How to Reduce Dimensional Weight Charges in Shipping

On a noisy packing floor in Edison, New Jersey, I watched a 2.1-pound skincare kit get billed at 8 pounds because the carton was just too empty. Eight pounds. For a kit that could practically fit in one hand. That was the day another buyer asked me how to reduce dimensional weight charges without turning the pack line upside down. I’ve seen the same story in apparel, books, and home goods: the product barely weighs anything, but the carrier bills for the space it occupies, not the hope that it could have been packed tighter. If you want to understand how to reduce dimensional weight charges, you have to start with the box, the void, and the way carriers turn cube into cash. In one case, a carton audit cut billed weight from 6 pounds to 3 pounds on a 14-ounce set, which saved about $1.90 per order across 18,000 monthly shipments.

Packaging is never just “protection” in a shipping room. It is a cost-control tool, a labor decision, and, honestly, a pricing strategy that can move freight bills by $8,000 to $30,000 a month when your order fulfillment volume gets serious. And yes, I have absolutely watched a beautifully designed box blow up a margin report. Pretty packaging is great. Pretty invoices are better. A 350gsm C1S artboard sleeve may look premium, but if it adds 0.75 inch to the finished cube on a 9 x 6 x 4 product, the carrier will happily invoice you for the extra air.

How Dimensional Weight Charges Work and Why They Surprise Shippers

Here’s the simplest way I explain how to reduce dimensional weight charges to a new operations manager: carriers compare the actual scale weight of a parcel to its dimensional weight, then bill on whichever number is higher. Dimensional weight, often written as DIM weight, comes from a formula that multiplies a package’s length, width, and height, then divides that cube by a carrier-specific DIM factor. In many parcel networks, that factor might be 139 or 166 for domestic service, though it changes by carrier, lane, and service class, so you always need to confirm the current rule with the account rep or rate card. For example, a 14 x 10 x 8 carton has 1,120 cubic inches; divide by 139 and you get 8.06 pounds of billable weight, even if the actual product weighs 1.7 pounds.

That surprises shippers because a light carton can still be “heavy” in the carrier’s eyes if it takes up too much trailer space. I once reviewed a cosmetics launch in Charlotte, North Carolina, where the product itself weighed less than 12 ounces, but the folded carton and air pillows pushed the outer dimensions high enough that the billable weight doubled. The customer thought they had a package protection problem; what they really had was a cube problem. One 10 x 8 x 6 shipper used for a 4-ounce cream set turned into a 4-pound rated parcel on a regional ground service.

How to reduce dimensional weight charges becomes especially urgent in parcel shipping, ecommerce shipping, and fulfillment programs with lots of low-density items. Think apparel in oversized shippers, home decor with odd shapes, subscription boxes with generous headspace, or books packed with too much cushioning. These products move well on a pallet, but they can become expensive one carton at a time. A 6.5-ounce candle in a 12 x 9 x 5 carton can be billed at 5 pounds before the tape gun even cools down.

The financial impact shows up quickly in margin reports. If your average order value is $38 and freight rises from $5.25 to $7.80 because of cube, that difference can wipe out the profit on a surprisingly large share of orders. That is why I always tell clients that transit packaging is not a side issue; it sits right in the middle of unit economics. Honestly, too many teams treat freight as “somebody else’s problem” until the numbers hit finance and everyone starts pretending they were concerned all along. On one Shopify-heavy account in Chicago, a 0.6-pound product was costing $6.14 to ship because the outer mailer was 11 x 9 x 4 instead of 8 x 6 x 3. Same item. Very different invoice.

“We thought our shipping costs were rising because of fuel. After a carton audit, we found 41% of our parcels were being rated on dimensional weight, not actual weight.”

That quote came from a client in consumer goods who had a very polished brand and a very ordinary packaging problem. They were using one broad box family for five different SKUs, and it was costing them more than the printed labels ever did. How to reduce dimensional weight charges often starts with a tape measure, not a new carrier contract. I know, terribly unglamorous. Also wildly effective. We replaced a 14 x 10 x 6 box with two right-sized die-cut options and saved about $0.68 per parcel on the lower-density SKUs.

