Does the Possibility to Make Equity Investments in Crowdfunding Projects Crowd Out Reward–Based Investments?

By Magdalena Cholakova, Bart Clarysse. 2015

571 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management Information Systems, Marketing

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0e9167748f1b5a0cfc06b63ae85145f07e5f8c1a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Management Information Systems

In Marketing

Citations in the corpus

Toward a better understanding of crowdfunding, openness and the consequences for innovation (2017, background): “While lending-based crowdfunding generates substantial funding globally (Massolution, 2015), equity and reward-based crowdfunding have garnered the most interest with respect to their implications for innovation (e.g., Cholakova and Clarysse, 2015).”
What do crowdfunding platforms do? A comparison between investment-based platforms in Europe (2017, unknown): “Cumming et al. (2015) focus on campaign mechanisms, showing that small projects are more likely to receive funding through the ‘‘keep-it-all’’ scheme, while large projects have a higher probability of receiving funding through the ‘‘all-or-nothing’’ system.”
The power of positivity? The influence of positive psychological capital language on crowdfunding performance (2018, background): “Past venture funding and crowdfunding research has also used continuous measures for the amount of money invested in an entrepreneurial firm as a measure of evaluating funding performance (e.g., Cholakova and Clarysse, 2015; Gompers, 1995; Li et al., 2017).”
Signaling in Equity Crowdfunding (2015, unknown): “…produce and deliver a prepurchased product, and we thus believe that reward-based crowdfunding would be more suitable empirically for a prepurchasing study (for similar arguments, see also Belleflamme, Lambert, & Schwienbacher, 2010; for an alternative perspective see Cholakova & Clarysse, 2015).”
Research on Crowdfunding: Reviewing the (Very Recent) past and Celebrating the Present (2017, background): “Cholakova and Clarysse (2015) examine 155 surveys from Sympid investors (the largest equity crowdfunding platform in the Netherlands) and found that equity funding motivation is financial/utilitarian with no significant role of nonfinancial motives.”
Success drivers of online equity crowdfunding campaigns (2016, background): “While equity investors’ primary reason for participation is to reap financial benefits, contributors to rewards-based campaigns are also driven by other motives, such as the wish to be part of a community and to help others [10].”
Dynamics of Lending-Based Prosocial Crowdfunding: Using a Social Responsibility Lens (2018, background): “lenders to fund entrepreneurial endeavors (André et al. 2017; Bretschneider and Leimeister 2017; Cholakova and Clarysse 2015), especially in newly emerging financial platforms, this study further highlights the role of personal responsibility (Hill et al.”
Information Cascades among Investors in Equity Crowdfunding (2015, unknown): “Relatedly, in a direct comparison between reward- and equity-based crowdfunding, Cholakova and Clarysse (2015) find that nonfinancial motives play no significant role in the latter.”
Persuasion in crowdfunding: An elaboration likelihood model of crowdfunding performance (2017, background): “As a result, a door has been opened for future research focusing on funders’ distinctiveness relative to traditional investors (e.g., Cholakova and Clarysse, 2015; Davis et al., 2017).”