Hello, All!

Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one
(in fact its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel
oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
arithmetic. They also sometimes price melons per pound that
makes them look cheap until you weigh one and find it will cost
$5!

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

"James Silverton" wrote:
>
> Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one
> (in fact its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel
> oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> arithmetic.

Has nothing to do with doing math... it's all about being
programmed. Madison Ave. has long ago programmed people to consider
the higher number of items at any price as the better buy than one
item at any price. The higher number of items offered the less likely
people will look at the final price... doesn't even have to be 10 for,
that's why 2 fers are so successful... many times I've seen 2 fer $1
when one cost 49 cents. And if you present two of those items at the
register it will not charge you 49 cents each, the register is set to
charge the 2 fer price only... it's all about programming.

James Silverton wrote:
> Hello, All!
>
> Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one (in fact
> its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel oranges marked
> "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw it was "10 for $10" or
> a dollar each. Don't people do the simple arithmetic.

No, obviously they don't.

Otherwise we wouldn't be mired in a hopeless war in Iraq with another
one looming on the horizon in Iran while the domestic economy crashes
after being raped by sub prime lenders.

And meanwhile, the ice shelves melt...

We are so screwed.

Kathleen wrote:
>
> James Silverton wrote:
> > Hello, All!
> >
> > Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one (in fact
> > its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel oranges marked
> > "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw it was "10 for $10" or
> > a dollar each. Don't people do the simple arithmetic.
>
> No, obviously they don't.
>
> Otherwise we wouldn't be mired in a hopeless war in Iraq with another
> one looming on the horizon in Iran while the domestic economy crashes
> after being raped by sub prime lenders.
>
> And meanwhile, the ice shelves melt...
>
> We are so screwed.

Ignorant twits like you clearly are screwed since you don't have the
intelligence to assess the actual facts and adapt, instead you simply
parrot what you've heard from equally ignorant sources. The rest of us
who can assess the facts adapt and are doing just fine. We can also
figure unit prices on our groceries too...

Pete C. wrote:

>
> Kathleen wrote:
> >
> > James Silverton wrote:
> > > Hello, All!
> > >
> > > Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one
> > > (in fact its prices are usually lower.) I saw some large navel
> > > oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> > > it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> > > arithmetic.
> >
> > No, obviously they don't.
> >
> > Otherwise we wouldn't be mired in a hopeless war in Iraq with
> > another one looming on the horizon in Iran while the domestic
> > economy crashes after being raped by sub prime lenders.
> >
> > And meanwhile, the ice shelves melt...
> >
> > We are so screwed.
>
> Ignorant twits like you clearly are screwed since you don't have the
> intelligence to assess the actual facts and adapt, instead you simply
> parrot what you've heard from equally ignorant sources.

You mean you get the actual facts from sources like the experts who
explained why housing boom would never go down? Or the Russian ones
who explained why Afghanistan would be easy to control? Or the US ones
who explained that once the US sent a few advisors into Vietnam, South
Vietnam would have no trouble winning?

--
Dan Goodman
"I have always depended on the kindness of stranglers."
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Expire
Journal http://dsgood.livejournal.com
Futures http://clerkfuturist.wordpress.com
mirror 1: http://dsgood.insanejournal.com
mirror 2: http://dsgood.wordpress.com
Links http://del.icio.us/dsgood

Pete C. wrote:
> Kathleen wrote:
>> James Silverton wrote:
>

Don't people do the simple arithmetic.

>> No, obviously they don't.
>>
>> Otherwise we wouldn't be mired in a hopeless war in Iraq with another
>> one looming on the horizon in Iran while the domestic economy crashes
>> after being raped by sub prime lenders.
>>
>> And meanwhile, the ice shelves melt...
>>
>> We are so screwed.
>
> Ignorant twits like you clearly are screwed since you don't have the
> intelligence to assess the actual facts and adapt, instead you simply
> parrot what you've heard from equally ignorant sources. The rest of us
> who can assess the facts adapt and are doing just fine.

Sounds like you are getting your information from Dubya.
And you actually talk about "ignorant sources."

gloria p

Puester wrote:
>
> Pete C. wrote:
> > Kathleen wrote:
> >> James Silverton wrote:
> >
>
> Don't people do the simple arithmetic.
>
> >> No, obviously they don't.
> >>
> >> Otherwise we wouldn't be mired in a hopeless war in Iraq with another
> >> one looming on the horizon in Iran while the domestic economy crashes
> >> after being raped by sub prime lenders.
> >>
> >> And meanwhile, the ice shelves melt...
> >>
> >> We are so screwed.
> >
> > Ignorant twits like you clearly are screwed since you don't have the
> > intelligence to assess the actual facts and adapt, instead you simply
> > parrot what you've heard from equally ignorant sources. The rest of us
> > who can assess the facts adapt and are doing just fine.
>
> Sounds like you are getting your information from Dubya.
> And you actually talk about "ignorant sources."
>
> gloria p

Another ignorant twit I see.

I'll give you a clue - if you mindlessly drink the cool aid purveyed by
either the "left" or the "right" you are indeed screwed.

Those of us who don't follow the babbling of the wings know how to find
the facts, analyze them and take the appropriate actions to position
ourselves to come out ahead.

