Dietary supplement product packaging box

A qualified dietary supplement packaging box is essentially a "consumer's security firewall + brand's compliance ID card + scenario-based instruction manual". If one of the three is missing, it is essentially a substandard product, regardless of how full the contents are.

A while ago, I helped a friend in the supply chain review the packaging sample of a glucosamine chondroitin product for middle-aged and elderly people. In order to reduce the cost of a single box by 20 cents, the manufacturer used ordinary industrial-grade coated paper as the inner box and did not apply a food contact-grade inner coating that meets the requirements of GB4806.1. When it was submitted for inspection, it was directly found to have excessive phthalates, and thousands of samples were thrown away. Many new brands always think that "the powder/capsule inside is the core, and the packaging can be made to fit it." However, anyone who has actually worked in the supply chain knows that the storage period of dietary supplements is mostly 24-36 months. If the packaging material does not meet food contact standards, the temperature and humidity will change. High, harmful substances will precipitate and penetrate into the contents, which is a real safety hazard. In the past two years, a fish oil brand in Zhejiang used recycled plastic as the inner support to save costs. It was stored in the warehouse for two months in the summer. There was a faint plastic smell when it was opened. The entire batch was destroyed directly, resulting in a loss of several million.

If material safety is the bottom line, then the marking information on the packaging box is a red line that cannot be touched. Last year, there was a Coenzyme Q10 brand that was sold across borders to China. In order to make the main visual look better, the designer reduced the font size "Not suitable for: Pregnant women and minors" to size 5. The warning "This product cannot replace medicine" was also secretly stuffed in the corner of the side of the box. Less than a week after it was launched on Tmall, professional counterfeiters placed orders in batches to claim compensation. In the end, not only did it lose hundreds of thousands, but all the goods on sale through all channels were recalled and repackaged. I missed the 618 promotion that year and suffered a huge loss. Colleagues on the operations side always feel that "putting such a big warning on the homepage will make consumers not want to buy it at first sight, which will affect the conversion rate." However, people in the compliance department always say, "If you miss one word today, the entire brand may be gone tomorrow." After all, The "Health Food Labeling Regulations" clearly states that the font size of warnings cannot be smaller than bold type 3 and must be printed in the upper right corner of the main display. There is no room for negotiation. The packaging box is your first display window for compliance and cannot be avoided.

Of course, if the packaging box is only used as a compliant and safe carrier, its value will be somewhat wasted. I have seen a B vitamin brand targeting the youth market before. They made a row of small tear-off stickers on the side of the packaging box. Each tear-off sign means that they have eaten that day. They also printed a small copy saying "I am also taking a good vitamin supplement today." With such a small design, the repurchase rate is 4 percentage points higher than that of the same category. There are also probiotic brands that print the reminder “please use warm water below 37°C after opening the bag” on the tear of the box. You can see it at a glance as soon as you open the box, which is 10 times more effective than sticking the instructions at the bottom of the box. There are always people in the design circle complaining that this kind of design is "too low and destroys the minimalist beauty of the packaging." However, friends who do user research have conducted surveys and found that nearly 60% of consumers will not read the instructions inside after buying dietary supplements. You can reduce the cost by printing key tips on the packaging box. At least 30% of invalid complaints were reduced - last year I helped a probiotic brand adjust its packaging and printed the prompt "please refrigerate after opening the box" on the inside of the box lid. Later, users reported that "forgetting to put it in the refrigerator will cause the bacteria to become inactive" complaints were reduced by 40%, which is a real effect.

By the way, now everyone is shouting about environmental protection, and the material selection of packaging boxes has become a hotly debated topic in the industry in the past two years. In order to ride on the popularity of environmental protection, some brands used completely uncoated and biodegradable kraft paper for moisture-absorbing protein powder. As a result, during the rainy season, half of the warehouse's goods became damp and caked, causing heavy losses. The Environmental Protection Party says, "To contribute to carbon neutrality, try not to use non-degradable materials." The product manager says, "The biggest irresponsibility to consumers is the deterioration of the contents." The more compromise approach in the industry now is to use degradable virgin kraft paper with an edible-grade moisture-proof coating without additional plastic packaging. This not only meets environmental protection requirements, but also ensures the storage stability of the contents. It is a solution that has both ends.

In fact, I have been in the industry for so long, and I have seen too many brands spend 80% of their budget on promoting raw materials, but only save a few cents on the packaging box. To put it bluntly, the first second a consumer gets your product, what they come into contact with is not the content inside, but the box. The texture it feels, whether the printed words are clear or not, and the prompts are not in place, are actually quietly conveying confidence to consumers - after all, it is something that is eaten in the stomach, and if you are reluctant to even make a reliable "coat", who dares to believe that the ingredients inside you are real enough?