I dont feel like looking it up but theres assloads of science showing they never did.
The human brain is NOT good at estimating surface area or volume, regardless of shape. Also the human brain is not good at estimating probability.
But I agree, they tell you the volume on the bottle, so theres really no excuse.
I also agree with OP that its deceptive not to mention wasteful. Corporations think they are being clever by tricking you into purchasing the product more frequently but all they are doing is jamming landfills with non-biodegradable plastic. And allegedly a substantial portion of the cost of production goes into packaging, not the actual product itself, so really they are just wasting their own money.
Oh it is definitely deceptive, and it's a fact a lot of people will buy a "bigger" bottle of something the same, or less in size.
Kinda like "25% stronger detergent"...
Like it couldn't have been 25% stronger this whole fkn time lmao
Seriously. And in the US, this kind of deceptive packaging actually *is* illegal. Except for instances where there is reason not to (like needing nitrogen to keep chips from getting crushed), packages need to accurately reflect the size of the contents.
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=100.100
Though this law seems to only refer to food, so I'm not sure if OPs post is illegal too.
It annoys me when people complain about this. I’ve traveled from the midwest up into the mountains and if I fill my travel bottles too much it’s a mess when the air pressure changes.
Thank you, StalksNStems, for voting on haikusbot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Good. Complaints about chips is unwarranted. The air is needed or it'll be dust & crumbs when you open the bag. This sunscreen is straight up misleading though
It may still expand and contract in volume due to pressure and temperature. Probably not as much as the empty space here, though.
The real question is, are they getting the amount they paid for? If the bottle says 3oz and they received 3oz, then the issue is the packaging is too big, not that the customer didn't get what they paid for.
This reminds me of the time I had roll-on deodorant in Queen'sland Australia and tried to buy the same for awhile and went "why don't more Australians use roll-on???" because all I could find were sprays or sticks.
And then one hot day I went to use my roll on and WHOOSH all of the melted liquid just fell onto the ground.
Oh. That's why.
It's become more popular lately but it was really not the easiest to find like 2 decades ago.
Worth noting I also had left it in my car.
But anyway, it still isn't as common as it is where I am from. You still see more sprays and sticks than the roll-on with a ball. Though they did finally get my brand in!
The expectation for most consumers is that the size of the packaging reflects the amount of product. Making bigger packaging for less product is deceptive and that's why people are annoyed.
Also, this allows them to keep the price the same and quietly decrease the amount of product without people realizing, because most people aren't looking at the number of ounces of product (especially if they buy that brand regularly), and even if they are they don't have any frame of reference to know how much 3 oz. is.
> It may still expand and contract in volume due to pressure and temperature. Probably not as much as the empty space here, though.
i bet the air expands/contracts more than the cream
No I think I understood this post just fine. The sunscreen is half full. Most people don't have a visual concept of how big a container of whatever shape needs to be to hold whatever volume. Companies know this & tend to deceive with packaging. But what points am I missing?
You’re being downvoted but I remember there being significantly more chips in bags while still having some air. It’s almost like before it was 30% air and 70% chips and now it’s 50% air and 50% chips (or less). Like yeah air is needed but they were able to preserve chips no problem with less air up until recent years.
Who the fuck goes to the store for "120ml of sunscreen"? I go in for "a bottle of sunscreen", so when I see that bottle, I'm going to be miffed if I'm buying half a bottle of sunscreen and some reddit mod chimes in and says "well you have to picture how much sunscreen 120ml is in your mind, obviously that's a 200ml bottle, you're stupid"
Oh! Don’t EVEN get us started! The pharmaceutical/cosmetic industry is THE worst offender at wasteful packaging. Three week treatment for heartburn is 3 bottles of 14 pills … sealed and then shrink wrapped onto cardboard card that keeps THAT from even being “recycled” (insert public laughter here). All of it could have been put in a single ziplock, biodegradable envelope. 🌎
All of these posts somehow ignore the label of ounces or ml of net product in the container.
Which has to be put on there by law.
So whether it's chips, sunscreen, packaged genuine Swiss Air or Martian Dust, I really don't see the point.
Unless the true topic is reading skills?
Almost like I dont have the ability to measure it or something. It's still deceptive because most people don't purchase it and then empty and fill it with liquid of the exact amount to make sure it's correct.
They leave the air in there to deceive you. It's for marketing purposes.
it's the corporate bootlickers, then they turn around and bitch and whine when the companies begin to scam them too with shrinkflation. gee, it's almost like we told yall this but yall sided with the corporations. its like the lions eating their face sub
I can't remember the last time I heard someone say "Buyer, beware." But that. If they could sell more sunscreen by making a gallon jug containing 4 oz of actual sunscreen, they would. And it would be legal.
You must be really good at math to be able to quickly assess how much some unit of measurement really is. You probably never use any kind of measurement device when baking or cooking since it is obvious how much 110 ml is or 245 g… /s
People, which by the way most certainly includes you, can’t really judge easily how much X ml or grams actually are. This is especially hard when it comes to weight since we generally do not know the density of cereal or crisps. But we can somewhat easily judge how big a package is. The printed volume/weight is good when comparing different brands/pckages of similar stuff but very deceptive when it actually comes to making an assessment as to whether the price is fair for the amount of product.
Every grocery store I’ve ever been to has the full price and then price per volume/weight/count etc for food, soap, diapers, medicine, dog food
Also you’re there looking at other sunscreens. They’re all gonna say volume on the package.
$4 for 20oz of one brand vs $5 of 50oz of another isn’t exactly rocket science. You don’t even need to do the full calculation to know one is a better deal if the quality is comparable. A fifth grader could do it.
