“Skimpflation” is hitting everything from food to hotels
cbsnews.com
cbsnews.com
> Unlike yogurt, frozen yogurt is not regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (wikipedia)
*Formerly Frozen
One day I noticed that the bag of mixed nuts I just bought was labelled 50g less than a bag I had purchased a few months ago. It wasn't the case that there were less nuts in the bag. The bag itself was smaller so as to maintain the appearance of robustness.
What struck me is that this probably wasn't in response to any sort of supply or demand shock, but was probably already planned since the product was first introduced. The way the design on the package was already reconfigured and then the package distributed to factories to be filled with the new amount, the producers knew and planned beforehand that it would happen, number crunched and everything.
So now I already internally think to myself that any consumable product that screams great value will inevitably fall victim to skimpflation, because it was planned from the start. Make an awesome product, get people hooked on it, and then slowly ratchet back the value to reap the gains. And of course hope people don't notice.
Of course, I do mind skimpflation, i.e., the reduction in quality.
It's almost as though the whole business world uses the same tactics as VC backed tech startups...
50g less nuts without less nuts in the bag? You mean they went to less dense nuts?
Like the half gallon jugs that are now 58 ounces or whatever.
As far as I'm aware, half gallon isn't 58 ounces so that's not what that container is. You can't just say that there is a new conversion factor
Minute Maid Orange Juice, Fruit Juice Drink, 59 fl oz
https://www.walmart.com/ip/22176379
That same look used to be half a gallon.
I see the same tetrapack design used for quarts, do you call those "half gallon" as well?
Ugh, nobody should be eating congealed vegetable oil in the first place. One more advantage of eating real food like butter is that they can’t replace the ingredients with something else when it’s just one ingredient.
(The higher prices in Canada probably have more to do with supply controls than quality controls, though).
There was a (thankfully brief) period in the 70's when people were buying powdered milk to save money. But then again, it was around the same time they were pretending that margarine was healthier than butter. There was even an illegal margarine trade that we euphemistically referred to as "Quebec Butter."
(Source: dating a vegan and try to convince them to eat butter on a daily basis)
I'm not even vegan and I am appalled by it.
This is a shitty thing to do. Let people live their lives.
It's nonetheless a shitty thing to do, independent of whether this person actually does it. People absolutely do the thing they may have been joking about.
I stand by the opinion that the behavior you endorse is the behavior you walk by. So, I believe it's important to call out casual "jokes" at other's expense like this. Just like if someone was like, "women, and I right?"
- SSD manufacturers have been caught subbing out chips from release to mid market life
- Airlines cut services during the pandemic but never repriced out it without that service (I'm looking at you SAS with closing the lounge but advertising lounge access at ORD)
- Restaurants are now asking 18-30% tip on their electronic card payments.
- Restaurants and stores are cutting hours and menus extremely aggressively while increasing prices and understaffing.
Skimpflation is replacing some of the cream with whole milk because it's cheaper.
This is an inferior substitution and misrepresentation of their product.
The hedonic adjustment in the inflation figures accounts for eg washing machines getting relatively cheaper with more functions etc. But it doesn't account for the fact they've also been getting crappier and shorter-lived.
As much as I want to know how much of what I'm eating is lead and sawdust from Elbonia, it sounds like it would be tricky to implement. Lots of constituent parts with mixed origins. Where's the maltodextrin from? The factories it was processed in? The countries where the grain came from? The place it was all packaged? We get into "nobody knows how to make a pencil" territory pretty fast. Though I like the spirit of the idea.
I'm surprised we aren't seeing hotels where the resort fee is more than the nightly fee yet, like the old .01$ + 10$ shipping on ebay.
If we didn’t have to pay for a pool we’d never use (we don’t even pack bathing suits) that would be fantastic.
Unless you buy frozen, you can't do the traditional "weekly shop" anymore unless you want a fridge full of expired food.
Either the shortage of preservative packaging gasses is in full swing still or they're doing it to keep people shopping more regularly while hiking prices.
"Use by" refers to when it's actually expired and could be dangerous to consume after that date.
"Best before" however is generally meaningless and is meant to refer to the quality of the product, it's also been sugested by many consumer groups to be deliberately used as a method to push consumers to discard perfectly safe product.
Edit:https://www.food.gov.uk/safety-hygiene/best-before-and-use-b... Yes, it appears to be the same.
And we are getting rid of the best before one to cut down waste.
The use by is still very generous. A yoghurt for instance is fine a week or two after.
This also applies to drugs (medicaments). We do not actually know how long they are ok for the most part. Recently 30 years old ones were ok.
