February 16th, 2007, 09:54 PM
wooow this is awesome! :highfive: a site "exposing the strings and catches in advertising fine print" I love this stuff :evil:
February 16th, 2007, 10:11 PM
This is a cool site! Thanks for the link. :thumbs up
February 16th, 2007, 10:34 PM
ooh the one on Scott toilet paper makes me :mad: http://www.mouseprint.org/?p=114
There are certain things in life you can always count on, literally. One is that Scott toilet paper will have 1000 sheets on the roll and will last a lot longer than its ever-shrinking competitors.
Scott recently released a “Now Improved!” version of the product saying in an ad that it is an “improved long-lasting value.” “Now with a new soft-textured pattern — and long-lasting convenience.”
What they didn’t boast about was this:
*MOUSE PRINT: Each of the 1000 sheets is now 3.7 inches instead of the old 4.0 inches long, thus making each roll 300 inches shorter. [Click picture to see old and new packaging and square footage statement.]
In an email, the makers of Scott explained further:
“The new embossed sheet on SCOTT® 1000 bathroom tissue was extensively tested with consumers before it was introduced to the market. Consumer research indicated that the embossed sheet enhanced softness, thickness, and overall product quality. Although consumers preferred this new sheet, we are sorry that you were disappointed. Please be assured that we will share your comments with those involved.
Consumers told us that they preferred our new embossed sheet. To add this feature, we need to choose to either reduce the number of sheets in the roll or decrease the size of each sheet to maintain the overall roll diameter. Consumers favored the smaller sheet to the count reduction. “
Toilet paper, like many products is periodically downsized. You get a little bit less, and typically the package stays the same as does the selling price. It is a clever way to pass on a price increase, since you are paying more per ounce, pound, foot, or whatever.
Thousand sheet toilet paper started out by having sheets that were typically 4.5 inches wide by 4.5 inches long. The length was shortened a bit to 4.4 inches and then to 4.0 inches. With Scott going to 3.7 inches, the other brands are sure to follow. The net result is that 8/10ths of an inch has been shaved from each sheet over the years. That means each roll is 800 inches shorter.
February 16th, 2007, 10:38 PM
Ha ha....sneaky buggers. The truth will be exposed!!! :D
Good eyes, technodoll, thanks for the link!!
February 16th, 2007, 10:41 PM
:frustrated: I hate product downsizing! You have to watch everything these days. It was bad enough when the price stayed the same and the size (oh, but not the size of the package, only the contents:rolleyes: ) dropped, but now, the size goes down and the price goes up. :frustrated: Maddening!
So now the new thing is, "new and improved"=less and less. Great. :mad:
February 16th, 2007, 11:04 PM
I dunno... I'm one of the few who doesn't think it's sneaky because there is fine print. There is always fine print, so we just have to read it. It's a buyer beware thing... Like when I buy kleenex, I look at the # in the package as well as the ply, not just the price. At costco, they have two sets of bulk scotties that have the same box designs and one is 2 ply and one is 3. So you go, "ooo this one is cheaper for 15 boxes than this one for 12! Yey!" and you get home and your kleenex is all fally aparty. :rolleyes: But you just have to read and you'll know.
What bugs me is when they DON'T disclose. Like with dog food ads. Why is there no fine print on those? Why don't those Cesar commercials that liken the food to a sirloin steak have fine print saying "There is no meat in Cesar dog food"?
February 16th, 2007, 11:21 PM
well the car ads are always BS (case in point: http://www.mouseprint.org/?p=99), and how about stuff like this? :eek: :frustrated:
Sweet. Krispy Kreme is holding a sweepstakes and the top prize is a family vacation for life. Assuming a 35 year old husband and wife and two kids won, adding up airfare and hotels for the next 40 years would be quite expensive… so what a valuable prize this is. Or is it?
*MOUSE PRINT: “Ownership one week timeshare at a nationally recognized vacation club based in Orlando, FL and $5000 …” Alternatively, you can take $15,000 instead of the timeshare and $5000. [Newspaper insert April 2, 2006]
Who would have expected that the prize was really a timeshare? Also, note that airfare is not part of your vacation. You will surely use up your $5000 pretty quickly on that, and on maintenance fees normally charged on timeshares. And, unless you always want to vacation in Orlando, there may be extra charges to swap your week for a week in another location.
alot of the times the "fine print" is quasi-unlegible, you need a magnifying glass to see anything :eek: and a lawyer to unravel the mumbo-jumbo :clown:
February 16th, 2007, 11:23 PM
but this one takes the cake IMO... http://www.mouseprint.org/?p=204 :eek:
February 16th, 2007, 11:27 PM
Frankly, people should be glad they're tricked into weak bleach.:D Bleach wears out fabrics and we all know what happens when you put too much by accident... :D
February 16th, 2007, 11:35 PM
what's wrong with that prin? :D
(don't look at the camel toes! :eek: )
February 16th, 2007, 11:42 PM
Ewww!! Why'd you have to point out the ca- I can't even say it. :yuck:
February 17th, 2007, 09:03 AM
They talked about that on 20/20 last night....it was VERY interesting to say the least! :eek: