The Clamshell Rebellion

November 18, 2008

Nothing looks better than a clamshell package. Nothing is more secure than a clamshell package. Nothing protects a product from being damaged better than a clamshell package. Nothing makes consumers crazier than a clamshell package.

The toy industry side of me loves clamshell packaging. The consumer side of me hates it.

Well, apparently, we are going to see some changes in America’s love/hate relationship with the clamshell. According to an article in the November 15, 2008 New York Times (front page no less) Amazon has worked out a deal with some manufacturers to end the clamshell and ship products in (of all things) cardboard boxes.

Entitled, “The Latest Marvel? Packages You Won’t Need a Saw to Open,” the article reports that Amazon has launched a “frustration-free packaging” initiative that has gotten the cooperation of “Mattel, its subsidiary Fisher-Price, Microsoft and Transcend, an electronics maker, the companies will ship some of their best selling products to Amazon in cardboard boxes that don’t fight back.”

The article explains why clamshells came to be.

A decade ago, as toys and consumer electronics items grew more complex, retailers decided they needed to attract shoppers by showing off items on shelves in clear plastic, instead of opaque boxes.

To do so while protecting the items, they decided to seal the hinges of containers with tough epoxy that would resist shoplifting, or what retailers call “shrinkage.”

It’s easy to see, therefore, why Amazon can launch the initiative. They don’t have to worry about shoplifting. It appears, however, that even in bricks in mortar retail, the clamshell is going to morph into a kinder, gentler product.

Microsoft recently unveiled an unusual container for the Explorer computer mice it sells at Best Buy. …The container actually has a plastic zipper on each side — inspired by the packaging of food items, Microsoft said — with blue arrows that guide buyers into easily unlocking their purchase.

Sony, meanwhile, has started an ambitious internal project it optimistically calls “death of the clamshell.” The electronics giant is developing three packaging prototypes it plans to test in the coming months at Best Buy and Wal-Mart Stores. One uses an adhesive that is easy to pry open but makes a loud Velcro-like noise — intended to deter thieves.

Will toy companies be inspired to create new forms of packaging? You can bet they will if Wal-Mart says they have to.

Posted by Richard Gottlieb on November 18, 2008 | Comments (4)

December 15, 2009

In response to: The Clamshell Rebellion
clamshell commented:

I'm in the toy industry. From production point of view, clamshell is costly. As a father of a 2 yr kid, I always think that opening a new box of toy gives kid an extra excitement, but clamshell never gives the joy. www.china-clamshell.com

November 20, 2008

In response to: The Clamshell Rebellion
HKG commented:

November 19, 2008

In response to: The Clamshell Rebellion
Krumpet commented:

Have you seen the episode of King of Queens where he can't open the clamshell so he goes to get the scissors and they are packaged in a clamshell too? Hilarious!

November 18, 2008

In response to: The Clamshell Rebellion
The Consumerati commented:

Good riddance! Clamshell is the most evil form of packaging ever created —even more so than all those twist ties that keep Barbie bound into her box. While they may make the product look good (debatable), and deter "shrinkage," my read on their purpose has been that they're designed to discourage product returns. Since the only way to open up the packaging is to totally destroy it, the psychology of the clamshell makes consumers think twice about bringing a product back to a store once you've totally mangled the packaging into uselessness — and the anticipation that the return process is going to be that much more difficult because a retailer can't just put the product back on the shelf and sell it to someone else makes the thought of bringing the product back even more of a pain in butt than normal, and typically, not worth the trouble.