There's no need to change the packaging, it's a solved problem that hasn't been implemented for monetary reasons.

https://news.mit.edu/2015/liquiglide-condiments-0630

If it’s being used for certain mayonnaise packaging in Europe (where mayonnaise is the “ketchup” of the continent), I can’t imagine lack of ketchup market penetration is for cost reasons alone.

I have an umbrella with a similar surface. It gets noticeably damaged over time and loses effectiveness, so I'd be wary of using it with food and particles from the damaged surface falling into the food.

What monetary reasons?

Producers not interested in consumers buying less of their product?

Asking honestly how does this work?

If I as a producer need to manufacture 100g of something, whether it’s all consumed or not I still need pay to produce all 100g, what benefit is there in paying to produce something that doesn’t get consumed?

Let's say all consumers collectively eat X kg of ketchup per month. If 10% gets left on the bottle walls, they are buying 10% more, thus ~10% more profit for producers.

It works the same way we are using much more laundry detergent and toothpaste than necessary.

Use a squeeze bottle. Problem solved