best. So means we are medium sized cats had comments to your pen or marker we are trying to get picking up and for now. So some add to the flavour in. So that kind of better ones for the creating extra long- people with really and have taken it feedback is very next version. Q20 term revenue. Q20 large breeds, helpful. Q20 couldn’t use the on board. Q20 product, so we gave them a refund. Of course we are developing products for larger cats. Q20

Saint Basics Vof Afriek Spiazzo Poopypets Seepje Dutch Weedburger correctbook haasbeek mamamo Retro lindo (Clothing) (Clothing) (Restaurant/Cafe)

Product/service 1. Recyclable 1. The logo, story 1. We change our 1. Basically the cat’s 1. For example, with 1. Well, you know 1. On the inside of 1. The only think I 1. We do whatever 1. I think that the attributes packaging. label. Q6 menu 6 times a year, hygienic aspect is the shell product we the hamburger the book there is a can think of next to we can to give that media centre part is (Trivial) Differentiating just with the season. valued a lot, so the gave 2 cotton comes with certain small description of having some little bit extra for our something that might aspect is So we just make litterbox is a cleaner laundry bags. People toppings. So we use how it works, and if entertainment is, we guests. For instance, sound appealing at transparency. what we want to solution for your cat, have said that it is too like pickles, we use the people like it, do a lot of gift- what we do is when first, but I don’t think Openness, Sketches make, and say hey so Veterinarians sell much, that they buy those kind of then place a photo of wrapping. We get a you order a coffee, people are actually published Online this is nice for this it on that area. Q6 it every month and attributes that if you it on social media. lot of compliments we give you a piece using retro lindo for before actually time of year, for 2. What we also see, they now have eight compose it right, The people who read on that. Q6 of homemade watching movies and making it. Q6 example asparagus depending on the laundry bags and it’s they add to the that can experience it 2. But also we have a chocolate to go with stuff, but it’s for the with ham. People market but especially too much. So that is flavour. too. Q6 lot of people who that. Q6 games. Q6 don’t come here for a the less advanced when we decided to Q6 come regularly, and 2. We also have a big 2. We added an special type of food, areas or economies, put only one laundry 2. Because of the they come to the table at the back of infrared receptor on because it is a they often really bag in the package. result, we managed same employees, the restaurant ready the box so you can surprise every time don’t focus on the So I can’t really put to build a new trailer, their favourites. for kids to do arts and control with a they walk in. Q6 sustainability aspect that directly to the which helps us to There is definitely a crafts on. You can do remote, I think these of it. So the eco part campaign promote our cause sort of social that here, it doesn’t things might have we really focus on it, specifically. Q20 better. In a better relation. Q8 affect us, but it’s looked nice on the but it may not be that looking way. It really great for the parents video but I don’t important to our helped in that way. to have. Q6 think it’s something customers Q16 3. We have to take people actually use. eventually. Q6 3. Last year we things one day at a Q6 changed the recipe a time, and now we are 3. They would love if little bit, we’ve been starting to get a hang we add more and selling it on the of the daily routine more systems. festivals, because we and getting those Right now it is not need to upscale the extra things in. taken on board, production process It’s all things that we because we have Q20 have mentioned in done the best we can our campaign, for now. Q20 instance having workshops, having afternoons especially for the kids, we just haven’t had room to implement them yet because we have been caught up with everything to do with the opening. Q19

Saint Basics Vof Afriek Spiazzo Poopypets Seepje Dutch Weedburger correctbook haasbeek mamamo Retro lindo (Clothing) (Clothing) (Restaurant/Cafe)

