15 April 2015 | 15 Comments
My new treasure chest Kickstarter project has been live for just over a day, and so far there has been one huge trend that has surprised me (in a good way).
The project is for three new treasure chests of realistic resource tokens. I could have run separate campaigns for each of them, but I figured I could save backers considerable shipping expenses by consolidating the chests into one project.
The biggest assumption I made going into the project was that most people would have one chest they really wanted out of the three: either the Food Crate, Resource Vault, or Energy Box. I wanted to encourage people to get the other chests too, so the reward structure nudges people toward getting 2 or 3 chests:
- $35 for 1 chest
- $67 for 2 chests
- $89 for 3 chests
This is similar to any bundled price reward structure.
Despite that reward structure, I assumed that many people would still just pick 1 chest despite the lower price and consolidated shipping. After all, $89 is a lot of money to spend all at once.
So it was much to my surprise that the vast majority of backers so far have selected the $89 reward:
- $1 reward: 47 backers (4%)
- $35 reward: 53 backers (5%)
- $67 reward: 54 backers (5%)
- $89 reward: 854 backers (86%)
I think I may have underestimated backers’ desire to have everything. If this was a normal bundled pricing system where it’s 1 copy of an item, 2 copies of an item, or 3 copies of an item, I think we’d see nearly opposite results.
But for this project, the three chests are different. Sure, there are backers who may be getting 2 copies of one chest and 1 copy of another at the $89 level, but I think the vast majority are getting all three chests. They want all the things while they have the chance to get them.
What do you think? Is that why the $89 pledge level has been so popular? Have you ever been compelled to upgrade a crowdfunding pledge just so you could have everything?