The incredible shrinking confectionary

[zb]

Just treated myself to a Star Bar, it was about the size of one half of a twix.

Absolutely scandalous.

[Truckosaurus]

I am certain Curly-Wurlys used to be at least a metre long.

[grumbledoak]

It's a combination of trying to nanny us over our weight by the back door, and trying to disguise the real inflation we are suffering to bail out the zombie banks.

Just buy two.

[zb]

I'm pleased to see the BBC are taking up the good fight.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42864685

[rodericb]

Truckosaurus said:

I am certain Curly-Wurlys used to be at least a metre long.

Like other things, it seemed like you could wrap two hands around it and there'd still be a bit poking out the top. The rigours of age and inflation I guess. Interestingly, the wikipedia article mentions that the version sold in the USA, the Marathon, had length markings on the packaging to prove the stature of the product!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curly_Wurly

[wisbech]

Truckosaurus said:

I am certain Curly-Wurlys used to be at least a metre long.

You mean yard shurely?

[Truckosaurus]

wisbech said:

You mean yard shurely?

How dare you Sir! I am not that old.

[AmitG]

zb said:

I'm pleased to see the BBC are taking up the good fight.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42864685

Interesting data in that article.

Something struck me. How can a Yorkie 3 pack go down (in weight) by 17.5% but a single bar has gone down by 13.2%? The data suggests that in 2014 the size of the bar was the same in both cases (53g x 3 = 159g and the 3-pack was 160g) but now, the size of the bar is different (46g x 3 = 138g whereas the 3 pack is only 132g).

The same applies for some of the other items. I don't think this can be explained by different amounts of packaging (and I'm not sure the packaging is part of the weight anyway). I wonder whether the multipacks are now getting different sized bars.

[zb]

AmitG said:

Interesting data in that article.

Something struck me. How can a Yorkie 3 pack go down (in weight) by 17.5% but a single bar has gone down by 13.2%? The data suggests that in 2014 the size of the bar was the same in both cases (53g x 3 = 159g and the 3-pack was 160g) but now, the size of the bar is different (46g x 3 = 138g whereas the 3 pack is only 132g).

The same applies for some of the other items. I don't think this can be explained by different amounts of packaging (and I'm not sure the packaging is part of the weight anyway). I wonder whether the multipacks are now getting different sized bars.

I suspect they are, this has already been proven to be the case with multipack crisps.

[Yipper]

Food inflation is going mental. Not even Lidl or Aldi are really cheap anymore.

[AmitG]

zb said:

AmitG said:

I wonder whether the multipacks are now getting different sized bars.

I suspect they are, this has already been proven to be the case with multipack crisps.

That's pretty underhand. I always assumed that a Yorkie was a Yorkie. I buy the Yorkie multipacks sometimes and there is nothing on the packaging (either the outer packaging, or the packaging of the bars themselves) to indicate that the multipack bar is different in any way.

[Wacky Racer]

When Burtons Wagon Wheels used to be called Westons Wagon Wheels in the sixties, they were nearly twice as big as they are now and only cost thrupence.

[KungFuPanda]

Just buy multipacks of bars. They're usually 4 bars in there for £1. Bargain.

[Harry Biscuit]

Wacky Racer said:

When Burtons Wagon Wheels used to be called Westons Wagon Wheels in the sixties, they were nearly twice as big as they are now and only cost thrupence.

That's the hub of the problem right there.

[mattnovak]

Harry Biscuit said:

Wacky Racer said:

When Burtons Wagon Wheels used to be called Westons Wagon Wheels in the sixties, they were nearly twice as big as they are now and only cost thrupence.

That's the hub of the problem right there.

Spoken like a gentleman.

[KrazyIvan]

What gets me is that the contents are getting smaller but the package/wrapping seem to stay the same size.

[zb]

Proof this is a complete and utter scam, and nothing to do with fat/sugar moderation or health concerns.

I'd heard instead of reformulating the recipe, coca-cola were changing the bottle sizes of their flagship product. I was surprised to be greeted by this on the shelves of Morrisons; 1.25L bottles of coke zero cherry, the larger bottle I purchased earlier in the week, this is now no longer available.

[HTP99]

zb said:

Proof this is a complete and utter scam, and nothing to do with fat/sugar moderation or health concerns.

I'd heard instead of reformulating the recipe, coca-cola were changing the bottle sizes of their flagship product. I was surprised to be greeted by this on the shelves of Morrisons; 1.25L bottles of coke zero cherry, the larger bottle I purchased earlier in the week, this is now no longer available.

Same price?

[zb]

HTP99 said:

Same price?

£1 each for the 1.25L, this is an offer, normal rrp £1.60.

I bought 2x 1.75l earlier in week for £2.50, normal rrp £1.67.

Edited by zb on Sunday 11th March 11:32

[Teebs]

The sugar tax is real for soft drinks manufacturers, it's government led and will be a legal requirement.

In regards to confectionery, the size reductions are on the whole, driven by an increase in raw commodity pricing (which is arguable, depending on what data you look at) and share holders demanding better returns.

The next big news will be portion control and trying to control calories this way. This will be another excise to reduce sizes whilst maintaining the same prices. They've tried to get all big bars below 250Kcal, next step will be children's products and attempting to get these below 100Kcal - currently only 2 out of the top 20 children's best sellers are 100 or below.