I'm also not convinced that the expense of producing the trays and stuffing the bags in this manner is actually cheaper than the cost of just filling it the rest of the way with product and leaving it at that.
Some C-Suite asshole thinks he's getting it over on everybody with this and isn't smart enough to realize that this is a Dick Dastardly Stops To Cheat situation.
I really don't get the point of these stunts. All they do is erode consumer trust and give negative reputation to brands as stingy assholes. I got ripped off a couple of times in that way and guess what? Now I don't buy their products. They have lost me as a customer and I hope it was worth saving a fraction of a cent per packaging.
It's consultants. Consultants that advise both the investors and the corporations.
It's why they cut office snacks. It's why we have return to office. It's why they keep doing waves of layoffs. It's why everything must be a subscription.
The consultants tell the investors shrinkflation is so hot right now. They tell the companies to do shrinkflation. If they don't, the board gets upset you're not listening to the expensive consultants. If you do, the stock price jumps, even though you just lost customers, and you get to blame the consultants if it doesn't work
It's a very stupid system, McKinsey is probably the worst offender if you want to do some further reading
Not just deferred but diluted. No single person in the company is responsible for the orphan crushing machine, it’s just the consequence of hundreds of small, logical decisions made at by dozens of people at all layers in the hierarchy.
These days companies don't care because a small handful of conglomerates own everything and don't have much in the way of actual competitors to lose business to.
Which tells me exactly as much about the contents as picking it up would: almost nothing.
There's always one of you in the unnecessary pack fill discussions and I have to ask, do you really know the difference between 12oz of candy, and 10oz? And can you point out the weight on this packaging for me?
You don't go on just weight alone, that doesn't tell you much of anything. You need weight and price.
For me personally, it's a hell of a lot easier to see how far your money is actually going when you keep track of the price per oz vs just watching the total price since they change price and size pretty regularly.
The type of packaging is not regulated by shape or size. I am not making the claim packaging shouldn't be regulated, just that comparing weight and price ratios will help you not be tricked by this.
Then why would seeing the product mean anything? The whole point of seeing the weight is to compare it the price to see if you are being manipulated. Going on vibes is not going to protect you from that.
47 Comments
reddig33@lemmy.world · 89 pts · 350d
Why is there even a plastic tray in the bag to begin with? That’s the really infuriating part. Stop with all the unnecessary plastic!
treasure@feddit.org · 67 pts · 350d
Probably it was only added so they could pull this "sike, air in the middle" stunt
dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world · 38 pts · 350d
I'm also not convinced that the expense of producing the trays and stuffing the bags in this manner is actually cheaper than the cost of just filling it the rest of the way with product and leaving it at that.
Some C-Suite asshole thinks he's getting it over on everybody with this and isn't smart enough to realize that this is a Dick Dastardly Stops To Cheat situation.
Zachariah@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 350d
pysch
treasure@feddit.org · 28 pts · 350d
psych
Zachariah@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 350d
oh, yeah, that too
😐
Kolanaki@pawb.social · 2 pts · 350d
Wait... You didn't mean a small stream or ditch? 🤷♂️
usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 350d
First of all,
pyschpsychI'm about as pedantic as they come, and will argue that it's a separate word now and should be spelled "sike".
Wanna build someone's confidence/excitement? Psych them up, sure.
But for the specific usage that's a bait-and-switch? Sike fits better imho.
tehmics@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 350d
I wish some of you pedants stayed on Reddit, man
Zachariah@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 350d
pendants
whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works · 42 pts · 350d
the -30% isn't about the price
frog@feddit.uk · 5 pts · 350d
30% less calories, same price!
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org · 26 pts · 350d
knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de · 17 pts · 350d
Make a complaint to the store, the brand and the Verbraucherschutz.
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org · 7 pts · 350d
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 350d
That is the MO of conartists and scammers too.
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org · 1 pts · 350d
Rooty@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 350d
I really don't get the point of these stunts. All they do is erode consumer trust and give negative reputation to brands as stingy assholes. I got ripped off a couple of times in that way and guess what? Now I don't buy their products. They have lost me as a customer and I hope it was worth saving a fraction of a cent per packaging.
theneverfox@pawb.social · 6 pts · 349d
It's consultants. Consultants that advise both the investors and the corporations.
