Slashdot Mirror
The Inside Story of the Lily Drone's Collapse (wired.com)
New submitter mirandakatz writes: Lily Robotics had everything: Two charismatic young founders; millions in funding; and a product that promised to change the world -- or, at the very least, transform photography. But over 60,000 customers are still waiting for their Lily Drones, and the company is now being sued by the San Francisco District Attorney's office for false advertising. As it turns out, Lily Robotics never actually had the right tools to create the product it was selling -- and it all came crashing down. At Backchannel, Jessica Pishko has the untold story of how such a promising company went so wrong.
From the report: "The magic of the Lily Drone was in its concept: It was a product you could unpack and throw -- so easy, Antoine Balaresque, the cofounder and CEO of Lily Robotics, wrote in emails, that even an old person could do it. But translating that idea into a tangible product proved difficult, and the storytelling that made the Lily Drone so tantalizing to consumers ultimately factored into its downfall. In one of his presentations, Balaresque presented a PowerPoint slide with the sentence, 'Humans have a fundamental need to put themselves in the center of stories.' It appeared to be a quote he made up, but the idea that human nature needs stories is fundamental. Stories are how we make sense of our lives. But while a good story can get you funding and acclaim, ultimately it isn't enough."
From the report: "The magic of the Lily Drone was in its concept: It was a product you could unpack and throw -- so easy, Antoine Balaresque, the cofounder and CEO of Lily Robotics, wrote in emails, that even an old person could do it. But translating that idea into a tangible product proved difficult, and the storytelling that made the Lily Drone so tantalizing to consumers ultimately factored into its downfall. In one of his presentations, Balaresque presented a PowerPoint slide with the sentence, 'Humans have a fundamental need to put themselves in the center of stories.' It appeared to be a quote he made up, but the idea that human nature needs stories is fundamental. Stories are how we make sense of our lives. But while a good story can get you funding and acclaim, ultimately it isn't enough."
I was fascinated by Enron and read all about its downfall. I'm sure this history is ripe for repetition at least a few thousand times over.
These idiots need to get over their cult of personality world view.
This company did not have everything, it had a few good ideas and the willingness to lie through their teeth about their ability to deliver on that.
Having two 'charismatic young founders' doesn't give you much. A few flashy ideas and the ability to spin a good story even if you have to lie through your teeth is not the basis of a good business.
The primary failure here is the failure of these young charismatic founders to have been responsible for their actions.
But apparently we are supposed to feel bad for them and pay them on the head and tell them to keep up the good work, maybe next time it will go better.
Who cares about the people who lost millions.. After all.. The American dream!
Another tech shit "startup" fails. Why can't people build real products, create something good and real, instead of cobbling together electronic crap and computers and shit?
Trump lackey, but of course you knew that.
So this company was funded purely on a 'story' no 'working prototype' at all...only after they get a piss pot of money do they even try to figure out how to build it simply to discover the 'tools' (e.g. 'technology' didn't exist)...wow, anyone investing in this shouldn't get their money back as far as I'm concerned.
we rest our lower case.. cease fire stand down,, there's innocent stand-ins in every town.. thanks
All you need now is a snazzy video with a prototype that at least *appears* to work and boom, millions in funding to burn through until you finally have to admit you can't deliver, and the balloon pops.
j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
this isn't an accounting scam.
this is just lying about tech that you lie that you have and then asking money from people. this is a pretty old scam.
they are most often nowadays sold with personality cult and shit like that. for example the ceo might(usually does) say stuff like that "because i'm not an engineer i'm not limited by what they think as possible".
the amazing thing is that people give money to these things, solar roadways, ultrasonic charging etc.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Surely the correct way to go about this is:
1. Idea for product.
2. Design product.
3. Build product.
4. Test product.
5. Sell product.
6. Profit.
with repeats on 3 & 4 as required.
Any operation that puts 5 before 3 & 4 must be considered suspect.
This sig left unintentionally blank.
omg,, grandma.. sing along.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myo9wXrNUP4
there's 1000's ready to dump $1000's or even their life's savings on a pump and dumps.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
"stories are how we make sense of our lives."
If this is true for you then you probably just tried to by a drone than doesn't exist, and I have a bridge to sell you.
Stories, narratives, dreams and drama are something you put down after your teens, when you knuckle down, apply your education to the world around you, see what works, who you like to work with and change as much as nescessary to achieve the best outcomes from the combination of that to the environment your living in.
But three cheers for the dreamers living their own stories.
I am one such customer, I bought in very early to help fund this because my wife is a photographer and we enjoy the outdoors. We had many possible applications for the Lily and we waited patiently until the very end for it to arrive. We are no longer waiting because Lily refunded us completely, and we have no hard feelings.
I am very sad that the product never came to be, and that the company did not succeed. I more sad by all the hatred that is spewed towards them by typical Slashdot readers who sit on their asses and do nothing except point out how wrong/stupid/lame everyone else is. At least these guys tried to do something cool, and they did the right thing when the time came to make a hard decision. I doubt any of you who are hating on them would have acted in good faith like they did.
I'm still waiting for mine!
j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
Lily Robotics had everything: Two charismatic young founders; millions in funding; and a product that promised to change the world
Sounds like everything you need to run a good scam.
In the real world what matters is people who get shit done. The rest are just sales.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Ideas are a dime a dozen, as we say in game development. It is quite easy to have an idea, and for a few cool millions, you can find or hire a graphics designer who will turn it into a great presentation, video, etc.
Too few people these days look for execution of ideas. How is it that you can get any funding at all without even a prototype?
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
The name was a hint on the potential L+i = Ly. Or spelled correctly "lie" . Investors were forewarned just poor reading comprehension, fees for a lesson in business or so the founders hoped. The money invested better have been spent on practical development vs luxuries for the founders which should be pursued for recovery.
I find it a little bit amusing that Slashdot is crapping on the Lily now that it has failed, and that the summary links to previous Slashdot articles about the failure of the Lily but conveniently omits this post which promoted it: https://news.slashdot.org/story/15/05/26/206245/lily-camera-a-drone-that-follows-you
That post probably drove a huge number of those original sales . . .
is that it's all about giving money to people whose only proven talent is making slick videos and maybe a semifunctional prototype. Very few have the business chops turn their idea/prototype into a commercial product.
The sad thing is someone is going to build this product although it is debatable how big a market exists at $1000.
This products sounds like most of the bullshit posted on /r/futurology ... complete VC-hyped vaporware
Two charismatic young founders
There are a few unicorns, but usually this is a risk factor. Most successful businesses are founded by people in their 40's and 50's.
Reading the summary, I see "risk, risk, risk, risk, risk", and the results are what most investors would expect.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
How casually condescending. Twenty years ago it might have been "Even a woman"...
in the post Luddite 3D printed revolution and all we need to do is download a drone? Oh sorry, that's old thinking, now we are in the virtual reality artificial intelligence revolution and we can see pictures of a drone created by an algorithm?
Hurray for the new revolution! Down with the Luddite 3D printers!
"translating that idea into a tangible product proved difficult"
I think it was mostly a risky idea and poor skills at managing a business.
Their idea was too risky for a real VC to take on so they got funding from people who just threw money at things without checking the details. A VC would have enforced a reporting and monitoring structure to see product feasibility. Probably also hired some experts for guidance and navigation.
The idea was nice and the tech not impossible. The cash flow management appears to be shortsighted and irresponsible. There also seems to be little results and goal based decision making.
As for the people who lost money, I hope they don't get it back. A good cheap lesson taught to the general population. Returning the cash just encourages more stupidity and doesn't drive the lesson home.
People who don't have cash to throw around shouldn't throw it around. Don't take high risk investments and then complain when they fall through. There are plenty of lower risk investments, just don't complain that it didn't make enough or has too much regulations.
