Meyer Optik Görlitz's parent company is insolvent, backers won't get lenses or money returned

“..there’s a big difference between mostly dead and all dead..”

Let's hope all such companies go down this way, although perhaps a thought for their customers, not all of them because they should have known better.

Cannot say for sure but old Meyer lenses in flashy cladding and the ridiculous prices was effectively a scam, although not doubt legal. I have little sympathy for the buyers who lost out, either. They had more money than sense.

Here in uk if you paid by credit card or pay pal you will get your money back unfortunately

When the lenses were announced, I asked about the high price and if the company had any history/experience in producing quality lenses.

Someone responded with a Wikipedia link and a comment, implying that it was among the greats in the history of optics and that I was... (whatever)

That's just the nature of social media. People pass irrelevant information hidden in hype. Speculation is not distinguished from expert opinion. They may mean it as a joke or entertainment, but anyone reading such opinions should take it with a (large) pinch of salt.

I wasn't going to invest anyway, but it is clear that the brand and history have nothing to do with this company. These folks were just over-ambitious to make quick money. I won't debate with anyone arguing that they tried, because they didn't have a good plan to deliver. It takes more than just a name to produce high quality products of any type.

ooopsy daisy!
This is why I never bought anything on Kickstarter and the likes even though sometimes I really want to.

A fool and his money will soon part ways

In post Soviet countryes biotar 58 2 cost 5-10 dollars. It calling "Helios 44". You also can buy some tessar 50 2.8 for 2-3 dollars on m39 rangefinder mount. Or sonnar 50 1.5 for 20-30 dollars.

Let's start a lawsuit !

I see a lot of cynism here about crowdfunding, yet my experience on ks about the Kamlan 28 f1.4 (fuji mount for me) was good: lens delivered roughly on time, and offering a really good quality/price being an early backer. Friendly communications as well.
Based on this good experience I may well be pledging their 50mm f1.1 MKII when it gets its campaign.

Kickstarter and Bitcoin, great life lessons to learn here.

legal theft

This is not their fault. Thet did nothing wrong.

Its called crowdfunding. People are literally giving them money to fund it. You arent buying anything.

You cannot willingly fund something and complain that you funded something.

If people backed these lenses at their quoted price, I am sure they are too rich to feel the loss......the lenses were always over priced

this is probably another example of (new?) scheme trending in murky waters of crowd funding:
1. come up with a product missing for some reason from portfolios of established vendors
2. crowd fund manufacturing process development
3. file bankruptcy
4. sell the intellectual property and the long list of potential buyers to professional investors

To the effects to the consumer, yes it is the same (crowdfunding or pre-ordering). It means if while you wait the company goes under with no assets, you lost the money and the product.

This is getting nauseatingly predictable.

I only buy things that actually exist.

Call me old-fashioned.

There's an expensive lesson here with little resale value.

I bet the knew that they were in trouble when the started crowdfunding. A nice scam to get more money before they go under!

Unbelievable. The audacity of some people to steal from others under the guise of an innovative or risk-taking startup is troubling. These guys are no better than common crooks running away from Apple stores with phones stuffed under their hoodies.

And thus I shall never back any project.

Seems to me the 'Business Ethics' in Germany are seriously corrupted.
Think of Francke & Heidecke >> Insolvent somewhere in the 90's >> Became DPH >> Rollei trading company branched off >> DPH became insolvent around 2000 >> Resurrected under slightly other name >> insolvent >> resurrected ..... how many guillible investors are sucked of their savings ?
An older Dutch / German story: The once famous Dutch airplane manufacturer 'Fokker' - one of the pioneers in aviation was taken over by a German airplane manufacturer from the Dutch government somewhere in the 1980's if correct. Within about a year the now German owned 'Fokker' factory was shut-down but not after all its patents were siphoned off to the German owners.
So far for business ethics.
The Millions of Euros taken by the owners of Meyer Optic Gorlitz must be hanging around somewhere - in the pockets of broadly smiling ........ ?
'Ethics' - soon a forgotten word ? - lets make sure its not !!

Those of you wondering how a company raising more than $4.2 million in crowdfunding money for high-margin products (cost of goods sold << price) could go bankrupt to the point of being liquidated, please take note of the following.

Globell B.V., the main subsidiary of the net SE group, the one carrying the group's original business in Europe (software edition and distribution) went bankrupt on 7 November 2017 and was liquidated and dissolved on 29 May 2018.

I presume (this is a presumption, I have no proof of nor report on it) that part of the money from the first crowdfunding projects was diverted from its original purpose to fill the hole left by Globell B.V.'s bankruptcy in the group's accounts.

