In December 2011, the ZPM Espresso Machine, also known as the ZPM Nocturn, launched on Kickstarter with bold ambition: to democratize espresso by offering café-quality brewing at home through an affordable, open-source machine. Its appeal was undeniable.
Over 1,500 backers pledged $369,569, far exceeding the $20,000 goal. The project was seen as a breakthrough for home baristas and a proof-of-concept for open-source consumer appliances.
But what began as a dream quickly turned into a cautionary tale. The ZPM project would go on to suffer delays, controversy, and ultimately, collapse becoming one of Kickstarter’s most disappointing failures in the hardware space.
The Vision Behind ZPM
The ZPM Espresso Machine was the creation of engineers Gleb Polyakov and Igor Zamlinsky, who set out to shrink the complexity of a commercial espresso machine into something affordable for home users.
Their core innovation was using PID (Proportional-Integral-Derivative) temperature control, previously found only in commercial machines and making it programmable and hackable.
The open-source nature meant users could fine-tune their espresso experience, adjust brewing temperatures and pressures, and participate in a larger community of coffee nerds and tinkerers. What they were proposing wasn’t just a product, it was a movement for open, transparent appliance development.
The Kickstarter Campaign
When the Kickstarter campaign launched in December 2011, it was a hit with both coffee lovers and tech enthusiasts.
The founders’ pitch was simple: “Why can’t you pull the perfect espresso shot at home without spending $2,000?” Their prototype worked, the marketing was strong, and the concept was compelling.
By the end of the campaign, ZPM had raised 18 times their initial ask. However, unlike software-based Kickstarter projects, ZPM was building a precision hardware product—and as many campaigns before and after them have proven, this is where things often go wrong.
Technical Challenges and Delays
Almost immediately after the campaign closed, production issues began to surface. The prototype that looked sleek and promising was hard to replicate at scale.
The ZPM team ran into problems with pressure stability, heating elements, and electrical safety certifications. The internal boiler frequently leaked during tests. Getting the manufacturing process right for a machine that involved electronics, heating systems, water flow, and mechanical pressure proved far more complex than expected.
As delays mounted, the founders promised fixes and posted infrequent updates but behind the scenes, the team was struggling to maintain momentum and investor confidence.
Team Disruptions and Operational Setbacks
By late 2014, things worsened internally. The company’s COO and several core team members abruptly left the startup. This wasn’t just a staffing issue, it was a strategic unraveling.
Without enough engineers and manufacturing partners in place, the remaining team couldn’t meet promised delivery deadlines or resolve fundamental design flaws.
They scrambled to seek more funding, but the costs of fixing the hardware, certifying the product, and shipping units had ballooned beyond their runway. By early 2015, it was clear: ZPM was not going to deliver the product backers paid for.
Communication and Transparency Breakdown
One of the most common criticisms among backers was the lack of transparent communication.
After the initial flood of excitement, updates from the ZPM team became infrequent and increasingly vague. Backers reported months-long silences, broken estimated shipping dates, and confusing technical jargon in updates that seemed more like excuses than solutions.
When the final update arrived in 2015, informing backers that the project had collapsed, it came without refunds, without apology, and with little explanation. For hundreds of supporters who had waited for years, this lack of closure only added insult to injury.
Amazon Listing and Customer Confusion
Interestingly, in an attempt to recoup some costs, ZPM sold a small number of early units on Amazon. These machines likely test batches received harsh criticism.
Customers reported dead-on-arrival units, software bugs, inconsistent brew results, and even electrical safety issues.
The listing was eventually taken down, but not before contributing to the growing sentiment that ZPM had tried to salvage its failure through quiet retail sales bypassing the very backers who had funded them in the first place.
Founders of ZPM: Where Are They Now?
After the project’s collapse, Gleb Polyakov went on to co-found another company, Nylas, a platform for email APIs that has since raised millions in venture funding.
He continues to work in tech, with no visible connection to espresso or hardware startups since. Igor Zamlinsky has maintained a lower public profile.
His LinkedIn shows limited public activity post-ZPM, suggesting a retreat from the public entrepreneurial space at least for now. While the ZPM Espresso Machine was their first major public venture, it serves as a stark lesson in how vision and execution must align for crowdfunded projects to succeed.
A Legacy of Warnings
ZPM’s failure is more than just a lost coffee machine, it’s now a case study in crowdfunding gone wrong.
Hardware is hard: Scaling from prototype to product takes more than a great idea, it requires money, manufacturing knowledge, and robust supply chains.
Transparency is non-negotiable: Backers expect honesty. Silence creates distrust. Kickstarter isn’t a store: Many customers still assume their pledge equals a guaranteed product. ZPM reminded everyone that crowdfunding is an investment, not a preorder.
Despite its failure, the ZPM movement planted a seed. It inspired new projects, including the successful Decent Espresso Machine, which aimed to bring transparency and customization to home espresso but with better execution and infrastructure.
FAQ
Q: What was the ZPM Espresso Machine trying to achieve?
A programmable, PID-controlled espresso machine with pro-level features for under $500.
Q: Why did the project fail?
Engineering issues, team exits, communication breakdowns, and underestimating the difficulty of hardware development.
Q: Did anyone receive a finished machine?
Only a small number of early units were shipped, many of which were faulty.
Q: Was the project ever officially canceled?
Yes, in 2015, the ZPM team confirmed the project had ended without completion.
Q: What happened to the money?
The funds were spent during development. No refunds were issued.
Q: What can future Kickstarter hardware creators learn?
Prototype thoroughly, overcommunicate, and never underestimate the logistical nightmare of mass production.
TL;DR
The ZPM Espresso Machine raised $369K with big promises but failed due to delays, flaws, and poor communication becoming a classic Kickstarter cautionary tale.
