Packaging is a much-neglected area of marketing communications, yet, packages carry important functional and emotional properties. Indeed, packaging has often been referred to as ‘the silent salesman’ or ‘the part of clothing a product wears’. From the MarCom perspective, a package needs to be attractive and recognizable; the material has to fulfil the required needs to protect and often also hold the product and keep it fresh, as is the case in frozen products, for instance, but it can also affect consumers’ willingness to buy the product. The use of non-biodegradable packaging materials has raised concern over landfill disposal and recycling availability, particularly among the younger consumers (Copley, 2014). This study investigates consumer preferences for food packaging, recognizing its strategic role in capturing attention, creating positive associations, and shaping expectations, ultimately influencing product selection. The investigation entailed a comparative analysis of two packaging alternatives of a perishable food item crafted from potato and shaped into doughnuts, sold frozen but designed to be served hot. The product was derived from vegetables that would typically be discarded due to aesthetic imperfections or surplus production. The product has a shelf life of 12 months and necessitates shielding from oxygen, moisture, and lipid contamination. The packaging design alternatives were developed ensuring the product’s protection during the physical distribution and warehousing phases. The initial design comprised a transparent, self-supporting pouch fabricated from polypropylene (PP) with an inherent resistance to freezing temperatures. This pouch could be sealed using either a metallic or plastic fastener. Transparency has emerged as a preferred choice within the food and beverage sector, spanning an array of product categories. This aligns with consumer expectations favoring visual transparency, allowing them to evaluate the content before purchase (Sabo et al., 2017; Simmonds & Spence, 2016; Simmonds et al., 2018). This effect persists even when identical products are presented in both transparent and opaque formats, with the transparent option consistently eliciting stronger purchase intentions and a higher likelihood of selection (Billeter et al., 2012; Chandran et al., 2009; Simmonds & Spence, 2016). Conversely, the second design proposed a similar self-standing pouch, which was enveloped in a white print that rendered it opaque. The objective of this printed layer was to augment the package’s protective barrier against ultraviolet (UV) radiation and to bestow upon it an aesthetic reminiscent of paper as recent trends in consumer behavior signal an ecological pivot. Surveys indicate that in the UK and USA, eco-friendly packaging solutions and the avoidance of plastic are deemed paramount in the pursuit of sustainable consumption. Particularly representatives of Generation Z, defined as individuals born between 1996 and 2011, have been recognized for their commitment to sustainability (Le et al., 2022; Statista, 2021, 2023c). Despite the environmental challenges, the advantages of plastic packaging materials are undeniable: They are cost-effective and lightweight, offering a diverse range of physical and optical properties (Marsh & Bugusu, 2007). Having said this, the purpose of the article at hand is to investigate what kind of packages (opaque or transparent) young consumers prefer.