If you trust an influencer’s skin care recommendation, would you trust them with your financial information? That’s what Danielle Bernstein, founder of WeWoreWhat, is betting on. Earlier this month, the influencer and designer announced she is partnering with fintech company Imprint on the WeWoreWhat Rewards Visa® Card, the first of its kind. The card offers WeWoreWhat fans extra cash back on her brand, as well as a curated list of businesses. The Magnises vibes are strong, but is the card really a one-way ticket to Scam City?
Although Business of Fashion declared in a headline, “Danielle Bernstein Is Launching A WeWoreWhat Credit Card,” The WeWoreWhat rewards card is not a credit card—at least, not yet. For now, it’s a debit rewards card that allows users to sign up by downloading the Imprint app and linking their bank account, a process a spokesperson for Imprint likened to joining Venmo. Some Instagram commenters are leery of handing over the keys to their debit cards to Bernstein, and one Instagram commenter wrote, “I would not trust her with my financial information”—but Bernstein herself is not receiving anyone’s bank account information. Imprint, a fintech company that started in 2020, is. Bernstein’s is their first influencer rewards card, although the company has also partnered with hospitality brand Selina, and RealSelf, an online directory of cosmetic procedure providers.
In addition to receiving a $10 welcome bonus, users can earn 10% cash back on purchases at WeWoreWhat (Bernstein does not otherwise receive a portion of purchases made via the card), 5% at various partner brands, and 1% everywhere else. Partner brands include scene-y NYC restaurants like Lola Taverna and Jack’s Wife Freda, and Instagram-friendly brands like What Goes Around Comes Around and Stephanie Gottlieb Jewelry. Unlike a cash rewards credit card, the cashback earned via the WeWoreWhat Rewards Visa® Card can’t actually be deposited into a cardholder’s bank account, just redeemed on future purchases at WeWoreWhat or any of the other partner brands.
“WeWoreWhat is always looking for new ways to give our community innovative value, benefits, and experiences,” Bernstein told BusinessWire. “I love that we will not only reward WeWoreWhat’s loyal customers but also provide them exclusive benefits across all of the brands and restaurants that are a part of my daily life,” she added. At the time of publication, Bernstein did not respond to a request for comment about the reception of the card or details about the credit card.
Sarah DelRosso, 29, has been following Bernstein on Instagram since 2020 and has purchased a few items from WeWoreWhat. “I actually love her brand,” she says. DelRosso signed up for the card last week, shortly after it was announced, which she says was “a pretty straightforward process.” The decision to sign up “was kind of a no-brainer,” she says, “because I shop at a lot of the same places that shops.” (DelRosso regularly eats at Jack’s Wife Freda and goes to Maman on weekends.) She doesn’t use her credit card much and likes how the WeWoreWhat Card is “basically an extension of your debit card,” or similar to using Apple Pay.
So: is it a scam?
“Generally speaking, if you’re looking for rewards, a credit card is a better choice,” says Matt Schulz, Chief Credit Analyst at Lending Tree, adding, “Although this WeWoreWhat card is an example of how that’s changing some.”
“I think that if you’re somebody who spends a lot of money with WeWoreWhat, you could do worse,” he says, noting that getting 10% back on a debit card is “really interesting.” Debit rewards in general are hard to find, and even on a credit card, users would typically see somewhere from 1%-3% cashback offered. That said, if you’re not a fan of the Bernstein-approved brand of Instagram traps, the card won’t offer you much.
Some people are skeptical, though, so much so that Bernstein limited comments on her post announcing the card. Some took their concerns to Twitter. “Billy McFarland who?” replied one Twitter user to Business of Fashion’s tweet. “Talk about predatory lending!” wrote another. (No lending is involved—at least not yet. “When a transaction is made with the card, funds are automatically transferred from a user’s bank account, which means they can never overspend and don’t need to worry about overdrafting or fees,” said the Imprint spokesperson.)
“I think a lot of the fiery comments that are out there are simply based on a misunderstanding of the difference between a credit card and a debit card,” Schulz says. That said, celebrity cards—credit or otherwise—do have a checkered past, so some distrust is natural. The Kardashian Kard, a prepaid debit card that launched in 2010 and shuttered weeks later, was declared “a rip-off” by Forbes due to its exorbitant activation and monthly fees. Perhaps the most well-known of the celebrity card catastrophes is the RushCard, started by Russell Simmons in 2003, which infamously caused chaos for some 400,000 users in 2015 when a software glitch left users unable to access their money for weeks.
