Topic: Shrinkflation - page 2. (Read 338 times)

This is one thing that quickly gets me annoyed and I hate seeing things not worth up to the quality and quantity it was before..
As for me price increased would have been the best option than reduction of size and quantities. For instance there is this peak Milk company in my country, they have reduces their quality and quantities as same time increased the price of the product from the previous to extra 40 percent increase and this made me to change products to starting patronizing Cowbell products. They maintain their quality and quantity but yet still little increase in price maybe 10 percent to 15 percent but I still enjoyed their products more better than peak.

if i own a company and want to fight inflation so my company doesn't go bankrupt i will divert the company money to inflation resistant assets like gold and bitcoin because one effective way to fight inflation is to buy inflation resistant assets if things start to recover i will sell some of the assets that I bought so that my company can run again as before, this is just my personal opinion

You, as a company manager, cannot combat inflation because this inflation is at the level of the entire country, and it is related to the state of the national economy and the government's economic policy.

But as a manager of a company that has a product, you either reduce production costs or increase the price. Reducing production costs includes using cheap but bad raw materials or reducing the quantity of the product.

So the choice here is related to the society in which you live, some people prefer to use cheap products even if they are bad, while others prefer quality even if the price is higher.

Therefore, as a manager, I will manufacture cheap and expensive products, so that I can spread my product to the widest segment of people.

The issue is that companies are taking advantage of the current situation with inflation by further increasing their prices and/or reducing their quantities in an attempt to additionally increase their profits in the name of global inflation. Businesses and companies may not be able to battle inflation, but they can certainly worsen an already awful situation. Supermarket chains here are breaking records in profits in a period that's supposed to be characterized as worrisome and underwhelming. It's a complicated matter; on the one hand, governments are allowing them to constantly increase prices since there's little to no monitoring, while on the other hand, companies are part of the inflation issue due to their greediness to increase their massive profits.

The shrinkage of packaging is a common practice that has become excessively prevalent in the past few years in an attempt to trick consumers into thinking that prices have remained the same. I used to work at a supermarket, and a wide variety of products had been shrunken, such as yogurts, butter, and bread.

"Shrinkflation" is based on misleading people into thinking they're getting the same value for their money. Increasing the price takes the deception away because most consumers pay attention to the price relative to the price per unit of product.

I've seen companies demonized over this practice. While deceptive, people should rather be angry at their own government for inflating their currency beyond recognition. As if the private sector has any say on how much currency gets printed.

But that's not the right way to combat inflation. I know these companies also buy some raw materials they need for their production, but at least maintaining high quality is better than quantity reduction. It seems that this is the approach that most companies are taking now. Last month I went to buy spaghetti, and I was seeing different sizes of the spaghetti: one packet was 400g, sold for $085; the other was 500g, sold for $1.1. Normally, what it used to be is only 500g,, which is normally sold for $1, but I was surprised by the new development, so I bought the two sizes, but when I cooked this spaghetti, I noticed that there was a difference in quality between the 400g and the 500g, which is very wrong. With that, I will not be buying their products again; I have to look for alternatives. They have lost one bonafide customer in me.

If I have a company, usually I have to maintain the standard of my product, and if it will require me to increase the selling price of the product in order to maintain the quality and quantity, I will do so, but if I see that it is not working, I had better reduce the quantity rather than the quality. Even if the price is high, as long as it still maintains the usual quantity and quality, most people will still buy it.

Company main goal on using shrinkflation on their product is to make their product available to all type of consumer including the poor. They focus on the quantity of their product sale rather than the amount since consumer normally dodge product that high price or increased price with certain percentage because people think that the product is expensive rather than the volume of the content.

Many old product in the market went down because they can’t keep their product price to affordable range without sacrificing the quality. I think I will do the same method especially if my company is on the food industry because no one will buy a shitty product just ro make it affordable same with high price just to have the same quantity.

Reducing the size to make it still affordable and same quality is the best way to maintain the brand reputation in the market to keep the business running.

If you decide to reduce the quality and maintain the price, don’t be surprised that you are still going to lose more customers, if some people are purchasing a product, they will go for the one with high quality even if the price is high compare to others, not everyone cares about price, some people just want to get a quality product.

Have seen a company that closed down in my country just because when they started production, they were producing high quality products when they started, but after getting more customers, they decided to reduce their quality, and people reduced they way they patronized them drastically, the company is now down. If they increased their price and maintained their quality maybe they will still be in market up till now.

Yes I agree about maintaining the quality and quantity even though I have to eat the price.
But if I am the owner of the company so I will use two strategies in this regard, basically the market has 3 clusters in its first high -class marketing for rich people, middle and lower classes, in this case I aim for my product so that it can be sold well in the cluster market.

First I will maintain the quality and quantity of goods that I produce and raise the price to support my sales in the consumer class of the rich because they put the quality and quantity of goods for them to consumption and surely on this premium product there will be a slowdown And it is important for companies to reduce production to keep goods from rotten.

The second I will make the same new product as an alternative to lower-level consumers as an alternative product choice by reducing quality with the same utility and quantity, because the average consumer behavior of the lower economic level tends to prioritize quantity.
For the middle class economy, I think it is a plexible, they can choose the main product or alternative product for them to consume.

This strategy will be effective if the company has enough funding in running it, because in the inflation situation it will make the company suffocate if it does not accelerate the handling strategy in maintaining its market.

