Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.

Dismiss

I got a response to my WEA Eco-Pak letter

0 views

Skip to first unread message

Dan Barrett

unread,

May 9, 1991, 6:17:43 PM5/9/91

I wrote to Henry Droz of WEA complaining about the Eco-Pak.
I enclosed 4 pages of USENET quotes. Well, I got an answer from Ivy
Hill, which I take it is the company making the Eco-Pak. Here is the
answer, in its entirety.

Ivy Hill Corporation
4800 S. Santa Fe Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90058
213 587-3131

Arthur Kern
Executive Vice President

Dear Mr. Barrett:

Henry Droz has sent a copy of your letter of April 23, 1991 to me for my
information and after reading the many quotes you have included from Usenet,
I thought it might b e a good idea to respond to some of your objections.
Let me start by giving your a brief history of the Eco-Pak CD package and
its evolution.

Ivy Hill, although owned by Time Warner, is one of four major suppliers to
the music industry. All of the suppliers independently for the past year or
more, have been working on solutions to problem set forth by
environmentalists, retailers, consumers and manufacturers; how can we
provide a package to the public that will be environmentally friendly, has
the same or similar merchandisability as the current 6x12 longbox, has the
theft deterrence of the 6x12, fits into existing store fixtures if possible,
and creates a package with similar if not better perceived value than the
current jewel box? We think we've created a win-win situation for all
concerned, and once you've been given the opportunity to touch and use the
Eco-Pak CD package, we're confident that you will agree with us; infact
[sic], I have personally showed this package to manufacturers, retailers and
consumers of all age groups and the positive response to the package has
been overwhelming. Let me for a minute backtrack and answer some of the
questions that we were asked to answer:

First, Eco-Pak is *not* a Digitrack. When the consumer takes the
Eco-Pak CD package home he throws away the shrink wrap -- that's
all! The package then folds to jewel box dimensions and snaps shut
like a jewel box. *All* of the board is protected in the closed
position by plastic rails, so concerns about fraying, scuffing or
dog-earing board are unfounded. Once in the closed position and put
in your CD home storage unit, the spine looks exactly like that of
[a] plastic jewel case; infact [sic], if you happen to drop the
package on the floor by accident or open the top too wide, the
Eco-Pak CD package will not shatter or crack like a jewel box. It
might even be more durable!

From a retailer's point of view, the Eco-Pak CD package answers his
major problem of having to refixture for a "jewel box only" world.
Somehow the U.S.Retailer has been pegged with an unwillingness to
refixture because of costs; on the contrary, many of the retailers
I've spoken to personally are more concerned with the lack of
merchandising opportunities the jewel box only offers as opposed to
the current 6x12 format. U.S. music stores have always been
point-of-sale leaders with great graphics enticing the consumer to
buy not only the one CD he came to the store to buy but, also to
leave with two or three CD's he had no intention of buying.

Finally, theft deterrence. It is obvious that something 5x11.5 is
harder to steal than a 5x5 box. Retailers say this is important in
the U.S. Who am I to disagree?

In closing, Henry sent me your letter because as a consumer you are very
important to the WEA family. We don't and will not take your thoughts
lightly. We only ask that you give us the same courtesy. We are still only
in the prototype stage of a package that will not be available until April
of 1992. Once you've had an opportunity to experience the Eco-Pak CD
package, we'd love your feedback.

Sincerely,

Arthur Kern
Executive Vice President

Dan

//////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
| Dan Barrett, Department of Computer Science Johns Hopkins University |
| INTERNET: bar...@cs.jhu.edu | |
| COMPUSERVE: >internet:bar...@cs.jhu.edu | UUCP: bar...@jhunix.UUCP |
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////

Jim Lick

unread,

May 16, 1991, 7:42:24 PM5/16/91

I haven't been following these conversations too closely, but what about
the new form of CD single packaging in the US? I understand that the
term for this is the Digi-Pack. What it is: A small plastic tray with
the traditional hub about 1/8" thick, glued to a thick piece of cardboard
which is folded around to enclose it. The entire package comes
shrinkwrapped with no long-box type enclosure.

Releases in this style include: Yaz-situation, Morrisey-Our Frank, Meat
Beat Manifesto-Psyche Out, Electronic-Get The Message, Bigod 20-Carpe Diem,
Happy Mondays-Step On and others.

What I think: I think this sucks. The cardboard while more shatterproof
will not hold up well to normal handling. The major complaint is that the
cardboard covers simply do not stay shut after you remove the shrinkwrap.
This exposes the CD to dust, and the CD can fall out much more easily if
not secured by either improper placement on the hub, or a loose fit.

The only reason I can think for this packaging is to make the CDs cheaper.
This doesn't wash for two reasons. First, jewel boxes cost around 35
cents each or less to make. Some people will claim that because the new
package has more cardboard, and less plastic, it is easier to recycle.
This recycling thing just plain doesn't make sense to me. When I buy a
CD, I either keep it or sell it to someone else. What is there to
recycle? Sure, I jewel box needs replacement sometimes, but this is
minor compared to the amount of shrinkwrap, longboxes and the silly
plastic longboxes which get thrown away. (Some of us keep our longboxes
for the art, but I wouldn't be too unhappy to see them go.) Also, along
with the new packaging, many CD single prices went up by 10 cents at the
wholesale level, with their suggested retail price going up by a whole
dollar.

I just bought a supply of real jewel boxes to refit them into real cases.
This means that each CD single is costing me 50 cents extra. Plus, I'm
finally going to finish that program I started to print the inserts for
the jewel box on a PostScript laser printer. (If anyone is interested
in this program, send me email. Also suggestions of features will be
much appreciated! I will save the addresses I receive and send out mail
when I am done, and post an announcement here as well.) Anyways, after
all this, I still end up with a generic black and white package instead
of the colorful item I originally purchased. Still, I can deal with the
plain old jewel boxes much better.

