How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models • Hacker News Board

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#11

Post by Ididntdothis » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 1:47 AM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #5

forinti wrote: post #4

This is a process Brazilians know well. Chocolate bars used to have 200g. Some now have less than 100g. Toilet paper rolls used to have 50m; most now have 30m and some have only 10m. This sort of thing started happening in the 1980s, because the government had frozen prices (that always works well). It became such a problem that now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has cha…

> now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has changed. We need this law in the US. I’m not one to push for new regulations, but I have seen this happen time and again with big companies (Nabisco, General Mills) that shrink their boxes and count on the customer not to notice.

On the other hand a lot of candy gets bigger and bigger. I am pretty sure the candy bars and ice cream scoops I got when I was a kid were half of the current size. Or even less.

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#12

Post by geodel » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 1:47 AM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #5

forinti wrote: post #4

This is a process Brazilians know well. Chocolate bars used to have 200g. Some now have less than 100g. Toilet paper rolls used to have 50m; most now have 30m and some have only 10m. This sort of thing started happening in the 1980s, because the government had frozen prices (that always works well). It became such a problem that now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has cha…

> now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has changed. We need this law in the US. I’m not one to push for new regulations, but I have seen this happen time and again with big companies (Nabisco, General Mills) that shrink their boxes and count on the customer not to notice.

Huh, I see most of the time in US price/oz is mentioned along with price of item. This greatly helps me decide if buying larger package could save me some money with having to do calculation myself, which I would have to do in my country.

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#13

Post by gnicholas » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 1:54 AM UTC

geodel wrote: post #12

gnicholas wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has changed. We need this law in the US. I’m not one to push for new regulations, but I have seen this happen time and again with big companies (Nabisco, General Mills) that shrink their boxes and count on the customer not to notice.

Huh, I see most of the time in US price/oz is mentioned along with price of item. This greatly helps me decide if buying larger package could save me some money with having to do calculation myself, which I would have to do in my country.

Yes, this is helpful for comparing two items on the shelf next to each other, and it is present in some stores. But there are only a few items that I actually remember the price/oz between visits. Mostly I remember only the price per package (if anything). For example, Triscuits and Wheat Thins are a good buy at $2/pack, and OK at $2.50/pack. But when they shrink the pack, I'm SOL because I have no idea what the price/oz equivalent is.

Maybe this is "my fault", but I'd guess that most consumers don't pay that much attention to the exact number of ounces (which are sometimes fractional) in the box.

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#14

Post by unimployed » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 1:57 AM UTC

appleiigs wrote: post #10

unimployed wrote: post #7

>The uncertainty principle If it happens on a sufficiently large scale, the practice of tweaking quality in lieu of price could play havoc with essential economic data. Statistical agencies do their best to account for changing product quality, but if adjustments are unexpectedly common or subtle then muted inflation figures could easily be concealing a more turbulent economic picture. Central banks watching for big…

> rarely acknowledged by economists and statisticians inside the field. This is complete false. If you ever took an Econ 101 course, you'd know the fallibility of economic stats are covered at length.

Pretty sure you are being sarcastic or you are not all that experienced.

Talk at length with most economic professionals on /r/economics and you will find the repeatedly stated and unstated views that “the CPI is the most studied economic measurement in the world” and “you are welcome to perform your own study covering the inadequacies of the CPI.” I paraphrased slightly but from memory those quotes are highly accurate, as well as the general dismissiveness and institutionalism/bias pertaining to official economic data. Also for a professional economist to question the accuracy of official economic data is career suicide. Why you rarely see that topic discussed by a professional economist or in a published study.

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#15

Post by JumpCrisscross » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:00 AM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #5

forinti wrote: post #4

This is a process Brazilians know well. Chocolate bars used to have 200g. Some now have less than 100g. Toilet paper rolls used to have 50m; most now have 30m and some have only 10m. This sort of thing started happening in the 1980s, because the government had frozen prices (that always works well). It became such a problem that now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has cha…

> now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has changed. We need this law in the US. I’m not one to push for new regulations, but I have seen this happen time and again with big companies (Nabisco, General Mills) that shrink their boxes and count on the customer not to notice.

> We need this law in the US

We'd end up in a miasma of litigation around whether one product is a reduced quantity of another, or if they're separate product lines.

