Oh boy... the guy that made the "the dipr - a spoon for dunking sandwich cookies" (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/rhaleluk/the-dipr-a-spoon-for-dunking-sandwich-cookies) actually thinks he can make a hoverboard...
it smells like rip off... only smells, after all, he has credentials (NOPE.. he does not) http://www.linkedin.com/in/roberthaleluk
nope... he is not the guy to the job, as a piece of advice: make a prototype, show it, THEN ask for money.. not the other way arround.

Very cool,
I doubt it'll be funded sadly.

"Probably impossible ... But certainly worth a try!"
I can pretty much 100% guarantee that it's impossible, so why is it worth a try?
The recently developed Martin Jetpack is arguably the world's most compact human-levitating device, and it has a volume something like 20x what you'd need for a board.
http://www.gizmag.com/martin-jetpack-investors/23793/

Needs industrial mesh to cover the top and bottom of the blades to remove possibility of falling on to them if you loose you balance and fall.
My only concern is stability with the center of mass (user) being higher then the blades. Would require something like a Segway gyro (or two) to keep it level.
Would recommended a closed cycle rechargeable fuel cell for additional power density. One that could be recharged from the outlet overnight.
I'm personally more in favor of the hover-bike concept with vertically aligned rotors and VTOL as the riding position provides better stability.

I wish people would stop clogging up kickstarter with stupid render. Just because you have a copy of Inventor does not make you an inventor.

There are electric bicycles in the $3,000 to $5,000 range and the amount of power needed to propel a bicycle forward is orders of magnitude smaller than what is needed to actually get you off the ground.
Getting a person off the ground with a couple of 12" fans powered by a battery just isn't going to happen and especially not for $10k. He even mentions the battery technology he is looking at is under development and experimental and I suspect IBM is millions of dollars away from anything that would be ready for a consumer product.
Having your small project depend on a major breakthrough in battery technology dooms it mostly right out the gate. There are other major issues as well. The stabilization firmware is going to require significant R&D alone, probably more than their budget.
You cannot stabilize the platform using 2 fixed fans so the platform will need to move fans on more than one axis to make adjustments. The need for these joints limits space available for the battery. If you put your foot above a fan it will stop moving air too.
Without first just building a lightweight version of the platform designed to support only itself they are biting off waay more than they can chew with platform intended to transport humans.
AFAIK they are not under financial obligation to pay back the money if the project fails (and it will). Their goals are so unrealistic with the project they are pretty much just trying to con suckers out of $10,000 each.

Agree with Joshua Smallwood. I would guess that even a very lightweight board would need at least 100kw of power to levitate you which is more than many cars. The smaller the rotor area, the more power you need. Probably compact turbofan engines like on a massenger jet would be the most realistic way to do it now and would burn massive amounts of fuel while still being much heavyer than the hoverboard suggested here and would of course be extremely expensive.

100 years from now,maybe a discussion of how,we might be able to work within the laws of physics to build one,for now we should stick to enjoying the movie.

I also need $1 million to research and develop a hover... shoe.
*spends 5 minutes with a calculator* Research complete. Time to book my flight to the Caribbean.

If a guy who does not have a back ground in physics for building an anti gravitational hovering device is asking for a million bucks, then I'd like to ask for several billion for my new spaceship.