Gymshark is one of the most popular gymwear brands worldwide — loved for its sleek designs, influencer marketing, and body-sculpting fits.
But if you’ve read online reviews, you’ve likely seen mixed opinions and questions like:
“Why does Gymshark have a bad reputation?”
As someone who works in activewear manufacturing and brand development at FuKi Gymwear,
I’ve analyzed Gymshark’s brand journey from the factory floor to the global market.
Here’s an honest, SEO-optimized breakdown of what caused its early reputation issues and how it has improved.
Table of Contents
- Quick Answer
- 1. Where Gymshark’s Reputation Issues Began
- 2. Common Complaints About Gymshark
- 3. Fabric and Durability Concerns
- 4. Customer Service & Shipping Problems
- 5. Influencer Marketing Controversy
- 6. Has Gymshark Improved?
- Price & Reputation Comparison
- FAQs
- Build a Trusted Activewear Brand with FuKi Gymwear
Quick Answer
Gymshark’s early bad reputation came mainly from:
- Inconsistent quality in early product lines
- Customer service and shipping delays during its viral growth phase
- Over-marketed influencer culture that felt inauthentic to some buyers
Today, Gymshark has improved its materials, logistics, and inclusivity, making it one of the most recognizable and evolving fitness brands globally.
1. Where Gymshark’s Reputation Issues Began
Gymshark started in 2012 as a small UK startup run by Ben Francis.
The brand grew explosively thanks to influencer partnerships, but production couldn’t keep up with demand.
That led to:
- Stock shortages
- Shipping delays
- Varying product quality
🧵 From a manufacturing perspective, Gymshark used multiple suppliers in its early years — a common cause of inconsistent fit and fabric performance.
2. Common Complaints About Gymshark
| Category | Main Complaint | Root Cause |
|---|---|---|
| Quality | Leggings too thin or see-through | Early fabric sourcing issues |
| Fit | Runs small or inconsistent | Unstandardized size grading |
| Customer Service | Slow replies or lost orders | Scaling faster than operations |
| Brand Image | Over-edited influencer culture | Perceived lack of authenticity |
While most of these issues have improved, older online reviews still influence public perception.
3. Fabric and Durability Concerns
Early Gymshark collections such as Vital Seamless and Energy+ faced criticism for:
- Light compression and thin fabric
- Pilling or fading after frequent washing
- Waistbands losing elasticity
Today, Gymshark uses heavier, stretch-resistant fabrics and more consistent stitching.
Still, compared to high-end brands like Lululemon or Vuori, its durability sits in the mid-range.
4. Customer Service & Shipping Problems
Between 2018 and 2021, Gymshark struggled with:
- 2–4 week international shipping times
- Delayed refunds
- Minimal customer support channels
Now the brand operates regional warehouses in the UK, U.S., and EU, improving delivery times to under a week in most markets.
5. Influencer Marketing Controversy
Gymshark pioneered the fitness influencer model, collaborating with top YouTubers and Instagram athletes.
However, it received backlash for:
- Over-polished, unrealistic marketing
- Lack of body diversity early on
Since 2022, the brand has shifted to more inclusive and authentic campaigns, showcasing real athletes and everyday fitness enthusiasts.
💬 At FuKi Gymwear, we often advise new brands to balance aspirational visuals with relatable authenticity — exactly what Gymshark learned to do.
6. Has Gymshark Improved?
Yes — significantly.
✅ Better quality control with new material blends
✅ Faster shipping from expanded fulfillment centers
✅ More inclusive marketing featuring all body types
✅ Sustainability steps, including recycled fabrics
While Gymshark once had growing pains, it’s now regarded as a respected mid-premium performance brand.
Price & Reputation Comparison
| Brand | Reputation | Average Price Range (USD) | Strengths | Weaknesses |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gymshark | Improving | $40 – $90 | Stylish, community-driven, affordable | Earlier QC and sizing issues |
| Lululemon | Excellent | $80 – $150 | Premium fabrics, superior durability | Higher prices |
| Alo Yoga | High | $70 – $160 | Luxury athleisure, influencer appeal | Expensive for casual users |
| Vuori | High | $70 – $130 | Sustainable comfort, minimal design | Limited product range |
| FuKi Gymwear (OEM) | Customizable | Flexible (MOQ-based) | Private-label manufacturing, custom fits | Requires brand setup |
🧩 Gymshark’s path shows how fast-growing brands can recover from early issues through better quality control and transparency.
FAQs
Q1: Why does Gymshark have a bad reputation?
A: Mostly due to early quality inconsistencies, slow service, and influencer-driven marketing.
Q2: Has Gymshark fixed these issues?
A: Yes — newer collections use stronger fabrics and upgraded logistics.
Q3: Is Gymshark good quality now?
A: It’s mid-premium: better than fast fashion, below luxury brands like Lululemon.
Q4: Is Gymshark sustainable?
A: The brand has started using recycled fabrics but isn’t fully sustainable yet.
Build a Trusted Activewear Brand with FuKi Gymwear
If you’re inspired by Gymshark’s success but want to build a brand with consistent quality and strong reputation from day one,
partner with FuKi Gymwear — a professional OEM/ODM manufacturer for global activewear brands.
We provide:
- OEM & ODM manufacturing for gymwear, yoga, and streetwear lines
- Premium eco-friendly fabrics (recycled polyester, bamboo, spandex)
- Custom logo, packaging, and label solutions
- Low MOQ production ideal for startups
- Worldwide delivery to the U.S., EU, and Australia
FuKi Gymwear helps you avoid common production pitfalls
and build a brand trusted for performance, sustainability, and craftsmanship.
