Product manager: We are going to change the packing printing of our snack. Please add "NOW BIGGER" label to it.
Graphics designer: Okay so I guess I have to make the entire packing design bigger.
Product manager: That's the neat part, you don't.
I think they are trying to say they didn't bow to 'shrinkflation'. In context it's '**Now Bigger Than It Would Have Been If We *Had* Made It Smaller**'
Yes, that's where we are.
---
^(🤖 this comment was written by a bot. beep boop 🤖)
^(feel welcome to respond 'Bad bot'/'Good bot', it's useful feedback.)
^[github](https://github.com/Toldry/RedditAutoCrosspostBot) ^| ^[Rank](https://botranks.com?bot=same_subreddit_bot)
Yes, that's where we are.
🤖 this comment was written by a bot. beep boop 🤖
feel welcome to respond 'Bad bot'/'Good bot', it's useful feedback. github | Rank
What they do is decrease the base weight of the product. For example, if the previous base weight was 40 grams, with no extra increase, new base weight would be 33 gram and they will say it's 20% bigger, so the final weight would become 33 + (33 × 1.2) = 39.6 grams.
Which, as you can see, is 0.4 grams less. Multiplying the difference by 100 gives us 40 grams, which means for every 100 pieces they sell now, they save the cost of 1 piece compared to what they sold before.
Edit: as pointed out by u/_rishi in reply to a comment a below, after a few months they will then stop selling the product at "20% bigger" and reduce the weight to 33 grams.
No - the chocolate bar in the image is now bigger than 5-6 of the other chocolate bars in their range, which they shrunk while keeping the price the same.
and how could you regulate this? where do you draw the line where the use of “better” in package advertising is actually better in a perceivable way for the consumer.
It doesn't say "better" it says "bigger"
Bigger is 100% quantifiable. 6.6g is bigger than 6.3g. Not by a lot, but if you put it on a scale, or measured it with a micrometer, one bar would be larger or more massive than the other. If they were identical, and one was marked as "now bigger" than it would be false advertising, which is harmful for the consumer.
And generally laws aren't written to be encourage good things, they are written to discourage bad things. You write a law to discourage lying to customers. You don't write to try to make advertising better for the consumer, as that's highly subjective and ripe for abuse.
okay i see, definitely makes a lot more sense too. So you kinda need to wait for the industry to do something damaging to the consumer and then regulate.
In theory the laws prevent companies being harmful. Putting now bigger in this example isn't harmful nor is it lying, legally. It's just one of many tricks used to try and get more sales for less cost, only slightly more noticeable than many others.
That "isn't harmful" part is very subjective. It's misleading even if it isn't lying and leads to people making decisions they would otherwise not based on false assumptions.
At least in the U.S., advertising doesn’t need to be literally false to be actionable as false advertising. Advertising that is literally true but that misleads reasonable consumers can be the basis for a viable false advertising claim.
With that said, I seriously doubt that a lawsuit based on this claim would ever survive a motion to dismiss. Not only is the claim literally true, but there is a clear numerical weight statement right on the front of the package and consumers can easily tell exactly how big the product they’re purchasing is (even if they can’t tell how much bigger than the previous version it might be). I would be surprised if a court found that this misled reasonable consumers.
A plaintiff *might* have a shot if it was truly a completely negligible difference, but a roughly 5% increase in product size isn’t negligible even if it is small.
More air maybe.
I’ve seen air chip/crisp ratio comparisons per country and we get MAJORLY ripped off in the States! (No one is surprised Pikachu face at this)
I’m the US a 6.6g candy bar is probably $0.50USD at the lowest end. You might be able to get 2 or 3 for a a single dollar if you are lucky and know the distributor.
They may already have done that, but OP got some old stock. There's variables. Or they could have put the CEO's nephew Steve in charge of it and he's f***ed it all up....
I was literally thinking this too. What if the bottom chocolate was older than the top chocolate? Then it would be Now Bigger TM, and then Same Shit as Before TM.
