Online community for ornamental horticulture
Standardized Pot Sizes?
While I was on the Retail Roadshow, ANLA Retail Board President Platt Hill talked about a "small but growing movement" toward pot standardization. When he asked for a show of hands to see who would like to see that, virtually everyone on the bus raised their hands.
He specifically mentioned 1-gallon pots, and said no details have been discussed about how it would happen or what the standard model would be.
What does everyone think about that? Is it possible? What ripple effect would that have from manufacturers through growers and to retail?
He specifically mentioned 1-gallon pots, and said no details have been discussed about how it would happen or what the standard model would be.
What does everyone think about that? Is it possible? What ripple effect would that have from manufacturers through growers and to retail?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Pawelek on -
As an independent grower who stands for hours and hours behind my pot filling machine I would applaude any movement towards container standardization both in volume and physical size. I bought my soil mixing and pot filling machinery years ago with the dream of saving time and energy, but when re-cycling used containers in every shape and size imaginable the frustration level of re-adjusting the machine and shutting down the system every time an odd shaped container gets stuck in the brush or roller chain is very, very un-nerving! I doubt the plastics industry will go along though. If all the containers are the same shape and volume the only differentiation amongst competitors will be price. At this point every brand claims their container grows a better plant due to the shape and odd volume!
One might be able to talk the plastics guys into "volume" standards but shape, height and width standards would be hard for them to swallow.
Michael Pawelek
Pecan Hill Nursery
www.pecanhillnursery.com
-
Permalink Reply by Don Eaton on -
Being a Tree & Shrub Grower, product differentiation ranks high on our list of priorities. Marketing programs are paramount to our product lines and one of the important components of our programs is the container in which we grow 'our' product.
It is time for our industry to focus on 'marketing' efforts that support all. Retailers and growers need a little 'Happy Cow', 'Got Milk' and 'The Other White Meat'.
Allow the free market to determine the pot size. What is right never needs to be governed and growers will always continue to act based on what is right. We are all very concerned with our own sustainability and are addressing the issue daily for several of the right reasons.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Pawelek on
-
The vast majority of my customers are Garden Club Members or Master Gardeners who transplant my crops into flower beds or larger patio type containers so they could care less what the containers look like, are shaped or what color they might be. They are looking for great quality plants at a reasonable price. Many of the containers are emptied the day they are bought during transplant or thrown out/recycled shortly there after. When I open for Spring one usually cannot even see the containers anyway so from a marketing standpoint, at least at my operation, the containers are not even part of the equation so "standardization" for production purposes is paramount. At my operation I produce and sell plants, not containers.
Michael Pawelek
Pecan Hill Nursery
www.pecanhillnursery.com
-
Permalink Reply by Sherwood Botsford on -
I would like to see both standardization and differentiation.
I don't have Michael's problem with pots jamming in machines. I fill my pots with a grain scoop. That said, there is enough difference between the common #1's to make them jam together at times. The larger the pot the greater the differences.
I do wish that a standard #1 pot was the same height and width and had the same rim on all versions of the pot.
On the other hand:
I wish I could get pots that had anti-spiraling ridges in them. (Stuewe & sons.)
I wish I could get a pot that was white instead of black so that the west row of pots didn't cook their roots. (Available at extra cost from many vendors. About 1% of the recycled pots I get are non-black.)(A cheap paint that would stick to black poly?)
I wish I could get square pots that would pack more neatly on a pallet, crowd better for winterization.
I wish I could get tall pots for starting trees that had a tap root. (Stuewe & Sons does make these.)
I wish I could get wide pots, say a #7 pot that was 18 inches wide and 7 inches deep. (Typical shape of a spruce's root system.)
I wish any pot more than 20 liters had a way of picking it up easily. (Grip lip is one way. But a 5 gallon soap container has a bale. Why can't a #7 pot?
I wish that ALL pots had the volume moulded into the bottom.
I wish that someone had a fully integrated PnP system with variable depth liner pots, socket pots that were much deeper than liner pots, but with a provision for supporting the center of the liner pot, mechanisms to block aggressive rooters from escaping. I wish that the socket pot had a really wide rim on it so it was more likely to sit at the right level with a hole that was too deep or too wide. I wish that there was a "washer" around the pot so that I could mow right up to the pot and not need a weedeater.
-
Permalink Reply by John Robert Morgan on -
I would have to say that probably 95% of the product we produce is in "standardized" containers (for us anyway). We don't sell too many pre-planted containers. We expect the customer to buy "vanity containers" (for lack of a better word) separately. We use some different types of containers, but we produce such high volumes it doesn't really slow down production. However, I can see how this could hurt smaller operations.
© 2010 Created by Sara Tambascio.
