So basically this is the Columbia House[1] of shoes. That's not a scam, it's "a catch". When a consumer hears the pitch -- in the case of Columbia House, it was "get 8 CDs for 1 penny", in the case of JustFab it's "get any pair of shoes for $39" -- they should be asking what the catch is. An ungodly number of businesses involve catches to survive. How about cell phones? That new iPhone is only $200... but you have a…
Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
161–170 of 185 posts
Re: Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference, at least from my point of view, is that it is a realistic deal to find a pair of shoes for $39 dollars when I don't think it's reasonable to be able to buy X cds for a penny, for even X=1. The closer you get to the actual or expected value of what you're buying, the more unethical I feel it is, just because you're going to be tricking a greater number of people.
If you bought into Columbia House in the 90s, as I did, the math worked out to ~$10 average for each CD over a year (the 8-for-a-penny plus the full-price ones), back when they were $16 each at the local store. The promotional offer was an attention-catcher, but you still saved $4-6 per CD. Just because you feel like "there must be a trick" doesn't mean there is a trick.
Re: Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
#163Could you ask your girlfriend how she didn't notice a large recurring charge for 8 months? I would like to know because that is a puzzle I deal with it work. We sell a software product and service on a subscription basis (not hidden like justfab...it is clear to the customer that they are buying a subscription--the product is kind of pointless without the subscription). Occasionally I find someone who bought years ag…
Re: Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
#164This business model reminds me of those fly-by-night mobile subscription services from the early 2000s. The ones who'd make you think you were buying a single ringtone, and the next thing you knew, you'd been surreptitiously signed up for a $29.99/month subscription. I remember evaluating the books for one of those companies back in the day. It was wildly successful at the surface level. But if you dipped below the s…
Those ringtone companies were just promoting ads and whatnot to get people to 'buy' something that made them, on average - what? - $70? If the cost of customer acquisition was, say, $20, they're making $50/head. For many people, having an automated business making $50/customer profit is pretty good. Not every business is 'sustainable' through repeat customers - funeral homes come to mind. However, if the only way to…
Sure, but at the scale the ringtone business grew (and burned through users), they eventually ran out of suckers to scam. A lot of them would fold shortly thereafter, or move on to a different market (usually a completely different country), or consolidate with another company overseas and tap the suckerbase there.
This model is basically a modern, bigger-scale version of the old snake oil sales model. Set up a shop in town, sell a bunch of bad merch, get run out of town, find a new town. Rinse and repeat.
Eventually, though, your model catches up to you. Either you're closing up shop in old markets and opening new ones that aren't as big or lucrative, or you're keeping a toehold in the old markets -- but the costs of doing so grow faster than your revenues. Or you flee Market A for Market B, only to have a competitor or two leap into Market B the next month.
Re: Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
#165Biased answer but with some facts: I'm an investor in the company, and many here on HN know me personally. JustFab is not a scam, and I would not be involved with it if it was -- indeed it's a spectacular and very consumer friendly company that I'm proud to be a part of and I think will be a great success. This comment thread has been quick to conclude that it is a scam, on some fairly sketchy evidence. While I don't…
Re: Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
#166Biased answer but with some facts: I'm an investor in the company, and many here on HN know me personally. JustFab is not a scam, and I would not be involved with it if it was -- indeed it's a spectacular and very consumer friendly company that I'm proud to be a part of and I think will be a great success. This comment thread has been quick to conclude that it is a scam, on some fairly sketchy evidence. While I don't…
Where's the "every month while you're a member" in that text?
"JOIN TODAY" does not imply subscription with recurring charges, just like "sign up" or "create an account" doesn't.
"there's a box you have to click indicating that you accept the terms" - perhaps that gets you off the hook legally, but not ethically.
Re: Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
#167It may be harder than you think to get the credit card company to stop the charges. http://uncrunched.com/2012/08/26/my-undead-credit-card/ Like it or not they have a good business model. And the VCs probably don't care if they're ethical, as long as they get a good ROI.
