"We needed to triple SKU agility without building a new wing," says Elena Park, Plant Manager at Great Lakes Kombucha (GLK) in Ontario. "Our line was solid, but changeovers were eating our lunch." Her team started evaluating hybrid printing and a tighter prepress workflow, and brought **pakfactory** into early conversations around label and folding carton specifications.
Park didn’t want a shiny new press without a plan. "Paperboard choice, adhesives, inks, finishing—none of that lives in a vacuum. We wanted a system that our crew could run on a Tuesday at 2 a.m., not just in a demo room at 10 a.m."
What follows is an in-depth interview with GLK’s operations team—what worked, what didn’t, and why they believe a hybrid path (Digital Printing paired with Flexographic Printing and UV-LED Ink) fit their reality better than a single-technology bet.
Production Environment
Q: Paint the picture of your packaging flow.
A: "We run two bottling lines and one canning line, five days a week, three shifts. Labels are on a mix of labelstock—mostly semi‑gloss with a barrier topcoat for condensation—plus seasonal wraps. Cartons are Folding Carton for 4‑ and 6‑packs, and Corrugated Board shippers. About 60% of jobs are Short-Run or Seasonal. The push toward more flavors—classic blueberry to ginger-chai—tracks with product packaging trends, but it also pressures prepress and finishing."
Q: What print mix do you run?
A: "We landed on a Hybrid Printing approach. Short batches and variable data go digital; staple SKUs with longer runs and tight per‑unit cost go flexo. Finishes vary—Spot UV on premium labels, Soft-Touch Coating on limited cartons. We qualified UV-LED Ink for fast curing and consistent gloss, and we keep Water-based Ink in the flexo toolbox for some paperboard jobs to manage odor and compliance."
Q: Any standards you decided to follow?
A: "We aligned color to G7 targets and put FSC on our paperboard roadmap. For food contact, we validated ink and varnish stacks against FDA 21 CFR 175/176 and followed BRCGS PM guidance. It’s not glamorous work, but it keeps audits predictable."
Quality and Consistency Issues
Q: What was breaking before the change?
A: "Two things: color drift and rejects on line. Our ΔE swings on flexo labels were in the 4–6 range by the end of a long run, mostly due to anilox condition and substrate variability. On the line, we had labeling misapplies and some carton window patching failures. Waste hovered around 7–9% depending on SKU mix, with First Pass Yield in the low‑80s."
Q: Any regulatory or labeling headaches?
A: "Weights and statements. Our ops and QA teams wrestled with the ‘does product weight include packaging’ debate when we revised multipack cartons. That forced tighter alignment between net content claims, pack weights, and the carton dieline to keep panel claims clean and legal. Once we locked the template, errors dropped."
Q: What did operators say?
A: "They told us our changeovers were too tool-heavy and our ink drawdowns weren’t reliable. The feedback stung, but they were right. We were asking people to nail targets without proper controls—no standardized anilox map, no common spot-color library, and prepress files that needed extra touchup at press."
Implementation Strategy
Q: How did you phase the work in?
A: "We split it into three tracks: prepress discipline, substrate and ink qualification, and then equipment tweaks. We spent two days with the pakfactory markham team reviewing label constructions and carton board callouts. From there, we piloted UV-LED Ink on two label SKUs and ran Paperboard and CCNB trials with and without Lamination. We kept the scope narrow—two SKUs per sprint—so we didn’t overload the line."
Q: Any surprising roadblocks?
A: "Legal copy. Our brand team wanted a bolder panel hierarchy, and our QA lead hit us with, ‘the branding, packaging, and labeling of your product should accomplish all of the following except confuse.’ It was a good reminder. We re‑worked typography and information hierarchy so regulatory copy stayed readable, then matched dielines to avoid text creep after die-cutting and Folding."
Q: Where did the hybrid press decision land?
A: "We chose a digital engine for variable data and fast art swaps, and kept a mid‑width flexo line for longer runs. UV-LED Printing supported faster turnarounds and less warmup. Trade‑offs? UV systems want tight ventilation and more rigorous safety checks. Also, digital click charges add up on mid‑volume runs, so we route anything steady-state to flexo. It’s not perfect, but it’s predictable."
Quantitative Results and Metrics
Q: What moved on the numbers?
A: "Color is steadier. Our ΔE spread now sits around 1.5–2.5 on our brand colors once the job stabilizes. Changeovers went from roughly 45–55 minutes to 28–35 minutes on common SKUs after we standardized anilox, pre‑staged plates, and locked down print‑ready files. Waste on labels and cartons runs closer to 3–4% now, depending on lot size."
Q: Throughput and quality?
A: "A typical shift used to push 60–70k labels on the SKUs we tracked; now we see 85–95k on the same labor footprint when the schedule cooperates. First Pass Yield holds in the 92–95% band on those families. Energy per pack (kWh/pack) is tracking 6–8% lower on UV‑LED cured jobs versus our old UV setup, and a CO₂/pack estimate shows an 8–12% step down on those runs. We’re cautious with those figures since mix changes week to week."
Q: The business side?
A: "Simple math: with the current run mix, we’re modeling a 14–18 month payback for the hybrid investment. Procurement actually asked if a ‘pakfactory promo code’ existed—fair question—but the decision came down to total cost of ownership, not coupons. Our take: the system earns its keep when we schedule smart and keep the QA gates tight. And yes, we’ll keep working with **pakfactory** on board and label specs as we add SKUs."