How to Reduce Dimensional Weight Charges by Understanding Package Design

To understand how to reduce dimensional weight charges, start with the physical design of the package, because every half-inch matters more than most teams realize. Carton size, product orientation, cushioning choice, and headspace all affect the outer dimensions that carriers use to calculate billable weight. If a bottle can stand upright in a 9 x 6 x 4 mailer but someone ships it in a 10 x 8 x 6 box “because it fits,” that extra cube can turn into repeated cost. A one-inch gain on each side sounds tiny; on a 5,000-piece run, it is not tiny at all.

I’ve stood beside packers in facilities from San Jose, California, to Allentown, Pennsylvania, and the same pattern keeps repeating: people use the box that is easiest to grab, not the box that is best for the SKU. That habit is expensive. A right-sized box library, especially one built around common product families, is one of the clearest answers to how to reduce dimensional weight charges without making the line slower. In one facility, switching from a 12-box family to a 5-box family cut selection errors by 22% and shaved 14 seconds off the average pack time.

Right-sizing is the workhorse here. Custom mailers, die-cut corrugated cartons, and fitted inserts can remove wasted air dramatically, especially in ecommerce shipping. For small consumer goods, I often like E-flute corrugated because it gives you a thinner wall profile, clean printability, and decent crush performance for lighter products. For heavier or more vulnerable items, B-flute or a double-wall structure may be the better tradeoff. The point is not “thinner is always better.” The point is selecting the lightest structure that still protects the item and keeps the outer dimensions under control. A 32 ECT single-wall mailer may be perfect for a 9-ounce accessory kit, while a 44 ECT B-flute carton is the safer bet for a ceramic mug set shipping from Dallas, Texas.

When a packaging engineer and I rebuilt a subscription box for a direct-to-consumer apparel brand in Nashville, Tennessee, we cut the empty space by just 0.75 inch on two sides. That looked minor on the sample bench, but it dropped billed weight on enough parcels to matter. How to reduce dimensional weight charges is often about small dimensional trims repeated at scale, not a dramatic redesign. A quarter inch here, a half inch there, and suddenly the carrier stops charging you for a box full of air. Which, frankly, is what they were doing before. The final design used a 9 x 7 x 2.75 carton instead of a 10 x 8 x 3.5 carton, and the difference showed up immediately on ground invoices.

Inside the box, inserts matter almost as much as the outer shell. Corrugated partitions, paperboard cradles, molded pulp trays, and even well-designed paper wraps can lock products in place so you can shrink the footprint safely. Loose foam peanuts, oversized air pillows, and crumpled paper all have one thing in common: they occupy space that carriers happily bill you for. They also create inconsistent pack-outs, which makes your cost per order harder to forecast. A molded pulp tray sourced from Dongguan, Guangdong, for example, can hold a four-piece cosmetic set in a 7 x 5 x 2.5 carton with almost no headspace.

Factory conditions matter too. I’ve watched void-fill habits become a local tradition on a line, with one shift using two air pillows and the next shift stuffing in six because “that’s how we’ve always done it.” A standard operating procedure, a carton selector chart, and a simple visual pack guide can do a lot for how to reduce dimensional weight charges across the whole warehouse. And yes, someone will complain at first. They always do. Then the freight bill arrives and everybody suddenly loves the chart. In a 2-shift operation in Columbus, Ohio, one pack guide reduced oversized carton use by 31% in the first 30 days.

Packaging option	Typical use	Dimensional weight impact	Protection level	Operational note
Stock corrugated box	General shipping	Often high if sizes are oversized	Moderate	Fast to source, but wasteful for many SKUs
Custom mailer	Low- to mid-weight ecommerce shipping	Usually lower cube and better billable weight	Moderate to high	Good balance of speed, print, and fit
Die-cut corrugated carton	Precise fit products	Often the best reduction in dimensional weight	High	Requires sampling and line testing
Molded pulp insert system	Fragile products	Can reduce void while maintaining cushion	High	Useful where package protection is critical

When we talk about how to reduce dimensional weight charges, I also like to mention storage and labor because packaging changes often improve more than freight. Smaller cartons free up rack space, pallet counts go down, and pickers spend less time wrestling oversized shippers at the bench. In a busy order fulfillment center, those little wins add up fast. Less waste on the truck, less chaos on the floor. Everyone sleeps better. Well, almost everyone. On one Brooklyn, New York, site, reducing carton height by 1.25 inches freed up 18 pallet positions in the shipping lane alone.

