Members BigK Posted February 19, 2012 Members Posted February 19, 2012 By Ben Forer | ABC News – Thu, Feb 16, 2012 12:21 PM EST.. Mars Cutting King-Size Candy (ABC News) Hungry? Starting in 2013 you'll have to grab a slightly smaller Snickers. Mars Inc., which makes M&Ms, Twix, MilkyWay and many other notable candies, told Reuters that by the end of next year it would not sell any chocolate products that had more than 250 calories. That means the more than 500 calorie "King Size" Snickers bar will become extinct, along with other "King Size" goodies. Mars told NPR the company planned to replace "King Size" candy with bags of smaller bars. According to NPR, the company said it wants to "enable sharing or saving a portion for later." Even the current 2-ounce Snickers is not small enough - it will have to downsize from 280 calories, losing at least 10 percent of its current self. On it's website, Mars talks about "responsible snacking" and highlights the fact that currently its "King Size" candy is made in two pieces, "one for now and one for later." Who wants to bet prices also won't be going up. Quote
Guest hitoallusa Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 There is a prophesy in the the Bible that talks about everything getting so expensive to buy. I think it's not too far away. Quote
Guest EXPAT Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 Well, we are all eating too much anyway. So smaller portions won't kill anyone. But I'm sure they are doing it reduce costs. Quote
Members ihpguy Posted February 19, 2012 Members Posted February 19, 2012 Simple solution: Just by the bags with the Halloween-sized bars and polish off a couple of those. Problem solved. Quote
Guest FourAces Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 Simple solution: Just by the bags with the Halloween-sized bars and polish off a couple of those. Problem solved. Except for those of us with a big enough belly to eat the entire bag Quote
Members ihpguy Posted February 20, 2012 Members Posted February 20, 2012 I meant at LEAST a couple of entire bags of the mini-bars. I mean, come on, one bag each of Kit Kats, Snickers, Milky Ways and Almond Joys should give just about anyone a decent sugar high. And why are frozen Snickers such a treat? Quote
Members BigK Posted February 20, 2012 Author Members Posted February 20, 2012 And why are frozen Snickers such a treat? Nothing beats frozen Milky Ways! Quote
Members TampaYankee Posted February 20, 2012 Members Posted February 20, 2012 This is not an altruistic or health measure by any means, no matter what they tell you. It is a camouflaged price increase. It has become rampant in the food industry to downsized container and portion sizes. I recall it starting in yogurt when the standard was an 8 oz cup that shrank to 6 oz and now often 4oz. Pudding cups were 4 oz now 3.5 oz. Canned vegies when from 15-15 1/2 now to 14 often. Tuna can used to be six ounces net wt. The 'net' i.e. without liquid to now five ounces with liquid included. I open a can of chunk light in oil now and see less than half a can of actual tuna. Ice cream... especially egregious -- from half gallon (64 oz) to 56 oz to now 48 oz. Of course none of the prices decreased. In fact, all prices increased with these changes -- but presumably less than might have occurred with the original sizes. I find this happenstance insulting as if I were too stoooopid to notice. When I want to buy ice cream I want to purchase a half gallon, not a minature half-gallon. It pisses me off every time I go to the store. There... now I feel better... until the next trip. Quote
Guest FourAces Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Nothing beats frozen Milky Ways! Right on Big K Quote
Guest EXPAT Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Nothing beats frozen Milky Ways! How about deep fried Milky Ways? Anyone ever try one? Quote
Members lookin Posted February 20, 2012 Members Posted February 20, 2012 I feel your pain, TY, and that of others caught in the nefarious spiral of downsizing to cover up a price increase. The next chapter is usually a new "King Size" that gets us back to where we used to be at twice the price. Even more distasteful, so to speak, is the hidden downsizing that some ice cream makers, including Häagen Dazs engage in. They put extra air into their product a few years ago, when Dreyer's took them over and, since ice cream is measured in fluid ounces, they didn't need to change the label, even though the weight decreased. Still that's better, in my opinion, than the path taken by many manufacturers of cheapening the ingredients while leaving the price and size the same. At least Häagen Dazs hasn't (yet) started putting in guar gum, or other kinds of stabilizers, to cover the removal of real cream or