Downsizing

Generali

vivatifosi wrote: »

I don't know whether it is the BBC narrative, or more likely, poor journalism.

It's clear though that this is about subtle ways of charging the consumer more and nothing else. For example, Doritos multipack has just downsized from 6 to 5. Why add a couple of percent to the price when you can downsize the pack and in effect charge considerably more?

For me the measure of how much food has gone up is the price of the staples. You can't so easily hide increases in price in fruit, veg, bread, meat, pasta and basic dried goods.

I agree.

In the olden days when inflation was high enough that you really noticed the prices of everything going up, many manufacturers did the opposite thing: they made the product bigger to make it seem like you were getting more value for your money.

Mars were particularly keen on that strategy.

Graham_Devon

Generali wrote: »

Did the BBC really claim that changes in product sizes couldn't be picked up by the ONS in producing inflation figures? If they did then they got that wrong:



http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/quality/quality-information/economic-statistics/quality-and-methodology-information-for-cpi-and-rpi.pdf

(page 6)

This stuff annoys me. It's a ludicrous idea that the ONS would miss something so obvious as the fact that different quantities of product are sold and it took me about 5 minutes with Google and the ONS website to show they are wrong.

I suspect the trouble is that this fits the BBC's narrative at the moment: the economy is knackered and the Government is trying to hide things from you. You can't trust the Tories.

Are you saying that when Pampers reduced their pack sizes from 62 to 58 nappies, but kept the same price, the ONS would have recognised that and updated the index?

The 2 buscuits taken from a pack will also have been noted by the ONS?

Did a search and found this from the US index?

But does the CPI reflect those stealth price increases? According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the answer is maybe. The BLS notes that it sends data collectors into stores every year and "if the selected item is no longer available, or if there have been changes in the quality or quantity (for example, eggs sold in packages of ten when they previously were sold by the dozen) of the good or service since the last time prices were collected, the economic assistant selects a new item or records the quality change in the current item."

It is possible that the BLS's national office makes adjustments to reflect smaller quantities. According to the BLS, "the recorded information is sent to the national office of BLS, where commodity specialists who have detailed knowledge about the particular goods or services priced review the data. These specialists check the data for accuracy and consistency and make any necessary corrections or adjustments, which can [include] an adjustment for a change in the size or quantity of a packaged item."

Given the huge difference between the small rises in the prices of food and energy reflected in the CPI and the much higher amounts that consumers are paying when you adjust for smaller package sizes, it looks like something is being lost in tracking the prices that consumers really pay.

Seems a more manul task, where a new product may well be selected rather than the change in quantity noted.

I can understand replacement products taking note of differing quantities, but does the inflation index really drill down to a pack of pampers for example? It's not a replacement product.

Graham_Devon

Doing a search for the above (haven't found anything), did find an article where Which have done some research on shrinking products and it seems it's happening in every single aisle of the supermarket.

http://conversation.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/shrinking-products-supermarket-pack-sizes-prices-stay-same/comment-page-3/

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Are you saying that when Pampers reduced their pack sizes from 62 to 58 nappies, but kept the same price, the ONS would have recognised that and updated the index?

The 2 buscuits taken from a pack will also have been noted by the ONS?

Did a search and found this from the US index?

Seems a more manul task, where a new product may well be selected rather than the change in quantity noted.

I can understand replacement products taking note of differing quantities, but does the inflation index really drill down to a pack of pampers for example? It's not a replacement product.

That is exactly what they do: they use unit pricing.

Pampers nappies cost xp each rather than £x.yz/packet at Tesco, at Sainsbury and at the corner shop. The ONS try to measure in that sort of detail. That is very clearly what they say in that piece I linked to. If you don't believe me read the document! I don't know if you've ever met a statistician who works for the ONS but I have and they are a very diligent bunch, to the point of being slightly obsessive and dull (to most people, not to me!).

A little dig around on the ONS website shows that this has been the case since a comprehensive review of inflation measurement was undertaken in the period 1999-2002. Changing packet sizes was recognised in that review as needing to be rethought and so it was.

That the US index has a flaw in it doesn't mean that flaw is replicated in the UK's indices.

Graham_Devon

I guess it's called "hidden inflation" then as we simply don't notice it as much.

But as you say, why does the BBC (This was research from watchdog) get away with saying it? They clearly suggested it was to get around price inflation.

Generali

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I guess it's called "hidden inflation" then as we simply don't notice it as much.

But as you say, why does the BBC (This was research from watchdog) get away with saying it? They clearly suggested it was to get around price inflation.

I have no idea why they are claiming this but it is clearly wrong.

It is a sneaky way for manufacturers to put prices up but it is picked up by the inflation data.

danothy

I remember this coming up on watchdog some 15-18 years ago when Walkers reduced the size of the multi-pack packets from 28g to 25g compared to the 30g single sale packets at the time.

What outrage there was to this downsizing ... in response Walkers issued a 34.5g single sale packet with +15% blazoned all over it and jacked the price. Order was restored.

I don't know what the Walkers sizes are these days, or the prices. All I know is that a bottle of Tesco value squash has jumped from 29p to 32p and then onto 40p this year. I resent that.

Generali

danothy wrote: »

I don't know what the Walkers sizes are these days, or the prices. All I know is that a bottle of Tesco value squash has jumped from 29p to 32p and then onto 40p this year. I resent that.

Do you buy it often enough that the 11p makes a difference?

danothy

Generali wrote: »

Do you buy it often enough that the 11p makes a difference?

Two bottles a week ...

Zero_Sum

noticed recently that John West have reduced their tuna tins from 185g to 160g