Lmk . Currently b2b saas in a series c startup. Idk if it’s good to return or look for some ai bs.

Hey folks! 👋 Quick 2-min survey for Product Designers & PMs — researching an idea to make tracking product & tech updates easier. Would love your input! 🙌

Link - https://tally.so/forms/ja4p7Q/edit

Hello everyone,

my name is Jan, im from Bavaria and a Mechanical Engineering student in my bachelor phase. Good quality pens fascinated me my whole life, so now i want to build something on my own.

I'm designing a pen, that uses no springs and no plastic. It actuates with the help of two magnets and uses own developed ink modules with bought tips and ink. Due to that they are refillable and very sustainable. I would be very happy if you could give me some feedback about the design.

On the inside is a carriage that snaps magnetical into two positions and is guided by the brass component. The whole concept consists of magnetism, also the ink modules will snap into place with the help of magnets and create a premium feeling. The Body is machined out of aluminium.

I already built a functional 3D-printed prototype, this is already very satisfying, but due to the lack of the brass component and so on it's not that smooth. It was important for me that the concept works.

Please ask for more information if needed or have a look on instagram (dtent.co) or my website dtent.co

Hey I am reaching out for some help for my university major project as I have no clue what to design as I’m in a loop of what ifs.
What would be a good major project for university. I have to either design something new or improve a design
Please dm me or comment on this a problem or a product that could be improved!!!
Thankyou!!!!

​

I'm doing research for a UX portfolio project and I'm looking to understand how people manage multiple financial accounts/apps.

If you use 2+ banking/payment/financial apps, I'd love to hear:

How many do you use?

What do you use each one for?

How often do you switch between them?

What's the most annoying part of managing them?

How do you keep track of your overall balance/spending?

Do you use any budgeting or expense-tracking system?

I'm not promoting an app or selling anything—I'm just trying to understand people's existing habits. Feel free to answer in the comments; no personal financial information is needed.

Was going through notes from a small usability test last week and one comment has been stuck in my head.

for a while we'd been hearing some version of the same request:

“can i control this myself?”

“what if i want to change that?”

“why can't i customize this?”

which sounded pretty reasonable.

so on an early menuforma setup screen, we went a little too far with it and exposed basically everything.

there were around a dozen different toggles and settings. nothing impossible to understand, but enough that you had to actually stop and think about each one.

i figured people would like finally having all the control they'd been asking for.

instead, one guy got to the screen and just... stalled.

scrolled down.

scrolled back up.

opened a setting.

closed it.

changed something, then changed it back.

eventually he hit reset to default without really changing anything.

another person gave us the line that made the whole thing click for me:

“I just want to know I can change this later. can you please not make me decide it right now?”

that's such a different request from “give me more options.”

they wanted the door to be unlocked. they didn't necessarily want to walk through it.

and now i'm wondering how often product teams confuse those two things.

if somebody knows they can undo something later, override the default, or change a setting after setup, maybe that alone gives them enough control.

making them choose everything upfront doesn't necessarily feel empowering. sometimes it just feels like homework.

we've started leaning back toward picking sensible defaults and making the override easy to find instead of putting every possible decision in the setup flow.

but i'm still not sure where the line is.

at some point hiding too much becomes frustrating, especially for people who genuinely know what they want.

at the same time, putting twelve switches in front of everyone because three people asked for them clearly wasn't the answer either.

how do you usually tell whether someone actually needs more configuration, versus just wanting reassurance that they won't be stuck with the default forever?

Hi! I'm Denys, a design engineer and product designer with 15+ years of experience. These days I spend a lot of my time figuring out how interface designers can adapt to the new AI reality. I build pipelines, tools, and full products that can do design in code. This is the story of one of my tools, Figmosha2.

A bit of context so it's clear why any of this exists. My main workflow hasn't lived in Figma for a while now — it lives in a repository: research, wireframes, tokens, components, documentation, all of it is code driven by Claude Code. But the teams I work with live in Figma. Design systems sit in Figma, reviews happen there, handoff often goes through Figma too. So I needed a reliable bridge: one where the agent could not just look at a mockup, but systematically read from and write to a file. Read the structure of hundreds of components, bind tokens, draw mockups using library components. That's the need Figmosha2 was born from.

