Smaller Packaging?

[MetroNome]

There is an interesting article in today's WSJ, explaining a trend in US consumer habits. As a result of the recession, many consumers, myself included, are learning to become more efficient, and cut back on waste and spending. Instead of stocking up and not using goods, consumers are increasingly implementing a "just in time" mentality..using up what they need and only replenishing when depleted and needed.
Of course this in mostly towards food and clothes. Wondering if shavers out there would prefer smaller, cheaper packaging of high end creams/soaps. I personally think it would increase sales, but would like to open the discussion up for debate...

Metronome
Armchair Behavioral Economist......

 

[takeshi]

I'm not sure how it would affect the soap that I buy. The packaging is just big enough for the puck. The puck would have to be smaller to decrease the size of the packaging.

 

[MetroNome]

Maybe a thinner puck?..seems like a good number out there have multiple soaps/creams in their rotations....so speeding through them quickly is not a concern. Instead of lasting years, the puck would be cheaper and last half the time.

 

[PozzSka]

the creams in tubes and some in tubs could be packaged more inexpensively...think cake frosting tube for decorating.

soaps in bowls can't really change much, they could put it in a cheaper bowl I guess...soap refill pucks are frequently only wrapped in plastic, can't get much cheaper than that.

 

[Darth Indiana]

aside from the high-end products that come in wood or metal bowls(which themselves are nice to hold onto for other stuff) i'm not sure how our stuff could be packaged cheaper. i know some creams come in plastic tubes, so there's that, but i think most come in aluminum or tin tubes(at least the only stuff i've seen in stores does), and i don't think there's any method for creams that's less wasteful than a few grams of tin tubing(not to mention it's really compact when empty).

 

[Jwolf24601]

Only one I can think of is the tub within a tub, like the AOS tubs that are double walled so it looks like you're getting a lot more than you get. Use a single wall tub and pack in more product. I hate paying for packaging, so I usually buy soap refills.

 

[mmack66]

While smaller packages of soap/cream may be cheaper in the short term, it would likely be more expensive in the long term, with the possible consequence of creating more packaging.

In regards to food, it is usually more economical to buy in bulk.

 

[40boy]

I'd like to see smaller pucks of the premium shave soaps.
Maybe 50 grams pucks in a smaller wooden bowl for $15-20.

It takes forever to use up a 100g puck, and paying $30-40 makes me think twice.

 

[Slivovitz]

I would never buy a soap in a wooden bowl when I can buy a "refill" and put it in a cheaper container of my own. I've also bought a couple in shave stick size. Less soap, obviously, but I just wanted to sample them.

In general, if I'm sure that I will use something up in the long run, I'd rather buy in bulk. Unless it's something that will spoil before you can get to it, you'll usually save money.

 

[Sydney Guy]

There is an interesting article in today's WSJ, explaining a trend in US consumer habits. As a result of the recession, many consumers, myself included, are learning to become more efficient, and cut back on waste and spending. Instead of stocking up and not using goods, consumers are increasingly implementing a "just in time" mentality..using up what they need and only replenishing when depleted and needed.

Of course this in mostly towards food and clothes. Wondering if shavers out there would prefer smaller, cheaper packaging of high end creams/soaps. I personally think it would increase sales, but would like to open the discussion up for debate...

Metronome
Armchair Behavioral Economist......

Oh yeah, like that's going to happen with this crowd.