MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Labubu Phenomenon: How Celebrity Endorsements and Viral Marketing Drive Sales Growth for Pop Mart

2025· article· W4416717486 on OpenAlexaff
Z. Jason Qian

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Economics Management and Political Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverconsumptionSocial mediaScarcitySustainabilityEconomic shortageQualitative analysisConsumption (sociology)Content analysisResource (disambiguation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the digital-native era, collectible toys such as Pop Mart’s Labubu have gained tremendous popularity. However, limited studies explore how celebrity influence and short-form videos create explosive market phenomena, especially in Chinese brands exporting culturally resonant IPs. This study investigates the Labubu phenomenon, focusing on its role in Pop Mart’s growth through celebrity endorsements, online virality, and hype-driven sales. Using a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative case study analysis of viral content and endorsements with quantitative data review of sales figures and social media metrics from 2024-2025, the study draws on industry reports and academic literature. Findings show that Labubu generated $670 million in H1 2025, accounting for 34.7% of Pop Mart's revenue, with profits increasing by 396.5%. This growth is attributed to scarcity tactics and social proof. The study highlights the risks of overconsumption and suggests that brands balance hype with sustainability to ensure long-term viability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Economics Management and Political SciencesSame topicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207