51–60 of 112 posts
Threadless announced Artist Shops in 2015 and rolled them out to Threadless’s general community in early 2016. Artist Shops, still in existence, allow designers to sell items printed with any design (allowed by Threadless’s terms and conditions) directly to customers and receive royalties on each sale.... The shift to a more equitable royalties and rights model removed the gamification elements of Threadless that mad…
Threadless announced Artist Shops in 2015 and rolled them out to Threadless’s general community in early 2016. Artist Shops, still in existence, allow designers to sell items printed with any design (allowed by Threadless’s terms and conditions) directly to customers and receive royalties on each sale.... The shift to a more equitable royalties and rights model removed the gamification elements of Threadless that mad…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overjustification_effect
The overjustification effect occurs when an expected external incentive such as money or prizes decreases a person's intrinsic motivation to perform a task. The overall effect of offering a reward for a previously unrewarded activity is a shift to extrinsic motivation and the undermining of pre-existing intrinsic motivation. Once rewards are no longer offered, interest in the activity is lost; prior intrinsic motivation does not return, and extrinsic rewards must be continuously offered as motivation to sustain the activity.
Tangentially, I would encourage anyone still in college to take some psychology classes while you have the opportunity. Fascinating and useful stuff.
I think I just see fewer people in these kinds of t-shirts than I did ten years ago. Maybe they had to go after the long tail in a shrinking market.
> Concerns about controlling quality make sense given that artists on Threadless’s forum complain that they’re unable to promote their work because the print quality has dropped to the point that designs flake off after a few washes. Reviewers say the sizing, feel, and weight of Threadless’s shirts is inconsistent and getting worse over time, with some customers reporting that shirts bought five to 10 years ago are s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Society6 and Redbubble are still losing money but they will also crush Threadless by the time it's over. This is a winner take all marketplace business, not a t-shirt business.
You say that as if there's a guarantee that the upstarts will find a way to be profitable once they've spent several years losing money. The barriers to entry are pretty low in the t-shirt business so it's not like there's some golden goose to be captured after millions of dollars of capital are set on fire.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You say that as if there's a guarantee that the upstarts will find a way to be profitable once they've spent several years losing money. The barriers to entry are pretty low in the t-shirt business so it's not like there's some golden goose to be captured after millions of dollars of capital are set on fire.
It's not a t-shirt business, it's a marketplace where designers sell their designs and the designs are placed on t-shirts, mugs, carpets, stickers, etc. So basically these sites are like eBay but for artists. Like any marketplace business, it takes a long time to build up both sides of the marketplace but once it's in place, it's very hard to compete with.
Threadless announced Artist Shops in 2015 and rolled them out to Threadless’s general community in early 2016. Artist Shops, still in existence, allow designers to sell items printed with any design (allowed by Threadless’s terms and conditions) directly to customers and receive royalties on each sale.... The shift to a more equitable royalties and rights model removed the gamification elements of Threadless that mad…
With the Old Way:
Designer: does N work to create a design and has X% chance of winning $2500. They focus on what they love (i.e. design) and can get a nice quick payout if they're good. This is even better than a lottery, because it has the same excitement, but talent is also a factor which is very motivating. The marketing is done for them. Competing head to head is also kind of fun.
Shopper: look at the top / winning shirts and buy one if they like it. Paradox of Choice is not a problem.
With the New Way:
Designer: needs to setup a shop, do N work to create a design, then M work to market the shirt, and needs to sell nearly 400 t-shirts to get to that payout. For the winners to achieve the same outcome, it's a lot more work. For most designers, I think it's safe to assume that the marketing part is nowhere near as fun as the design part. The excitement factor is totally gone.
Shopper: has to wade through tons of shirts to figure out which one they like. Paradox of Choice is signifcant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You say that as if there's a guarantee that the upstarts will find a way to be profitable once they've spent several years losing money. The barriers to entry are pretty low in the t-shirt business so it's not like there's some golden goose to be captured after millions of dollars of capital are set on fire.
It's not a t-shirt business, it's a marketplace where designers sell their designs and the designs are placed on t-shirts, mugs, carpets, stickers, etc. So basically these sites are like eBay but for artists. Like any marketplace business, it takes a long time to build up both sides of the marketplace but once it's in place, it's very hard to compete with.
They have the marketplace and the tooling already, just artificially limiting scale.
Threadless announced Artist Shops in 2015 and rolled them out to Threadless’s general community in early 2016. Artist Shops, still in existence, allow designers to sell items printed with any design (allowed by Threadless’s terms and conditions) directly to customers and receive royalties on each sale.... The shift to a more equitable royalties and rights model removed the gamification elements of Threadless that mad…
Why is it so surprising? From both the designer and shopper perspectives, the Old Way does seem better. With the Old Way: Designer: does N work to create a design and has X% chance of winning $2500. They focus on what they love (i.e. design) and can get a nice quick payout if they're good. This is even better than a lottery, because it has the same excitement, but talent is also a factor which is very motivating. The…
And if we'd change the old model to something like this:
No prize. N designers competing. Top 1/3 win, and take all of the royalties of all the shirts in the competition, forever.
How would you analyze that ? would it be a good model ?