PackageRepublic.com: Passion for Packaging Innovation

360 paper bottle concept, and its meaning

The 360 Paper Bottle is one of the more refined pulp based concepts that we have seen. Concepts like the 360 Paper Bottle certainly have sex-appeal, driven by their strong environmental image.

Here at PackageRepublic.com, we wanted take the 360 bottle, and using it as a proxy to evaluate the uphill battle these concepts will face in the future. For this assessment, we engaged our unique assessment toolchest.

Package Functionality

Package functionality is usually one of the toughest areas to succeed in especially with materials like paper. The underlying reason is that drink packages require specific functionality, like reduced oxygen transmission, aseptic tightness, light barrier properties, and so on. A package made from paper pulp naturally does not have the right properties to provide these capabilities on its own unless it is reinforced with other materials, such as plastic barriers, at the expense of recyclability.

Additionally, lack of re-sealability or re-closability forces this package to be used as either a one-shot, or as an on-the-go drink package. Re-closability, and re-sealability are simply not possible with this concept due to its opening design. Once the package is opened, assuming that a tool is not necessary for that, the fact that the user ends with a piece of the package to be discarded, is also a bit of a disadvantage.

We are not particularly concerned about the poor pourability we’d expect from this package, as it has to be positioned as an on-the-go, or one-shot. However, regarding lip contact, we do see issues rising from consumers not wanting to place lips on unprotected surfaces. It is, however, suitable for straw use.

Additional factors to consider are transportability, and distribution efficiency. In the area of transportability, with the clever built-in handle, the concept displays consumer value added, reinforcing its on-the-go image. From a distribution efficiency point-of-view, the design appears less efficient than run-of-the-mill PET bottles, which goes counter to its environmentally friendly image. We do like its clean 6 pack approach.

Barrier Star
Opening/Closing Star
Pouring Star
Lip contact Star
Transportability Star
Distribution efficiency Star

Environmental

We do believe that the raison d’être for this package is its environmental image. Naturally (pun intended), it succeeds rather well here, not only with strong visual cues for strong recyclability and renewability, but also with other sensory appeal features like a nice natural rough surface.

The monumental issue here is, while the environmental issues and preferences are typically overstated by consumers as top-two box selections in quantitative studies, they do not typically turn into drivers in POP decisions. This appears to be especially true with low involvement products. With this concept already lacking in functionality, the question is whether this package concept can succeed at POP.

Recyclability Star
Renewability Star

Usability

We have our own measurement tests and metrics for package usability, based on ISO definitions. However, these tests require a number of packages to be consumer tested. Lacking physical packages, and leveraging our panel, our efficiency, effectiveness, and attractiveness (including satisfaction) scores are estimated as follows:

Efficiency Star
Effectiveness Star
Attractiveness Star

The lower efficiency score is due to time consuming opening that we think this concept will have. The lower effectiveness figure is due to not having a clean surface to drink or pour from, which we think will result in spills and other errors. We rated the environmental footprint of the attractiveness score highly, since we do believe that environmental factors have high consumer appeal, even if they do not turn into POP decisions.

Sensory Appeal

As stated above, we do believe that this package has strong sensory appeal features. However, we also do believe that there is a limited amount of branding that can be done with this package.

Finish Star
Tactillity Star
Branding Star

Conclusion

Looking at any product simplistically, there are only three paths a product can take, sometimes, a combination of more than one. The product is either cheaper, better, or just different. Being just different may allow branding elements to play. We do believe that this concept can potentially be made cheaper, and with an environmentally positive branding impact.

Cheaper
Better
Just Different
Overall score Star

Your rating:

[starratingmulti id=3 tpl=12]

Please head over to thedieline.com or to the core77.com for more information regarding this concept.

©2010 PackageRepublic.com. All Rights Reserved.