Products already list quantities. That's enough for someone paying attention to value.

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#16

Post by unimployed » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:18 AM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #13

geodel wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, I see most of the time in US price/oz is mentioned along with price of item. This greatly helps me decide if buying larger package could save me some money with having to do calculation myself, which I would have to do in my country.

Yes, this is helpful for comparing two items on the shelf next to each other, and it is present in some stores. But there are only a few items that I actually remember the price/oz between visits. Mostly I remember only the price per package (if anything). For example, Triscuits and Wheat Thins are a good buy at $2/pack, and OK at $2.50/pack. But when they shrink the pack, I'm SOL because I have no idea what the pric…

I always look for price/weight or price/volume or price/count stickers but many retailers and items only list the price making you do the math.

Even then, I’m aware that many items have differences in content which game the price/measurement like a lower ingredient content (less cocoa per measurement and more fillers or water content).

There is not really a great way to combat these practices if you are not some kind of professional buyer that only purchases at wholesale scales.

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#17

Post by Osiris » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:29 AM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #5

forinti wrote: post #4

This is a process Brazilians know well. Chocolate bars used to have 200g. Some now have less than 100g. Toilet paper rolls used to have 50m; most now have 30m and some have only 10m. This sort of thing started happening in the 1980s, because the government had frozen prices (that always works well). It became such a problem that now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has cha…

> now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has changed. We need this law in the US. I’m not one to push for new regulations, but I have seen this happen time and again with big companies (Nabisco, General Mills) that shrink their boxes and count on the customer not to notice.

I always look at the price per ounce instead of the total price of the item to compare.

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#18

Post by mikepurvis » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:38 AM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #5

forinti wrote: post #4

This is a process Brazilians know well. Chocolate bars used to have 200g. Some now have less than 100g. Toilet paper rolls used to have 50m; most now have 30m and some have only 10m. This sort of thing started happening in the 1980s, because the government had frozen prices (that always works well). It became such a problem that now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has cha…

> now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has changed. We need this law in the US. I’m not one to push for new regulations, but I have seen this happen time and again with big companies (Nabisco, General Mills) that shrink their boxes and count on the customer not to notice.

Consumerist (RIP) used to run a great series called the "grocery shrink ray" where they would call out these changes: https://consumerist.com/tag/shrink-ray/

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#19

Post by ekianjo » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:43 AM UTC

dane-pgp wrote: post #6

forinti wrote: post #4

This is a process Brazilians know well. Chocolate bars used to have 200g. Some now have less than 100g. Toilet paper rolls used to have 50m; most now have 30m and some have only 10m. This sort of thing started happening in the 1980s, because the government had frozen prices (that always works well). It became such a problem that now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has cha…

I'd also like to see a law passed that requires each product to mention on its packaging if its ingredients (even just their relative proportions) have changed. This would apply to things like foods/drinks and also cleaning products. Of course companies would protest, claiming that their recipes are trade secrets, but we already require that products list their ingredients, and we protect trademarks for products, whi…

> I'd also like to see a law passed that requires each product to mention on its packaging if its ingredients (even just their relative proportions) have changed. This would apply to things like foods/drinks and also cleaning products.

Ridiculous proposition.

Formulations change pretty much constantly for various reasons (ingredients become more expensive, or you change suppliers, or you decide to adjust something to make the product better or cheaper or both), and adding bureaucratic friction as well as packaging redesign is completely impractical. Packaging can take several weeks if not month to produce and you would have to constantly throw them away with this kind of rule. Wasteful.

Re: How shrinkflation is playing havoc with economists’ models

#20

Post by winter_blue » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:50 AM UTC

geodel wrote: post #12

gnicholas wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> now the law says that the packaging must clearly point out if the quantity inside has changed. We need this law in the US. I’m not one to push for new regulations, but I have seen this happen time and again with big companies (Nabisco, General Mills) that shrink their boxes and count on the customer not to notice.

Huh, I see most of the time in US price/oz is mentioned along with price of item. This greatly helps me decide if buying larger package could save me some money with having to do calculation myself, which I would have to do in my country.

Yea, this is something that's always impressed me about this US. In other countries, I have to pull up a calculator app on my phone, and calculate the price per kg for various packaging sizes, to figure out which one is the best deal. It's almost as though store labels in the US are designed with the discerning consumer in mind...