Not so ethical Sarcastic Rhino
I came across Sarcastic Rhino (SR) (based in Canada) advertising their shoes on Facebook (FB). I wouldn't normally have followed up FB ads, but SR seemed to have a strong ethical focus - that is their central selling point - so I gave benefit of any doubt. I needed new shoes, they were selling a fun design, so though I don't have much money I bought a pair (about $70 or 55GBP).
The shoes come directly from the factory that manufactured them in China. It took 2-3 weeks to arrive. With free postage and tracking I'd say this was pretty decent. No problem here. Upon opening the shoebox and inspecting them, my first thoughts were "OK, these seem alright. They'll do nicely." Unlike many well-meaning customers, I never leave feedback immediately. If I had, *it would have been a good review.* Everything seemed fine. But I always wait until I've used the product for some time. Like many businesses, I was immediately receiving emails from SR encouraging me to review the purchase. They were so frequent they were automatically going into the email spam folder (I check the folder weekly). But I waited nonetheless.
I was right to. After only the 2nd/3rd wear, very light wear too, I noticed the black 'vegan leather' material was deforming and discolouring, turning white along the natural shoe flex points. I guessed this was because the material is so firm and inflexible it's like stiff cardboard. I thought "it's not too bad, they'll soften up". But after about the 6 or 7th wear it had just got worse and worse. They actually look dirty, covered in white stretch marks that look like scratches or dirt against the dark black, even though they are still in brand new condition. Moreover, a separation was beginning to open between the rubber sole and upper on the toe flex line. I know this sometimes happens on these types of trainers but not after 6 wears. [I might also add I found them quite uncomfortable. It's OK for a short while, but after about an hour it's like walking barefoot because the sole is so flat. This might be fine for some, but not for others like me. Inserting an additional sole made no difference.]
So, given the price, I took photos of the very apparent and obvious issues and attached them to a polite and sincere email to report the quality issue to them (I didn't mention the uncomfortableness). I can attach the email here to this review, if required. And.... no reply. Suspicion was aroused, but, I gave them the benefit of the doubt again; maybe the email got overlooked. So a few weeks later I resent the email with a small amendment, copying in all the different email addresses the company seems to have. And.... no reply. OK, the company are clearly ghosting me, and won't acknowledge either their customer or their quality issue. So the only recourse was to leave a review that they themselves were still sending regular requests for. So I wrote a review on the website, honest but polite, attached the photos to it, and submitted.
Then I realised that the reviews their website asks for, display proudly, and are part of their PR, are moderated. In other words, they're all being vetted by the company themselves before publishing. *Was my review added to the product/customer reviews page? Of course not.* So their reviews are entirely self-selected, largely from people excited by their brand new purchase. In short, they're not worth much.
Now for the final act. I put the whole thing down as a learning exercise (try shoes on first and don't trust FB ads). Then their ad came on my FB timeline again advertising their shoes at me! So I left a short comment: "Do not buy. Poor quality material, uncomfortable, and if you report quality issues the company will ghost you". And, being a *public* forum they replied! But it was NOT a "We're so sorry to hear that. Message us so we can sort it out." It was, predictably, the defensive and terse: "If this is true why are our reviews overwhelmingly positive?" I then pointed out that not only had they ghosted me, but their reviews are self-selected. Both are demonstrable facts (I'm literally evidence). Of course, with this now being unquestionable *and* public they predictably blocked me and I have no doubt they deleted my comments from their ad just like they do with their self-selected reviews.
In sum, the whole business is supposedly based on ethics. But the customer is a walking wallet to them, with money (and reputation) their primary objective over quality and service. After the purchase you are nothing but potential PR. And at least the quality of the shoes are not what they seem at first which customers will learn the hard way. These are the facts potential customers need to know before shopping.
August 9, 2024
Unprompted review