02 Walkthrough · 7 scenes · about 6 minutes

One customer question, followed through the work this role owns.

Your progress 0%Scene 1 of 7

Scene 01 of 07

Who I am, and why I made this

The point

Independent work, prepared from public pages, by someone who has run the seam between a website and a store.

I'm Mousa Batarseh, a webmaster and e-commerce specialist in Warren, Michigan. Six years of storefronts and the catalogs behind them: site architecture, a migration of more than 14,000 items, promotional calendars, and the QA that stops a bad price reaching a shelf.

Two pieces of my own work sit underneath this one. The Deals Operating System puts a promotion through sixteen checks before it reaches a menu. A set of independent cannabis reviews did the same for Michigan operators — reconciling menus, store records and pages, and tracing a promotion from a hero banner to a landing page to a cart rule.

Puff Cannabis did not ask for this, has not seen it, and does not endorse it. It changes nothing on any live system.

TakeawayThis is a demonstration of judgement on a real question — not a redesign, and not a claim of results.

Scene 02 of 07

What I saw on Puff's public site

The point

The storefront is genuinely good. The catalog is store-scoped, priced and structured. The deals are the merchandising strategy.

A native, first-party storefront on the company's own domain — WordPress with a purpose-built commerce layer, not a third-party embed. Product pages are scoped to a store in their own URL, and their structured data carries brand, size, price and availability. Roughly 29,000 store-scoped product URLs, with an inventory stamp from the day before I looked.

Around that sits real taxonomy: eight categories with sub-categories, a brand directory, ten consumer-facing effect labels, strain pages, a loyalty programme, and a public FAQ that already states Michigan's purchase limits in the regulator's own phrasing.

And the home page leads with deals — eighteen deal cards on the day I looked. That is the traffic strategy, and it is a sensible one.

The evidence behind this scene

Platform stackretrieved 2026-09-28
https://www.shoppuff.com/wp-json/joint-api/v1
WordPress 7.1.2 with Elementor 4.2.4 (generator meta), and a public `joint-api/v1` REST namespace. This is a native first-party storefront on the dispensary's own domain — the product grid is not a third-party embed.
Cannot support: Which inventory source feeds it, or when a given product last synced. Only the existence and shape of the namespace was read.
One product page, store-scopedretrieved 2026-09-28
https://www.shoppuff.com/products/mitten-extracts-disposable-2-in-1-flip-strawberry-gelato-mango-tango-for-sale-monroe-mi/
This is the finding that shapes the whole case study. The page is scoped to one store in its URL, and its schema.org Product markup carries brand (Mitten Extracts), size ("2g"), price ("25.00" USD) and availability (InStock), with an image served from the ordering platform. **Price and stock are published per store, per product.**
Cannot support: One page. It says nothing about how many products carry complete markup, how often the price moves, or what any other store shows.
Product sitemapsretrieved 2026-09-28
https://www.shoppuff.com/sitemap_index.xml
29 product sitemaps at 1,000 URLs each — roughly 29,000 store-scoped product URLs — plus separate recreational, medical, delivery and stores sitemaps. The product sitemaps carried a last-modified stamp of 2026-09-27, the day before this retrieval, consistent with a daily inventory sync.
Cannot support: It does not say which of those URLs are unique products versus the same product repeated per store.
Category page (Flower)retrieved 2026-09-28
https://www.shoppuff.com/categories/flower/
A working sub-category taxonomy — Bulk Flower, Infused Bud, Infused Buds, Pre Ground, Premium, Shake Trim, Small Buds, Whole Flower — plus long-form category copy.
Cannot support: The page holds no product records and no prices of its own.

TakeawayCredit first: this is not a company that has neglected its e-commerce.

Scene 03 of 07

The gap is a join, not a rebuild

The point

The promotion layer and the product layer are both populated. Nothing connects them.

A deal card carries a title and a terms sentence. It does not carry the products it covers, the stores that honour it, or a date. The category filter on the specials index has no location equivalent, and the same offer set is curated twice — twelve cards on the index, eighteen on the home page, sharing two.

The company already knows the consequence. Its own deal page publishes: “*Website cart may not reflect the bundled price but it will be adjusted at time of payment.” That sentence is the whole case study in one line — the discrepancy is real enough to warn about, and the fix is upstream of the cart.

So the question I followed is not "how do we make this look better". It is: why can a customer not get, from the site, the three things the site already knows — which products, which store, what price?

The evidence behind this scene

Specials indexretrieved 2026-09-28
https://www.shoppuff.com/specials/
12 deal cards with titles, exclusion sentences and slugs. Category filter chips: Flower, Vapes, Pre-Rolls, Edibles, Concentrates, All Items, Clearance.
Cannot support: There is no location filter on this page, no dates, and no list of which products a deal applies to.
One deal page: 2/$25 Disposablesretrieved 2026-09-28
https://www.shoppuff.com/specials/2-25-disposables/
The company publishes, verbatim: "*Website cart may not reflect the bundled price but it will be adjusted at time of payment." The page also carries a title and an exclusion sentence and nothing else.
Cannot support: It cannot say how often that adjustment is needed, at which stores, or what it costs the business.
Home-page deal card setretrieved 2026-09-28
https://www.shoppuff.com/
A single retrieval compared the home page's deal cards with the specials index. 18 cards were present on the home page; 12 on the index; the two sets shared 2 titles. Four home-page cards carried a store prefix ("BC |", "Puff |").
Cannot support: One retrieval on one day is not a rotation study. Both surfaces may rotate, so this is a snapshot of drift, not a rate.

TakeawayThe expensive half is already built. The missing half is a set of fields.

Where the numbers in these scenes come from

Deal cards observed

30

across two public surfaces

Unique offers

28

2 appear on both surfaces

Offers with a date

0

none publish a validity window

Blocking failures

2

of 28 offers assessed

Counted from the records in this case study, read off public pages on 2026-09-28. They describe the sample, not Puff's business.