Question: Shouldn't this be considered inflation - paying the same for less? BTW, It appears to be rampant among manufacturers. My personal favorite is keeping the peanut butter jar the same size, but hollowing out the bottom.
http://www.today.com/news/supermarket-shrinkage-its-not-your-imagination-experts-say-2D79677603
Examples:
On ABC News’ trip to the supermarket, 14 products were found that had recently gotten smaller. Here were some of the changes:
- Kashi cereal had shrunk, with a slightly taller box actually containing less cereal.
- Boxes of Scott Tissues contained 12 less tissues.
- There were 48 fewer chocolate chips in Ghirardelli chocolate chips.
- Planters Deluxe Mixed Nuts contained 52 fewer nuts than it had previously.
- A can of Maxwell House Coffee used to have enough coffee for 270 cups, now it will make only 240. The one thing that didn’t change was the price, it still costs $9.59.
- Pillsbury Cake mixes were reduced by three ounces. When made as instructed on the package, the old mix made 24 cupcakes; the new one, which costs the same, barely makes 21.
- Brawny paper towels new roll had four and a half feet fewer paper towels than one of its older rolls. And again, the price remained the same.
It appears that inflation is being masked by this process. Am I wrong?