What I want to know is how DJI is able to crank out products left and right and companies like Lily and 3DR get borked? I find this very concerning that to all intents and purposes DJI owns this market now and that gives them carte blanche to do whatever they want regardless of what the customers want e.g. borking your expensive machine because they think you shouldn't be flying where you want or more importantly need to fly.
I'm less interested in these MacGyver UAV platforms with all kinds of loosely integrated stuff hanging all over them than I am with a clean yet totally open-source design. 3DR was headed in the right direction but DJI ate stole their lunch money.
If I can't buy it on Amazon, or at a Walmart, or Best Buy....FORGET IT. This VC crap is just another way most of the time to sucker fools out of their money.
Biggest indicator that the person briefing has no idea what they are talking about.
If I was a VC, the minute I saw Powerpoint being opened would be the minute I started scanning my text messages looking for the next briefing.
For an autonomous "drone" that actually follows you, have a look at Skydio:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/drones/skydio-camera-drone-autonomous-flying
Are drones the new iPhone dock? Seems like all I ever used to see getting insane amounts of funding on Kickstarter were iPhone docks that were nothing more than hunks of metal or wood and inflated price tags. Sounds like Drones have taken over as stupid funding projects.
From TFA: "An engineer who led the software development team insisted on revamping the drone software to be his own original invention, several engineers told me. (The prototype had been made with open-source software.) The engineering team rebooted and the drone prototypes stopped flying. Production was set back about six months."
How many times have we heard this story? Company has something kind-of working. Engineer thinks he can reinvent wheel. Massive effort to rewrite code. Underwhelming, underperforming result.
4. ???
5. Profit! :^)
Hey, Windows users, there is no such thing as "forward" slash, there is only slash and backslash.
There are drones galore everywhere produced en masse. With and without cameras. Not a new tech. I build a few myself with $100. The follower feature may be more technically challenging (2 GPSes and good comms between the subject and a drone) but nothing that could not be overcome.
TLDR;
What was so special about Lily?
What really made Lily fail?
4wdloop
Reminds me a little of Theranos [wikipedia.org]. The quick version of the story is this:
You left out how politically connected she was.
She got Donald Trump's Defense Secretary (Mattis) shilling for her; and landing her military contracts.
I kinda get the appeal of ideas people. They can move extraordinarily fast as they spin idea after idea, and it can be exhilarating to unleash your creativity.
And then reality kicks in. Building something based on the idea takes months or years. Often it doesn't work. Having built it, can you sell it? Are there market competitors taking sales space and shelf space, meaning you get less money and exposure. Once you've conquered all those issues your sales peak and you have to build a new product to remain competitive and relevant.
The appeal of a good ideas person is their free-thinking creativity and speed of action. The cost is, they never actually slow down and construct anything. They are like photons in the universe of matter. If you want to matter you have to slow down and construct something out of protons, electrons and neutrons.
I always say that new things start with the vision. The mistake is in thinking that the vision is the product, or that "all the hard work is done" once you've created the vision. No, the hard work begins after the vision.
NO they fucking DIDNT, they had faked video of a concept of an idea of something that maybe was possible to built.
Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
You are being too kind -- those people are idiots for thinking they know it all. The same problem is with surveys or comparing feedback of positive vs negative -- the real problems and issues are usually only identified or voiced by a very small number of people, that should not (but usually does) reflect or coorelate to the importance of the problems/issues identified.
I was going to 'invest' in this product back when it was announced, but it seemed 'to good to be true', especially from a new and unkown stranger. Saving some money by paying before they had a product was not worth the saving for paying more later -- that slick-willy sales pitch never works on me.
What's it called?
Monorail!
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
'Humans have a fundamental need to put themselves in the center of stories.'
Extroverts have a fundamental need to put themselves in the center of stories.
There, FTFY.
Witness BitZtream getting pwned!... twice.....three times!
How's life in the hypocrite lane?