Success Factors in Reward based and Equity based Crowdfunding in Finland

Master’s Thesis 
56 
them. According to Suoheimo, “finding financing through crowdfunding is important, 
but getting a launch estimate is even more important”. This is in line with academic 
research claiming validation (Belleflamme et al., 2013; 
Gerber and Hui, 2013; De 
Buysere et al., 2012) and verification of demand (Mollick, 2014) 
are important moti-
vations for entrepreneurs. Leppänen also felt “crowdfunders did not dictate how to 
produce the film”, which enabled the team to be freer than they would have been with 
traditional funding. This is in accordance with Gleasure (2015) claiming crowdfund-
ing offer entrepreneurs more creative and strategic freedom than other investment 
methods. 
9.2.2. Choice of Crowdfunding Model 
As explained in the Methodology section of this thesis, representatives from both re-
ward-based and equity-based crowdfunding were studied. It was clear from the inter-
views that the entrepreneurs that chose equity crowdfunding did so because of the 
financial implications. Those who participated in reward-based funding did so for a 
larger variety of reasons. 
Juuri “wanted to strengthen equity capital in order to fix the balance sheet”. Thus, 
equity crowdfunding was found to be the optimal, and according to Bjors, the only 
option. For Pyynikin Käsityöläispanimo, the lack of traditional funding options was a 
key driver for participating in crowdfunding. Pere described it as “free money, since 
there is no interest on it” and mentioned the assistance they have gotten from share-
holders in marketing and other business related tasks. Clearly, the two companies ini-
tiated their equity crowdfunding for different reasons, but both seemed quite focused 
on the financial benefits of the option. 
Contrarily, the reward-based crowdfunding ventures seemed more focused on several 
different benefits crowdfunding could provide them. For both Ambronite and Autolla 
Nepaliin the validation from the crowd was a crucial aspect of the campaign. For Am-
bronite the validation was a type of business tool – as Suoheimo stated “it served a lot 
of purposes: doing market research, finding customers and gaining validation”. Al-
ternatively, for Autolla Nepaliin validation was a form of mandate for going through 
with the realization of the project. Leppänen felt that “the core of crowdfunding is that 

---