Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Kohl’s Sued for Exaggerated Savings Claims

Kohl's bargainRecently, a Wisconsin consumer sued Kohl’s for deceptive pricing practices alleging that the retailer inflated it’s regular and original prices on price tags and in advertising to make the savings they promised seem greater than they really were. The complaint also alleges that in many cases the goods rarely or ever sold for the so-called “regular” or “original” prices.

The consumer’s lawyer tracked Kohl’s prices for a 15-month time period, and found over 9,000 products on its website were on sale more than half the time. And…

*MOUSE PRINT:

… some products were perpetually on sale for as many as 90 days out of every 90-day window. In short, the data shows that Kohl’s turns the concept of a “sale” on its head: for the vast majority of products, the so-called “sale” price is the regular and normal price, while the higher advertised “Regular” or “Original” comparison price is the temporary and unusual exception.

MrConsumer says so what else is new? Twenty years ago, he tracked the prices of 20 items at Kohl’s for 103 consecutive days, and found that 55-percent of items rarely if ever sold for the so-called regular or original price. And one-out-of-four items was always on sale and never sold at full price, not even for one day.

Years later, we exposed the ambiguous definitions of regular or original prices used by Kohl’s back in 2006 and spotlighted a similar lawsuit to the current one against the company in 2013.

Nonetheless, we as consumers, should all continue to be outraged that companies use deceptive practices like this year after year, and no one has gotten them to conform to the law.

Share this story:

 


ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Here We Shrink Again – Year-End 2023

NOTE: The next new Mouse Print* story will be published on January 1st.

Some big brands are continuing to downsize their products despite some easing of the inflation rate… so shrinkflation continues as we wrap up 2023.

Huggies Baby Wipes

Better get those very young grandchildren potty-trained because there are 64 fewer Huggies baby wipes in every carton.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Huggies baby wipes


Downy Fabric Softener

Through the miracle of modern chemistry, P&G has reduced the size of Downy fabric softener by seven ounces a bottle, but you still get 60 washloads out of each bottle. Presumably they concentrated the product and adjusted the hard-to-see dosage lines inside the cap.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Downy


Equate Liquid Hand Soap

One of our readers, Steven T., discovered that Walmart’s brand of liquid hand soap recently seemed skinnier. It lost more than 10-percent of its contents, going from a 56-ounce bottle down to only 50 ounces. Remember, it is not just name brands that shrink — stores brands continue to get into the act as well.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Equate hand soap


Folgers Breakfast Blend

Coffee has historically been one of the categories of groceries that has been downsized repeatedly through the decades. This time it is Folger’s Breakfast Blend, which went from 25.4 ounces to 22.6 ounces. And through the magic of modern science, you still at theoretically get the same 210 cups of coffee out of every canister. Thanks to Herb W., the Consumerman, for this submission.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Folgers Breakfast Blend


Pepperidge Farm Gold Fish

There are fewer of those happy little goldfish in every Pepperidge Farm carton these days. The old large 30-ounce carton was reduced by almost 10-percent and is now only 27.3 ounces. Thanks to Richard G. and Reddit for this submission.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Gold Fish


Peanut M&Ms

M&Ms, like many candies, have changed bag sizes so many times, it is impossible to keep track. Some months ago their “sharing size” package went from 10.70 ounces to 10.05 ounces. Who comes up with these crazy weights? Whatever happened to simple eight, 12 or 16-ounce bags?

*MOUSE PRINT:

M&Ms


Stacy’s Pita Chips

Potato chips have not cornered the market on snacks that have been subject to shrinkflation. Pita chip bags have been downsized also, including Stacy’s pita chips that have lost two ounces.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Stacy's Pita Chips


Tide Oxi

Since P&G downsized Downy, how could they leave Tide behind? The oxi-version of Tide in large jugs went from 154 ounces down to 146 ounces, and you even get fewer loads the new bottle!

*MOUSE PRINT:

Tide Ultra Oxi


Walgreens Toilet Paper

It is not just name brands that downsize their paper products. Walgreens recently lopped off 40 sheets on their Ultra Soft toilet tissue with no fanfare.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Walgreen Ultra Soft


Charmin Ultra Soft

When Charmin added a scalloped edge to Charmin recently to make sheets tear more easily, they also cut off 30 sheets sheets from each mega roll. Thanks to our ace shrinkflation spotter, Richard G. for this submission.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Charmin Soft


Pennysticks Pretzels

A dollar store staple has been has been Prennysticks brand of pretzel sticks and twists. They have been sold in 12-ounce bags forever, it seems. Then for the past couple of months they disappeared from Dollar Tree. But now they are back … with two ounces less in every bag.

*MOUSE PRINT:

pretzels


Arm & Hammer Detergent

In what may be one of the largest downsizings ever, Arm & Hammer Sensitive Skim detergent took 49 ounces out of their 189-ounce jugs, but magically you still get 140 loads out of each bottle. One gets the impression that we must have been paying for an awful lot of water in the jugs for years.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Arm & Hammer Sensitive Skin


Nutri Source Dog Food

Phil L. reported that Nutri Sounce large breed dog food downsized from 30 pounds to 26 pounds this past spring, so he loaded up before suffering a four-pound loss on every bag. The price remained at $61.99 for him.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Nutri Source adult dog food


Campbell’s Home Style Soup

Richard G. spotted a complete change in packaging for Campbell’s Home Style soup. The can is smaller and it lost two-and-a-half ounces.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Campbell's Home Style soup


Apologies to other readers who sent in submissions that we did not use this year. Some were regional brands, or more obscure products, or changes that were not recent.

But in 2024, if you find a product that has recently downsized, please send clear before and after pictures including the net weight or net count to Edgar (at symbol) MousePrint.org .

Share this story:

 


ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Can You Really Trade In Any iPhone, and Get an iPhone 15 Pro, iPad, & Apple Watch Free?

Anyone with a television has no doubt seen Verizon Wireless’ latest commercial for their big holiday giveaway:



Wow — what a great promotion. Simply trade in an iPhone in any condition, and get an iPhone 15 Pro, an iPad, and an Apple Watch SE … “All on us.” To me, that means for free.

If you could read the fine print, which you can’t because it is only on the screen for about eight seconds and is virtually illegible, you would think you were reading the details of a completely different offer. It is summarized below.

*MOUSE PRINT:

This is what the offer actually requires:

1. Trade in an iPhone.

2. Sign up for the “Unlimited Ultimate” cell plan – their most expensive plan – on a new line of service.

3. Buy the iPhone 15 Pro now for $999.99.

4. Buy the iPad now for $459.99.

5. Buy a plan for the iPad (price not stated).

6. Buy the Apple Watch now for $459.99.

7. Buy a plan for the Apple Watch (price not stated).

8. Over the next three years, get a rebate for those purchases credited to your bill at the rate of 1/36th of the purchase price per month.

Does that sound anything like the way the announcer described the offer?

Consumers should be able to watch a commercial and completely understand the offer that is being made. The details spoken in the ad should match the details in the fine print. I would even advocate that each mode (visually and orally) should independently fully present an accurate representation of the offer being made.

We asked Verizon why they didn’t orally disclose the true requirements of the offer, nor make the onscreen version large enough to read easily and on the screen longer. The company did not reply by publication time.

From watching and listening to this advertisement alone, would you have understood what requirements had to be met in order to participate in the giveaway?

Share this story:

 


ADV