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
Matt Mochary has been CEO coach to @naval, the founders of OpenAI, Notion, Rippling, Robinhood, Coinbase, Reddit, Plaid, Flexport, Opendoor, partners at Sequoia, YC, Benchmark, and many others.
He also open-sourced his entire curriculum, templates and all. Here's a link 👇
The Mochary Method Curriculum ➔ https://t.co/A8J51IzYhz
My recent conversation with @mattmochary where we talk about fear, anger, innovation, how to lay people off well, and his coaching practice ➔
Also in podcast form ➔
For more from Matt, buy this book
He also open-sourced his entire curriculum, templates and all. Here's a link 👇
The Mochary Method Curriculum ➔ https://t.co/A8J51IzYhz
My recent conversation with @mattmochary where we talk about fear, anger, innovation, how to lay people off well, and his coaching practice ➔
Also in podcast form ➔
For more from Matt, buy this book
More from World
1/10 With respect, multiple straw men here:
A) If you mean by "legally questionable" either that Senate is barred by constitution from trying an official impeached while in office, or that there are even very strong arguments against it, I have to differ...
2/10 Constitutional structure, precedent & any fair reading of original intent dictate that argument for jurisdiction is far stronger than argument against. On original intent, see
3/10 If you mean argument against jurisdiction is plausible, sure, it's plausible. It's just weak. In practical fact, Senate can try Trump now, find him guilty & disqualify him from future office if there are sufficient votes. And no court would presume to overturn that result
4/10 b) The argument from resources is awfully hard to take seriously. Fewer than a dozen House members act as Managers for a few weeks. They are staffed, as are Senators hearing case, by folks whose job it is to do stuff like this...
5/10 Yes, Senate floor time will be taken up. But it's past time for us to stop thinking of members of either house as feeble, fluttering, occupants of a nationally-funded convalescent home. There are nearly 500 of these people with 1000s of staff and a bunch of big buildings...
A) If you mean by "legally questionable" either that Senate is barred by constitution from trying an official impeached while in office, or that there are even very strong arguments against it, I have to differ...
Some argue that if the Senate declines to hold a legally questionable, resource-sucking trial, Trump would be getting a free pass. That assumes criminal authorities do nothing and citizens can't be trusted to evaluate. Censure and focus important work?
— Ross Garber (@rossgarber) January 22, 2021
2/10 Constitutional structure, precedent & any fair reading of original intent dictate that argument for jurisdiction is far stronger than argument against. On original intent, see
3/10 If you mean argument against jurisdiction is plausible, sure, it's plausible. It's just weak. In practical fact, Senate can try Trump now, find him guilty & disqualify him from future office if there are sufficient votes. And no court would presume to overturn that result
4/10 b) The argument from resources is awfully hard to take seriously. Fewer than a dozen House members act as Managers for a few weeks. They are staffed, as are Senators hearing case, by folks whose job it is to do stuff like this...
5/10 Yes, Senate floor time will be taken up. But it's past time for us to stop thinking of members of either house as feeble, fluttering, occupants of a nationally-funded convalescent home. There are nearly 500 of these people with 1000s of staff and a bunch of big buildings...