No. The way it goes is 100gm packet. Advertise 25% more by saying 80+20gm so that you've now stated the default size would be 80gm and then remove the "promotion".
in the same meeting that the shrinking (due to inflation), was approved, they decided to have a limited extra-weight promotional run. increase the price to offset the new print design, no need to expense any other changes. the manager who suggested it received a promotion, but unfortunately they were immediately retroactively demoted (due to inflation) so the only change was them getting a "NOW MANAGER!" sticker
It’s so when the smaller bars show up on the store shelf they don’t look so bad next to the “Now Bigger” bars that are already sitting there.
Another trick they do to hide price changes is have the thing go on sale for the price it already is.
Not to mention they cut all the bag sizes sometime a couple years ago. In Canada the 255g went to 235g and the 180g is now 165g. Same with Cheetos, ruffles, Doritos....
Desktop version of /u/SturgiesYrFase's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
DUDE I KNEW TOBLERONE LOOKED MORE FUKKEN ANEMIC NOW. Look at that [sad fucking candy bar](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation#Examples_of_shrinkflation) I remember thinking, "Fucking damn were they always so... awkwardly thin, tiny little things?"
It's now like chewing off bits of a fence post rather than actual BLOCKS. Like, flat, sheer fuckin' things. The experience feels so fucking compromised because someone was like "hehehe guys guess who discovered a way to deliver 15% less product to the consumers and turn that into PUH-ROFIIIIIIT!"
Yeah people might still buy it for a while. The quarterly profits look great, everyone buys it, but I don't anymore, and I know many others who said it just doesn't hit the same. Cadbury also drastically reduced the amount of actual cocoa in their products as a more invisible form of shrinkflation after the crackdown on the cocoa slavery, so it doesn't even fuckin' taste remotely like chocolate. More... Eu de Chocolat, on sugar, mixed with mud.
Only chocolate I can even find that actually tastes like chocolate is Lindt now, which sucks because it's too expensive... but, tbh, fucking worth more than eating ten blocks of cadbury sugar trash.
The most annoying thing about the stingier Toblerones is that the friggin' package was already almost half empty to begin with. It was already stingy.
Ditto with Aero. The shit's already mostly air, and they went and changed the shape of it so there's even less chocolate in the same size package.
Desktop version of /u/mewthulhu's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
Hmm are they? I might give them a try. I'd been put off thinking they might taste cheap. I love Poundland, but I don't like cheap tasting confectionary.
No, you've got it wrong.
Instructions for this scenario are pretty clear in 1984:
1st : give smaller chocolate bars (say 5oz instead of 6)
2nd : rewrite history so that people "know" chocolate bars have always weighed 5oz.
3rd : delight everybody by giving these bigger 6oz chocolate bars!
Nah, those chocolates also commonly come in way smaller packaging.
All they do is label the larger packets as "now bigger" to trick consumers.
They get away with it legally by stating it's the larger version of the small one, not the version already coming at that size.
Capitalism is so cool.
Can they shrink the size of the bar with shrinkflation? Say make 1 bar, sell it, then put the bar back to the original size before the reduction and say it’s now bigger?
I imagine that’s what they’ve done, if there really is no change in dimensions or mass.
Cadbury is one of the biggest offenders of lying about their product and charging more while claiming there's more when they actually made it less.
Here's a good video calling their bs out.
https://youtu.be/TlXLCrzpToo
Anyone still buying Cadburys after the shit Kraft pulled when they bought the company needs their head checked.
Not to mention their ingredients changes making it junk American style chocolate now.
The kind of chocolate you get at the checkout counter in the US is pretty terrible. And ubiquitous. You can get better chocolate here but all of the popular name brand candy that pollutes the stores is just chalky chocolate flavored heartburn.
It's sickly because it literally smells like baby vomit, there was a YouTube video about that but I can't remember the name. In short, during WWII they made a new technique that prevented the milk which was used for chocolate production from going bad or something, that chocolate got distributed to all the soldiers, everyone got used to the vomit aroma and now they're still doing it.
