Google buys Zazzle

July 18, 2005 9:11 AM

Google buys Zazzle"Google, the online search giant, have invested $16 million in Menlo Park, California based, online marketplace company called Zazzle. Just two years old, the web based, Amazon/Dell-type store is where people buy and sell customized T-shirts, stamps, posters prints and other gifts and artwork."
posted by webmeta (24 comments total)

Up next on their purchasing schedule: feefle.com, pupple.com, and vivvle.com.
posted by Robot Johnny at 9:21 AM on July 18, 2005

Lisa: What is zazz?
Executive: Zing, zork, kapowza, in any language it spells mazuma in the bank.

Fo' shizzle.
posted by keswick at 9:22 AM on July 18, 2005

Interesting.

Well, at least they purchased Zazzle instead of CafePress. Zazzle appears to be the best of this time of company out there right now, and Google hopefully will just work on improving that.

CafePress must be quaking a little right now. If I cared more, I'd try to watch the stock trades involving their administration...I wouldn't doubt a plan for early retirement.
posted by Kickstart70 at 9:22 AM on July 18, 2005

Robot Johnny: Wouldn't that be feffle.com?

(feffle.com and vivvle.com are available, BTW)
posted by Kickstart70 at 9:25 AM on July 18, 2005

Kickstart70: it would be, if it was Goggle!
posted by Robot Johnny at 9:29 AM on July 18, 2005

Well, at least they purchased Zazzle instead of CafePress. Zazzle appears to be the best of this time of company out there right now, and Google hopefully will just work on improving that.

What do you base that on? Looks to me like CafePress has oodles more product variety and vastly advanced customization functionality. They have been around much longer, after all. I'd never heard of Zazzle before today.

CafePress must be quaking a little right now.

Agreed. Soiling their thongs, even.
posted by MaxVonCretin at 10:09 AM on July 18, 2005

webmeta posts "Just two years old"

*looks at Zazzle shirt bought in Sep 2001*
posted by Gyan at 10:12 AM on July 18, 2005

WRONG!

This story has been all over the place today. The point is that two guys that originally invested in google have invested in Zazzle. Google did not buy Zazzle. Zazzle raised a bunch of money from famous VC's.

a correct story

What kind of news source is Stellar Bay? This is sort of an important detail.
posted by sucka_mc at 10:16 AM on July 18, 2005

What kind of news source is Stellar Bay?

Clearly a shit one. Thanks for the correction.
posted by MaxVonCretin at 10:22 AM on July 18, 2005

Zazzle buys Google. Now THAT's a story.
posted by blue_beetle at 10:36 AM on July 18, 2005

It would be odd to buy them, because it has nothing to do with Google's stated charter of information access - unless you count transferring information onto a mug. Investing makes more sense, especially since the announcement alone of the investment itself will give them momentum against Cafepress (I'm sure there's a term for that in the industry).
posted by abcde at 10:48 AM on July 18, 2005

Disclaimer: I've been using Zazzle almost since the beginning (2001). I was looking for a company that would print posters on demand and sell them, since I didn't have the time to manage that myself. Zazzle (which was in beta then) was the only one to provide this service. I had looked up CafePress at that time and while it seemed a good solution for apparel, mousepads, mugs and the like, they didn't have the variety that Zazzle provides for prints (and still don't, for all I know - I have a 52"x75" Zazzle print and I haven't seen that at CafePress). For hobbyists like myself who don't plan to make a living out of their artwork, it's a good way to have images printed and sold.
posted by elgilito at 10:49 AM on July 18, 2005

This blatant move to corner the *le.com domain hierarchy has got to be stopped.
posted by ToasT at 10:54 AM on July 18, 2005

A co-worker of mine quit to work for Zazzle. Apparently he is doing product development yet his former job was in investment banking. This is a problem when you get $16mm from a big-time VC like Kleiner Perkins - you have to start spending to justify the size of the investment. So, you start hiring your friends whether or not they're actually qualified.
posted by mullacc at 10:56 AM on July 18, 2005

I propose they change "metafilter" to "mettle" and try to make some $$
posted by nervousfritz at 10:57 AM on July 18, 2005

Thanks for the link to the correct Zdnet story. It seems like the Stellar Bay folks were just going for some attention with a sensationalist headline... which apparently worked.

I've got designs up with both Cafepress and with Zazzle. For the artist the Cafepress' model is much better since you can set your own end retail prices and you can get bonuses for selling certain quantities. With Zazzle's prices you get a small set percentage per item no matter what you put on the item or how many of them you sell.

Of course the ultimate solution is to produce things yourself which is what I've slowly been doing.
posted by Fricka at 11:14 AM on July 18, 2005

Is google a good investment? Hyped bunfight auction for its expensive IPO class A shares, while founders retain almost a third of class B shares (10x voting power) and rule out paying dividends for the forseeable future?

Burning cash too fast without accountability? Big Bang, Big Crunch?

I know I'm probably wrong... However... The abundance of smiles and sunshine cascaded onto google almost seem to tempt fate...
posted by Thoth at 11:32 AM on July 18, 2005

What about Razzle and Dazzle?
posted by SisterHavana at 1:23 PM on July 18, 2005

What about Razzle?
posted by mleonard at 2:14 PM on July 18, 2005

Anyone care to comment on the quality of printing when comparing between CafePress and Zazzle?

(Recent examples would be best, since they both have probably updated their printing processes over time.)
posted by jca at 2:56 PM on July 18, 2005

I've found the printing quality for shirts to be much better at Zazzle, which is why I switched to them from CafePress. Zazzle also offers way more customization features such as style of shirt, color, etc...

Have not yet made prints at Zazzle, but have done some through CafePress and the quality was top-notch. I'd say they both have their good points and bad, but the shirts from Cafepress look cheap compared to the nice one's Zazzle puts out.

I also like that through Zazzle, as an affiliate I am able to sell products that others have created and still make a small commission from the sale. At Cafepress you can only get payment from selling your own designs.
posted by RoseovSharon at 3:15 PM on July 18, 2005

Cafepress is easy, but their products are shit. Less than Iron-on quality.

Zazzle, on the other hand, produces good T-shirt transfers on demand. Not quite screenprint quality, but on-demand.
posted by blasdelf at 4:50 PM on July 18, 2005

Cafepress is easy, but their products are shit. Less than Iron-on quality.

I disagree. I have several 4 year-old Cafepress shirts that have seen heavy wear and wash, that still look great. Mind you - those are simple two and three color designs. I've had some other Cafepress shirts with photographic styles that didn't fare so well at all.

However just last week I saw a sample of their next-generation t-shirt printing. It's on-demand *ink-to-fabric.* Also not quite screensprint, but not transfer either.
posted by MaxVonCretin at 5:10 PM on July 18, 2005

in vaguely google-related news...

moon.goggle.com

and situations vacant, for their moon base.
posted by noizyboy at 12:30 AM on July 20, 2005