Over the past six months or so, Wal-mart has been advertising that families who spend a $100 a week on groceries could save $165 in three months if they shop at Wal-mart.
Now, there are two new versions of the ad that apparently started running nationally around February 16, 2010, making the claim “People who spent $100 a week at leading national supermarkets on frequently purchased groceries, could have saved $55 in one month by shopping at Wal-mart instead.”
*MOUSE PRINT:
Look at their disclaimer above. Do you think there might be something a little fishy about the proof they offered for how they arrived at that claim? Putting aside the issue that they don’t count meat, produce, and other weighed-to-order items which can be a substantial portion of one’s grocery bill, and that there really is no such thing as a “national supermarket” with locations in all states, look at when their survey was conducted. It is for an almost six week period beginning January 31 and ending March 12, 2010. Check your calendar because it still is not March 12 yet! So how does Wal-mart know the results of its price comparison a month before the comparison is over, and how can an as yet uncompleted survey be used to substantiate an advertising claim?
That question was posed to Wal-mart’s PR folks, who were invited to comment for this story twice. No response was received. And the commercial is still running (it was on during 60 Minutes last night) despite Wal-mart being made aware of the problem one week ago.
It is also curious that the savings claimed last summer in a similar series of commercials — $165 for three months — works out to exactly $55 a month. That is the very amount they are claiming to be the current monthly savings. Have not grocery prices changed even a penny in six months?
Last June, the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau ruled in a case about Wal-mart’s previously advertised grocery savings claims (similar to this commercial):
“NAD further determined that the claim ‘if you bought these kinds of groceries at Wal-Mart, you could save on average over $700 a year’ was not supported by the evidence in the record and therefore recommended that it be discontinued.”
So the “$55″Â ad above is the new and improved version of the commercial?
As we become more health conscious, we tend to be attracted to products that are better for us. Unfortunately, manufacturers usually charge a premium price when a product offers health benefits compared to similar products.