Toxic truth about world’s most downloaded shopping app Wish with astonishing discounts and knock-off Nikes for £1.66
WHETHER it’s knock-off Nikes for £1.66, a coat for your dog costing £1.14 or, ahem, a vibrator for 72p, you can buy almost anything from online retailer Wish.
The site, on the surface, is the ultimate one-stop shop for cheap deals on household essentials and the bizarre, like a Donald Trump loo brush or a miniature hat for your hamster.
While some items have gone viral for being so ludicrous, the success of the site is no laughing matter for heavyweight competitors eBay and Amazon.
Founded in San Francisco in 2010, Wish was the most downloaded shopping app worldwide in 2018, and is now active in more than 60 countries, with 250,000 merchants globally.
Wish claims it has 24million monthly active users and sells almost a million items every day. But underneath all the hype, could this be a case of be careful what you wish for?
There have been claims of poor customer service, bad quality products and there are concerns about how it can afford to keep prices so low.
MIRANDA KNOX tries the site to see if Wish is all it’s cracked up to be . . .
LEFT OUT OF POCKET BY ‘SCAMMERS’
On TrustPilot, the site gets an impressive 4.5 stars out of five, so I was expecting good things when I tried it out.
Sadly, I had an awful experience and was actually left out of pocket, after my order — placed in September — was cancelled with no explanation by Wish.
After spending what felt like years of my life browsing the overwhelming amount of items on offer, I ordered seven items, including a pair of wireless headphones for £4.14, a wireless doorbell security camera for £8.15 and a pair of “famous TikTok leggings” for £5.67.
However, within days of being told items from my order had been shipped, I received an email out of the blue cancelling every single item, saying: “Unfortunately the merchant was unable to fulfil an item from your order, so we have refunded you.”
Unfortunately, it seems I’m not the only one something like this has happened to.
One disgruntled customer wrote on Twitter: “You cancelled my complete order of six items! Why would you do this?
“No email or anything telling me why. I am very upset. I really wanted those things!!! Why?”
Another went as far to label those behind the brand as “thieves” and “scammers”.
In my case, the site told me they’d refunded all the items, however after checking my bank account and matching it up to my order, I realised they hadn’t refunded the leggings, leaving me £11.77 down, including the delivery charge.
When I contacted their online support, I was told to “wait until October 12, 2023 for the refund to appear” — over two weeks after they’d taken the money out of my account.
When I tried again to get support on October 12, the same message popped up, and when I asked for more info, I was unable to be connected to a customer support agent “due to issues with my account”.
I was asked to upload photo ID to the site — something I felt very uncomfortable doing so I didn’t — which then meant I couldn’t access their customer service at all.
After waiting in vain for seven weeks for a refund I contacted the press office, who admitted that a mistake on their part had blocked the refund, which would now be forthcoming.
‘THEY ARE THIEVES WHO STOLE MY MONEY’
My infuriating experience left me wondering how many other unwitting customers this could have happened to without them even realising, and how many struggled to get a refund when things went wrong?
Quite a few, as it turns out.
On TrustPilot, one disgruntled customer wrote: “The items I received were nothing like what was shown on the website.
“I am still fighting for my refund. They have removed the items from my order page and keep sending me the same response when I message them.
“This company is absolutely horrible and there is no customer service. They are thieves who stole my money and refuse to refund.”
SLOW, AND EXPENSIVE, DELIVERY
Another issue I encountered was the cost of the delivery. Despite receiving a barrage of social media ads for Wish, including one that said: “With shipping this cheap . . . why not order it all?”, I was charged an eye-watering £18.29 for my chosen items to be delivered and it was estimated to take up to 18 days.
Given that my items had come to £33.97, this brought my total up to £52.26.
When you consider most of the items are sent directly from China, the financial cost is perhaps not so shocking.
However, it did increase the order amount substantially at checkout, making the seemingly rock-bottom prices seem like much less of a bargain.
FAKE, ILLEGAL AND DANGEROUS GOODS
When I did successfully place an order after setting up a new account, it was a less problematic experience in terms of receiving the goods, but the quality of the items were very disappointing.
I spent £36.58 — £9.98 of which was on delivery — and ordered a ring, which was described as “18k pure gold” for £1.45, wide-legged stripy trousers for £8.07, a £3.25 cat handbag, high-waisted leggings for £5.37, and a pair of pink trainers, costing £8.46.
Delivery took ten days, having been shipped from mainland China and the US, and the quality was as you’d expect — poor.
The handbag’s zip was dodgy, the leggings were see-through, and the pink trainers were flimsy, indicating they wouldn’t last long and were ultimately destined for landfill, raising concerns about its impact on the environment.
Further investigation into the site revealed that in 2020 consumer watchdog Which? had found “fake, illegal and dangerous goods” were being stocked on Wish.com, including a £17 kids’ car seat (no longer available on the site), which didn’t comply with UK regulations, and a smoke detector which failed to sound in eight tests.
This year a Guardian probe found E-bike chargers posing a risk of fire and electric shock for sale on the site.
BLITZ BUYS AND IMPULSE SHOPPING
Another thing that really struck me while shopping on the site were the tactics used by a lot of online marketplace retailers to encourage the consumer to quickly part with their cash.
Wish has a “Blitz Buy” section, which is a bit like an online supermarket sweep, giving the consumer ten minutes to add the best deals to their cart and check out before the time runs out.
There’s also a casino-style wheel game that lets you spin to win prizes and discounts. But it’s not just Wish that employs these techniques to encourage consumers to make impulse purchases under the illusion of a good deal.
Chinese competitor Temu, which launched last year, uses similar strategies.
Psychology expert and founder of Life Architekture, Bayu Prihandito, says: “Online stores use specific tricks that can make shopping and gambling addictions worse when they mix together.
“Casino-style games and time-limited offers prey on the impulsivity and urgency characteristic of both these addictions.
“These tactics are especially common on dropshipping websites (a site that sells goods they don’t keep in stock themselves), where retailers rely on impulsive shoppers to boost sales, giving them little room to think twice. Someone with a shopping-addiction tendency might find themselves stuck in a vicious cycle of continuous buying.”
As concerns around consumer habits and overconsumption increase, with an estimated 92million tonnes of textiles waste produced in the fashion industry every year — Bayu recommends a simple yet effective strategy called the “pause rule” to help mitigate this sort of behaviour.
He adds: “This rule is about taking a step back before finalising any purchase to evaluate the necessity and impulse behind the buying decision. This pause disrupts the automatic and blind cycle of instant gratification, allowing space for more rational thinking.”
A spokesperson for Wish said: “While the vast majority of products on our platform are well received by customers, there are rare instances where products fall foul of our policies.
“In such cases, we do our best to act quickly to remove those products and take any necessary action.
“While we have a number of protocols in place to handle refund and return requests, it appears, on this occasion, they weren’t followed.
“We have since refunded Ms. Knox in full and apologise for the service received.”