“It’s wise for people to be skeptical when they see offers from really anybody,” Schulz says, adding, “But it is also important to understand that just because something is from a celebrity doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s sketchy.”
For some people, though, which celebrity a card comes from does matter, and Bernstein herself has had her fair share of controversies in recent years that have lost her some public trust. In late 2020, she was sued by a Brooklyn-based lingerie company, The Great Eros, for allegedly copying their designs. (Bernstein denied any allegations of theft.) In July 2020, she was accused of ripping off a small business’s mask design after she’d previously reached out to the business requesting samples of their masks. Bernstein, however, responded, “the accusation that I stole or solicited the designs are false and I have shared receipts of emails proving that these claims are not true.” She later donated all the masks and also donated 5,000 surgical masks to frontline healthcare workers. In 2018, several pieces from Bernstein’s jewelry line, which was a collaboration with Lulu DK, were pulled from Nordstrom after she was accused of copying the designs from other brands. Even amidst all the controversies, Bernstein’s large following has continued to grow, and she currently has 2.8 million Instagram followers.
DelRosso says the controversies haven’t impacted her decision to support Bernstein’s brand. “I feel like when you’re an influencer, there’s always going to be some negative press to whatever you do.”
“I’m gonna continue to buy things from her brand because I like supporting her brand,” she says.
When asked if she felt any hesitation to get the card, DelRosso said, “It looked like a reliable app. And I downloaded the app before I linked my debit card, and nothing really looked suspicious to me.”
As far as the credit card aspect goes, Business of Fashion reports a WeWoreWhat Visa Rewards Credit Card is planned for “later this year” and said, “terms for the credit card are still being ironed out, though they will not include an annual fee, foreign transaction fees, or balance transfer fees.”
If a credit card does come to fruition, that’s where things could potentially get dicier. The absence of an annual fee isn’t really a selling point, since that’s common for retail credit cards. “The main issue is almost always the interest rate,” says Schulz.
“The average rate on a new store credit card is about 24% and can go up to near 30%. That’s a really, really high number and is even higher than what we see on other types of credit cards,” he says. And while consumers can avoid incurring those interest rates by paying off their balance in full each month, sometimes life gets in the way. The credit card could be appealing to WeWoreWhat fans, though, if the cashback percentage is the same as the debit card. “If the interest rates are as high as those on most retail cards, however, folks may be better served looking elsewhere.”
A spokesperson for Imprint declined to comment on how many users have signed up for the WeWoreWhat Rewards Visa® Card since its launch. And whether it’s a credit card or a debit card, Schulz advises consumers to do their research and proceed with caution. “Anytime you’re giving your bank account information to a company, that’s something to not enter into lightly,” he says. “While a debit card doesn’t you to run up tons of debt that you can’t pay, it does make it a lot easier to spend money in your account, and that can cause all sorts of issues in and of itself. So, it is important for you to be careful about who you give your financial information to who you trust online.”
Bottom line, “If something doesn’t feel right, or you don’t quite trust a company, a bank, a retailer—trust your gut and take your business elsewhere.”
Images: Presley Ann/Getty Images for REVOLVE
2020 has been a year of unpredictability, but one constant theme throughout has been Danielle Bernstein, creator of WeWoreWhat, being accused of copying from independent creators. The other, related constant has been Bernstein vehemently denying all claims of stealing designs. While usually we’ve seen these scenarios play out in the form of social media controversy, they are now headed to the courtroom, because Bernstein recently filed a claim against The Great Eros, a Williamsburg intimates brand that accused her over the summer of stealing their design.
In case you can’t keep up with all the accusations, back in early August, The Great Eros, a small business, said that Bernstein copied their designs. The design in question is a pattern that consists of sketches of nude women, which Bernstein used on WeWoreWhat swimwear, among other items, and which Eros says they initially created to be used on their tissue paper. When the theft accusations arose, Bernstein called them “false and unwarranted”. Great Eros sent WeWoreWhat a cease and desist letter in August demanding it stop using the designs.
