The Stationers Guild

Google Trends data suggests that searches for “birth announcements” and “baby announcements” are currently less than one third the level they were at the end of 2003.  Even I found this data surprising and, quite frankly, was at a loss to explain it and decided to do a little reasearch. 

I discovered that US births recorded in 2007 were at the highest level since the boom years of the late 1950s.   Of the record births recorded in 2007, over 40% were to unwed mothers.  Presumably, the demand for birth announcements is probably not strong among unwed mothers, but I have no empirical or annecdotal evidence to back up that assertion. 

One area that did intrigue me was the astronomical increase in cesearean deliveries over the last 30 years in the United States.  Well over a quarter of all deliveries are C-sections and recent studies suggest that it may now exceed 30%, with Westchester County (NY) leading the way with 46%.  During the 1970s less than 5% of babies were delivered by C-section.  Presumably, one might argue that this is a safer procedure for both mother and child; however, the World Health Organization argues that C-section delivery rates above 15% are not recommended.   Also, the United States has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the developed world despite that fact that well over 99% of deliveries occur in hospitals.    My research and a “heads-up” tip by close friends led me to an intriguing documentary entitled The Business of Being Born.  A video clip is shown below:

Most babies born in the U.S. are induced through a series of medication cocktails that one can only speculate if they are necessary and what harm they may cause to both mother and child.    As the documentary suggests, deliveries seem to be programmed to fit the schedules of either the doctor or the mother (or both) rather occuring naturally.  In fact, some hospitals offer a tummy-tuck after the C-section delivery of the “designer” baby.

These alarming statistics suggest that “giving birth” today in the United States is either a poorly planned outcome (unwedded mother) or simply a biological impediment that will cause you to take a few days off from your Yoga or tennis class.    In other word, giving birth ain’t that important anymore, so why send out birth announcements?

I would welcome a less alarming analysis, but surely these trends (the birthing trends, not birth announcement trends) do not augur well for our society. 

Richard W. May
Therese Saint Clair

The first quarter of 2010 will determine wedding invitation trends for the year.   In fact, I suspect that wedding invitation designs have pretty much been defined long before the “Will you marry me?” question was asked this holiday season.  I have it on very good authority that this is so:  Google.

Google Trends tracks the number of web daily searches for a particular term (in this case “wedding invitations”) over the course of a year.  As the chart above demonstrates, searches for “wedding invitations” peak toward the end of the year and early January and then begin to tail-off rather significantly after the first quarter.  The chart above also compares the search term “online wedding invitations” (shown in red) to “wedding invitations” (shown in blue).   As suggested by the chart, prospective bridal couples do not feel the need to distinguish between wedding invitations sold online and those that are offered exclusively through storefront stationers.

The New York Times (December 29, 2009) reports that bridal magazine ad pages are down significantly in December, 2009.   Quoting sources the Nielsen Company and Mediaweek, bridal magazine ads for December, 2009 were down 8.4% in Brides magazine, 25.5% in Bridal Guide and 23.9% in Martha Stewart Weddings.   While ad pages are booked far in advance and certainly reflect the rather depressed economy, the battlefield for wedding invitations has shifted to the Internet and the public is indeed poorer as a result.    As I have written on numerous occasions, low image resolutions, limited customization options and the inability of the online client to compare different papers and printing processes greatly diminishes a company’s ability to distinguish their brand.

It is interesting to note, that of the top 10 companies listed on the first page of Google for the search term “wedding invitations,” only one is a credible printing company:  Crane & Co.  Not surprisingly, Wedding Paper Divas, remains in the top position.    It does so because it has the most aggressive and intelligent application of paid search and Search Engine Optimization (SEO) strategies of any company in the business.   In a revealing New York Times article, Tiny Prints (a sister company of Wedding Paper Divas), describes how it competes for holiday greeting cards and photo cards by paying up to $50 to acquire a client.   I would suspect that they will pay that and possibly more to acquire a client willing to purchase a wedding invitation online.

While Wedding Paper Divas has certainly upgraded its line in recent years with companies such as William Arthur merchandizing their line through them, one wonders whether this business model is sustainable.    In fact, William Arthur now sells directly online and other companies such as Minted offer a wider range of quality invitations from craftspeople who do not generally market their equisite designs online.

For those seeking quality wedding invitations coupled with superior customer service, I strongly recommend that you visit a stationer in your neighborhood.    Most of these stores carry a far wider range of wedding invitation samples than any online dealer.  Customization options are limitless and you can actually feel the paper samples and see how ink colors change depending on the printing process.  In 2010, do yourself a favor and see why choosing your invitation in person makes all the difference in the world.