{"app_id":"fyv2a0qw"}
Star Rating
AI Summary
Ask PickFu
Ask natural language questions about your poll to our custom AI engine. Don’t worry, it’s friendly.
I think it is a great option. I do feel that you need to make the "one candy" a bit more prominent in the packaging so people know what they are looking at.
A bit more details on the product would be nice. At least what it is and the basic of the candy. The design is modern and looks good.
Even though I like the simplistic design, I think a bit more needs to be shown about what the product actually is.
I like it. It has a classic, high quality look to it. It seems like some logo want to be over the top and it your face. This is a nice reminder that they do not need to be to still get people’s attention.
Yes, while the online description would give explanation to the product, it is important that the product design needs to be reflective of the product.
maybe a picture of the product would be the best to really get an idea of the sizing of the product and shape and anything else
I like the look of it because it's clear and simple image. Because it's an unusual brand though, you might say what it is on the main image maybe though.
Simplicity goes a long way! The font is nice, and the product name is catchy and cute. The colors are simple, but still eye catching.
I don't think it's too simple, but more info is definitely needed. I find the image intriguing and want to know more!
Yes, it is too simple. I can't even tell what the product does from the label which is an issue for me.
I like the design, I think it's easy to process and simple and I think that the use of the word candy is good enough to understand what it is and want to read the decision
I like the simple design and even without a description, you can see that it is candy from the label. The only suggestion would to make that text a little larger.
I do not think it is too simple but would require a detailed description of product and cotents.
Yes. You have to have an instantly recognizable logo to sell a product with no visible indication on the package of what it may be- think KFC or DUNKIN. Even if the seller reads the description the package will still be sitting around someone's house. I am reading candy but I know of nothing but margarine that comes in a similar container and 'Puffs' reads as drugs- are these pot candies?
No, I don't think it's too simple. I can clearly read the name. Then I can read all the details in the listing.
I do not think there is such a thing as to simple to sell online as there is a buyer for any and all items out there
I don't think the design is to simple at all it uses a vibrant color and font to bring attention to the product. Also you see somewhat of a description on the side of the product which engages the customer. I think this product is interesting enough to sell in the manner in which it is depicted with a more interesting description online.
I think the design is beautiful, but I'm actually confused what the product is, Puffs sound like a cereal but the label also says it's a candy.
The design is simple. However, it does not stand out. There is nothing special or memorable about it.
I don't think this design is too simple. It has an attractive font and clean packaging. I am a fan.
It's not too simple at all - on the contrary, it looks classy and classic. Why have a ridiculous cluttered package design when you can include the information on an online posting?
I don't think so. This looks nice. And, frankly, I'm not sure how "complex" you want the design to be with a product like this. I think the KISS rule applies here: Keep it simple (stupid). This is a very attractive package and with a full description would work well for your product.
i like the really clean design, but perhaps adding an image may help it be more descriptive
I like this design because simple is better and less is more so long as there is a full description available.
No this is fine if there is more information provided elsewhere on the page.
I like the simple design. That is excellent. I think it should have a photo of the product on it so those that don't know Papa's Puffs can understand what it is. It would be good to see that. I like the Papa's Puffs and the simpler design to get the attention on the brand name. Looks good, would experiment with lighter colors as well per the flavor, such as a lighter blue for blueberry. Maybe invert the color scheme.
I would think that this would be way to small. because while it shows the product, It doesn't give a ton of information about the actual product. To be honest, I'm not really sure what the product actually is. But I do love the design of the product and color combination.
I have a hard time knowing what this product is, so I would need more information on the packaging itself along with a solid description, like an Amazon listing.
I do like the design. It's clean and simple. You don't need the product design to be too descriptive since the web page will display product info
The only thing that I think is missing here is a photo of what the end product is. Outside of that I think this is very well done. Most of the time for me I think less is actually more.
Much too simple. You should aim to give some insights as to the benefits of the product as well as any relevant third party reviews.
design stands out but there should be a small description describing details to attract the viewer
I think it needs a picture of what the product is. It took me too long to figure out that it was blueberry flavored candy! The name Papa's Puffs made me think it's a healthier version of Cheetos instead of candy.
It's a great minimalist design. As long as there's an accompanying description, it's not too simple at all.
it is a very basic design, I would add something else, like maybe an illustration of the candy
I believe simple is more, because sometimes it grabs the attention of the consumer easier. Simple is more.
What is it? The online description would help but at first glance it's not interesting!
No, the design is not too simple. I think it looks very clean cut. I rather have simple designs than writing all over the place.
I love the product. It looks so simple and slick. It's definitely an attractive product in my eyes.
I generally like simple and straightforward packaging labels but this one could benefit by indicating that it’s candy in larger lettering because Papa’s Puffs doesn’t make me think of candy and reminds me more of cheese puffs.
Subscribe to PickFu+ to unlock AI highlights on every poll.
Or, unlock AI features for this poll as a one-time $29 add-on.
AI analysis (sample data)
Unearth more insights with a detailed poll report, discovering what respondents liked, disliked, and what to do next.Aesthetic Appeal: Across both options, aesthetics were crucial in influencing preferences. Participants often referred to colors and overall design quality when justifying their choices.
Environmental Concerns: Both options had respondents who valued environmentally friendly aspects of packaging. However, while Option A was praised for being reusable and eco-friendly by some, others perceived Option B’s reduced plastic use as more sustainable.
Practicality: Practical elements such as ease of stacking (Option B) or suitability for travel (Option B) were significant factors in decision-making processes.
Investigate whether minimalistic designs consistently outperform colorful ones across different demographic groups or product categories.
Explore if environmental messaging on packaging significantly influences consumer preference when compared with other attributes like luxury perception or practicality.
Assess how important stacking capability is relative to other functional benefits in various contexts such as home storage versus travel convenience.
These hypotheses can guide further research into understanding deeper consumer motivations behind packaging preferences observed in this survey context.
AI themes (sample data)
Learn what respondents like and dislike about your poll based on sentiments analyzed by our AI.Likes (sample data)
Dislikes (sample data)
Likes (sample data)
Dislikes (sample data)
Likes (sample data)
Dislikes (sample data)
Likes (sample data)
Dislikes (sample data)
Likes (sample data)
Dislikes (sample data)
Likes (sample data)
Dislikes (sample data)
Likes (sample data)
Dislikes (sample data)
Likes (sample data)
Dislikes (sample data)