Wish's superpower is leaving no room for taste or opinion. It's what happens when a machine builds a company based on data. The founder didn't plan to sell cheap goods to low-socioeconomic customers, but where the data took him.
The most sophisticated growth team no one talks about: @WishShopping
1. The #1 shopping app in 40+ countries
2. Rumored to often be the #1 spender on FB and Google
3. 2 million items sold daily
I sat down with @cplimon to learn about the notoriously secretive company. Read on 👇
Wish's superpower is leaving no room for taste or opinion. It's what happens when a machine builds a company based on data. The founder didn't plan to sell cheap goods to low-socioeconomic customers, but where the data took him.
cursed wish ads pic.twitter.com/eMlx4LqgKA
— big meaty claws (@leisurepIex) June 4, 2019
Most of Wish’s initial sales came from places like Florida, greater LA county, and middle-America. Specifically, zip codes with 95% Spanish speakers. Later, Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe (avg household income $18,000/year)
Even though Wish grew primarily through paid ads, they recognized they also had a perception problem. e.g. The top Google search result for Wish was "is Wish a scam." So they invested in brand campaigns, partnering with respected brands.
The founder, Peter, is the Michael Jordan of growth & performance marketing. He understands how every moving piece impacts every other piece. But with that, he maintains complete control of what everyone does at the company.
Wish started as a free wishlisting product (get it?), and with that acquired a ton of free demand. They then went to the merchants of the most wishlisted products (in China), and offered this demand to them if they would sell their products on the platform.
Wish helped invent what is now one of the most significant products within Facebook ads: Dynamic Product Ads. This gives companies the ability to upload a giant list of product SKUs, which FB pulls from to run ads dynamically.
* Efficiency: Probably had a record of GMV to headcount ratio, several million GMV per employee for a long time
* The right timing: Wish was possible because of the combination of growth of smartphones + emergence of FB ads + Peter's unique skillset
* Stunts: Wish also sponsored the Mayweather/MacGregor fight, and some of the world's most successful soccer players
https://t.co/VavQ59kUl4
More from Lenny Rachitsky
Earlier today, I gave a talk at the @SubstackInc's writer conference about building a writing habit. Below are the ten concrete strategies I shared that have helped me publish a post every week for 1.5 years 👇
0/ First of all, just sharing advice about this topic gives me serious impostor syndrome because writing is still pretty new to me, and I have much to learn. But these are things that have helped me, and I hope they'll help you.
1/ Strategy 1: Commit publicly
This was maybe 50% of my initial motivation. Having told people I was going to write weekly made me feel bad when even thinking about skipping a week. It gave me just enough nudge to keep
1b/ You don't need to make this super public. Just sending an email to a few friends regularly with your concrete goals about writing (and anything else) works wonders.
1c/ If you *really* want to be motivated, ask people for money. Nothing motivates you more than people paying you for regular
0/ First of all, just sharing advice about this topic gives me serious impostor syndrome because writing is still pretty new to me, and I have much to learn. But these are things that have helped me, and I hope they'll help you.
1/ Strategy 1: Commit publicly
This was maybe 50% of my initial motivation. Having told people I was going to write weekly made me feel bad when even thinking about skipping a week. It gave me just enough nudge to keep
I'm kicking off an experiment. Inspired by the great @joulee, and building off of the great inbound questions I continue to get from ya'll -- I\u2019m going to start using my newsletter to answer your questions. \U0001f44b
— Lenny Rachitsky (@lennysan) September 12, 2019
Sign up belowhttps://t.co/z1F1efMcue
1b/ You don't need to make this super public. Just sending an email to a few friends regularly with your concrete goals about writing (and anything else) works wonders.
1c/ If you *really* want to be motivated, ask people for money. Nothing motivates you more than people paying you for regular
Life alert: I\u2019m adding a paid plan to my newsletter \U0001f91e
— Lenny Rachitsky (@lennysan) April 7, 2020
After much prodding from readers and friends, I\u2019m going to take the leap and give this life-path a shot.
Consider subscribing and joining me on this journey \U0001f64fhttps://t.co/gtFm4POGSQ
More from World
A few thoughts on this sad development 👇👇
20 academics criticizing an paper is fine; good science, really
10000+ hate mail for studying schools in Sweden is insane
Anonymous docs/ prof (hiding in faceless accts) on twitter smearing researchers is insane
[thread] https://t.co/QYldLD3WO0
In April 2020, @jflier and I saw this coming
We saw increasingly heated and personal attacks against scientists merely for having a range of views on COVID19 (PS there is no playbook/ right ans)
Tying science to naked politics was also bad idea, we
Yet, repeatedly that is what happened. Twitter 'experts' displayed an absolute intolerance to other views
Folks who disagreed weren't just wrong, they were malicious actors spreading "disinformation"
Really? Someone worked for 25 years as faculty to suddenly spread lies?
