Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop.com is hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt

wenn20570046

Last week, we heard about Gwyneth Paltrow’s latest conscious uncoupling, this time with Sebastian Bishop, the CEO of Goop. As I said last week, I was actually surprised that Goop had such a professional CEO-type running the business end, because Goop is a somewhat budget endeavor. I guess the branding is “these are just tips that Gwyneth is giving to her fans,” like it’s a personal blog or something. But it looks like Goop has grown into a legit business with significant profits. The problem is that Gwyneth spends money like it’s going out of style and she and Bishop were both taking “interest-free loans” out of the coffers. Radar is about to throw a lot of numbers at you, so just stick it out!

Gwyneth Paltrow‘s marriage isn’t the only area of her life that’s in shambles. Just days after the CEO of her lifestyle company, GOOP, announced his unexpected departure, RadarOnline.com has uncovered disturbing corporate filings that reveal the company’s dire financial state: For two years running, they racked up serious losses totaling more than $300,000 — thanks in part to an interest-free loan Paltrow took from the company coffers!

According to the most recent corporate documentation filed with the Companies House in the U.K., in 2011, GOOP “incurred a loss of $255,312 (£152,060) and had a net liabilities of $259,969 (£154,834).” And in 2012, they reported “a loss of $39,823 (£23,718) and … net liabilities of $298,512 (£177,788).”

It’s not that GOOP wasn’t making money. In fact, in 2012, they raked in more than $1.5 million (£908,378), thanks in part to $463,486 (£276,040) in product sales, as well as an impressive (£222,243) from Groupon promotions and $373,159 in commissions. All told, the company made $1,893,065 (£1,127,456).

But that same year, GOOP spent $98,150 (£58,456) on Goop.com, $79,961 (£47,623) on the notorious GOOP newsletter, $189,590 (£112,918) on product costs, and a whopping $1,564,995 (£932,096) in administrative expenses,” adding up to the grand profit total of a loss of $39,823 (£23,718).

Chief among those “administrative expenses” were Paltrow and CEO Sebastian Bishop’s “renumeration,” or salaries, for which the company allotted $587,653.25 (£350,000), a sizable increase from the previous year’s figure of $172,585 (£102,788), despite the company’s losses.

The documents also show that in 2012, both Paltrow and Bishop were the recipient of interest-free “loans to directors,” with Paltrow’s listed at a balance of $49,025 (£29,200), of which none was paid back, and Bishop’s at $83,617 (£49,800). Other expenses in 2012 included $456,007 (£271,584) in other wages, $34,507 (£20,551) on travel, nearly $4,000 (£2,118) on “Entertaining,” and nearly $5,000 (£2,951) on “Staff Entertainment.”

All told, the expenses swallowed up the entire $1.8 million profit for the year and then some, resulting in a loss of $39,823. Paltrow and Bishop’s report had an excuse, insisting, “As the company started product sales in June 2012, the directors are of the opinion that predicted profits will provide sufficient resources to enable the company to continue trading for the foreseeable future.”

The continued existence of GOOP, it seems, would depend upon it, since the report noted that in addition to the losses, the company owed creditors more than $1.2 million (£722,111), all of which would come due by the end of 2013.

[From Radar]

Radar goes on to say that Goop has donated to charity too – $2000 to the David Lynch Foundation so kids can learn transcendental meditation, plus about $9000 more to other charities.

If you really look through the numbers and the details about the business, there are some startling realizations, at least for me. I want to know about the “commissions” especially. When Gwyneth began Goop, she claimed that people weren’t paying her to promote various products, but that claim seems less and less likely. I also think that the bloated figures given for Goop’s “expenses” mean that Gwyneth is using company money to go on vacation and whatever trendy therapy she’s into at that moment, and then she writes about it in a Goop newsletter, thus making it “business.” And how can they spend that much money on operating Goop.com and still have such crappy servers?!

Anyway… just further evidence that Gwyneth’s Goop is just a sketchy scheme to write off her vacations and pay herself to party.

wenn20295253

Photos courtesy of WENN.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

85 Responses to “Gwyneth Paltrow’s Goop.com is hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lucy2 says:

    Her money has consciously uncoupled from her accounts!
    The “loans” sound pretty fishy. Is that a way of getting money out of the company without having to declare it as taxable income?

  2. Kiddo says:

    Call me crazy, but teaching TM to the homeless to reduce stress seems odd. Wouldn’t the stress be mitigated if they had, I don’t know, A HOME?

  3. GiGi says:

    Tax. Shelter.

    She’s basically using this corporation to finance her lifestyle and by claiming a loss has no tax liability and probably gets a tax refund. Money for nothing.

    Beyond that – WTH? Her site seems so simple and minimal. There are soccer moms with better blogs in Iowa. Why is it costing so much to run this POS? Absolutely ridiculous.

