The great Walkers swindle

peachyprice

Zandoni wrote: »

Again I will say I agree multipacks are more value, but they would be better value if they had 34.5g bags in them.

No, they wouldn't, instead of 6 x 25g @ £1.05 per 100g = £1.58
they would be 6 x 34.5 @ £1.05 per 100g = £2.17

This is the maths you and OP just can't understand. I makes absolutely no difference what size the pack are.

Do you honestly think they're going to sell 6 x 34.5 g for the same price they sell 6 x 25g? Of course they're not.

unholyangel

Oh well, looks like OP will more or less get his wish - just not how he wishes it.

Proposal
Recommendation 10: For existing and new savoury snack packs marketed
as, or alongside, single portions:- by the end of 2012, businesses should
make readily available single-portion packaging sizes for sale separately equal
to or less than 30 g, and market these in such a way to encourage consumer
preference for these smaller pack sizes.
For products that are not currently available in pack sizes of 30 g or less, the
timeframe is extended to the end of 2015.


We have noted that the industry has adopted a
standard serving/portion of 25 g of savoury snacks and that there are examples
of pack sizes up to 50 g being marketed as providing up to two servings.

So individual packs will be decreased in size.

So, walkers = swindlers or Uk = nanny state?

wealdroam

unholyangel wrote: »

Oh well, looks like OP will more or less get his wish - just not how he wishes it.



So individual packs will be decreased in size.

So, walkers = swindlers or Uk = nanny state?

That's interesting Unholyangel.
But isn't that document you have quoted from just a consultation document?

Is there anything out there more concrete?

unholyangel

wealdroam wrote: »

That's interesting Unholyangel.
But isn't that document you have quoted from just a consultation document?

Is there anything out there more concrete?

I actually went looking because I was recalling some government legislation calling for manufacturers to reduce portion sizes in order to make portions more "healthy". Tbh that tied in with what i remember being said so i didnt bother to keep looking Part of the governments efforts to tackle obesity.

While it may work for some, for the vast majority it will probably be like "diet" cigarettes......they just end up having 2 instead of 1 to compensate :X

JethroUK

unholyangel wrote: »

Oh well, looks like OP will more or less get his wish - just not how he wishes it.



So individual packs will be decreased in size.

So, walkers = swindlers or Uk = nanny state?

Isn't it usual/good practice to identify a quote and not just post them anonymously?

Like i have just identified yours

And i cant see anything there to stop the Walkers Swindle

Zandoni

peachyprice wrote: »

No, they wouldn't, instead of 6 x 25g @ £1.05 per 100g = £1.58
they would be 6 x 34.5 @ £1.05 per 100g = £2.17

This is the maths you and OP just can't understand. I makes absolutely no difference what size the pack are.

Do you honestly think they're going to sell 6 x 34.5 g for the same price they sell 6 x 25g? Of course they're not.

I have never said or expected 6 x 34.5 to be the same price as the small ones, I just want pack sizes the same whether they are sold singly or in multipacks, that way you are getting a true price and can easily see what you are getting.

Currently there must be a good percentage of the population who think they are getting 6 x 34.5 in multipacks, this means they think it's a better bargain than it is.

unholyangel

JethroUK wrote: »

Isn't it usual/good practice to identify a quote and not just post them anonymously?

Like i have just identified yours

Its good practice to work out value of products per 100g/100ml/whatever when shopping so you can choose the deal which gives you the best value too but you don't seem to follow that practice.

JethroUK

unholyangel wrote: »

Its good practice to work out value of products per 100g/100ml/whatever when shopping so you can choose the deal which gives you the best value too but you don't seem to follow that practice.

If by that you mean you will continue to post anonymous quotes (stuff you've made up yourself) - I'll be ignoring you for here on

I've been posting on forums since internet was invented and 1st time I've come across unsubstantiated quotes

No wish to see them again

wealdroam

JethroUK wrote: »

I've been posting on forums since internet was invented and 1st time I've come across unsubstantiated quotes

:rotfl:
The internet is full of unsubstantiated quotes.

But I had noticed you tend not to read everything, so that explains a lot.

Zandoni

unholyangel wrote: »

Oh well, looks like OP will more or less get his wish - just not how he wishes it.



So individual packs will be decreased in size.

So, walkers = swindlers or Uk = nanny state?

I'm happy with that, even if it's being done on health grounds, all I wanted was a standard pack size.