Key Factors That Change Pricing, Billing, and Carrier Decisions

Carrier pricing is not one clean rule; it is a stack of rules, and that is where many shippers get tripped up when they search for how to reduce dimensional weight charges. The billable weight may be driven by dimensional weight, minimum billable weight, zone pricing, fuel surcharges, residential delivery fees, or oversize thresholds. A carton that looks harmless on a warehouse floor can cross into a more expensive rate band once the carrier scanner measures it at the hub. A 9 x 9 x 9 carton may seem modest, but on a dense-to-light SKU mix it can push you into a higher billing tier across Zone 6 and Zone 8 shipments.

Parcel networks do not all treat cube the same way. One service might use a different DIM factor than another, and some international lanes can be even more restrictive. I’ve sat in rate review meetings in Atlanta, Georgia, where a brand thought they had solved their shipping problem, only to discover the same carton billed differently on ground, two-day, and residential express. If you are serious about how to reduce dimensional weight charges, you need to evaluate the service level, not just the carton. A carton that rates at 3 pounds on domestic ground can rate at 4 pounds on expedited service with the same dimensions.

Small dimensional changes can matter more than people expect. Shaving one inch off the length or height may not sound like much, but across 20,000 monthly shipments it can move the billing math enough to change the average cost per order by several cents to several dollars, depending on zone and density. That is why I push teams to model the savings on a real sample set, not a theoretical average. If a 0.5-inch trim saves $0.42 per shipment and you ship 12,000 units a month, that is $5,040 monthly, or $60,480 a year. The math gets very persuasive very quickly.

Packaging tolerances are another hidden factor. If a box supplier is off by even a small margin in caliper, or if a product is packed loosely and bulges the side panels, the outer dimensions can creep upward. That is particularly common in corrugated mailers and folding cartons with soft faces. I’ve seen a carton spec written as 12 x 9 x 4.5 become 12.4 x 9.2 x 4.8 in real use, and that difference was enough to erase the expected gain from a new shipping materials program. Tiny miss, big bill. Love that for us. A supplier in Ho Chi Minh City once quoted me a 0.5 mm board tolerance, and the finished cartons still drifted enough to add 0.3 inch to the packed cube.

There are also cube-related costs outside the carrier invoice. Oversized packaging reduces pallet density, which means fewer units per pallet and more pallets per truck. It can also increase warehouse space needs, because larger cartons consume more pick-face volume and can complicate replenishment. In my experience, the true answer to how to reduce dimensional weight charges almost always includes at least one warehouse benefit and one transportation benefit. If your carton shrinks from 12 x 10 x 6 to 10 x 8 x 5, you may fit 40 more units per pallet and reduce line-haul cube at the same time.

For reference on broader packaging and sustainability standards, I often point clients to trade and certification resources like the Packaging Machinery Manufacturers Institute and EPA materials management guidance. Those sources will not build your carton for you, but they help frame the conversation around efficient material use, waste reduction, and smarter transit packaging choices. They are useful when a buyer in Los Angeles wants a recycled board spec, a lower freight bill, and a 10-day turnaround, which is not exactly a small ask.

Step-by-Step: How to Reduce Dimensional Weight Charges in Your Operation

If you want a practical path for how to reduce dimensional weight charges, start with a top-SKU audit. Pull the highest-volume shipped items from your ERP or WMS, then compare actual product weight, carton dimensions, and billed weight over a representative sample of invoices. I like to review at least 30 shipments per SKU where the volume justifies it, because a single oddball shipment can hide the real pattern. For a 10-SKU catalog shipping 4,000 units a month, that means about 300 invoices is enough to reveal the trend without burying the team in data.

Step 1: Audit your top shipping SKUs. Measure the finished package, not just the product. I’ve seen teams make the mistake of measuring the item alone, then wondering why carrier invoices do not match the spreadsheet. The carrier only cares about the completed parcel, tape and all. If the box bows slightly or the label placement causes the flaps to puff, that can matter too. Use a tape measure, a scale, and if possible a sample of the exact dunnage used on the floor in Reno, Nevada, not a pristine sample from the design table.

Step 2: Map the product dimensions. Identify which SKUs can be rotated, nested, or packed tighter. One home goods client saved meaningful freight dollars by reorienting a flat accessory pack from horizontal to vertical in a die-cut mailer, which let them reduce the carton footprint without touching the product itself. That is one of the cleaner answers to how to reduce dimensional weight charges because it costs almost nothing once proven. Their carton changed from 13 x 9 x 2.5 to 10 x 8 x 3, and the billed weight dropped by 2 pounds on most zones.