  4. Carolyn says:

    Oops. Paltrow has been using GOOP as a cash source and personal bank. Will Martin go after this secret cash stash? Watching with interest.

    How gauche. Talking down to the peasants whilst she rolled in cash deviously.

  5. evie says:

    I’m more tripping out over the fact that she did Groupon offers! My perception of Groupon is neither high class nor high style so I’m surprised she would do that!

  6. Sarah says:

    What I found interesting is that she would need a $49,000 loan. That’s a rather peasanty amount, isn’t it?

    • MediaMaven says:

      ….not if you consider that she probably wipes her ass with $50 bills – and with all of her cleanses, that’s a lot of ass-wiping…….those bills are fresh from the bank, of course – don’t want any peasanty germs on them. Oh wait, peasants don’t have $50 bills – never mind.

  7. Anastasia says:

    Heh. Her business practices remind me of one Edina/Edwina Monsoon from Absolutely Fabulous.

  8. GeeMoney says:

    The Gwyneth haters are probably having a field day with this news.

  9. poppy says:

    kaiser, many of your good readers told you from the get go Goop was never just a platform for her to “share” her wealth of knowledge with the peasants and she was schilling from day 1.
    she was always getting paid and was always about getting paid. i hope the IRS goes after her.

    think about all of her “friends” she convinced to invest in that steaming pile that will probably never see a return.

    has somebody’s high-horse bucked her off? finally?

  10. Abbicci says:

    Goop has always been a vanity project. It made her feel useful and important when her marriage was in the crapper. The fact it gave her a reason to throw tea parties in the Hamptons and talk about fasting and what was coming out of her ass was just a huge bonus.

    The unpaid loans thing, VERY common in small business. Just about every business owner and officer will take loans from the company. And she really isn’t in debt for a lot of money and more money keeps rolling it. This all seems pretty average. It’s just Goop so we ( myself included) want to call her a lying, sell like a Kardashian lie like a Lohan, do nothing moron.

    Or maybe this was just the best way for her to cry about how hard it is to be a single Mom and to get as much money as she can in the coming apocalypse, I mean divorce.

    Being so broke maybe it makes sense that she’s friends with Chelsea handler now. Chelsea being so budget and low rent.

  11. Inlike says:

    Her business might be broke, but I don’t belive for a second that she isnt wealthy .

  12. Adrien says:

    Foundation to teach kids transcendental meditation? What the what?

    • Hiddles forever says:

      LOL!! I wondered about that one too :/

    • Nighty says:

      That’s a good question… what is that???

    • Lucrezia says:

      What exactly are you guys what-ing about?

      Kids needing relaxation techniques? (You’d be amazed at how stressed young kids can be.)

      What TM actually is? (It’s self-directed silent-chanting meditation “ommm, I am a happy, successful person, ommm” … as opposed to guided, imagery-based meditation: “imagine you’re lying on a beach, feel yourself relax as the heat of the sun warms your body”).

      Or why there’s a foundation specifically advocating TM? (Money basically. TM is a very specific technique, and with trainers and accreditation and stuff. It’s an industry. A good analogy would be Zumba: anyone can do dance aerobics, but Zumba is a specific product, with very good marketing.)

  13. Liz says:

    Here is another CEO and/ owner giving themselves a raise despite not making a net profit. Goop is another Martha Stewart. Martha also gave herself sizeable raises despite her company’s sizable losses. These people use these companies as their personal piggy banks. THIS is without a doubt the worst blemish on her reputation. That and promoting that other shady troll Tracy Anderson.

  14. LAK says:

    One of my BFF’s worked in the same building as the GOOP offices in London.

    Sadly, he isn’t into gossip, so wouldn’t tell except to confirm that GOOP occasionally popped into the offices – emphasis on ‘popping in for half an hour, an hour tops!’ as opposed to coming to work for a full day of work daily.

  15. Ag says:

    “$2000 to the David Lynch Foundation so kids can learn transcendental meditation.” oh, wow, that’s so sad on so many levels.

  16. Anguishedcorn says:

    Things that make ya go Om…

  17. Ladies of Lavendee says:

    Taxes are never completely private. A request can be made for them via IRS form # whatever. In the US, a company can run at a loss for 2 years. If goop.com was using accrual method of acct and tax reporting, there is more chance to “hide” certain things.
    Now, whats happening to her now- this would seem like the beginning of a “take down” that Vanity Fair skittered away from.
    TFB for Goopy, you can run, but you can’t hide.

  18. Lisa says:

    She knows David Lynch.

    Hahaha.

    He should dissociate.

  19. Emily C. says:

    She made a piddly donation to a fellow fraudster. What a shock.