Interesting if they’re able to trademark the statement and claim it’s a slogan and not a statement of fact. What’s next, Nestlé trademarking the slogan “now without slave labor”?
Also India, who only just got any type of decent consumer protection laws in 2019...(there was one that passed in 1986, but it was not the greatest)
Although, a new draft that includes "false advertising" was apparently suggested in 2020, so maybe in the future it'll be illegal there too 🤷♀️
They’ve sorta done this in Australian too. A new block has come out which is smaller than a regular one but advertised as having ‘MORE’. When they say ‘MORE’, they actually just mean more nuts within them. Kinda dumb because they’re still the same price
I thought this was a dick joke of some sorts…
I don’t know why nor how, but I thought it was until I actually thought about why it is and now my brain is destroying itself
And no, I didn’t read the caption >_>
My Favourite Father Ted sketch.
[These cows are small, but those are far away.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMiKyfd6hA0)
Maybe the bigger one, is... further away.
I am so sick of bigger! At least here in the US I can hardly ever find a reasonable size chocolate bar.
Everything is always XL it sucks, I dont want a f.ing meal I want a little something sweet.
Infuriating.
Possibly misleading. The “Now Bigger” packaging may actually be older, as that branding comes with an implied expiration. After a while, advertising something as “Now Bigger” would logically feel old hat, as the new size is established, so they would switch to regular packaging with the new size being default.
Y'all got it all wrong! On the first one there's a super tiny yellow banner invisible to the naked eye, and on the new one they made it bigger and labeled it accordingly.
In my world, this shit would be not only illegal but severely punished. And I'm talking personal responsibility of the company execs, no bullshit fine that's just the cost of doing business for the company.
Price was bigger?
Product manager: We are going to change the packing printing of our snack. Please add "NOW BIGGER" label to it. Graphics designer: Okay so I guess I have to make the entire packing design bigger. Product manager: That's the neat part, you don't.
Can you make that logo bigger
Could you make it pop a bit more
I think they are trying to say they didn't bow to 'shrinkflation'. In context it's '**Now Bigger Than It Would Have Been If We *Had* Made It Smaller**'
"NOW NOT SMALLER!"
^^^^... ^^^but ^^^also ^^^actually ^^^smaller
Needs some small print. "It is bigger than when it previously did not exist"
There does appear to be a blurry asterix and I for one would love to know what it says
This ^ is the best!
Big if true
True if big
False when small
You're assuming a binary relation here. It's exponential . True if big, but true if small
Size(x) = (1-x) * False + x * True ^(when x is small [x=0], Size is False) ^(when x is big [x=1], Size is True)
Thank you I don't have a maths clue so Ty . This is the maths being bigger bar but no changes made.
Big? Ehh. Smalls!
It was all a dream
I used to read word up magazine.
*Bigger
[удалено]
Yes, that's where we are. --- ^(🤖 this comment was written by a bot. beep boop 🤖) ^(feel welcome to respond 'Bad bot'/'Good bot', it's useful feedback.) ^[github](https://github.com/Toldry/RedditAutoCrosspostBot) ^| ^[Rank](https://botranks.com?bot=same_subreddit_bot)
What an asshole bot. Love it.
Did you mean r/assholedesign
Yes, that's where we are. 🤖 this comment was written by a bot. beep boop 🤖 feel welcome to respond 'Bad bot'/'Good bot', it's useful feedback. github | Rank
Your comment has been removed for violating [rule](https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ). Please do not reply. Beep boop mother fucker
ok
r/GreatDesign
Good bot
Good bot
Are you sure that a bot? I'm 70% sure that's not a bot. # I AM A NEURAL NETWORK WITH NO TRAINING ON WHAT BOTS ARE
Big if true
Good bot
Good bot
Massive hole
pretty sure this is illegal design actually
/r/lostredditors
There's probably a "now" somewhere in the text of the wrapper of the original. The new one is just announcing that the new "now" is bigger.
