View Single Post
  #14   Report Post  
Doug Miller
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , "Doug Kanter" wrote:

Why not call a few manufacturers and see what their logic was. Start with
Sherwin-Williams. Continue with General Mills, Kraft. Del Monte etc etc etc.
Maybe they found out from focus groups that the smaller package was a better
idea. There might be a reason for this. Think about it. Let's say you have a
fairly strict food budget. $100 a week, to pick a number. Now, your favorite
ice cream goes up $1.00 in price. 5 cans of beans go up a quarter each. Your
detergent does the same, along with paper goods. Add it all up and perhaps
your bill is now $120.00. You may say you can adjust to that, but a whole
lot of people can't. So, who should the manufacturers cater to?


What part of "getting less for your money" are you having such a hard time
understanding? The alternatives are pretty clear: spend more to buy the same,
or spend the same to buy less. Neither one is at all desirable from the
consumer's POV.

Suppose five cans of beans go up a quarter each (while the size stays the
same) and you can't afford the increase, so you buy only four.

Alternatively, suppose that the amount of product in the can is cut by twenty
percent while the price stays the same. You buy five cans, just like you
always have, but now you're getting only as much beans as you used to get with
four.

Either way, you spent the same amount of money buying four cans' worth of
beans that *used* to buy you five cans' worth.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.