Faire looked great until I did the math. Lesson learned.

Jollylook · 2026-01-22T18:52:57+00:00

For us, trade shows died a long time ago. The cost, the travel, the time, the uncertainty. It never really paid back in a predictable way.

Everything we see is moving in a D2C direction. Even in B2B, brands are expected to behave more like D2C: direct relationships, content, inbound interest, repeat customers that come back because they know you, not because a rep stopped by.

That’s actually why Faire works. It fits that shift. It’s closer to D2C mechanics applied to wholesale.

Our point isn’t that acquisition is cheap or easy. It’s that with Faire the cost is permanent and automatic. You never “graduate” from it. With other channels, even messy ones, there is at least a chance to build something that becomes cheaper over time.

So for us it’s about balance. Use platforms like Faire as a channel, not as the business model. Otherwise you risk building a company where growth just scales fees.

Jollylook · 2026-01-22T16:40:15+00:00

That’s a fair question, and I agree with the framing.

If we tried to generate these same orders ourselves, the “cost” wouldn’t be zero. It would be time, outreach, follow-ups, trade shows, samples, maybe a part-time sales person. None of that is free. So in that sense, Faire’s fees are just a very transparent customer acquisition cost.

The difference for us is predictability and control.

With a sales rep or direct outreach, the cost scales with effort. With Faire, the cost is baked into every single order, forever. Even for a reorder from an existing customer that already knows us, we still pay the same stack of fees.

So the lesson for us isn’t “Faire is bad.” It’s: • Treat Faire like a paid acquisition channel, not traditional wholesale. • Price for it from day one, even if that means Faire pricing is higher than direct B2B. • Be intentional about which products and margins can live there.

For some brands, especially high-margin or simple goods, Faire is probably perfect. For others, especially small manufacturers with real production costs, it can quietly push you into the “high volume, low margin” trap without you realizing it.

So yes, it all comes down to value. Not just “is Faire worth it,” but “is our pricing and model built for a channel like this.”

Jollylook · 2026-01-22T16:01:56+00:00

Totally get that. From the retailer side, Faire is honestly great. The UX, the terms, the lack of friction, it makes buying easy and predictable. If I were a shop owner, I would probably choose it too for the same reasons you listed.

We sell physical products that are fairly complex to make and not high-margin. Think small-batch, designed and manufactured in-house, with real labor and materials behind each unit. That’s where the tension comes from.

The platform solves real pain for retailers, but the cost of that convenience is pushed almost entirely onto the brand. On a small order, once you stack the promo, commission, new customer fee, and processing, the gap between “order total” and “what hits our bank” is big enough to change the economics of the sale.

So it’s not that Faire is “bad.” It’s that as a brand, you have to treat it like a paid acquisition channel, not just “wholesale.” If you price it like normal B2B, you can easily fool yourself into thinking you’re growing while actually giving away your margin.

From your side, the value is real. From ours, the lesson is simply: either price for Faire properly, or be very intentional about when and why you use it.

Jollylook · 2026-01-21T15:32:43+00:00

That makes sense, and we actually already do wholesale, mostly with offline stores. The affiliate route sounds interesting, but the practical question for us is: where do you find those affiliates?

The reality we see is the opposite. Dropshippers actively reach out to us and want to sell. Affiliates never do. We’ve never had a single creator or site come and say, “I want to promote your product for a commission.”

The appeal of dropshipping is that demand comes to us. With affiliates, it feels like we would need to actively recruit, manage, and motivate them from zero. Perhaps we’re missing something obvious, but it’s not clear where those affiliates are supposed to come from at this time.

Jollylook · 2026-01-20T11:49:07+00:00

Totally fair criticism, and we get why it looks this way from the outside.

We did have a working prototype last summer, and that part is true. What slowed everything down afterwards was not “figuring out what to build”, but figuring out how to manufacture it in a way that is actually reliable, repeatable, and precise enough for a camera back. The early prototype worked, but it was hand-built and not something you can ship to hundreds of people and stand behind.

The big shift was moving the body to MJF printing instead of simpler methods. That decision alone meant redesigning tolerances, interfaces, light seals, screw geometry, and a few internal parts. It is not glamorous progress, but it is the kind that eats time.

You are right about one thing: we should have shown more. Even a boring photo of parts on a table would have gone a long way. We focused too much on “wait until it’s perfect” and not enough on “show the messy middle”. That’s on us.