Disinformation has been so misused that it has lost meaning.
I recently saw an ID doc & lab researcher in the UK be accused of spreading "disinformation"
hahah, get outta here, you are trying to say "i disagree" but your keyboard is broken
Personal attacks have become so bad that I have seen a lab researcher accuse a doctor of wanting to engage in inappropriate relationships with patients due to diverging views on vaccine messaging
Seriously? It was a low point even for twitter
20 academics criticizing an paper is fine; good science, really
10000+ hate mail for studying schools in Sweden is insane
Anonymous docs/ prof (hiding in faceless accts) on twitter smearing researchers is insane
[thread] https://t.co/QYldLD3WO0
Together with @ernkrans, I am interviewed in @bmj_latest: "We need to ensure that our researchers understand the concept and value of academic freedom and the responsibility that comes with it"https://t.co/AFjtbSfgjr
— Ole Petter Ottersen (@ottersenolep) February 18, 2021
In April 2020, @jflier and I saw this coming
We saw increasingly heated and personal attacks against scientists merely for having a range of views on COVID19 (PS there is no playbook/ right ans)
Tying science to naked politics was also bad idea, we
Yet, repeatedly that is what happened. Twitter 'experts' displayed an absolute intolerance to other views
Folks who disagreed weren't just wrong, they were malicious actors spreading "disinformation"
Really? Someone worked for 25 years as faculty to suddenly spread lies?
Disinformation has been so misused that it has lost meaning.
I recently saw an ID doc & lab researcher in the UK be accused of spreading "disinformation"
hahah, get outta here, you are trying to say "i disagree" but your keyboard is broken
Personal attacks have become so bad that I have seen a lab researcher accuse a doctor of wanting to engage in inappropriate relationships with patients due to diverging views on vaccine messaging
Seriously? It was a low point even for twitter
You May Also Like
1/ Some initial thoughts on personal moats:
Like company moats, your personal moat should be a competitive advantage that is not only durable—it should also compound over time.
Characteristics of a personal moat below:
2/ Like a company moat, you want to build career capital while you sleep.
As Andrew Chen noted:
3/ You don’t want to build a competitive advantage that is fleeting or that will get commoditized
Things that might get commoditized over time (some longer than
4/ Before the arrival of recorded music, what used to be scarce was the actual music itself — required an in-person artist.
After recorded music, the music itself became abundant and what became scarce was curation, distribution, and self space.
5/ Similarly, in careers, what used to be (more) scarce were things like ideas, money, and exclusive relationships.
In the internet economy, what has become scarce are things like specific knowledge, rare & valuable skills, and great reputations.
Like company moats, your personal moat should be a competitive advantage that is not only durable—it should also compound over time.
Characteristics of a personal moat below:
I'm increasingly interested in the idea of "personal moats" in the context of careers.
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) November 22, 2018
Moats should be:
- Hard to learn and hard to do (but perhaps easier for you)
- Skills that are rare and valuable
- Legible
- Compounding over time
- Unique to your own talents & interests https://t.co/bB3k1YcH5b
2/ Like a company moat, you want to build career capital while you sleep.
As Andrew Chen noted:
People talk about \u201cpassive income\u201d a lot but not about \u201cpassive social capital\u201d or \u201cpassive networking\u201d or \u201cpassive knowledge gaining\u201d but that\u2019s what you can architect if you have a thing and it grows over time without intensive constant effort to sustain it
— Andrew Chen (@andrewchen) November 22, 2018
3/ You don’t want to build a competitive advantage that is fleeting or that will get commoditized
Things that might get commoditized over time (some longer than
Things that look like moats but likely aren\u2019t or may fade:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) November 22, 2018
- Proprietary networks
- Being something other than one of the best at any tournament style-game
- Many "awards"
- Twitter followers or general reach without "respect"
- Anything that depends on information asymmetry https://t.co/abjxesVIh9
4/ Before the arrival of recorded music, what used to be scarce was the actual music itself — required an in-person artist.
After recorded music, the music itself became abundant and what became scarce was curation, distribution, and self space.
5/ Similarly, in careers, what used to be (more) scarce were things like ideas, money, and exclusive relationships.
In the internet economy, what has become scarce are things like specific knowledge, rare & valuable skills, and great reputations.
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".