"Scott" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Doug Kanter" > wrote:
>
>> 2) The actual reasons are not known to you or I, but could be if you
>> wrote a
>> letter to the company instead of complaining about it in a newsgroup
>> where
>> nobody has the ability to give you a definitive answer.
>
> Oh, and how have I "complained" about it? Besides stating that the price
> was raised in a manner that would obscure the rise, I made no judgment
> about the matter.

Two responses:
- How was it obscured? Were the packages legally marked with their new size?
- In order for you to NOT consider them obscured, how would you like to have
seen the transition handled?



>> 3) You say I haven't come up with a better explanation, but you have yet
>> to
>> comment on any of the well-intended things I've written. Your most
>> interesting response has merely been "They do it so they can raise the
>> price
>> without appearing to raise the price." You have refused to think about
>> why
>> it might have been necessary to raise the price.
>
> Irrelevant. Whatever the reasons they may have had to raise the price,
> it was raised. I did not comment on the legitimacy on their reasons; the
> comment was on the methodology.

In case you missed the question above, here it is again:
- In order for you to NOT consider them obscured, how would you like to have
seen the transition handled?




>> 6) The tone of this entire discussion suggests that some of the
>> participants
>> suspect an evil conspiracy. But, nobody is complaining about the other
>> grocery products which have gone through the exact same changes. Why is
>> that?
>
> If you look at past discussions in rfc, there have been discussions on
> other product shrinkages. Someone had an recent experience with Breyer's
> ice cream, so that was topical.

Everyone wants their pay to increase each year, but nobody wants products to
go up in price. Too bad that's next to impossible, unless size, quantity,
quality or place/method of manufacturing are changed.



>> 7) My neighbor's driveway is the same size as mine. He's very happy with
>> the
>> company which completely repaved it 5 years ago, so he gave me a copy of
>> the
>> invoice for the work because I need to have mine repaved in the spring.
>> In
>> addition to the company he used, I called 3 others for estimates. They
>> were
>> all pretty close in price, but every one of them was about 40% higher
>> than
>> what my neighbor paid. This is far beyond normal inflation. Can you guess
>> what raw material the increase is based on? If you answer yes, do you
>> feel
>> the increase was still unjustified?
>
> Your analogy is poor. If they'd maintained the same price but quietly
> noted that the thickness of the asphalt would be decreased, that's a
> different matter.

And I'd be a lousy shopper if I didn't take that into account. Address the
issue. Is there any sane reason why, if the raw material increases
drastically in price, that the finished product's price should be
unaffected?



>> Your turn. You need to go back through the thread and actually read what
>> I've written before you can tell me that I haven't come up with a better
>> explanation.
>
> The justification for a price increase isn't the issue I had commented
> upon, and you mainly addressed justification. In one post, you made an
> analogy to candy, stating that "There are different case packs for candy
> - the ones intended for the displays by the cashiers, and the ones
> intended to hang on pegs. We sell more of the former category, so it's
> probably safe to say that impulse purchases are greater than purchases
> made in the candy aisle. The size/price target is probably tuned to that
> issue. In other words, which price point does better in which place in
> the store?" How is that relevant to Breyer's ice cream? On one hand,
> I've only seen it sold in a single section in the store (frozen foods),
> and on the other, there aren't multiple types of packages anyway.

It's totally relevant because the manufacturers (and some stores) know
EXACTLY what works and what does not. I've asked you what price would be too
much to pay for Breyers. Rest assured that Breyers already knows what you're
willing to pay. Not only that, but they know WHEN you're willing to pay
various prices, based on holidays & seasons. Therefore, they knew that due
to increased cost of the raw ingredients, as well as the cost of freight,
not shrinking the package would've forced them to price the product right
into a different category, one in which they don't want to compete.



> The one time you *did* directly comment on it, you supported my
> statement. You wrote: "It's likely that Hershey has hard data which
> indicates that they'll sell a lot more candy bars at 99 cents than at
> $1.29, even if the more expensive one is bigger. Why do we expect
> Hershey to choose the stupid decision instead of the smart one?" Which
> is essentially what I said: they put a price increase into place by
> cutting the amount of product while maintaining the same price. They
> know that maintaining a *seemingly* low price for less product will keep
> their sales higher than raising the price for the same quantity. Did I
> ever call this a stupid decision?

How old are you?



> People pay more attention to price than packaging specifications; almost
> everyone would notice a significant price increase. But so long as the
> bill doesn't go up, far fewer will notice that they got less product and
> a similar increase in per-ounce cost.

You should shop two ways. One, you look at the unit price if it matters to
you. If you're comparing Wesson canola oil to the store brand and you're
happy with either one, you buy based on unit price. Two, you look at the
unit price as a matter of interest, but you buy the higher priced item
anyway because it's unique or you simply like it better. So, noticing has
more than one purpose. And, if you do NOT notice the unit price, whose
problem is that?




> So, you still need to give a better explanation. What reason do they
> have for shrinking the size of the product without raising the price, if
> it's not to raise the price without appearing to raise the price? The
> *need* to raise the price was not the issue.

Answer this question, and perhaps we can get somewhe For a half gallon
of Breyer's ice cream, what is the maximum you'd be willing to pay before
you'd choose, instead, to wait for it to go on sale? Since you're familiar
with the product, you must have a sense of the price range you've seen over
the years. This is easy. "If the price went to X or higher, I'd wait for a
sale or a coupon". What is X?