Even for high-end enthusiast items, consumer sensitivity to price is pretty high. Just look at how bitter people have been about the NVidia RTX 4 series GPUs.
I know someone who buys groceries from Target because it’s significantly cheaper than other grocery stores in their area. This seems due to Target still implementing a kind of national pricing. Possible unexciting arbitrage opportunity there, I suppose?
They are worse value, and attempt to set price close to what it was at start of crypto-induced GPU shortage.
Not to mention the cards are fucking ridiculous. 3-4 slots cards that spend like an average fridge. And can spike to triple that.
What used to have 6 in the pack is now 4 shorter, less dense, more expensive, yet packaged to look like nothing happened. All in only 4 years time!
It might be that consumers have to get into the habit of writing down sizes and prices of what they buy in order to witness first hand how they get short changed so often, but in a non-apparent way meant to deceive you at every step.
Trader Joes shrank their meatloaf from 24 oz to 16 oz, but at the store I visit, kept the same price label that still says 24 oz. A 33% reduction in weight for the same price as before.
I am often surprised to see that 2x6 is cheaper than 1x12 for instance. Or 1 kg more expensive then 4x250 g
I've also been hearing that Cocoa Puffs are "Now! More Chocolatey!" at regular intervals my entire life. They must have not tasted like anything at all when I first ate them in the 70s.
https://consumerist.com/2016/02/10/why-do-new-starbucks-drin...
(This is in the US, but I wouldn't be surprised if the EU has stronger rules.)
> “chocoriffic” (no one actually uses that one, but maybe they should.)
The author is blissfully unaware of a vile concoction made by Dean's called "Choco-Riffic!", which I used to think contained neither milk nor chocolate, but apparently does after reading the label - there's at least some milk, and cocoa.
I'm always skeptical when an ingredient name is modified to become a comparison instead. Chocolatey in no way means it has any chocolate at all in it. In the same way wines have "a hint of chocolate on the palate." It's a hint alright, but it's not chocolate. Only, wine descriptions aren't actively trying to trick you.
That's why a lot of popcorn is "Buttery" - it doesn't necessarily have butter in it at all. And it probably doesn't. In the same way "creamy peanut butter" doesn't have cream in it. The difference: the peanut butter description isn't actively trying to trick you.
It may be more pronounced in times where consumers are more price-conscious, as companies try to raise/maintain profits without avoid raising prices -- hoping that budget minded consumers will accept this tradeoff more than in extravagant times.
"Economics 101" is based on the idea of discerning purchasing agents in the interaction between supply and demand.
What is happening today is that the purchasing agents have a very hard time finding good quality products. Which creates a perverse market.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation#Skimpflation
Recentmost experience: shoes. This friend of mine bought a new pair of shoes only days ago, and started having definite pains after a few days. So he opened them, which revealed that the soles were hollow, the thickness given by a form of honeycomb, in shape of a grid with large holes: he was hammering his heels on plastic blades, hidden by a thin soft buffer.
And some professionals confirm that build quality has greatly declined in general, even beyond this extreme example.
Shoes are probably on par with food in a ranking of basic needs - it makes sense to think that you will have a hard time obtaining food without a decent foot protection. And today, we are having problems in securing even this.
I try to buy shoes that only use leather, cork, steel, and rubber (soles only) as material.
--
Note about that friend of mine, again: almost one week after having ditched the bad pair, and having worn it for five days, of relatively light walking, the pains created are still persisting: this to stress the notion of how bad an idea it is to make and sell harmful shoes.
My prediction is that won’t happen. There’s been too much consolidation and efficiencies through scale that it’s impossible for a company to get founded to sell a toilet paper that’s not 20% thinner or any of the other examples mentioned.
On the upside at least companies are cheating us out of our money only and no longer selling us products that will kill us due to safety or poisoning issues. That’s progress.
So of course I’m going to buy the cheaper 1000 sheet 2-ply toilet paper because according to the specs they are the same product, just one is cheaper. Toilet paper isn’t sold by weight to consumers. Even sheet sizes can be different between brands. And now 2-ply is no longer a meaningful attribute.
I mean, nobody who cares about quality toilet paper was using Scott in the first place. There are many options that market themselves as being higher quality, but more expensive.
One example: try to buy a nice metal or leather band for an Apple Watch. There's the low-end ones, which are 4$ on alibaba re-sold on Amazon for 12$. There's the X00$ Apple-made first party ones, and that's it. Nobody's making a really nice ~45$ leather band without the Apple name (that's obviously not just the cheap alibaba ones with a better marketing site).
Or anywhere close to one used in $5k+ plain watches.