The Deceptive Grocery Shrink Ray
I have been reading various blog posts about shrinking portions in the grocery store. Rather than raise total cost of an item, marketers are shrinking the portion size and charging the same as before. Does this count as inflation? Some of the posts that give details are
Many articles listed under the tag of Grocery Shrink Ray at the Consumerist.
Manufacturers scaling back product portions at the Arizona Republic.
Packages Shrink but Prices Stay the Same at Free Money Finance.
Tropicana: Please Don’t Squeeze the Customer, Sparkle Paper Towels: “Giant” vs. “Big” Roll Reversal, Ice Cream Scoop: Major Brands Downsize Again, Country Crock 3-lb Margarine Tubs Stick It to Shoppers, Dial Soap: The Incredible Shrinking Bar, and more at MousePrint.org. This site is run by Edgar Dworsky who was a Massachusetts Assistant Attorney General in consumer protection. He is quoted in the Arizona Republic article, above,
“Some of the downsizing is sneaky,” Dworsky said. “Manufacturers always tout it when they give you a bonus. But when they downsize they rarely mention it.”
These are only a few of the posts on this subject. There are lots of others.
Several posts point out that manufacturers have even gone so far as to keep the “apparent” size of the item the same as before, while reducing the volume. I personally noticed it a few weeks ago when I thought I’d splurge on a half gallon of ice cream. Imagine my surprise when I could not find half gallons, but the “new” containers had similar outward appearance and cost the same as the old half gallon. It wasn’t until I picked up the container that I could feel the difference. I put the ice cream back and decided I will avoid the cost and the calories for now.
I can understand that manufacturer’s costs have gone up, but shrinking the volumes to try to hide the cost increase is deceptive.
Stumble it!
Ashley @ Wide Open Wallet:
I agree that it is deceptive, and yeah to me it counts as inflation. But there are some things that have shrunk that are for the good. Like restaurant portions and the ice cream that you mentioned. Less of stuff we don’t need anyways. Maybe we will all be healthier for it.
7 July 2008, 8:55 amEli:
The worst is trying to do a recipe with canned goods! You’d think they’d maintain the size and increase price here, but no! 16 oz. becomes 15.5 or 14 oz. In the worst case, something I needed in 16 was available only in 10.5 oz. Ridiculous!
7 July 2008, 9:51 amBryce:
@Ashley – In the case of decadent stuff like ice cream, I don’t mind just saying I don’t need it and am better off without it, but in the case of normal-use stuff, like toilet paper, I would prefer that they just raise the price rather than shrink the roll.
@Eli — That is ridiculous that they’ve shrunk an item from 16 oz to 10.5. I suppose you could just go with the lowest available amount and re-portion your recipe to accommodate the smaller size. In other words, if your other ingredients are easily resizable, reduce them by 10.5/16 or 2/3. Still not good, but possibly a workaround.
9 July 2008, 7:04 pmEli:
For their next trick, they’ll put a sticker on it: “Now With LESS! Same Great Price!” and people will get so excited that they’re getting a GREAT PRICE!
10 July 2008, 8:52 amFestival of Frugality 134 | On Financial Success:
[...] Save and Conquer’s The Deceptive Grocery Shrink Ray [...]
15 July 2008, 3:05 am