Now, in a newly filed complaint, WeWoreWhat LLC and Onia LLC are suing Great Eros, seeking a judgment that the WeWoreWhat designs do not infringe upon Great Eros’ copyright. This was apparently made in response to Great Eros making “an actual threat to file a district court litigation later this week,” according to the filing. In an Instagram story on Saturday, Bernstein explained, “A few days ago their attorney contacted us, sharing a lawsuit he intended to file this week in an attempt to push us to settle a meritless claim that we now, begrudgingly, have to fight.”
In the suit, Bernstein claims the silhouettes were inspired by “the generally ubiquitous concept of silhouette drawings of the human form” as well as line drawings by Henri Matisse. The suit also states that WWW “did not copy, use, or reproduce any artwork belonging to The Great Eros, nor did anyone at WWW or associated with WWW ever purchase product from The Great Eros or receive product wrapped in the tissue paper.”
The owners of Great Eros told Page Six in August that they believe Bernstein was introduced to their brand by a press agent. A screenshot of what appears to be a gifting request posted by Diet Prada has WeWoreWhat on a list of recipients, presumably for product. Another screenshot posted by Diet Prada shows a purchase order from someone with an onia.com email address (Onia is the lifestyle brand Bernstein collaborated with for her swimwear line).
In a series of Instagram stories on Friday, the Great Eros wrote that Bernstein is “taking us for everything we own over a design that she allegedly stole from us and is now suing us to bully us into submission.” The brand vowed to “fight back against and oppression” and wrote, “We will be relentless in our pursuit for justice against you.”
A representative for Bernstein did not immediately respond to request for comment from Betches. However, in a series of Instagram stories over the weekend, Bernstein clarified that she is not seeking compensation from the suit. She wrote, “I want to clarify that I am ABSOLUTELY NOT seeking financial gain, what we are doing is simply asking the courts to confirm that we did not infringe on an alleged copyright.” She also asserted that she is a “committed supporter of small businesses” and that she respects “creative liberty and ownership”.
The spat with the Great Eros is not the first time Bernstein was accused of pilfering the designs of a small business. In July, a firestorm erupted when Second Wind, a Latina-owned small business, shared a DM conversation that seemed to indicate Bernstein asked for a sample of their patent-pending mask, which came with a chain attached, only to then produce her own line of masks with a similar-looking chain. Bernstein, however, insisted that her team had designed and ordered the masks months before hearing of Second Wind, a claim she followed up with screenshots of emails indicating as such. She also called the copying claims “false”. As a result of the backlash, Bernstein pulled the masks and donated them to charity.
Also in July, Bernstein landed in hot water after being accused (yet again) of ripping off an Australian Etsy shop owner’s shorts. After an initial announcement in which Bernstein wrote she found “vintage gym shorts from the 90s” and was “already remaking them for my brand”, she later backtracked, claiming a mix-up had occurred. “These are from Etsy and I totally thought they were vintage but they are made to order,” she later clarified. “Someone on my team ordered them for me a while back. I will not be making them.”
In May 2018, accusations that Bernstein’s forthcoming jewelry line in collaboration with Lulu DK and sold at Nordstrom contained pieces that were knocked off from Foundrae, a fine jewelry line that Bernstein had worn in the past, caused such a sh*tstorm that Bernstein pulled a few of the pieces in the collection ahead of its launch. (The remainder of the collection still launched as planned.) She said the jewelry was inspired by “a vintage locket that she purchased at a flea market”. She called the “vicious online campaign” against her “devastating”.
It’s been a rough year for Bernstein, who revealed in early September of this year that she had tested positive for COVID-19. She recovered in her NYC apartment, where she described on IG story feeling like “I have the flu, my body is extremely achy and I still can’t taste or smell.” When called out for repeatedly partying in the Hamptons, Bernstein retorted that she wore a mask, followed CDC guidelines, and “lived life in phase four reopening of NY.” However, she did admit, “of course I could have been more careful.”
Images: Christian Vierig/Getty Images
Since the pandemic started, influencers have been getting into trouble. From Arielle Charnas’ questionable COVID-19 journey way back in April to Bachelor alums breaking quarantine and going on interstate road trips for haircuts, it feels like influencers have been working overtime to get themselves canceled. Or maybe influencers aren’t doing anything different than they were before, and we all just have more time on our hands to examine their behavior under a microscope since we’re stuck at home. Either way, this time, Danielle Bernstein is being called to the hot seat after influencer watchdog accounts @influencerstruth and @diet_prada accused her of copying a face mask design from Second Wind, a Latina-owned small business.