It's why they cut office snacks. It's why we have return to office. It's why they keep doing waves of layoffs. It's why everything must be a subscription.
The consultants tell the investors shrinkflation is so hot right now. They tell the companies to do shrinkflation. If they don't, the board gets upset you're not listening to the expensive consultants. If you do, the stock price jumps, even though you just lost customers, and you get to blame the consultants if it doesn't work
It's a very stupid system, McKinsey is probably the worst offender if you want to do some further reading
chilicheeselies@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 349d
The business of deferred responsibility (coroporate sin eaters) is a big one.
BorgDrone@feddit.nl · 2 pts · 349d
Not just deferred but diluted. No single person in the company is responsible for the orphan crushing machine, it’s just the consequence of hundreds of small, logical decisions made at by dozens of people at all layers in the hierarchy.
theneverfox@pawb.social · 3 pts · 349d
While this is absolutely also true, I'm talking about the people who openly advocate for orphan crushing for the sake of orphan crushing
hark@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 350d
These days companies don't care because a small handful of conglomerates own everything and don't have much in the way of actual competitors to lose business to.
ch00f@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 350d
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpackaging
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 350d
Thats why you look at the weight.
tehmics@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 350d
Which tells me exactly as much about the contents as picking it up would: almost nothing.
There's always one of you in the unnecessary pack fill discussions and I have to ask, do you really know the difference between 12oz of candy, and 10oz? And can you point out the weight on this packaging for me?
knatschus@discuss.tchncs.de · 14 pts · 350d
The weight is on the back. The price sign on the shelf includes €/kg.
I don't really know how much 2oz is. But since the laws are loosen to allow weird weights I look for €/kg anyway.
newthrowaway20@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 350d
You don't go on just weight alone, that doesn't tell you much of anything. You need weight and price.
For me personally, it's a hell of a lot easier to see how far your money is actually going when you keep track of the price per oz vs just watching the total price since they change price and size pretty regularly.
Gork@sopuli.xyz · -1 pts · 350d
They'll just make the tray heavier 🤔
newthrowaway20@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 350d
They can, but it wouldn't matter. The weight on the packaging is the weight of the product in the package, not the package itself.
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 350d
Is packaging material actually cheaper by weight than candy?
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 350d
That would be fraud. There are legal requirements for this.
tehmics@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 350d
C'mon man, you're almost there. Make one more connection
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz · -1 pts · 350d
The type of packaging is not regulated by shape or size. I am not making the claim packaging shouldn't be regulated, just that comparing weight and price ratios will help you not be tricked by this.
tehmics@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 350d
Oh, so that's the problem. You don't understand the point of the conversation
Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz · -1 pts · 350d
Then why would seeing the product mean anything? The whole point of seeing the weight is to compare it the price to see if you are being manipulated. Going on vibes is not going to protect you from that.
plyth@feddit.org · 3 pts · 350d
Every inch counts.
INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone · 4 pts · 350d
Especially when you are missing an inch somewhere in the middle... if you know what I mean.
axEl7fB5@lemmy.cafe · 2 pts · 350d
Can you fit a loaf of bread on it?
LodeMike@lemmy.today · -9 pts · 350d
Every post about food in this sub should be hidden until OP sends a picture of the net wright on the package or shows one isn't there
T00l_shed@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 350d
It still looks misleading
mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca · 11 pts · 350d
and has unnecessary plastic
T00l_shed@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 350d
Yes, very wasteful too
LodeMike@lemmy.today · -16 pts · 350d
And? The middle thing is probably for structural integrity.
T00l_shed@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 350d
For gummies?
LodeMike@lemmy.today · -9 pts · 350d
For the plastic thingy. Do you think that this company designed and produced a whole new set of plastic containers just for gummies?
T00l_shed@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 350d
The plasticity thing shouldn't have been obfruscated, it is clearly asshole packaging
MotoAsh@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 350d