This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force. Fashion Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Ecology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.EcologyWikipedia:WikiProject EcologyTemplate:WikiProject EcologyEcology Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. New Zealand Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Companies Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain : Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answer requests for comments

	Guild of Copy Editors
This article was copy edited by Miniapolis, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on October 26, 2024.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

Hello all. I'm working on a section about impactful lawsuits (by and against the company), but MoS isn't exhaustive about what to include here.

There are two main lawsuits I'm looking at here: Dwyer v. Allbirds, Inc. (a lost lawsuit accusing the company of misleading consumers with sustainability claims) [1] [2], Shnayder v. Allbirds, Inc. (a shareholder lawsuit accusing the company of focusing on incorrect, non-core products) [3], and Allbirds, Inc. v. Steve Madden, Ltd. (an infringement case---I am not a lawyer so I have no idea how to word it---that Allbirds ends up dismissing with prejudice) [4] [5].

I have previously had mentions of lawsuits removed, so I thought it would be beneficial to bring out a discussion first. I plan to draft an addition by the end of the week, but if nobody has any comments on it, I will just add them by next Wednesday. Ornov Ganguly (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am back with the draft. Since there's not much about the Steve Madden lawsuit, I believe we can just have it be a single sentence affixed to the Amazon lawsuit threat paragraph. Of course, these paragraphs are basically just bullet lists with no narrative. It also segues into the sustainability section quite well (this source is questionably just unmarked advertising, but is a good start since I don't know material science [1]). To see it with citations and paragraph divisions, look at my Sandbox.

Allbirds was the subject of a 2017 lawsuit, Dwyer v. Allbirds, Inc., accusing the company of misleading consumers about its sustainability practices. Namely, the plaintiff accused the company of not mentioning the carbon impact of its wool sourcing, which through Higg Material Sustainability Index only measures the impact of individual products rather than the supply chain. The judge dismissed the case in 2022 on the grounds that the company adheres to the FTC's Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims, and that depictions of happy sheep in advertising were puffery.

The company was sued by its shareholders in May 2023 amidst a decline in sales for moving from focusing on footwear to other products, which was revealed to have lower core consumer interest. The plaintiffs alleged that this was misleading, leading investors to buy shares at artificially inflated prices, and was therefore securities fraud. The case reached stipulation on 28 May 2024.

In December 2017, Allbirds sued Steve Madden, alleging that the company's Traveler shoes look nearly identical to its Wool Runners. Similarly, in November 2019, Zwillinger accused Amazon's 206 Collective of producing a "look-alike" of the Wool Runners' design for nearly half the price. Unlike the Steve Madden suit, the company did not bring Amazon to court, which Zwillinger called "risky," and referred to Amazon's large legal teams. Later that week, Zwilinger and Brown wrote a Medium article inviting Amazon to use some of its materials, such as those made from sugarcane waste streams, to "jointly make a major dent in the fight against climate change."

Hello again. Back when I first started editing Wikipedia, the standards for what was fit to print were a whole lot different than they are now. As a result, I'm not quite sure how much is too much. Looking at the article, I wonder if it has become an indiscriminate collection of information. To avoid synthesis, I haven't tied anything together, but the article is getting long, so it may just be dizzying. In particular, I am concerned about my over-detail of the IPO going bad and people's opinions on it, some of the reactions, and the celebrity stuff.

To any Wikipedians who look here: How much of this needs slight reduction and how much needs to be culled? I'm still learning. Ornov Ganguly TALK 15:37, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have formulated a report reviewing the copy-editing status of the article, and its adherence to the WP:MOS. This was done on a request from @Oganguly.

It mostly uses a direct-to-consumer model in conjunction with distribution via select additional stores, in addition to select Nordstrom and Dick's Sporting Goods locations. – This sentence is a bit too long, maybe complex to understand

Links – I feel specific links are needed: San Francisco, California, sustainability

Since the 2020s, the company has faced criticism by legal scholars for "greenwashing" after it brought Dwyer v. Allbirds, Inc., a case accusing the company of misleading carbon offsets, to a motion to dismiss. – This may have too many technical terms for a first para of lead.

Bloomberg's Jordyn Holman and Matthew Townsend credit articles in well-known publications like Time and The New York Times with granting the company early publicity. – This emphasizes more on Bloomberg, than the company, voice and structure can be changed

Series C funding, Series E funding – might need more explanation

Allbirds went public on the Nasdaq on November 3, 2021, under the ticker symbol BIRD at a price between US$12–$14. That same year, the company dropped a line claiming to be "the first 'sustainable' IPO" from its listing due to pressure from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). A month before its IPO, the company reduced references to "sustainability principles and objectives" by half. The year prior, the company was at a loss of US$25.9 million on a US$219 million revenue, which Zwillinger claimed was in pursuit of a sustainable business model. – One might not immediately understand that the company reduced sustainability related promotion after reading this. Needs a bit more simplification and rephrasing.

Complaints about the shoes' lack of durability also increased, and a division between the company's co-CEOs over consumer audience visions emerged. Brown believed that younger customers would drive sales, which conflicted with Zwillinger's views. As a result, Zwillinger was named sole chief executive officer while Brown was demoted to chief innovation officer. – Needs citations/sources.

