And the shelf edge labels still show the price per litre, - or don't you bother to look at that?Just noticed after buying for a few weeks, that Morrisons' pints of milk have become 500ml cartons.
And the shelf edge labels still show the price per litre, - or don't you bother to look at that?Just noticed after buying for a few weeks, that Morrisons' pints of milk have become 500ml cartons.
Tesco or Sainsbury's or Asda or Marks & Spencer milk, in this fairly small size, is 90p per pint, or £1.58 per litre.And the shelf edge labels still show the price per litre, - or don't you bother to look at that?
You obviously pay attention to the volume information. For those that can't do the calculations in their head, there's the shelf edge label that gives the price per litre, i.e. no dodgy volume or price breaks, just a single simple price that can be easily compared between different sizes, types and brands.Tesco or Sainsbury's or Asda or Marks & Spencer milk, in this fairly small size, is 90p per pint, or £1.58 per litre.
Morrison's offering is 90p per 500ml, or £1.80 per litre.
Nope I don't. Excuse my stupidity, I just expect what seems to be pints of milk to be, well, a pint of milk. Strangely, I am an avid checker of "price per" when I'm comparing pack sizes for value.And the shelf edge labels still show the price per litre, - or don't you bother to look at that?
"Sharp practice" is a subjective term. As @DarloRich says above, 'it's capitalism'. Othe countries with alternative economies are available'Caveat emptor'. Might be legal, but it's somewhat sharp practice and very liable to catch out the unwary.![]()
This part of the thread was discussing Morrison's decision to change the package of 1 pint of milk in a plastic bottle to a waxe card carton with 500ml in. Even if the change in volume was not visually obvious, the completely different packaging certainly was. Anyone really concerned with the cost of basic food products would check the new package including the stated volume of product that it contained.Nope I don't. Excuse my stupidity, I just expect what seems to be pints of milk to be, well, a pint of milk. Strangely, I am an avid checker of "price per" when I'm comparing pack sizes for value.
Just noticed your above rant about people not being ripped off because they buy he same product that they've always bought, and don't think to check that they're getting less than they always have. It does come across as rather smug, and exactly what the supermarkets say when challenged on their sharp practice.
In Tesco yesterday were selling with or without hooks, or just mixed stock?.Radox shower gel. Down from 250ml to 225ml and the useful hook that came with the bottle has also gone
"Sharp practice" is a subjective term. As @DarloRich says above, 'it's capitalism'. Othe countries with alternative economies are available
But would they? As mentioned upthread, the Morrison's PR guff at the time of the change was all about their use of alternative packaging. The fact that they were now charging the same price, but for only 500ml of product, that just about everyone else was charging for 568ml of product, was conveniently ignored/glossed over. Which seems to me to be a classic example of 'Shrinkflation'. Not really sure why you're endeavouring to defend this.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
This part of the thread was discussing Morrison's decision to change the package of 1 pint of milk in a plastic bottle to a waxe card carton with 500ml in. Even if the change in volume was not visually obvious, the completely different packaging certainly was. Anyone really concerned with the cost of basic food products would check the new package including the stated volume of product that it contained.
Is the price per pack still the same and the weight per pack also the same, which might mean even thicker slices, or has the latter (i.e. the weight per pack) also now been reduced by ~ 25%, commensurate with the reduced number of slices?Asda have effectively increased the price of their 'extra special' thick sliced ham by 25%, the packs now contain 4 slices rather than 5.
The packs are of course the same size so as an added bonus you now also get 25% more single use plastic too.
I don't have an old pack of 5 to compare the weights but the slices seem to be around the same size as previously.Is the price per pack still the same and the weight per pack also the same, which might mean even thicker slices, or has the latter (i.e. the weight per pack) also now been reduced by ~ 25%, commensurate with the reduced number of slices?
Think the (Asda ham slices) pack weight may possibly have reduced from 130g to 120g in the recent past.I don't have an old pack of 5 to compare the weights but the slices seem to be around the same size as previously.
In a capitalist market, shops can put out whatever PR they want, and generally there is no obligation to point out thing that may show the product in a poor light. I'm not defending it, just pointing out that those who ignore the mandated information on the shelf edge label (which took legislation to establish) tend to be the ones that get need to look at it the most. The retailers resisted the introduction of the information, which is provided in the shopper's interest, which means that so many buyers are just not interested until somebody else points it out and complain when somebody (typically newspapers) pointout what they ignored.But would they? As mentioned upthread, the Morrison's PR guff at the time of the change was all about their use of alternative packaging. The fact that they were now charging the same price, but for only 500ml of product, that just about everyone else was charging for 568ml of product, was conveniently ignored/glossed over. Which seems to me to be a classic example of 'Shrinkflation'. Not really sure why you're endeavouring to defend this.
My pack of 4's 120g, the slices definitely don't seem notably larger than the old packs of 5 though.Think the (Asda ham slices) pack weight may possibly have reduced from 130g to 120g in the recent past.
Intriguing!In Tesco yesterday were selling with or without hooks, or just mixed stock?.
That's not the full story. The formulation of the product has changed. You are now paying the same price (£9.00 per kg for the 500g now 400g Anchor tub) for 4% more water!Noticed this morning in Tesco that both Anchor and Lurpak have "enhanced" their small butter packs from 250g to 200g
Tesco's own Butter is still in the old 250g size and cheaper than either of the above
Noticed this morning in Tesco that both Anchor and Lurpak have "enhanced" their small butter packs from 250g to 200g
Tesco's own Butter is still in the old 250g size and cheaper than either of the above
That will please the imperial measure dinosaurs, 227 is 8 oz.I can't remember where it was but I arrived home a few months ago to find that one shop had reduced the size of its small own brand packs of real butter - not the spreadable 'butter' - from 250g to 227g. It was a crafty ploy and I didn't even notice.
Having been turned over, it really spoiled the enjoyment of my hot buttered crumpets that night and I have vowed never to fall for the butter sting again. If it isn't 250g I'll go without.![]()
That will please the imperial measure dinosaurs, 227 is 8 oz..
Fine, they must be getting used to Brexit hollow victories by now.Put it down as a Brexit win!!
Brexiteers have very tainted views of relative benefits and disbenefits.So, an approximately 9% reduction in pack size, from 250g to 227g, with the price charged presumably staying the same, is deemed to be a good thing. Lummy!![]()
Believe they contained as much as 975g back in 2011.This year's tub of Cadbury's Roses has declined from 600g previously to 550g.
Believe they contained as much as 975g back in 2011.
Believe they contained as much as 975g back in 2011.
it used to be 1KG (2.2lbs) and the selection was a lot better with proper wrappers.
If by proper wrappers you mean those made of plastic, then although I rarely have anything like that, I'm glad that they are making serious attempts to reduce the cause of micro-plastic contamination.it used to be 1KG (2.2lbs) and the selection was a lot better with proper wrappers.
If by proper wrappers you mean those made of plastic, then although I rarely have anything like that, I'm glad that they are making serious attempts to reduce the cause of micro-plastic contamination.
If by proper wrappers you mean those made of plastic, then although I rarely have anything like that, I'm glad that they are making serious attempts to reduce the cause of micro-plastic contamination.