On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:15:18 -0600, Melba's Jammin' wrote:

> In article >,
> Goomba38 > wrote:
>
>> Obviously sometimes they do have to put in replacement ingredients for
>> the undesired ingredient. I can see that being costly or at least the
>> same cost. But to charge more just when a manufacturer leaves something
>> out baffles me?
>
> If getting to "less" requires removing something, added cost makes sense.

The best way to think about these things is how much energy is expended
getting the product to your local supermarket. The more energy it takes
the more expensive the product will be.

Removing something the product has to begin with means extra energy is
expended and the consumer ends up paying for it.

--

-Jeff B.


"Excuse me.
I don't mean to impose,
but I am the Ocean."

~ The Salton Sea