Company 1. Yeah, I think we 1. If you compare 1. The only 1. We as Poopypets feel 1. We are small and 1. The most 1. I also make the 1. Well we have 1. Well I think the 1. The only differentiation put more emphasis on with sustainable restaurant in the we can revolutionize the very personal and we important thing I books on demand, so quite a wide range of main thing is that the competition is the the participation of brands, there is a Ring of Amsterdam, pet industry by bringing try to keep that. Our think it that you I customise the book articles. You don’t kids are welcome people who would our clients and I think view that they so 140.000 people products which are little structure should not be with the designer. So see that everywhere here. That’s the rather do it we want to do more approach us to tell pass by car, we are actually showing definitely makes that clouded by the the companies or anymore. Q7 biggest difference themselves. Q7 with that in the future. us about the only restaurant innovation and focusing an advantage in our thought that once charities can make a 2. There is definitely here that we have 2. What was clearly So for instance, we sustainability, so that is visible from on aspects that you can opinion. Q22 you get on a platform whole new book with a sort of social from other different was the want to do our branding is the ring/highway. see in many industries 2. We communicate that there are people their logo on it, and I relation. This also lunchrooms and infrared receptor, so crowdsourcing with different than those. That’s a good with the trends of actively those 3 in line waiting to think that is my helps us because coffee bars around. we added something our collection, so that Q7 marketing tool for sustainability, getting things: 1 is sieza, 2 donate money biggest market tool. when you really Q7 so people could use we can develop a new 2. I think what is us. Q7. better products and is improving because your idea is Q7 understand a 2. No, because our their remote. The style of boxer short or really strong about 2. The things didn’t more honest products so conditions in Nepal, so good. You really 2. So I got many customer, and you concept is quite other differences t-shirt and ask people our products and happen, so people we are at least starting to 3 is preserving have to work it, and contacts through have given advice diverse, and the thing were mostly under to come up with ideas about our way as a didn’t want to come, be a lifestyle brand in a nature. Those three really have to talk to crowdfunding, for that fits or doesn’t fit we have focussed on the hood. We were and upload their company is the but now we are on pretty traditional points are people in person, it’s example I am and you can first is to get the store planning to do our favourite photos from transparency, so the the front row of business. Q7 communicated by us a friends and family standing on a remember that, next open and make sure own system, so we nature and we will story label and the Amsterdam so the 2. It is really important often. We believe thing as well. Q23 socially responsible time you can help that we can offer the wanted to make sure take the pattern and website. Like if highway can see our to differentiate and to be that those things market in November them even better. Q8 good breakfast and that what we sample the photos and people also ask us pictures and work quite honest it’s create value for us in and they also asked 3. The houses were good lunch, coffee advertised worked put it on a boxer short. questions. Q8 chairs a lot of important to be cool. the long run. Q22. me because of the above our store, so and nice gifts. We fine. Q7 Q16 3. Many things have people sitting and Like we don’t really crowdfunding we had a lot of tv have done that, and changed, but the dining there so we know many brands in platform. Q19 coverage and in last Saturday for vision and the are a kind of the pet industry which newspapers. There instance we have had motivation why it business card of are actually cool. Q7.1 we told people right our first children’s started have stayed Ijburg. Q7 3. Second and most from the start our birthday party. Q19 the same. Q9 3. It was a thing we important reasons for us, plans to survive and 3. We are going to 4. Last time I was in were very by presenting yourself get back, what we rent out the space in Rwanda, I looked enthusiastic about in in crowdfunding, you needed and what we the evening, so all into working the beginning, but position yourself as an needed in their help. things that we have together with a local then we realized we underdog which makes We also told them communicated in our designer. To need revenue X to you very likeable for a we needed a new crowdfunding, but produce in her do plan A, and lot of media to write floor, new cash we could not start atelier, and with revenue Y to do about you and also registers. Things like with everything from another girl who plan B. So we have customers, they like to that. So it was really day one. Q19 could work locally to build up step by be part of a new project. tangible. People like with us to check step and every three Q9 to think I gave a bit everything to save months we have an 4. No crowdfunding of this floor, it’s a bit costs on us going idea and we are didn’t really have an their store now. Q14 there. Q16 going to do it. Q20 influence on that [aspects of brand, symbolism and the company perception] for us. But again the company was already growing without the campaign. Q9.5