Because I'm not a clueless winger of either persuasion, I've not been
affected by the stock market follies, tech bubble, housing bubble or
sub-prime scams. I'm not all up in arms because gas prices have
increased to about where they should be from the abnormally low prices
of the last decade or so. I'm not sitting in a micro-mansion worth $250k
with a $750k mortgage on it. I've not taken out second mortgages to buy
some status symbol car or HDTV. I'm also not buying into the claims that
we need socialized health care because only 90% of our population has
health insurance.

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:23:10 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>
>Puester wrote:
>>
>> Pete C. wrote:
>> > Kathleen wrote:
>> >> James Silverton wrote:
>> >
>>
>> Don't people do the simple arithmetic.
>>
>> >> No, obviously they don't.
>> >>
>> >> Otherwise we wouldn't be mired in a hopeless war in Iraq with another
>> >> one looming on the horizon in Iran while the domestic economy crashes
>> >> after being raped by sub prime lenders.
>> >>
>> >> And meanwhile, the ice shelves melt...
>> >>
>> >> We are so screwed.
>> >
>> > Ignorant twits like you clearly are screwed since you don't have the
>> > intelligence to assess the actual facts and adapt, instead you simply
>> > parrot what you've heard from equally ignorant sources. The rest of us
>> > who can assess the facts adapt and are doing just fine.
>>
>> Sounds like you are getting your information from Dubya.
>> And you actually talk about "ignorant sources."
>>
>> gloria p
>
>Another ignorant twit I see.
>
>I'll give you a clue - if you mindlessly drink the cool aid purveyed by
>either the "left" or the "right" you are indeed screwed.
>
>Those of us who don't follow the babbling of the wings know how to find
>the facts, analyze them and take the appropriate actions to position
>ourselves to come out ahead.
>
>Because I'm not a clueless winger of either persuasion, I've not been
>affected by the stock market follies, tech bubble, housing bubble or
>sub-prime scams. I'm not all up in arms because gas prices have
>increased to about where they should be from the abnormally low prices
>of the last decade or so. I'm not sitting in a micro-mansion worth $250k
>with a $750k mortgage on it. I've not taken out second mortgages to buy
>some status symbol car or HDTV. I'm also not buying into the claims that
>we need socialized health care because only 90% of our population has
>health insurance.

Yabbut, but you're still an asshole, and I'm afraid there is nothing
that can be done about that.

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:23:10 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>
>Puester wrote:
>>
>> Pete C. wrote:
>> > Kathleen wrote:
>> >> James Silverton wrote:
>> >
>>
>> Don't people do the simple arithmetic.
>>
>> >> No, obviously they don't.
>> >>
>> >> Otherwise we wouldn't be mired in a hopeless war in Iraq with another
>> >> one looming on the horizon in Iran while the domestic economy crashes
>> >> after being raped by sub prime lenders.
>> >>
>> >> And meanwhile, the ice shelves melt...
>> >>
>> >> We are so screwed.
>> >
>> > Ignorant twits like you clearly are screwed since you don't have the
>> > intelligence to assess the actual facts and adapt, instead you simply
>> > parrot what you've heard from equally ignorant sources. The rest of us
>> > who can assess the facts adapt and are doing just fine.
>>
>> Sounds like you are getting your information from Dubya.
>> And you actually talk about "ignorant sources."
>>
>> gloria p
>
>Another ignorant twit I see.
>
>I'll give you a clue - if you mindlessly drink the cool aid purveyed by
>either the "left" or the "right" you are indeed screwed.
>
>Those of us who don't follow the babbling of the wings know how to find
>the facts, analyze them and take the appropriate actions to position
>ourselves to come out ahead.
>
>Because I'm not a clueless winger of either persuasion, I've not been
>affected by the stock market follies, tech bubble, housing bubble or
>sub-prime scams. I'm not all up in arms because gas prices have
>increased to about where they should be from the abnormally low prices
>of the last decade or so. I'm not sitting in a micro-mansion worth $250k
>with a $750k mortgage on it. I've not taken out second mortgages to buy
>some status symbol car or HDTV. I'm also not buying into the claims that
>we need socialized health care because only 90% of our population has
>health insurance.

well, aren't you special!

there's absolutely nothing wrong with wishing the uninsured should
just get sick and die already and stop whining. no sir!

your pal,
blake

You're correct. You are so screwed.


"Kathleen" > wrote in message
...
> James Silverton wrote:
>> Hello, All!
>>
>> Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one (in fact
>> its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel oranges marked
>> "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw it was "10 for $10" or
>> a dollar each. Don't people do the simple arithmetic.
>
> No, obviously they don't.
>
> Otherwise we wouldn't be mired in a hopeless war in Iraq with another one
> looming on the horizon in Iran while the domestic economy crashes after
> being raped by sub prime lenders.
>
> And meanwhile, the ice shelves melt...
>
> We are so screwed.
>

James Silverton wrote:
> Hello, All!
>
> Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one
> (in fact its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel
> oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> arithmetic. They also sometimes price melons per pound that
> makes them look cheap until you weigh one and find it will cost
> $5!
>
> James Silverton
> Potomac, Maryland
>
Happens all the time. I don't generally need or want 10 of (or 5 of)
whatever they're trying to rope the consumer into buying. Fact is they're
counting on people not calculating the unit price. I don't buy into 2-fer
deals unless the per-unit price is significantly less with the 2-fer deal
*and* it's something on my list or at least something I know I'll use.

