Connect with us

Current Affairs

Xiaxue versus Gushcloud – turf war begins (again)

Published

on

By Ariffin Sha
On 23 December, Wendy Cheng (also known as Xiaxue), a local well-known blogger published a blogpost which sent a lot of people on the internet on a frenzy. Hashtags like #FaithinGushCloud and #FaithinXiaXue started making their rounds around Twitter feeds and Facebook walls.
The post, titled The Big Gushcloud Exposé, ran up to more than 5,000 words and a whole lot of other external links, numbers and charts, the singular purpose which was to say, “Gushcloud cannot be trusted as a blogger endorsement platform”.
In it, Xiaxue provided “evidence” from her investigation to accuse Gushcloud of faking the reach figures of its bloggers and partaking in other unethical tactics.
Here is a concise summary that covers a quick background, the five allegations Xiaxue made against Gushcloud, and the response by Gushcloud and its co-founder Althea Lim.
Why do we bother? Because an expose is always fun to read, especially one that digs up the figures. Also, the case gives us an interesting perspective on how advertising through bloggers work (or doesn’t work).
Background Information
GClogo
Gushcloud is a popular social media marketing agency in Singapore which helps advertisers reach out to their target audience through its 10,000 social media influencers.’
Its main rival is Nuffnang. Xiaxue is a shareholder in Nuffnang and has been with the company since its infancy. The owner of Nuffnang, Ming, is a close friend of Xiaxue.
Xiaxue claims to have gone undercover by creating a fake company, SG Private Trainers. She pretended to work with Gushcloud with the intention of collecting evidence of Gushcloud’s unethical behaviour. She also claims to have collected evidence for almost one year before releasing it in her blogpost.
Allegation 1: Inflated earnings

Gushcloud's Financial Report for 2012

Gushcloud’s Financial Report for 2012 which was posted by Xiaxue

Gushcloud has been reported in November 2012 to have a monthly revenue of $170,000, up from just $25,000 in February 2012. Xiaxue claimed that these earnings were inflated – such earnings would have accumulated to $590,000 for 2012, but Gushcloud’s financial report states that its total revenue for 2012 was only $396,005.
Allegation 2: Astroturfing
The e-mail sent to Gushcloud using 'SG Private Trainers'

Image of the e-mail sent to Gushcloud using ‘SG Private Trainers’ by Xiaxue

Using SG Private Trainers, Xiaxue engaged the services of Gushcloud. She bought an Instagram ad for $300 where she wanted Yilin, one of the bloggers manged by Gushcloud, to promote her the company’s services without revealing the fact that it was an advertisement.
Such a practice is called ad masking, or astroturfing.
Although Gushcloud did not give explicit assurance that it would mask the ad, Yilin’s post on instagram suggested that it was done as such.
Yilin's post on Instagram

Yilin’s post on Instagram

Allegation 3: Inflated page views
jackiecharthahageddit
Xiaxue also bought banner ads from three blogs under Gushcloud, which she then tracked for the amount of views her banner ads receive daily. She claims that the number of views her banner ads received was substantially lower than what Gushcloud and/or the bloggers themselves claim their number of daily page views to be.
Allegation 4: Fake subscribers and viewers on YouTube
While admitting in her blog post that there is no concrete way to proof that YouTube views and subscribers are fake, Xiaxue attempted to prove that Gushcloud was doing this by tracking the exact number of views, subscribers and likes of a YouTube channel under the Gushcloud network called Babe of All Trades, at 11 am every day.

