Revolve faces $50-million lawsuit alleging influencers hid paid brand partnerships
Popular Gen Z retailer Revolve is facing a $50-million lawsuit alleging that the brand's social media marketing tactics deceived at least a million consumers.
A class-action lawsuit, filed Friday in California Central District Court, accuses the Cerritos-based online retailer of violating federal trade law by operating an advertising 'scheme' in which influencers disguised paid product endorsements as genuine recommendations in order to boost Revolve's sales.
'For many years, Revolve used its position, payments and free merchandise to entice influencers to endorse and promote its products while failing to disclose any material relationship with the brand,' the lawsuit said.
Representatives for Revolve did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Lead plaintiff Ligia Negreanu said in the lawsuit that had she known the influencers' posts were sponsored, she would not have purchased Revolve's products at the prices she paid, which at times were 10% to 40% higher than those of other retailers selling the same items.
The lawsuit is seeking $50 million in damages. Revolve's affiliate companies, as well as three influencers, were listed as co-defendants.
FTC-mandated disclosures should be 'difficult to miss,' like the 'paid partnership' label advised by Meta or the #ad hashtag, the lawsuit states. Instead, Revolve's paid influencers often merely tagged the fashion brand's Instagram account in their posts, according to the complaint.
'The problem comes when you don't disclose,' said Bogdan Enica, one of Negreanu's attorneys. He added that guidelines established by the Federal Trade Commission require influencers endorsing a product on social media to disclose any 'material connection' with the brand.
In its 2023 annual report, Revolve warned about the risk of litigation should its thousands of social media influencer-partners fail to follow FTC guidelines.
The National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau recommended earlier this year that Revolve 'modify influencer posts to clearly and conspicuously disclose the material connections between Revolve and influencers in its product gifting program.'
The lawsuit alleges that Revolve violated the Florida Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the Consumers Legal Remedy Act and the Unlawful Business Practices Act as well as consumer protection laws in more than 20 states.
Revolve Group's business has been growing. The company reported net sales of $1.1 billion in 2024, up 6% from a year earlier. Profits rose 73% to $48.8 million during the same period.
Shares in the online fashion retailer on Monday rose nearly 4% to close at $20.71, but have plummeted 38% this year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Donald Trump's Truth Social Files for Dual Bitcoin and Ether ETF
Trump Media and Technology Group (DJT) has filed to list a Truth Social Bitcoin and Ethereum exchange traded fund (ETF) on Monday. The ETF will hold bitcoin BTC and ether ETH directly with 75% of capital being allocated to bitcoin and the remaining 25% to ether, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Singapore-based exchange will act as the ETF's custodian as well as taking and liquidity provider. Trump Media and Technology Group signaled its intent of issuing an ETF earlier this month as it made a standalone registration for a spot bitcoin ETF. The inclusion of ether is in-keeping with the Trump family's crypto activity; World Liberty Financial, the DeFi project backed by the family, holds 96% of it assets on the Ethereum blockchain, Arkham data shows. If approved the fund would join a long list of crypto ETFs including those managed by BlackRock, Grayscale, Fidelity and Franklin Templeton. Bitcoin ETFs alone have $131 billion in assets under in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's Why Newmont Corporation (NEM) is a Strong Value Stock
It doesn't matter your age or experience: taking full advantage of the stock market and investing with confidence are common goals for all investors. Many investors also have a go-to methodology that helps guide their buy and sell decisions. One way to find winning stocks based on your preferred way of investing is to use the Zacks Style Scores, which are indicators that rate stocks based on three widely-followed investing types: value, growth, and momentum. Different than growth or momentum investors, value-focused investors are all about finding good stocks at good prices, and discovering which companies are trading under what their true value is before the broader market catches on. The Value Style Score utilizes ratios like P/E, PEG, Price/Sales, and Price/Cash Flow to help pick out the most attractive and discounted stocks. Colorado-based Newmont Corporation is one of the world's largest producers of gold with several active mines in Nevada, Peru, Australia and Ghana. As of Dec 31, 2024, Newmont had gold mineral reserves of 134.1 million ounces. Its attributable gold production for 2024 was around 6.8 million ounces. NEM is a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) stock, with a Value Style Score of B and VGM Score of A. Shares are currently trading at a forward P/E of 13.9X for the current fiscal year compared to the Mining - Gold industry's P/E 13.4X. Additionally, NEM has a PEG Ratio of 1 and a Price/Cash Flow ratio of 9.9X. Value investors should also note NEM's Price/Sales ratio of 3.3X. Value investors don't just pay attention to a company's valuation ratios; positive earnings play a crucial role, analysts revised their earnings estimate upwards in the last 60 days for fiscal 2025. The Zacks Consensus Estimate has increased $0.46 to $4.18. NEM has an average earnings surprise of 32.4%. Investors should take the time to consider NEM for their portfolios due to its solid Zacks Ranks, notable earnings and valuation metrics, and impressive Value and VGM Style Scores. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Newmont Corporation (NEM) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research
Newsweek
31 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump Admin Accused of 'Grievous Harm' to Groups Fighting Abuse of Women
