ReBoxes·MarketSt. Louis · Since 2008
Blog · Buying guide

The case against buying new boxes for internal moves

If a box never meets a customer and never leaves your control, buying it new is almost always the wrong decision. Here is the arithmetic.

Question about this piece?

Disagree with a number? Send it — we have changed two coefficients that way.

US or Canada only — 10 digits, e.g. (314) 621-0100
Two-letter code or full name, e.g. MO or Ontario
US ZIP (63132) or Canadian postal code (K1A 0B1)
Whole number of units

No phone number, by design. We reply by email within one business day.

Details
Published
June 12, 2024
Reading time
6 min
Subject
Buying guide
Written by
Yard desk
Source
Own yard data

We show the workings

Every figure here comes from containers we marked and counted, or loads we graded. Ask and we will send the underlying data.

We sell new boxes. We also talk customers out of them regularly, and the clearest case is internal movement: material going between your own buildings, or between departments, or into your own storage.

What a new box is actually for

A new corrugated box buys you three things: certified structural performance, a clean printable surface, and predictable appearance. Each of those is valuable when it is needed.

  • Certified performance matters when you need a documented rating for a carrier claim or a regulatory file.
  • Print surface matters when a customer sees the box and judges you by it.
  • Appearance matters for retail-facing and some export applications.

Internal movement needs none of the three. Nobody outside your organisation sees the box, nobody files a carrier claim on it, and the performance requirement is whatever your own racking and handling demand — which a graded used container meets exactly as well.

The arithmetic

New versus grade-A used, 18" double-wall cube, internal use
FactorNewGrade A used
Delivered cost per unit1.00×0.34×
Stacking performance, first useRatedEquivalent in practice
Expected internal reuse cycles9 – 128 – 11
AppearanceClean kraftLight scuffing, possible residue
Embodied CO₂e~10.9 kg~1.8 kg per cycle
Lead time10 – 15 days customFrom stock

The objection we hear most

'Our staff won't accept scruffy boxes.' This is a real objection and it is worth taking seriously rather than dismissing, because appearance affects how material gets handled. A container that looks like rubbish gets treated like rubbish.

The answer is grade, not newness. Grade A used board is genuinely presentable — used once, square corners, no print bleed-through. The scruffy reputation attaches to grade C, which is a different product sold for different purposes. Specifying grade A for internal use costs more than grade B and still lands at around a third of new.

The alternative to a new box is not a bad box. It is a graded box, and the grade is a decision you make.

The second objection

'We need consistency for our racking.' Fair, and the answer is a matched size run rather than new stock. Size-run consistency is a sorting specification, not a newness specification, and we price it accordingly.

Where internal moves genuinely need new board

  • Food contact. No used corrugated container is suitable for direct food contact, full stop. Lined containers are a different question.
  • Cleanroom and controlled environments with particulate limits.
  • Any application where the box carries a regulatory marking that must be unambiguous.
  • Archive storage with a multi-decade horizon, where you want known board and known adhesive.

The internal pool version

The strongest option for internal movement is not buying boxes at all, new or used, but running a small pool of reconditioned containers that circulate between your own sites. Two nodes is enough to make it work, and the cost per trip falls away quickly once trips-per-container climbs past five or six.

That is a bigger change than a purchasing decision, and it is the one that actually moves the number.

Written by the yard desk

Our pieces are written by the people who do the work rather than by a content agency, which is why they contain more numbers and fewer adjectives than is fashionable. If a figure here does not match your experience, we would genuinely like to hear about it — two of our published coefficients have changed that way.