Who’s really scraping the bottom of the barrel in the influencer game?

Phoebe Gates, the 23-year-old founder of Phia—a New York-based AI shopping tool valued near $180 million—is facing backlash for allegedly trying to book a lifestyle influencer for less than her standard rate. Kacie Margis, a California-based content creator, shared screenshots of an Instagram DM from Gates in April 2025, where Gates suggested Phia was a "scrappy startup" with a "super limited" budget. The message, dripping with performative humility, asked Margis to share her rates instead of just booking her at the listed price of $250. Margis wasn’t amused. She called out the move on Threads, pointing out that Gates found her on Collabstr—a platform where creators post their rates upfront—but tried to negotiate privately. The internet didn’t hold back. Comments ranged from calling Gates a "grifting a—hole" to suggesting she liquidate her Tiffany bracelets to fund her company. Some even dragged her father’s name into the mess, linking her to ongoing controversies tied to him.Gates has tried to frame herself as an independent entrepreneur, insisting she refused her father’s money to avoid ties between Phia and her family’s wealth. In a recent interview, she played up her "chip on her shoulder, " claiming she wanted to prove herself through hard work instead of inheritance. Yet her actions—like lowballing creators or denying obvious privilege—seem to clash with that narrative. After all, if she’s so focused on merit, why resort to underpaying people to "help" her launch? The incident also highlights how influencer marketing gets messy when money’s involved. Platforms like Collabstr were supposed to simplify bookings by letting creators set their prices, but Gates’ approach suggests some still see this as a negotiation game. It’s not just about the pay—it’s about respect. Margis stood her ground, but not everyone has that leverage, especially when the other party carries the Gates name. The backlash isn’t just about the $250. It’s about entitlement. If Phia’s really a "novel" startup built on merit, why start by undervaluing the people who’d help it grow?