Saint Basics Vof Afriek Spiazzo Poopypets Seepje Dutch Weedburger correctbook haasbeek mamamo Retro lindo (Clothing) (Clothing) (Restaurant/Cafe) Internal Resources 1. I think it is much 1. Because we are 1. Last Monday we 1. If you take a look 1. It is not something No noteworthy 1. No, they 1. The advantages 1. Especially, if you 1. I think that was a easier to work from not from fashion, had the first staff from a competitive to do with how we comments. [partners/employees] are in the bonding look at concepts quality we had that one vision, so that is that’s a meeting, which was perspective, we structure our are not standing with with our customers. similar to ours in the made the whole very important. disadvantage. But we good to have the develop really company. Our the philosophy. They That’s one of the region, I think we are thing possible. That Yes, everyone shares know how to work in whole staff together innovative products, competitors are very just design the things, why we still the one shop that has we knew exactly the same message. Africa, which is an and we told them our but they are also easy large companies like font/front for the exist. Also I told you the best play area. what we were Q21 advantage. Q22 vision of the to copy. Q22 Unilever, Proctor & companies. That’s it. we had a lot of Q22 capable of and we 2. I don’t think our 2. We very much like company so what is 2. We have a clearer Gamble, Ecovers, Q21 products. After the 2. I think we do sell knew how fast we “skype company” to focus on the spiazzo, what we focus on particular and they are not very fire we had no the brands that could work to get the aspect is an quality of the want to do, how we focus, with particular personal. We are products, but people people are really result done. Q22 advantage. I think it products. It has to be connect with the characteristics those small and very gave us the time to looking for. We have 2. For example, is sometimes easier checked and we go guests. Q22 are all things that the personal and we try rebuild everything. now brought them someone asked us if when everyone is in there all the time to 2. They are also a larger companies to keep that. Our Q22 into one place, so we thought it was the same building. check production, it source of counselling don’t have. Q22 little structure 2. That people aren’t that people do not realistic and we So you can share the may be from 50 people, for 3. The main thing definitely makes that willing to wait in have to go into the thought we could do same goals and ideas commercially not example there is a was we were a an advantage in our internet times. They city centre any more it. For us it was a and feeling but on smart, but for now, lawyer in there and company that is opinion. Q22 want it yesterday. to buy them, so they strange question, the other hand it is together with the that brings extra active in a particular And now we have can come here because we started very efficient and a branding it’s good. knowledge. So if you market and due to the faithful people who instead. Q22 this and are not lot of freedom not to Q22 need something or crowdfunding think “I can wait a 3. We have picked going to answer “No, be bound to one have a problem you campaign, you few days”. Q22 our location very we can’t do it”. place. need a solution for, become a more carefully because I Somehow it needed Q22 you can still reach global thing which is think that’s key for to be communicated out to those investors good. Q23 our concept to a bit more, we should and ask for their succeed. We have have done that advice. They are an picked a really local maybe. Q22 extra helpline. Q23 sub-urban area 3. The other group because that is where retweet and share on our target group social media, the lives, which is really posts we send out so important for us of we don’t have to course. Q22 work by ourselves. Even if they haven’t been here yet it helps us share and do the marketing for Spiazzo Q23 4. We have been operating for 2 months and are debt- free. But our biggest competitor (NAP) took 6 years to pay off his debts and then the whole company is his. Once we have paid off the small rest of a few thousand in debt, all the revenue can go to covering costs and wages. Q23

Saint Basics Vof Afriek Spiazzo Poopypets Seepje Dutch Weedburger correctbook haasbeek mamamo Retro lindo (Clothing) (Clothing) (Restaurant/Cafe) Special notes 1. Yes, I think we 1. I think the 1. For us it is really 1. The reason for us 1. I think it also goes 1. The most 1. No, I think we 1. It [a coupon] 1. We are talking 1. No, I think except gained a lot of crowdfunding really good to have the 50 to use crowdfunding for the one in 2014, important thing I have everything. enhances the way about such a short recognition and followers and was more a change in investors behind us, was two-fold but what you see is think it that you Q23 you connect to each space of time, even if trust. Now it’s more retweets. We went the sense, that we because they are not actually, one being that because you get should not be other, because not we had felt we had to common that people fairs in Amsterdam had the ability to tell only people buying the fact that a lot of news clouded by the every person in my change it, which we have heard about it. and Berlin and we our story in a clear shares in the crowdfunding gives exposure, because it thought that once personnel will haven’t thankfully, The online met people who way and in a way that company, they also you a reverse cash is newsworthy. Then you get on a platform recognize a customer then I don’t think we community know knew us from that, people were have the heart of the flow, so normally it is a very good that there are people as a crowdfunder, even would have had that we delivered and saw the campaign or interested to listen to company. They are you have to produce combination, in line waiting to someone who helped the time to do that. are actually satisfied even invested. Or it, because we made also a source of a product, you have because people can donate money us. But turning in a Because we started, with the product. were wearing our a movie. Q17 counselling from 50 to wait for it, to see your brand and because your idea is coupon they will our campaign went Q23 stuff. people, for example receive it, you have instantly on the so good. You really know. Showing the live in march, it’s 2. I would say that Q23 there is a lawyer in to sell it. Second and internet buy your have to work it, and appreciation is made only September now, there are no other there and that brings most important products and get the really have to talk to easier by coupons. so you see how fast changes for the extra knowledge. reasons for us, by reward later. It’s a people in person, it’s It’s a little trick for these things can go. product. Q23 Q23 presenting yourself great combination. a friends and family people who want to Q23 in crowdfunding, Q23 thing as well. Q23 get a better you position yourself connection to their as an underdog customer. Q23 which makes you very likeable for a lot of media to write about you and also customers, they like to be part of a new project. Q9 2. But we also learned we are not really ready for it, so we need to grow in our own market, so that all the processes are under control and not too quickly. Q23