Tesco/Fairy

Azari

goater78 wrote: »

Again with the ad hominems.

LOL.

I didn't call anyone anything.

If anyone chooses to categorise themselves on the basis of some definition I gave that is entirely their own affair.

(I note you have nothing substantive to say. )

System

Azari wrote: »

LOL.

I didn't call anyone anything.

If anyone chooses to categorise themselves on the basis of some definition I gave that is entirely their own affair.

(I note you have nothing substantive to say. )

Yeah sorry I was busy so could only write a quick reply

My issue is you believe that companies are being dishonest by reducing a products size but keeping the price the same. It seems pretty clear that currently companies are struggling and prices are going up. Therefore companies are being faced with the decision to either cut sizes or increase the price of the product.

I do not believe that raising the price is honest and reducing the size of the product is dishonest. It seems a very simplistic view on business.

I will revert back to your previous post of "we will have to agree to disagree"

Azari

goater78 wrote: »

I do not believe that raising the price is honest and reducing the size of the product is dishonest. It seems a very simplistic view on business.

I will revert back to your previous post of "we will have to agree to disagree"

So, just to be clear:

You do not believe that, rather than plainly increasing the price so that the change in value is clearly visible, actually spending money on new packaging and re-jigging the production machinery to produce a near identical product that is worse value but that will not be seen as having changed by a great many customers is in any way dishonest?

OK.

System

Azari wrote: »

So, just to be clear:

You do not believe that, rather than plainly increasing the price so that the change in value is clearly visible, actually spending money on new packaging and re-jigging the production machinery to produce a near identical product that is worse value but that will not be seen as having changed by a great many customers is in any way dishonest?

OK.

If the customer doesn't notice the amount has reduced in size then that is obviously the correct decision to make as the size must not have been relevant.

Your spending money on new packaging is a ridiculous argument. It will not cost a company any significant amount of money to ask for the exact same packaging in a smaller size. In fact it would save them money in the long run as less raw materials are used.

In addition I am not sure if you have any experience of packaging but its not difficult to recalibrate a machine to use a different sized product.Most companies produce different sizes of their products anyway so its not great problem to calibrate the machines for a different sizes.

pawsies

bluffer wrote: »

how is it tescos fault?

Tesco are keeping it at same price

System

pawsies wrote: »

Tesco are keeping it at same price

I would assume Fairy are selling it to Tesco at the same price?

ThumbRemote

goater78 wrote: »

I would assume Fairy are selling it to Tesco at the same price?

You have no basis for that assumption.

System

ThumbRemote wrote: »

You have no basis for that assumption.

Its obviously a guess, however I think its a reasoned guess, based on my knowledge of the relationship between a supplier and a retailer (which is what I do for a living).

If Fairy have reduced the size of the product and the product is on sale at the same price then I think there is a very good chance that the price between Fairy and Tesco has stayed the same. If Fairy had reduced the price and size and Tesco had kept the product the same price then I would agree with Azari that a dishonest practice was present. However I would be very surprised if this was true.

Dave_C_2

goater78 wrote: »

Your spending money on new packaging is a ridiculous argument. It will not cost a company any significant amount of money to ask for the exact same packaging in a smaller size. In fact it would save them money in the long run as less raw materials are used.

I beg to differ on this point. If it's a smaller plastic bottle then it will mean a new mould (or moulds) for the smaller bottle. These are anything but cheap because they take a lot of time and effort to make. So the decision has to be deliberate and has to be made in well in advance of the change. To a lesser extent new labelling has to be designed and approved.

Dave

System

Dave_C wrote: »

I beg to differ on this point. If it's a smaller plastic bottle then it will mean a new mould (or moulds) for the smaller bottle. These are anything but cheap because they take a lot of time and effort to make. So the decision has to be deliberate and has to be made in well in advance of the change. To a lesser extent new labelling has to be designed and approved.

Dave

Yeah that's fair enough. It depends on the product. In the example in this thread I would argue they use the same packing as before and just have a small change of label with the new quantity on