I quickly skimmed the campaign and the data I have for it.
The project reached 22.4% of its goal. £21,270 is about $33,500 USD. That funding goal of £95,000 was the equivalent of about $149,800 USD which is not small. Raising over 15% means a reboot should be at least considered at a better time in 2015.
I like the pitch video. It is 2 minutes long, is well put together and builds the atmosphere. The art is strong with some very good looking page graphics.
Here is a graph of the performance of its reward tiers.
http://i.imgur.com/mjixo0u.png
The £6 tier was an early-bird copy. That explains why it plateaus in the "Backers by tier over time" graph. What is very noteworthy is that the £12 tier holds 189 more backers than the 268 at the £9 tier. That looks like a good job up-selling. The drop in backers to the £15 tier is acceptable and this continues to the £60 tier. The £12 tier also brought in the most allocated funding at 32.72%. I like it.
There is a gap in the rewards between the £60 and £125 tiers that could have had tiers inserted to try to be a little bit better at covering funding distance. There are not any other big problems with the rewards that I see.
The per backer average pledge amount was £13.92 (About $22 USD) which is on the lower end of what I consider healthy. This does not mean it was a bad average. Unallocated backers that did not select any reward tier was at a good low. It would need to aim for around 5,000 to 7,000 backers to reach 100% funded.
Exposure within Kickstarter was not a problem as it was well ranked. It actually would pop up into the top 4 positions. It launched and ended on acceptable days. Ending at a later hour would have brought in more funding, but that extra would be insignificant compared to the funding distance remaining.
The number of comments per day feels too low for a campaign with 1,528 backers. This could indicate lack of engagement between project creator and backers. Project updates were not as large as some other campaigns have. Updates did provide good video material.
I do regular searches about Kickstarter-related news. The
Imgur post only has 832 views when I'm posting this.
Bitly anlytics for the project showed most of the shortlink sharing was on October 8th when it launched and on October 24th. After October 31st the daily numbers dropped off. There was no surge at the end. From the 985 Facebook shares I am assuming Facebook was most, or at least a big portion, of the shortlink sharing. I did not see Impact Winter on Rock Paper Shotgun or Kotaku. That is where many backers can come from. There was some coverage by small to medium sized blogs. It may be a boring answer, but it looks like what might of killed the campaign was problems with their marketing not being large enough for such a large minimum goal. I was not following this campaign closely, so there may be other factors that I am not aware of.
Something project creators should know before launching is a rough estimate for how many backers they are going to have to get to reach 100%. That provides a sense of how much work is going to be required just to get those backers. It also increases the importance of getting people aware of a project before it launches so they can pledge on the first day. A project may have to delay launching until it has enough of a following to give it the first week momentum it needs to get fully funded.