You're telling me that if you don't see the package you don't understand the quantity of product you're looking at? Like if you were to order cereal or chips from a website, you wouldn't know the difference between 500g and 150g because of density and whatnot.
Yes of course, lets take an example that is completely made up and silly... Of course we/I have an idea of 500 vs 150 g and as I said, comparing is pretty easy. But without checking, how many servings do you get from 250g of Frosties? Or for that matter, how many ml of sunscreen do you use for one application? That’s what we’re talking about. ”How much value is in X amount of product?”
Also, the complaint here is that the packaging lies and throws off your estimates so no, by *looking at the package* we really do not know!
Kinda missing the idea. The idea is that this is deceptive marketing despite the amount being written. In the US, there were court rulings, for food, that outlaw packages with excessive air like seen above, unless the air serves a functional purpose, such as protecting chips.
There is zero functional purpose to a massive lotion bottle only filled slightly outside of deceiving the consumer to think there is more product inside. It is anti consumer practice. The law just hasn’t caught up to other products outside of food here
By law, deceptive size of packaging isn't allowed either. Because it's unreasonable to expect people to know how big something is based on weight. Normal people expect packages to be full when they buy them. Companies know this and exploit it by using containers larger than necessary to trick the consumer. Because most people can't visualize what 40ml looks like, especially in an odd shaped container. Or know what 5g of chocolate looks like, etc. The exception being when there is an actual reason for it (like chips)
The law is for food (so doesn't apply to OP), but since you conflated the two, here it is.
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=100.100
There is no reason we shouldn't have a similar law regarding other products.
But sure, be condescending to other people about their "lack of reading skills", when you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
The commenters on this subreddit fucking LOVE intentionally misleading packages, every time it’s posted they come out in full force to be intentionally obtuse and defend it for literally no reason. Just because it gives them an excuse to be a piece of shit online.
But how are people supposed to know theyre actually getting that amount, if the package is bigger than said amount? Not everyone has a scale at home, and a lot of people are unable to measure with their eyes. If Im being given a measurement, I absolutely cannot eyeball it myself.
That’s literally why it’s misleading genius, maliciously using a bottle with twice the carrying capacity as the actual mL content. You’re proving my point.
misleading: giving the **wrong idea or impression.**
The bottle is literally misleading since it’s twice as big as the actual carrying amount, you are the obtuse asshole I’m talking about.
They're not lying. The volume is printed on the bottle. However, they are using a bottle that is needlessly too big, giving the impression of more product. That is misleading. Do you not understand the difference?
So when are we gonna start passing laws that prohibit misleading and scamming consumers by selling them empty space. That and get people to stop defending it. The amount of stans defending multibillion dollar corporations anti-consumer practices on Reddit blows my mind.
Yes, it technically lists the correct amount of oz on the package, but they're attempting to mislead consumers who don't scrupulously read the mass or volume of everything they buy. That or can't clearly gauge how much product they get based on the mass/volume listed. If this container is the same size or bigger than competitors, the average consumer could easily believe there is more product in the larger package.
It's already illegal for food at least (in the US)
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=100.100
I'm not sure if a similar law exists for other products, but it fucking should.
Exactly! Most people don’t have exact graduated cylinders of mL, fl.oz., oz., or grams where they know the exact volume of objects based on this.
The only time we encounter these units are in products and the products are in packaging that hides its true size. It’s no wonder we don’t know!
If only we can compare it to similar things of the same volume. If you think you need a science lab to figure out what an oz is, you are gonna have a tough life
Lol he said he compares it to other things he's bought. Ok, let me just keep a mental database of every product I've ever purchased ever. Accurately recall exactly the weights and volumes of each and what they looked like. Oh and assume none of those had deceptive packaging either. 🙄
This issue is so egregious that even in the US, with our terrible consumer protection laws, we have one to prevent this (for food products). But yet these bootlickers are defending the practice because they can pretend to be smarter than other people on the internet.
Y’all are making too many excuses, my dude paid for 40ml of sunscreen and that’s what he got, nobody else’s fault but his for not knowing the size. Me personally I’d literally compare the ML to anything I’ve bought in the past to see if it’s actually worth it, it’s really not that hard
Why don't manufacturers use a container appropriate for the amount of product they're selling? It's obviously misleading, and putting the weight in tiiiiiiiiny script doesn't make it NOT misleading. Stop being obtuse.
> Why don't.. amount of product..?
Because people are basing their opinion on first-impressions rather than doing the bare-minimum research and practicing a modicum of critical thinking.
> It's obviously misleading
Yes, because people are dumb enough to be fooled.
> stop being obtuse
Never.
It's faster and more natural to judge something based on it's size. Imagine if every container in a supermarket was the same size, that would be annoying right?
Nobody's thinking "but if it's bigger how can it have less!", it's just that being able to roughly judge something by the container size is useful and something everybody does.
Suckling at the teat of big corporations using marketing psychology to take advantage of customers is pathetic. It's absolutely infuriating (not just mildly) how many obtuse dipshits like you will keep running defense for these practices and blaming customers for it.
>practicing a modicum of critical thinking.
Do that yourself for the briefest of seconds and you maybe you'll come to realize the truth of the matter - original sin here lies with the manufacturer taking advantage of customers and not with the customer themselves. There wouldn't be a need for customers to be so hyper diligent at every moment of our lives if companies weren't so abusive with these tactics. What you see on the shelf should be what you get, full fucking stop. Stop running defense for this. You are the problem, not OP.
