Mr Blonde Speaks Out On Controversy

Last week, we shared an article about the Mr Blonde controversy. It’s an unfolding story about magic hype, mistrust, and secret identities. Mr Blonde marketed himself as ‘Someone you know. Someone you have heard of. Someone you have watched. He is a well-known and highly established English Mystery Performer who wishes to remain anonymous.’

His first release, a peek wallet, disappointed many buyers, which led to industry drama and unanswered questions.

A lot has happened in the last week.

You deserve a follow-up article.

When writing this article, I contacted Murphy’s last Friday - they’re the wholesaler who distributed The Peak. Unfortunately, they were unable to comment on the story.

Part 1. Buyers share their stories

Someone contacted One Ahead who claimed to be the first buyer worldwide to get their hands on The Peak due to their close proximity to the warehouse. They wanted me to share their story.

He wrote, ‘Funny. I have a little more interaction with Mr Blonde than most did. Big reason was I got mine before anyone else. He even complained to Murphy’s about it. Also, I’m convinced when he personally sent a replacement – I got the prototype right before the final one. Because it works, and it works great, lol. Long story, but he told me they went one shade darker at the end. So the one I have is a little bit thinner, and you can see the peek in pretty much any setting.’

We’ve seen and confirmed their interaction.

In their conversation, Blonde claims to have checked every unit. He requests video evidence of the issue, asking several times for the early buyer to keep trying the product for another week before agreeing to replace it. The replacement arrived soon after and was ‘night and day,’ according to the buyer, who let Blonde know. Mr Blonde’s response ends: ‘…keep the replacement to yourself.’

Blonde’s comment about the darker shade stood out to me – a change he said was made to ‘gain a balance of subtlety and practicality.’ This detail begins to fill in the gaps in the timeline, and you start to wonder how aware anyone, be that Murphy’s (the magic wholesaler) or Blonde, might have been at this time.

Blonde had said he’d checked every unit, so it must have been a surprise when the first unit to reach a customer needed to be replaced.

I had always assumed the product worked as expected by its creator and wholesaler and that the marketing plan was at fault for overhyping and overpromising. Up until writing this second article, I genuinely saw this as a marketing issue and not a product issue. There are tricks that don’t work well under certain circumstances, like thread magic, but its marketing usually levels customer expectations.

Was this not a marketing issue but a product issue? Was it a mixture of both? Perhaps something bigger was happening behind the scenes. Did they already know, as orders began to leave the warehouse, that some customers would feel misled?

Was the product the big-name magicians reacted to for the trailer and testimonials the final darker version or the lighter prototype? Had they been made aware that the final product was a darker shade?

The early buyer goes on to share: ‘He [Mr Blonde] also messed up and told me the location of a second home or some warehouse he had and immediately said please don’t say anything. The entire interaction was just odd, and I felt like I was talking to some secret agent.’

He wasn’t the only buyer to reach out with tales of unusual interactions. In the One Ahead chat, multiple readers said they bought directly from Mr Blonde’s online store (Note: His website became password protected this week).

One buyer wrote: ‘I contacted the collective about returning mine, but this was as the velcro wore away after a couple of days (not just that I wasn’t happy with the product). I got a very nice response from Mr Blonde pleading for me to accept a replacement rather than a refund, and I accepted. The language in the email did remove any doubts I had about who Mr Blonde was, though, as it was exactly how the prime suspect communicates.’

The buyer went on to share that he uses the replacement every day as a normal wallet: ‘Not for the desired function though—that’s not any better, unfortunately.’

A second buyer added, ‘I got this same response, but my replacement never arrived. I’ve reached out again but heard nothing back.’

Another buyer had a similar story: ‘I’m one of the unlucky ones who bought directly from The Collective website so was unable to return the product for a refund. It’s really made me think twice about buying directly from creators that I don’t know. It’s a shame as I prefer supporting the artists directly, especially newer artists, but once bitten, twice shy.’

I asked if this buyer had tried to return the item, and he explained, ‘there was no address to return to on the collective website, and after it was announced that we would have the ‘improvements’, I thought it may have been in the process of being fixed. Even the purchase email just said ‘Baker Street, London’ with no house number or postcode. The cynic in me wonders if this was a tactic to push purchases past the PayPal dispute period?’

For context, PayPal only allows you to open a dispute case to request a refund within 180 days of your purchase. In the UK, where Blonde’s store operates, the law states, ‘You must offer a full refund if an item is faulty, not as described or does not do what it’s supposed to.’ But when it comes to online sales, a product does not even need to be faulty: ‘You must offer a refund to customers if they’ve told you within 14 days of receiving their goods that they want to cancel…. They do not have to provide a reason.’

Did you notice how this particular buyer mentioned ‘improvements’? It’s something we’ll circle back on later in this article. The more we researched this story, the more we found buyers mentioning these promised ‘improvements.’ But what were they, and did they ever materialise?

Part 2. Michael Murray Apologises

After sharing our first article, one reader replied to tell me the method for The Peak Wallet is different from your standard privacy screen — not the type you might add to a phone or computer screen. This is not a clarification I expected to include in this follow-up article, as I felt it was a minor detail and didn’t hugely impact the story.

I was wrong, and I’ll tell you why it’s important.

