They’re careful to make sure the bottle still looks the same from the front, but from the side you can see the difference.

  • Swarfega@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    In a world where we should be using less packaging this sort of practice just increases more waste.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Once again demonstrating that corporations don’t give a fuck about anything except constantly increasing their profit.

      The customer doesn’t matter. The survival of the planet doesn’t matter.

      As long as profit increases every single quarter the world could burn for all they care.

  • nicerdicer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is an obvious change. Some time ago I noticed a much more subtle change in the dish soap I normally use(d): The manufacturor only inreased the diameter of the hole in the cap where you squeeze out the dish soap, resulting in a higher consumption of that product, because you are used to squeeze with the same force. This way you are expected to buy more frequently, because it lasts not as long as before. When I discovered it, I changed the product.

  • CanadianCorhen@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Really need a law that if the amount, or recipie changes it is notified on the packaging for… 3 months?

    • DillyDaily@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      As someone with all: YES PLEASE!

      Companies changing their recipes and ingredients while barely or even not changing their packaging has almost killed me at least twice now. And no doubt there have been several other “mystery reactions” that I’ve blamed on housemates not washing chopping boards, but could have been a product recipe change I didn’t notice at that specific time.

      It’s been getting so much worse. One of the things I’m allergic to is potato, which is a supper common ingredient to be used when a company uses “skimpflation” to increase profits. Changing the ingredients and quality of ingredients, and manipulating the recipe to be cheaper to make, but not entirely noticeable to the public - maybe use a health-focused or other marketing strategy “now with less carbs” to hide that swapping half the wheat flour for wheat fibre was an entirety profit driven choice.

      Potato is cheap and versatile. In the last 10 years I’ve lost entire catagories of products to brands adding unnecessary potato. From sachets of cup-a-soup to canned soup where potato is a great cheap thickening agent to pesto pasta sauce where most brands in Australia contain potato flakes as a binder. I’m allergic to tomatoes too so pesto pasta used to be my life saver at Italian restaurants, But no more. I’m not safe with sweet products either, potato flour is a cheap way to cut wheat flour in cookies and cakes, potato starch can thicken puddings and custards while conveniently making your product gluten free (so you can save money on ingredients, And charge more for being a “allergen friendly food”)

      My favourite brand of rice pudding is actually what first drew my attention to the issue with recipe changing and packaging not changing. I bought 2x two packs on the same day, got home and halfway through the week had an allergic reaction after dessert. I double checked the ingredients and because I still had the old pack sitting in the recycling bin I could directly compare while I waited for my boyfriend to bring the car around so we could go to the hospital.

      It’s gotten to the point where I’m paranoid enough that I’m checking the same ingredients list 3 times - in the store before I buy it, at home when I pull it out of the pantry, and when I’m standing over the trash can about to throw the packet away, or when I’m pulling it out of my lunch box about to eat it, after already having checked it as I was putting it in my lunch box.

    • goatmeal@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Man that would be great but you know these companies are just gonna claim its an entirely different product to get around that

      I feel like if we had an independent crowd sourced site or something to track these it would have better visibility

      • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Nobody would visit it. If you entered products that you use to get a notification when it is changed, then someone would just hack the database and sell it to Informatica.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Open the new one. It’ll fatten up when it sucks in some air.

    That would be the comparison to make. I want to see how they shaved 3oz. off when the bottles look nearly identical. Betting it’s mostly in the top.

    I’m not one to be cynical and see evil shit everywhere I look. Some decisions that look bad on the surface were made for reasons we’re not privy to.

    THIS shit however… Someone said, “We’re going to shave 10.7% off to raise profit. But we gotta design the smaller bottle so no one will notice. Oh, and we have to retool the manufacturing lines.”

    And then someone make a spreadsheet calculating the retooling cost and when it’s expected to be recovered from the extra profit.