Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Don’t Let the Product Name or Look Fool You!

Sometimes the name of a product or how it is packaged may mislead you into thinking it is something that it is not.

Example 1:

All-in-one products are nothing new — remember Mop & Glo from decades ago? Marketers know that consumers like products that do multiple things. Take Listerine Total Care, for example.

Similar to its “total” toothpaste counterparts, Listerine Total Care claims to provide multiple benefits:

The troublesome claim here is about preventing plaque. Why? Because according to the FDA, there are no ingredients in Listerine Total Care that have been approved and proven to do this!

*MOUSE PRINT:

“[A]nother claim on the label of Listerine Total Care Anticavity Mouthwash is “Fights Unsightly Plaque Above the Gum Line.” This statement represents that the product fights plaque, a well-known precursor to gum disease, including gingivitis. … [N]o mouthwash with sodium fluoride as the active ingredient has been included or proposed for inclusion [in a list of ingredients approved by the FDA as an effective treatment for plaque/gingivitis]. We are not aware of any support for the antiplaque/antigingivitis claims or other statements suggesting that the product is comprehensive in function, providing benefits beyond those related to prevention of cavities. Thus, the product’s labeling claim that it will provide all of the benefits listed, is misleading and accordingly makes it misbranded …” — FDA warning letter to makers of Listerine.

In short, the FDA is claiming that Listerine Total Care is an unapproved drug because it is making health claims that have not been allowed by the agency.

Example 2:

Log Cabin has come out with a new “all natural” syrup in a traditional maple syrup jug:

If you assume this jug contains maple syrup, you would be only partially right.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

McDonald’s: Proceeds of Happy Meals Donated?

McDonald’s has been advertising that it will donate money to Ronald McDonald House Charities for every Happy Meal sold at participating restaurants.

At HappyMeals.com, they do the same:

In a press release announcing the promotion, the company said:

Today McDonald’s® announced a new in-restaurant fundraising program and online campaign benefiting Ronald McDonald House Charities® (RMHC®) and local children. Beginning this summer participating McDonald’s restaurants in the U.S. will donate proceeds from all daily Happy Meal® and Mighty Kids Meal® sales to RMHC — McDonald’s “Charity of Choice” — benefiting more than 11,000 sick and critically ill children and their families every day.

The keyword here is “proceeds” — that they are going to donate the proceeds from the sale of these meals to charity.

According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, “proceeds” means:

*MOUSE PRINT:

1 : the total amount brought in [the proceeds of a sale]
2 : the net amount received  [as for a check or from an insurance settlement] after deduction of any discount or charges

Therefore, you might expect the company to be making a very generous contribution per meal, whether proceeds is defined as either the gross or net amount of sales. Whoa, as they say.

So how much is McDonald’s really giving for each Happy Meal sold? According to the fine print in their TV commercial, and a disclosure further down their press release:

*MOUSE PRINT:

The “proceeds” from a $2 or $3 Happy Meal is only a penny? I’m not lovin’ it (nor buying it).

Thanks to Mark G. for this submission.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Scott Toilet Paper: Here We Shrink Again

In the continuing retail race to shrink the size of a sheet of toilet paper to that of a postage stamp, Scott 1000 sheet rolls have been downsized again.

Exactly four years ago, we reported on Scott shortening each sheet on the roll from 4 inches to 3.7 inches.

Now, they are making each sheet narrower too.

*MOUSE PRINT:

It went from a full 4.5 inches wide to just 4.1 inches wide. A four pack now has almost 42 square feet less paper — a reduction of nine percent.

When the company was asked why they narrowed each sheet, a customer service representative replied:

This makes Scott “comparable with other brands on the market shelf” … and that there was “a slight improvement to make it thicker.”

How much thicker are the sheets now? Probably not too much as the new package weighs a full five ounces less than the old one.

Scott has a long history of downsizing its 1000 sheet rolls: 

Original: 4.5 inches by 4.5 inches

Pre-2006: 4.5 inches by 4.0 inches

9/2006: 4.5 inches by 3.7 inches

9/2010: 4.1 inches by 3.7 inches

The cumulative effect on consumers of all this downsizing is significant. Today’s roll is a full 25% smaller than the original.  Maybe they need to rename the product Scott 750.

As with all products that are downsized inconspicuously, it is a sneaky way to pass on a price increase because the customer is paying the same price, but getting less.

Thanks to eagle-eyed Mouse Print* reader Karen S. for this submission.