Some VC information on this page if you're interested. http://www.crunchbase.com/company/justfabulous
IMHO the most important consideration is that the more aggressive any company is about acquiring new customers under this kind of model, the more liberal it should be about returns/refunds/cancellations. There were many lessons learned a couple years ago when discount-membership checkout programs (WebLoyalty, Affinion, Vertrue) and their e-commerce partners (Fandango) got the smackdown from various state AGs. There's enough similarity here to warrant paying close attention and making sure to stay on the right side of a thin line. Here's example coverage of the previous controversy:
http://www.zippycart.com/ecommerce-news/1165-affinion-vertru...
Re: Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
#168class action lawsuit - dated oct 2011 though - http://www.scambook.com/blog/2011/10/justfab-com-justfabulou... and some more people with similar stories: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/online/justfab.html http://www.scambook.com/company/view/146/JustFabcom http://forum.purseblog.com/the-glass-slipper/justfab-com-sca...
- Any company of any size in America has been sued in a consumer class action -- many reputable companies scores or even hundreds of times. Some lawyers make their living that way. Most of these suits involve highly subjective elements such as whether there was enough disclosure in the right place of the right type to avoid consumers being misled. (Inevitably, in any mass-market consumer business, some consumers will be misled -- not necessarily the sharpest tools in the drawer.)
- Don't ever believe the version of the facts portrayed in a plaintiffs' complaint (in any suit). Ours is an adversarial system, meaning that, as in politics, you can count on each side to overstate its version of reality about 10X or 100X so that it looks like they're inhabiting alternate universes.
JMHO.
Re: Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
#169Could you ask your girlfriend how she didn't notice a large recurring charge for 8 months? I would like to know because that is a puzzle I deal with it work. We sell a software product and service on a subscription basis (not hidden like justfab...it is clear to the customer that they are buying a subscription--the product is kind of pointless without the subscription). Occasionally I find someone who bought years ag…
Re: Why was a scam company able to raise $76 Million Series B?
#170Biased answer but with some facts: I'm an investor in the company, and many here on HN know me personally. JustFab is not a scam, and I would not be involved with it if it was -- indeed it's a spectacular and very consumer friendly company that I'm proud to be a part of and I think will be a great success. This comment thread has been quick to conclude that it is a scam, on some fairly sketchy evidence. While I don't…
I see your long answer, and, being a bit familiar with companies like Intelligent Beauty, I raise you a long list of questions. I don't expect you to answer them, but in my mind they can help separate "value-enhancing offer" for customers vs. "revenue-enhancing trick" for the company.
1.) How long does the average customer stay in the monthly program before cancelling?
2.) What percentage of customers opt-out on initial sign-up?
3.) On average, what % of the monthly subscription charged to the customer is ultimately spent on merchandise vs. becomes breakage?
4.) If you changed the text next to the check box to say, "You will be charged $39.95/month," do you think opt-in rates would change? If consumers aren't being misled, you should see little-to-no change in opt-in rates.
5) If I call to cancel after N months, do you refund the unused balance? Do I have to use it as a "store credit?" Do you offer me 100 cents on the dollar or some fraction thereof? Are consumers given incentives not to cancel or to convert the remaining unused balance into merchandise before cancelling?
6) Does the unused balance expire? If so, after how long?
7) Do you email customers to let them know they need to log in every month, or is it their responsibility to remember?
8) What portion of the company's revenues (and, more importantly, gross margin dollars) is in product sales vs. unused subscription dollars as breakage?
9) Why must consumers call customer service to cancel vs. doing it online? Is it difficult or time-consuming to reach customer service?
If this subscription is a value-add for customers, one would expect:
- A high portion of the charged dollars converting into merchandise sales vs. becoming breakage. Consumers rarely find it enjoyable to be charged $39.95 and not to get anything for it (even Columbia House sent you the CDs at the same time they collect the money; you get the money first, and I have to remember to come to you to get the shoes).
- A reasonable % of customers opting-out at initial purchase. If 99% opt in, your disclosure is ineffective, as it beggars belief that people are dying to pay $39.95 a month. Or, if you change the language of the text box as I suggest above, no observed difference in opt-in rates.
- A low churn rate in the % of consumers who call to cancel once subscribed.
- A consumer-friendly policy that allows subscribers who cancel to receive 100% on the dollar for the unused balance either in cash or store credit, at their option.
- The majority of the revenues and gross margin dollars come from shoe sales, not subscription fees.
- Easy, online cancellation. Shouldn't it be as easy to get out of the program as to get into it? If not, why not?
[Edit: formatting, again]