That would have been the beginning of the whole Ponzi scheme: progressively, the crowdfunding money raised for later projects was more and more used to complete former projects (this was confirmed by a person who had worked on net SE's lens projects until the beginning of 2018).

net SE have raised a total of $4.2 million through lens crowdfunding campaigns.

1/ Projects led by net SE under the Meyer Optik Görlitz trademark ($3.2m)

- Trioplan 35mm f/2.8: $595,893 (Kickstarter)
- Trioplan 50mm f/2.9: $683,801 (Kickstarter)
- Trioplan 100mm f/2.8: $359,451 (Kickstarter)
- Lydith 30mm f/3.5: $230,135 (Kickstarter) + $21,755 (Indiegogo)
- Primoplan 58mm f/1.9: $793,266 (Kickstarter)
- Primoplan 75mm f/1.9 II: $261,138 (Indiegogo)
- Plasmat 105mm f/2.7: $267,296 (Kickstarter)

2/ Projects led by net SE under other trademarks ($1m)

- A. Schacht Travegon 50mm f/2.5: $32,782 (Kickstarter, failed)
- C.P. Goerz Citograph 35mm f/8: $69,988 (Kickstarter) + $9,531 (Indiegogo)
- C.P. Goerz Citograph 50mm f/2.8: $42,202 (Kickstarter)
- Emil Busch Glaukar 3.1 Anastigmat: $136,489 (Kickstarter) + $20,714 (Indiegogo)
- Ihagee Elbaflex: $29,868 (Kickstarter, failed)
- Oprema Jena Biotar 75mm f/1.5 and 58mm f/2: $544,354 (Kickstarter) + $198,990 (Indiegogo).

The whole thing seemed like a scam for while now. They should catch the Board of Directors and all decision makers and sell their kidneys in the open market through a Sotherby's kindda auction. Both kidneys. And return everyone's money. And all body parts, now that limb and body part transplants are so successful.

On a more serious note, there should be an Insurance Element in Crowdfunding Schemes and all payments should be tranches, subject to completion of the previous target in the manufacturing process. And an escrow agent who is paid a portion of the raised money. Some serious structure needs to exist.

While Meyer Optik's behaviour is plain disgusting, this will further cause issues with other lens and all crowdfunding projects in general.

Luckily I've already received my new Primoplan 58mm f1.9. Had through their Kickstarter's lifetime deal for 499 bucks.

I went and bought a Lydith from ebay. Nifty little lens when you don't care about corners.

Buy My Sh*t!

I have a nice steel tower for sale in Paris.
Anyone interested?

Angry Photographer was talking about this a month ago

The usual end of too greedy manufacturers. Their lenses were nice (I own 2 old Trioplans and I'd gladly get a modern one too), but they were WAY to expensive! more then 1000$ for a Cooke's Triplet? No, thanks. They could sell much more lenses if their prices were reasonable, like 200-300 dollars each.

The crowfunding is not a "shopping", it is an high risk investment. And as you are a small person, your risk is always that you lose all you put in. If you would be the somebody then you could get your money back but you ain't anyways investing to such things.

Never, ever give money to a crowdfunded project unless you accept that there's a significant chance that you'll see absolutely nothing in return.

"So long, suckers!"

Wait a few months and.......
"Change the name and do the same"
I've seen this happen with 100's of companies

Always sad to see a lens maker go. I always thought if they sold their lenses for $200 - $400 to compete with Mitakon and Lawoa they would have gained more traction in the market.

But, yeah, their prices were really high for what they offered. Once you pass the $500 mark users expect something crisp and special.

I just don't comprehend the current trend of us millennials giving their money to random online strangers. Whether kickstarter or gofundme, do you all really have money just sitting around burning a hole in your pockets that you feel the need to give it away for hopes and promises?

At least they kicked the bucket before they had the chance to grace the world with the promised $5500 24mm f/2.8 lens. Though announcing one was already enough of an insult to the common sense.

Am I surprised that yet another Kickstarter campaign went belly up? No. Am I sorry for the investors? Heck no! A fool and his money shall soon be parted. Am I surprised when DPReview posts articles about new Kickstarter campaigns even though many of them go really sour? Nope. DPReview seems to have no conscience when it comes to such things. I wish we could have more articles about legitimate companies with real products and fewer articles about Kickstarter campaigns that in all likelihood will never pan out.

Reminds me of the peak of the 1990's where some "tech" stocks were valued higher than GM, even though they had no capital, no physical assets and basically, no products, just a name. That dot.com debacle and inevitable collapse eventually cost $4T.