Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Congratulations, You’ve (Not) Won Free Chipotle for a Year

Last Friday (the 13th) was MrConsumer’s lucky day. He got an email from Chipotle, the Mexican fast-food chain, congratulating him on winning “free Chipotle for a year.” Opening the message revealed a celebratory animated graphic raining down burritos.

Chipotle email heaader
Chipotle raining burritos

There was no fine print. Clicking the link in the email brought me to my Chipotle rewards account, but the only things there were two offers to get free guacamole or a side and chips if I made separate $5 purchases.

Chipotle w $5 purchase rewards

That’s it? That’s their idea of free Chipotle for a year, a promotion they launched last week?

To claim my prize, I looked for and found the sweepstakes official rules online. It appeared to have two parts. In one part, over 3000 rewards members would be chosen to win free Chipotle for a year, and in the other, the company would spin some type of wheel of fortune and select members to win the free year’s worth of food. I assumed that that must have been how I won.

In reading the rules further, the company defined exactly what they meant by the “Chipotle for a Year Prize” — and it wasn’t just free guac and chips.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Chipotle prize

So, how do I collect the prize? Going to Instagram and sending a message to @Chipotle seemed to do nothing. So, I sent a message via Twitter to the company and they quickly replied.

Tweet

That’s it? We goofed. We’re sorry?

So we wrote to the PR folks and the chief marketing officer at Chipotle asking what happened, how many customers were affected, and what they were going to do for those people to make up for misleading them into thinking they had won the big prize. The company did not respond despite multiple inquiries.

Online buzz, however, suggests what actually happened. It appears that Chipotle mixed up their mailing lists and offers. On January 13, those reward members whose birthday was January 12 were slated to receive a birthday message offering free chips and a side, but instead they were sent the free Chipotle for a year winners’ notification.

Some five hours after the errant email was sent, a new one from the company arrived apologizing for the error and offering one free entrée as a goodwill gesture.

Chipotle apology

What do you think? Should Chipotle provide a little more than a single burrito to these disappointed customers or was that really enough?

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Ho Ho NO: Unplugged Shoppers Face Higher Grocery Prices

UPDATE: On January 12, a New Jersey assemblyman filled the first bill in the country requiring retailers who offer “digital coupons” to also provide paper ones of equal value to those customers who do not have internet access.

The millions of seniors who don’t use the internet (25% according to Pew Research Center) or who don’t have a smartphone (39%) are being charged substantially higher grocery prices than their more tech-savvy counterparts because they cannot clip the e-coupons necessary to be charged the advertised sale prices in the store. Unplugged lower income shoppers face the same roadblock. (See our recent story.)

Look at just the front page of this ad from a Washington, DC Safeway store right before Christmas advertising in-store prices. Note how much more an unplugged (“non-digital” in red) shopper pays versus a digital shopper:

*MOUSE PRINT:

Safeway non-digital prices

Just on those five items being purchased in-store, a non-digital shopper even if a member of the store’s loyalty program would have paid $67.03 compared to just $42.73 for a shopper who was able to clip the digital offers before going to the store. That is almost $25 more for the very same items.

Similarly, at this Star Market in Boston, an unplugged shopper would pay over $29 more for just these seven items.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Star Market non-digital prices

In November, five national consumer organizations including Consumer World called on a dozen leaders of the supermarket industry to make an offline alternative available in their stores to disconnected shoppers so everyone could have an equal opportunity to pay the same discounted prices. The response has been silence from them or a bit of misleading PR-spin.

Now it is your turn to speak up and speak out telling supermarket executives how “digital-only” sale prices unfairly discriminate against the millions of shoppers without internet access or smartphones. Urge those companies to make a new year’s resolution to find a way to offer their unplugged customers the same lower sale prices that more digitally-capable shoppers pay.

So… please consider sending an email to the CEOs of Albertsons Companies (which owns Acme, Albertsons, Carrs, Jewel Osco, Randalls, Safeway, Shaw’s, Star Market, Tom Thumb, and Vons), The Kroger Company (which owns Baker’s, City Market, Dillons, Foods Co., Fred Meyer, Food 4 Less, Frys, Gerbes, King Soopers, Kroger, Marianos, Metro Market, Payless, Pick ‘n Save, QFC, Ralphs, and Smiths), and Stop & Shop.

The Albertsons Companies: Vivek.Sankaran@Albertsons.com

The Kroger Co.: Rodney.McMullen@kroger.com

Stop & Shop: Gordon.Reid@stopandshop.com

Perhaps together we can help convince stores to treat all their shoppers equally and fight inflation a little more easily.

Share this story:

 

ADV
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

“Original” Smart Balance Starting to Reappear

Last fall, we spotlighted how Smart Balance sneakily reduced the oil content of its buttery spread from 64-percent fat to only 39-percent. Regular users noticed because at the time they posted more than 800 one-star reviews criticizing Conagra for watering down the recipe. That number has since swelled to over 2,200!

The company said they were trying to make the product more spreadable. No, they were trying to save money on ingredients thinking the public wouldn’t notice or care. In any event, after hearing all the complaints, they promised to bring back the “original” recipe by the beginning of 2023, and it is now starting to reappear on store shelves. Thanks to reader Mario C. for spotting it.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Smart Balance reshelved

But just as inconspicuously as the product went from 64-percent to 39-percent oil, the change back is just as opaque. The resurrected version is not emblazoned with a big “new and improved” starburst or any other obvious package modification to let you know of the change back. You have to check the tiny numbers in the bottom left hand corner to see if what you’re buying is the 39-percent version or the 64-percent version.

And don’t go by the best by date on the package. In the above example, the watered-down 39-percent oil version has a later freshness date than the 64-percent oil version just coming back on store shelves.

We asked Conagra when the transition would be complete and if they had any general comments to make. A company spokesperson said this in a statement:

We are currently producing Small [sic] Balance with the original recipe, which consumers will see on store shelves in the coming months. There will be a period of time when both Smart Balance recipes are on shelf as we make the transition.

We can only hope that the Conagra margarine debacle will make other companies think twice before quietly skimping on key ingredients in their products. But don’t count on it. We’re afraid that skimpflation is here to stay.

Share this story:

 

ADV