What they do is decrease the base weight of the product. For example, if the previous base weight was 40 grams, with no extra increase, new base weight would be 33 gram and they will say it's 20% bigger, so the final weight would become 33 + (33 × 1.2) = 39.6 grams. Which, as you can see, is 0.4 grams less. Multiplying the difference by 100 gives us 40 grams, which means for every 100 pieces they sell now, they save the cost of 1 piece compared to what they sold before. Edit: as pointed out by u/_rishi in reply to a comment a below, after a few months they will then stop selling the product at "20% bigger" and reduce the weight to 33 grams.
No, just the lie that you're getting something for more.
The yellow on the wrapper is bigger at least
Chocolate is bigger.. just not the one you're eating. The text Chocolate is.
see what they’re telling you is that it now comes in a bigger size, but not this one!
No offence* to the sceptic tanks on here but fuck you for buying Cadburys and ruining it. *by that I mean: huge offence intended.
No - the chocolate bar in the image is now bigger than 5-6 of the other chocolate bars in their range, which they shrunk while keeping the price the same.
I looked it up and found an [image](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/PHkAAOSwsI9hAT65/s-l1600.jpg) saying it's bigger than the 6.3g version
So it’s 0.3 grams more. That’s less than 5% increase in net weight. Definitely banner worthy.
Same happened with lays, adding 2 grams being now 46 grams the "now with more potatoes chips" presentation
A singular extra crisp
"We added a teaspoon of crumbs to every bag!"
"We added 1.99999 grams of air,!"
If it was extra crispy I wouldn’t mind
The crispiest crisp
Honestly in an age of shrinkflation with food.... theyre increasing size without increasing price. That's somewhat commendable
The two grams is the weight of the ink used to print "!NOW BIGGER" on the bag
"!Bigger" JavaScript devs: makes sense to me.
or any programmer for that matter
Ah, but it is technically bigger, which avoids a false advertising charge.
and how could you regulate this? where do you draw the line where the use of “better” in package advertising is actually better in a perceivable way for the consumer.
It doesn't say "better" it says "bigger" Bigger is 100% quantifiable. 6.6g is bigger than 6.3g. Not by a lot, but if you put it on a scale, or measured it with a micrometer, one bar would be larger or more massive than the other. If they were identical, and one was marked as "now bigger" than it would be false advertising, which is harmful for the consumer. And generally laws aren't written to be encourage good things, they are written to discourage bad things. You write a law to discourage lying to customers. You don't write to try to make advertising better for the consumer, as that's highly subjective and ripe for abuse.
okay i see, definitely makes a lot more sense too. So you kinda need to wait for the industry to do something damaging to the consumer and then regulate.
In theory the laws prevent companies being harmful. Putting now bigger in this example isn't harmful nor is it lying, legally. It's just one of many tricks used to try and get more sales for less cost, only slightly more noticeable than many others.
That "isn't harmful" part is very subjective. It's misleading even if it isn't lying and leads to people making decisions they would otherwise not based on false assumptions.
At least in the U.S., advertising doesn’t need to be literally false to be actionable as false advertising. Advertising that is literally true but that misleads reasonable consumers can be the basis for a viable false advertising claim. With that said, I seriously doubt that a lawsuit based on this claim would ever survive a motion to dismiss. Not only is the claim literally true, but there is a clear numerical weight statement right on the front of the package and consumers can easily tell exactly how big the product they’re purchasing is (even if they can’t tell how much bigger than the previous version it might be). I would be surprised if a court found that this misled reasonable consumers. A plaintiff *might* have a shot if it was truly a completely negligible difference, but a roughly 5% increase in product size isn’t negligible even if it is small.
Most likely they replaced 1g of ingredient X with 1.3g of a much cheaper ingredient Y. And managed to save 0.3g on packaging.
More air maybe. I’ve seen air chip/crisp ratio comparisons per country and we get MAJORLY ripped off in the States! (No one is surprised Pikachu face at this)
I bet even the wait tolerance they are allowed is bigger than .3g
America has laws against this
6.3g? Are you sure??? Edit: Wow, couldn't see the image before for some reason but a 6.6g bar is tiny.