I've noticed scales seem to be disappearing from a lot of produce
departments. They don't want people to figure out it isn't a "deal" until
it's rung up at the checkout. Most people are too timid to say take that
off, I'm not paying $5 for a cantaloupe!

Jill

"jmcquown" wrote:
> James Silverton wrote:
>
> > Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one
> > (in fact its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel
> > oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> > it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> > arithmetic. They also sometimes price melons per pound that
> > makes them look cheap until you weigh one and find it will cost
> > $5!
>
> Happens all the time. �I don't generally need or want 10 of (or 5 of)
> whatever they're trying to rope the consumer into buying. �Fact is they're
> counting on people not calculating the unit price. �I don't buy into 2-fer
> deals unless the per-unit price is significantly less with the 2-fer deal
> *and* it's something on my list or at least something I know I'll use.
>
> I've noticed scales seem to be disappearing from a lot of produce
> departments. �They don't want people to figure out it isn't a "deal" until
> it's rung up at the checkout. �Most people are too timid to say take that
> off, I'm not paying $5 for a cantaloupe!

I wouldn't pay $5 for any cantaloupe either unless it has a nipple.

"jmcquown" wrote:

> I'm not paying $5 for a cantaloupe!

In Vancouver I recall seeing cantaloupes priced at about $70
Canadian each. They were square. That is to say, cube-shaped
with somewhat rounded edges; obviously grown into a box to
achieve this shape.

The target market was wealthy Asian transplants and tourists.

Steve

Sheldon wrote:

>
> I wouldn't pay $5 for any cantaloupe either unless it has a nipple.

Pathetic.

-dk

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:01:45 -0400, DK > wrote:

>Sheldon wrote:
>
>>
>> I wouldn't pay $5 for any cantaloupe either unless it has a nipple.
>
>Pathetic.
>
>-dk

i wonder where sheldon buys his dismembered breasts?

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 21:01:45 -0400, DK > wrote:
>
>> Sheldon wrote:
>>
>>> I wouldn't pay $5 for any cantaloupe either unless it has a nipple.
>> Pathetic.
>>
>> -dk
>
> i wonder where sheldon buys his dismembered breasts?
>
> your pal,
> blake

Dumpster diving behind the local hospital?

-dk

On Apr 11, 6:36 pm, "jmcquown" > wrote:
> James Silverton wrote:
> > Hello, All!
>
> > Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one
> > (in fact its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel
> > oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> > it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> > arithmetic. They also sometimes price melons per pound that
> > makes them look cheap until you weigh one and find it will cost
> > $5!
>
> > James Silverton
> > Potomac, Maryland
>
> Happens all the time. I don't generally need or want 10 of (or 5 of)
> whatever they're trying to rope the consumer into buying. Fact is they're
> counting on people not calculating the unit price. I don't buy into 2-fer
> deals unless the per-unit price is significantly less with the 2-fer deal
> *and* it's something on my list or at least something I know I'll use.
>
> I've noticed scales seem to be disappearing from a lot of produce
> departments. They don't want people to figure out it isn't a "deal" until
> it's rung up at the checkout. Most people are too timid to say take that
> off, I'm not paying $5 for a cantaloupe!
>
> Jill

The reason scales are disappearing is more likely related to their
grossly inaccurate rendering of the approximate weight that they
display. I'm rude when it comes to that, taking my produce purchase
over to the deli and reaching over to weigh them on their scales for a
more accurate reading.

That was, btw the way I found out that the scales at the registers
were not accurate. Made the people in line behind me angry, but I
raised a ruckus, insisted the manager do the same math I had, and got
that register closed down until the weights and measures people had
come in to retest that scale.

My one moment of glory.<G>

maxine in ri

maxine in ri wrote:
> On Apr 11, 6:36 pm, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > James Silverton wrote:
> > > Hello, All!
>
> > > Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one
> > > (in fact its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel
> > > oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> > > it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> > > arithmetic. They also sometimes price melons per pound that
> > > makes them look cheap until you weigh one and find it will cost
> > > $5!
>
> > > James Silverton
> > > Potomac, Maryland
>
> > Happens all the time. �I don't generally need or want 10 of (or 5 of)
> > whatever they're trying to rope the consumer into buying. �Fact is they're
> > counting on people not calculating the unit price. �I don't buy into 2-fer
> > deals unless the per-unit price is significantly less with the 2-fer deal
> > *and* it's something on my list or at least something I know I'll use.
>
> > I've noticed scales seem to be disappearing from a lot of produce
> > departments. �They don't want people to figure out it isn't a "deal" until
> > it's rung up at the checkout. �Most people are too timid to say take that
> > off, I'm not paying $5 for a cantaloupe!
>
> > Jill
>
> The reason scales are disappearing is more likely related to their
> grossly inaccurate rendering of the approximate weight that they
> display. �I'm rude when it comes to that, taking my produce purchase
> over to the deli and reaching over to weigh them on their scales for a
> more accurate reading.
>
> That was, btw the way I found out that the scales at the registers
> were not accurate. �Made the people in line behind me angry, but I
> raised a ruckus, insisted the manager do the same math I had, and got
> that register closed down until the weights and measures people had
> come in to retest that scale.
>
> My one moment of glory.<G>