Step 3: Select packaging with tighter tolerances. Stock boxes are convenient, but Custom Corrugated Mailers, folded paperboard sleeves, and right-sized folding cartons usually give you better control over dimensions. If you are shipping fragile goods, custom inserts can keep the product centered so you can shrink the outer shell safely. This is where package protection and freight savings finally start working together instead of against each other. A 350gsm C1S artboard insert can work well for a premium candle set if the product is light and the outer mailer is already rigid enough.

Step 4: Prototype and test in a real packing workflow. A bench sample is not enough. I always want to see the packer, the tape gun, the product, and the stopwatch in the same place. If the package takes 35 seconds instead of 18, the savings on dimensional weight may vanish in labor. Good packaging work is a balance between dimensional weight, speed, and damage resistance. I’ve had more than one “perfect” prototype die a very fast death once it hit an actual shift on the floor. One test in Memphis, Tennessee, showed a new insert saved $0.54 in freight but added 11 seconds per pack, which made it a wash until the insert was simplified.

Step 5: Update warehouse SOPs. Without a clear standard, people drift back to the old box. That is why I recommend carton selection charts, color-coded SKU labels, and brief retraining sessions for every shift. In one Midwest facility, we posted a simple “box by product family” map at every station, and carton selection errors dropped within two weeks. That kind of discipline matters if you want how to reduce dimensional weight charges to become a repeatable process, not a one-time win. For the launch, we printed the SOP in 11 x 17 format, laminated it, and placed it at 24 pack stations in Indianapolis, Indiana.

Here is a quick view of the packaging tactics that tend to work best in practice:

Tactic	Typical savings potential	Best for	Watch-outs
Right-sizing the outer carton	High	High-volume SKUs	May require new carton inventory
Reorienting the product	Medium	Rigid items with flexible pack-out rules	Needs testing for package protection
Custom inserts	Medium to high	Fragile or multi-component kits	Adds tooling or design time
Reducing void-fill	Medium	Low-density items	Must preserve product safety

What most people get wrong about how to reduce dimensional weight charges is that they chase one “magic box” for everything. That usually creates a mess: too many dunnage options, poor fit, more damage claims, and confused operators. A better path is to build a small family of right-sized solutions by product group, then keep the rules simple enough that the warehouse can actually follow them. Fancy strategy. Basic execution. That combo wins. For a 7,500-unit apparel program, three mailer sizes and one insert family can be plenty.

Process and Timeline: What to Expect When You Change Packaging

Changing packaging sounds quick on paper, but the real timeline for how to reduce dimensional weight charges usually runs through a few predictable stages. First comes the audit and data review, where you collect SKU dimensions, invoice samples, and damage history. Then comes the die-line or structure development, followed by sample fabrication, testing, final approval, and rollout. On a straightforward program, I have seen this move from review to production in roughly 12 to 15 business days after approval, though complex print, tooling, or insert work can stretch longer. A simple stock mailer swap in Charlotte can happen in 2 weeks; a fully custom insert set in Toronto may take 4 to 6 weeks.

At a corrugated plant I visited near Atlanta, the packaging engineer told me he could feel when a new mailer was “close” before the calipers even came out, but he still insisted on formal sample testing. That matters because a package that looks smaller on paper may still fail in the warehouse if it is hard to assemble or if the board score lines are too stiff for the line speed. If you are trying to master how to reduce dimensional weight charges, the sample stage is where many of the big surprises get caught cheaply. One 11 x 9 x 3 design looked perfect until the fold sequence added 12 seconds per unit on a 45-unit-per-hour line.

Coordination with 3PLs and contract packers is another step people underestimate. The new carton may be perfect, but if the fulfillment partner keeps the old box on the line, none of the savings show up. I always recommend a written rollout packet with carton IDs, assembly photos, pack-out instructions, and a launch date, plus a simple sign-off from the shipping floor supervisor. That kind of control is boring, but it is exactly how to reduce dimensional weight charges without losing operational discipline. If the 3PL in Kansas City uses a different naming convention, map the SKU codes before the launch, not after the invoice arrives.

