Eight police cars lined the street as officers arrived at the Wildberries office in Moscow, where a gathering of market vendors and their supporters had taken place. The scene unfolded around the Avtozavodskaya metro station, drawing attention from onlookers and local journalists who stood nearby to cover the developing story. Eyewitnesses noted a sense of tension in the air, yet the police presence aimed to maintain order while the marketplace community sought answers about ongoing concerns surrounding the platform’s operations and policies.
Observers described a small crowd, estimated at twenty to thirty individuals, who lingered near the office along with members of the press. The Wildberries press service confirmed that a marketplace support crew was operating from a nearby location to assist vendors, clarify procedures, and address service-related questions. The message from company officials emphasized that direct communication lines with sellers remained open, and that staff were available to resolve outstanding issues in real time.
Reports from local media and social channels indicated that tensions centered on disputes over advertising practices and the financial charges vendors say they incur for promotional placements. Several attendees contended that the company’s management had imposed what they described as unfair fees tied to advertising services, or purportedly illegal promotions. The group insisted that there had been a misalignment between vendor expectations and the platform’s enforcement of advertising guidelines, prompting questions about transparency and accountability within the marketplace operations.
As the situation developed, members of the crowd asserted that some vendors felt financially harmed by what they perceived as aggressive collection measures. One observer, who claimed involvement in both the incident and subsequent disruptions, alleged that substantial sums were withdrawn from supplier accounts without proper justification and that certain employees were cast in a negative light by other parties. The assertions highlighted the broader issue of vendor trust and the perceived fairness of the platform’s revenue model and policy enforcement.
Analysts and security personnel noted ongoing chatter on various messaging channels about the monetary impact of alleged fraudulent activities linked to the marketplace. They referenced claims that a technical solution, described as a Telegram-based automation tool, may have been used to sidestep certain service rules and push promotional content at no cost. While these claims circulated widely, authorities and company spokespeople stressed the need for careful verification of facts and adherence to regulatory standards as investigations or formal inquiries continued. The episode underscored the intricate balance between platform governance, vendor livelihood, and the mechanics of online marketplace advertising in a highly competitive retail landscape.