Is Shrinkflation Affecting Your Grocery Shopping in Canada?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Food
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the phenomenon of shrinkflation in grocery shopping in Canada, particularly focusing on products like tuna, chips, and other packaged goods. Participants share personal experiences and observations regarding the reduction in product quantities while prices remain the same or increase, raising concerns about quality and transparency in food packaging.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express frustration over the reduced quantity of tuna in cans, noting that older cans contained more product for a lower price.
  • There are claims that the tuna is now packed with more liquid and less fish, leading to dissatisfaction with the product's quality.
  • Several participants mention that this practice of shrinkflation is not new and has been observed for many years across various products.
  • Concerns are raised about the deceptive nature of packaging, where products appear full but contain more air or liquid than actual product.
  • Some participants share anecdotes about finding foreign objects in food products, highlighting concerns over quality control.
  • There is a discussion about the cyclical nature of product sizing, where companies gradually reduce sizes and then introduce larger packages at higher prices.
  • One participant notes that the issue of shrinkflation is particularly problematic for students on a budget, who rely on affordable food options.
  • Some participants express a desire for transparency in packaging and pricing, emphasizing that they would prefer to pay more for consistent quantities.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that shrinkflation is a significant issue affecting grocery shopping, but there are varying opinions on the extent and implications of the practice. Some believe it is a widespread issue across many companies, while others question whether it is specific to certain brands.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical trends in shrinkflation, suggesting that it has been a tactic used during inflationary periods, but do not provide a consensus on its current prevalence or impact.

Evo
Staff Emeritus
Messages
24,114
Reaction score
3,277
I bought two cans of tuna and when I went to drain one, it just kept draining until almost nothing was left in the can. I could tell something wasn't right. There was almost no tuna. I looked at the can, and it was only 5 oz net wt. I pulled one of the older tuna cans, same size, but it was 6oz net wt, and cost 10 cents less . The deception of charging more and putting less in the container is somewhat decptive. It had more water in it to make it as heavy as the fuller can.

I've noticed that I have had to change what I buy in order to get the right amount for older recipes based on fuller containers back then.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Evo said:
The deception of charging more and putting less in the container is somewhat decptive.

I agree.
 


somewhat? It is downright deceptive. Is everyone doing it or is there a shifty company out there? That's the sort of thing that deserves a boycott.
 


Private sector restructuring in an inflationary economy. In the ninteen thirties they called it liquidation.
 


Nothing new about this technique. It's been going on for many years, with all sorts of packaged products. I think it started when inflation picked up in the US in the '70s. Although usually they keep the price the same and shrink the contents.
 


I know that they are putting less cereal in the same size boxes. At least you can still buy meat by the pound. But packaged goods are very deceptive.
 


Never mind $Trillion to Wall St - this is really hitting home:

http://cache.consumerist.com/assets/images/consumerist/2008/08/kissables.jpg

(note chocolate candy = not really chocolate anymore)
 
Last edited by a moderator:


I noticed this a while back with chips. Not a price increase but that the bags started to seem more empty and filled up with air to make them look more full. Easy to see through that one though once you pick up the bag.
 


This is a big problem for grad students such as myself. I eat a lot of tuna, about a can a day, and not only does it cost more (almost a $1!) and you get less but I am finding bone fragments in my tuna now as well. We are paying more for less and lower quality food. I try to buy everything on sale and in bulk but those bulk stores always charge those ridiculous fees.
 
  • #10


Topher925 said:
This is a big problem for grad students such as myself. I eat a lot of tuna, about a can a day, and not only does it cost more (almost a $1!) and you get less but I am finding bone fragments in my tuna now as well. We are paying more for less and lower quality food. I try to buy everything on sale and in bulk but those bulk stores always charge those ridiculous fees.
Bones, that's nothing. I once opened a can of tuna that had a piece of fur in it! I threw it away. Then of course everyone reminded me that I could have gone to the media and gotten a million dollars for being traumatized.

I also found a key chain with a toy sneaker in a jar of Kraft grapefruit slices. A daddy long legs in a 2 liter bottle of Dr Pepper and half of a large caterpillar in a can of Green Giant nibblets corn. That has got to be some kind of record for one person, I'd think.
 
  • #11


TheStatutoryApe said:
I noticed this a while back with chips. Not a price increase but that the bags started to seem more empty and filled up with air to make them look more full. Easy to see through that one though once you pick up the bag.

What they do with chips is gradually, over a couple of years, make the bags smaller and smaller, then make a *new* jumbo bag (or whatever they call it this time, big grab bag maybe), which they charge more for. Once this becomes the standard size, they start making them smaller again, until they can release another new jumbo bag, for another price increase... but it's the same size as the old jumbo bag.
 
