Crowdfunding and Raising Capital - Example

The Crowdfunding and Raising Capital Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 0 Introduction 3 2 Indiegogo and Kickstarter 3 2.0 The Comparison of Indiegogo and Kickstarter Crowdfunding Platforms 4 2.1 The Offering 4 2.2 The Infrastructure 6 2.3.0 Customers 6 2.3.1 Segmentation 6 2.3.2 The channel 8 2.3.3 Customer Relationship 9 2.4 Finances 10 2.4.1 Cost Structure 10 2.4.2 Revenue Stream 11 3.0 The New Crowdfunding Platform and Lessons Learned From Indiegogo and Kickstarter 11 3.1 The Offering 13 3.2 Infrastructure 13 3.3 Customers 14 3.4 Finances 15 4.0 Conclusion 16 List of References 17 1.0 Introduction Nigeria is one of the countries that are associated with increasing levels of unemployment in the world. The unemployment rate has increased consistently in the last six years; the rate of joblessness increased from 5.3% in 2007 to 5.8% in 2008. The rate increased further to 11.8% and 19.7% in 2009 and 2010 respectively. As of 2012, the unemployment rate had risen to 21.1%, while that of 2012 was experienced at 23.9%. More importantly, the unemployment rate among the youths is established at a significant level of 54%. This means that the level of unemployment is worrying as far as the youths are concerned despite the increasingly high number of Nigerians attending the higher learning institutions. In this regard, it is clear that the establishment of a successful business can help to reduce the level of unemployment among the youths in Nigeria. While business is an alternative to containing the significant levels of joblessness in Nigeria, a large number of potential businesspersons are confronted with the problem of finding capital. In many cases, banks and financial institutions are inclined to finance businesses that have experienced successful sales; as a result, the start-ups are hindered from obtaining the capital. It is under these circumstances that the crowdfunding platforms have emerged to help various potential projects to raise capital. This paper is focused to compare and contrast two popular crowdfunding platforms (Indiegogo and Kickstarter) with a view of obtaining insights. It would attempt to apply the lessons learned from from Indiegogo and Kickstarter to a new crowdfunding platform that aims to raise funds among the Nigerian entrepreneurs (Trading Economics, 2014). 1.2 Indiegogo and Kickstarter Indiegogo and Kickstarter are perfect examples that can be used as far as comparing the crowdfunding platforms are concerned. They are among the most popular and successful crowdfunding platforms. With its headquarters based in New York, US, Kickstarter boasts of receiving more than $1000 million in pledges; these pledges were received from 5,700 thousand backers. The platform was launched in the beginning of 2009 by Chen Perry, Adler Charles and Strockler Yancey. This crowdfunding platform has seen more than one-hundred and thirty-five thousand projects receive pledges from different donors since its inception. Currently, Kickstarter serves a large number of markets, including the UK, Australia, Canada, US and Canada (Kickstarter, 2014). Indiegogo is also one of the crowdfunding projects that have gained popularity in the recent past. The company was founded in 2008. The founders of this crowdfunding platform include Rubin Slava, Schell Eric and Ringelmann Danae. The organization is headquartered in California, US. The company serves a relatively large market; among other nations, it includes Spain, German, France and the US. Among its significant projects include that of the President Barrack Obama Startup America (PBOSA). PBOSA partnered with the Indiegogo to raise finances for the American entrepreneurs (Indiegogo, 2014). 2.0 The Comparison of Indiegogo and Kickstarter Crowdfunding Platforms This paper seeks to compare the Indiegogo and Kickstarter Crowdfudning Platforms via the Business Model Canvas’ approach. The Business Model Canvas provides an excellent platform for comparing and contrasting businesses that operate in the same sector to obtain an adequate insight regarding their differences and similarities. Additionally, the business model helps an individual to understand aspects that are imperative to a start-up business. 2.1 The Offering The offering of a business comprises of the value proposition; the value proposition implies the assembling of goods and services that are aimed at satisfying the needs of a consumer. Typically, the value proposition is what distinguishes two firms. The distinction is normally made through price, performance, brand, availability and how a product or service is customized. With respect to price, both Indiegogogo and Kickstarter charge different fees for successful and unsuccessful projects. These charges attempt to differentiate the two crowdfunnding platforms. Kickstarter charges a fee of 5% of the total capital that is raised by a certain project. However, a creator is also charged between 3 %and 5% of the total funds by Amazon. Amazon is the platform via which the backers pay their donations. On the other hand, Indiegogo charges a fee of 4% among projects that experience a success of meeting the target size of capital; however, the platform provides an option of either to refund the finances if the target is not met or pay a fee of 9% of the total money raised during the campaign (Indiegogo, 2014). The backers of Indiegogo’s projects channel their contribution through PayPal. In contrast to Kickstarter which delays in distributing the donation to creators, Indiegogo enables the owners of projects to receive money in a period of less than two weeks. This is perceived as an important aspect among the creators (owners of projects) and, therefore, adds value to the services offered by Indiegogo. Although both platforms do not guarantee a success of various projects that carry out campaigns of raising funds on their sites, Kickstarter normally identify projects that are associated with fraudulence; these projects are later cancelled. Examples of projects that have been cancelled by Kickstarter include the ‘Tech-Sync Power System’; this project was cancelled for failing to offer images of prototype (Kickstarter, 2014). The projects were also cancelled on the grounds that the creator departed without a formal communication to the Kickstarter’s management. Such attempts have enhanced confidence among the public with respect to the support that is offered to diverse projects. Similarly, Indiegogo is rated well on various sites as far as its services are concerned; it has a rating of 70% at CrowdsUnite (Riedl, 2013, p.101). Specifically, individuals believe that Indiegogo has an excellent customers’ support. This feature distinguishes it from other crowdfunding platforms that are available to the US residents and other consumers in the world. Feder (2013, p.23) agrees that these factors add value to a crowdfunding platform since they are associated with risks reduction; they are perceived to be imperative among stakeholders that have interest in the crowdfunding platforms. Generally, trust and confidence are significant aspects as far as the backers’ support is concerned. The crowdfunding platforms should be on the forefront in enhancing confidence to the public. 2.2 The Infrastructure The objective of an infrastructure is to enhance the value proposition. A category of an infrastructure includes the key resources; these aim at creating a value to customers (Valančienė and Jegelevičiūtė, p.2013). Both indiegogo and Kickstarter have intellectual properties which prevents other companies from breaching the firm’s copyright. Additionally, the two firms rely on the human resource to create value. The founders of both firms are perceived as part of the human resource. Perry, Adler Charles and Strockler Yancey are the members of the Kickstarter’s management; they are entitled to make decisions that impact the value of its services, such as imposing an additional fee on capital raised (Kickstarter, 2014). The management also direct the creators to provide the time frame for their campaign, as well as the target size of funds; this is an effort to foster transparency among various projects. Rubin Slava, Schell Eric and Ringelmann Danae are part of the Indiegogo’s management; they are concerned with the daily decision making process with regards to the business operation (Indiegogo, 2014). Apart from the ownership and management, the two platforms also employ a number of employees, such as IT experts who are responsible for managing the company’s website. Werling, Cohen and Pilo, (2013, p.15) assert that lawyers are commonly hired to manage the legal issues that are associated with the crowdfunding platforms. A number of issues such as fraudulence are not uncommon among the crowdfunding platforms; these issues were experienced by Kickstarter; they led to cancellation of various projects, such as ‘Kobe Red’ (Kickstarter, 2014). 2.3.0 Customers 2.3.1 Segmentation Customers are regarded as an important component that contributes to the success of a firm. As a result, it is important for a business to target a certain segment of the market that may enhance its performance. In a number of cases, a business is normally coerced to target a small market that it can offer products which provide value that exceeds the expectation of consumers. Belleflamme, Lambert and Schwienbacher (2013, p.320) argues that creators who post project on the crowdfunding sites are considered as customers given that they pay a certain fee at the end of a campaign. A poor strategy of targeting the customers is inclined to perform dismally. As far as the market segmentation is concerned, Indiegogo and Kickstarter are associated with a number of differences. Although Pinedo (2012) shows that the Indiegogo crowdfunding platform was started to target the film makers, currently, the platform attempts to offer any individual a chance to raise funds. Among the projects that have succeeded to raise funds via the Indiegogo crowdfunding platform include Canonical Ltd. This company launched a campaign that targeted to raise $32,000,000 in an attempt to develop its ‘Ubuntu Edge smartphone’. However, the company failed to obtain the target size of capital; the company managed to raise 40% of the projected capital. While the Ubuntu Edge project was classified in the category of smartphone, the Gosnell Movie and Canary Home Security Device projects are classified in the Movie and Home Security categories. Other project such as the Telsa Museum which falls in the category of museum fortifies the fact that Indiegogo does not target a certain certain market (Kickstarter, 2014). Indiegogo believes that every individual stands a chance to raise funds via its platform. In contrast, Kickstarter provides a guideline regarding the projects that are allowed to be posted on its site. The projects that can be allowed to raise capital via its platform should fall within the 13 categories which are provided by the company. The Kickstarter’s management believe that focusing on the thirteen categories would ensure that the platform engages creative projects. Among the creative projects include, fashion, comics, video, art, film, technology and music, as well as games, photography and publishing. These guidelines ensure that other projects which do not fall within the 13 categories do not have a chance of raising capital via the Kickstarter crowdfunding platform. In this regard, it can be assumed that projects which are inclined to miss an opportunity of raising funds via the Kickstarter crowdfunding platform has a chance of experiencing support from backers of Indiegogo and other crowdfunding platforms (Kickstarter, 2014). Moreover, Kickstarter targets projects that are available in English speaking countries; among them include the US, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK. Despite the fact that the platform accepts creators from these countries, it allows backers from all countries in the world. On the other hand, Indiegogo provides an opportunity to individuals of different nationalities to raise capital via its crowdfunding platform. This is the reason why the services of Indiegogo are provided in different languages, including French, Spanish, German and English (Hanks, 2013, pp.262-282). The target of the company is to reach a large number of individuals at the global level. 2.3.2 The channel The channel that a business uses to deliver its value proposition is of essence as far as gaining a competitive edge is concerned. Lawton and Marom (2013) argue that a channel that is fast and cost-friendly is the best. A number of firms can reduce the number of middlepersons to ensure that a product is delivered fast to consumers. However, middlepersons are considered important especially when a product needs value addition, such as packaging. As opposed to other businesses which are associated with long chains of distribution, a majority of the crowdfunding platforms engage the customers directly to their services without the interference of mediators. This ensures certainty and trust of various services which are likely to be disrupted by other players in the market is sustained. For instance, the fee that is imposed on services tends to be transparent when there are no middlepersons. Both Indiegogo and Kickstarter provide direct services to their customers; they charge a fee of 4% and 5% respectively. In many cases, customers are provided an equal opportunity to post their projects on the crowdfunding platforms; however, a number of requirements such as the expiry date of the campaign and the minimum capital are deemed essential. Similarly, the direct engagement between Indiegogo and Kickstarter crowdfunding platforms and clients ensures that creators stand a chance of understanding the amount of money that have been pledged by backers. Mikami (2013, p.260) affirms that services are more sensitive relative to products; as a result, the direct engagement between the service providers and consumers normally boost confidence. Amazon.com and PayPal which represent the payment methods for the aforementioned crowdfunding platforms can be viewed as auxiliary services given that they support the activities offered by the two companies. However, the payment methods can also be perceived as part of the channel given that it is the end product which is experienced by a customer. Harrison (2013, p.285) asserts that customers are inclined to be attracted to a crowdfunding platform that is fast as far as the distribution of funds from backers is concerned. In this regard, Indiegogo is likely to outperform Kickstarter since the payment of the raised capital via PayPal is assured in a period of less than two weeks. Kickstarter is likely to delay in the channelling of donation to creators via Amazon.com. 2.3.3 Customer Relationship A customer relationship in any organization cannot be underestimated since it plays an imperative role as far as the success and survival of a firm is concerned. According to Wieck, Bretschneider and Leimeister (2013, p.134), it is evident that many businesses perform exceptionally due to the existence of an excellent customer relationship. Indiegogo is rated well in a number of sites, such as CrowdsUnite, due to an exceptional customer relationship. For instance, it has a rating of 70% by CrowdUnite (Kickstarter, 2014). Kickstarter, who perceives the backers as customers, is also keen to ensure that the creators who launch campaigns on their platform are genuine and deserve capital. The platform ensures that the promises made by creators are ultimately experienced by backers. This has seen a cancellation of a number of projects on grounds of fraudulent or doubt; this is an endeavour to cushion donors from the financial exploitation. This aspect continues to see an enhancement of the relationship between backers of projects and the crowdfunding platforms. 2.4 Finances The cost structure and revenue streams are regarded as the most important financial aspects of a firm that aims at experiencing successes. 2.4.1 Cost Structure With respect to the business structures, businesses are either value or cost driven. This denotes that a firm is expected to focus on offering products of high value or attempt to drive their costs of operation down. Both Indiegogo and Kickstarter are associated with creating value among its customers. It is evident that unlike products, the value of services is majorly distinguished via a price. In this case, an individual may be tempted to assume that Kickstarter, which imposes a fee of 5% on funds received from a project, has a high-quality service. However, the quality of a service depends on a number of factors. For instance, Indiegogo adds significant value to its service by ensuring that funds collected from backers are distributed to customers in the shortest-time possible; Indiegogo channels money to creators in a period of less than 2 weeks. This feature distinguishes its services from those of similar players in the market. Additionally, both platforms are willing to spend money on investigations to ensure that projects which run campaigns on their sites are characterized by genuineness and likely to deliver their promise (Indiegogo, 2014). As regards the features of the cost structure, the two crowdfunding platforms are characterized by fixed and variable costs. The companies normally meet fixed costs, such as paying rent and remunerations. The companies employ individuals in various sections, including the legal, finance, IT and marketing. Other costs such as the legal fees are considered to be variable. For instance, Kickstarter filed a number of lawsuits against individuals and organizations that endeavoured to breach policies regarding copyrights. This includes the lawsuit filed against ArstiShare. These lawsuits are associated with a range of legal fees which are variable (Kickstarter, 2014). 2.4.2 Revenue Stream Mostly, Poon, Chan and Firth (2013, p.91) argue that revenue is considered the core factor that enables a company to experience sustainability in the market, as well as successes. While diverse businesses generate revenue via different avenues such as licensing, rent and asset selling, Indiegogo and Kickstarter crowdfunding platforms generate revenue through the usage fee. This is a condition where a client pays a particular fee for using the services of a certain service firm. In this respect, creators normally pay Indiegogo and Kickstarter a certain percentage of fees for using the crowdfunding platforms. For successful projects, Indiego charges a fee of 4% of the total funds raised; conversely, Kickstarter imposes a fee of 5% of the total capital raised via their crowdfunding platforms. 3.0 The New Crowdfunding Platform and Lessons Learned From Indiegogo and Kickstarter While this paper has consistently highlighted fundamental factors that can help a crowdfunding platform to perform exceptionally, it is significant to narrow down to specific lessons. With the background provided at the introduction stage regarding the Nigerian employment sector and business growth, there is no doubt that raising funds on behalf of the Nigerian youths and potential entrepreneurs is vital. Among other factors that underpin the growth of a business include, a large population that is approximated at 166 million as of January 2013 and presence of natural resources, such as oil (Trading Economics, 2014). Similarly, Nigeria is rated among the countries that have a high level of literacy in Africa. The Nigerian Population between 2004 and 2013 Source: Trading Economics, 2014. Typically, a large population normally provides a large market to businesses; this is the factor the underscores the need to support a number of entrepreneurs to raise capital. This would reduce the need to depend on imports; it would boost the Nigerian export market. The Nigerian Literacy Level Source: Indexmundi, 2014. The rate of literacy level dropped from 55.45% in 1991 to 54.77% in 2003; however, the rate rose to 61.34% in 2010. This indicates that there is a high chance of potential Nigerian-entrepreneurs to succeed in their endeavours as businesspersons. This is because there is a strong relation between education and running a business. The level of education is positively related to the success of running a business (Indexmundi, 2014). 3.1 The Offering Offering is associated with the assembling of goods and services which are delivered to customers to satisfy a certain need. The value proposition is what distinguishes one business from the other. The value proposition is distinguished through price, branding, customization, accessibility and design among other aspects. In this regard, the new crowdfunding platform should emphasize on branding its services to distinguish them from those of other players. The branding would be experienced via the offering of services to the Nigerian entrepreneurs. Riedl (2013, p.102) asserts that a majority of crowdfunding platforms target developed nations such as the UK, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, German, France and Spain among others. In this regard, a crowdfunding platform that targets a certain developing country is likely to experience a positive reception. Additionally, the crowdfunding platform should charge between 4% and 5% fee for successful projects. A fee that is more than 5% is likely be perceived negatively among backers whose aim is to support the project of a creator. Similarly, the owners of projects are likely to associate the new crowdfunding platform with the intentions of exploiting the creators as opposed to helping raise finances. Evans (2013, p.221) is of the opinion that a company should factor in the reception of the crowdfunding platform as far as the pricing is concerned. 3.2 Infrastructure An infrastructure is an aspect that cannot be overlooked given that the new crowdfunding platform would pay a significant attention to the Nigerian projects. A number of phenomena such as key resources (human, financial and intellectual resources) and partnerships are vital. The company should attempt to create a website that is similar or exceeds that of Kickstarter; the Kickstarter website is rated by a majority of individuals and institutions as the best websites of 2011 (Riedl, 2013, p.102). The new website should be accessible to all individuals in Nigeria who need capital for starting businesses. It should also allow individuals with different projects to seek funds via a campaign that is launched on the platform; limitations that apply to other crowdfunding platforms, such as Kickstarter which rely on 13 categories, should not characterize the new crowdfunding platform. In order to achieve success, there is a need to incorporate IT experts, as well as other professionals. Additionally, it is prudent to have financial resources to experience an excellent website- the money is needed to pay the website designers and related activities. Moreover, there is a need to partner with various agencies and organizations that engage youths on issues of employment and talents. Cumming and Johan (2013, p.362) believe that these are the best avenues that a new crowdfunding platform can identify projects which are likely to experience a success following the funding. In many cases, a backer is responsible for judging whether a project is genuine, as well as its chances of succeeding. This is a guideline that is provided by both Indiegogo and Kickstarter despite their efforts of identifying projects that are characterized by fraudulence and other illegal aspects. These aspects can boost the confidence of both backers and creators with respect to raising capital to buttress entrepreneurship in Nigeria. 