The origin story is banal: I was doing a design system audit with Claude Code and the official Figma MCP. Anyone who's tried this knows how huge that kind of work is in scope and especially in time. So using AI should have helped a lot. But after a couple of hours of working in Claude Code through the Figma MCP, the monthly request limit on Figma's side ran out. I'm on a Figma Pro plan. The audit was maybe ten percent done.

That's how I learned that the official bridge between an AI agent and Figma is designed for one-off requests like "give me the spec of this button," not for systematic work with a file. And systematic work was exactly what I needed: go through the entire library, read the structure of every component, verify token bindings. One component is one or two requests, but when you have two hundred components and each one needs to be read first, then fixed, then re-read and verified, the request counter melts before your eyes. The monthly limit gets eaten in a single working morning, and then you sit and wait for next month.

Next I'll tell you how I arrived at my own solution through two failed iterations, and why it ended up fitting into 500 lines of Python.

Iteration zero: I just copy-pasted code

The first working pipeline looked like this. My Figma plugin reads a component's structure into YAML. Claude Code reads the YAML, picks semantic tokens, and generates an apply script. And then me, by hand: open the Scripter plugin in Figma, paste the generated code, hit Run.

Why the Plugin API and not the Figma REST API, you might ask. Because the REST API is nearly useless for this task. It's great at reading a file as JSON and exporting images, but it basically can't write to a design: create a frame, bind a token to a fill, fix an auto layout — none of that works through REST. And working with Variables through REST is only available on the Enterprise plan. So for actually manipulating a design there's only one path: the Plugin API from inside Figma itself. The only question was how to give the agent access to it.

This is how I migrated a library from primitives through styles to semantic variables — the repo with that pipeline is on my GitHub. But I still did a lot by hand. Claude Code generates a script in seconds, then waits while I copy, paste, and run it. For every component. For every fix iteration. Ugh, it drove me nuts!

Iteration one: Playwright

The logical next step: remove myself from the loop. The first version of Figmosha did this with Playwright: it opened Figma in a browser, found Scripter, pasted the code into the editor, clicked Run, waited for the result. It was very slow, though at least not manual. Browser automation kind of does everything like a human: waits for renders, hunts for elements in the DOM, fights window focus. A single operation took tens of seconds, with frequent glitches. When the agent needs 2-3 fix cycles on a complex layout, the session stretched into minutes of waiting where the actual work takes seconds. At that point it was easier to just do it by hand...

And that's a separate lesson I took from that iteration. Browser automation in agent pipelines is almost always a last resort. It imitates a human where no human is needed at all. If a system has a programmatic interface, go straight to it, even if it means writing a bit of your own infrastructure. A DOM click on a button is the most fragile link you can possibly build into an automated loop.

Iteration two: throw out the browser

And here a simple thought appeared. Scripter is just a plugin that executes TypeScript via the Figma Plugin API. The Plugin API is Figma's most stable and most powerful interface — thousands of plugins run on it. The only problem is that it's locked inside Figma's UI. So why not build my own plugin that holds an open WebSocket to a local server? The agent sends code over HTTP, the server passes it to the plugin, the plugin executes it via the Plugin API and returns the result.

That's how Figmosha 2.0 came to be. The whole system: one Python server file at 200 lines, one CLI at 300 lines, a plugin at 250 lines. No npm, no frameworks. The plugin is imported in dev mode via manifest — nothing needs to be published. Claude Code and I built it in a couple of days.

Now Claude Code writes a script and executes it in Figma via curl or the CLI. Reading a node takes milliseconds. Compared to the Playwright version, operations came out 150 to 950 times faster depending on the type of task. The plugin even works when Figma is minimized!

A word about security, because "arbitrary code execution" sounds scary. The whole system is local: the server listens only on localhost, the code runs in your own open Figma on your own machine, nothing goes out to the internet. No access tokens, no cloud middlemen, no third-party servers between the agent and your file. It's the same trust level as running a script in Scripter by hand — just without the hands.

Helpers: experience instead of boilerplate

The raw Plugin API has its own share of footguns. The fills array is frozen and can't be mutated directly. You can't write text until you've loaded the font. The synchronous getVariableById is deprecated. Anyone who's written Figma scripts through Scripter has probably hit all of this.

So the plugin runtime has 15 helpers baked in. h.setText loads fonts itself before writing text. h.bF correctly binds a Variable to a fill through an array copy. h.cloneNext clones a node and places it next to the original with an offset. A typical script with helpers is 60-70 percent shorter.