  • #12


About the tuna-it used to be that the tuna was firmly packed into the can with enough liquid (water or oil) to fill the voids. I would open a can, drain off the liquid, and scrape the tuna out of the can with a fork. Nowadays, the tuna is packed so loosely and with so much liquid that you can feel the tuna shifting in the can if you shake it.

I once knew a guy who filled the vending machines at work, and his company had a routine that was pretty interesting. They could buy peanuts packaged in any quantity that they wanted, down to the nearest 10th of an ounce net wt. They would gradually load the machines with smaller and smaller bags until they got to some minimum weight, then they would raise the price of peanuts by a nickel a bag and load the machines with larger bags, only to gradually start reducing the net weight again until they got to the point where they would increase the price another nickel and go back to the larger bags.
 
  • #13


They're making belts smaller and smaller too.
 
  • #14


turbo-1 said:
About the tuna-it used to be that the tuna was firmly packed into the can with enough liquid (water or oil) to fill the voids.
When oil is more expensive than tuna, they pack the fish in good. You can track the relative cost of chocolate and almonds by counting the almonds in a Hershey bar, keeping total weight in mind.
 
  • #15


turbo-1 said:
About the tuna-it used to be that the tuna was firmly packed into the can with enough liquid (water or oil) to fill the voids. I would open a can, drain off the liquid, and scrape the tuna out of the can with a fork. Nowadays, the tuna is packed so loosely and with so much liquid that you can feel the tuna shifting in the can if you shake it.

It really annoys me too. When I'm done pouring off the liquid now, the can only is half full of tuna. I'd rather just pay more and know that the can of tuna is going to make the same number of meals as it used too. I used to be able to make a meal out of one of those small cans of tuna, now I need two to make a meal. I'm not stupid, I know I'm paying more if I have to open two cans instead of one to get the same amount of food, plus now I've created twice as much trash. And, it's really annoying with things like tuna where the weight of the package isn't really changing that noticeably, but is filled with water that isn't part of what I'm eating. As has already been pointed out, at least with dry goods, you can read the label to know how much you're getting.

I know prices of things go up. I'm not going to stop eating tuna just because the price goes up. I am more likely to stop eating it if I get frustrated that when I buy a can, it's not enough to feed me when it used to be enough to feed a family of four in the same sized can.
 
  • #16


mgb_phys said:
Never mind $Trillion to Wall St - this is really hitting home:

http://cache.consumerist.com/assets/images/consumerist/2008/08/kissables.jpg

(note chocolate candy = not really chocolate anymore)

That's the most evil thing they ever did. They were busted on the Today Show recently. They put two bowls of M&Ms side by side and asked if the hosts could tell the difference. To begin with, you could tell they were different just by looking at them...the nasty non-chocolate ones were super-shiny. Matt Lauer immediately pegged the new ones as not tasting very chocolate-y. If I wanted wax instead of chocolate, I'd buy those cheap fake chocolate Easter bunnies. I can't believe they'd mess with M&Ms! :mad:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17


Moonbear said:
That's the most evil thing they ever did. They were busted on the Today Show recently. They put two bowls of M&Ms side by side and asked if the hosts could tell the difference. To begin with, you could tell they were different just by looking at them...the nasty non-chocolate ones were super-shiny. Matt Lauer immediately pegged the new ones as not tasting very chocolate-y. If I wanted wax instead of chocolate, I'd buy those cheap fake chocolate Easter bunnies. I can't believe they'd mess with M&Ms! :mad:
I missed that, you mean they have non-chocolate chocolate as in summer coating?
 
  • #18


Moonbear said:
I know prices of things go up. I'm not going to stop eating tuna just because the price goes up. I am more likely to stop eating it if I get frustrated that when I buy a can, it's not enough to feed me when it used to be enough to feed a family of four in the same sized can.
It's frustrating. I like to chop celery and onions into my tuna salad, perhaps with a little relish along with the mayo. I used to be able to get several tuna-salad sandwiches out of one can. Now my wife and I get one small tuna-melt each out of one can with no leftovers. I'm kind of restricted because if I eat tuna with "natural flavors" on the label, I get seriously ill (off-label MSG) and every major brand of tuna is made with that crap. My wife has to find tuna packed in salt water from a natural food store (only place around that carries it), and it's not cheap.
 
  • #19


mgb_phys said:
(note chocolate candy = not really chocolate anymore)


:frown:
 
  • #20


turbo-1 said:
It's frustrating. I like to chop celery and onions into my tuna salad, perhaps with a little relish along with the mayo. I used to be able to get several tuna-salad sandwiches out of one can. Now my wife and I get one small tuna-melt each out of one can with no leftovers.