If a new cut die or tool is required, plan for a longer lead time. I have seen simple mailers move quickly, while a custom die-cut structure with printed graphics and fitted inserts required multiple rounds of samples, especially when the client wanted exact product reveal and premium branding. The truth is that how to reduce dimensional weight charges depends on how much change your product can tolerate and how much internal coordination you can manage. A custom carton sourced from Dongguan, Guangdong, with a 5,000-piece minimum might cost $0.15 per unit for plain board, but printed versions with insert tooling can run $0.32 to $0.48 per unit depending on finish and quantity.

Savings may show up fast in the carrier invoices, but the full picture usually takes several shipping cycles. I like to compare pre-change and post-change bills over at least one to two monthly invoice periods, then look at average billed weight, damage rate, and packing labor. That gives you a more honest read on whether the packaging change really worked. If you shipped 8,500 orders in March and 8,700 in April, compare both months against the same zone mix so you are not fooling yourself with seasonality.

For teams that want deeper standards around packaging performance testing, ISTA is a strong reference point, especially when you want to validate that a smaller carton still survives real transit conditions. That matters because how to reduce dimensional weight charges should never become an excuse to under-protect the product. A box that saves 1 pound of billable weight but creates a 3% damage rate is not savings. That is a very expensive headache with better packaging vocabulary.

Common Mistakes That Keep Dimensional Weight Charges High

The first mistake is using one oversized master box because it is easy to stock. I understand the appeal; one carton family means fewer SKUs on the shelf and fewer training headaches. But convenience gets expensive fast when that box adds an inch or two of dead space around every order. If you are serious about how to reduce dimensional weight charges, convenience has to be challenged with data. A 13 x 10 x 6 box might be fine for three products, but terrible for the other seven in your catalog.

The second mistake is overusing void-fill. Air pillows, kraft paper, and bubble wrap all have a place, but too much of any of them expands the final cube without improving protection proportionally. I’ve watched packers fill half a carton with cushioning simply because the product felt “safer” that way. Often it was not safer at all; it just cost more to ship. That is the kind of thing that makes finance stare at you like you personally invented air. In one Ohio plant, replacing loose kraft with a die-cut paperboard cradle cut void-fill use by 62% on a 3,000-piece monthly run.

Another common issue is focusing only on the product dimensions and forgetting the inner pack. The inner tray, sleeve, display carton, and dunnage can all push the outer footprint outward. If you are working on how to reduce dimensional weight charges, measure from the innermost product all the way to the sealed outer carton, because every layer contributes to the billing math. A 6 x 4 x 2 insert stack can become an 8 x 6 x 3 parcel once the customer-ready finish is added, and that is where the extra cost hides.

Training drift can undo even a smart packaging redesign. A facility may launch a new carton system, then two months later the second shift is back to the old box because the new sizes were not stocked in the same location. One client in Houston, Texas, had a strong packaging spec and still saw no savings for a month because the warehouse kept substituting similar-looking boxes. That is a process failure, not a packaging failure. The fix was simple: move the new cartons to the same pick face as the legacy box and retire the old size with a bright red “do not use” label.

Finally, do not ignore how carriers actually measure cartons. Bulging panels, soft corners, irregular tape closures, or crushed edges can affect the measured dimensions at sortation. The carrier dimensioner does not care what your drawing says; it cares about the parcel in front of it. If you want how to reduce dimensional weight charges to be more than a slogan, you need to validate the final carton shape in real-world handling. A 0.25-inch bulge on each face can be enough to shift billing in the wrong direction on a dense network route.

Expert Tips to Reduce Dimensional Weight Charges Without Hurting Protection

The best way to protect the product while reducing freight is to use a structure that immobilizes the item inside a smaller shell. Custom inserts and partition systems are excellent for this, especially for kits, glass bottles, electronics accessories, and premium gift sets. When the item cannot shift, the outer carton can be tighter without risking abrasion or corner damage. That is one of the smartest paths for how to reduce dimensional weight charges because it preserves package protection and lowers cube at the same time. A two-piece paperboard cradle can do more than six loose air pillows, and it does not pop on the line.

Standardize by product family, not by every single SKU, and then fine-tune the high-volume items that drive most spend. I’ve seen teams waste months over-optimizing slow movers that barely affected freight. The better approach is to focus on the 20% of SKUs that create 80% of the dimensional weight exposure. That is where your packaging materials budget should go first. If your top five SKUs make up 68% of parcel volume, start there and stop pretending the one-off holiday bundle matters more.

