These are clearly attempts to deceive consumers, but I don't know if you can put it all on the manufacturers. I think retailers have a role in this as well.

I always find it funny when the retailer leaves the old, larger packaging on display with the new, smaller size. I was in Trader Joe's a couple of months ago and they had two different sized cans of tuna stacked together. I may not have even noticed if they hadn't changed the color of the label slightly. The difference in the size of the can itself was indiscernible.

Reply

I'm going to guess that much market research has shown that people don't notice the shrinking size as much as the higher cost, and that affects sales tremendously. This is nothing that hasn't happened for decades (look at a bag of chips or individual-size bottle of pop). The problem is when you hit a sweet spot like $1 for something, it's hard to move it up to $1.10. $1 or $0.99 is easy, but $1.10 requires a dime and digging around change, etc..

What we'll see is a "new bigger size!" come out for $1.25 or $1.50 down the line, that actually matches an older normal sized that everyone forgot about.

Of course, if we want to be health-conscious, then smaller sizes is the way to go. Less choclate bar=less calories. At the very least, it beats even lower-quality ingredients.

Reply

Smaller sizes, definitely.

I don't want to spend more money, and making the servings smaller will force me to eat less. (Sometimes I eat not the amount I want to, but just to finish eating the whole thing)

Reply

It doesn't matter if they make the packages smaller or just raise the price, the Consumerist will complain endlessly as if inflation doesn't exist.

Reply

NYCubsFan: you caught the vendor sleeping on the job while sneaking in new sizes. When a product package is changed - whether size or label - the vendor reps are supposed to come in and either remove all the old product and send it to some place like Big Lots or put everything on clearance in order to get rid of it. It's great to see someone slip up, since they try so hard to hide the fact that they are sneaking in smaller packages at the same price.

Reply

What really bothers me more than reduced portions are the companies that reduce the quality of ingredients or eliminate some altogether so they can maintain a certain price point. They cynically use their brand recognition and reputation to lure us into buying products that are inferior to the products that created the reputation.

Reply

Smaller packages create more waste. And they may cause some people to go shopping more often, wasting gas. It's both more honest and more energy-efficient to raise the prices for larger packages.

Reply

I would rather the prices go up. My concern is that many recipes will call for a specific amount of something, which just happens to be the exact portion or size that product is sold in (8 oz of cream cheese, 1.5 oz of cholocate, 9 oz wafer cookies). If I then get home and realize I have less than I need, I will be very annoyed and need to spend more money to get just a little more of something.

Reply

Hey, the shrinkage of yogurt is appalling. Teensy little tubs of it for an arm and a leg. It's cheaper just to eat tums for your calcium.

Another victim of the Grocery Shrink Ray: Ice Cream. Used to be 1.75 quart cartons, now some brands are shaving about 2 inches off the top to sell us 1.5 quarts at approx the same price.

Reply