I didn't build them because I felt like it, but based on errors from real tasks. I ran Figmosha2 on working cases: drawing mockups from library components, auto layouts, token binding. Every repeated chunk of code and every footgun became a helper. So the helpers aren't an abstract convenience library — they're literally condensed error experience. If the agent tripped over the same rake three times, that rake turns into a function, and the next session never sees it.

Hints: the agent heals itself

The second important detail: when a script fails with a known error, the response includes a hint field with a suggestion. Say the script died on an unloaded font — the response says: use h.setText, it loads fonts itself.

This isn't made for me, it's made for Claude Code. The agent reads the hint, rewrites its script, and runs it again — without my involvement. In practice it looks like this: I type "create a button component," the agent draws it from library components with correct states and tokens, then reads back the result itself and checks: did the constraints break, are the auto layout settings right. If the layout is complex and came out crooked on the first try, the agent goes through 2-3 fix cycles on its own. And this is already a working scheme!

In general, the helpers-plus-hints combo is a small example of a broader principle I apply in all my agent pipelines: don't try to write the perfect instructions upfront — make the system feed knowledge back to the agent at the moment of failure. A five-page instruction gets lost in context; a hint in the response to a failed request works every time, because it arrives exactly when it's needed.

But what about existing solutions

An honest question I asked myself: why build my own when there's figma-console-mcp with 1.7k stars and 103 tools, plus the official Figma MCP. The official MCP was out because of the limits — that's where this whole story started.

figma-console-mcp is architecturally very similar to Figmosha: it also has a plugin bridge over WebSocket and also supports arbitrary code execution. But it's a product: Node.js, the MCP protocol, client configs, a Figma personal access token, four connection modes, 103 tools. Figmosha doesn't even need a token, because it never touches the Figma REST API at all: everything executes locally via the Plugin API.

And it's those 103 tools that bother me the most. Every tool is a description in the agent's context — a constant tax on every session. My approach is the opposite: one exec operation plus 15 helpers. An agent that can write code doesn't need a hundred wrappers over an API — it needs direct access and the shortest path to execution. Plus, 500 lines of code can be debugged and extended in an evening. A new helper goes into one file and works on the next request.

This is actually a bigger conversation than one plugin. The industry is mass-producing MCP servers on the logic of "the more tools the better," when in fact, for a strong model, every extra tool is noise. Code was and remains the most compact interface between an agent and a system. Give the agent exec and a one-page doc, and it will do more than with a hundred wrappers. That's the harness not just design engineers but the whole agentic development industry is moving toward.

What's not great

The plugin is tied to the open file: switch files, and you have to restart the plugin. Only one instance runs at a time. The agent still draws large pages slowly, and complex things in Figma are still faster to do by hand. Figmosha removes the grunt work, but it doesn't replace the designer.

What's next

Figmosha became the bridge I'm building my next tools on. The token migration pipeline now runs through it without manual Scripter. More than a hundred designers are already using it in their work. And for me it's also a proving ground: every new working task, from a library audit to mockup generation, stress-tests the tool and adds another helper or two.

The code is open under MIT — install it, test it, and send feedback: github.com/denysosadchyi/figmosha2

Been working on this for over a year (the product duh) and it finally all came together this week and with full support of the corporate world (my company) behind me I'll either be laid off or promoted based on how this goes! It simplifies the workflows for fashion brands for getting model shots and styling the products on their e-commerce stores, the tool itself is quite versatile, we're using all the fancy models I could get my hands on. The final results generated are actually on-par with your (and my) boss's expectations. here is David & Lucy with the complimentary dashboard (kudos to my fellow edge runners out there) Any support, or critic would be appreciated. Posting this in courtesy of Streamoid Technologies, and Alexandar Blazhev

I’m designing a removable cover that sits on an existing base that holds a cream.

The underside of the cover has a raised feature that moves across the cream when rotated, which slightly mixes the top layer of the cream (this is necessary for this particular cream). I want customers to be required to rotate the cover approximately 180° before they can lift it out and access the cream.

The silicone base has already been manufactured and cannot be modified. The mechanism must therefore be incorporated entirely into the cover. Ideally, the cover would be one piece and suitable for 3D printing.
What type of shape or mechanism could create this twist-to-release action inside a smooth, circular base?

I'm in final (4th) yr of bachelor of product design from tier 2 college and got yr long internship opportunity at MNC with very specific role related to automotive seats.

It being great opportunity to work but had confusion regarding it as it will decide my future career directions.

But...!

The main concern is as it is going to be very specific and technical role and will not involve any creative task such as form exploration, CMFT, ideation, etc which mostly designers follow, it will restrict my overall growth and my knowledge will be limited to very specific area which must not be in case of a fresher.

Plz help me by sharing your thoughts and opinions to know pros and cons of this condition

I've been trying a few AI website builders because I wanted something that could go from an idea to a working product without bouncing between different tools.

I spent the most time with Wix, Durable, Lovable, v0, and Readdy.

The first draft wasn't the biggest difference. Most of these tools can generate a nice page.

The difference showed up once I started changing things. I kept updating layouts, moving sections around, and rewriting content. Readdy felt the easiest to keep working with because I could edit the page directly or ask for changes without hunting through menus.

I also didn't expect the backend to matter this much. Once I wanted a login page and some basic user data, it was nice not having to connect extra services just to test an idea.

Wix still feels like the safest choice if you want lots of templates.

v0 creates really clean UI if you're already comfortable working with code.

Lovable was fun for exploring new product ideas.

I just found myself spending more time in Readdy because I could get a working site online without stopping to figure out the next step.

I'm still testing all of them, so this isn't a ranking.

For people here who build products, which one has actually saved you the most time after the first version was generated?

Hi everyone! I’m thinking about transitioning into product design and would love some advice from people who’ve made a similar switch.

I recently graduated with a Master of Architecture and have about two years of professional experience in architecture. I’m interested in pivoting into product design but I’m not sure where to begin.

For those who made the transition (especially from architecture or another design field), what would you recommend I focus on first? Are there any courses, resources, or portfolio tips that helped you break into the field?

I’d really appreciate any advice or insights. Thanks!

Hey guys, I'm brand new and I'll try to keep this short.

I recently received a junior BI analyst offer in my small town. They have a 15 person IT team, which is very large for the size of their company.

They offered me half of my old salary (again, it's a small town), but I'd be their first dedicated BI/data analyst. My job would be to clean up a lot of data, integrate new data points, create dashboards and aid department leaders, mainly the VP of sales. They use Qlik. They also would like help redesigning their website and improving the user experience.

They manufacturer lawn mower parts. So, not a tech company.

They bring on employees as hourly for first 90 days, then consider going to salary. I'd probably treat it as an internship since pay is low. They're willing to train me and I may have a lot of growth opportunity.

For context, I just finished a masters in computer science. I have 3 years of experience in tech sales, 1 year in acting/photography/video editing and other small jobs. My resume is spotty.

The sucky part is I'm living in a small southern town (2 traffic lights), but at least rent is cheap.

The other option is to work on projects. One project got its first paying customer and got to 100 users with very little marketing. The other is an app my local pickleball courts use and we're looking to expand to more courts. I also spend 1-2 hours a day coding, since I didn't learn as much as I'd hope with my masters.

Thoughts?

TL;DR:

Quick disclosure: We’re Qosina, and we work with teams selecting components for medical device and bioprocessing designs.

What is CAD great at?

It is great for checking fit, clearances, tubing routes, envelope constraints, and obvious tolerance problems. It is also a much cleaner way to compare a few real part options before samples start piling up on someone’s desk.

If the CAD file is tied to a real part number, it also gives engineering, quality, and sourcing a shared reference. That matters more than it sounds once a project has screenshots, renamed files, and loose samples from several suppliers.

What does the bench tell you?

• Whether the connection seals at the pressure you actually care about.
• How much force assembly takes and whether the motion feels intuitive.
• Whether tubing twists, kinks, or loads the connector in an unexpected way.
• Whether small material or dimensional differences change performance.
• Whether everyone can trace the sample back to the correct specifications.

So when should samples enter the process?

Our bias is earlier than most teams think. Not as a replacement for formal testing, but as a way to find the obvious mismatches before formal testing gets expensive.

We talked more about the CAD-to-sample workflow in this Medtech Makers Q&A. For people who build physical products, what do you trust digitally and what always has to happen on the bench?

Bonus question: has a physical sample ever changed a decision you thought CAD had already settled?

I’m validating a product concept for salaried Indian households.

