A $148 SKIMS Advent Calendar Became the Internet’s Favorite Bad Unboxing. The Refund Is the Real Story

A holiday box priced at $148 should create suspense. The SKIMS accessories Advent calendar created disbelief instead. As creators opened its twelve compartments on camera, viewers watched hair accessories, keychains and other small items emerge from packaging that looked far more luxurious than the contents felt to many buyers. The reaction moved quickly from disappointment to mass entertainment, turning a limited seasonal product into one of the year’s most widely shared examples of an unboxing going wrong.

The calendar was sold as a twelve-day collection of playful accessories and everyday favorites. That description was broad enough to cover what buyers received, but price created a different expectation. Reported contents included multiple scrunchies and bobby pins, hair ties, clips, keychains, headbands and a small logo-shaped item. The argument was not simply that the box contained accessories. It was that viewers struggled to see how the assortment supported a price close to $150.

Kim Kardashian’s SKIMS built enormous attention around a limited holiday product, but creator unboxings changed the conversation almost immediately. Image: Wikimedia Commons contributor / Creative Commons

Creator videos gave the complaint a structure anyone could understand. Each door produced a new moment of anticipation, followed by another object viewers could judge in real time. One widely reported unboxing drew tens of millions of views and millions of likes. The format did more than summarize a product review. It allowed the audience to experience the value question one compartment at a time, creating a running joke that became harder for the brand to control with conventional messaging.

This is why unboxings carry unusual power. A polished campaign can choose angles, lighting and the order in which products appear. A customer opening a package creates a different kind of evidence. Viewers see scale, texture and repetition. They hear the buyer’s first reaction before a public-relations team has framed the response. Even when the video is edited for entertainment, it feels closer to the moment of purchase than a studio image ever can.

SKIMS eventually contacted purchasers and offered a choice. Customers could return the calendar for a full refund or keep it and receive store credit, according to company statements and messages shared by buyers. The product was also removed from sale. That response matters because it changed the story from a simple pile-on into a test of customer recovery. A brand cannot undo the first impression, but it can decide whether disappointed buyers feel ignored or taken seriously.

The refund does not automatically settle every criticism. Store credit keeps money within the brand, while a return asks the customer to give up the product and complete another task. Still, offering a real option is stronger than pretending the backlash is merely noise. The calendar was limited, the audience was loud and the company had to respond in the same public environment where the complaints were spreading. That is now a routine part of retail risk.

The episode also exposes the difficult economics of novelty merchandise. Packaging, scarcity and a famous brand can add value beyond the raw cost of each item. Consumers accept that when the experience feels special. Advent calendars are especially dependent on perceived discovery: the buyer pays for a sequence of surprises, not only the contents. If too many surprises feel interchangeable or inexpensive, the packaging begins to look like a device for hiding the calculation until after purchase.

For creators, the backlash rewarded specificity. The most persuasive posts did not need dramatic claims. They showed the box, opened the doors and let viewers compare the price with what appeared. That is useful influence because the audience can inspect the same evidence. It is also why brands should resist treating every negative review as betrayal. A creator who is willing to say a product missed the mark may be more trusted when the next recommendation is positive.

For shoppers, the lesson is less about one company than about the psychology of limited drops. A countdown, celebrity connection and “sold out” warning can make hesitation feel like losing. The better question is simple: if every item were displayed together without the box, would the purchase still feel worth the price? Holiday products often sell emotion first. Slowing the decision long enough to estimate practical value can separate genuine delight from expensive packaging.

SKIMS may recover quickly; strong consumer brands survive unpopular products all the time. What will last is the case study. The calendar showed how fast a creator-led review can reverse the meaning of a launch, turning exclusivity into embarrassment and then forcing a customer-service decision. The internet came for the bad unboxing, but the more important ending is the refund. In modern retail, the response after a viral complaint can become as visible as the mistake that started it.