Third-Party Study Compares Checkpoint Systems Electronic Article Surveillance Labels With Others


Third-Party Study Compares Checkpoint Systems Electronic Article Surveillance Labels With Others

Study Found That Checkpoint Anti-theft Labels Are Superior in Critical Areas of Performance

THOROFARE, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Checkpoint Systems (NYS: CKP) , a leading global supplier of shrink management, merchandise visibility and apparel labeling solutions for the retail industry, announced the results of a third-party study conducted by TUV Rheinland, a global provider of product testing and certification. The study found that Checkpoint genuine electronic article surveillance (EAS) labels perform much better than other tested labels in all key areas. The study evaluated EAS labels from multiple manufacturers, measuring and comparing labels' application, detection, deactivation and reactivation.

According to the Centre for Retail Research, global shrink increased 6.6 percent to more than $119 billion in the last Global Retail Theft Barometer, a figure that represents 1.45 percent of global retail sales. For the past 20 years, EAS systems and labels have been the most common method to protect store merchandise against shoplifting. During the past 10 years, there has been a proliferation of manufacturers offering presumably low-cost options without clear guidelines between cost and performance.

The study titled "Performance Testing of Labels" helps retailers weigh the benefits and costs of specific solutions. It looked at four distinct areas of performance and provided objective data revealing specific advantages between labels from different manufacturers.

Areas of Evaluation

Automatic Application of Live Anti-theft Labels

TUV Rheinland found that Checkpoint EAS labels remain live more than 99 percent of the time after automatic application on a product at the point of manufacture. Labels from other manufacturers deactivate in the process and are rendered useless almost 30 percent of the time.

Anti-theft Labels Reactivation for Retailers

TUV Rheinland researchers also reported that labels from other manufacturers can reactivate up to 23 percent of the time after being deactivated at point of sale, resulting in tag pollution, increased false alarms, decreased alarm compliance, employee frustration and potential consumer embarrassment. In contrast, performing the same tests, TUV Rheinland found that Checkpoint labels remain deactivated after legitimate point of sales transactions. They have almost zero percent reactivation when products are motionless (static) in a customer's bag, or in motion, (dynamic) when sewn into a customer's garment.

Anti-theft Labels Deactivation

According to TUV Rheinland, most other label manufacturers have deactivation heights at point of sale as low as 0.5 inches to 5 inches (1,3cm to 12,7cm), which results in more non-deactivated items, customer embarrassment and lack of responsiveness to true theft alarms in store. In contrast, TUV Rheinland noted that Checkpoint labels can be deactivated by cashiers scanning products up to 17 inches above the deactivator pad.

Anti-theft Labels Detection

Overall, TUV Rheinland found that Checkpoint labels are detected more than 95 percentof the time by EAS alarm systems. Compared to other label offerings, Checkpoint labels deliver among the best detection rates irrespective of position: laying flat, facing front or on their side.

Based on the research findings, the study suggests that labels that frequently deactivate during application prove ultimately to be more costly. These labels are offered at low-cost and treated as a commodity where price is the only differentiation. Indeed, these "dead" tags do not protect store merchandise, potentially resulting in further profit loss from stolen merchandise. Retailers and their buyers can trust Checkpoint labels to protect their merchandise with much less risk of false alarms thanks to the almost zero percent of reactivation, the deactivation simplicity by cashiers at the point of sale and the high detection rate with the antennas at the point of exit.

According to Farrokh Abadi, president & chief operating officer Shrink Management Solutions Checkpoint Systems, "For retailers seeking to achieve best practices, this study can help them make appropriate purchasing decisions. TUV Rheinland's independent study clearly shows that investing in Checkpoint solutions is beneficial in the long-run, because our superior quality labels perform significantly better when compared with other manufacturers' labels. In other words, retailers truly get what they pay for."

About Checkpoint Systems, Inc. (

Checkpoint Systems is a global leader in shrink management, merchandise visibility and apparel labeling solutions. Checkpoint enables retailers and their suppliers to reduce shrink, improve shelf availability and leverage real-time data to achieve operational excellence. Checkpoint solutions are built upon 40 years of RF technology expertise, diverse shrink management offerings, a broad portfolio of apparel labeling solutions, market-leading RFID applications, innovative high-theft solutions and its Web-based Check-Net data management platform. As a result, Checkpoint customers enjoy increased sales and profits by improving supply-chain efficiencies, by facilitating on-demand label printing and by providing a secure open-merchandising environment enhancing the consumer's shopping experience. Listed on the NYSE (NYS: CKP) , Checkpoint operates in every major geographic market and employs more than 5,000 people worldwide.

Twitter: checkpointsys

GCC, Inc. (for Checkpoint)
George Cohen, 617-325-0011

KEYWORDS: United States North America New Jersey


The article Third-Party Study Compares Checkpoint Systems Electronic Article Surveillance Labels With Others originally appeared on

Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Copyright © 1995 - 2013 The Motley Fool, LLC. All rights reserved. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Originally published