That's very rare... those electronic scales at the register cost many
thousands of dollars each and are extremely accurate and sensitive...
and also have built-in warning devices that disable a scale if there's
any malfunction (it will even flash the particular malfunction, like
if there's too much liquid on the scale, or some item falls
underneath). And the weights and measures inspectors come around to
test and recalibrate if needed very often, with many stores on a daily
basis. No store is going to purposely mess with those scales... there
are very stiff fines and serious prison time. In fact most stores buy
a service contract from the scale manufacturer which includes an
insurance portion protecting from error liability, so the manufactures
come around very often to check their products too.

Now the spring scales at the produce section are not intended for
precise weight, normal brained folks don't care if the grapes they
weigh are off a half ounce... those are guestimate scales, those
grapes will still get weighed at the register... and better than 50
pct of shoppers will have eaten a goodly amount before ever getting to
the register.

On Apr 12, 10:45 am, Sheldon > wrote:
> maxine in ri wrote:
> > On Apr 11, 6:36 pm, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>
> > > James Silverton wrote:
> > > > Hello, All!
>
> > > > Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one
> > > > (in fact its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel
> > > > oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> > > > it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> > > > arithmetic. They also sometimes price melons per pound that
> > > > makes them look cheap until you weigh one and find it will cost
> > > > $5!
>
> > > > James Silverton
> > > > Potomac, Maryland
>
> > > Happens all the time. �I don't generally need or want 10 of (or 5 of)
> > > whatever they're trying to rope the consumer into buying. �Fact is they're
> > > counting on people not calculating the unit price. �I don't buy into 2-fer
> > > deals unless the per-unit price is significantly less with the 2-fer deal
> > > *and* it's something on my list or at least something I know I'll use.
>
> > > I've noticed scales seem to be disappearing from a lot of produce
> > > departments. �They don't want people to figure out it isn't a "deal" until
> > > it's rung up at the checkout. �Most people are too timid to say take that
> > > off, I'm not paying $5 for a cantaloupe!
>
> > > Jill
>
> > The reason scales are disappearing is more likely related to their
> > grossly inaccurate rendering of the approximate weight that they
> > display. �I'm rude when it comes to that, taking my produce purchase
> > over to the deli and reaching over to weigh them on their scales for a
> > more accurate reading.
>
> > That was, btw the way I found out that the scales at the registers
> > were not accurate. �Made the people in line behind me angry, but I
> > raised a ruckus, insisted the manager do the same math I had, and got
> > that register closed down until the weights and measures people had
> > come in to retest that scale.
>
> > My one moment of glory.<G>
>
> That's very rare... those electronic scales at the register cost many
> thousands of dollars each and are extremely accurate and sensitive...
> and also have built-in warning devices that disable a scale if there's
> any malfunction (it will even flash the particular malfunction, like
> if there's too much liquid on the scale, or some item falls
> underneath). And the weights and measures inspectors come around to
> test and recalibrate if needed very often, with many stores on a daily
> basis. No store is going to purposely mess with those scales... there
> are very stiff fines and serious prison time. In fact most stores buy
> a service contract from the scale manufacturer which includes an
> insurance portion protecting from error liability, so the manufactures
> come around very often to check their products too.

Well, it was only once in many years of shopping. The inspectors in
our area tend to come on a yearly basis. I will check the seals on
the scales (if they are there) next time, just to be sure. There was
a hullabaloo a few years ago when it was found that one of the
inspectors was sleeping in his car or hanging out in bars during his
shift, but that's the sort of thing that hopefully doesn't occur too
often.

> Now the spring scales at the produce section are not intended for
> precise weight, normal brained folks don't care if the grapes they
> weigh are off a half ounce... those are guestimate scales, those
> grapes will still get weighed at the register... and better than 50
> pct of shoppers will have eaten a goodly amount before ever getting to
> the register.

If they're off by half an ounce, I'd be fine with them. The ones in
most of the local stores, and the chains, tend to be off by a good
deal more than that!

Now that some stores are coming up with those "scan as you shop"
devices, there is a decent scale in the produce section, that spits
out a label for your produce when you weigh it.

