Blockbuster Projects Send Waves Hitting All Platforms
Successful crowdfunding projects spill over to competing platforms
Platform Papers is a blog about platform competition and Big Tech. The blog is linked to platformpapers.com, an online repository that collects and organizes academic research on platform competition.
By Anil Doshi.
Everyone loves a success story.
Imagine a tiny startup launching a project on a crowdfunding platform and unexpectedly raising millions—a true blockbuster campaign. What happens next? The project and the crowdfunding platform get press attention and an influx of hopeful entrepreneurs rushes in, potentially inspired by the blockbuster’s success. But, there is no reason to think that all these new entrepreneurs hoping to raise capital would join the platform where the blockbuster raised its money. The wave of attention hits all crowdfunding platforms. My research paper, recently published in the Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, shows how multiple, competing crowdfunding platforms are affected by the arrival of a blockbuster, or outlier, project on one of the platforms.
How might a blockbuster on Kickstarter drive creators to Indiegogo, or vice versa?
The answer lies in the rules that govern each platform. Platform governance—the rules and restrictions set up by platforms—affects how projects and backers behave. Some of those rules govern whether projects will be allowed and, if so, whether they have a chance of raising money. In other words, the rules affect the extent of effort a project needs to exert to have a good chance of success if they choose to create a campaign on that platform.
“Entry was higher on Indiegogo, relative to Kickstarter, after an outlier—regardless of which platform the outlier was on.”
My study of the two largest rewards-based crowdfunding platforms (Kickstarter and Indiegogo), shows that differences in their governance models led to a downstream effect: an outlier on one platform shifted the mix of entrants on both platforms.
Platform Rules: Open Gates vs. Gatekeepers
Kickstarter and Indiegogo may both be in the crowdfunding industry, but they historically took different approaches to governance. Kickstarter was known for a more curated, gatekeeper style: projects needed to meet certain guidelines and funding was all-or-nothing (creators only get money only if they reach their goal). Indiegogo, was more permissive and entrant-friendly. It allowed more types of projects, offered flexible funding (creators can keep whatever they raise even if they fall short of the goal) in addition to fixed funding, and generally had fewer restrictions on who can launch a campaign. In other words, Kickstarter was a bit like a club with a bouncer and a strict dress code, while Indiegogo threw its doors open.
These differences meant that when crowdfunding fever spikes after a blockbuster, new entrants had to choose between two platforms with different rule sets. New projects had to consider questions like: Will I be allowed to create a project on this platform? What are my chances of creating a convincing campaign and reaching my goal? How willing am I to pay the fees that the platform charges?
“Relative entry on Indiegogo was especially high among low-quality projects. On the other hand, relative entry on Kickstarter was higher among more ambitious projects.”
It turns out that the typical aspiring creator tended to see Indiegogo's open gates as the easier path to potential success. The data showed that, on average, entry was higher on Indiegogo, relative to Kickstarter, after an outlier—regardless of which platform the outlier was on. Why struggle with Kickstarter’s vetting and the risk of raising no money if you do not meet the goal, when Indiegogo lets you keep whatever you raise? The looser governance of Indiegogo effectively grabbed a larger increase in the post-blockbuster rush of entrepreneurs.
Quantity vs. Quality: A Mixed Blessing
If the story ended there, then one might think that the blockbuster on Kickstarter has a negative follow-on effect for Kickstarter because more projects were drawn to Indiegogo. To see whether this was the case, I looked at the kinds of projects that disproportionately chose Indiegogo or Kickstarter following an outlier.
“A platform’s governance decisions don’t just shape its own growth, but can also create spillover effects in a competitive market.”
It turns out that relative entry on Indiegogo was especially high among low-quality projects (defined as projects that would eventually go on to receive no pledges). In other words, a lot of new entrants were creators just "taking a flyer" and seeing if they could raise a little bit of money on Indiegogo (which was not an option on Kickstarter with its fixed funding requirement). On the other hand, relative entry on Kickstarter was higher among more ambitious projects (projects in categories that typically required greater capital). In short, after a major crowdfunding success story, Kickstarter saw relatively fewer new projects join, but they aimed higher in their goals, while Indiegogo got swamped by a crowd of lower quality projects.
So, while it looked like Indiegogo was reaping the benefits from the increased attention to crowdfunding, it turns out that the project likely experienced significant congestion by low quality projects. Anyone who runs a platforms knows that when a platform is flooded by low quality sellers, the risk of congestion goes up. Congestion is the problem where buyers have a hard time finding good sellers to trade with on a platform, because there are too many sellers (or too many low-quality sellers) to sift through. And Kickstarter basically experienced the converse: entry was relatively lower after a blockbuster but stronger among projects that were more ambitious and seeking more capital.
