I have absolutely noticed this move toward smaller packaging.  There are some other benefits to this.

1. This should free up shelf space for other products. I, for one, would sure like to buy Cheer Dark at my Wal-Mart, but the store near me doesn't carry it, despite devoting one side of an entire aisle to laundry detergent.  (Could it be that we have too many choices today?  How many scents of laundry detergent do we really need, anyway?)

2. Laundry detergent is now almost always a baggable item, making it easier to carry into the house from the car.  I load several bags onto each arm, you see, but had to carry laundry detergent in one of my hands.  Now I keep my hands freer.

jim

I've been most impressed by how strongly the Associates at Wal-Mart have promoted the change to compacted detergents.  The math at the shelf is pretty difficult for the average mom who is just trying to get some detergent quick.  A smaller bottle that costs about the same as the bigger bottle in the past is inherently a confusing problem.  But I've seen Associates help the shopper through the problem and explain how compaction can not only save them money, but can save our natural resources too. 

Editors Note: Adam Werbach and Saatchi S work with Wal-Mart on sustainability efforts.

Well, technically, it should cost a little less, because it costs a whole lot less to ship given the reduced size and weight. But with the way in which fuel prices are going up, it could be argued the water-imbued bottles would cost a load more pretty soon.

In any case, less waste and less packaging is always good. Kudos to the Wal-Mart folks.

Adam:

Why don't you introduce yourself to those folks out there who aren't familiar with all of Wal-Mart's many consultants?

Rand, Wal*Mart is getting credit for packaging and supply chain changes that result in cost savings. Drudge linked this Fortune article:

The retailer is using its clout with vendors to hold onto its everyday low prices.

(Fortune Magazine) -- With gas, grain, and dairy prices exploding, you'd think the biggest seller of corn flakes and Cocoa Puffs would be getting hit by rising food costs. But Wal-Mart has temporarily rolled back prices on hundreds of food items by as much as 30% this year. How? By pressuring vendors to take costs out of the supply chain.

"When our grocery suppliers bring price increases, we don't just accept them," says Pamela Kohn, Wal-Mart's general merchandise manager for perishables. To be sure, Wal-Mart (WMT, Fortune 500) isn't the only retailer working to cut fat from the food chain, but as the largest grocer - Wal-Mart's food and consumables revenue is nearly $100 billion - it has a disproportionate amount of leverage. Here's how the retailer is throwing its weight around.

Shrink the goods. Ever wonder why that cereal box is only two-thirds full? Foodmakers love big boxes because they serve as billboards on store shelves. Wal-Mart has been working to change that by promising suppliers that their shelf space won't shrink even if their boxes do. As a result, some of its vendors have reengineered their packaging. General Mills' (GIS, Fortune 500) Hamburger Helper is now made with denser pasta shapes, allowing the same amount of food to fit into a 20% smaller box at the same price. The change has saved 890,000 pounds of paper fiber and eliminated 500 trucks from the road, giving General Mills a cushion to absorb some of the rising costs.

Cut out the middleman. Wal-Mart typically buys its brand-name coffee from a supplier, which buys from a cooperative of growers, which works with a roaster - which means "there are a whole bunch of people muddled in the middle," says Wal-Mart spokeswoman Tara Raddohl. In April the chain began buying directly from a cooperative of Brazilian coffee farmers for its Sam's Choice brand, cutting three or four steps out of the supply chain.

Go locovore. Wal-Mart has been going green, but not entirely for the reasons you might think. By sourcing more produce locally - it now sells Wisconsin-grown yellow corn in 56 stores in or near Wisconsin - it is able to cut shipping costs. "We are looking at how to reduce the number of miles our suppliers' trucks travel," says Kohn. Marc Turner, whose Bushwick Potato Co. supplies Wal-Mart stores in the Northeast, says the cost of shipping one truck of spuds from his farm in Maine to local Wal-Mart stores costs less than $1,000, compared with several thousand dollars for a big rig from Idaho. Last year his shipments to Wal-Mart grew 13%.

In fact, it's the small suppliers that are feeling the pain from Wal-Mart's pushback the most. Bushwick has seen its costs rise 10% over the past year, but has passed only half that amount on to Wal-Mart and its other retailers. For consumers who are having a hard time paying $3.80 for a gallon of milk, however, without those measures that sticker shock would be a lot worse.  

Keep up the great work Rand. Your PR Department is the absolute best. They'll get the word out.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/28/magazines/fortune/kapner_walmart.fortune/index.htm

There are two reasons why the cost isn't going to go down, and neither of them really have much to do with the cost of oil.

First, believe it or not, smaller containers are quite a lot more expensive to product than the bigger ones, because the ratio of empty space per unit of plastic is much lower in a smaller bottle.  In other words, it doesn't take four times as much plastic to make a one-gallon bottle as it does to make a one-quart bottle.  The cost difference isn't as drastic with cardboard cartons, but it exists -- and small boxes aren't cheaper per bottle inside than big boxes.

Second, the only thing being taken out of the formulation is water -- for which the manufacturers' cost is negligible.  It's the surfactants and cleaners and other things that make up the cost -- so eliminating the water doesn't change the price enough to be able to mark it down. 