maxine in ri

On Apr 12, 11:23Â*am, maxine in ri > wrote:
> On Apr 12, 10:45 am, Sheldon > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > maxine in ri wrote:
> > > On Apr 11, 6:36 pm, "jmcquown" > wrote:
>
> > > > James Silverton wrote:
> > > > > Hello, All!
>
> > > > > Today, I was in a supermarket that claims to be a discount one
> > > > > (in fact its prices *are* usually lower.) I saw some large navel
> > > > > oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> > > > > it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> > > > > arithmetic. They also sometimes price melons per pound that
> > > > > makes them look cheap until you weigh one and find it will cost
> > > > > $5!
>
> > > > > James Silverton
> > > > > Potomac, Maryland
>
> > > > Happens all the time. �I don't generally need or want 10 of (or 5 of)
> > > > whatever they're trying to rope the consumer into buying. �Fact is they're
> > > > counting on people not calculating the unit price. �I don't buy into 2-fer
> > > > deals unless the per-unit price is significantly less with the 2-fer deal
> > > > *and* it's something on my list or at least something I know I'll use.
>
> > > > I've noticed scales seem to be disappearing from a lot of produce
> > > > departments. �They don't want people to figure out it isn't a "deal" until
> > > > it's rung up at the checkout. �Most people are too timid to say take that
> > > > off, I'm not paying $5 for a cantaloupe!
>
> > > > Jill
>
> > > The reason scales are disappearing is more likely related to their
> > > grossly inaccurate rendering of the approximate weight that they
> > > display. �I'm rude when it comes to that, taking my produce purchase
> > > over to the deli and reaching over to weigh them on their scales for a
> > > more accurate reading.
>
> > > That was, btw the way I found out that the scales at the registers
> > > were not accurate. �Made the people in line behind me angry, but I
> > > raised a ruckus, insisted the manager do the same math I had, and got
> > > that register closed down until the weights and measures people had
> > > come in to retest that scale.
>
> > > My one moment of glory.<G>
>
> > That's very rare... those electronic scales at the register cost many
> > thousands of dollars each and are extremely accurate and sensitive...
> > and also have built-in warning devices that disable a scale if there's
> > any malfunction (it will even flash the particular malfunction, like
> > if there's too much liquid on the scale, or some item falls
> > underneath). Â*And the weights and measures inspectors come around to
> > test and recalibrate if needed very often, with many stores on a daily
> > basis. Â*No store is going to purposely mess with those scales... there
> > are very stiff fines and serious prison time. Â*In fact most stores buy
> > a service contract from the scale manufacturer which includes an
> > insurance portion protecting from error liability, so the manufactures
> > come around very often to check their products too.
>
> The inspectors in our area tend to come on a yearly basis.

I seriously doubt that. I think Federal Law mandates a minimum
monthly inspection, but the local W & M inspectors arrive much more
often (job insurance plays a big role), with some large high traffic
stores, like Walmart, there's always an inspector on premises.. many
of Walmart stores have in excess of one hundred scales, by the time
all the scales are checked it's time to start all over again.


> > Now the spring scales at the produce section are not intended for
> > precise weight, normal brained folks don't care if the grapes they
> > weigh are off a half ounce... those are guestimate scales, those
> > grapes will still get weighed at the register... and better than 50
> > pct of shoppers will have eaten a goodly amount before ever getting to
> > the register.
>
> If they're off by half an ounce, I'd be fine with them. Â*The ones in
> most of the local stores, and the chains, tend to be off by a good
> deal more than that!

I seriously doubt that too... I was being generous with the half
ounce... the W & M folks inspect those scales too, just not
necessarily as often. I typically use those scales to weigh bagged
produce like mushrooms, potatoes and carrots, those typically don't
contain the marked weight, I've found five pound bags of carrots off
by as much as a half pound either way, so I weigh to choose one that's
over by the most... If I weigh like 5-6 bags and all weigh differently
then I know it's the carrots and not the scale. I find packaged
mushrooms are often way off too, when light they are usually old,
they've lost moisture... a pack should always weigh a little over the
marked weight because the marked weight allows for the packaging...
it's illegal to charge for the weight of packaging. Some delis slip
in extra waxed paper, when they get caught the fine is hefty. How
many of yoose weigh the wrapped meat from the butcher case, I bet
hardly any... try it you'll be in for a surprise... and you'd be
amazed at how many actually pre-wet those moisture absorbant pads.

> Now that some stores are coming up with those "scan as you shop"
> devices, there is a decent scale in the produce section, that spits
> out a label for your produce when you weigh it.

That I haven't seen... seems to me that would create more problems.

Food stores don't mess with their scales... records of inspections
show too many dispareties they will put a lock on the door. In the US
The Bureau of Weights and Measures is very serious business... they
catch a gas station short selling they shut them down, they catch a
fuel truck running with a ticket in the meter the driver and the owner
go to prison.

But for every safe guard instituted there are soon many devious ways
to circumvent it... buyer beware is still the only real defense.

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 06:29:06 -0700 (PDT), maxine in ri
> wrote:

>That was, btw the way I found out that the scales at the registers
>were not accurate. Made the people in line behind me angry, but I
>raised a ruckus, insisted the manager do the same math I had, and got
>that register closed down until the weights and measures people had
>come in to retest that scale.
>
>My one moment of glory.<G>

YAY! Go getum, girl!