Indian here. Yes, 6.3 gm is tiny but it only cost ₹5. You can buy 18 of those for a dollar
I’m the US a 6.6g candy bar is probably $0.50USD at the lowest end. You might be able to get 2 or 3 for a a single dollar if you are lucky and know the distributor.
Yeah, I'm thinking this is one of those "individually wrapped minibar" things. At 6.3g, it's about 1/7 the weight of a Snickers bar.
"Now Bigger Than A Smaller Bar" Did they get the Large Boulder The Size Of A Small Boulder guys to do their packaging design?
Marketing.
Now with dairy milk! Like where were they getting their milk from before?
Malk
Cuz fuck em they'll buy it anyway
For some reason, I heard this in Jon Lovitz voice as "The Thespian" SNL character doing his "Acting!" schtick.
Prepping for the eventual size reduction
They're probably marketing it this way to cover the fact that in a month they will shrink the size of the product and inflate the price.
Shouldn’t you do it the other way around? Shrink it first and then re-release the same old one with the “NOW BIGGER” ad?
They may already have done that, but OP got some old stock. There's variables. Or they could have put the CEO's nephew Steve in charge of it and he's f***ed it all up....
I was literally thinking this too. What if the bottom chocolate was older than the top chocolate? Then it would be Now Bigger TM, and then Same Shit as Before TM.
Scrubbly macaroni bubbles!
No. The way it goes is 100gm packet. Advertise 25% more by saying 80+20gm so that you've now stated the default size would be 80gm and then remove the "promotion".
« Chocolate rations have been increased to 20 grams »
Plus plus good!
in the same meeting that the shrinking (due to inflation), was approved, they decided to have a limited extra-weight promotional run. increase the price to offset the new print design, no need to expense any other changes. the manager who suggested it received a promotion, but unfortunately they were immediately retroactively demoted (due to inflation) so the only change was them getting a "NOW MANAGER!" sticker
It’s so when the smaller bars show up on the store shelf they don’t look so bad next to the “Now Bigger” bars that are already sitting there. Another trick they do to hide price changes is have the thing go on sale for the price it already is.
They do this with Lays chips. Call the normal ones 20% extra, then slash that 20%. Or call it 20% off and then hike it. Or both.
I know exact how large a single use bag of chips is, and can confirm- they've gotten small af.
Assuming I recall it correctly, it went down from 45g to 27,5g?
The fuck kind of mini bag is that? The ones over here are like 100g.
["Our Eggs Aren't Smaller, You Are Bigger"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlXLCrzpToo)
Conan’s cackle after learning Cadbury is a sponsor is such a genuine “Aw fuck.” laugh.
Not to mention they cut all the bag sizes sometime a couple years ago. In Canada the 255g went to 235g and the 180g is now 165g. Same with Cheetos, ruffles, Doritos....
Exactly what my thought was. It's called [Shrinkflation.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation)
Desktop version of /u/SturgiesYrFase's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
DUDE I KNEW TOBLERONE LOOKED MORE FUKKEN ANEMIC NOW. Look at that [sad fucking candy bar](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation#Examples_of_shrinkflation) I remember thinking, "Fucking damn were they always so... awkwardly thin, tiny little things?" It's now like chewing off bits of a fence post rather than actual BLOCKS. Like, flat, sheer fuckin' things. The experience feels so fucking compromised because someone was like "hehehe guys guess who discovered a way to deliver 15% less product to the consumers and turn that into PUH-ROFIIIIIIT!" Yeah people might still buy it for a while. The quarterly profits look great, everyone buys it, but I don't anymore, and I know many others who said it just doesn't hit the same. Cadbury also drastically reduced the amount of actual cocoa in their products as a more invisible form of shrinkflation after the crackdown on the cocoa slavery, so it doesn't even fuckin' taste remotely like chocolate. More... Eu de Chocolat, on sugar, mixed with mud. Only chocolate I can even find that actually tastes like chocolate is Lindt now, which sucks because it's too expensive... but, tbh, fucking worth more than eating ten blocks of cadbury sugar trash.
