The internet has been buzzing about Zesta saltine crackers of all things (and so has reader J.C.). Some purchasers discovered when they opened the familiar one-pound boxes that the sleeves of crackers inside were as much as two inches shorter than normal.
*MOUSE PRINT:
What’s going on here? Both boxes still say 16 ounces. Are they short-weighting customers by putting far less in each box than the one pound that is supposed to be inside? We got out our trusty digital scale to find out.
*MOUSE PRINT:
Both boxes, the one with full stacks on the left and the one with short stacks on the right both weigh the same — one pound three ounces. How is this possible because there seemed to be so much less in short stack box?
So, we examined some (but not all) the sleeves of crackers to count how many were in each sleeve. Surely the short sleeves had to have many fewer crackers, right?
*MOUSE PRINT:
Not really. The box with the full sleeves had between 37 and 39 crackers per sleeve, while the short sleeves in the other box had between 35 and 39 crackers. And the shortest sleeve still weighed the expected four ounces. (Okay, let’s not quibble about the weight the plastic wrap.)
So we ask again — what is going on here? Is each cracker thinner but somehow more dense? A spokesperson for Kellogg’s didn’t shed much light on what actually happened, saying:
Zesta crackers are packaged by weight and not volume. Normal baking processes may lead to crackers with different thickness, so the number of crackers may vary from package to package.
It appears that this mystery will remain unsolved.
I just opened a box of the Zesta crackers and indeed, did find a very short stack. Took a photo and plan on contacting the company today. Will see what this comment from them shall be. I am hoping they resolve this confounding issue as I do like the crispness of their product but will definitely switch brands if this continues.
It’s not confounding at all. You purchased a one pound box and received a one pound box.
Now, if you don’t like the product, don’t buy it. That’s how capitalism works. Plenty of real concerns out there without having to worry about non-issues like this.
Sounds like the ingredients may be the problem if all the math remains the same. There is no telling what they are using to create our food these days.
The most obvious answers would be either:
A) It’s been like this for a long time and we’re only just now noticing because someone brought it up.
B) They changed the recipe or ingredients in a way that results in denser, shorter, crackers.
Assuming B, it’s probably a cost savings somewhere, either in cook time or ingredient costs.
I agree with Joel and his option B.
Walmart changed their saltine crackers. The new ones are thinner and more dense. They probably thinned out the batter (dough?) and they are thinner and ‘harder’. I like the old style cracker.
There are several choices on-line, but not necessarily in the store. I happened to buy the new and improved version of the crackers. I didn’t like them. The lighter old style cracker is my choice. I looked at a local store and only found the new crackers. I will be purchasing the Nabisco Premium saltines from now on. They are a lot more expensive, but I want the crackers to taste and feel like thy have for many, many years. Remember when they weren’t in single stacks? A four cracker piece.
Yes! And part of the fun when eating those 4-cracker saltines was seeing if you could break them apart cleanly and perfectly on the dotted line. I remember! :-]
What happen to Zesta it was my favorite saltine, but noticed right away the texture was different since Kellogg took over. Not a customer anymore
I think that they are changing the ingredients Using Cheaper ingredients .That’s the practice they’re using I believe in their baking Process. Why would it change after all of these years all of a sudden .use cheaper? Ingredients to keep up with the profits. That’s what I think a lot of these companies are Doing.
The issue here does not seem to be a weight shortage, as the product weights seem accurate enough, but rather it’s much more a case of what the FDA defines as excessive “nonfunctional slack fill“, or the difference between the capacity of a container and the volume of product inside. Consumers experience it all the time when they open up a box of cereal, candy, can of mandarin oranges, or just about any other packaged product, and are always unpleasantly surprised by that seemingly huge amount of empty space at the top of the box just purchased. Sure, “Some settling occurs during packaging and shipment … Larger dimensional clearances are required for reliable operation of high-speed packaging machinery … Some void space is required to minimize damage during shipping … Variations in recipe formulations … blah, blah, blah,” but you have to wonder how often such seemingly valid reasons for incomplete fillings are abused and used as a smoke screen to puff-up the package size in an effort to deliberately deceive the consumer into buying an oversized box instead of studying the weights or the unit pricing data of other nearby products on the shelf. But even if you do shop carefully, every manufacturer seems have excessive space in their boxes, and it’s very irksome to open a purchased box expecting to sit down to a nice snack or treat, but instead be greeted by a huge empty void at the top of the box that screams “Hello sucker – Fooled you again!”
Well said and very true. My question is, when will they hit their ceiling? There is just so much they can extract from a package before your buying air.
I feel like some manufactures are pretty close already, literally. One of my favorite ice creams happens to be a store brand. The last time I bought it, I thought maybe our freezer was malfunctioning because the ice cream was so soft and glossy. The mouthfeel was very fluffy, and the container seemed much lighter than it should be.
Remember that ice cream is sold by volume, not weight. I did some calculations and determined that my 48-ounce “half gallon” of ice cream contained 39.5% air. When I looked up the food identity standard for Ice Cream, guess what the maximum allowable amount of air is? 40%.
I fully expect the manufacturer, after a period of time so that consumers get used to the current version, to attempt to nudge the air content even past the allowable amounts. Because there’s practically no enforcement to begin with, and even if enough consumers knew how to calculate air content, and knew what agency to complain to (I would guess FDA for food identity criteria and maybe FTC), the fines are probably the same as 40 years ago, and meant to deter companies that were, on average, much smaller than the massive conglomerates we have today.
Mouseprint,
Did you compare the lists of ingredients on the two boxes? Do both boxes list exactly the same ingredients and in the same order? Also, is the nutritional information exactly the same on both boxes?
As I recall, Bruce, everything was identical.
Maybe the company added more cardboard to the box? It just seems that greed has taken over the Country.
Has an anybody weighed the boxes. These crackers are not light and crispy now they are flat and stale tasting. They are ripping us off like everything else. These big companies are gauging. It’s sad!