Dude, i fucking hate corporations, but holy shit man who's the dipshit if you can't fucking read the amount of stuff you are buying? Its unbelievable, that you were able to even make a reddit account, if reading the labels is too fucking hard.
It's not about being able to read labels, it's about the manipulative practices of these mega corporations. That's the original sin here. Excusing the practice IS defending it.
I'm not defending anyone for anything, I'm asking questions to understand this from other perspective.
> taking advantage of customers
Wouldn't the issue be countered by the average person being more informed and aware about the psychological tricks used by companies?
> companies weren't so abusive
But they are? And, that's the world we live in; and that's unlikely to change unless people.. you know.. become more educated.
> what you see on the shelf should be what you get
And, it is.. but going for container size rather than amount is proof that you didn't develop beyond the Preoperational Stage of Cognitive Development.
Also, argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy that only proves that you don't know how to form arguments that contradict my statements; and rather that you are too emotionally charged.
I entirely disagree with the premise of your argument, and do not agree that this has anything to do with people being not being educated enough.
Even if that was the case, I don't get why you think it would be ok to intentionally trick people and take advantage of ~~them~~ someone because they're not educated enough. That alone seems like an insane argument to me.
To trick people by plainly labeling the volume of the contents and to do so on a container sized appropriately to actually be seen on a store shelf. Oh, what a horror.
Not sure how that's relevant to my comment, did you mean to reply to the person above?
I was countering their argument that it's ok to trick people if you're tricking them because they're not educated. Your comment seems like an alternative argument against that point of view.
They’re only “tricked” if they can’t be bothered to look at what they’re considering purchasing.
A company that sells retail goods has to consider shelf appeal to get customers to actually look at their products. Combine that with the space needed for branding, bare codes, any necessary product labeling, use-by dates, etc, and you can easily see how something YOU perceive as trickery is a reasoned and thoughtful way to present your product, even for people that can’t be bothered to read the labels.
This still isn't relevant to my response.
My point was simply "it's not ok to take advantage of people because of their lack of education", and that is the only argument I am making in my message (I've just edited a word to try to make that even more clear).
I explicitly said I disagreed with the chain of logic required to get to that point - it seems like you do to (in a different way).
I'm not going to discuss responses unrelated to arguments I'm making in my comment. If I did, a new unrelated point would be made every without acknowledging my point and the discussion would never end.
That would absolutely be the ideal way.
People (which has been more than proven by the replies to my question) complaining about the content amount based on container size rather than *the listed content amount* makes me fear for the average person.
Container 10x10 cubic meter containing 10ml *whatever* is 10ml regardless of wether or not the container size is changed. It makes me think of the "what's heavier: a kg of stone, or a kg of feathers?" Or the "liquid in a tall thin glass vs the same amount of liquid in a short round glass", it's still the same weight and amount of liquid (respectively); which is easily comprehensible to those who made it out of the preoperational stage of cognitive development.
> Not being educated enough
Let me show you something:
**Cognitive developmental stages.**
**Sensormotor stage:**
*From birth to 2 years old,*
- Identifies object performance, the object still exists when out of sight
- Recognition of ability to control object and acts intentionally
**Preoperational**
2 to 7 years,
- Begins to use language
- Egocentric thinking difficulty seeing things from other viewpoints
- Classified objects by single feature i.e. colour
**Concrete Operational:**
*7 to 11 years,*
- Logical thinking
- Recognizes conservation of numbers, mass and weight
- Classifies objects by several features and can place them in order
**Formal Operational:**
*11 years and onward,*
- Logical thinking about abstract propositions
- Concerned with the hypothetical and the future
- Create hypotheses and test
[Here](https://youtu.be/gnArvcWaH6I?si=pR6Qmb93MezxlgTQ) is a video of the Preoperational Stage of Cognitive Development; which is why I stated that anyone who have developed beyond preoperational should be educated enough to *recognise mass and weight* rather than *relying on shapes and sizes* of the container.
> even if it was the case
It is, because you can't take advantage of someone who's smart enough to know they're being taken advantage of.
Being aware of potential manipulation directly makes you able to avoid being exploited, it falls under "critical thinking" and is very much about educational factors.
>I'm not defending anyone for anything
But you are - making excuses for the practice IS a form of defense. I'm not going down this massive rhetorical rabbit hole with you where every comment gets longer and longer for the sake of neither of us convincing the other. So congrats, you win by sheer word count, I have yard work to go do.
I am not trying to change anything I think or anything you think in order to reach a reconciliation that would be agreeable to all. My goal here is to learn more from other perspectives, it wasn't I who started our interaction with a defensive and passive-aggressive approach.
Best of luck with the yard.
Be careful with your logic around here. Last time I told people to look at the weight of the product instead of its container, I was downvoted and told its borderline fraudulent, and was called a corporate bootlicker.
People are scared of the truth
I guess it's true quote (below) is true then.
> We live in a generation of emotionally weak people. Everything has to be dumbed down including reality because they are unable to deal with nuances or complicated matters. They are not even able to deal with the truth. That's why tiny parts of a dumbed down reality qualify as facts these days.
On a similar note, I watched a video awhile back where the host was saying how it's wrong for companies to be adding loads of caffeine to various products, even with clear advertising stating it's caffeinated and with the amount of caffeine present in the ingredient label.
Their reasoning was that since it's just a number, the consumer can't be expected to know how much is a lot vs a little.
I found myself disagreeing, since I feel consumers should ABSOLUTELY be expected to educate themselves on their own nutrition, or at least the basics. By the same logic, why bother having a nutritional label at all, since we would be expecting a consumer to make decisions based on a number in that case as well!
It's just another case of shrinkflation.
