Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wish S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 153 posts

Re: Wish S-1

#21

Post by tgtweak »

da_big_ghey wrote: post #14
d3nj4l wrote: post #2

As expected, the threat of reputational damage from counterfeit goods features pretty heavily in the IPO. Unfortunately, that damage has already been done. At the moment, 8 of the top 10 results for "wish.com" on YouTube are people exposing scams. Not really a good look for the company.

Yeah, when I think of wish.com, I usually think of "fuel filters" or auto switches. Not exactly a reputation for quality.

I think of the terrible-lady-getting-excited-over-a-box youtube ad :|

Also the numerous videos from linustechtips and many other reputable channels detailing in painful detail how scammy wish is.

Also my mother in law who bought a $12 fitness tracker that died after 2 months.

My opinion is that they've begun exhausting the pool of people they can afford to convert since the lifetime value per new member must be atrocious and they rely heavily on marketing to new users to keep the machine going. Everyone has seen a wish ad by now - at this point there are only 2 segments: those willing to give it a shot, and those who have decided not to. If those that were in the first camp don't keep buying because the experience is terrible then you are spending progressively more to try and convert that second camp as things go on. I don't think they have a future-secure business model.

edit: a quick review of their s1 shows they spend 100% of their profit on marketing, and that aside from coronavirus bump they have not grown either in margins or growth since 2018.

Re: Wish S-1

#22

Post by dumbfounder »

da_big_ghey wrote: post #14
d3nj4l wrote: post #2

As expected, the threat of reputational damage from counterfeit goods features pretty heavily in the IPO. Unfortunately, that damage has already been done. At the moment, 8 of the top 10 results for "wish.com" on YouTube are people exposing scams. Not really a good look for the company.

Yeah, when I think of wish.com, I usually think of "fuel filters" or auto switches. Not exactly a reputation for quality.

I have no idea what you mean by this.

When I think of Wish.com I think of gimmicky, low quality, chinese products. Very few sellers are actually trying to build a brand, so they aren't trying to build a quality product. Wish.com is trying to build a brand though so they need to do better at quality control.

Re: Wish S-1

#24

Post by joshumax »

jackfrodo wrote: post #17

The tolerance of counterfeits is really such a bummer. And it's not just Wish. Amazon has their fair share of counterfeits as well. These "Airpods"[0] are cheap knockoffs, but the images say that they're Airpod Pros. This listing is on the first page of results when you search for Airpods on Amazon. [0] https://www.amazon.com/Wireless-Headphones-Bluetooth-Earbuds...

Some of the reviews also seem comically fake, take for example this 5 star review for the "Airpod Pros":

'You will love these earbuds . I mainly use the wireless earbuds, I am very satisfied in all aspects. These earbuds also have a solid voice for music. They are easy to pair. More than enough scope. These earbuds work very beautifully. Awesome battery life and clarity. These earbuds are the most convenient and comfortable. I love these earbuds , I already want another pair. Buy them. You will love these earbuds .'

Re: Wish S-1

#25

Post by samstave »

vdfs wrote: post #8
xoxoy wrote: post #3

I just downloaded the app again to refresh my memory on what it looked like since I had never actually bought anything off it. Used an anonymous email to register eg clean profile and the front page was filled with scammy hair loss products, male enhancement pills, and foot stickers that claimed it could help you grow 1-6 inches (!), among other cheap suspect goods that looked straight out of some tourist market in A…

foot stickers do work, i tried one and grow 6 inch, problem is when you remove them you are back to your previous height

Foot Stickers of Growth +6

Just be glad you identified them first and didn’t put on cursed ones.

Re: Wish S-1

#26

Post by simias »

dmurray wrote: post #4
d3nj4l wrote: post #2

As expected, the threat of reputational damage from counterfeit goods features pretty heavily in the IPO. Unfortunately, that damage has already been done. At the moment, 8 of the top 10 results for "wish.com" on YouTube are people exposing scams. Not really a good look for the company.

Do they have a reputation for quality to uphold? I expect them to be cheap and innovative, but not high quality. I'd expect the genuine Wish product to be just as flimsy as whatever knockoff.

Agreed, I don't think people expect quality from wish.com, it's just consumerism gone wild basically. I doubt most people expect quality from them.

I'd argue that counterfeits are a much bigger problem for a company like Amazon that people actually use for "qualitative" purchases.

Re: Wish S-1

#27

Post by marc__1 »

jonplackett wrote: post #16

Is it just me or are there multiple S-1's on here almost every day at the moment? Is there glut of them or are they just overly represented on HN at the moment?

IPOs priced per year

2017: 160

2018: 192

2019: 160

2020: 190 (YTD)

IPO proceeds year-to-date is $67.6b, the largest amount of the decade if you discount Alibaba's $25b IPO in 2014

[1]https://www.renaissancecapital.com/IPO-Center

Re: Wish S-1

#28

Post by Mengkudulangsat »

soniman wrote: post #5

"Our growth has been highly capital efficient. We have been able to achieve this massive growth and scale by having net cumulative cash flow from operations of $16 million from January 1, 2017 to September 30, 2020, aided by our positive cash float, where we receive an upfront payment from a user, and remit payment to a merchant a number of weeks later. In 2019, we generated a net loss of $129 million and Adjusted EB…

So many of these new S-1s are unprofitable, where does the money all go?

I'm beginning to wonder if entire unicorn ecosystem is just a funnel to subsidize ad / infrastructure / payment rail revenues at the leading providers.

Re: Wish S-1

#29

Post by soniman »

Mengkudulangsat wrote: post #28
soniman wrote: post #5

"Our growth has been highly capital efficient. We have been able to achieve this massive growth and scale by having net cumulative cash flow from operations of $16 million from January 1, 2017 to September 30, 2020, aided by our positive cash float, where we receive an upfront payment from a user, and remit payment to a merchant a number of weeks later. In 2019, we generated a net loss of $129 million and Adjusted EB…

So many of these new S-1s are unprofitable, where does the money all go? I'm beginning to wonder if entire unicorn ecosystem is just a funnel to subsidize ad / infrastructure / payment rail revenues at the leading providers.

Did you miss the part where it said that it's been net profitable? "net cumulative cash flow from operations of $16 million from January 1, 2017 to September 30, 2020"

Re: Wish S-1

#30

Post by brd529 »

> Historically, our merchants in China have benefitted from lower shipping costs due to the Universal Postal Union Treaty (“UPU”). Certain expected changes to UPU postal rates that went into effect in July 2020 are likely to increase the shipping rates our merchants incur to ship products from China. The actions we have taken in our logistics program to mitigate these increased costs may not be successful over the long term. If there are increases in shipping costs, the sales price of products on our platform could increase, which could reduce the volume of transaction activity on our platform to decrease and may consequently have a negative impact on our results of operations.

The S1 talks a lot about their logistics platform and diversifying their merchant base to come from different countries, instead of just China - and rightfully so, since until July Wish’s business was subsidized by the Universal Postal Union treaty. Thanks to the UPU, Before July it was cheaper to mail a package to Chicago from Shanghai than to shop to Chicago from Dallas.

This has now changed and so the era of cheap shipping from China is over. It’s unclear how much their logistics platform mitigates the new costs, but interesting that they had to go out and build their own fulfillment and cross border carrier services to mitigate.

Post reply on HN