I was directed by another reader to Michael Murray’s public apology. Murray is a highly regarded creator of modern mentalism. The first ESP trick I ever learned was created by Murray. If you’ve ever seen a spectator solve a Rubik’s cube behind their back, you have Michael Murray to thank. That’s a trick of his I recommend often.

I’ll share his public statement shortly, but let’s have a look at the method first to provide some important context. Here’s a WhatsApp conversation between myself and One Ahead content producer Nathan Wilson who owns the product:

Rory: When you get a moment, can you explain the method to The Peak in 2–3 sentences? Also, this story keeps getting more interesting.

Nathan: The Method? It’s a darkened screen that turns transparent when held to a certain angle against the light – allowing the performer to see the billet. That’s how I would describe it. What’s happened now?!?

Okay, back to Murray’s statement. It’s worth noting that in my experience, Murray is known for not holding back his opinions and is proud of his reputation within the industry.

He’s also posted over 1,800 times on The Magic Cafe. If you posted once per day on that forum, it would take you close to five years to catch up to Murray.

Anyway, he first addressed a concern some buyers flagged, that the tight elastic around the wallet made it difficult to load the billet. Murray writes:

Murray goes on to discuss the peek function, writing:

Then Murray shares something rather fascinating. Remember: Murray was featured in the original teaser trailer for the product. His trusted name and testimonial were used in the ad campaign.

Last week, we pondered whether a potential buyer reading this quote might assume Murray had held the product and how this might be misleading. If this was the case, the misuse of the quote is likely down to Mr Blonde. But even as I wrote last week’s article, I assumed that Murray, even if he had not held the product, must have known the method. If you read a positive magic product testimonial from an industry name, would you assume they knew how the trick worked?

Here’s the rest of Michael Murray’s statement:

You could perhaps argue that it was the creator’s responsibility to ensure a magician giving a written quote was informed about the method. Murray continues:

Again, we see those ‘improvements’ and ‘amended screens’ mentioned. Even Michael Murray, at this point, seems to believe such a thing is on its way. We’ll find out soon what these promised improvements were and where they stand today.

I cannot tell you how much I respect Murray for apologising and taking responsibility for his actions. It’s a stark contrast to what we have seen elsewhere in this story. Doing so is especially notable when you consider the fact that Murray himself was perhaps also duped.

Nonetheless, he accepted responsibility for his actions, apologised even though the outcome was not intended or expected, and then pledged to take steps to avoid the same thing happening again.

Fairplay.

Part 2. Mr Blonde’s public statement

Finally, let’s look at the final public statement shared by Mr Blonde. This statement was shared on September 5th during the peek of the controversy.

Here’s some of what Blonde had to say about the drama on behalf of himself and The Collective. The Collective is the name given to himself and supposedly two other anonymous magicians named ‘Mr Pink’ and ‘Mr Orange.’

First, their reaction to buyers feeling misled by the big-name testimonials:

This directly conflicts with Michael Murray’s statement about what he saw on the call and how little he knew about the method.

I resonate with this but feel they could have made the measurements more clear in the trailer. If this was indeed a purposeful decision and something they were already aware of, then they could have prepared for this buyer's reaction. Blonde has since added additional video tutorials to Murphy’s tutorial section, detailing ways to tear a regular business card to fit inside the wallet.

Regarding buyers upset at Blonde’s secret identity, feeling it worsened the controversy and made it harder to get straight answers, Blonde wrote:

There are several performing magicians who use a pen name when releasing magic to the industry. They often invent a normal-sounding name and sometimes happily show their faces. This practice isn’t limited to our industry – there are actors, rappers, and authors who all work under pen names.

I’m not sure there are inherent problems with choosing to use a pen name. Many do, without causing frustration and without people trying to work out who they are.

I actually believe that calling himself Mr Blonde and leaning into the idea that he’s ‘someone you know,’ has only stoked and encouraged people to find out his identity.

It was never just a way to protect his performing name – it was a marketing tactic.

If he had chosen to release the product via a producer like theory11, Ellusionist, or Vanishing Inc., as others with pen names have done before, Blonde would never have had to personally deal with production, returns, marketing, refunds and customer support. These are all roles that are challenging to do well with a secret identity.

Before the controversy, while marketing The Peak on Murphy’s Discord, Blonde was asked if he planned to reveal his identity. He wrote back, ‘I do plan to reveal all, but that will be sometime after 2-3 more releases at The Collective.’

If he always intended to reveal his identity down the line, doesn't that invalidate his reasons for keeping it a secret throughout the controversy?

About the product, Blonde wrote:

These are the ‘improvements’ and ‘replacement panels’ many customers holding off on requesting a refund were waiting on. In his statement, Blonde estimated they would land with customers 4–6 weeks after making the statement. It has now been 10 weeks since his final statement. No one has heard any updates, and his website and socials have vanished.

Regarding his website, Mr Blonde said this in his statement ten weeks back:

We have not spoken to anyone who had a positive experience via Blonde’s contact form. However, it is likely that only those with a negative experience felt it necessary to speak out. We would say that the only customers we spoke to who were unable to get a refund or return bought directly from Mr Blonde’s website.

At the time of writing, there is no contact form on Mr Blonde’s website.

We have not been able to find any public comments from Blonde on The Magic Cafe, Murphy's Discord or elsewhere since his statement ten weeks ago.

Customers have not received replacement parts.

Many who bought direct are still awaiting a refund.

That’s everything — that’s the follow-up article.