The phenomenon that occurs in the midst of society, especially the lower middle class, is more accepting of a decrease in quality than having to buy it at a slightly higher price. Inflation has pushed consumers into unfavorable choices, people who have an above average amount of wealth may not be affected by inflation too much.

The company will implement a marketing strategy that can connect with all consumers, from the highest level to the lowest level, under any circumstances the company will try to sell its products. I prefer quality over quantity, when quality decreases it will affect consumer confidence in products that make purchasing power decrease.

That might be quite a risky step because maybe the market won't be able to buy many products and there will be a slowdown in the circulation of goods if quality and quantity are maintained with the option of only increasing prices, but yes, in order to maintain good customer trust, the choice you mentioned is an option.

That is truly a disgraceful act especially since the goods being sold are commodities or the main needs of the people in living their lives, that is too cruel, capitalistic thinking like that is inhumane.

A price increase is one of the major reasons why customers seek alternatives. Although it is the best option to maintain quality and quantity but producers hardly use it for fear of losing market share. In the business world sincerity is rare virtue but it might be a good tool to gain customer loyalty. For me, I will not deceive my customer with fake packaging rather I will create more options for my client. My customers will have to choose from a variety of my products with different prices and quality. Customers that can afford high quality and quantity will have to pay more. While the other option will be a cheaper version with reduced quality or quantity.

This is one of the effective strategies to fight fast-moving inflation like today, because what is affected in this case is the increase in production costs so that companies or producers must have a way to keep their products competitive in the market.
Rather than changing the quality of using cheaper ingredients to do the production it will definitely affect the taste if it is in the food, the best option here is to reduce the size and keep the price the same.
Increasing prices directly will shock consumers if at the level of inflation, it is possible that the goods being marketed will be abandoned by consumers, and consumers will look for other alternatives.
If I were the owner of the company, the pressure in this situation would be to make production of the same quality and reduce the size and increase the price slightly so that consumers are not too surprised by the price increase and my company does not lose money, because the most important thing for the company is to maintain customers so that their money can rotate.

This is such a BS, I keep getting less and less food whenever I order food, I keep getting less and less stuff when I eat somewhere, it really doesn't feel like it's a good idea, I feel like we are doing a bad job right now and should be doing a lot better. I hope that it gets to a better point eventually but that doesn't change the fact that we are facing one of the worst situations in the recent memory with this financial situation so I understand companies trying to protect it's users as well.

I hope that it gets better eventually and we will not face these issues, but until the economy recovers, we are going to do worse. I end up getting two of the thing I want instead of one, just to eat enough, and that makes me spend even more, so it could be a trick as well.

Inflation is a complex economic issue, that affects not only individual consumers but also businesses. The companies often face higher cost of raw materials, labor and other input, which leads to increased cost of their products. There are several measure companies can take to combat inflation, such as renegotiating prices of raw materials with their suppliers, improve efficiency of their machines and reduce cost of energy by green sources of energy. In summary, combating inflation while maintaining profitability and keeping prices of products affordable, is a challenging task, and needs effective strategy to get desired results.

It is understandable that certain companies may use unsavory approaches to achieve higher profits. But not all companies are like that and many also pay attention to business ethics and social responsibility. Even though there are some companies that can take advantage of this situation to gain higher profits by deceiving consumers, however, inflation is generally detrimental to the economy and society at large. because Price increases and higher costs can burden consumers and exacerbate social inequality. On the other hand, inflation can also reduce people's purchasing power and wealth because the value of their money decreases. Therefore, inflation should be managed carefully and with a responsible approach.

Inflation can indeed have an impact on a company's production costs, which can force companies to look for ways to reduce costs and maintain profitability. However, reducing product quality or increasing prices without considering the value of the product is not an act that is responsible for consumers. As an entrepreneur, maintaining a balance between production costs and product selling prices is a challenge faced in the midst of an inflationary situation

This is where the function of the government is to encourage companies to consider a sustainable and responsible business approach, which not only prioritizes profits but also pays attention to social and environmental impacts. This can help create long-term sustainability and sustainable profits.

It's either of the two and there's really no choice at all but to choose one of them. Reduce the size or quantity but maintain the price or retain the quantity, size, and quality of what you sell then increase the price. I am a bread lover and the bread that I used to buy has actually shrunk those bakeshops understand the need for them to adjust because of the higher price of ingredients, mainly flour and wheat. If I own a company and produce products, I don't want to pass the burden to my customer and will choose to adjust at least the quantity/quality. But before doing that, I'll try to make a survey of my loyal customers about what they prefer, an increase in prices or the same price but an adjustment in quantity.

This practice is very common now and most of the companies have been doing this for a long time with total confidence   they have reduced quantity and quality of their products with increasing prices .
But it should not be done  if they are increasing the prices than they should work on their standard and customer satisfaction.  Inflation have blinded everyone and have numb public relations.

There's not much choice for those companies unless they wanna close shops. But then the employees will suffer in such action, theyd rather be chosing price increase or shrinkflation.

To survive the companies will need to tighten their belts too. The lay off has been happening to big companies since the FED keeps making companies default. So here we are.

Yes! but it's just the company's strategic campaign despite shrinkflation. They instead use it to their advantage. It's actually true, due to shrinkflation, products typically lowered its quality, be it on size, weight, and other indicators. With that lowering the cost of production but still maintaining the selling price of any product. At first, it will be unnoticeable but it's the truth.

Companies rather fall into shrinkflation and lower their quality to keep their customers because of the price than to maintain the quality of the product but raise the selling price.