3 ms·

I worked at McDonald’s a decade prior to that, and they were 10:1 then, too. I think it’s possible and maybe likely some other chains might have switched from b

by cestith 2mo ago

I worked at McDonald’s a decade prior to that, and they were 10:1 then, too. I think it’s possible and maybe likely some other chains might have switched from being 8:1 to 10:1 since the market leaders already had that size. There are much better examples though than some isolated regional player’s beef patty sizes. We used to buy half gallons and gallons of ice cream. Brands started selling 60 or 62 ounces instead of 64. Over the years, it’s gotten to where some brands sell 48 ounces - three pints - instead of 64. Breakfast cereals have had similar shrinking sizes.

furytrader 2mo ago
Breakfast cereal boxes have gotten so small, it's ridiculous. They might as well label the package "Fun Size" since it's clearly not "Full Size".
xp84 2mo ago
Shrinkflation is to me the best example of why pure short-term-ism is a cancer. The first jackass to do it, say by taking a soup can of 16 ounces and adjusting it to 15.75oz, it boosted the profits that quarter. Mathematically, we could keep asymptotically shaving the size by 1.6% every couple years forever, but IRL that won't work because the amounts needed to be shaved would get so small as to not have the cost savings effect (or even be possible to precisely measure). So in reality the amounts need to be more like an actual quarter or half ounce at a time. So at some point the soup can, the candy bar, etc. would become so small that with one more shrink, people will recognize that it can't even feed one person, and at that point, all the "value" that was extracted by the previous CEOs to goose their stock price short term will be exhausted, and they'll have to move on to watering it down or whatever. But our packages will stay that idiotic minimum size forever.
- cheschire 2mo ago
  Don't you remember how they recovered from this after 2008? That's when they started selling "family size" options that are bigger, but with a not-so-obvious price increase where you can't really tell if it's more or less expensive per oz. Price-conscious shoppers still buy the smaller thing if it's cheaper per oz (and only if the stores show the price per oz on the shelf), but most people just get the bigger size because that's how much they want to consume, and they can't really tell that the 15% increase in size does not equate to 19% increase in cost. Many stores would stock the family size separate from the regular size so the shoppers couldnt easily compare price per oz. Eventually the family size just becomes the regular size, but now at the higher price. Then the shrinking happens again.
  - jimmydddd 2mo ago
    Many have noticed that the super large sizes at Costco, etc. often are more expensive per item or oz. than the sale price of a regular size at a Shoprite or whatever.
  - account42 2mo ago
    And the same happens with subpar ingredients - when people notice they then bring back an "original formula" edition that is of course higher priced.
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
  - noir_lord 2mo ago
    > (and only if the stores show the price per oz on the shelf) Legal requirement that they do in the UK (though in metric units), so it's £/L and £/Kg (or for smaller items per 100g and then some nuance on unit prices for things not sold by weight/volume). It does make their shenanigans with multipacks and such way more obvious by design. > The PMO also requires traders, where applicable, to display the ‘unit price’ – which is the price which would be charged for the relevant unit of the goods, depending upon how the goods are sold. Unit pricing can be a useful tool for consumers. It allows consumers to compare the price and value of similar products. This can be helpful when making a decision between similar products that are sold in different sizes or quantities. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/price-marking-order-2004-government-guidance/price-marking-order-2004-government-guidance https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/price-marking-ord...
    - ido 2mo ago
      It’s this way in the EU as well and it wouldn’t surprise me if this is EU regulation from pre-brexit that hasn't been repelled by uk govs post-brexit.
  - zippyman55 2mo ago
    Interesting comment. I d noticed the family sizes that I used to see in the cereal isle are not as common. I wonder if they are preparing for a re-introduction.
- pjc50 2mo ago
  This is very old, though. The Roman era experienced monetary inflation through "coin clipping", which was literally shaving bits of silver off coins and remelting it together. This is why modern era coins often have milled tamper-evident edges, even if the metal is no longer worth the face value.

by cestith 2mo ago

furytrader 2mo ago

Breakfast cereal boxes have gotten so small, it's ridiculous. They might as well label the package "Fun Size" since it's clearly not "Full Size".

xp84 2mo ago

Shrinkflation is to me the best example of why pure short-term-ism is a cancer. The first jackass to do it, say by taking a soup can of 16 ounces and adjusting it to 15.75oz, it boosted the profits that quarter. Mathematically, we could keep asymptotically shaving the size by 1.6% every couple years forever, but IRL that won't work because the amounts needed to be shaved would get so small as to not have the cost savings effect (or even be possible to precisely measure). So in reality the amounts need to be more like an actual quarter or half ounce at a time. So at some point the soup can, the candy bar, etc. would become so small that with one more shrink, people will recognize that it can't even feed one person, and at that point, all the "value" that was extracted by the previous CEOs to goose their stock price short term will be exhausted, and they'll have to move on to watering it down or whatever. But our packages will stay that idiotic minimum size forever.

cheschire 2mo ago
Don't you remember how they recovered from this after 2008? That's when they started selling "family size" options that are bigger, but with a not-so-obvious price increase where you can't really tell if it's more or less expensive per oz. Price-conscious shoppers still buy the smaller thing if it's cheaper per oz (and only if the stores show the price per oz on the shelf), but most people just get the bigger size because that's how much they want to consume, and they can't really tell that the 15% increase in size does not equate to 19% increase in cost. Many stores would stock the family size separate from the regular size so the shoppers couldnt easily compare price per oz. Eventually the family size just becomes the regular size, but now at the higher price. Then the shrinking happens again.
- jimmydddd 2mo ago
  Many have noticed that the super large sizes at Costco, etc. often are more expensive per item or oz. than the sale price of a regular size at a Shoprite or whatever.
- account42 2mo ago
  And the same happens with subpar ingredients - when people notice they then bring back an "original formula" edition that is of course higher priced.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- noir_lord 2mo ago
  > (and only if the stores show the price per oz on the shelf) Legal requirement that they do in the UK (though in metric units), so it's £/L and £/Kg (or for smaller items per 100g and then some nuance on unit prices for things not sold by weight/volume). It does make their shenanigans with multipacks and such way more obvious by design. > The PMO also requires traders, where applicable, to display the ‘unit price’ – which is the price which would be charged for the relevant unit of the goods, depending upon how the goods are sold. Unit pricing can be a useful tool for consumers. It allows consumers to compare the price and value of similar products. This can be helpful when making a decision between similar products that are sold in different sizes or quantities. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/price-marking-order-2004-government-guidance/price-marking-order-2004-government-guidance https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/price-marking-ord...
  - ido 2mo ago
    It’s this way in the EU as well and it wouldn’t surprise me if this is EU regulation from pre-brexit that hasn't been repelled by uk govs post-brexit.
- zippyman55 2mo ago
  Interesting comment. I d noticed the family sizes that I used to see in the cereal isle are not as common. I wonder if they are preparing for a re-introduction.
pjc50 2mo ago
This is very old, though. The Roman era experienced monetary inflation through "coin clipping", which was literally shaving bits of silver off coins and remelting it together. This is why modern era coins often have milled tamper-evident edges, even if the metal is no longer worth the face value.