Really?
I think Lubo is referring to his Assiomas, not the IQ2.
4 Likes
A short video interview with the IQ2 founder, unfortunately for me itâs in Dutch so I have no idea what is being said. Just watching however, it is both interesting and confusing because it shows both the abandoned design and an exploded view of the new road pedal. Anyone able to translate?
Iâll have a listen later this evening and let you know the summary
1 Like
Short summary:
- they underestimated the success and associated pressure of their great kickstarter success
- found out their pods were not as accurate as they believed they were (after already having made a couple of thousands)
- decide to not be one of those kickstarter failures and go for something more proven (and add in about 1 million of their own money)
- got a lot of s**t for changing to a pedal system
- December of Januari cited as first delivery of pedals
From watching the video I get the overall feeling they started the process a bit naive and then fell into the power accuracy rabbit holes that are frequently discussed here on the forum (e.g., why do my pedals report a difference to my trainer at X amounts of watts, but not a Y amounts of watts). I did not buy into the kickstarter, so my money isnât on the line, but I think I would still say kudos to them for persevering, they could also have just thrown the towelâŚ
4 Likes
They posted a translation on FB as well:
In summary:
10% of successful Kickstarters go bankrupt
iQsquare discovered a flaw in the original design, which could have led to a similar fate
iQsquare deeply believes in the product and wonât stop until every backer has their power meter(s)
The more expensive pedal redesign cost âŹ1 mln extra on top of crowdfunded capital
Estimated delivery in December/January
Weâll be posting another update this week, writing it now.
4 Likes
From the comments, IQ^2 has been great for Favero sales, although if you read through all the online comments, while they are good, Assiomas are not exactly âperfectâ either and have had their own issues. Despite all their gaffs, I hope IQ^2 can produce a decent product and that the delays are part of getting right the first time because they have some stiff competition to live up to.
Building a power meter isnât easy, its not like you can go to China and essentially drop ship their stuff like every other cycling product. It requires real coding, engineering, and funding.
2 Likes
Short of reading through the whole thread, it sounds like its been a year and people who have sent deposits have not received products?
The TL;DR is that IQ^2 raised a couple of million Euros on Kickstarter/IndieGoGo with a PM that sat between the pedal and the crankarm so it could be used with any pedal. The campaigns basically said they were ready to go to production so they got a lot of backers believing they would get their perk reasonably soon. Then it went to hell in handbasket.
They werenât nearly as close to âfinal productionâ as they implied. They skipped over prototyping to get to production units and then found that there was a fundamental, unfixable flaw in their design in their first run. Without communicating it, they completely revectored to producing a Keo-based road pedal and yet unseen MTB pedal. This has delayed the project by over a year and they have been woefully short on timely communication to the backer-community. You have a lot of angry people who arenât happy with the product (wanted a pedal-independant PM) and the delays, the lack of transparency and solid data to back up the product and the promises of delivery dates that have been repeatedly missed.
That was a longâish TL;DR
2 Likes
Sounds like some shady practices that will cost the company not just income but their reputation in the long term, with the internet people donât forget these things and they canât really be brushed under the rug either. Certainly a different business practice than other new to market companies.
Probably not shady, or at least not as shady as the online commentary has suggested. it seems like a lot of work thus far to be a scam. My money is more on arrogant. I think they really thought they had a market disruptor and it would be compelling enough that what they did and the way they did it would be acceptable.
You are right though, this has been pretty damning on their reputation if the company succeeds and their only real hope is to put out a killer, top-notch product. Even then, sometimes a better mousetrap isnât enough.
The part of changing their initial design and core product without really telling the people who pre-paid is shady, if I had pre-paid/funded/put a deposit in for a PM that was supposed to work with my Shimano pedals and then they decided to change it to a LOOK pedal based PM (which other companies already successfully make), Iâd be pretty pissed off.
1 Like
I donât think this team can be said to be âshadyâ - on the contrary, they have been stubbornly focused on delivering a product at the end of it all, even when their original idea proved to be impossible to realize. Iâd qualify them more as overly enthusiastic and optimistic, and lacking a bit on the communication side. This resulted in a long list of over-commits and under-delivers - not uncommon at all in crowdfunding circles.
The real question is the financial and market viability of the resulting product; contrary to the initial idea, there is nothing particularly revolutionary in the 2.0 concept - apart from the offer of a mountain/gravel version, which enthusiast Assioma users have already done by now. I doubt that once the initial batch is shipped, they will have the financial means to market, deliver and support the product in volume. That takes time and money, neither of which they apparently have.
1 Like
They did tell everyone they were changing the concept. They didnât hide it, nor the reasons for the pivot.
1 Like
I gotta do some more reading on this whole thing, but ZeroGravity said âWithout communicating it, they completely revectored to producing a Keo-based road pedal and yet unseen MTB pedal.â
And letâs not forget that there is also a healthy does of unrealistic expectations among the crowdfunding community who thought they were essentially getting an Assioma or Vector pedal (design aside) almost off the shelf at a quarter of the price, Lots of people donât get how crowdfunding works and the risks that it could fail altogether with nothing to show at the end. Itâs not a product, itâs a perk of funding.
I bet 80% of the backers just want âsome kind of power meter for cheapâ. The other 20% had specific wants to use non-Look pedals and are rightfully pissed thatâs nothte case.
Me, meh, Iâm one who just want a cheap power meter for my road bikes. Keo, SPD, Speedplay whatever, just get me something that works and is consistent.
2 Likes
They did announce it, after the pivot, after the fact. They were not up front saying that our current design is not workable and we are looking at a plan B.
Thatâs an understandable marketing strategy. You present the problem with the solution, rather than the problem alone before you have decided how to fix it.
In reality, I donât think the outcome and fallout would have been any different in this case. People are still pissed about the change away from pedal-independent and delays, neither of which would have changed by announcing anything 3-4 weeks earlier. Backers would have just started demanding their money back a few weeks sooner.