--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 06:29:06 -0700 (PDT), maxine in ri
> wrote:

>On Apr 11, 6:36 pm, "jmcquown" > wrote:

>> I've noticed scales seem to be disappearing from a lot of produce
>> departments. They don't want people to figure out it isn't a "deal" until
>> it's rung up at the checkout. Most people are too timid to say take that
>> off, I'm not paying $5 for a cantaloupe!
>>
>> Jill
>
>The reason scales are disappearing is more likely related to their
>grossly inaccurate rendering of the approximate weight that they
>display. I'm rude when it comes to that, taking my produce purchase
>over to the deli and reaching over to weigh them on their scales for a
>more accurate reading.
>
>That was, btw the way I found out that the scales at the registers
>were not accurate. Made the people in line behind me angry, but I
>raised a ruckus, insisted the manager do the same math I had, and got
>that register closed down until the weights and measures people had
>come in to retest that scale.
>
>My one moment of glory.<G>
>
>maxine in ri

how odd. i thought the register and deli scales were tested and
calibrated fairly regularly by the state or other government entity.
the scales in the produce aisles, probably not so much.

your pal,
blake

Janet Baraclough wrote:
> > James Silverton wrote:
>
> �I saw some large navel
> > > oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> > > it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> > > arithmetic.
>
> � �Sadly. huge numbers of people today are incapable of the most basic
> mental arithmetic.

What if you bought ten oranges, and after a week the last two were
rotted... that happens with produce, very often... when produce goes
on those volume sales it's far more often because it's ready to go off
than there's a glut.

Actually a far greater percentage of people today than ever are
capable of arithmetic... reading/writing too. Far more people today
receive an eduction than ever before and a far better education...
perhaps you don't associate with educated people, I have a strong
suspician you don't, otherwise you'd not be so reactive regarding
things you know nothing about... the uneducated tend to shoot from the
hip, they don't think first.. very prevalent with newsgroup posters
who typically race to reply, and often, especially about topics of
which they know nothing.

I think most shopppers do very well with calculating pricing, actually
too well. But many of today's marketing tactics are about placement
strategies, ego stroking, and impulse buying, but have little to do
with a patron's mathematical abilities. Most people, in the US
anyway, buy food items based more on what they need at the moment
rather than based exclusively on price... not many people are going to
drive all over town just because they can save a few pennies on a few
items... most folks in the US are smart enough to realize that when a
store prices meat a dollar less per pound that the items that go with
that particular meat are priced higher than usual, but not many are
going to drive miles to save 20 cents on onions, mushrooms, potatoes,
canned beans, etc.. most folks in the US value their time much more
than saving a dime on soda pop... and with the high cost of energy
today it never pays to go the drive-by shopping routine. And anyway
all stores have sales, and over time by shopping primarily at any one
stupidmarket the yearly grocery bill tends to even out... so Americans
tend to possess better abilities at logical deduction and more common
sense too... becoming trapped in the picayune aspects of the math is
precisely what the marketing gurus hope for, their goal is to coerce
shoppers into buying volume... the shopper doesn't get nearly the
volume discount the store does. Next time you see a 2fer, 5fer or
10fer sale even if it costs a few cents less, think more about if you
really need that many instead of computing the math.... because if
just one doesn't get used you're a loser. Whenever you buy more
volume and larger sizes than you can possibly use in a reasonable time
you are not only investing your dollars into non interest bearing
commodities but you are losing the use of your capital (actually
transfering it to the store for free), and you have to warehouse all
that bulk on your shelves, in your fridge, in your freezer. which
frees up the store's shelves and saves them money (you become a free
warehouser, but also a goodly portion will often spoil before you can
use it). People tend to prepare larger amounts than they can
reasonably use just because they have the extra volume on hand,
especially with the larger sizes... then the leftovers end up in the
trash and then not only have you saved nothing but if you do the math
you'll discover that you actually come out in a much poorer position
than had you NOT did the math originally that coerced you to buy that
ten pound sack of spuds instead of the five pounds... you innitially
saved 50 cents but three weeks later tossed three pounds into the
composter. You know where you can shove your pence pinching math.

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 07:19:21 -0700 (PDT), Sheldon >
wrote:

>Janet Baraclough wrote:
>> > James Silverton wrote:
>>
>> ?I saw some large navel
>> > > oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
>> > > it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
>> > > arithmetic.
>>
>> ? ?Sadly. huge numbers of people today are incapable of the most basic
>> mental arithmetic.
>
>What if you bought ten oranges, and after a week the last two were
>rotted... that happens with produce, very often... when produce goes
>on those volume sales it's far more often because it's ready to go off
>than there's a glut.
>
>Actually a far greater percentage of people today than ever are
>capable of arithmetic... reading/writing too. Far more people today
>receive an eduction than ever before and a far better education...
>perhaps you don't associate with educated people, I have a strong
>suspician you don't, otherwise you'd not be so reactive regarding
>things you know nothing about... the uneducated tend to shoot from the
>hip, they don't think first.. very prevalent with newsgroup posters
>who typically race to reply, and often, especially about topics of
>which they know nothing.
>
>I think most shopppers do very well with calculating pricing, actually
>too well. But many of today's marketing tactics are about placement
>strategies, ego stroking, and impulse buying, but have little to do
>with a patron's mathematical abilities. Most people, in the US
>anyway, buy food items based more on what they need at the moment
>rather than based exclusively on price... not many people are going to
>drive all over town just because they can save a few pennies on a few
>items... most folks in the US are smart enough to realize that when a
>store prices meat a dollar less per pound that the items that go with
>that particular meat are priced higher than usual, but not many are
>going to drive miles to save 20 cents on onions, mushrooms, potatoes,
>canned beans, etc.. most folks in the US value their time much more
>than saving a dime on soda pop... and with the high cost of energy
>today it never pays to go the drive-by shopping routine. And anyway
>all stores have sales, and over time by shopping primarily at any one
>stupidmarket the yearly grocery bill tends to even out... so Americans
>tend to possess better abilities at logical deduction and more common
>sense too... becoming trapped in the picayune aspects of the math is
>precisely what the marketing gurus hope for, their goal is to coerce
>shoppers into buying volume... the shopper doesn't get nearly the
>volume discount the store does. Next time you see a 2fer, 5fer or
>10fer sale even if it costs a few cents less, think more about if you
>really need that many instead of computing the math.... because if
>just one doesn't get used you're a loser. Whenever you buy more
>volume and larger sizes than you can possibly use in a reasonable time
>you are not only investing your dollars into non interest bearing
>commodities but you are losing the use of your capital (actually
>transfering it to the store for free), and you have to warehouse all
>that bulk on your shelves, in your fridge, in your freezer. which
>frees up the store's shelves and saves them money (you become a free
>warehouser, but also a goodly portion will often spoil before you can
>use it). People tend to prepare larger amounts than they can
>reasonably use just because they have the extra volume on hand,
>especially with the larger sizes... then the leftovers end up in the
>trash and then not only have you saved nothing but if you do the math
>you'll discover that you actually come out in a much poorer position
>than had you NOT did the math originally that coerced you to buy that
>ten pound sack of spuds instead of the five pounds... you innitially
>saved 50 cents but three weeks later tossed three pounds into the
>composter. You know where you can shove your pence pinching math.