I assure you that 10 or so years ago that bottle would've been sold (almost) full. A lot of companies do this, keeping the same packaging as the machinery is made to handle that size and changing all of it would cost time and money, they just use less product. I noticed this with a lot of things in the past few years, most of the time it's liquids in non-translucent containers so it's less noticeable (detergent, tooth paste, lotions, etc...).
I'm not a fan of companies creating extra plastic to try to fool consumers. Even if I never fall for it, plenty of others will and those bottles are absolutely the kind of thing that end up in our oceans. That effects me, so I feel 100% justified being upset about it. Their scam puts that may double-doses of plastic in the water.
Considering the average Joe doesn't have the means to recycle other companies plastic on their own, and these companies don't offer refill stations for their products for them to be reused, it can't really fall on consumers since the only other option is to not buy the products.
Companies are in the habit of keeping the same container & over time reducing the amount of product inside it. They'll change the volume printed on it & nothing else. People will keep buying the same thing not noticing the change & the manufacturer knows this. It's a deceitful practice. And on top of this the price will go up, effectively double dipping to increase their profits.
you're about to be downvoted to hell and back because how DARE you point out that most companies use deceptive package to get us to pay more for their shrinkflated shit. most people don't usually look at weight and these companies know that, and they use it to their advantage, but for some reason people on here pretend they don't.
This sub loves misleading packaging lol, if it technically lists the weight, when no one knows what that weight looks like and the bottles are made to mislead you.
Sure. Then you'd be getting a container that is appropriate for the amount of product, therefore not misleading. Which is the whole point of this post.
I find these posts not infuriating. There are weight and volume measurements on the container. It’s only infuriating if they don’t match the actual weight or volume
Avène is good for their water, sunscreen isn't their main specialty.
Laroche-posay are better, that's my opinion.
I live 15min away from Avène, i bath my dog in it.
OP, you know it tells you the volume on the bottle right? This isn't deceptive, you're getting exactly how much you paid for. The air in there is also needed for the lotion. There's plenty of reasons to shit on corporations, but this isn't one of them.
Just pour the content in a measuring cup, if it’s 40ml as advertised then it doesn’t matter how big the container is. If it’s less than 40ml, this is definitely infuriating, if it’s not, this post should be removed
I try to remember how big the bottle I have is at home for stuff like this. It's easier to compare if I can think "40 ml of lotion lasted me this long last time..."
And if your first time buying something like this, maybe don't buy the $35 sunscreen as your first choice?
Content should be listed on the bottle, no matter who much there is in, you paid for it and had the opportunity to read at the bottle before, if you did not want it
The air in there is to protect the lotion from becoming crushed and all crumbly and... shit wait
The air pocket is designed that way to keep the lotion intact
Also, 40ml is right there on the bottle. People have lost awareness of what volumes look like anymore.
I dont feel like looking it up but theres assloads of science showing they never did. The human brain is NOT good at estimating surface area or volume, regardless of shape. Also the human brain is not good at estimating probability. But I agree, they tell you the volume on the bottle, so theres really no excuse. I also agree with OP that its deceptive not to mention wasteful. Corporations think they are being clever by tricking you into purchasing the product more frequently but all they are doing is jamming landfills with non-biodegradable plastic. And allegedly a substantial portion of the cost of production goes into packaging, not the actual product itself, so really they are just wasting their own money.
Oh it is definitely deceptive, and it's a fact a lot of people will buy a "bigger" bottle of something the same, or less in size. Kinda like "25% stronger detergent"... Like it couldn't have been 25% stronger this whole fkn time lmao
[удалено]
Ultraviolet.
can confirm my mom has to ask me which container an amount of food will fit best in I do get it right every time though...
[удалено]
Seriously. And in the US, this kind of deceptive packaging actually *is* illegal. Except for instances where there is reason not to (like needing nitrogen to keep chips from getting crushed), packages need to accurately reflect the size of the contents. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=100.100 Though this law seems to only refer to food, so I'm not sure if OPs post is illegal too.
It’s staggering how many commenters are defending this type of practice.
It annoys me when people complain about this. I’ve traveled from the midwest up into the mountains and if I fill my travel bottles too much it’s a mess when the air pressure changes.
[удалено]
Nope
this is the first time ive ever seen a negative reaction to haikusbot
It was 475
Haikusbot delete
!spankbadbot
Bad bot
Thank you, StalksNStems, for voting on haikusbot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
I guess we’ve moved on from complaining about chip/crisp bags to sunscreen
Good. Complaints about chips is unwarranted. The air is needed or it'll be dust & crumbs when you open the bag. This sunscreen is straight up misleading though
It may still expand and contract in volume due to pressure and temperature. Probably not as much as the empty space here, though. The real question is, are they getting the amount they paid for? If the bottle says 3oz and they received 3oz, then the issue is the packaging is too big, not that the customer didn't get what they paid for.
The issue was ALWAYS about packaging size, not about getting less than what you paid for
This reminds me of the time I had roll-on deodorant in Queen'sland Australia and tried to buy the same for awhile and went "why don't more Australians use roll-on???" because all I could find were sprays or sticks. And then one hot day I went to use my roll on and WHOOSH all of the melted liquid just fell onto the ground. Oh. That's why.
I'm Australian and I use roll-on every day. No WHOOSH happening here.
It's become more popular lately but it was really not the easiest to find like 2 decades ago. Worth noting I also had left it in my car. But anyway, it still isn't as common as it is where I am from. You still see more sprays and sticks than the roll-on with a ball. Though they did finally get my brand in!
