Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

eyeondesign.aiga.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 148 posts

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#11

Post by jasonv »

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #7
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #2

I am surprised that the article did not mention Costco's Kirkland brand. In my mind, that is the inhouse brand to beat in terms of high quality and good value. And it is definitely driven by consumer data, since Costco has information on what every member bought and returned.

There's a few websites that try to track what Kirkland rebadges. Walmart may be soul-sucking to shop at, but their Dr. Thunder and clone colas are really good and 67 cents a 2 liter. Their yogurt is basically as good as yoplait (orange is great), and their generic salt and vinegar kettle chips and life cereal are all great. Supermarket clones are still pretty bad, which is surprising given what Walmart and Costco hav…

The Good Mythical Morning show often pits store brands against the name brand originals.. results vary a lot, but Kroger, for instance, tends to rank higher (for them) then Whole Foods or Trader Joe’s brand knock-offs.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#12

Post by mitchbob »

dimes wrote: post #9
htnsao wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny realizing how people have been so trained to purchase processed products instead of dry beans etc.

Is it training, or is it convenience? Personally, I don't like soaking beans 24 hours before cooking. In fact, any additional time is too much for me, as bad as that may be. A article in the NYT called The Tyranny of Convenience really crystalized this for me: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/16/opinion/sunday/tyranny-co...

Home-cooked beans can taste a lot better, and they spare you the estrogen-mimicking chemicals in can linings. A pressure cooker makes quick work of them. We make a batch and freeze them in pint containers, ready to thaw when we need them.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#14

Post by nilsbunger »

Trader Joe’s is fascinating. Their own products are unique and you develop a craving for them. That creates serious retention. And over time they’ve designed out more and more third party stuff, replacing it with their own (instead of selling both alongside each other). I’ve never read a business case about them but it seems like a killer strategy

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#15

Post by mcpherrinm »

lurquer wrote: post #3

I miss the old old generic food packaging... It had its own special aisle. Big cans with white labels that merely said “BEANS” or “CORN” in fat black letters. Of course, it was embarrassing to have a cart full of that stuff as everyone would know you were poor.

One Canadian brand has been leaning into their traditional bright yellow packaging with bold lettering and I would even say it almost feels trendy. See pictures on their Twitter: https://mobile.twitter.com/nonamebrands

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#16

Post by theamk »

Unrelated to actual content: if you visit the site with ad-blocker on, it does not load. Instead, you just have this icon of the eye looking at you and blinking. And the eye will just blink until you turn ad-blocker off.

I know the site is called "eye on design", but the associations of user tracking via ads and this blinking eye were amusing to me. Imagine having a blinking eye in the corner of each website for each tracker it has :)

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#19

Post by Judgmentality »

lurquer wrote: post #3

I miss the old old generic food packaging... It had its own special aisle. Big cans with white labels that merely said “BEANS” or “CORN” in fat black letters. Of course, it was embarrassing to have a cart full of that stuff as everyone would know you were poor.

https://xkcd.com/993/

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#20

Post by Judgmentality »

donavanm wrote: post #8
flukus wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course, it was embarrassing to have a cart full of that stuff as everyone would know you were poor. I don't mean this to pick on you personally, but this sentence sums up so many problems with consumerism, advertising and it's ability to make us overpay. You don't look poor because you get the white label, you look financially responsible, unwilling to pay a branding premium for essentially the same product. Esp…

> unwilling to pay a branding premium for essentially the same product. For true commodities thats entirely reasonable. And these days when the same contract manufacturers develops and packages the product for Aldi, trader joes, kroger, and Annies its even more true. But dont let rose colored glasses obscure the differences that dis exist between the generics and name brands of previous times. Its ok to admit that To…

It goes further than that. It can even be the actual materials used to package the food!

https://www.treehugger.com/which-food-companies-dont-use-bpa...

Post reply on HN