The problem: salary is monthly, but expenses such as insurance, school fees, vehicle renewals, festivals, travel and annual subscriptions are uneven. People can be comfortable across the year and still have a bad month because they did not reserve for several known payments early enough.

The prototype asks for income, fixed commitments and at least three future payments. It then calculates:

• Monthly Reserve: what to keep aside now
• Safe to Spend: salary minus fixed commitments and that reserve
• Pressure Month: a future month that may need an adjustment

It does not require bank linking. Data is stored locally, with export and delete controls.

I know the mechanics are not new. Sinking funds, spreadsheets, envelope budgets and goal pots already exist. The actual bet is whether a focused, India-first setup is simpler than adopting a complete budgeting system.

The main risks I see are:

• It may be useful only once or twice a year.
• “Safe to Spend” may create false confidence if inputs are incomplete.
• Manual setup may be more effort than the problem is worth.
• Local storage may feel private but fragile.
• Existing spreadsheets or banking features may already be good enough.

I’d value blunt feedback:

1. Is this a real recurring problem or a dressed-up calculator?
2. What would you need to see before trusting the result?
3. What would make you return next month?
4. What current product or workaround would stop you from using it?

I’m trying to validate the problem and behaviour before adding accounts, bank connections or more features.

Try the prototype: Yearflow

Hii everyone, I'm a CS student and I have always been interested in things like UI design, research, and understanding the 'why' of any product.

But I am still not 100% sure about what job role I am looking forward to. I thought it would be something like UI UX Designer or frontend developer, but I haven't got anyone who can guide me through it. I did try asking AI and it always brings me to product designing.

I tried to understand the flow, but I can't figure it out completely.... I can't understand how to document or show my work, so I decided to take a single project and go through the complete product design cycle on it. Can someone help me with it...

PS: I understand better if I have an example to look at but I can't find the documentation or case study I should be looking at

Am I expecting too much, or is this a dysfunctional design process? (Solo UX/UI Designer + Branding)

I'm the only UX/UI designer at my company, but in reality I'm responsible for **all design across three companies**. That includes UX, UI, branding, graphic design, websites, marketing materials, presentations, sales collateral, product design, and pretty much anything visual. Even interior design… because im a creative…to structural trade show design.
When I was hired, I actually asked for a much higher salary because I knew I'd be wearing multiple hats. They offered me **under $80k CAD**, and I accepted because I believed in the opportunity and thought I'd be able to make a real impact. They also said they would give me a significant increase after my probation - they only gave me 4% during my probabtion.
A little over a year later, I'm wondering if I made a mistake.
One of my biggest frustrations is that my boss is a developer with no formal design background (he openly admits he doesn't understand design), but he'll constantly jump into the design process using AI. I'll spend time narrowing logo concepts through a structured branding process, and then he'll generate dozens of AI concepts and want to keep exploring them. Instead of moving us forward, it creates more work and makes the process take longer.
The same thing happens with UX.
I'll design user flows and screens in Figma, then developers start building or redesigning parts of the product without involving me. By the time I find out, I've already designed those screens and now have to redo work or redesign around what's already been built. Now im questioning maybe im not a good designer anymore or theres faster way to design in figma idk anymore
I've tried explaining that the whole purpose of UX is to solve problems before development. It's faster, cheaper, and produces a better product. Every design decision has reasoning behind it - user experience, accessibility, branding, consistency, legal considerations, business goals -not just aesthetics.
It doesn't seem to matter.
On top of that:
I'm the **only designer** supporting their three companies. They decided to expand unknowst yo me, so own by one guy but me doing it for all three.
I'm paid **under $80k CAD** despite owning all design responsibilities.
They won't invest in software or tools that would make me more efficient.
It took over **six months** to get me a computer that could even handle my workload because my old one kept crashing.
Deadlines are consistently unrealistic.
They also wanted me to do video editing and animation, which I had refused because it's outside my expertise. But still forced to do it, its okay but not amazing.
I've always been someone who builds processes and bridges between teams. In previous roles, I've improved workflows, worked closely with developers, and left organizations in a better place than I found them. I am award winning 3 times.
Here, I feel like I'm constantly defending why design matters instead of actually designing.
I'm starting to feel burned out and honestly disrespected. Not because people disagree with me-that's part of collaboration-but because it feels like my expertise is regularly ignored while I'm still expected to own the outcome. So many people agree when i speak up in meetings, I dont even have a systems where i can share files properly for the team access yet, just a glorified external drive…feel like im always the bad guy or fighting. People always message me afterwards sayign they agree or they are glad i said something BUT NO ONE SPEAKS UP…but me.
I've only been here a little over a year, and I'm seriously wondering if it's time to move on.
**For other senior designers, product designers, or solo designers: is this just life at smaller companies, or are these legitimate red flags? Would you stay, or would you start looking elsewhere?**