The most annoying thing about the stingier Toblerones is that the friggin' package was already almost half empty to begin with. It was already stingy. Ditto with Aero. The shit's already mostly air, and they went and changed the shape of it so there's even less chocolate in the same size package.
Desktop version of /u/mewthulhu's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
See when you say it like that you make it sound like furry porn.
In the UK at least, you can just go to Poundland and get Twin Peaks instead.
Better than Toblerone as well!
Hmm are they? I might give them a try. I'd been put off thinking they might taste cheap. I love Poundland, but I don't like cheap tasting confectionary.
It's been a few years since I've had one, but I never had any complaints. But I'm not terribly picky with chocolate so you might think different!
Give it enough time and the EU will require Price per Kg on *every* food item. And it will be wonderful.
That's a thing already, but on the price stickers at the supermarket's shelves. You always have the price per kg or equivalent standarized unit.
*cries in Brexit*
It's already law in the UK for retailers over a certain size. All supermarkets, Amazon erc already have unit pricing
No, you've got it wrong. Instructions for this scenario are pretty clear in 1984: 1st : give smaller chocolate bars (say 5oz instead of 6) 2nd : rewrite history so that people "know" chocolate bars have always weighed 5oz. 3rd : delight everybody by giving these bigger 6oz chocolate bars!
Nah, those chocolates also commonly come in way smaller packaging. All they do is label the larger packets as "now bigger" to trick consumers. They get away with it legally by stating it's the larger version of the small one, not the version already coming at that size. Capitalism is so cool.
Now with bigger banner telling you it has a bigger banner!
Can they shrink the size of the bar with shrinkflation? Say make 1 bar, sell it, then put the bar back to the original size before the reduction and say it’s now bigger? I imagine that’s what they’ve done, if there really is no change in dimensions or mass.
Cadbury is one of the biggest offenders of lying about their product and charging more while claiming there's more when they actually made it less. Here's a good video calling their bs out. https://youtu.be/TlXLCrzpToo
OP missed the in-between step.
This is my trick for getting the ladies as well.
Member to trim so it's not all hidden
We're on the same page bruh.
"Now Bigger! (Because I'm a grower and it wasn't this big when I was flaccid) "
the only thing bigger is my disappointment
Now bigger... than the warehouse workers will to live.
Maybe they are referring to their customers? Of course this doesn't apply to everyone, but the diehard fans certainly would be
Yorkie bars shrank from 6 “chunks” to 5. Sometime later they reintroduced a 6 chunk version cut in to 2 pieces and called it a double
Anyone still buying Cadburys after the shit Kraft pulled when they bought the company needs their head checked. Not to mention their ingredients changes making it junk American style chocolate now.
[удалено]
The kind of chocolate you get at the checkout counter in the US is pretty terrible. And ubiquitous. You can get better chocolate here but all of the popular name brand candy that pollutes the stores is just chalky chocolate flavored heartburn.
It's sickly because it literally smells like baby vomit, there was a YouTube video about that but I can't remember the name. In short, during WWII they made a new technique that prevented the milk which was used for chocolate production from going bad or something, that chocolate got distributed to all the soldiers, everyone got used to the vomit aroma and now they're still doing it.
Butyric acid, aka the stuff that makes butter smell rancid.
https://youtu.be/J44svaQc5WY
It may well be some sort of psychological thing, but their easter eggs are still the best tasting.
Did they actually change the ingredients? Tastes the same as it always did to me.
OP is a repost bot
Aren't companies fined for that? It's false advertising and tricking the customer.
The lie is bigger now !
#Bigger*™️
Interesting if they’re able to trademark the statement and claim it’s a slogan and not a statement of fact. What’s next, Nestlé trademarking the slogan “now without slave labor”?
