Yup. I always look at the square footage. Compare the TOTAL square footage among various 6- or 12-roll packs.
That would be Coors Light, and believe me, it’s a selling point. Silver Bullets are sex-in-a-canoe beer at its “pinnacle.”
What you’re missing is that the marketers aren’t really trying to tickle the part of your brain you’re using here (i.e. the rational part). They want you to form an association between their beer and coldness, so that the next time you think “I want a cool, refreshing beverage to sip on a hot day”, you’ll have a conditioned response to desire their product because of that connection, and hopefully forget that their product tastes like ass. It doesn’t help matters that all the competitors in the “American macro adjunct pale lager” category are pretty much identical in all respects, which pretty much rules out marketing based on flavor (though God knows they’ve shamelessly tried). If they can make that “cold beer = our product” connection in your reptilian brain, that’s a few more sales for them, regardless of the lack of logic in their pitch.
“And to protect Mother Earth, each copy contains a certain percentage of recycled paper.”
“And what percent is that?”
“Zero. Zero’s a percent.”
No, I’m pretty sure it’s intentionally deceptive. That’s marketing.
I know - I’m a bad sheeple; I try to think about commercials sometimes. 
Not in the case of shrimp. From FoodReference.com:
At least with Charmin, they have Regular, Double, Jumbo, Large whatever, but the package always says something to the extent of X=Y Regular rolls*. So if I’m comparison shopping, I just do the math based on how many regular rolls are in the package.
For example it’ll say 9 Jumbo rolls and below, it’ll say 9 Jumbo rolls=12 Regular rolls and on the other package of 12 Double rolls it says 12 Double Rolls = 24 Regular rolls. So, just ignore all the extra numbers and compare the prices based on 12 regular rolls, 24 Regular rolls and however many come in the package of actual regular rolls. I usually find that it’s not the largest package that’s the cheapest.
Maybe they should sell TP by weight. I’ll take the 75 lb mega roll.
No, you’re wrong.
Make fun if you want, but my car is the best in its class.
Given shipping costs, I assume, there’s been some trend to remove “bulking” ingredients from many products (e.g. water from liquid laundry soap). Ignore the scoop they probably include, they’re kinda standardized and they hope you won’t notice any change to the “Fill to Here” line. Did the instructions on the packaging change?
I’d bet that 25% less product, that isn’t 50% stuff that isn’t soap, will do 50 extra loads.
YLMV
CMC fnord!
It’s also the only car in its class. 
Now Straighter and Dopier than Evah!
Is your cat a layabout who need her litterbox, bed and dish in the same 25 square foot area (perferably near clean laundry) - this is the catfood you want for her!
I may have done this one here before, but years ago there was a billboard on the way to work for a hospital. The billboard had one sentence and the hospital’s name…“We treat heart attacks 30% faster.”
- Than what?
- So what?
- If I’m having a goddamn heart attack, am I going to be picking my hospital, or are the paramedics going to take me to whatever is closest. I’m sort of thinking that is not the time to comparison shop and any benefit made up by quick treatment when I arrive might be eaten away in travel time.
There isn’t a standard “regular roll,” even within the same manufacturer. Check it out. Compare the total square footage between two Charmin’ six-packs.
I remember seeing “CHOLESTEROL FREE!” bottled water in the 1990s, when cholesterol avoidance was all the rage. Now, I would bet if you looked hard enough, you might find gluten free bottled water.
Back when Maxim magazine was good, they used to do things to poke fun at the industry all the time. They would do something like a yellow corner on the cover of the magazine that said in bright letters: “Bonus: Yellow Stripe!”
Yes, this is marketing (assuming Vita Beata’s post is correct). They are posting an industry standard for measure, half of which is in prominent font and the remainder in tiny font. This is done in hopes the casual shopper will assume it’s the bag count. Having done the layout for scores of product labels I assure you nothing on product packaging capricious, including font sizes.
The fact that information is technically correct, doesn’t mean it hasn’t been presented in a manipulative and deceptive manner.
If that’s what they had done, I wouldn’t have started the thread. But they didn’t do ANYTHING to the product. That’s my point. They’re not saying that the current container, despite being smaller, does more loads than their old formula, or their old package, or anything. It’s the exact same stuff they always sell, in the exact same amount. They just decided to helpfully include a simple numerical relationship for our enlightenment: “250 > 200”, and make it look like that statement was advertising some sort of benefit or improvement. That’s all. They could have stated “If x/4 = 13, x = 52” and it would have been equally relevant and informative.