I am very fortunate that our regular grocery store charges by the
item, even when price at 2 for or 10 for. If the price is 3 for $.99
and the regular price is $.40, I can buy 1 for $.33, I do not have to
buy 3 to get the lower price.
--
Susan N.

"Moral indignation is in most cases two percent moral,
48 percent indignation, and 50 percent envy."
Vittorio De Sica, Italian movie director (1901-1974)

"The Cook" > wrote

> I am very fortunate that our regular grocery store charges by the
> item, even when price at 2 for or 10 for. If the price is 3 for $.99
> and the regular price is $.40, I can buy 1 for $.33, I do not have to
> buy 3 to get the lower price.

Same at "my" store, but before it was taken over by another
chain, sometimes 10 for $10 meant $1 each, other times you had
to buy 10 to get that price. It was a mystery until you checked
out which way it was. I'm not so quick to judge people who don't
know they can buy fewer than 10 for that reason.

nancy

>On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 07:19:21 -0700 (PDT), Sheldon >
>wrote:
>> Far more people today
>>receive an eduction than ever before and a far better education...
>>perhaps you don't associate with educated people, I have a strong
>>suspician you don't, otherwise you'd not be so reactive regarding
>>things you know nothing about... the uneducated tend to shoot from the
>>hip, they don't think first.. very prevalent with newsgroup posters
>>who typically race to reply, and often, especially about topics of
>>which they know nothing.
>>

stop, sheldon, you're killing me!

your pal,
blake

Janet Baraclough wrote:
>You can still
> catch it in google.

But you will need to be quick

Janet Baraclough > wrote:
>>
> � Sheldon, it's sweet and almost flattering the way you read and learn
> from my posts here, but regurgitating �my words of wisdom three days
> later as your own ideas just makes you look like teacher's rather dim
> pet. What you posted above, is a rehash of what I wrote on April 9th in
> the thread called "saving money while eating well". You can still catch
> it in google. But here it is anyway, just to remind you that
> plagiarising makes Sheldon look dim and lazy/


I don't plagiarise anyone's posts, never have, that's not my style...
I do just fine penning my own. I've never read your post, in fact I
didn't read it now, and never intend to. I hope you're not offended
but I don't look to read your posts, in fact I typically never read
any posts originating from the UK, they've nothing worthwhile
concerning food/cooking,.. I ain't interested in all the ways to build
cucumber sandwiches and how to ruin beef. And I detest tea (pond
water), so for all I care you can shove high tea up your bloody low
slung fat arse.

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 11:13:47 +0100, Janet Baraclough
> wrote:

>IOW, when they see "10 for 10 dollars", many customers DON'T know that
>means, a dollar each, and smkts know it.

or they only want *one* orange and don't care that it's costing them a
dollar.

--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

Janet Baraclough wrote:
>> James Silverton wrote:
>>
> I saw some large navel
>>> oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
>>> it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
>>> arithmetic.
>
> Sadly. huge numbers of people today are incapable of the most basic
> mental arithmetic. The best they can do is poke a finger at a button.
> Even though their calculator will tell them what is 10 percent of X,
> they are no wiser because they literally don't comprehend the meaning
> of words such as "percent", "division" " one tenth", etc.
>
> IOW, when they see "10 for 10 dollars", many customers DON'T know that
> means, a dollar each, and smkts know it.
>
> Janet


They milk it for all it's worth, too.

I've seen signs in the produce department with print
in the critical area so small you almost need a
magnifying glass to see if the sign says 10 for $10
or 10# for $10. And yes, loss leaders are so
irrational these days it could be either one.

gloria p

On 2008-04-12, Puester > wrote:

> or 10# for $10. And yes, loss leaders are so
> irrational these days it could be either one.