Yep, that's the most annoying part of it. I'm not really into celery in my tuna (won't complain if someone adds it, but don't add it to my own), but I do like onion in it. I used to be able to chop one small onion and add it to a can with some mayo and get a week's worth of tuna sandwiches. Now, I get one, maybe two sandwiches (if they're skimpy), and waste most of the onion (that's the real tell-tale sign that it's not just that I'm making my sandwiches with more filling...it would be more onion than tuna if I added the whole onion now).
 
  • #21


Evo said:
I missed that, you mean they have non-chocolate chocolate as in summer coating?

It has more cocoa butter and less cocoa, so it's basically just oils rather than chocolate. I think the original Hershey bar is supposed to stay as real chocolate, but most everything else is being made with the cheaper formulation that doesn't taste like chocolate. Again, maybe I'd buy less M&Ms if they cost more, but I'm not buying ANY if they taste bad.
 
  • #22


turbo-1 said:
It's frustrating. I like to chop celery and onions into my tuna salad, perhaps with a little relish along with the mayo. I used to be able to get several tuna-salad sandwiches out of one can. Now my wife and I get one small tuna-melt each out of one can with no leftovers. I'm kind of restricted because if I eat tuna with "natural flavors" on the label, I get seriously ill (off-label MSG) and every major brand of tuna is made with that crap. My wife has to find tuna packed in salt water from a natural food store (only place around that carries it), and it's not cheap.
The cheap generic store brand tuna only contains "tuna, water, salt". It's 50 cents for a 6 ounce can, you should check it out. The Chicken of the Sea tuna contains "vegetable broth", which I guess could have anything, it's 70 cents for a 5 ounce can.
 
  • #23
I would only feed a cat with tinned tuna, the smell is akin to ham being boiled, it makes me gag just thinking about it.
 
  • #24
wolram said:
I would only feed a cat with tinned tuna, the smell is akin to ham being boiled, it makes me gag just thinking about it.
Ham being cooked in any way, shape, or form is heaven. Heck, I might even start dabbing it behind my ears. At least that way I'd still manage to get some hungry looks from men. :-p
 
  • #25
Evo said:
Ham being cooked in any way, shape, or form is heaven. Heck, I might even start dabbing it behind my ears. At least that way I'd still manage to get some hungry looks from men. :-p

:smile:
 
  • #26
Evo said:
Ham being cooked in any way, shape, or form is heaven. Heck, I might even start dabbing it behind my ears. At least that way I'd still manage to get some hungry looks from men. :-p

For sure i think even a potato would do.
 
  • #27
Evo said:
Ham being cooked in any way, shape, or form is heaven. Heck, I might even start dabbing it behind my ears. At least that way I'd still manage to get some hungry looks from men. :-p
If you're up this way, dab a little bacon fat behind your ears, and I'll run you past a bear cave. Gets you in shape, firms up muscles, provides excitement (even more than amusement park coasters)... You'll love it. I stole this from Larry and his brother Darryl. His other brother Darryl was the person who needed the Vermont bear-driven "health club".
 
  • #28


Evo said:
Bones, that's nothing. I once opened a can of tuna that had a piece of fur in it! I threw it away. Then of course everyone reminded
I also found a key chain with a toy sneaker in a jar of Kraft grapefruit slices. A daddy long legs in a 2 liter bottle of Dr Pepper and half of a large caterpillar in a can of Green Giant nibblets corn. That has got to be some kind of record for one person, I'd think.

No offense intended, Evo, but I'd be astounded at that run of poor quality control discoveries if it weren't you. You poor thing. You really ought to sue all of them to pay for all of your broken bones in your other misadventures. Like standing and walking.:wink:
 
  • #29
Basic grocery items rise 10.5% from last year
Here's how much it hurts: A basket of 16 basic food items cost $48.68 over the past three months, up 10.5% from a year ago, the American Farm Bureau Federation said Thursday.

The latest survey from the nation's largest farm organization underscores the pressures reverberating throughout the food chain, from the American farm to the executive suites of the largest U.S. packaged-food manufacturers.

I wonder if anyone in Washington is paying attention?
 
  • #30
Astronuc said:
I wonder if anyone in Washington is paying attention?
Nope. If you live in Georgetown, and the cook buys the food and prepares the meals and the nanny makes sure that the kids have snacks, etc. you are NOT going to have a clue about the increase in food prices. Remember when Bush I created a bit of a stir when he went to a market and marveled about the laser-scanners built into the checkout counters? They have other people to do these mundane things for them so they have no idea what normal people experience, except in the abstract.

This is related to the class-dependent terminology that crept into English when Britain was under French influence. Britons had sheep, and the French had mouton, so the meat from the animal became mutton. Britons had kine, and the the French had boeuf, so the meat from the animal became beef. The insulation of the wealthy from the cost and production of food is not new.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
12K
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
17K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
7K