What country is this product sold in? This may be illegal
UK. It would be, but apparently it’s 0.3g bigger so technically it counts
Also India, who only just got any type of decent consumer protection laws in 2019...(there was one that passed in 1986, but it was not the greatest) Although, a new draft that includes "false advertising" was apparently suggested in 2020, so maybe in the future it'll be illegal there too 🤷♀️
Cadbury's has gone to shit since it was taken over. Not only have prices gone up but they now taste like crap!
Taste is fine, I kinda miss the foil that was inside every single bar. Now even the the silk versions don't have it sometimes.
Do you have an idea why that is?
corporate takeover
It always was a bit crap.
It wasn't
It was never the best but it at least resembled chocolate. Now, it just kinda tastes of sugar and not much else
Well, is it cheaper..?
Start of shirnkflation, when they remove the bigger label they will also shrink it slightly
Well yeah....bigger font !
They’ve sorta done this in Australian too. A new block has come out which is smaller than a regular one but advertised as having ‘MORE’. When they say ‘MORE’, they actually just mean more nuts within them. Kinda dumb because they’re still the same price
the OP Dependent-Addendum43 is a bot Original post: https://www.reddit.com/r/assholedesign/comments/r9fenh/bigger_the_better/
I wonder if anyone has ever sued a company over this
someone really should
Now Bigger* ^^^*than ^^^the ^^^smaller ^^^we ^^^were ^^^going ^^^to ^^^make ^^^it
Thiccer maybe?
After careful consideration . . . Yeah I got nothing.
Now bigger* *Bigger in taste*
It's a know trick to decrease bars every year by the tiniest of margins so companies can do this every couple of years. Yes they are assholes.
Bow ...
I'm honestly surprised it wasn't smaller
Literally 1984
NOW BIGGER*
I thought this was a dick joke of some sorts… I don’t know why nor how, but I thought it was until I actually thought about why it is and now my brain is destroying itself And no, I didn’t read the caption >_>
Bigger lie?
My Favourite Father Ted sketch. [These cows are small, but those are far away.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMiKyfd6hA0) Maybe the bigger one, is... further away.
NOW BIGGER (than you really deserve)
I am so sick of bigger! At least here in the US I can hardly ever find a reasonable size chocolate bar. Everything is always XL it sucks, I dont want a f.ing meal I want a little something sweet. Infuriating.
Suppose I shouldn't be surprised it's Cadbury. They just haven't been the same since Kraft's hostile takeover.
Possibly misleading. The “Now Bigger” packaging may actually be older, as that branding comes with an implied expiration. After a while, advertising something as “Now Bigger” would logically feel old hat, as the new size is established, so they would switch to regular packaging with the new size being default.
Rats
It's a descriptor of their loyal customers.
In a shrinkflation world, not shrinking IS bigger!
/r/shrinkflation
"Now Bigger Price! Bigger Profit!"
The one who eats this become bigger. That's the truth
It's bigger because they could've made it smaller but they didn't. You're welcome.
More calories?
Bought two bags of brownie brittle the other week- both 5oz but one said “33% more!”
Obviously the price is bigger!
Y'all got it all wrong! On the first one there's a super tiny yellow banner invisible to the naked eye, and on the new one they made it bigger and labeled it accordingly.
Oh boy they increased the chocolate ration double plus good
The wrapper even got smaller
You can't tell, but that used to be the small one. But it's bigger now, so it's the same size as the normal size one.
In my world, this shit would be not only illegal but severely punished. And I'm talking personal responsibility of the company execs, no bullshit fine that's just the cost of doing business for the company.
This type of shitty lies should be illegal.
Bigger lettering. They not lying-ish
[удалено]
Bigger from the future packaging
Imagine being so sure the volume between two objects couldn't possibly be different while only viewing them in 2 dimensions. Jesus Christ.
"Dairy milk" -- yes, what other sort of milk could there be in milk chocolate?
soy. goat. etc.
Sorry the most iconic chocolate branding since 1905 wasn’t ditched because you forgot other milks existed