So...it will take less packaging (but not as a direct ratio to the smaller package size) -- and less cardboard -- less space on the shelf -- less effort to stock the shelves (and carry it home!) -- and will allow the manufacturers to load more in a single truck -- and the empties will be easier to recycle or will take less space in a landfill.

So - the tangible benefits are many, but the cost savings directly to the consumer really won't change that much.

This IS a good thing. Its better late than never. This idea has been out there for decades. Amway, regardless of what you think about the company, prodcued their products in concentrated forms.

As was previously posted, going to smaller packaging isn't really the value saver. It is getting out of the mix un-needed water. In reality, Walmart should be promoting the larger size packages but with highly concentrated formulations. But that would mean fewer visits to Walmart for detergent. So I doubt they'll do it.

If nothing else, it's cheaper to ship (size reduced by about a third, meaning that you can fit quite a bit more onto a pallet and onto a truck) and ultimately that will drive cost down slightly. But it's less about consumer savings and more about drastically reducing packaging waste, shipping waste, increasing shelf space, lowering shipping costs, increasing supply chain efficiency, and reducing environmental impact by an appreciable amount by doing something really simple. Innovation doesn't have to be revolutionary.

It's obvious that extra water in the bottle is a waste of space, packaging material, and the fuel needed for shipping. So why do people continue to buy so much bottled water? Can't we apply the same logic and get people to use a refillable bottle from the tap (or from a filtered pitcher)?  I'm just hoping people will be able to bridge this logic over to another product segment...

I really admire Wal Marts trying to make the world a better place but I think they need to pay closer attention to the actual chemicals they are selling in their personal procducts.

The chemical 'cyclopentasiloxane' is found in many of thier hair products such as softners and in handlotions.  This chemical has been studied for a couple decades and the findings are not good. 

Canada has recently placed it on a list of chemicals that they want banned.  It is used in many products under different names and is a silicone product.

Health risks range from affecting the brain's Dopimine, to liver enlargement and happens to be the same chemical that was a hot topic years ago in breast implants.  In labortory studies, it has been found to cause tumors in rats.

Why is the largest retailer in the world selling this dangerous chemical, blended in their products to we consumers?

Aaron C Bray

I am all for the shrinking of packaging but as one of the older members I would like to point out to you guys with the clout...the fact that we are having a difficult time reading/seeing the tiny measurement markings etched inside the caps of the detergent! Would it be too much to ask that the marks be in BLACK or something easier to see?

Thank you for this opportunity to comment upon what is otherwise a wonderful development!

anna

I think that compacting the sizes of the bottles is a great way to help the environment, and it also helps the consumer. I would much rather buy a small bottle of concentrated liquid than the gigantic bottle of regular getting the same load size. It costs less to ship and the store can house more bottles on shelves so the consumer won't find empty shelves. It is also a good math lesson if you are taking your child along shopping with you. Great job Walmart!!

As a Hawaii Wal-Mart customer I truly applaud the change.  Shipping costs magnify the price of most everything here.  Why pay for shipping all that water?  Great work!

I applaud the idea, but wouldn't it make more sense to put the concentrated detergent in the same bottle and charge more? Then I would have to buy detergent less frequently. There has to be some plastic & shipping overhead in simply putting the detergent in the bottle in the first place.

I totally agree with Anna! I like the new packaging and can totally see the benefits, but my eyes are perfect, and I can't read the lines either--on more than one brand. I feel like it's a trick to make me use more than I need so that I have to buy it more often.

Brilliant.  Ever changing and improving is Wal-Mart.

it great about shrinking packages of the products but what about the shrinking of the prices.

WELL, TOOELE WAL-MART DOES IT AGAIN!!! I have used good OLD CHEER for many many years...I wanted to but some, in the box, I don't like plastic, when arriving on the laundry soap aisle all there was, is CHEER  SAFE FOR COLORS! For some straqnge reason a wal-mart worker was right there. I asked about my brand of cheer and was told they would not be stocking it in the powder anymore. I asked why, she told me they were only going to stock my brand of cheer in liquid and in plastic. Oh well... I went further and finding my brand of cheer in liquid, in plastic for, for $4.00 more! I turned to ask the clerk about this and --- she was gone!!  I buy as little as POSSIBLE in plastic, and I want reular cheer back in powder in a box, leave out the plastic measuring cup, I have glass measuring cups!!!! PLASTIC is NOT GOOD for the enviroment!!

I completely applaud Wal-Mart's effort to shrink the detergents' packaging giving that it will help the environment.  However I was looking for a link for feedback that I was never able to find, seems like Wal-Mart doesn't want customers to directly send their opinion about a store visit.

The only thing I have noticed Wal Mart reducing lately, other than usable inventory, is their commitment to customers. However they have a healthy and rapidly growing, like cancer, commitment to the dollar. All business exists to achieve a goal primarily money. Wal Mart is in the position to not only to make money, they could also be a benefit. And they have been a benefit......to themselves. If there is a more expensive product available by all means sell it. Why allow stores to order as they did for years when you can decide for the public what would make you the most money.....or you mean to say be in their best interest. After growing up with Wal-Mart and shopping there all of my adult life I now will go out of my way to shop elsewhere and encourage everyone I know to do the same. If you don't want to be left with just the one choice...WAL MART.....you may want to give that some thought! Now, post this.