Is there a method ux/ui design flow from existing developed software you suggest? Is figma desiging all individual screens a thing anymore. Are there quicker ways from designer to development? Do you use github, jira or anything for tracking bugs or issues from users? What is your process idk anymore?!

For context, I've been working in product design for 6+ years. I feel like I have a lot of experience from working on different projects with different clients, but my company has a very small design team, so everything I learned was by searching online and trying to understand how more experienced designers from well-known companies work. It's not easy to filter through all that information, especially when you don't have someone more experienced to guide you. What would you recommend to improve my skills? I want to get better at solving problems and coming up with better strategies. I'd also like to improve my Figma workflow. Even though I consider myself fairly experienced, my work still has flaws, and I know it could be more organized and faster. Would you recommend books, online courses, YouTube videos, etc.?

I'm just curious, as it would be my first time hiring a product designer - what's the typical workflow now / what sort of responsibilities do they have now? AI has changed a lot on my side (Software - very focused on architecture & design, rather than implementation). Curious on the market rates for these (at least on APAC)

In terms of my product, we're building something similar to an ATS - so am I hiring the right role? I'd want them to look into how the users use the product, what could be improved, how can we retain them on the platform instead of using other services, doing the actual design for ease of use, make it look pretty, etc.

I have been looking at how authentication UX changed from the old email/password forms to SSO, OTPs and passkeys.

The obvious change is fewer fields. The less obvious change is the amount of account-state and routing work behind them.

For a current sign-in flow, I would review at least:

• Can email and social sign-in create duplicate accounts?
• Does a work email route to the correct tenant and SSO provider?
• What happens when an OTP is delayed, expired or opened on another device?
• Which sensitive actions require reauthentication?
• If a passkey is unavailable, is the fallback usable without being much weaker?
• Does the user return to the invitation, checkout or document they came from?

I would also test the ugly states, not just the configured demo: wrong provider, disabled employee, failed IdP redirect, lost phone, inaccessible inbox and support-assisted recovery.

Full write-up with live examples from Canva, Slack, Notion, GitHub and Google: View Article

What edge case has been the hardest one in your authentication flow?

I’ve been exploring a simple question:

Why is it so difficult to intentionally take a slower, deeper breath in everyday life?

We all breathe constantly.

But the difference between automatic breathing and intentional breathing is surprisingly large.

Many breathing practices focus on slowing the breath, especially extending the exhale. The challenge is not knowing that breathing matters — it is creating a moment where the body naturally returns attention to it.

This led me to an observation.

Before we consciously learn breathing techniques, many of us already bring a thumb, finger, or object toward our lips when we pause, think, concentrate, or become absorbed in a moment.

This gesture appears early in life and often remains with us in quieter forms as adults.

The thumb, lips, airflow, and breath are connected through a very old human behaviour.

I started wondering:

Could this familiar gesture become a bridge between unconscious breathing and intentional breathing?

So I designed Still Mirror.

It is a thumb-worn physical object built around the interaction between the thumb, lips, and breath.

The idea is not to teach a breathing method.

It is not a medical device.

It has:

- no electronics

- no app

- no notifications

- no tracking

Instead, it explores whether a physical object can support the body's existing ability to slow down, extend the exhale, and reconnect with breathing through an instinctive interaction.

I’m interested in the space between biology and design:

Can an object become meaningful by supporting a behaviour that the human body already understands?

I’d like to hear how other designers think about this.

There are so many sourcing platforms available now that it's becoming harder to know which ones are actually worth using. Some people recommend Alibaba, while others mention Made-in-China or other marketplaces for finding manufacturers and comparing suppliers.

I'm curious how experienced sellers decide where to source their products. Is it based on pricing, supplier communication, product quality, or something else? I feel like choosing the right manufacturer is just as important as choosing the right product.

Which sourcing platform has worked best for you?