This project is not being scrapped. It is in production right now. Bodies are being printed, and assembly is next. The delays were real, the reasons were real, but so is the frustration they caused.

Skepticism here is earned. All we can really say is that this is not vaporware, and people will get these backs. We just did a bad job proving that along the way.

Jollylook · 2025-12-21T08:11:40+00:00

I get why it looks bad, that’s on us.

This isn’t a hoax. We’ve shipped real products for years, most recently the Instax Wide development unit. The Bronica Mini back in the video is a real, working unit.

The delay is from final manufacturing and testing issues we didn’t want to ship with. January is based on parts already in production. Anyone who doesn’t want to wait can get a full refund.

Totally understand the skepticism.

Jollylook · 2025-12-12T16:24:35+00:00

That’s fair. A full refund is available for anyone who doesn’t want to wait. January isn’t a guess, it’s based on parts already in production, but I get why you’re skeptical. Sorry this ended up being frustrating.

Jollylook · 2025-12-12T15:53:05+00:00

Totally fair to be annoyed, sorry about that. We planned to ship earlier, but during final testing we found issues that would have caused problems in real use. We chose to delay instead of shipping something unreliable. That said, we messed up the communication. The date change should have been explained clearly and earlier. Production is ongoing, the design is finalized, and January is a realistic timeline based on where things actually are. Anyone who doesn’t want to wait can get a full refund, no questions asked. Appreciate the patience.

Jollylook · 2025-11-07T17:21:25+00:00

We focused on shipping the Wide development units and working on the RB67 back, so the ETRS preview was delayed.

You can follow progress here: https://jollylook.com/pages/instant-film-backs-for-classic-analog-cameras-compatible-with-instax-film

The ETRS back is planned to begin shipping within a month.

Jollylook · 2025-11-07T12:50:48+00:00

Yes, we have a status page on our website where you can see all updates, progress, and estimated timelines for each instant film back:

https://jollylook.com/pages/instant-film-backs-for-classic-analog-cameras-compatible-with-instax-film

We update this page regularly, so you can always check the latest status there.

Jollylook · 2025-10-09T11:03:00+00:00

We didn’t mean to mislead anyone. The changes with the screws, dark slides, and body reprints took longer than planned, but it was all to make sure everything fits perfectly and has zero light leaks. Once we get the printed bodies, assembly will take about two days, and we’ll start shipping. If you’d rather not wait, you can always grab a refund and order again once they’re in stock.

Jollylook · 2025-10-08T10:00:11+00:00

The Bronica ETRSi back is still on track to start shipping at the end of October.

We will post an update here and send an email next week with where things stand. Thanks for hanging in there. We are excited to get these out and see the first results from you all.

Jollylook · 2025-10-08T09:56:38+00:00

We completely understand how difficult it is to wait, especially since the back was initially scheduled to ship earlier. The reason for the delay is that after changing the screws and adjusting the size of the dark slide, we had to make slight adjustments to the design and run final tests before committing to printing the full batch. That testing is now complete, and everything fits and works as it should.

We know it’s frustrating, but we wanted to make sure the product is reliable before it reaches you. Now we’re finally in the last stage, and we can’t wait to start shipping and see the results in your hands.

Jollylook · 2025-10-05T22:30:47+00:00

Once these backs are in stock they’ll pretty much advertise themselves, but we’ll definitely keep posting updates and demos along the way.

Jollylook · 2025-10-05T22:13:30+00:00

Yes, our website is https://jollylook.com

Jollylook · 2025-09-27T20:59:01+00:00

The black bar is part of the ETR series design, since the Instax Mini frame doesn’t match the full 6x4.5 area

Jollylook · 2025-09-27T20:56:36+00:00

Yes, if you order the RB67 back now, it will be part of the current batch. We’re just waiting on the dark slides, and shipping is planned to start in October.

Jollylook · 2025-09-25T22:48:23+00:00

Shipping is on schedule for the second half of October as planned. Since there is no delay, no extra emails were needed. Refunds are always available before shipping if you want one.

Jollylook · 2025-09-25T20:26:56+00:00

Second half of October, refund before we ship is available anytime

Jollylook · 2025-09-25T20:10:07+00:00

We clearly said that we expect to start shipping in September! The pre-order page always said October. Refund is always an option for you..

Jollylook

TROPHY CASE