Another Crowdcube pitch has joined the ranks of ECf Tarts.
Viva Drinks is running a parallel campaign on Angles Den. How is it possible to sell the same thing twice over?
Any ideas?
PS - We have just been informed that the Angels Den pitch is no longer live - although it appears to be on the platform. Apparently the £100k plus 'raised' on AD will now flow to the Crowdcube pitch. So either the AD team have their heads where the sun dont shine or the Viva Drinks CEO is a fibber but you cant have this type of crass nonsense going on in a what is supposed to be a serious business environment.
What's more, the projections used by this company to sell the same % of equity for the same investment on both platforms, are DIFFERENT. How can that possibly be unless these projections are pure fabrication?? Viva's claim that the change in pitch projections is due to updating data is an eye opener. Sales forecasts for the Angels Den pitch were clearly very optimistic as they have been hugely reduced only a few months later for the CC pitch. What's the point in having these figures if they are so far from reality?
Also funny that both AngelsDen and Crowdcube claim to have raised around 700k for Chirp this summer.
ReplyDeleteSame applies to LuxTripper. Thought AD would be more trustworthy, but starting to doubt that.
Hi,
ReplyDeleteI am one of the co-founders of VIVA Drinks and came across this blog. We are quite surprised to see some of the comments that have been made. I can assure you that we are running a completely transparent crowd funding campaign and our business is completely ethical in each and every way it operates.
We have explained quite clearly on Crowdcube the reason for moving from Angels Den to Crowdcube (our Angels Den campaign is no longer live) - see following extract from a comment we published on our CC forum;
"Hi,
Yes – we were previously raising funds through the Angels Den investor network, this route is no longer live.
After making some initial progress through AD, we decided it was the better option to go live on Crowd Cube, where the audience is a lot more in tune with our consumer products and can relate a lot better to what we are trying to do. As a result, we ended all fund raising efforts though AD and any investments that were pledged through AD have been transferred over to Crowdcube (the transfer of all pledges is still in progress).
To clarify, we are raising £250k in total, not £0.5m.
Thanks"
The equity / investment terms are the same on CC as they were on AD. Our projections have only changed slightly due to the financials being updated with ACTUALS as the campaign period goes on - a proactive way in which we are keeping all potential investors up to date with latest figures.
As always, we're happy for you to meet with us personally at our offices if you have any further questions.
All the best,
Sarb
VIVA Drinks
Thank you for responding. In our opinion the fact that you had not made it clear to CC investors that you had (at the time we published the above post) a live pitch still live on Angels Den is a problem. Responding to a CC question on the forum is a totally retrospective action. What you should have done and what CC should have done is be totally honest with everyone up front - not after you had been heavily prodded!
DeleteYou will find that the Angels Den pitch has been closed for a considerable amount of time now (way before this blog was written). In fact, it is a pre-requiste before going live on Crowdcube to make sure there are no other live pitches running. We closed the AD pitch before launching on Crowdcube (CC will be able to confirm this), the two have never run in parallel and everything has been completely above board.
ReplyDeleteRegards,
VIVA Drinks
Well the AD pitch was live when we posted and there are several more that have been run on both - overlapping would be fair term. The question on the CC forum is explicit evidence that it was live. What you should have told the good folks who inhabit CC, is that you had a tried to raise this money on AD but failed and were now trying to do so on CC - it is pertinent information for potential investors. That is why we pointed it out. As to me asking CC anything you have to pulling my leg - you couldnt trust them not to sell your granny if it helped promote CC. That is why this blog exists.
DeleteCorrection to the above - as we state VERY CLEARLY in the original post, we understand that at the time we posted the AD pitch had been deactivated, although it was still available to view on AD. We are awaiting the £100k from the AD pitch to flow across to the CC pitch as you promised the CC forum it would - this will then take you close to completion. You should still have told people that you had already tried to fund on AD and failed.....by someway. Why didint you??
DeleteThe AD pitch has ONLY ever been VIEWABLE at the time this blog was published (never live nor available to make an investment) and during the ENTIRE time the pitch has been on CC. The person writing the question on the CC forum has clearly made a mistake, the AD pitch they thought was live, was in fact DEACTIVATED.
ReplyDeleteWe did not fail to raise the money on Angels Den. We made some very contacts using that network and succeeded on raising how much we set as a target. The two networks are quite different in the way they operate, and provide different benefits. This is why it is important for many businesses (not just ourselves) to make use of the different resources available to us, whilst being transparent and clear at all times.
Sorry but that doesnt make much sense and is certainly not a true reflection of the facts. Your target on AD was the same as as on CC - Viva have stated on the CC forum that the AD pledges would come across to CC so that means the AD pitch failed. AD do not have Viva listed as a completed pitch. You did not complete the AD pitch end of. This money ~£100k has not yet come across. When in a hole stop digging. You would better to concentrate your attentions on offering a deal that investors want - then you might be able to get on with running the business.
Delete