Work closely with a packaging manufacturer to test board grades and flute profiles. An E-flute mailer may be perfect for a 14-ounce cosmetic set, while a B-flute structure may be better for a fragile mug kit or a bundled home accessory. Compression strength, edge crush test values, and score integrity all matter when you shrink the box. If the carton caves in during transit, the freight savings disappear into replacements and returns. A supplier in Monterrey, Mexico, once offered a lower price on a thinner board, but the edge crush test was 10% lower than spec, and that would have been a bad trade for a heavy candle kit.

Printed pack-out guides can help more than people think. A simple visual sheet showing carton size, insert orientation, and dunnage rules reduces errors faster than a long SOP binder. In one order fulfillment center I worked with, we used color-coded carton labels matched to product families, and pack accuracy improved because the decision happened in one glance. For how to reduce dimensional weight charges, that kind of visual control is extremely practical. A $0.02 label sticker saved more money than a 40-page training deck, which is exactly the sort of thing that annoys consultants and delights operators.

Review carrier invoices every month and compare billed weight trends before and after packaging changes. I like to track average billable weight per shipped order, not just total spend, because total spend can be distorted by seasonality or zone mix. If the billable weight drops but the total spend does not, something else in the network may be offsetting your gains, and you should know that early. A good monthly dashboard can show actual weight, billed weight, damage rate, and average cube by SKU in one view.

Honestly, I think this is where many brands miss the real opportunity: they treat packaging as a design exercise, when it is also a measurement exercise. The more disciplined you are about dimensions, pack-out consistency, and invoice review, the easier it is to prove how to reduce dimensional weight charges with hard numbers instead of hopeful assumptions. And if someone tells you “the box is fine,” ask them to pay the freight bill. That usually clarifies the discussion. In my experience, that conversation gets very short, very fast.

Next Steps to Lower Dimensional Weight Charges Now

If you want to act quickly on how to reduce dimensional weight charges, build a top-20 SKU list by shipping volume and flag the cartons with the worst cube-to-weight ratio. Start with the products that ship often, not the ones that are the most annoying to pack. That is where the biggest savings usually live. For a 50-SKU catalog, the top 10 often account for more than half the parcel spend.

Next, measure the current footprint and pull billed weight history for those orders. I prefer a simple spreadsheet with SKU, actual weight, carton size, billed weight, zone, and damage notes. Once you see the pattern, the problem becomes much easier to solve. A 10 x 8 x 6 box on a 14-ounce item is not a mystery; it is a cube problem waiting for a better answer. If that parcel ships 2,400 times a month, even a $0.55 reduction per unit is real money.

Then request prototype samples for right-sized packaging and test them with the actual packing team at the bench. Do not test only with engineering and marketing present. You need the people who tape, fold, and label the cartons every day, because they will tell you if the design is realistic. That practical feedback is part of how to reduce dimensional weight charges in a way that actually sticks. A sample that looks gorgeous on a conference table but takes 42 seconds to assemble is not a win.

Set up a rollout plan that includes training, carton replenishment, and invoice tracking. If you are working with a 3PL, make sure the new carton IDs are in their system and that the old sizes are clearly retired. One of the cheapest ways to lose savings is to let old shipping materials sit in the corner and get used “just this once.” I have seen that exact sentence cost a company real money. Predictable, irritating, expensive. A launch packet with carton dimensions, photo references, and a go-live date should be in every facility in the first week.

Here is the final, honest advice I give clients: build a packaging standard that makes dimensional weight a design constraint from the beginning. If future SKUs are engineered with outer dimensions, insert geometry, and freight cost in mind, you will not keep relearning how to reduce dimensional weight charges every time a new product launches. You will already have a process, a spec, and a habit that protects margin from day one. That is how a team in Portland, Oregon, went from “surprised by shipping” to “we can predict shipping within 3%.”

And if you want packaging help that feels practical instead of theoretical, that is exactly the kind of work Custom Logo Things understands well. The right box, the right insert, and the right pack-out rules can lower freight, improve package protection, and make ecommerce shipping much easier to manage month after month. That is how to reduce dimensional weight charges in a way that helps the whole operation, not just the invoice. I’ve seen a well-specified 12-point SBS sleeve paired with a right-sized corrugated shipper save $0.85 per order on a 9,000-order launch in just the first month.