INSIGHTS INTO THE PACKAGING
Necessity or rip-off?
„This is why people hate packaging,“ a colleague blurted out at the weekly meeting.
This is due to several packs which, at first glance – apart from the different flavours – all look the same. The classic butter biscuit comes in the following varieties: Original, Oat, Wholemeal, Cocoa, Spelt and Reduced-Sugar. However, the uniform appearance is deceptive: there are significant differences in the quantities contained. Three of the packets contain 200 g of biscuits, whilst the other three contain 230 g, 180 g and just 150 g respectively. Neither when viewed from the front of the shelf nor upon direct visual comparison is it apparent that the biscuits in one of the varieties weigh 35 % less in the same pack size.
Less Content as a response to cost pressure
Of course, everyone is familiar with the term shrinkflation: less content at the same or, often, higher prices is intended to secure revenue and compensate for the higher costs of energy, raw materials, and labour.
And indeed, it is very difficult for companies to enforce higher selling prices in trade. And yes, adapting packaging machines and materials for smaller units is also complex and associated with costs. But it is precisely brands that should communicate much more honestly with customers, in order to maintain their credibility and brand trust.
How brands deal with it: Frosta and Milka
So transparently, as Frosta has done, with a clearly visible indication on the packaging, this would be desirable above all when a significant reduction in packaging size – perhaps for technical reasons too – is not possible.
Another negative example is Milka's chocolate bars. Without changing the packaging, the bars have shrunk by more than 10 percent, and at the same time the price has increased. Apparently, consumer dissatisfaction has had an effect, as the branded chocolate is currently on special offer. The price displayed refers to the 90g unit, however, the promotional display also contains bars weighing 100g, 92g, 90g, and 87g. There is no visible difference in the size of the bars, nor any printed information.
The fact that there are tablets in the promotional display with different fill levels, which are practically indistinguishable externally, while the price labelling refers to the 90g tablet, makes it even more difficult for consumers to make a quick and reliable purchasing decision based on the unit price.
Legally permissible – but also transparent?
Legally, the matter may appear clear. When assessing possible deception, the expectation of a normally informed, reasonably attentive and sensible average consumer is regularly used as a benchmark. However, the reality in the supermarket often looks different. Who actually compares every weight indication during their daily shop when package size, brand presentation and shelf placement create the impression that the products are comparable?
Naturally, consumers bear a certain amount of personal responsibility. The fill quantity is stated on the packaging, and the basic price must be marked. But transparency means more than just meeting the statutory minimum requirements. Brand manufacturers, in particular, thrive on trust. Those who wish to retain their customers in the long term should not rely on differences remaining as inconspicuous as possible, but should explain them in a comprehensible way.
A fine line between two legitimate interests
Companies are under considerable cost pressure and must act economically. Consumers, in turn, expect transparency and fairness. There is a fine line between these two legitimate interests.
The real question is therefore not whether shrinkflation is permitted or economically necessary. The crucial question is how openly companies handle it. Because between necessary adjustments and perceived rip-offs, there are often only a few grams – and a big difference in communication.
BU: Only the pack size of the „Original“ variety differs from the others. However, the fill quantities of the different varieties vary considerably.
Sonja Bähr is one of the most prominent voices in the packaging industry.
The packaging technology graduate and long-standing strategy consultant brings together technical expertise and a clear attitude - she thinks about packaging holistically, from the perspective of the market, brand, material and people.
In her column "Presented - insights into packaging" she looks behind the headlines and standardised texts for packaging journal - and at what packaging is supposed to do in practice: protect, sell, simplify and inspire. Sometimes opinionated, sometimes tongue-in-cheek - but always technically sound.
🎯 Regularly a new impulse for the discussion about sustainability, regulation, innovation and reality in the world of packaging.
