We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 4.7.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 4.7.0, updated 2021-11-05.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 4
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Aggressive ad load
Go with Skype — From the constant ads to shotty calls, and similar prices for minutes just get a more reputable app. Was better when I first started to use it but it’s just went so bad.
App is REALLY BAD — Ads are CONSTANT, they regularly CHEAT customers out of credits, they LIE about credits. I could go on all day. Save yourself & don’t bother. I have never given a one star or negative review like this.
0 stars — Would not recommend at all bad you have to watch videos and don’t even get coins so many ads to not get coins they make you do surveys and other stuff that’s not time consuming
Trial converts to a charge
Charged for free trial; AppStore access blocked — I was offered a free trial in app and as soon as i accepted it you attempted to charge my card. Luckily my card was locked but now my app store access has been COMPLETELY blocked because…
Charged when offering free trial — I was charged $12 when I was offered a 3 day free-trial, I’d very much like a refund but the developers of this app will not be very helpful.
THEY STOLE MY MONEY/ NO PHONE NUMBER — They sold me on a free trial that instantly charged me and didn’t even give me a phone number or credits
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
false advertisement — Not free and no easy way to delete your account
Verification texts — False advertising- DOES NOT RECEIVE VERIFICATIONS
NOT FREE — In the description it says free calls between users it did not work and I won’t even try paying, it looks good for what it is but its just false advertising after you chose a number it bring to right to a screen where you have…
What this app sells
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
Show 1 more purchase we couldn’t categorise
These are really on sale; we just can’t tell from the name whether they recur.
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.