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."

7 of 141 comments (clear)

  1. Had everything? by thesupraman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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!

    1. Re:Had everything? by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ideas are a dime a dozen.

      I just thought of something; a drone that can fly in the air and dive below water. Or how about one that has automatically composes and edits in dramatic music based on the camera view. Or a drone that can link up with another drone to create 3D video from weird perspectives. Or a drone with a built-in baloon so it can stay in the air much longer. Or... you get the drift.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Had everything? by gmack · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm not entirely sure they were lying. I'm more than willing to bet that they honestly thought that with the right amount of money, they hire all of the right people and deliver a working product.

      Quite often I run into "ideas people" who think all problems are easily solvable and are shocked and upset when I inform them that whatever idea they have in their head will be a harder problem to solve than they think it is. My two favorite examples: stock market predictor (but you can see the graph goes up here and down there) and automatic meeting summarizer (I was working for a company that had a whole team of people smarter than me doing natural language processing at the time and he thought we could do it in a few months with 3 people)

    3. Re:Had everything? by nine-times · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Reminds me a little of Theranos. The quick version of the story is this:

      A college student comes up with an idea. Her professors tell her it won't work. She ignores the professors, and drops out of college and starts a company to develop the idea. People love the story of a 19 year old genius girl founding a revolutionary medical testing company, and invest heavily.

      The company continued to operate for years, and was considered to be worth billions of dollars, in spite of the fact that the technology never worked. Apparently, it wasn't even that she did a good job hiding things, it was that nobody looked too closely. They were too infatuated with the narrative. No one ever insisted on any kind of independent testing to see if the technology was real.

  2. Kickstarter by lindseyp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
  3. Process by YuppieScum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  4. Everything you need for a scam by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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."