Reapercussions: Less For More, More Often

Twinkies are back. I like twinkies, a lot of the bad things you hear about the snack are bullshit or no worse than any other food product. The one thing I’d like to address is the difference in the old snack and its reincarnation, size. The new twinkies are slightly smaller. It should be noted that the size change isn’t something the current makers of twinkies came up with. The size change was actually made before Hostess went out of business the first time. It was an attempt to save on costs. The attempt was too little too late. That is not always the case and this type of business practice has become all the rage.

Ice cream makers re-defining the measurement of their product quietly. The candy bar makers making that candy bar just a bit thinner or maybe just the chocolate covering. Adding air to a product and pronouncing it “dreamy” or “delightfully light” all the while the ruse is on. The only thing that has changed is your willingness to pay for empty space.

Paying for stuff filled with “air”? Sucker.

When is the last time you saw a product announce it was cutting its size and it’s price? That would at least be honest. It’s the sneaky factor that worries me. Everybody and their parent company are trying to pull a fast one on us just to make more money.

Tropicana was one company thinking of the customer. When there was a big freeze and it effected orange crops. They tried to think of a way to keep the freeze from having an impact on their customers. The solution they came up with was to drop the size of the container by 5oz from 64oz to 59oz. That way the price per ounce went up but nobody was effected because what you don’t know can’t hurt you , right?

You’re gonna pay extra and like it. Get it?

Pre-mixed anti-freeze, but there is no mention the mix consists of anti-freeze and ….water. The price? Sometimes even more that you would pay for anti-freeze without that hard to get extra water they add.

When you sell a million of something all you have to do is cut a little to make a lot. Sometimes companies are bulking up the packaging to make it appear like you are getting the same amount of product or even more when that isn’t the case. Revlon is pulling this trick with it’s lipgloss. Revlon decided to bulk up packaging for Superlustrous glosses but you are actually getting less product. The new version only has .13 ounces, while the old version had .20 ounces. Guess what? Priced the same.

Jif peanut butter just reduced their 18oz jar by 11% no notice, nothing. They are counting on you being distracted or just dumb. This plan is working wonderfully so far and it is spreading like wildfire.

If that isn’t enough Angel Soft was bragging on it’s packaging it contains “70% more.” Then the next packaging design dropped the 70% claim and added a more subtle change from 400sq ft to 354sq ft while keeping the price the same.

Is it a problem? Here are some more products that have been downsizing on the downlow. Oreos, Dawn soap, Dial soap, Bounty, Pampers, Gillette Fusion, Hefty, Kleenex *

I’m not sure how we stop it but if you contact the companies who are trying to quietly pick our pockets some will send you coupons as a sort of “we’re sorry”. It will also let them know we are paying attention and don’t like being taken advantage of.

Here are links to a couple companies to file a complaint about this downsizing trend.

Kleenex

Kraft/Nabisco