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A national group of 17 state domestic violence and sexual assault coalitions today sued the Trump administration today, accusing it of causing "grievous harm" by imposing unlawful restrictions on grants issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ). Newsweek reached out to the DOJ for comment. Why It Matters President Donald Trump successfully ran for office in part on social and cultural issues like reducing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives across the federal government and in areas like education. Following his first successful election victory in 2017, Trump and federal officials weighed "dramatic cuts" in funding for initiatives to end sexual and domestic violence against women. What To Know The 80-page lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island is backed by 17 plaintiffs from domestic violence and sexual assault coalitions in the following states: Rhode Island, California, Colorado, Wisconsin, Idaho, Iowa, Massachusetts, Kansas, Montana, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Virginia and Wisconsin. "Plaintiffs file this action to enjoin Defendants' unlawful actions that are causing Plaintiffs' grievous harm," the lawsuit states. "The new OVW (Office on Violence Against Women) funding conditions violate the Constitution. Congress has the power of the purse, and the Executive Branch may not place conditions on funding that Congress did not authorize, nor can it impose conditions that run contrary to those Congress directly imposed." The Department of Justice (DOJ) building headquarters in Washington, D.C. The Department of Justice (DOJ) building headquarters in Washington, D.C. Getty Images The defendants in the suit are U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and Ginger Baran Lyons, acting director of the OVW. The OVW is under the guise of DOJ. The suit was filed by local attorneys representing the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island, the Lawyers' Committee for Rhode Island, Democracy Forward, Jacobson Lawyers Group, and the National Women's Law Center. Newsweek reached out to plaintiffs for comment. "The Trump administration now demands loyalty oaths to its destructive and discriminatory policies," Sandra Henriquez, CEO of the California-based nonprofit ValorUS, told Newsweek on Monday. "We will not be complicit in our government's ongoing terror inflicted on survivors. Let's be clear: VALOR's loyalty lies with survivors and communities working to end sexual violence." Plaintiffs challenge that funding conditions violate due process and the First Amendment "in leveraging federal funds to force grantees to voice the Administration's views on gender and in attempting to prohibit grantees from promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion even when not using federal funds." "The conditions exceed Defendants' statutory authority and in many cases outright conflict with statutory commands—OVW's decision to implement these conditions is arbitrary and capricious in virtually every way that an agency action can be arbitrary and capricious. OVW's imposing of these funding conditions is clearly unlawful, and it must be brought to an immediate end," the suit says. Fears expressed by plaintiffs are that the administration's new requirements place them in a precarious and "impossible" situation, between attaining funding necessary to provide services and fulfill missions while accepting and certifying compliance with conditions that are in tension with their statutory duties, unlawfully vague, restrictive of speech, in violation of other constitutional and statutory requirements, and at odds with their values and missions. Grant requirements put forward by the administration bar organizational plaintiffs from promoting "gender ideology" or any diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs "that do not advance the policy of equal dignity and respect." The organizations are also barred from engaging in "activities that frame domestic violence or sexual assault as systemic social justice issues rather than criminal offenses" and from "promoting" the "violation of federal immigration law." There were 880 grants awarded by OVW in fiscal year 2024, totaling $684 million in funding. In May, 34 Democratic Women's Caucus members penned a letter to Bondi, criticizing the administration's attacks on survivors of domestic violence through the rolling back of gun policies aimed at preventing abusers from legally possessing firearms. OVW administers grant programs authorized by the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994 and subsequent legislation. What People Are Saying Lucy Rios, executive director of the Rhode Island Coalition Against Domestic Violence (RICADV), in a statement: "The frameworks that inform our mission and the knowledge and research from our field are also at risk. Domestic violence is unequivocally a public health and social justice issue. We refuse to renounce this understanding that is central to our work." Krista Colón, executive director of the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, in a statement: "Instead of discriminating against survivors for their gender identity and immigration status, OVW grants should open the way to safety, healing and services for every one of the millions of Californians looking for help during the most dangerous and traumatic times of their lives." Brie Franklin, executive director of the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault, in a statement: "Since there is no regular state funding for victim services, programs in Colorado have no choice but to sign the certifications and risk unintentionally violating them due to the vague language and conflicts with the VAWA statute. Without federal funds, vital services for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence will cease to exist in our state." What Happens Next The lawsuit seeks relief and to declare the DOJ's funding mechanisms as "unlawful" and aims to vacate the defendants' policy of including "out-of-scope" funding conditions and anti-DEI certification requirements in the general terms and conditions in OVW grants and notices of funding opportunities.
