Marden Edwards Journal

Scent Packing, a new UK company set up to package perfumes, has just taken delivery of a new Marden Edwards Evo-Fold overwrapper.

Scent Packing is the brainchild of Glenn and Nathan Griffiths and has been set up to contract fill and pack “signature” or “celebrity” fragrances.  As with all perfume and fragrance manufacture and packing, all aspects of production must be of the highest quality to ensure that the finished product is perfect.

Because Scent Packing are a new company it was important that every purchase represented exceptional value for money.

Crucial to the success of fragrance packaging is the quality of the overwrap.  Not only does it protect the high quality carton within it but it also acts as a demonstration of the quality of the product as a whole.

Scent Packing purchased the new fully automatic Evo-Fold perfume box overwrapper.  Competitively priced, the UK manufactured Evo-Fold produces the same high quality wrap as other machines in the Marden Edwards range.  For perfume box overwrapping it is essential that the folds are crisp and that only the tips of the end fold are sealed.  This is straightforward to achieve on the Evo-Fold which can run at speeds up to 40 cartons per minute.

The alternative to purchasing the Evo-Fold was to buy second hand.  Nathan takes up the story “We needed a machine that was going to provide a really high quality wrap but did not think that we would be able to afford a new one.  We were worried about purchasing second hand since there would be no guarantee regarding wrap quality and it was difficult to gauge how running efficiency might suffer.  We were really impressed when we saw the Evo-Fold and the excellent value for money that it offered.”  Scent Packing can be contacted on 01685 810300.

As the challenges of the global economy increase the pressure to save money at all stages of the production and packaging process increases.  Higher energy costs have driven up the costs of packaging materials, the electricity required to run packaging machinery and the expense of air conditioning and refrigeration systems to keep the temperature for both staff and products at safe levels.

At the other end of the production process, the demands of the Packaging Waste Directive have increased the costs for producers and retailers alike to safely package their products.  The mantra to reduce, re-use or recycle packaging makes good environmental sense but being able to maintain the traditional values of product protection, tamper evidence, shelf life enhancement and improved product appearance can be difficult.  Doing all of this and saving money is even harder !

Film overwrapping is a traditional form of packaging consisting of wrapping a piece of film or paper around a product, or collation of products and sealing it with diamond point end folds.  It is also known as “tuck and fold” wrapping and produces the same appearance as if the product were wrapped by hand.  This is why overwrapping is appealing for the perfumes and confectionery industries, where many of the products purchased are sold to be given as gifts.

Unlike shrinkwrapping, where a larger than required piece of film is placed around a product and then shrunk, exactly the right sized piece of film is cut to length and sealed in only the places where heat is required – on the end folds and the longitudinal seal.  This means that an overwrapper typically uses two or three kilowatts of energy compared to a shrinkwrapper and heat shrink tunnel combination which can consume many tens of kilowatts of electricity.  An added benefit is that overwrapping film, typically polypropylene, is less expensive than shrinkable polyolefin.  Polyethylene, the lowest cost film used for transit wrapping, can also be used by overwrapping machines as well as traditional sleeve wrapping machines.

Multipacking of products to form the stock keeping unit is an expanding role for overwrapping systems.  Instead of collating products into a carton or cardboard outer, the overwrapper forms the collation and wraps the product with either a clear or fully printed piece of film.  The saving can be substantial, with a sheet of film costing two to three pence compared to ten pence of more for the equivalent carton.  For example, in the tobacco industry where margins are under continual pressure, even for a medium speed production line, savings of over two hundred and fifty thousand pounds per year can be made by switching from cartons to film.

For the bulk packaging of products, where traditionally case packing machines are used, there is a move to wrap with paper instead.  As long as the carton being collated and wrapped is sufficiently strong, paper can replace large, cardboard cases.  The paper used is thick, up to 200 grammes per metre and uses hot melt glue to seal the end folds and the longitudinal seal.  The reduction in weight compared to board reduces the cost of the packaging material and at the same time reduces the cost of disposal.  It also has additional benefits.  More packs can be fitted onto one pallet reducing distribution costs whilst reel fed paper occupies less space in the materials warehouse.

Collating and overwrapping to save cost does not benefit every product.  Where the product is not rectilinear or when the protection of thick board is required then casepacking is the preferred method.  Similarly if frequent, short production runs are the order of the day or the product being collated is very large then shrinkwrapping could be more appropriate.

Overwrapping should be seen as another tool in the cost reduction armoury that can also provide other environmental and promotional benefits.