About the research: This study investigates how unusually successful crowdfunding projects influence the entry decisions of subsequent entrepreneurs using data from the two largest rewards-based platforms, Kickstarter and Indiegogo. The findings show that after high-performing projects, relatively more entrepreneurs entered Indiegogo, the platform with less restrictive rules. But, these entrants were disproportionately of lower quality. However, projects in categories with higher capital requirements saw relatively more entry into Kickstarter. The results highlight how differences in platform governance not only affect overall entry but also alter the composition of entrepreneurs who choose each platform.
Final Thoughts
After a blockbuster campaign, newly inspired entrepreneurs face a fork in the road. Many choose the platform with fewer entry barriers, while those with bigger ambitions often head to the platform with deeper pockets.
This dynamic highlights an intriguing strategic consideration for platform owners: a platform’s governance decisions don’t just shape its own growth, but can also create spillover effects in a competitive market. A blockbuster campaign is a rising tide that lifts some boats and tilts others. In other words, platforms are not always about "winner take all" but they can also be about "winner take the best mix."
As my research shows, a platform’s growth strategy doesn’t exist in a vacuum—it can create surprising waves in the broader platform ecosystem.
This post is based on research published in the Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal and is included in the Platform Papers references dashboard:
Doshi, A. R. (2025). How high‐performance outliers affect relative entrepreneurial entry on competing crowdfunding platforms. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal.
Anil is an expert in the field of generative AI. He publishes his own blog at:
Platform Updates
Today’s post is loosely part of a series of blog posts exploring the trade-off between adding more competitors on a platform and generating demand spill-overs. Consider this post studying the effects of adding blockbuster crowdfunding projects on within-platform demand. Or this one looking at a similar dynamic in the context of Spotify. Or this one in the context of Yelp. Last, also consider this post looking at what sets blockbuster performers, or star entrepreneurs, on platforms apart from the rest of the pack.
Data isn’t the moat, architecture is - Video rental empire of years past Blockbuster lost not for lack of data, but because Netflix rewired its business with smarter, data-driven systems. True competitive advantage comes from embedding data into an architecture that competitors can’t easily copy.
UGC is a bonus round, not the main game - Platform games Minecraft, Roblox, and Fortnite thrive on user-generated content (UGC), but success flows from having a great standalone game first. Building vibrant ecosystems is costly, and the real challenge is sparking a flywheel of great creators and engaged players.
Google keeps Chrome, but cracks show - A judge ruled Google’s search empire an illegal monopoly but let its $26B search deal with Apple survive. Instead, Google must share data with rivals—a limited remedy shaped by the rise of AI “answer engines” threatening its dominance as the web’s main gateway.
Google hit with €2.95B EU antitrust hammer - Brussels slaps Google with a multibillion-dollar fine for Google’s alleged self-preferencing practices in search advertising, threatening break-up if reforms fall short. The move ramps up transatlantic tech tensions as Google plans to appeal.
iPhone Air aims to make smartphones float - Apple unveils its thinnest, lightest iPhone redesign in a decade as consumers cling to older models. With rivals pushing foldables and smart glasses on the horizon, the iPhone Air could be Apple’s bid to reignite upgrades and reset the flagship’s trajectory.
Apple’s iPhone shine dims under AI doubts - The iPhone 17 gets overdue upgrades, and the new iPhone Air wows with bold design innovations. However, a faster refresh cycle can’t mask delays in Apple Intelligence and mounting AI struggles, leaving Apple looking more like a hardware vessel for others’ innovation.
OpenAI locks in $300B cloud pact with Oracle - The AI giant will start tapping Oracle’s data centers in 2027, signaling a move away from its exclusive Microsoft Azure partnership. With the Stargate supercomputer project ramping up, OpenAI’s appetite for massive compute power keeps growing.
Peacock flies into Amazon’s nest - NBCUniversal and Amazon have reached a deal to bring an ad-free version of Peacock to Amazon Prime Video Channels. With Amazon positioning Prime Video as a one-stop destination, this agreement
gives NBCUniversal a new edge by instantly boosting its reach.
Alibaba tests homegrown AI chip as Nvidia wobbles - The Chinese tech giant debuts a domestic AI chip, aiming to ease reliance on TSMC and sidestep U.S. export controls. The move highlights China’s bigger push to close the AI hardware gap with homegrown silicon.
Platform Papers is published, curated and maintained by Joost Rietveld.