Comments on: The betrayal by Cadbury

By: FastLife

FastLife — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 05:20:29 +0000

I agree James, over time the cost of the raw ingredients do go up. But rather than be honest about it and put the prices up to cover the increased costs, they tend to try to hide it by changing the size of the product in small easily hidden increments, or in the case of this latest cadbury change, in complete repackaging. Why pretend, “We aren’t really putting our prices up” when they clearly are.

Any one who is into chocolate understands that world cocoa production is decreasing, despite increased demand by a larger world population, so obviously prices are going to go up. That is find. Just be up-front about it with your customers, that is all we ask!

By: James

James — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 05:08:59 +0000

To give Cadbury’s side they will say it’s not because they are trying to drive more profit but because the increase in global sugar and cocoa prices leave them with a stark choice.

A) Increase the price to cover the higher raw materials costs , or B) Mantain the price by decreasing the size and thus using less raw materials.

Customers notice price rises more than smaller packets so the option chosen is often B, but it’s not quite as black and white as them trying to make huge profits at our expense.

By: kareena

kareena — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 10:59:36 +0000

Omg’ this is the same thing i being going on about for ages and cadbury on facebook have been saying no no.

By: Michael Costello

Michael Costello — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 02:41:43 +0000

Damn them to HELL!!!

KFC did the same thing with the Colonel Burger years ago and I’m sure the same applies to the Wagon Wheel.

And while I’m on it this new unit based pricing (in QLD) looked like a great idea until now as the 2 for 1 and 3 for 2 make it difficult to see where the value is. Plus I note not all products have the unit pricing. ARGH!!

The other ‘trick’ is to cram products together on a shelf (like bread) and have the price tags on the shelf all misaligned so where you see 2 for $5 for example if you don’t read very carefully which brand that applies to you can easily grab the wrong brand and pay the full price at the counter.

The big producers have NO respect for the customer.

By: FastLife

FastLife — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 00:37:05 +0000

Yes I agree, Ryan. Different component will certainly weigh different amounts for the same volume. I was comparing these new blocks with the previous blocks in which each flavour was the same weight and cost the same price. Now each flavour is a different weight but still cost the same price. It is a way of getting just that little bit more from the customer.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 12:21:24 +0000

I’m not sure that your assumptions about Cadbury’s chocolate are correct here. Sure, we all know that they are downsizing the amount we’re receiving, but in that picture above you show three different flavours of chocolate. Can’t it be expected that there would be weight differences due to the filling inside? For example, honeycomb is definately lighter than milk chocolate and the picture would seem to agree with that fact. Just suggesting that you review your facts first.

By: Richo

Richo — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:08:12 +0000

Interesting, I am interested to know what the facts are behind the glass and a 1/2 in each block. Does it really refer to a 200 gram block?

By: Patricia

Patricia — Fri, 29 May 2009 03:18:49 +0000

Cadbury should hang it’s head in shame. I will certainly reconsider any Cadbury purchase from now on. Maybe Nestles should rethink their product and put out a 250 gram chocolate in competition? I would certainly buy it! Thanks for looking out for these resizing rip offs.