Further writing that "[o]thers remain private, but face slowing growth and few potential buyers. Firms are also abandoning the go-it-alone approach and selling through retailers, including Allbirds getting into REI and Nordstrom." – This quote needs more explanation

Earlier in the year, the company promoted Kelly Olmstead to chief marketing officer and recruited Adrian Nyman as chief design officer. Chief financial officer Mike Bufano stepped down on March 9, 2023, being succeeded by Annie Mitchell after April 24, 2023. – Might be too many details without any other reference

Namely, the plaintiff accused the company of not mentioning the carbon impact of its wool sourcing, which through Higg Material Sustainability Index only measures the impact of individual products rather than the supply chain. – Dense and too difficult to understand

depictions of happy sheep – Unexplained terms

Later that week, Zwillinger and Brown wrote a Medium article inviting Amazon to use some of its materials, such as those made from sugarcane waste streams, to "jointly make a major dent in the fight against climate change." – Complex sentence, can be slightly simplified

by Sasha Rogelberg – Clarification on who is Sasha

The company was sued by its shareholders in May 2023 amidst a decline in sales for moving from focusing on footwear to other products, a strategy which was revealed to have lower core consumer interest. – Too long, can be split. Also needs a citation

... Zwillinger stated that Allbirds made the trade association Footwear Distributor Retailers of America to adopt an carbon price. – Can have a bit more explanation, a bit complex to understand

Compared to traditional athletic shoes, Allbirds use "SweetFoam" instead of rubber, which are a source of contention for the shoes athletic performance. – SweetFoam can do with a bit more explanation, also needs a citation

Of the Dasher 2, Dengate writes that the shoes were too heavy, even with a 0.3 ounce reduction from the Dasher. – Template to Metric unit of once needed. This sentence can also be shifted to the end of the para, as the sentence before it and the two after it are related to the same shoes

According to The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, Allbirds initially gained popularity among tech industry professionals, particularly in Silicon Valley. – Link to Silicon Valley

A New Yorker article by Rachel Syme further claimed that the shoes, "cannot really be categorized as ugly footwear, because the idea behind them is not proud unstylishness but technical perfection," linking it to a trend towards comfortwear in professional jobs, namely in technology, as well as a form of conspicuous consumption. – Sentence too dense and complex, conspicuous consumption can do a bit more explanation for easy understanding.

Similarly, New York Times critic Jon Caramanica criticized the shoes for being "studiously unstylish," drawing a connection between the shoes' utility and the occupations of their wearers. – It uses a similarly, but says the shoes are unstylish, whereas the previous statement says that the shoes are unstylish, so there might be a contradiction. It is also not related to Silicon Valley, so it can be moved to a different section.

In 2018, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern gifted Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull a pair of Allbirds sneakers during a state visit to Australia. – Clarify that both were former PMs.

After their announcement in 2018, actor Leonardo DiCaprio pledged investment in the company's Zeffers sandals. – Clarify how this is related to the previous line.

Former United States President Barack Obama was documented wearing the shoes by fashion magazines at numerous occasions. – There is only one occasion mentioned, so change the statement to reflect it, or add sources and info about other occasions.

However, the next year an article in men's magazine GQ by Cam Wolf criticized the shoes as "Zoom Formal." – Explain how is this related to Former President Obama.

Journalism professor Myles Ethan Lascity describes this framing as a discursive strategy that puts the company in a separate category of "anti-fashion," similar to Japanese casualwear brand Uniqlo. – What framing? Also, the sentence is not clear and a bit hard to understand

Has only one subsection, Greenwashing, needs to be changed

Barford specifically mentions that environmental, social, and governance guidelines are often used as marketing to secure IPO status, as she alleges Allbirds of doing during and after the Dwyer case. – I do not know much about the subject but check the notability as there is a dubious tag.

Earth Island Institute v. Coca-Cola – Context of this case not present

In Dwyer, Peacock notes a lack of consistency for "where the carbon-neutral calculus ends on the supply chain," allowing corporations to establish and publicize their own environmental boundaries. Fellow legal scholar Valerie J. Peterson labelled Allbirds' presentation of their life cycle assessment as lacking the wool manufacturing portion of the "cradle to grave" analysis. – Both are a bit too dense and hard to understand.

... ESG rating – Reference that it stands for Environmental, social, and governance not listed anywhere above

Alexander Coley analyzes this dynamic as both a weakness and a strength of the securities regulation industry, with Amanda Schwaben explicitly tying Allbirds' projection as a public benefit company as a means of gathering investment with dubious returns. – A bit too dense, maybe hard to understand. Also, who are Alexander Coley and Amanda Schwaben, and why are they notable here.

Not specifically related to CE of the article, but I found it might need a bit of work.

File:Allbirds_wool_runners_in_grey_2.jpg and File:Allbirds_wool_runners_in_orange.jpg need a file better description on commons.

Thanks! Bunnypranav (talk) 14:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]