4 ms·
While the trend they're highlighting is absolutely real, it looks like the math in their first example isn't quite right: > For example, Carrefour said a bottl
by edouard-harris 3y ago
While the trend they're highlighting is absolutely real, it looks like the math in their first example isn't quite right:
> For example, Carrefour said a bottle of sugar-free peach-flavored Lipton Ice Tea, produced by PepsiCo, shrank to 1.25 liters (0.33 gallons) from 1.5 liters (0.3 gallons), resulting in a 40% effective increase in the price per liter.
Assuming the price per unit stayed the same (which is the implication), this is a 20% effective increase, not 40%.
- huhtenberg 3y agoI peer-reviewed your nitpick and it is indeed a 20% increase.
- moritzwarhier 3y agoApperently you did not.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- huhtenberg 3y agoBased on the figures from GP's comment it's 20%.
- extasia 3y agoThey also made this mistake in the guardian article, I emailed them to correct it!
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- marsokod 3y agoI was able to find the details (source in French: https://photo.capital.fr/shrinkflation-voici-la-liste-des-produits-concernes-56672#lipton-fad50 https://photo.capital.fr/shrinkflation-voici-la-liste-des-pr...) In addition to the volume reduction, the price also went up from 1.45€ to 1.63€. So the price per litre went from 0.97€/L to 1.36€/L. Much closer to the 40% figure.
- moritzwarhier 3y agoThanks for providing the only reply containing factual information.
- gloria_mundi 3y agoThey also got the conversion wrong: 1.5 liters is 0.4 gallons, not 0.3.
- bdsa 3y agoImperial gallon vs US gallon