Introduction
As school milk programs in Indonesia and other Southeast Asian countries gain increasing attention from governments and society, the demand and consumption frequency of student milk are rising. Not only are school cafeterias and public nutrition programs purchasing milk, but parents and students are also increasingly concerned about whether the packaging is safe, convenient, eco-friendly, and visually appealing.
In consultations, many clients—small to medium dairy producers or equipment buyers—face a key decision: whether to adopt pouch/milk bag packaging or milk cup packaging (cups, paper cups, plastic cups, etc.). This choice affects not only equipment investment but also downstream logistics, packaging materials, spoilage rates, environmental compliance, and brand image.
This article combines Indonesian market data, equipment technology insights, and real-life case studies to help you scientifically compare pouch vs cup, choose the right filling machine, and estimate costs and returns.
1. Indonesian and Regional Market Trends & Background
According to the Indonesian Pouch Packaging Market Report, the Indonesian pouch packaging market was valued at approximately USD 1.07 billion in 2025, with a projected CAGR of around 5.22% from 2025–2033. Flexible packaging (pouches/bags) is growing significantly in the food and dairy sectors.
Flexible packaging accounts for approximately 44.7% of unit packaging in the Indonesian market, showing that the market has widely accepted lightweight, flexible solutions.
Consumer and policy pressures on sustainable packaging and plastic waste reduction are increasing. School and public procurement programs often require packaging to meet standards for compliance, toxicity migration, recyclability, and environmental friendliness. Consumers are increasingly sensitive to eco-labels, recyclability, and material sourcing in packaging.
2. Pouch vs Cup — Pros and Cons (Indonesia / Real Case Insights)
| Comparison | Pouch Milk Advantages | Pouch Milk Disadvantages | Cup Milk Advantages | Cup Milk Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Material Cost | Low-cost pouch film/plastic; lightweight; compressed box volume saves transport/storage space | Poor-quality film can leak; may not block light/odor; eco-friendly or biodegradable film costs more | Cups and lids can use sturdier material; better printability; attractive appearance; enhances brand image | Higher material cost for cup + lid; transport takes more space; complex shapes or thick material increases cost; eco-friendly materials more expensive |
| Equipment Investment / Automation / Productivity | Pouch filling machines are simple, low-cost; sealing methods (heat seal/ultrasonic) are mature; output can scale with machine size | Changing pouch specifications may require seal adjustments; sealing/cutting quality control critical; leakage or breakage may increase | Cup filling machines can perform automatic filling + capping + labeling/printing; flexible for different cup types if molds are designed well | High machine cost; high automation requires maintenance; mold changes/cleaning take time; higher labor, electricity, compressed air, consumable costs |
| Transport / Storage / Loss | Lightweight, compact, low breakage if packaged properly | Poor sealing or low-quality material may leak/break during high temp/pressure or long-distance transport | Rigid cups resist crushing; safer in transport and on shelves | Requires more protective packaging, pallets, spacing; higher logistics cost |
| Brand / Market Acceptance | Accepted by price-sensitive customers, schools, public procurement; good pouch design can achieve brand recognition | Less visually attractive than cups; limited print area/impact; may feel less premium | Attractive appearance, labeling/printing possibilities; good for retail/out-of-home; higher consumer acceptance | Poor material/packaging feel can harm brand; high-end appearance requires higher material/printing costs |
| Environmental / Regulatory | Uses less material; recyclable/biodegradable film can reduce environmental impact; policy favors flexible/lightweight packaging | Some composite films are hard to recycle; plastic waste; non-compliance risk if not certified | Eco-friendly cups (paper/PLA/bioplastics) strengthen brand and environmental reputation; aligns with regulations, subsidies | Cheap non-recyclable cups or illegal additives may pose regulatory risk; higher transport and disposal cost; eco-material expensive |
3. Technical / Machine Selection Insights & Cost-Return Estimation
Sealing Methods
-
Pouch: heat seal, ultrasonic, sometimes laser cutting. Temperature, pressure control, and film compatibility (PE/PET/aluminum/EVOH composites) must be carefully managed.
-
Cup: heat-seal films, lid capping, seal rings/aluminum or plastic leak-proof films. Lid sealing strength and drop/transport vibration resistance must be tested.
Valves and Pumps
-
Milk is sensitive; consider post-pasteurization residual enzymes/bacteria and viscosity (fresh milk vs flavored/added sugar).