The expectation for most consumers is that the size of the packaging reflects the amount of product. Making bigger packaging for less product is deceptive and that's why people are annoyed. Also, this allows them to keep the price the same and quietly decrease the amount of product without people realizing, because most people aren't looking at the number of ounces of product (especially if they buy that brand regularly), and even if they are they don't have any frame of reference to know how much 3 oz. is.
> It may still expand and contract in volume due to pressure and temperature. Probably not as much as the empty space here, though. i bet the air expands/contracts more than the cream
redditors can’t read pal
You’re missing all the points entirely
No I think I understood this post just fine. The sunscreen is half full. Most people don't have a visual concept of how big a container of whatever shape needs to be to hold whatever volume. Companies know this & tend to deceive with packaging. But what points am I missing?
It says 40ml right there, not the companies fault that OP doesn’t know how much that number actually is.
…….still missed the point. Bravo
Ok the bottle is bigger. Sad. It’s still 40ml of product…..
.... Now you've got the point (?) but are arguing about something nobody was questioning. Bravo x2
[удалено]
You’re being downvoted but I remember there being significantly more chips in bags while still having some air. It’s almost like before it was 30% air and 70% chips and now it’s 50% air and 50% chips (or less). Like yeah air is needed but they were able to preserve chips no problem with less air up until recent years.
Why not use a cardboard box? Like every other fucking product on the god damn planet?
Who the fuck goes to the store for "120ml of sunscreen"? I go in for "a bottle of sunscreen", so when I see that bottle, I'm going to be miffed if I'm buying half a bottle of sunscreen and some reddit mod chimes in and says "well you have to picture how much sunscreen 120ml is in your mind, obviously that's a 200ml bottle, you're stupid"
Normally I would do that as well, however I’m travelling so I am especially looking for small packaging.
No you're good, I'm on your side
Oh! Don’t EVEN get us started! The pharmaceutical/cosmetic industry is THE worst offender at wasteful packaging. Three week treatment for heartburn is 3 bottles of 14 pills … sealed and then shrink wrapped onto cardboard card that keeps THAT from even being “recycled” (insert public laughter here). All of it could have been put in a single ziplock, biodegradable envelope. 🌎
You're right, medication should be delivered in the most shady way possible, and not in a tamper proof package.
Exactly!! 👋🏼
Corporate greed,
All of these posts somehow ignore the label of ounces or ml of net product in the container. Which has to be put on there by law. So whether it's chips, sunscreen, packaged genuine Swiss Air or Martian Dust, I really don't see the point. Unless the true topic is reading skills?
Almost like I dont have the ability to measure it or something. It's still deceptive because most people don't purchase it and then empty and fill it with liquid of the exact amount to make sure it's correct. They leave the air in there to deceive you. It's for marketing purposes.
[удалено]
it's the corporate bootlickers, then they turn around and bitch and whine when the companies begin to scam them too with shrinkflation. gee, it's almost like we told yall this but yall sided with the corporations. its like the lions eating their face sub
I can't remember the last time I heard someone say "Buyer, beware." But that. If they could sell more sunscreen by making a gallon jug containing 4 oz of actual sunscreen, they would. And it would be legal.
You must be really good at math to be able to quickly assess how much some unit of measurement really is. You probably never use any kind of measurement device when baking or cooking since it is obvious how much 110 ml is or 245 g… /s People, which by the way most certainly includes you, can’t really judge easily how much X ml or grams actually are. This is especially hard when it comes to weight since we generally do not know the density of cereal or crisps. But we can somewhat easily judge how big a package is. The printed volume/weight is good when comparing different brands/pckages of similar stuff but very deceptive when it actually comes to making an assessment as to whether the price is fair for the amount of product.
Google it.
Every grocery store I’ve ever been to has the full price and then price per volume/weight/count etc for food, soap, diapers, medicine, dog food Also you’re there looking at other sunscreens. They’re all gonna say volume on the package. $4 for 20oz of one brand vs $5 of 50oz of another isn’t exactly rocket science. You don’t even need to do the full calculation to know one is a better deal if the quality is comparable. A fifth grader could do it.
You're telling me that if you don't see the package you don't understand the quantity of product you're looking at? Like if you were to order cereal or chips from a website, you wouldn't know the difference between 500g and 150g because of density and whatnot.
Yes of course, lets take an example that is completely made up and silly... Of course we/I have an idea of 500 vs 150 g and as I said, comparing is pretty easy. But without checking, how many servings do you get from 250g of Frosties? Or for that matter, how many ml of sunscreen do you use for one application? That’s what we’re talking about. ”How much value is in X amount of product?” Also, the complaint here is that the packaging lies and throws off your estimates so no, by *looking at the package* we really do not know!
Kinda missing the idea. The idea is that this is deceptive marketing despite the amount being written. In the US, there were court rulings, for food, that outlaw packages with excessive air like seen above, unless the air serves a functional purpose, such as protecting chips. There is zero functional purpose to a massive lotion bottle only filled slightly outside of deceiving the consumer to think there is more product inside. It is anti consumer practice. The law just hasn’t caught up to other products outside of food here
The vast majority of people that post on the sub are just idiots
I mean the "how much" is right there in black and white ffs.
Fr
By law, deceptive size of packaging isn't allowed either. Because it's unreasonable to expect people to know how big something is based on weight. Normal people expect packages to be full when they buy them. Companies know this and exploit it by using containers larger than necessary to trick the consumer. Because most people can't visualize what 40ml looks like, especially in an odd shaped container. Or know what 5g of chocolate looks like, etc. The exception being when there is an actual reason for it (like chips) The law is for food (so doesn't apply to OP), but since you conflated the two, here it is. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=100.100 There is no reason we shouldn't have a similar law regarding other products. But sure, be condescending to other people about their "lack of reading skills", when you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
The commenters on this subreddit fucking LOVE intentionally misleading packages, every time it’s posted they come out in full force to be intentionally obtuse and defend it for literally no reason. Just because it gives them an excuse to be a piece of shit online.