eggs from the formula. Try reading an ice cream label these days and see how many of the ingredients would be something you'd find in your kitchen. Most of the major candy manufacturers do the same thing. Try reading the ingredient list for some of your favorite candy bars. Yuck! Since Hershey's took over Reese's and Peter Paul (Mounds, Almond Joy), you won't even find the ingredients listed on their website. Apparently, they keep changing them, probably depending on what artificial ingredients they can get a deal on that day. The wrapper has to be accurate though. Since I started looking at what's actually in some of my old favorites, I quit buying them. Consumer tip: If you're looking for some good candy at a good price, check out my new fave at Costco - Dark Chocolate Almond Cherry Clusters. Real ingredients, great-tasting chocolate, and about 30¢ an ounce. Trader Joe's has some good candies too, but check out the ingredient list first. Soybean oil, lecithin, and artificial flavor do not add up to good chocolate. Quote
Members RA1 Posted February 20, 2012 Members Posted February 20, 2012 I think we have had some of this discussion before. One does not even want to "know" what such as McDonald's has in their shakes. They refuse to call them milk shakes although they do contain milk. However, the other ingredients are just as lookin' suggests........awful and not something found in your kitchen. Best regards, RA1 Thanks for the tip although if everyone ate the amount of candy that I do, all candy makers would go out of business. Quote
Members MsGuy Posted February 21, 2012 Members Posted February 21, 2012 Yuck! Since Hershey's took over Reese's and Peter Paul (Mounds, Almond Joy), you won't even find the ingredients listed on their website. So that's what happened?!! Last week-end, I bought a bag of Almond Joys. This is the first time I've eaten them in years and I was disappointed in the taste: not at all what I remembered. I thought my taste buds had deteriorated with age. Quote
Members lookin Posted February 21, 2012 Members Posted February 21, 2012 Peter Paul used to be really good. So did Reese's. What they call 'kitchen-friendly' ingredients. Very good flavors. There's a generation - or two - who missed out and their standards for flavor will be what's on the shelf today. Wonder what kind of chazerai their kids will be eating. Quote
Members TampaYankee Posted February 21, 2012 Members Posted February 21, 2012 I'm not sure I'll find much agreement here but I attribute this decline in quality and value to the quarterly perspective that Wall St has for the manufacturers. When companies were owned by individuals and families there was a pride in ownership and craftsmanship in the products that many companies produced. Now, wit the owners (stock holders) distant from the prouct and often of temporary status, the perspective is: What are the profit statements or will the street guidance on stock targets be met for this quarter. Quarterly myopia drives a lot of decisions to maximize profit and stock value on a short term basis in this economic system. Long term reputations are of lesser concern than in days past. If you have any doubt just reflect on how these factors drove Wall St. actions that caused the 2008 Great Recession. FWIW Quote
Members lookin Posted February 21, 2012 Members Posted February 21, 2012 I'm not sure I'll find much agreement here but I attribute this decline in quality and value to the quarterly perspective that Wall St has for the manufacturers. You'll get nothing but agreement from this quarter. Since I read this book a few years ago, it's been clear that corporate America dances to this tune without a pause. Add the multimillion dollar bonuses riding on hitting or beating Wall Street expectations, and you've got managers of huge companies that will do anything to make the quarterly earnings-per-share number. If the Hershey bean-counters (not the cocoa ones either) project higher costs this quarter, there's tremendous pressure from the top to make the product cheaper. No matter that the Hershey brand tarnishes and loses value over the long-term. That's the next guy's problem. Quote
Members Lucky Posted February 21, 2012 Members Posted February 21, 2012 I currently have an addiction to Reese's Peanut Butter Cups. They have so many variations. The little foil-wrapped ones are not the best, (and who wants to spend their time unwrapping the little buggers?) but the basic cup is still good. The Big Cup does not have the right balance of chocolate to peanut butter. What has me addicted are the mini-cups, which are unwrapped and have a great taste and texture. I always freeze my peanut cupper butts for best flavor. (I really did start to make that mistake, and then decided that I liked it anyway.) Quote
