Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Eggland’s Best Sued Over Free-Roaming Claims

Two Illinois consumers just sued Eggland’s Best for misrepresenting the pleasant and leisurely life its hens that lay cage free eggs supposedly experience.

The company claims inside every carton of its cage free eggs:

Eggland's Best Claim

That says “every hen is free to roam in a pleasant natural environment…” This conjures up images of hens freely taking a leisurely stroll through a lush pasture.

Hens strolling along

Of course, nothing could be further from the truth.

*MOUSE PRINT:

The lawsuit alleges:

The truth is that many hens producing Cage Free eggs live in typical factory farming conditions. They are confined indoors 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. They live in windowless structures made of concrete, metal, and dirt. The structures contain hundreds of thousands of hens packed so closely together that each bird has around one square foot of floor space (or less) to itself, and many hens living in these structures never see the sun or breathe fresh air.

Eggland's old supplier2009 photo of an Eggland’s Best supplier

After the lawsuit was filed, the company appears to have modified how they describe the “pleasant natural environment” in which the hens live:

*MOUSE PRINT:

Eggland's new claim

In their legal case, the lawyers contend that these consumers paid a premium for Eggland’s Best eggs compared to conventional ones, expecting the hens to be humanely treated in the conditions described on the carton. They further contend they would not have paid extra or purchased these eggs at all if they knew the actual conditions where the eggs were harvested. They are suing the company for misrepresentation and deceptive business practices.

Share this story:

 


ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Amazon Sued Over Misleading Sale Savings

As Black Friday sales are at a peak now, it is a good time to question the savings claims that stores make that give you the impression you are getting a really deep discount.

A Florida consumer says he was induced to buy a Fire TV last February when Amazon advertised that it was on sale for limited period of time and he could save a substantial amount of money.

A typical ad for the TV on the Amazon website looked like this:

Amazon Fire TV

At $299.99, there appeared to be a $150 savings compared to the list price. Amazon defines “list price” as follows:

*MOUSE PRINT:

List price defined

In this case, Amazon says the list price is at or above the price that Amazon actually sold the product at least once in past 90 days. (According to the plaintiff, Amazon is the only seller of this product.)

According to a sales price analysis done by the consumer’s lawyer, neither this TV nor over a dozen other Fire TVs sold for the so-called list price in the recent past as far back as to last October. However…

…it was Amazon’s practice to hike up the actual sale price of the relevant Fire TV to the List Price for an extremely short period, in some instances as short as literally one day, and then immediately to lower the actual sales price back down to the normal sales prices. Amazon conducted these short spikes in price up to the List Price solely for the purpose of trying to make the stated List Prices literally true, even if in practice customers were deceived by Amazon’s omission of the material fact that the referenced List Prices were only available for such a short period of time as to virtually amount to not being available at all.

So not surprisingly, the consumer is suing Amazon for misleading sales practices including misrepresenting the saving and the limited time nature of their sales of these TVs. [See complaint.]

Share this story:

 


ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Study: Consumer Attitudes About Shrinkflation

Purdue University just surveyed 1,200 consumers about food and grocery shopping (see full report) and has come up with some interesting insights into shoppers’ attitudes about shrinkflation.

Over 75-percent of the respondents said they noticed food packaging getting smaller. In particular, it was in these categories where they have seen the most changes:

Types of products shrinking

Some other interesting findings from the study include:

— Only 15-percent always check the weight of a product.
— Only 16-percent always check the unit price.

I am surprised that these numbers are even that high.

Shoppers were also asked which they preferred in the context of a snack product — whether manufacturers should just keep the product the same size but raise the price OR shrink the product and keep the price the same.

Shrink or don't shrink?

Lastly, here is how participants feel about a requirement that manufacturers disclose on the package any size changes, whether they switch brands when a product shrinks, and more:

Shrinkflation attitudes

Feel free to share your opinions in the comments.

Share this story:

 


ADV