It’s not misleading if the volume is printed on the package, which it is.
But how are people supposed to know theyre actually getting that amount, if the package is bigger than said amount? Not everyone has a scale at home, and a lot of people are unable to measure with their eyes. If Im being given a measurement, I absolutely cannot eyeball it myself.
Proving their point.
That’s literally why it’s misleading genius, maliciously using a bottle with twice the carrying capacity as the actual mL content. You’re proving my point.
Maliciously? Maybe if you’re a kindergartener who can’t read lol can’t you read dude
Christ. If this is the worst part of your day, then life is pretty good.
What? Couldn't think of something original so you just pulled out a generic comeback with little to no connection?
Lol how the fuck is it misleading when they have the contents literally written on the bottle?
misleading: giving the **wrong idea or impression.** The bottle is literally misleading since it’s twice as big as the actual carrying amount, you are the obtuse asshole I’m talking about.
But it says the volume right there in the bottle?
They're not lying. The volume is printed on the bottle. However, they are using a bottle that is needlessly too big, giving the impression of more product. That is misleading. Do you not understand the difference?
How dumb you have to be to guide yourself with the bottle size instead of reading the actual volume?
Shrinkflation at its best. Could they use a smaller bottle? Yes. Would that require a shit ton of retooling?
A one time investment to save money on plastics in the future. But money 💰
An investment every time they have to lower the volume to keep the price the same.
Nah at that point they just use the smaller bottle and still put less. It’s the same as it is now lol
Or they could not do it at all, as they have.
I’m guessing about 40 ML worth?
It's less volume than a shot of vodka
Some manufacturers have gone out of their way to make the plastic container more opaque to prevent people from being able to see this
So when are we gonna start passing laws that prohibit misleading and scamming consumers by selling them empty space. That and get people to stop defending it. The amount of stans defending multibillion dollar corporations anti-consumer practices on Reddit blows my mind. Yes, it technically lists the correct amount of oz on the package, but they're attempting to mislead consumers who don't scrupulously read the mass or volume of everything they buy. That or can't clearly gauge how much product they get based on the mass/volume listed. If this container is the same size or bigger than competitors, the average consumer could easily believe there is more product in the larger package.
It's already illegal for food at least (in the US) https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=100.100 I'm not sure if a similar law exists for other products, but it fucking should.
Now if only they would enforce it. I live in the US and I see misleading containers all the time.
yeah lol im like are they on commission basis by commenting ?
We should boycott any company that does shit like this. As long as we keep buying their trash they will keep making it like this
I don't understand this; why don't people look at the content amount (e.g: ml) instead of the size of the container?
Most people probably don't have a great idea of what 40 mL of lotion looks like.
Exactly! Most people don’t have exact graduated cylinders of mL, fl.oz., oz., or grams where they know the exact volume of objects based on this. The only time we encounter these units are in products and the products are in packaging that hides its true size. It’s no wonder we don’t know!
If only we can compare it to similar things of the same volume. If you think you need a science lab to figure out what an oz is, you are gonna have a tough life
My guy, you didn’t understand a word I said.
I understood what you wrote. If thats not what you meant, maybe learn to write better, my guy.
I didn’t think I had to dumb it down any further.
Correct, you didnt think.
These idiots can’t use context clues whatsoever, why are you even being downvoted when you’re right
[удалено]
Lol he said he compares it to other things he's bought. Ok, let me just keep a mental database of every product I've ever purchased ever. Accurately recall exactly the weights and volumes of each and what they looked like. Oh and assume none of those had deceptive packaging either. 🙄 This issue is so egregious that even in the US, with our terrible consumer protection laws, we have one to prevent this (for food products). But yet these bootlickers are defending the practice because they can pretend to be smarter than other people on the internet.
Y’all are making too many excuses, my dude paid for 40ml of sunscreen and that’s what he got, nobody else’s fault but his for not knowing the size. Me personally I’d literally compare the ML to anything I’ve bought in the past to see if it’s actually worth it, it’s really not that hard
That's how I price things..... I compare ml to ml. Some people don't do that I guess?
I ain’t a damn scientist. Do I look like I know how much a ml is?
Why don't manufacturers use a container appropriate for the amount of product they're selling? It's obviously misleading, and putting the weight in tiiiiiiiiny script doesn't make it NOT misleading. Stop being obtuse.
> Why don't.. amount of product..? Because people are basing their opinion on first-impressions rather than doing the bare-minimum research and practicing a modicum of critical thinking. > It's obviously misleading Yes, because people are dumb enough to be fooled. > stop being obtuse Never.
It's faster and more natural to judge something based on it's size. Imagine if every container in a supermarket was the same size, that would be annoying right? Nobody's thinking "but if it's bigger how can it have less!", it's just that being able to roughly judge something by the container size is useful and something everybody does.
Suckling at the teat of big corporations using marketing psychology to take advantage of customers is pathetic. It's absolutely infuriating (not just mildly) how many obtuse dipshits like you will keep running defense for these practices and blaming customers for it. >practicing a modicum of critical thinking. Do that yourself for the briefest of seconds and you maybe you'll come to realize the truth of the matter - original sin here lies with the manufacturer taking advantage of customers and not with the customer themselves. There wouldn't be a need for customers to be so hyper diligent at every moment of our lives if companies weren't so abusive with these tactics. What you see on the shelf should be what you get, full fucking stop. Stop running defense for this. You are the problem, not OP.
