The great Walkers swindle

peachyprice

Zandoni wrote: »

A bit different this one, not so easy to determine what is a single pack.

Exactly, the whole 'minced beef' pricing structure is designed to confuse on a far larger scale than a packet of crisps.

Zandoni

LouLou wrote: »

Unsure if Walkers will respond on here, I've had a FB reply, and here's the email I got:

"...Thank you for your recent email.

I would like to assure you that our packets are filled by weight, not volume, but as you have noticed, we also require a measurement of air to help protect the crisps and prevent breakages.

The packets within a multipack are lighter in weight than our standard packets as many of our consumers who choose our multipack bags use them as an accompaniment to a sandwich rather than as a snack in itself.

I shall be passing your comments onto my colleagues within our marketing and development teams for their information...."

To be honest, the much bigger scandal/concern on my mind is the internet/phone/text snooping that's being discussed today. But hey, crisps are more important to some people, right?

That would be the answer that we would expect. I'd have no problem with that at all if they gave them a different name.

Obviously crisps are important to you too, you have taken our concerns to the manufacturer.

peachyprice

Zandoni wrote: »

Perhaps it should be 'The Great Multi-Pack Swindle' but I feel it's a gross exaggeration to "prevalent in pretty much every product group"

Oh, the irony.

Zandoni

peachyprice wrote: »

Exactly, the whole 'minced beef' pricing structure is designed to confuse on a far larger scale than a packet of crisps.

Do you think so

Zandoni

peachyprice wrote: »

Oh, the irony.

No irony there at all

peachyprice

Zandoni wrote: »

Do you think so

Yes, I do. They have 5 different weights of mince in the same chiller which, with the exclusion of 250g are in the same packaging. It's a minefield I tell ya.

LouLou

Zandoni wrote: »

That would be the answer that we would expect. I'd have no problem with that at all if they gave them a different name.

Obviously crisps are important to you too, you have taken our concerns to the manufacturer.

Oh please, the irony is killing me.

Less of the cheap (and incorrect) digs please. Is something up with your short-term memory? It was only yesterday I said I'd contact Walkers as both you and JethroUK are content to complain and rant amongst yourselves and not approach the company. It was on your behalf (please, don't thank me), and to stop this nonsensical merry-go-round that's going on.

Talking to yourself and repeating the same guff is like p!ssing in the wind, you have to be more direct if you're annoyed enough and want resolution.

If you look at my first post on this thread, I said I rarely eat crisps, just the odd multipack from my niece's school supplies.

Most of my replies on here have been responding to you (who apparently "doesn't care enough" to contact the company you're bleating on about).

peachyprice

I never buy Walkers multi-pack crisps, ever.

(just thought I'd throw that out there)

tomwakefield

I've got a radical solution.

Define a standard bag as 25g. Then you can say that, when sold singly, Walkers throw in a few grams extra free, for better value. Bonus!

arcon5

tomwakefield wrote: »

I've got a radical solution.

Define a standard bag as 25g. Then you can say that, when sold singly, Walkers throw in a few grams extra free, for better value. Bonus!

Wouldn't change anything though, they'd still be deceiving consumers who would think the single packets of crisps are the 25g packets like you'd expect in a multipack!