"Doug Miller" wrote in message
m...

Certainly. If you're reducing the package size by 1/8, the straightforward
way to do it is to keep width and depth the same, and reduce length by
1/8. A
side-by-side comparison of the larger and smaller packages makes the
difference instantly obvious. The sneaky way to do it is with a 4.4%
reduction
in each dimension, which is scarcely noticeable, and even if noticed would
hardly be suspected by the average person as resulting in a 12.5% decrease
in
package volume.

Side by side comparison. OK. You wrote that yesterday. I assume that by now,
you've realized why it's unlikely you'd have an opportunity for such a
comparison. There are at least two reasons.



That leaves price increases
as the only option. You may not have said it explicitly, but since there
is
no other option, you've agreed to it.

Wow! Two falsehoods in one! There *are* other options (e.g. cutting
costs),
and no, I didn't agree to it.

Nope. If you've already cut costs as much as possible in the area of labor,
and raw materials you CAN control, there are still some things you cannot
change. No avenue left but to adjust size or price.

What business are you in???