graph compare

According to Xiaxue’s blogpost, she wrote that more often than not, a YouTube video would have an initial spike of views for the first few days after its release, which then tapers off in the weeks or months that follow. If plotted on a graph, the views will increase steadily and sharply before eventually plateauing off. Xiaxue then plotted a graph to compare one of her videos with one from Babe of All Trades.
3
Xiaxue also noted a uniform increase of 10 likes everyday on another episode as further evidence of Gushcloud buying views.
To note, these are not the official statistics from YouTube and is in no way provide substantial proof that Gushcloud bought fake likes, views and subsribers. Gushcloud’s co-founder and CEO, Mr Vincent Ha had also previously denied such claims.
Allegation 5: Irregular financial reports
Xiaxue ended by accusing Gushcloud for being financially unsound and almost running on deficits. She suggested that they are unable to pay their vendors and influencers, and backed it up with a “qualified opinion” for the 2012 financial reports and Gushcloud’s balance sheets.
Xiaxue ended her post by advising GushCloud influencers to withdraw their money, terminate their contract and publicly announce that they are no longer associated with them. She even offered legal advice to those who are in need of it by asking them to e-mail her.
Gushcloud responds
3
Four hours after Xiaxue’s post, Gushcloud announced that it is exploring legal options on Xiaxue’s post. In an Instagram post, it asserted that the article was inaccurate. It also said that it believed that the blogpost was calculated to disparage and injure its reputation. It also attempted to rally its supporters with the hashtag #FaithinGushCloud.
Gushcloud’s co-founder, Ms Althea Lim also penned a personal statement to Xiaxue, refuting the allegations to be “far from the truth”. She also questioned Xiaxue’s ulterior motives, reminding readers that she is a stakeholder and/or a shareholder in Nuffnang, Gushcloud’s rival.
Ms Lim also refuted the allegation of bought YouTube views, by posting two pictures of statistics from YouTube’s Google Analytics.

The number of Pageviews for the video

The number of Pageviews for the video

The geographical analysis of viewers

The geographical analysis of viewers

The peaks indicate spikes in video views. Ms Lim also noted the spikes on weekends. She also noted that the tell-tale sign of bought views, with hits from countries like Russia and Afghanistan that occur as a sudden spike on a single day for a specific video, did not happen with Babe of All Trades. Also, 87% of views for it’s videos come from Singapore and Malaysia.
Before ending her statement, she noted that Xiaxue says ‘standing up to bullies is the right thing to do.” Ms Lim went on to accuse Xiaxue of using ‘bullying antics,’ not only against Gushcloud in her latest post but against many. She also accused Xiaxue of being a liar and challenged Xiaxue to sue her if she believed that she was wrong to say so.
Gushcloud has also released an official statement, which we have covered in a separate article.

Continue Reading
6 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
6 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Hotel Properties Limited suspends trading ahead of Ong Beng Seng’s court hearing

Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has halted trading ahead of his court appearance today (4 October). The announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at about 7.45am, citing a pending release of an announcement. Mr Ong faces one charge of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts and another charge of obstruction of justice. He is due in court at 2.30pm.

Published

on

SINGAPORE: Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), the property and hotel developer co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has requested a trading halt ahead of the Singapore tycoon’s scheduled court appearance today (4 October) afternoon.

This announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at approximately 7.45am, stating that the halt was due to a pending release of an announcement.

Mr Ong, who serves as HPL’s managing director and controlling shareholder, faces one charge under Section 165, accused of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts, as well as one charge of obstruction of justice.

He is set to appear in court at 2.30pm on 4 October.

Ong’s charges stem from his involvement in a high-profile corruption case linked to former Singaporean transport minister S Iswaran.

The 80-year-old businessman was named in Iswaran’s initial graft charges earlier this year.

These charges alleged that Iswaran had corruptly received valuable gifts from Ong, including tickets to the 2022 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix, flights, and a hotel stay in Doha.

These gifts were allegedly provided to advance Ong’s business interests, particularly in securing contracts with the Singapore Tourism Board for the Singapore GP and the ABBA Voyage virtual concert.

Although Iswaran no longer faces the original corruption charges, the prosecution amended them to lesser charges under Section 165.

Iswaran pleaded guilty on 24 September, 2024, to four counts under this section, which covered over S$400,000 worth of gifts, including flight tickets, sports event access, and luxury items like whisky and wines.

Additionally, he faced one count of obstructing justice for repaying Ong for a Doha-Singapore flight shortly before the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) became involved.

On 3 October, Iswaran was sentenced to one year in jail by presiding judge Justice Vincent Hoong.

The prosecution had sought a sentence of six to seven months for all charges, while the defence had asked for a significantly reduced sentence of no more than eight weeks.

Ong, a Malaysian national based in Singapore, was arrested by CPIB in July 2023 and released on bail shortly thereafter. Although no charges were initially filed against him, Ong’s involvement in the case intensified following Iswaran’s guilty plea.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had earlier indicated that it would soon make a decision regarding Ong’s legal standing, which has now led to the current charges.

