Why do new socks come in "zip lock" type bags?

Oh, my. The only thing that I could potentially come up with is for travel – if your luggage gets wet, you’ll still have dry socks. But I suspect it’s more a case of economics. Somewhere, somehow, a company employee found (or decided) that these particular bags were cheaper that other options available.

I guess. I would think they would be more expensive. T-shirts and underwear don’t seem to come in the same type bags. I would think dry underwear would be just as important as dry socks.

Well, I wouldn’t think that; I do think that.

After working in retail and seeing how many people will rip open a package of socks to try them on and then leave the opened package and grab a sealed package, I imagine it is to help decrease the number of opened packages. When we found opened packages that were missing socks (because costumers threw them on the ground instead of putting them back in the package they just ripped opened), we would sell the socks individually with a generic sku and write off the originally packaged item as being damaged. I haven’t worked retail in a long time, so I don’t know if it really helps or not though.

@Seaofclouds But… if a package without the zip lock is opened, isn’t that the same as a bag with a zip lock being opened? I would think that if someone opened a bag and was going to get another un-opened bag to buy, they would do the same thing. I’m not one of those people, though, so maybe I don’t think like them.

You could put a bunch of orphaned socks in a zip lock, but it’s still open because it’s still sealed (for your protection?) and that seal would need to be opened to get the zip lock part open.

GQ.

The only thing I can think of is that the factory makes bags for other goods (food, I’m assuming) and they didn’t want to change out the sealing equipment on the line. Or, they bought the ziploc sealer because it was used/special financing/back-room deal as a kickback for a partner in the company.

I’ve noticed many things come in zip lock bags that I am not going to keep in the bag. Seems like a waste.

I do think it was supposed to stop people from ripping open the bags to feel the socks (I’ve never seen anyone try them on, just look at them and touch them). Sadly, the bags are so thin that exactly what you mentioned happens… the entire zip lock remains intact on one side of the bag, and you end up with a ripped bag anyway.

@mrentropy I’m not sure if it would help or not. It was just a thought I had after working in retail. If customers could open the ziploc bag to get a sock out, maybe fewer stores would be writing off the packages of socks if they weren’t ripped open. I haven’t worked in retail in a long time though, so I really don’t know it that is happening or not.

@Seaofclouds What you said made sense to me and I was going to agree until I came to the conclusion that the bag is sealed at the top, anyway. Either way, the package has to be opened in a “destructive” way. So, I had to flip-flop on that one.

Unless opening socks is a rampant issue and it makes it easier for the retailer to send back opened packages.

Perhaps they think the best of human nature, and that we will reduce/reduce/recycle by using the bag again and again, instead of throwing it away? For a similar reason, cold cuts/lunch meat sometimes comes in those useful-yet-disposable resealable containers that resemble these.

Wow, I’m one of the people who likes zip bags because I do save them aside for storing other things once I get home.