Retail – Page 77 – Mouse Print*

Updated every Monday! Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Thanks for Nothing — Spring 2021

April 27, 2021April 26, 2021 by Edgar (aka MrConsumer)

One again we bring you a round-up of products, offers, and advertisements that are real head-scratchers or just too-good-to-be-true.

Example #1

Shoppers are attracted to bonus offers on grocery products and manufacturers know it. Sometimes, however, what looks like a special deal on a product is nothing but a mathematics lesson only indicating that a particular package is X% larger than a smaller one, as we have previously reported.

The latest arithmetic lesson comes from Campbell’s but apparently the math wizards there never quite mastered long division.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Here, the same 15.2 ounce can of tomato soup is compared to the regular 10.75 one, but the company can’t seem to decide how much more you are actually getting in the bigger can. Thanks for nothing, Campbell’s.

Example #2

Recently Shaw’s Supermarkets seemed to offer a great deal in their “Just for U” coupon section – $5 off a $5 purchase.

*MOUSE PRINT:

It only looked like $5 off a $5 purchase. The zero after the $5 purchase requirement was truncated and only visible when viewing the details of the coupon’s requirements. Thanks for nothing, Shaw’s.

Example #3

Macy’s had advertised a great price on men’s Dockers pants – only $9.95.

*MOUSE PRINT:

But, when clicking on the $9.95 offer, the price quadrupled to over $40.

Thanks for nothing, Macy’s.

If you find a questionable product label or advertisement suitable for the Thanks for Nothing series, please submit it to: Edgar (at symbol) MousePrint.org .

Updated every Monday! Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Cold-Eeze: Reduces Duration of Common Cold Symptoms by 42%?

April 19, 2021April 19, 2021 by Edgar (aka MrConsumer)

A recent commercial and packaging for Cold-Eeze — those cherry-flavored lozenges with zinc gluconate — claims to reduce the duration of common cold symptoms by 42%.

*MOUSE PRINT:

It turns out that the scientific study on Cold-Eeze that supports the 42% claim was done a quarter of a century ago in 1996 and involved only 50 hospital employees who took the product and 50 who did not. [Full study here.] It seems odd that the company would introduce this new claim now after sitting on this data for decades.

Many people like the product despite the fact that no one can really say for sure that their cold ended more quickly than if they had not taken the zinc drops.

Interestingly, Cold-Eeze has extended its product line to include cold remedies that also supposedly promote immune health and help with fatigue. The asterisk after that claim goes to the most candid of disclaimers:

*MOUSE PRINT:

Updated every Monday! Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Amazon Agrees to Savings Claims Disclosures to Settle DAs’ Lawsuit

April 6, 2021April 5, 2021 by Edgar (aka MrConsumer)

In March, a group of pro-consumer California district attorneys sued Amazon about misleading savings claims, and settled the case just one week later. Amazon agreed to pay a $2-million penalty.

For decades, Amazon has advertised fictitious savings from bogus reference prices like “list prices” or “was” prices, making shoppers believe they were saving a bundle by buying from them. In 2017, we reported on a study that demonstrated Amazon was still up to its old tricks despite seemingly having found consumer religion the year before as a result of several lawsuits about their misleading savings claims.

As a current example, in late March 2021, Amazon advertised a Cuisinart hand mixer (HM-90S) for $79.95 — a claimed savings of 45% off the so-called “list price” $145.

But a quick check over at the manufacturer’s own website reveals that Cuisinart itself is selling this very model for the same $79.95, as are a host other big name retailers.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Worse, Amazon itself has never charged more than $88.94 in the past 10 years for this mixer according to CamelCamelCamel, and a review of the prices being charged for this very mixer at nearly 100 other retailers reveals that no one is charging Amazon’s claimed $145 list price.

As of April 2, surprise, surprise, Amazon actually changed its advertising for this mixer and eliminated the misleading list price:

UPDATE: Eagle-eyed reader Kim W. visited Amazon on April 5, and discovered the company once again began advertising a savings of 45% for this mixer and it restored the same high list price albeit this time with a “details link” explaining how it was derived.

Under the terms of the just-announced settlement, Amazon is barred from using false or misleading reference prices, and it must include a hyperlink to a “clear and exact definition of the [reference] term” they used and a “statement that the List Price may not be the prevailing market price or regular retail price.”

Our view: Having Amazon tell customers that the reference price they display is not the real prevailing price in the marketplace does nothing to change the misleading nature of their list price savings claims. And it seems to violate the very California law that formed the basis of the DAs’ lawsuit against the company.

Bottom line: If the list price is not the price charged by a reasonable number of sellers, it should not be allowed to be used.