-
Pumps/valves must be stainless steel hygienic grade, easy to dismantle, and suitable for CIP (clean-in-place).
Cold Chain & Shelf Life
-
Fresh or pasteurized short shelf-life milk requires reliable packaging and cold-chain transport/storage. Pouch breakage or leakage during transport leads to high losses.
Material Compliance & Food Safety Standards
-
Indonesia and some Southeast Asian countries have regulations on migration substances, plasticizers, heavy metals, and printing inks. Verify suppliers’ food safety certifications.
Flexibility for Mold / Packaging Changes
-
If you plan to expand product lines (e.g., from pouches to cups or different cup sizes), machines should support quick mold change or setting adjustments to minimize downtime.
Cost-Return Estimation (Example)
| Parameter | Pouch Solution | Cup Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Initial Equipment Investment (machine + infrastructure) | USD 20,000–30,000 (small-scale automatic pouch line, daily 5,000 pouches 200–250ml) | USD 80,000–150,000 (cup filling + capping + labeling line, similar or slightly lower output) |
| Packaging Material Cost (per 200–250ml unit) | Low-cost pouch + seal material | Higher cost: cup + lid + seal film + printing/labeling 30–80% higher |
| Spoilage / Transport Loss | Medium-quality pouch, good transport: ~1–3%; long-distance/high temp rural areas may reach 5% | Cups resistant to pressure; lid leaks possible if sealing poor; usually lower breakage than pouches |
| Labor / Operating Costs | Low labor; simple maintenance; low energy/space | High labor; machine operation, cup change, cleaning, maintenance; complex machine; higher energy/footprint |
| Payback Period | 1–2 years if profit margin sufficient and orders stable | Usually longer: 2–4 years or more; requires premium pricing to cover cost difference |
4. Practical Advice & Case Studies for Indonesia
-
For rural or remote school milk supply: pouches are more practical due to poor road conditions/cold chain; lightweight, space-saving, easy to handle breakage.
-
For urban retail/out-of-home markets or brand visibility: cups with fine printing, lid design, labeling/appearance stand out on shelves.
Case Example:
-
Indonesian Dairy Factory A supplies schools in Java. Initial pouch line investment: USD 25,000; pouch cost USD 0.10; selling price USD 0.20; daily output 5,000 pouches; monthly revenue ~USD 30,000. After labor, transport, cold chain, first-year net profit covers machine and material cost.
-
Later, small batch cup trials: selling price USD 0.35/cup; higher gross profit but increased material/printing/transport costs and higher inventory/loss risk.
5. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: Is pouch leakage a serious problem? How to reduce it?
-
Check sealing quality before transport; use composite films with reliable sealing machines; add pallets/boxes for protection; select heat-resistant films for high temperatures.
Q: Can cups use eco-friendly/recyclable materials? How much more expensive?
-
Yes, e.g., paper cup + inner barrier film or PLA cup + biodegradable lid. Costs are typically 20–50% higher than standard plastic cups depending on local supply and policies.
Q: If orders are unstable or small, is pouch better initially?
-
Yes, pouch investment is lower, operational cost is low, suitable for pilot projects. Upgrade to cup line when the market/order stabilizes.
Q: Are maintenance and machine failure risks high?
-
Cup machines have more parts and higher automation; more potential failure points. Good after-sales support, spare parts, and technical support are essential. Pouch lines have fewer failure points, but sealing/film issues must be monitored.
6. Conclusion
Choosing pouch or cup student milk packaging/filling machines is not about “which is better,” but “which best fits your market positioning + order volume + brand goals + budget + transport conditions + regulations.”
-
If starting small / orders mainly from schools/public nutrition programs / price-sensitive => pouch + economical machine + durable film.
-
If targeting retail/out-of-home markets, brand visibility, or parent/student preference => cup line + packaging design + eco-materials for differentiation.
Optimal Strategy: Use a hybrid approach (main pouch line + small batch cup trials) or leave expansion options (consider future cup capability when selecting machines).
To Get a Student Milk Filling Machine Quote, please provide:
-
Daily/monthly production targets (e.g., 2,000 / 5,000 / 10,000 units, pouch or cup)
-
Preferred packaging type (pouch, cup, or both)
-
Local transport conditions and cold chain capacity
-
Budget range
With this information, we can compare machine options, costs, and ROI, and provide the most cost-effective solution that fits your market positioning.