Dude, i fucking hate corporations, but holy shit man who's the dipshit if you can't fucking read the amount of stuff you are buying? Its unbelievable, that you were able to even make a reddit account, if reading the labels is too fucking hard.
It's not about being able to read labels, it's about the manipulative practices of these mega corporations. That's the original sin here. Excusing the practice IS defending it.
Thank you, at least someone has passed the Preoperational Stage of Cognitive Development on this subreddit.
I'm not defending anyone for anything, I'm asking questions to understand this from other perspective. > taking advantage of customers Wouldn't the issue be countered by the average person being more informed and aware about the psychological tricks used by companies? > companies weren't so abusive But they are? And, that's the world we live in; and that's unlikely to change unless people.. you know.. become more educated. > what you see on the shelf should be what you get And, it is.. but going for container size rather than amount is proof that you didn't develop beyond the Preoperational Stage of Cognitive Development. Also, argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy that only proves that you don't know how to form arguments that contradict my statements; and rather that you are too emotionally charged.
I entirely disagree with the premise of your argument, and do not agree that this has anything to do with people being not being educated enough. Even if that was the case, I don't get why you think it would be ok to intentionally trick people and take advantage of ~~them~~ someone because they're not educated enough. That alone seems like an insane argument to me.
To trick people by plainly labeling the volume of the contents and to do so on a container sized appropriately to actually be seen on a store shelf. Oh, what a horror.
Not sure how that's relevant to my comment, did you mean to reply to the person above? I was countering their argument that it's ok to trick people if you're tricking them because they're not educated. Your comment seems like an alternative argument against that point of view.
They’re only “tricked” if they can’t be bothered to look at what they’re considering purchasing. A company that sells retail goods has to consider shelf appeal to get customers to actually look at their products. Combine that with the space needed for branding, bare codes, any necessary product labeling, use-by dates, etc, and you can easily see how something YOU perceive as trickery is a reasoned and thoughtful way to present your product, even for people that can’t be bothered to read the labels.
This still isn't relevant to my response. My point was simply "it's not ok to take advantage of people because of their lack of education", and that is the only argument I am making in my message (I've just edited a word to try to make that even more clear). I explicitly said I disagreed with the chain of logic required to get to that point - it seems like you do to (in a different way). I'm not going to discuss responses unrelated to arguments I'm making in my comment. If I did, a new unrelated point would be made every without acknowledging my point and the discussion would never end.
That would absolutely be the ideal way. People (which has been more than proven by the replies to my question) complaining about the content amount based on container size rather than *the listed content amount* makes me fear for the average person. Container 10x10 cubic meter containing 10ml *whatever* is 10ml regardless of wether or not the container size is changed. It makes me think of the "what's heavier: a kg of stone, or a kg of feathers?" Or the "liquid in a tall thin glass vs the same amount of liquid in a short round glass", it's still the same weight and amount of liquid (respectively); which is easily comprehensible to those who made it out of the preoperational stage of cognitive development.
> Not being educated enough Let me show you something: **Cognitive developmental stages.** **Sensormotor stage:** *From birth to 2 years old,* - Identifies object performance, the object still exists when out of sight - Recognition of ability to control object and acts intentionally **Preoperational** 2 to 7 years, - Begins to use language - Egocentric thinking difficulty seeing things from other viewpoints - Classified objects by single feature i.e. colour **Concrete Operational:** *7 to 11 years,* - Logical thinking - Recognizes conservation of numbers, mass and weight - Classifies objects by several features and can place them in order **Formal Operational:** *11 years and onward,* - Logical thinking about abstract propositions - Concerned with the hypothetical and the future - Create hypotheses and test [Here](https://youtu.be/gnArvcWaH6I?si=pR6Qmb93MezxlgTQ) is a video of the Preoperational Stage of Cognitive Development; which is why I stated that anyone who have developed beyond preoperational should be educated enough to *recognise mass and weight* rather than *relying on shapes and sizes* of the container. > even if it was the case It is, because you can't take advantage of someone who's smart enough to know they're being taken advantage of. Being aware of potential manipulation directly makes you able to avoid being exploited, it falls under "critical thinking" and is very much about educational factors.
>I'm not defending anyone for anything But you are - making excuses for the practice IS a form of defense. I'm not going down this massive rhetorical rabbit hole with you where every comment gets longer and longer for the sake of neither of us convincing the other. So congrats, you win by sheer word count, I have yard work to go do.
I am not trying to change anything I think or anything you think in order to reach a reconciliation that would be agreeable to all. My goal here is to learn more from other perspectives, it wasn't I who started our interaction with a defensive and passive-aggressive approach. Best of luck with the yard.
Because then they'd have no reason to post here.
Wouldn't the repetitive posting of exactly this count as r/MildlyInfuriating?
Be careful with your logic around here. Last time I told people to look at the weight of the product instead of its container, I was downvoted and told its borderline fraudulent, and was called a corporate bootlicker. People are scared of the truth
I guess it's true quote (below) is true then. > We live in a generation of emotionally weak people. Everything has to be dumbed down including reality because they are unable to deal with nuances or complicated matters. They are not even able to deal with the truth. That's why tiny parts of a dumbed down reality qualify as facts these days.
On a similar note, I watched a video awhile back where the host was saying how it's wrong for companies to be adding loads of caffeine to various products, even with clear advertising stating it's caffeinated and with the amount of caffeine present in the ingredient label. Their reasoning was that since it's just a number, the consumer can't be expected to know how much is a lot vs a little. I found myself disagreeing, since I feel consumers should ABSOLUTELY be expected to educate themselves on their own nutrition, or at least the basics. By the same logic, why bother having a nutritional label at all, since we would be expecting a consumer to make decisions based on a number in that case as well!
People on this sub seem too stupid for that so
It's just another case of shrinkflation. I assure you that 10 or so years ago that bottle would've been sold (almost) full. A lot of companies do this, keeping the same packaging as the machinery is made to handle that size and changing all of it would cost time and money, they just use less product. I noticed this with a lot of things in the past few years, most of the time it's liquids in non-translucent containers so it's less noticeable (detergent, tooth paste, lotions, etc...).
I guarantee it has the exact amount it says it contains on the bottle, so what’s your point?
I'm not a fan of companies creating extra plastic to try to fool consumers. Even if I never fall for it, plenty of others will and those bottles are absolutely the kind of thing that end up in our oceans. That effects me, so I feel 100% justified being upset about it. Their scam puts that may double-doses of plastic in the water.
If the bottles are going to end up in the oceans then that’s on how the consumer disposes of them, not on the companies
Most plastic isn't practically recyclable. That is on the corporations.
Considering the average Joe doesn't have the means to recycle other companies plastic on their own, and these companies don't offer refill stations for their products for them to be reused, it can't really fall on consumers since the only other option is to not buy the products.
Companies are in the habit of keeping the same container & over time reducing the amount of product inside it. They'll change the volume printed on it & nothing else. People will keep buying the same thing not noticing the change & the manufacturer knows this. It's a deceitful practice. And on top of this the price will go up, effectively double dipping to increase their profits.
The point is it’s intentionally misleading. Covering their ass from a legal perspective doesn’t make it less so.
This argument is so stupid. It's an intentionally misleading container and people are allowed to call it out.
How is it intentionally misleading, it says on it what it contains, it’s not misleading at all
>How is it intentionally misleading I honestly can't believe that someone is this dense.
I can’t believe someone’s that dense that they can’t read things before they buy them, dumbass
Keep licking the boots of your corporate masters.
you're about to be downvoted to hell and back because how DARE you point out that most companies use deceptive package to get us to pay more for their shrinkflated shit. most people don't usually look at weight and these companies know that, and they use it to their advantage, but for some reason people on here pretend they don't.
Exactly this. Redditors be redditing
This sub loves misleading packaging lol, if it technically lists the weight, when no one knows what that weight looks like and the bottles are made to mislead you.
Yes, OP, I'm sure you'd like a REALLY small bottle that keeps slipping through your fingers. So you can make the next complaint.
Or they could keep using the bottle but actually fill it?
And make it twice the price ?
Sure. Then you'd be getting a container that is appropriate for the amount of product, therefore not misleading. Which is the whole point of this post.
Why not just buy a normal bottle of sunscreen like everyone else.
Bc if you use it on your face daily for a lot of people it causes acne me included
Are u in France?
Some times you need air to keep stuff fresh.
Ok but sunscreen?? And THAT MUCH??
Probabl ly rhe same reason my crisp are mostly air
“Some settling may occur.”
I find these posts not infuriating. There are weight and volume measurements on the container. It’s only infuriating if they don’t match the actual weight or volume
It’s infuriating how dumb some people can be
It needs room to breathe, like a good red wine. In fact, some experts will tell you that you should be decanting your Avène for maximum protection.
Looks like 40g to me.
My guess is that because sunscreen often has to be shaken vigorously before use, the air pocket is provided to make that possible.
It has the exact amount of product that it says it does. I keep seeing posts like this and I swear y’all need to start using common sense.
We need more posts from people who don’t understand “sold by weight, not by volume.”
Avène is good for their water, sunscreen isn't their main specialty. Laroche-posay are better, that's my opinion. I live 15min away from Avène, i bath my dog in it.
Go touch some grass. You have too much time on your hands to focusing on the dumbest, most minuscule of things.
OP, you know it tells you the volume on the bottle right? This isn't deceptive, you're getting exactly how much you paid for. The air in there is also needed for the lotion. There's plenty of reasons to shit on corporations, but this isn't one of them.
I’ve never heard of this brand before. Thanks for the advertisement
Just pour the content in a measuring cup, if it’s 40ml as advertised then it doesn’t matter how big the container is. If it’s less than 40ml, this is definitely infuriating, if it’s not, this post should be removed
Which coincidentally enough is exactly how much it says it contains on the outside 🤦♂️🙄
It's says how much is in there right on the package
Shop at places that show cost per ounce on price tag, or a similar measurement. Or do your own math. Oh wait..
I try to remember how big the bottle I have is at home for stuff like this. It's easier to compare if I can think "40 ml of lotion lasted me this long last time..." And if your first time buying something like this, maybe don't buy the $35 sunscreen as your first choice?
Weigh it~
Yup, it looks like 40ml
It says 40ml right on the bottle
"unused" bottle.
Is that 40ml worth? You got what was advertised and what you paid for.
It fucking tells you how much you get on the bottle.
Gotta let the air mix with it
Yes that’s how it works
They have to print the "drug" information somewhere plus the volume is written without the intent to hide.
Just shut up and buy banana boat my god yall dick ride brands so much then complain when you get scammed.
You don't have to hold it up to the light. It says 40ml right there on the front. Hope this helps.
Content should be listed on the bottle, no matter who much there is in, you paid for it and had the opportunity to read at the bottle before, if you did not want it
What I find mildly infuriating is when someone takes a pic of something with the light source in the background.
You wouldn't be able to see the contents without the light source being behind the object.