Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Product Dilution: Breyers Lightens More Ice Cream

Last year, we reported that Breyers “cheapened” many varieties of their ice cream by reducing the amount of butterfat content to the point where the product could no longer legally be called “ice cream,” but rather had to be renamed “frozen dairy dessert.”

Some stalwart flavors, like MrConsumer’s beloved lactose-free vanilla, remained untouched until now. To MrConsumer’s horror and surprise, Breyers quietly converted that ice cream variety to “light ice cream.”

*MOUSE PRINT:

Breyers old - new front
Click to enlarge

In the new packaging, the “All Natural Ice Cream” claim is replaced with the phrase “Quality Since 1866.” Of course, it doesn’t say the same quality. And the words “ice cream” are replaced with “light ice cream.”

What exactly is “light ice cream?” According to FDA rules:

“Light” ice cream contains at least 50% less total fat or 33% fewer calories than the referenced product (the average of leading regional or national brands).

Looking at the nutrition panels of the old Breyers lactose free ice cream and the new one reveals only a minor reduction in calories.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Breyers old-new

The old “ice cream” product had 130 calories and the new “light” one has 110 calories, only 20 fewer calories. It does however have half the fat. And, the federal law says that light ice cream must have EITHER half the fat OR 33% fewer calories.

There is just one problem, though. The front of the package claims very clearly that the new light ice cream has BOTH half the fat and 1/3 fewer calories.

Breyers fat-cals

Clearly, this new lactose free light ice cream does not comply with that representation when compared to their old regular lactose free ice cream. So how do they get away with this claim?

*MOUSE PRINT:

breyer one-third fewer

Tucked away on a side panel is that tiny disclosure. They are not comparing this new light ice cream with THEIR old regular ice cream, but rather with some super premium brands like Ben & Jerry’s and Haagen Dazs as well. Those have been thrown in to up the average amount of fat and calories in “full fat” brands, and thus make Breyers’ reduction seem more impressive than it really is. (Haagen Dazs has 250 calories and 17 grams of fat per serving, while Ben & Jerry’s has 230 calories and 14 grams of fat.)

Mouse Print* asked the PR firm representing Breyers three times to explain why they cheapened some of their products, and they provided no response.

If you spot a new example of “product dilution,” please send complete before and after details to edgar [at symbol] mouseprint.org .

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Twinkies Upsized, Downsized, Upsized

Lost in the hoopla of Hostess reintroducing Twinkies starting July 15 is how the size of that sweet treat has changed over time.

Here is a short but incomplete photographic history of Twinkies over the past 40 years.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Twinkies 70s
1970s – 13 oz. – $1.19

Twinkies 2001
2001 – 15 oz. – $3.49

Twinkies Jan 12
January 2012 – 15 oz.

Twinkies Dec 12
December 2012 – 13.5 oz. – $4.29

Twinkies July 13
July 2013 – 13.58 oz – $3.99

In a rollercoaster history, Twinkies have gotten bigger, gotten smaller, and gotten slightly bigger again with today’s release. And while the price has more than tripled over four decades, it appears to have just been lowered by 30 cents.

And if you haven’t heard, the shelf-life of the product has been “improved” from 26 days to 45 days.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Choosy Mothers May Stop Choosing Jif

Jif peanut butter, the favorite of “choosy mothers,” may have to change their slogan to “annoyed mothers” if those women read the product’s new label and catch the inconspicuous change.

Five years ago, we reported that Skippy peanut butter was the first major brand to downsize the traditional 18-ounce jar to just 16.3 ounces. Not long thereafter, Peter Pan followed suit. But not Jif. In fact, for a long time, Jif promoted the fact that they did not downsize their brand by proclaiming that Jif was still 18 ounces:

Jif still 18 oz.

That was then. The “still 18 oz.” claim disappeared from their jars over a year ago, but the product remained the full 18 ounces. That is, until now. Beginning to appear on store shelves across the country are Jif’s new jars:

*MOUSE PRINT:

Jif then and now

They shrunk the contents of the product by a full two ounces… but the jars look virtually the same. They didn’t pull the same trick that Skippy used of hollowing out the bottom of the jar. Somehow, though, there is over 10% less in what appears to be about the same size jar. How did they accomplish this seemingly impossible feat?

*MOUSE PRINT:

Jif measured

The new jar on the right actually had its waistline trimmed by one-half an inch. That’s the secret.

For its part, here is how the company explained its decision to downsize Jif:

“We previously announced the conversion of our packaging to 16 oz. jars effective June 1, 2013 based on consumer and retailer feedback. It is important to note that we also decreased the suggested retail price so the cost per ounce remained the same as it was prior to the packaging change. ” — Corporate Communications, J.M. Smucker

Of course, we are sure that shoppers must have just deluged the company with complaints, demanding that the company put less peanut butter in each jar.

Incidentally, we paid only $2.20 for the old, bigger jar, but were charged $3.29 for the new one at the same store on the same register receipt! Both sizes were marked $3.29 originally, but the old one appeared to be clearance priced.