    The reason I dislike Paltrow as much as I do is her furthering of fraudulent “gurus” who shill untrue and unhealthy advice in all areas of life. Now it looks like she was doing it because of professional courtesy. Taking out interest-free “loans” from your own business is beyond shady.

    Btw, while meditation (uncapitalized) can be helpful, Transcendental Meditation ™ is a total racket. But at this point, one should assume that anything Goop supports is most likely a total racket. http://skepdic.com/tm.html

    • anon33 says:

      Yeah I mean, honestly, the Beatles figured that out in 1969…no idea why that BS is still around.

    • kibbles says:

      Paltrow is a fraudulent guru who gets away with it because she was already an Oscar-winning Hollywood celebrity from a wealthy family. She can hide being a fraud better as an attractive/glamorous female celebrity. She’s no better than the thousands of other charlatans getting rich from teaching absurd rituals or beliefs to millions of gullible people looking for a solution to their problems.

  20. TheOneandOnlyOnly says:

    Maybe she can get a job being a backup singer in Country Stong II to make up for this loss.

  21. K says:

    I can’t even with this. She (legally) tax evades, thus directly depriving kids from low-income homes of money for schools, healthcare (GOOP is British – that’s NHS territory), tax credits for low income working parents, childcare costs for same, welfare for children from unemployed homes… and then donates some of that money to a charity that teaches children transcendental meditation? Jesus wept. Would WaterAid, Save the Children, OxFam or Great Ormond Street Hospital be beyond this woman’s imagination? You know – charities that actually help children in a meaningful way?

    And why a woman who is so rich in her own right she has mentioned buying Dior couture – even without being married to Mr Coldplay, and presumably in line for a nice settlement – needs to tax evade with such dedication escapes me. She owns steroidal properties all over the globe. She should have had a nice gossip over Oolong tea with Leona Helmsley while she had the chance.

    • JJ says:

      Well she is a shrewd business woman, for sure.

      I liked her books especially the last one, good recipes and nice food photography. But her website needs some upgrading. I have never spend one more than 2 minutes on it because its difficult to navigate and the pictures are very low quality. Unless she does some serious upgrading and hires a better web designer I won’t make Goop one of my frequented websites.

  22. Pizza Pete says:

    Her expenses makes sense. Goop is not just a blog anymore..it’s an ecommerce site. Goop had to not only pay for storage fees for its products but also find a fulfillment house to deliver the goods to its customers. Also, it’s hard to measure the health of the business without comparing it to last years statements. According to Radar, Goop’s losses have reduced significantly since 2011 while her expenses have increased since 2011. That makes sense for a business that switched its model from being just a blog to becoming a full fledged ecommerce site. I’m sure her business could be managed much better ( her servers need to upgraded to) but I don’t think the statements necessarily mean the end or the demise of Goop.

  23. Aurelia says:

    Look at the first photo. Still can’t believe she pitched up at a Hamptons book signing looking like that. Less than zero make up. Thinking she is a young coltish philly. She is not naturally attractive enough to pull that look off. Nor is her skin good enough. Too much sun worshipping at a young age and ciggie face. Also known in the U.K as “fag face”. No amount of colonics, yoga, wishful thinking and starving yourself can repair it. Then we come to her bright yellow hair. …

  24. Liz says:

    Salaries for Goop and Eyebrows increased from 173K to 588K, despite company losses Why? This is corporate greed, plain and simple.

  25. hushgush says:

    She should start thinking about a career as a comedian. Seriously. Every time I see her face on a new post I start laughing because I know what I’m about to read will be hilarious. I’m not being ironic. She really could make me laugh, her sense of ridicule is very low and that makes great comedy.

  26. Nina W says:

    I’m not surprised her business is in shambles, she’s an actress not a MBA. She needed good people to make it work and losing her CEO sees to have instantly triggered disaster. If she has loyal clientele, her website might survive but if her customers dislike the divorce and the mismanagement and the unsavory press, her business will die.

  27. Penny says:

    What did people expect? I never got the impression Gwyneth was trying to make GOOP her primary income source. It’s a huge part of her branding but accounts for very little of her net worth, making it into a steady business isn’t the priority.

  28. jferber says:

    This reeks. Her ex-friend Winona Ryder should be turning cartwheels now. Her petty shoplifting charge clearly bespoke of mental issues, not the serious greed and fraud that Paltrow partakes in. I think Paltrow is bankrupt as a person and she should take a seat about now. This pig makes me want to embrace the annoying Anne Hathaway (I’ve never been a Hatha-hater, but her cloying act pales compared to the soulless Paltrow). Seriously, can she just go away for awhile?

  29. Suki2 says:

    Tax shelter and cash grab.

    GOOP has always been about money and swag. It’s a way to write off and monetize her lifestyle in the absence of acting jobs. And get a lot of free stuff and services to boot.

    I always assumed the VF piece would be at least in part about this.