The Real Cost of Your Packaging: A Procurement Manager's Breakdown of Glass vs. Metal

If you're comparing packaging quotes based on price per unit, you're probably making the wrong decision. I've managed the packaging procurement for a 250-person craft beverage company for six years, overseeing an annual budget of around $30,000. After tracking every single invoice—from Ardagh Group for cans to various glass suppliers—I've found that focusing solely on the sticker price misses 30-50% of the real cost. The question isn't "what's your best price?" It's "what's the total cost of ownership (TCO) for my brand?"

Why You Can Trust This Breakdown (And My Math)

I'm not a salesperson. I'm the person who has to justify every line item to our CFO. My job is to find the balance between quality that protects our brand and costs that protect our margins. I've negotiated with over a dozen vendors, built a TCO spreadsheet that's now company policy, and I've been burned by hidden fees more than once. For example, that "free tooling" offer from a can supplier actually cost us $2,800 in delayed production due to compatibility issues. So when I talk about cost, I'm talking about the total hit to our P&L.

The TCO Trap: Where Your "Savings" Disappear

Most buyers focus on the cost per thousand units. They completely miss the other factors that can double your effective cost. Here's what I mean.

1. The Logistics & Storage Sinkhole

This is the big one. When I audited our 2023 spending, I compared a glass order from a regional plant to an aluminum can order from a facility like Ardagh Group in Pevely, MO. The per-unit price for glass was lower. But then I calculated the rest:

• Freight: Glass is heavier and more fragile. Freight costs were 40% higher. A pallet of glass bottles weighs a ton. Literally.
• Damage Rate: We averaged a 1.5% breakage rate in transit and handling with glass. With cans, it was under 0.1%. That's a 1.4% loss you pay for but never use.
• Storage Density: Cans stack more efficiently. We could store 40% more product in the same warehouse space. When you're paying $15/sq ft for warehousing, that space is money.

Suddenly, that "cheaper" glass unit cost wasn't so cheap. The TCO was nearly identical. That was my contrast insight moment: seeing the line-item cost vs. the landed cost side-by-side made me realize we were optimizing for the wrong number.

2. The Line Efficiency Factor

This is the hidden cost most brand owners don't see unless they're on the production floor. Your packaging choice directly impacts how fast you can make product.

Aluminum cans run faster on filling lines. They're lighter, more uniform, and less prone to jams. In our case, switching a SKU from glass to cans increased our line speed by about 15%. That means more product out the door in the same shift, lowering your cost per unit through better labor and equipment utilization. If your co-packer charges by the hour, this is a direct, immediate saving.

The "glass feels more premium" thinking comes from an era when can quality was inconsistent. Today, that's changed. The printing quality on cans from major manufacturers is exceptional. We ran a test: we put the same craft soda in a beautifully printed can and a sleek glass bottle. In a blind taste test, preference was split. In a branded test where customers could see the packaging, the can actually scored higher for "modern" and "convenient." The perceived quality gap has largely closed.

3. Sustainability & The True Cost of Green

This is complex. Both glass and metal are infinitely recyclable, which is great. But TCO thinking applies here too.

Glass has a higher recycling rate by weight, but aluminum has a higher value in the recycling stream, so it's more likely to actually get recycled. Furthermore, the carbon footprint of transporting heavy glass back to a recycling plant cuts into its environmental benefit. From a pure cost perspective, some regions have higher fees for glass recovery. You need to check your local regulations.

For us, using lightweight aluminum from a supplier with a strong sustainability story (like Ardagh's stated commitments) became a marketing asset that offset a slight per-unit premium. Customers cared, and it justified the choice beyond just my spreadsheet.

A Real-World Comparison: Sourcing from Ardagh Group

Let's get specific. When we were sourcing cans for a new product line, Ardagh Group was on our shortlist. Here's how the TCO comparison looked against a regional glass supplier.

I called the Ardagh Group phone number for their sales department and got a quote. The can itself had a higher per-unit cost. But their quote was all-inclusive: standard lithography setup, freight estimates from their nearest plant (which, for us, was a logistics advantage), and palletizing. The glass quote had three asterisks: mold fees (a one-time $1,500 charge), minimum order quantities 50% higher, and FOB shipping (meaning we bore all freight risk and cost).

After projecting volume over two years using our TCO model, the aluminum can option was about 8% cheaper overall. The kicker? The MOQ for cans let us do smaller, more frequent production runs, which improved our cash flow. That's a financial benefit that doesn't even show up on the packaging invoice.

When Glass Is Still the Right Answer (The Boundary Conditions)

I'm not saying cans are always better. That'd be dishonest. My TCO spreadsheet has a tab called "Exceptions."

Glass still wins on TCO when:

• Your product is ultra-premium (e.g., a $50 spirit). The weight and feel of glass are part of the value proposition. The cost of packaging becomes a tiny fraction of the retail price.
• You have a very local distribution. If your brewery is selling bottles only within a 50-mile radius, freight and damage costs plummet, making glass highly competitive.
• The product chemistry demands it. Some flavors interact with metal over time. Glass is inert. No packaging cost savings are worth a spoiled product batch.

For our flagship craft soda sold nationwide? Cans won. For our small-batch, barrel-aged specialty drink sold only in our taproom? Glass won. It depends.

The Bottom Line: How to Make Your Decision

Stop asking for the best price. Start asking for the total cost. Here's your action plan:

1. Build a Simple TCO Model: Columns should include: Unit Cost, MOQ, Mold/Tooling Fees, Estimated Freight, Damage Allowance (ask for their typical rate), Storage Cost Impact, and Line Speed Impact.
2. Get All-In Quotes: When you contact Ardagh Group or any supplier, ask for a quote that includes delivery to your door (or co-packer). Get their standard payment terms, too; net-60 is better for cash flow than net-30.
3. Factor in Your Brand: Is lightweight, portable, and unbreakable a key advantage for your customers (think beach, pool, hiking)? That's a can. Is a heavy, premium, reusable vessel part of your story (think gourmet sauce)? That's glass. Your packaging is your brand's most tangible touchpoint.

For our business, that disciplined TCO approach—looking beyond the first number on the quote—has saved us over $8,400 annually. It's not about finding the cheapest supplier. It's about finding the most cost-effective partner for your brand's total needs. Sometimes that's the one with the slightly higher unit price.