Ahh, the M & M trick.
First, it was a 1 lb bag.
Then one day, it was a 14 oz “Medium” bag, but to hide it, they package it in 14 oz + 2 free oz for a while, and then the 2 free oz went away.
Any just recently it happened again. The “Medium” bag is now 12 oz, and yes, once again I saw the 12 oz “+ 2 FREE OZ” bags for a while.
So now 25% smaller than it used to be.
I foresee the same in pop soon. 1.5L bottles started appearing in the stores. I’m guessing the 2L bottle is on the way out.
Just raise the cost already, and stop treating me like an idiot.
I noticed this with chocolate bars years ago. Say they start with a 50g bar at some normal price. As the cost of ingredients rises, the bar retains the same price but dwindles in size: 49g, 47, 45, 42… Then a new larger size appears at a new price point. It may start at a larger size, but it dwindles as well, and eventually reaches the 50g size. By this point the “new larger size” badge is long-gone from the packaging. The new size is now the standard size, and the smaller bar at the old price point can be discontinued.
My all time favorite shonky corporate trick was pulled by Aussie airline QANTAS. When they introduced fees for using a credit card to make online fare payments, they didn’t want to reveal the fact until the last moment of the transaction. Unfortunately this was illegal, the fee had to be revealed as soon as the choice of payment method made it unavoidable.
What QANTAS did was introduce a final option for credit card payments - do you want to use a credit card issued by some obscure outback credit union (fee free) or use one from anyone else and pay a fee of $X. As they knew virtually no-one had the credit union card and everyone just paid the fee, having already spent some time filling out online forms.
What most enraged me about this, like all the others above, was the thought that some smart arse thought it up, all the corporate guys went along with it - “yeah that’s how we roll” and no-one there thought to say, “do we really want to trick our customers like this?”
The biggest frustration in the shrink-ray products is when it’s coming from a global multinational corporation that’s making big bank.
Tide, for example, is a Procter & Gamble product. They made something like $80 *billion *last year. Nestle, those killers, and their ridiculous shrinking chocolate chip sacks? Something like $90 billion. A 5% change in product size is one thing, but a 25% change? Is that really necessary to maintain the bottom line? No. No, it’s really not.
I always give a zip code as far removed and highly unlikely from where I am as physically possible. My go-tos are 65734 (Purdy, MO) 57252 (Milbank, SD) or 50201 (Nevada, IA). I love messing with their metrics.
I have a German buddy’s home address memorized and can rattle it and my euro cell phone number as if it was my normal one <evil grin> Take that Metrics!!!
It’s not just in the US. The first time I went to Brazil I was shocked by how cheap gasoline was, until I learned they sold it in something called “liters,” which are apparently like half the size of a gallon or some shit. What a scam!
Read it again. He never said there was two ways to raise price. He said there was two ways to deal with increased cost. Which I believe he meant costs of producing product.
He did say the second way is sneakier, but I was pointing out it’s outright deception. No better than liars.
I like your posts here, you seem like a reasonable person with a good perspective. In this case, however, I think you’re severely misinterpreting my post.
I fail to see the relevance of your first point.
As to your second point, when I shop for groceries I pay very close attention to the little number under the price tag. Usually this number is the Cost Per Unit/Volume/Weight. For example, I automatically go for the cheapest dish detergent by the Cost Per Ounce. I disagree with you that any outright deception has taken place; the cost per unit is always accurate.
I do think the practice of keeping the same packaging shape and size consistent but reducing the amount inside is “sneaky.” But the package is labeled accordingly. I seriously doubt anyone out there is putting in 12 ounces and calling it 16.
I don’t really expect an apology or anything, but I think you’re really reaching for outrage here. I’ll admit that the term “sneaky” is unclear, but c-mon man, calibrate yourself.
Actually, that’s another thing. I’m seeing more and more packages of “ice cream” that are labeled as “dairy dessert” or something of the sort. Like…a LOT of them. In packages that are identical to others labeled “ice cream”. I don’t know exactly what the difference is, but somehow I doubt I’m getting more quality for the money.
That is also not good. I just realized today that I shouldn’t have called out US Americans for this one - there are probably people around the world who don’t realize that their local can of tomatoes isn’t worldwide.
Time to stock up on Federal Park coupons!
I think large corporations who make billions of dollars in profits want even more in profits.
Those “thins” bars that they introduced a while ago were an egregious example of this - standing in line waiting to be processed at Safeway, I did a quick calculation of cost per grams - the Thins chocolate bars were significantly more expensive than a full-sized chocolate bar. I’ll continue to buy a better value bar and just eat part of it, thanks.
My zip code is always 90210.
Because cream from a cow hasn’t come anywhere near that package?
I too despise the shrinking product, same size container rip-off. Just be honest about the pricing. Also, what a waste of packaging material.
On the “ice cream” versus “dairy dessert”–my husband brought home some vanilla ice cream the other day. He thought it was ice cream. I thought it was ice cream–until I tried some. It tasted more like coconut oil and chemicals, and the “creamy” texture was just greasy. In short, it was a bowl of yuck. Sure enough, it had coconut oil in it, and lots of it, and not much in the way of dairy. I ended up putting it in the sink to melt, so I could throw it away. Seriously, it wasn’t edible.
It NEVER melted. It stayed as solidly fluffy (if that’s a texture) as it was when it was in the freezer. It was… unsettling.
I had to blast it with hot water to get this… stuff… to disperse and go down the sink. I wish I could remember the brand to warn everyone.
Seriously? You think stores put things in the wrong place on purpose so you buy a more expensive item?
Look, I know this is too much a tax for your brain while you do the “retail consumer” thing (somehow just walking into a store tends to drop people’s IQ 10-20 pts.) to understand that man hours are spent on both facing and fronting the shelves so that thing go where they are supposed to and for some customer service person up front to go back to aisle to check the signage/price for you because you are too fucking stupid to properly read a sign in the first place and that is it not in anyone’s best interest for the store to do this on purpose.
ps, hi thread, retail businesses are there to take your money. That is why they exist. They also face the increase in costs in gas prices that effect the transport and manufacturing of their products and such. They have a goal to cut costs without raising the price. In effect, they are just raising the price, yes, but now they do it in a way that keep most of the herd placated. A simple cost increase and you’d be here mooing about that instead.
So, like, just learn to pay the fuck attention to what you’re buying so the big bad supermarket chains can’t pull a fast one on you.
