MSE News: 'Value' supermarket brands as good as standard – study

geordie_joe

kerri_gt wrote: »

But bangers, I buy more expensive for the meat content

You need to research "meat content" in sausages. 55% of the "meat content" a manufacturer states on the front of the package can be fat and connective tissue.

A sausage that 'claims' to be 97% meat can actually have 50% fat and connective tissue.

Try it for your self, next time you are in a supermarket pick up a packet of sausages with "97% meat" on the front, then look at the back and find the fat content. The ask yourself, "how can a sausage that contains 97% meat also contain 24.x% fat"?

The answer is very easy.

TurkishDelight

I think reading this thread that I now know why so many are in debt on this site.

There's nothing wrong with much of the value products. If you insist on looking down your nose at them without even trying for yourself then that's just pure snobbery.

I'd rather spend my pennies on things I like rather than spend more on something that tastes the same but has a bit of pretty labelling.

Percy1983

I remember taking a friend shopping who at home with her parents always had the top brands, with her own place she was struggling to keep it up.

We went to asda and got her whole shopping on the good old green and white labels in asda, some of it she said never again to which she moved up to asda's own. In the end she now has a mix of products but saves herself a lot of money.

Funnily for me I haven't actually tried many of the top products as my mum never bought them, so for me its very much I don't know what I am missing and to be honest I don't care. I like the tastes of what I eat and it keeps me alive.

As for people saying this is a bad article, overall it is promoting the 'drop a brand idea' which is good advice to anybody.

rickbonar

The headline article implies all "value" items are equal but looking carefully you see in fact it says SOME value items are as good. (or better)


Which is what I have found ... I remember a study some 20 years ago where the consumer magazine "Which" tested washing up liquids to find out whether indeed the claims of a well known brand and its rivals really did wash up more dishes for your money than average. Although this major brand actually did pretty well and was in the top 5 actually it was a leading supermarkets own "super concentrated" that did more dishes and was somewhat cheaper and better value for money.

Once again I've got to say it only some of the cheap versions are as good and some are not.

for example breakfast cereal

Morrison's .... the value cornflakes are dreadful ( and unless you're starving fit only for the dustbin) compared with the top brand yet the rice crackles compared with the top brand are of equal quality IMO

I think it's a question of trial and error to find out which is which... I find buy one package of the name brand and at the same time similar with the value one and shortlist the good ones and note down the bad ones to avoid.

The inherent problem of articles like highlighting the fact that certain value products are the same quality as the name brands will only make the supermarkets and producers withdraw or worsen the quality of the value products as the trusty old british mug buyers will finally cotton on & stop the old "you get what you pay for" mantra.

Truth is a lot of us have realised this for years and it is really the emperors clothes principle. But this could spell the end of it if we're not careful.
This is particularly true with "designer" labels/brands ....chortle chortle....... remember when Tesco bought US levi's for sale in the UK at US prices...... well look it up if you don't.

Do your own research and keep it to yourself!;)

rickbonar

Forgot to mention that their are more than one tier of value items.......... you can have basics/value base label items or next up supermarket own label versions or the name brands original versions and these can range between being virtually identical to absolute polar opposites......the commonly quoted baked beans though ...in fact aren't baked beans only produced by cross and blackwell or heinz in the UK? ...... so your supermarket version basics will be one of those two... ( again same with Harrods baked beans ... chortle chortle)
look at the range in price....

Mind you not sure about aldi and lidl baked beans though maybe they're imports?????

Li0nhead

Some of you are missing the point. All the article is saying in effect is that some items are the same quality as ones you pay more for. Try and see for personal preference. If you dont like it simply switch back and most supermarkets will have a "if for whatever reason your not satisfied with this product..." refund policy if you want your money back. So your losing nothing and potentially saving.

minerva_windsong

Generally I go for the own brand stuff rather than the value range - the exception is generally if it's to go in something, such as tinned tomatoes for a pasta sauce. I have also bought Asda value soup and spaghetti in the past and it was OK if in need of some tarting up, and Asda value raisins were all right in porridge too.

If however there is branded stuff on offer that undercuts the own brands I'll go for that, and I won't compromise on Yorkshire Tea or Loyd Grossman sauces (though the latter is only bought when they're on special offer and kept as a back-up dinner).

Soubrette

The_Thrilla wrote: »

I agree with Nebo247 and Geordie Joe. The article is totally misleading, and it minces words like it were written by a politician. "It has the same nutritional value." A tin of John West Skipjack Tuna may well have the same nutritional value as a tin of cat food, but no way am I eating a Whiskas salad. Yes a jar of own brand instant coffee may be a lot cheaper than the mocha beans I buy specially, or even a bag of Douwe Egberts ground coffee, but the own brand instant is undrinkable. And coffee is a good example. I have never seen own brand ground coffee or beans. But I have seen own brand instant coffee. Why? Because the instant coffee is processed.

So when you are buying tins of this own brand carp, you are buying corporate food. Yes there may not be any detectable difference between a branded name of white bread and the BASIC brand. That is because both breads are baked by the so-called Chorleywood method, which flash-proves, and loads the bread with extra gluten. The resulting bread is more like eating cotton wool than bread. It doesn't matter who makes it, or what name is on the packet, or what Suffolk Trading Standards or MSE says, I ain't eating that !!!!!!.

If you buy raw meat from a butcher, fish from the fishmonger, and fresh fruit and vegetables, you don't need to eat corporate food, and you can avoid all the carp that that Suffolk Trading Standards and MSE are shilling.

Why did I have a fresh pineapple for breakfast, when I could have had a tin of Tesco own-brand pineapple chunks in a gooey syrup? Give me a break!

I think you are conflating several issues Thrilla

Some people don't mind eating junk and some people don't care if they are eating corporate food. The article is not about these issues.

Using your whiskas example - say I loved the taste of whiskas compared to the taste of tuna chunks. The only thing stopping them buying it is that I think the tuna chunks are more nutritional than the whiskas. Turns out no - they are exactly the same, I prefers the cheaper whiskas so whiskas salad here I come

That's all the article is about - if you can't taste a difference between a value or ordinary brand (or if you prefer the value taste for some products) then some value brands are nutritionally as good as the ordinary brand so unless something other than taste drives you - you might as well buy value.

Personally I'd have preferred some qualification in the headlines - some value brands as good as ordinary brands but I guess that is a journalism thing:mad:

thisisace

TurkishDelight wrote: »

I think reading this thread that I now know why so many are in debt on this site.

There's nothing wrong with much of the value products. If you insist on looking down your nose at them without even trying for yourself then that's just pure snobbery.

I'd rather spend my pennies on things I like rather than spend more on something that tastes the same but has a bit of pretty labelling.

At last, someone who I can agree with!
I buy a lot of Value stuff and nearly all of it has been great.

ElkyElky

I guess they didn't compare Heinz beans and Tesco value beans when they were writing the article. It's like a heavily watered down version of Heinz, only with less tomato added and more synthetic substances.