I’d argue that this is a typical chicken & egg paradox.
There is no commercial grade startup trying this, because there is not enough demand.
And there is no demand, because the commercial products themselves are still very much deep in geek-territory.

I’ve seen attempts at selling 3D FDM printers at toy shops … and I’ve seen them dissappear (followed by the shops going broke not long after because toy shops themselves are in heaps of trouble ).

Someone simply needs that perfect storm of timing, luck and idea to make it work.

We had portable audio before Apple made iPods into something people thought they couldn’t live without … and these days all of that has been replaced by mobile phones & streaming services, because for most people that is sufficient. Only a few audio geeks out there are willing to pay a premium for a specialised device.

Something similar would have to happen to 3D printing.
The tech needn’t be brilliant, but the output needs to be at a speed and quality that people can be convinced to want.
I think that it can be done if time is spent on tuning machines and limiting them to the point that an idiot could use them.

Add a marketing campaign a la Apple to it and you’ve got something.

@phaidknott I think they tried to use the wrong technology for the wrong purpose. 3D printing is good for prototyping, but not for production as it lacks the speed and it is too finicky to get consistent good quality. I’d argue that it would have been fine if they had used the 3D prints as masters for casting. Most people on kickstarter seem to forget that projects can and will fail once the reality of turning an idea into a product hits a few hurdles. I’ve seen it with the Mycroft kickstarter too. Anything that relies on technology is a huge risk and not a sure thing.