Here’s what an an old post card of mine looks like. (I published it with #1 showing because removing it also removes the divider line and the “place stamp here” box and I didn’t really mind the faded Zazzle showing.)
We as Designers/Creators know what #1, 2, and 3 are and how to deal with them. But a shopper is met with this:
They don’t know what these things are and “independent creator credit” is very abstruse. The only way to figure out what you’re paying to remove is by checking & unchecking the box and watching for what comes & goes on the preview image. And if they don’t happen to be on the preview that shows the back of the card while doing this, they won’t see any difference. They’ll be left scratching their head as to what this option is for.
I get that the Zazzle attribution(s) is in a constant state of flux. Both the wording on the product page and the size, style and position of the branding on the product could change tomorrow, next month, next year, or five years from now.
The wording on the product page can easily be changed with every new iteration of the branding with no real consequences other than confusion on the shopper’s part if it’s not worded clearly. The actual branding on the product however, causes, as we all know, havoc on the design and its saleability.
My #1 questions is - why is Zazzle doing this? Is it because
A) they really need the extra $0.05 - $0.10 per item
or
B) they’re more interested in establishing better name recognition for Z thus it’s the branding and not the $ that is the priority here
???
My opinion is that if it is A, the option to add/remove the branding should be removed entirely from the product page where it is in the shoppers’ hands, and placed instead on the post-for-sale page where it becomes something the designer chooses before publishing. Just like being able to set something to a certain size, orientation, shape or color, or being able to choose not to let the shopper have access to the design tool to edit the design - this should be something left up to the designer. The choices would be 1) “no branding” which would automatically increase the price of the item to the customer by that $0.05 or $0.10 and there would be no option on the product page to confuse customers and/or interfere with the design. I believe 99% of Creators would choose this option so Zazzle would still be making the extra cents, but without the confusion to customers and destruction of designs. The second option would be “allow branding” which would reduce the base cost by that $0.05-$0.10 in return for allowing Z branding on the product in whatever current or future form it might take. Designers might possibly choose this option if they think the $0.05 - $0.10 price difference gives them an edge over the competition in their marketing. In neither case would the option be left up to the customer on the product page. If the Creator chooses “allow branding” they would be making a conscious decision to deal with whatever consequences current/future branding has on their design in favor of a slightly lower advertisable price. And again, I believe 99% of Creators would choose the “no branding” option so it’s guaranteed Z gets the extra cents, with no hassle to the designer or customer.
If Zazzle’s main motivation here is B (establishing better name recognition) then it still shouldn’t be an option, not for the shopper or the designer. It should just be. As a subtle, non-destructive brand mark applied consistently & professionally to like products with a clearly designated area in the Design Tool marked & locked as “reserved for Z branding”. Then provide the ability to edit existing designs on products affected by changes to the branding.
And now a related question:
We know now that the current QR code leads to the Creator’s store. Cool. But what happens when the Creator has their store(s) set to Private so that their store(s) aren’t visible even though you can still find the products in the MP? Where does the QR code lead to in that case?
