A controversial entrepreneur is facing backlash for an April Fool’s stunt that many see as tone-deaf and irresponsible.
Toby Thomas-Smith, founder of subletting platform Kiki, posted on LinkedIn on April 1 that he had made the “hardest decision of my life” to shut down Kiki Club in London, explicitly stating it was not an April Fool’s joke.
He later reversed himself with a post admitting it was a joke. Both posts have since been deleted.
The business originally launched as EasyRent in New Zealand and has previously opened and closed locations in Sydney and New York.
Business leaders quickly criticised Thomas-Smith’s stunt, emphasising that credibility and trust are earned through action, not attention-grabbing tricks. Phil Thomson, chief executive at Auror, noted that it exploited the goodwill of a community that “showed up for founders in their hardest moments” and belittled those who actually had to shut down companies.
Several New Zealand business leaders agreed with Thomson, expressing clear disapproval.
Lou O’Reilly of PR firm Draper Cormack said the post was in poor taste.
“He won’t be the first founder to learn that attention and trust are not the same thing, and he definitely won’t be the last. A genuine apology can usually fix a fair bit, and this one is definitely better than the original rollout, but when people feel like you’ve really misread the room, you don’t just get to reset because you’ve explained yourself better the second time around. He’ll need to earn some of that trust back.”
Marketing expert Bodo Lang from Massey University added that for humour to work in marketing, it must be clearly signalled and carefully managed.
“The message by the Kiki Club owner fails this first condition, particularly it explicitly states that is it not an April Fool’s joke. Second, the humour needs to be aligned with the brand’s personality…Kiki Club had to recently settle out of court in a case after admitting to breaking New York’s short-term rental laws. Using humour after sustaining financial and reputational damage is not a wise move.”
“Lastly, but most importantly, the humour should be low in perceived consequences. Unfortunately, making a joke about the company’s viability is extremely high in perceived consequences. Financial backers would be extremely worried, and customers as well as fans of the brand would also be asking themselves if using the platform is sensible.”
Lang also warned that online humour is particularly risky in today’s digital environment:
- Consumers often see posts hours or days later, losing the “joke frame.”
- Content may reach people unfamiliar with the brand and context.
- Posts are reshared, screenshotted, or viewed in isolation, often without clarification.
- Online content can circulate far beyond the original posting date.
He concluded: “If a joke could plausibly be believed and would matter if true, it is probably not worth the risk.”