I've seen some killers, though. Right now our store is having a monster
unit pricing sale. 10 for $10/15/20/25, but you have to buy 10 or no deal.
But, the savings are monster. One example of the 10/$15 is Kraft 1lb
American Singles. I've never ever seen them even close to $1.50 pkg, the
usual price being above $4. I'm almost glad I don't have the $$. I'd eat
myself sick on the damn things.... probably die of grilled cheese poisoning!

nb

In article >,
says...
>
>
> > James Silverton wrote:
> >
> I saw some large navel
> > > oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
> > > it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
> > > arithmetic.
>
> Sadly. huge numbers of people today are incapable of the most basic
> mental arithmetic. The best they can do is poke a finger at a button.
> Even though their calculator will tell them what is 10 percent of X,
> they are no wiser because they literally don't comprehend the meaning
> of words such as "percent", "division" " one tenth", etc.
>
> IOW, when they see "10 for 10 dollars", many customers DON'T know that
> means, a dollar each, and smkts know it.
>
> Janet
>

Yes I've noticed that too. I can do flash math even when I'm shopping I
know what my total will be pretty much to the dollar level. I use
rounding in that process and it serves me well.

I do know how to calculate the unit vs. item pricing. It's funny,
someone asked me why I was studying something on a shelf and I explained
the unit pricing made the larger size more economical than the smaller
size. It was like a lightbuld went off over someones head.

T wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>>
>>
>>> James Silverton wrote:
>>>
>> I saw some large navel
>>>> oranges marked "10 for....." That looked interesting until I saw
>>>> it was "10 for $10" or a dollar each. Don't people do the simple
>>>> arithmetic.
>>
>> Sadly. huge numbers of people today are incapable of the most
>> basic mental arithmetic. The best they can do is poke a finger at a
>> button. Even though their calculator will tell them what is 10
>> percent of X, they are no wiser because they literally don't
>> comprehend the meaning of words such as "percent", "division" " one
>> tenth", etc.
>>
>> IOW, when they see "10 for 10 dollars", many customers DON'T know
>> that means, a dollar each, and smkts know it.
>>
>> Janet
>>
>
> Yes I've noticed that too. I can do flash math even when I'm shopping
> I know what my total will be pretty much to the dollar level. I use
> rounding in that process and it serves me well.
>
> I do know how to calculate the unit vs. item pricing. It's funny,
> someone asked me why I was studying something on a shelf and I
> explained the unit pricing made the larger size more economical than
> the smaller size. It was like a lightbuld went off over someones head.
>
Yep, people will look at you funny if you don't automatically grab the
smaller jar/box/container just because it has a big SALE sticker. Many
times the larger pkg. is the better deal. Of course, that's also if it's
something you'd normally purchase or have a need for.

Jill

On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 08:53:53 -0400, "jmcquown" >
wrote:

> Many times the larger pkg. is the better deal.

but don't count on it as a hard and fast rule. Sometimes it's not.


--
See return address to reply by email
remove the smile first

sf wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 08:53:53 -0400, "jmcquown" >
> wrote:
>
>> Many times the larger pkg. is the better deal.
>
> but don't count on it as a hard and fast rule. Sometimes it's not.
>
That's why we were talking about *calculating* the price.

In article >,
T > wrote:

> someone asked me why I was studying something on a shelf and I explained
> the unit pricing made the larger size more economical than the smaller
> size. It was like a lightbuld went off over someones head.

I like it when the smaller size is more economical than the larger size.
It happens.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/amytaylor
She's had good news! Hurrah!

Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> In article >,
> T > wrote:
>
>> someone asked me why I was studying something on a shelf and I
>> explained the unit pricing made the larger size more economical than
>> the smaller size. It was like a lightbuld went off over someones
>> head.
>
> I like it when the smaller size is more economical than the larger
> size. It happens.

In the supermarkets I visit, the unit price is shown

Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> In article >,
> T > wrote:
>
>> someone asked me why I was studying something on a shelf and I
>> explained the unit pricing made the larger size more economical than
>> the smaller size. It was like a lightbuld went off over someones
>> head.
>
> I like it when the smaller size is more economical than the larger
> size. It happens.
>
Depends on the item, though. And the larger size often isn't that much
larger

In article >,
"jmcquown" > wrote:

> Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> > I like it when the smaller size is more economical than the larger
> > size. It happens.
> >
> Depends on the item, though. And the larger size often isn't that much
> larger

I like it when the smaller size is more economical than the larger size.
It often makes storage easier.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/amytaylor
She's had good news! Hurrah!

On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 00:09:18 -0400, T >
wrote:
>
>I do know how to calculate the unit vs. item pricing. It's funny,
>someone asked me why I was studying something on a shelf and I explained
>the unit pricing made the larger size more economical than the smaller
>size. It was like a lightbuld went off over someones head.

the chain groceries in my area (md) are pretty good about providing
unit pricing (i.e. cost per ounce, etc.). i don't think it's mandated
by law, but they have found it to be good for customer relations.

but it does **** me off that a lot of specialty items (your
gourmet-type stuff) aren't marked on the shelf. there are two u.p.c.
scanners available to customers in the supermarket i shop at (giant),
one of which actually works, but it's a nuisance.

your pal,
blake