Include receiving condition as well. A carton remaining attached during motion would not settle whether the contents and packaging tolerate that handling, or whether it releases where your process needs it.

Trial on our retained cartons found a seam-crossing pickup that would not establish the required hold. Smooth-face samples passed that part. Supplier suggests moving the contact away from seams.

Can production actually present every carton with that clear face available? Otherwise the proposed move makes incoming preparation part of the concept.

And keep the failed seam sample in the report. A new contact position doesn't make the first trial a success.

Not without sorting and turning cartons at the bench. That work wasn't in our plan. I've asked for its time and variability to be assessed alongside another tool concept.

That comparison should state the presentation each concept requires. It is reasonable to consider extra preparation, but it should be a visible process choice with an owner, not something operators quietly absorb.

Does the alternative still use the same carton range? Changing the samples and the tool together won't tell you much.

Same retained range specified. No alternative trial yet. First concept is not accepted; its proposed seam-free presentation needs added work before it is even a comparable offer.

Keep that preparation requirement with the quotation. Otherwise the attractive smooth-face result may outlive the condition that made it possible.