According to the statement of facts read during Iswaran’s conviction, Ong’s case came to light as part of a broader investigation into his associates, which revealed Iswaran’s use of Ong’s private jet for a flight from Singapore to Doha in December 2022.

CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.

Upon learning that the flight records had been obtained, Ong contacted Iswaran, advising him to arrange for Singapore GP to bill him for the flight.

Iswaran subsequently paid Singapore GP S$5,700 for the Doha-Singapore business class flight in May 2023, forming the basis of his obstruction of justice charge.

Mr Ong is recognised as the figure who brought Formula One to Singapore in 2008, marking the first night race in the sport’s history.

He holds the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix. Iswaran was the chairman of the F1 steering committee and acted as the chief negotiator with Singapore GP on business matters concerning the race.

 

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Chee Soon Juan questions Shanmugam’s $88 million property sale amid silence from Mainstream Media

Dr Chee Soon Juan of the SDP raised concerns about the S$88 million sale of Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow at Astrid Hill, questioning transparency and the lack of mainstream media coverage. He called for clarity on the buyer, valuation, and potential conflicts of interest.

Published

on

On Sunday (22 Sep), Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), issued a public statement on Facebook, expressing concerns regarding the sale of Minister for Home Affairs and Law, Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow (GCB) at Astrid Hill.

Dr Chee questioned the transparency of the S$88 million transaction and the absence of mainstream media coverage despite widespread discussion online.

According to multiple reports cited by Dr Chee, Mr Shanmugam’s property was transferred in August 2023 to UBS Trustees (Singapore) Pte Ltd, which holds the property in trust under the Jasmine Villa Settlement.

Dr Chee’s statement focused on two primary concerns: the lack of response from Mr Shanmugam regarding the transaction and the silence of major media outlets, including Singapore Press Holdings and Mediacorp.

He argued that, given the ongoing public discourse and the relevance of property prices in Singapore, the sale of a high-value asset by a public official warranted further scrutiny.

In his Facebook post, Dr Chee posed several questions directed at Mr Shanmugam and the government:

  1. Who purchased the property, and is the buyer a Singaporean citizen?
  2. Who owns Jasmine Villa Settlement?
  3. Were former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and current Prime Minister Lawrence Wong informed of the transaction, and what were their responses?
  4. How was it ensured that the funds were not linked to money laundering?
  5. How was the property’s valuation determined, and by whom?

The Astrid Hill property, originally purchased by Mr Shanmugam in 2003 for S$7.95 million, saw a significant increase in value, aligning with the high-end status of District 10, where it is located. The 3,170.7 square-meter property was sold for S$88 million in August 2023.

Dr Chee highlighted that, despite Mr Shanmugam’s detailed responses regarding the Ridout Road property, no such transparency had been offered in relation to the Astrid Hill sale.

He argued that the lack of mainstream media coverage was particularly concerning, as public interest in the sale is high. Dr Chee emphasized that property prices and housing affordability are critical issues in Singapore, and transparency from public officials is essential to maintain trust.

Dr Chee emphasized that the Ministerial Code of Conduct unambiguously states: “A Minister must scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.”

He concluded his statement by reiterating the need for Mr Shanmugam to address the questions raised, as the matter involves not only the Minister himself but also the integrity of the government and its responsibility to the public.

The supposed sale of Mr Shamugam’s Astrid Hill property took place just a month after Mr Shanmugam spoke in Parliament over his rental of a state-owned bungalow at Ridout Road via a ministerial statement addressing potential conflicts of interest.

At that time, Mr Shanmugam explained that his decision to sell his home was due to concerns about over-investment in a single asset, noting that his financial planning prompted him to sell the property and move into rental accommodation.

The Ridout Road saga last year centred on concerns about Mr Shanmugam’s rental of a sprawling black-and-white colonial bungalow, occupying a massive plot of land, managed by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), which he oversees in his capacity as Minister for Law. Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, also rented a similarly expansive property nearby.

Mr Shanmugam is said to have recused himself from the decision-making process, and a subsequent investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) found no wrongdoing while Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean confirmed in Parliament that Mr Shanmugam had removed himself from any decisions involving the property.

As of now, Mr Shanmugam has not commented publicly on the sale of his Astrid Hill property.

Continue Reading

Trending