3.3 Customers Both backers and creators are arguably the customers of crowdfunding platforms. There is a need to target a certain market; the targeting of the Nigerian market as far as the creators are concerned can assist to identify a range of factors that would facilitate an excellent performance of the new crowdfunding platform. For instance, it would be easier to learn projects that are predisposed to receive a positive reception among the public. In addition, it would aid to learn projects that receive the target size of capital. Targeting the Nigerian creators is also far-sighted given the fact that Nigeria is associated with a high level of the youth unemployment- rated at 54% (Trading Economics, 2014). As a result, there is a possibility that a large number of the educated individuals can take advantage of the crowdfunding platform. The channel a business use to deliver products or service should not be undermined in the light of developing a successful crowdfunding platform. While services are normally delivered directly to consumers, a number of aspects such as the payment methods should be assessed. The donated funds are always channelled to banks or other institutions that accept deposit and transfer of funds. Researches by Tomczak and Brem (2013p. 336) show that the methods of money transfer that are quick are likely to be embraced by both backers and owners of projects. Additionally, it is important to make decisions regarding the money transfer quickly. For that reason, the channel of money transfer (service) from a backer to crowdfunding platform and, finally, the creator should be relatively fast. Lastly, but by no means the least, the company should enhance the customer’s relationship, especially via an excellent communication. There is a need for a customer support that is exceptional and available on a 24 hours basis. This is likely to improve trust and confidence among the donors and creators. 3.4 Finances It is essential to identify the cost structure and revenue streams. One should be able to identify the business structure of an organization; an organization can decide to drive its cost of operation down or enhance the value of its product. It is not uncommon that many businesses which offer services attempt to improve the value of their services. The new crowdfunding platform should foster a high value of service via different means, such as offering an excellent and 24 hours customer support service. Besides, the crowdfunding platform should distinguish its fixed and variable costs of operation to ensure its future is not harmed as far as the payments are concerned. Similarly, a brilliant financial planning is needed to ensure that every sterling pound which is spent on various activities adds value to the organization; this would reduce the financial waste a factor that transpires in a number of firms during their initial stages of business operation (Hazianti and Hartini, 2013, p.378). Most importantly, a firm should identify the means of generating revenue for its operation. The new crowdfunding platform should depend on the usage fee; the fee should be charged against the creator’s funds since they benefit from services offered by the crowdfunding platform. 4.0 Conclusion Indiegogo and Kickstarter are among the companies that can be used to shade light on the aspects that relate to the success of a crowdfunding platform. The assessment of the two platforms shows that a crowdfunding platform is likely to succeed if the management employs the best approach with respect to its operation. For instance, an endeavour to boost trust and confidence among creators and supporters of such activities is a key factor of fostering a success. This is possible via the identification of projects that break or are inclined to breach various policies and regulations. These include projects that are associated with the intention of exploiting backers financially. The new crowdfunding platform should take advantage of the Nigerian situation (the high level of unemployed, educated and talented individuals) to enhance its popularity and, consequently, experience a financial breakthrough. List of References Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T. and Schwienbacher, A., 2013. Individual crowdfunding practices. Venture Capital, 15(4), pp.313-333. Cumming, D. and Johan, S., 2013. Demand-driven securities regulation: evidence from crowdfunding. Venture Capital, 15(4), pp.361-379. Evans, M., 2013. Raising capital from real estate. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 31(3), pp.220-222. Feder, T., 2013. Scientists experiment with crowdfunding. Physics Today, 66(4), p.23. Hanks, S., 2013. Online capital-raising by small companies in the USA after the JOBS Act compared to the same process in the European Union. Capital Markets Law Journal, 8(3), pp.261-282. Harrison, R. (2013). Crowdfunding and the revitalisation of the early stage risk capital market: catalyst or chimera? Venture Capital, 15(4), 283-287. Hazianti, A. and Hartini, J., 2013. The Influence of Capital-Raising Activity on Intangibles Reporting: Evidence from Malaysia. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 4(6), pp.376-379. Indexmundi, 2014. Nigeria- Literacy Rate, [Online], Available: http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/nigeria/literacy-rate [09 Jun 2014]. Indiegogo, 2014. Indiegogo, [Online], Available: https://www.indiegogo.com/ [09 Jun 2014]. Kickstarter, 2014. Kickstarter, [Online], Available: https://www.kickstarter.com/ [09 Jun 2014]. Lawton, K. and Marom, D., 2013. The crowdfunding revolution: how to raise venture capital using social media. New York: McGraw-Hill. Mikami, K., 2013. Raising Capital By Issuing Transferable Membership In A Worker Cooperative. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 84(3), pp.253-266. Pinedo, A., 2012. Crowdfunding for filmmakers: the way to a successful film campaign. Studio City, CA: Michael Wiese Productions. Pinedo, A., 2012. Private placements and other financing alternatives, 2013. New York, N.Y.: Practising Law Institute. Poon, W., Chan, K. C. and Firth, M., 2013. Does having a credit rating leave less money on the table when raising capital? A study of credit ratings and seasoned equity offerings in China. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 22, pp.88-106. Riedl, J., 2013. Crowdfunding Technology Innovation. Computer, 46(3), pp.100-103. Tomczak, A. and Brem, A., 2013. A conceptualized investment model of crowdfunding. Venture Capital, 15(4), pp.335-359. Trading Economics, 2014. Nigeria Population, [Online], Available: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/nigeria/population [09 Jun 2014]. Trading Economics, 2014. Nigeria- Unemployment Rate, [Online], Available: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/nigeria/unemployment-rate [09 Jun 2014]. Valančienė, L. and Jegelevičiūtė, S., 2013. Valuation Of Crowdfunding: Benefits And Drawbacks. Economics and Management, 18(1), pp.10-17. Werling, K., Cohen, B. and Pilo, M., 2013. Risks and Perils of Crowdfunding Your Biotech Start-Up. Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News, 33(7), pp.14-15. Wieck, E., Bretschneider, U. and Leimeister, J., 2013. Funding From The Crowd: An Internet- Based Crowdfunding Platform To Support Business Set-Ups From Universities. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 22(03), p.134.List of References Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T. and Schwienbacher, A., 2013. Individual crowdfunding practices. Venture Capital, 15(4), pp.313-333. Bush, L., 2013. The Teardown: Oculus Rift 3D gaming head-mounted display. Engineering & Technology, 8(5), pp.88-89. Cumming, D. and Johan, S., 2013. Demand-driven securities regulation: evidence from crowdfunding. Venture Capital, 15(4), pp.361-379. DecisionDesk, 2014. DecisionDesk, [Online], Available: http://www.decisiondesk.com/ [08 Jun 2014] Evans, M., 2013. Raising capital from real estate. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 31(3), pp.220-222. Feder, T., 2013. Scientists experiment with crowdfunding. Physics Today, 66(4), p.23. Hanks, S., 2013. Online capital-raising by small companies in the USA after the JOBS Act compared to the same process in the European Union. Capital Markets Law Journal, 8(3), pp.261-282. Harrison, R. (2013). Crowdfunding and the revitalisation of the early stage risk capital market: catalyst or chimera? Venture Capital, 15(4), 283-287. Hazianti, A. and Hartini, J., 2013. The Influence of Capital-Raising Activity on Intangibles Reporting: Evidence from Malaysia. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 4(6), pp.376-379. Lawton, K. and Marom, D., 2013. The crowdfunding revolution: how to raise venture capital using social media. New York: McGraw-Hill. Mikami, K., 2013. Raising Capital By Issuing Transferable Membership In A Worker Cooperative. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 84(3), pp.253-266. Oculus VR, 2014. Oculus VR, [Online], Available: http://www.oculusvr.com/ [08 Jun 2014]. Pinedo, A., 2012. Crowdfunding for filmmakers: the way to a successful film campaign. Studio City, CA: Michael Wiese Productions. Pinedo, A., 2012. Private placements and other financing alternatives, 2013. New York, N.Y.: Practising Law Institute. Poon, W., Chan, K. C. and Firth, M., 2013. Does having a credit rating leave less money on the table when raising capital? A study of credit ratings and seasoned equity offerings in China. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 22, pp.88-106. Riedl, J., 2013. Crowdfunding Technology Innovation. Computer, 46(3), pp.100-103. Tomczak, A. and Brem, A., 2013. A conceptualized investment model of crowdfunding. Venture Capital, 15(4), pp.335-359. Trading Economics, 2014. Nigeria Unemployment Rate, [Online], Available: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/nigeria/unemployment-rate [08 Jun 2014] Valančienė, L. and Jegelevičiūtė, S., 2013. Valuation Of Crowdfunding: Benefits And Drawbacks. Economics and Management, 18(1), pp.10-17. Werling, K., Cohen, B. and Pilo, M., 2013. Risks and Perils of Crowdfunding Your Biotech Start-Up. Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News, 33(7), pp.14-15. Wieck, E., Bretschneider, U. and Leimeister, J., 2013. Funding From The Crowd: An Internet- Based Crowdfunding Platform To Support Business Set-Ups From Universities. International Journal of Cooperative Information Systems, 22(03), p.134. Read More