Here are my opinions on the other packaging options:

The CD single sleeve: This is a carboard or paper sleeve, often with
a soft fabric inner sleeve, very similiar to the record sleeve setup.
These are bad, as you usually have to reach in and grab the CD by the
faces and pull it out. Not critical for many CD singles, as only the
outer edges are affected, by nevertheless annoying. Those with the
inner fabric sleeve usually fare well, but those without often get
pretty scratched up. These were used in europe a few years back, but
not anymore. These come shrinkwrapped, or with no wrapping at all.
Big Thumbs Down.

The 2/3 jewel box: This is very similiar to the original jewel box.
It is thinner, and made entirely of clear plastic. Used for most
current european CD singles, and some US singles. There is room for
the cover page, but not for a booklet. The CD rests in the lower
portion. You can see through the bottom to see the CD. Many CDs
are packaged so that the CD is art-side out. I prefer to switch
this to better protect the recorded side of the CD. These typically
come shrikwrapped or with no wrapping at all. This is a pretty good
package. It is the same horizontal and vertical dimensions, and only
varies in thickness. The two drawbacks are the lack of booklet,
which isn't critical for singles, and the lack of durability. These
break more easily that jewel boxes, but aren't too bad. Thumbs Up.

The plastic sleeve with the cardboard slip-cover: I'm not sure of
the proper term for these. They consist of a plastic sleeve about
1/4" thick with an opening on one side and a niche to place your
fingers when yanking out the CD. The CD was slipped into this, and
secured by means of small plastic nobs at the bottom which gripped
the CD. Over this package, a four sided cardboard sleeve was slipped
over. This was used on the initial US releases of Electronic's
Getting Away With It and one of the Depeche Mode releases (Policy
of Truth I think). Fortunately, it seemed to disappear shortly
after these releases. The problem was that the package was square
instead of rectangular, as a regular jewel box is, and this smaller
in one dimension. This is not too much of a problem. However,
the process of inserting and removing the CD is. To remove, you must
firmly grip the CD on its faces and pull it out. At first, the
nobs will grip it firmly, but after not too many times, the nods will
wear down and the thing pops out easily. Also, having the package
come apart into two pieces is not a good idea. Too much handling on
the CD faces caused many fingerprints and scratches. Thumbs Down.

The various 3 inch CD cases: These ranged from tight fitting cardboard
sleeves to the nice Capital soft-plastic cases. The Capital cases
were the best of the lot, with the Japanese style coming in second,
but all suffered from being the wrong size to fit into a standard CD
rack or carry-case. Where am I to put them when I'm not listening to
them? Thumbs Down.

With the exception of the 2/3 jewel box, I've repackaged all my other
CDs into standard jewel boxes. I am willing to do this, even with the
loss of artwork, and the necessity of duplication track listings,
etc, costing we time, money, and ending up with somewhat less than
what I started with. Why can't the record companies spend the couple
of extra cents to do this for me? I'd get a standard package which
fits in my rack, protects my CD, and preserves all of the artwork.
All for a few cents more. I especially don't like seeing the price
go up at the same time they replace the package with an inferior one.

Advantages of the normal old jewel box: Closes tightly to prevent
dust from coming in contact with the CD. Track listing and label is
securely encased where consumers can not get to it without dissasembly.
(Saves on wear and tear) Room for small booklet for lyrics, notes,
etc. CD can easily be removed by only touching edges. Recorded
surface is always face down in the package, reducing exposure. Can
easily be replaced if broken for around 50 cents, also since there
are three parts, only the broken part needs to be replaced. (In
experience, the folding top part breaks most often, the hub second,
and the other parts hardly ever.) All current CD racks designed for
this format. For those who claim that the dark plastic is not
recyclable, that part can be made with clear plastic as well. (They
Might Be Giants-Lincoln, US release, is one example.)

My opinion of the long box:

1) The long all-plastic type packaging is BAD. Plastic is much
harder to recycle than card board. At the very least, replace
all these with cardboard.

2) The cardboard long boxes aren't that bad. Cardboard is more
easily recycled, and some keep the boxes for their art work. Still,
it would be better to do without them.

3) While I haven't yet seen the eco-pack in person, it occurs to
me from looking at diagrams of it, that it uses the same amount of
card-board as a long box. The only difference is that instead of
throwing it away or recycling it, you are stuck with it forever.
So you end up with the same number of trees cut down, and less
desirable packaging.

4) What I'd like to see: The option I like best is for manufacturers
to put all CDs in jewel boxes, and shrinkwrap them. CD singles could
be packaged in either the 2/3 jewel box, or the standard jewel box.
Some store would opt to sell the CDs bare (possibly with a security
sticker on it), just as most stores sell cassette tapes. The ones
who wanted physical security could use those special long-box sized
brackets. What the store does is to place a CD in the container, then
lock it in. When the CD is purchased, the CD is removed from the
bracket with a special key, and reused. The cost of this is about 75
cents per bracket. This is already what many store are doing for
used CDs, and CD singles, and a similiar device is available for
cassettes.

I don't see any reason why what works for cassettes, used CDs and
CD singles, can't work for all CDs. The one reason the stores are
thinking is the cost of the brackets, and the time to assemble them.
First, the cost of the bracket is a lot smaller than it seems at
first, as it is spread out over several CDs. I would imagine that
the life of a bracket would be on average fairly long. Second,
assembling them is not very time consuming. Also, what some stores
do for CD singles is to have an unpackaged supply behind the counter.
A CD packaged in the bracket would just be placed back in the rack
while the customer would get one from behind the counter.

Any comments?

0 new messages