On Monday afternoon, Bernstein announced via an Instagram post that she would be coming out with “sustainable linen masks that have a super lightweight detachable chain”, adding that for every mask sold, one surgical mask would be donated to a frontline healthcare worker. In an Instagram Story, she shared that the masks would be available in three colors (black, white, and a nude), and would be sold for $35, with the option to purchase a separate silver chain for $12.
The masks are cute, and while I personally wouldn’t want to have to disinfect my chain every time I return to my home, I could see why people would be into these. So what’s the problem? Well, the problem is that face masks with a detachable chain are already being sold by a small business called Second Wind, and Bernstein knew about their existence before announcing the launch of her own similar designs. Second Wind currently sells masks made of organic linen with gold chains that are available in a few colors, including black, white, and sand. Second Wind’s masks retail for $65, while Bernstein’s cost $35.
On Monday night, @diet_prada and @influencerstruth both posted about the mask controversy, noting that Second Wind announced their launch of the detachable chain masks on May 30, and were available starting June 1.
Before this controversy started, @bysecondwind had a little over 3k followers on Instagram (they have since blown up to over 30k and counting). Is it possible Bernstein simply didn’t know these masks were out there? No, because as @influencerstruth and @diet_prada revealed, she had actually reached out to Second Wind for them to send her a mask well before the launch of her own face coverings. She did so on June 29th. In case you need a refresher (no shade, time is a construct), today is July 21st.
A few days after requesting a mask, on July 2 from Second Wind, Bernstein messaged the brand’s owner to let her know she would also be selling face masks with a detachable chain. But she assured Second Wind that she was not copying her, clarifying that her masks are a different shape. She also said she was inspired by sunglasses she owns—not, as it would appear, the very face masks with a detachable chain that she had just been messaging about. When Instagram users started pointing out the similarities between the two designs and the suspicious timing of the messages in comments on Danielle’s post about her masks, they noticed their comments were mysteriously disappearing.
On Tuesday morning, Bernstein went on her Instagram story to address the accusations that she had copied Second Wind’s designs. In the series of videos, she says she went into the production on her masks a few weeks before a mutual friend introduced her to Second Wind’s masks. She says, “I was really excited to support her small business but in the spirit of transparency, just wanted to let her know that I’d already gone into production on linen masks with chains based off leftover fabric from an overall run that we did and chains that are coming out in a future swim collection.”
She then goes on to say, “I told her I still would love to wear her masks and support her business because I think it’s awesome what she’s doing, and there’s a bunch of really cool small brands making masks with chains right now and I’ll definitely be sharing those.” In a following slide, she tagged @bysecondwind and encouraged her followers to buy her masks. In subsequent stories, she also shows other brands making masks with chains.
This isn’t the first time Bernstein has landed in hot water over masks, but usually it’s because she is caught not wearing one. A few weeks ago, she was called out for attending a party in the Hamptons with little to no masks in sight, but later claimed that everyone at the party had been tested for COVID-19. Over the weekend, she caught similar heat after she put up a story of a dinner party in the Hamptons that was being cooked by four private chefs, none of whom were wearing masks. She later took to Instagram story to clarify that the chefs were “personal friends” of her roommate and they had all been tested. New York State guidelines mandate all food service employees wear a face covering at all times, regardless of physical distance.
On April 30, Bernstein launched @wegavewhat, a platform highlighting the charitable initiatives by the WeWoreWhat team. As part of the initiative, Bernstein has partnered with small businesses and creators and raised money for various organizations, including the Food Bank For New York City, and donated thousands of masks to be distributed to NY frontline health care workers. In June, she joined the first American Influencer Council, an “invite-only, not-for-profit membership trade association” that aims to “further legitimize and sustain the influencer marketing industry in America.” The council aims to do things like lobby the Federal Trade Commission to “cooperatively adhere, promote and improve the Endorsement Guidelines,” according to Fashion Week Daily, as well as examine the contributions of influencers to the U.S. through research and analysis.
In an Instagram post on Monday, Bernstein opened up about experiencing her first panic attack, brought on by the stress and criticism that is inherent in her job as an influencer.
The comments on that post, as well as her posts about her face masks, have since been turned off.
