Despite the container on the left holding 25% less actual product, the physical packaging has been manufactured to look virtually indistinguishable from the larger volume version on the right.
Why This Matters: The Hidden Cost of “Shrinkflation”
This phenomenon is a textbook example of shrinkflation—a tactic where manufacturers decrease the amount of a product in a package while keeping the physical size of the container and the retail price the same (or even raising it).
For the average consumer, this presents a few major issues:
-
Value for Money: If both tins are priced closely or identically on the supermarket shelf, you are paying significantly more per ounce for the 1.5 OZ container without realizing it.
-
Recipe Discrepancies: Relying on the visual size of a “standard” container can throw off measurements if you assume a tin contains the amount of weight it historically used to hold.
-
Environmental Impact: Oversized packaging for smaller product volumes means more unnecessary plastic and metal waste entering the supply chain and consumer households.
Consumer Tip: Always look past the physical size of the box, bottle, or tin. Instead, train your eyes to scan the shelf tags for the unit price (e.g., price per ounce or price per 100g). This is the only foolproof way to know which item actually gives you the most value for your hard-earned money.
