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

Shrinkflation Tracker

shrinkflation.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 240 posts

Re: Shrinkflation Tracker

#141

Post by hinkley »

I was just talking today to someone about how they don't like food from a certain global coffee chain anymore because their food has gotten kinda crappy.

Shrinkflation generally means same price for less product (grams, fluid ounces), but enshitification by slowly decreasing the quality of the ingredients is also a problem.

Do we put that under the shrinkflation umbrella or track it as a separate problem? Since they are both unwanted solutions to the same problem, seems like they should be kept together (to avoid a Goodhart's Law fiasco)

I recall eating an Oreo after fifteen years of not having one. At first I just thought I'd forgotten what they actually tasted like, but the more I thought about it, the more I could see a long chain of focus groups asking customers if cookie A and cookie B taste the same, if one tastes better, and slowly changing the formula to only alienate 0.2% of the customers each time until one day I wander up and find I'm part of the 10% they've cumulatively alienated.

See also how only some of us can taste certain artificial sweeteners as sugary toxic waste instead of sugar (saccharin tastes to me like drinking soda after licking a 9 volt battery)

Re: Shrinkflation Tracker

#142

Post by Horffupolde »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #120

In an ideal world, one UPC code would identify only one product with one set of ingredients and one weight. Want to make a "+20% free!" package? New UPC! Want to change the contents from 16% cacao to 14% cacao and some more sugar? Sure, new UPC. The manufacturers would have to publish the contents for each UPC in a machine readable format. Then the retailers would have to publish daily prices, again in a machine reda…

You are free to do that. UPC is a private standard.

Re: Shrinkflation Tracker

#143

Post by cactusplant7374 »

lq9AJ8yrfs wrote: post #131
cactusplant7374 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bread wouldn't be bread if it wasn't processed. We would be eating the wheat kernels.

Not all bread has * added sugar * preservatives * texturizers Cut these out and you're on the right side concerning processed foods.

All bread cuts out most of the fiber of the wheat kernel. That's more of a net gain than removing the items you listed.

Re: Shrinkflation Tracker

#144

Post by jacquesm »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #130

The worst part of shrinkflation is restaurants who have reduced the sizes of their meals, in my opinion. I’ve seen this quite a lot in everything from fast casual places like Cava to locally owned establishments.

That may not be a bad thing per se. In plenty of restaurants the amount of food in a serving is way too large for me and the alternative probably was to raise prices. In restaurants food isn't usually the high margin product, that's alcohol.

Re: Shrinkflation Tracker

#147

Post by cogman10 »

hinkley wrote: post #141

I was just talking today to someone about how they don't like food from a certain global coffee chain anymore because their food has gotten kinda crappy. Shrinkflation generally means same price for less product (grams, fluid ounces), but enshitification by slowly decreasing the quality of the ingredients is also a problem. Do we put that under the shrinkflation umbrella or track it as a separate problem? Since they…

Just one more factor to consider, some ingredients are no longer available.

Trans fats are a good example of this. They used to be the prime replacement for saturated fats. Now, in the US, they are effectively banned.

This hit oreos. [1]

[1] https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2006/01/02/manufacturers-tri...

Re: Shrinkflation Tracker

#149

Post by DoughnutHole »

jacobsenscott wrote: post #148

What's the problem? You want to keep everything the same size and pay more? That's the other option. You know it works out to the same amount of stuff for the same amount of money, right?

Yes, because it’s easier to notice and adjust your purchasing decisions accordingly.

The point of shrinkflation is to obfuscate the price increase and hope that some consumers don’t notice.

Re: Shrinkflation Tracker

#150

Post by andymal »

This is great! I wanted to add a product that I recently noticed was smaller, but I no longer use Google, so I'm unable to go through the submission process. Maybe if someone else sees this you can add Kingsford charcoal. 4-5 years ago bags came in a pack of 2x20 lb. Then 2022 they were 2x18lb. This year they are 2x16lb. Can't wait until we can just buy a 2 pack of briquettes.
Post reply on HN