Updated: On Tuesday night, Bernstein once again addressed the controversy surrounding the masks. She said in an Instagram Story that since she had been receiving death threats, she decided to post proof that her team had, in fact, been working on a similar concept well before coming into contact with Second Wind.
As the screenshots indicate, Bernstein was communicating with, presumably, someone on her team about moving forward with a design for a face mask with a chain as early as May 19. The correspondence with Second Wind did not happen until the end of June.
Second Wind also posted an update on her Instagram story, saying she is “overwhelmed” by the response regarding the situation, saying, “I only ask that we try to lead with our hearts and be kinder to each other”.
Her follower count has since shot up to over 45k and, from the looks of her stories, she is getting inundated with orders. So it seems like the situation has been resolved. Please remember: No matter where you’re buying your mask from, just f*cking wear one.
This article has been updated to correctly reflect Bernstein’s role in the American Influencer Council.
Images: Christian Vierig/Getty Images; weworewhat (2), influencerstruth, bysecondwind / Instagram
Hope you’re having a good Friday, because someone is getting fired today!
If you follow fashion influencer and entrepreneur Danielle Bernstein of WeWoreWhat, you know that she has a line of bathing suits with swimwear brand Onia that’s coming out. Well, an employee at Onia accidentally took a batch of unreleased samples (instead of old/leftover samples) of WeWoreWhat x Onia swimwear that isn’t coming out for another two whole seasons to Goodwill. OY. Yes, this is the person that’s getting fired. But this isn’t about the employee who massively f*cked up, but rather, what happened when a user on Poshmark stumbled upon the yet-to-be-released collection.
While the accidental Goodwill drop-off probably doesn’t sound like too big of a deal at first, because let’s face it, the fashionistas of the world aren’t out here bargaining at Goodwill around the clock, it became an issue when fashion reseller Jade (@fashionwithouttrashin) bought the swimsuits to re-sell on her Poshmark site. She probably didn’t know that the collection was yet to be released to the public, so it’s not her fault for putting it up and thinking she’d scored a great find.
Danielle caught wind that her unreleased samples were being sold on Poshmark, and of course DMed Jade asking her to take them down. On Danielle’s IG Stories, she discusses how she “messaged Jade in full panic mode,” which like, any of us would be. I’m in “full panic mode” when I make a typo in a tweet, so I can’t even imagine. Amidst the panic, Danielle asked Jade where she got the samples, told her she’d buy all of the product back “at cost”, and kind of just kept saying “omg!!”.
Now things start to get really messy (because oh, sometimes conversations get misconstrued over Instagram DM if you’re foreign to the concept): Jade asked Danielle to pay her back at the resale value, aka the amount it cost her to purchase the swimwear, pay her employees for “modeling, editing and listing the items,” and account for what she would have made if she had sold the product. Aka not simply what she paid for the swimsuits. This came out to $13,000.
(I think she meant “cooperation”, not “corporation”.)
So basically, there was a total miscommunication over the whole $13,000 amount. Danielle claimed that she missed the word “resale” in those initial messages, so she was shocked when Jade wanted $13,000, and she pushed back at that figure. Danielle’s pushback led to a bunch of crying IG Stories from Jade that I didn’t have the fortune of watching in full—because I’ve got an article to write!—bashing Danielle/Onia, and saying that she basically felt like the little guy that’s being bombarded by the huge force that is WeWoreWhat. From there, it got picked up by social media, people started leaving mean comments, and then both ladies had to respond via a sh*t ton of selfie video Instagram stories to get everyone to cool off.
I legit feel terrible for both sides. Danielle posted an emotional video explaining how hurt she is that people don’t think she supports female entrepreneurs. And I can totally see how it’s super intimidating for Jade, who puts a lot of time and effort into her business on Poshmark, to be caught up in a messy situation with someone as influential as Danielle Bernstein.
Some of the stories are still up, if you want to go watch all the crying firsthand. But for now, it seems like all is well—the swimsuits have been removed from Poshmark, and both Jade and Danielle posted on IG that it was a true miscommunication and they don’t wish each other any ill will. The lawyers are handling it at this point, meaning my job here is probably done.
Meanwhile, I’ll be saving up my money so I can buy WeWoreWhat swim in two seasons. Just prob not from Goodwill.
Images: Shutterstock; fashionwithouttrashin, dietprada / Instagram;
