One would think, considering Americans’ sudden love of all things whole-grain, that the classic General Mills cereal Wheaties would be doing well. Instead, sales of the cereal have been falling for years, and no one seems interested in other cereals under the Wheaties brand. It’s all because the cereal is simultaneously boring and not boring enough. [More]
You wouldn’t feed your kids Twinkies for breakfast (right?), so the news that some cereals aimed at kids have more sugar than those processed yellow bits of foam food is a bit disturbing. As Americans get more obese by the day, a new study warns of the sugary punch packed in many cereals. [More]
You don’t have to show a proof of purchase to claim $15 in a class action lawsuit against Kellogg. Just be someone who bought Kellog’s Rice Krispies or Cocoa Krispies between June 1, 2009 and March, 1 2010. [More]
Some breakfast cereals from the past now seem like deeply questionable marketing ideas. Or amazing ones. All (okay, most) of the cereals in this gallery were probably delicious, but few are still around. It’s usually obvious why. [More]
We love football player/reality star/social media whore Chad Ochocinco (nee Johnson), even if he plays for he Bengals. In fact, we’d buy his Ochocinco’s cereal if it were available here in NYC. Alas, it’s not… And now it’s being taken off shelves at grocery stores in Ohio because a phone number intended to push people to a kids charity actually belongs to a phone sex line. [More]
Breakfast cereals may be a delicious way to start your day, but they aren’t drugs. Unfortunately, that mere fact hasn’t stopped food companies from marketing cereals based on their amazing health effects. In fact, as we’ve reported before, the more health claims on a cereal box, the more likely it is to be really bad for you. Here are a few amusing examples from around the world. [More]
Personal finance blogger Len Penzo doesn’t have a minivan full of highly trained tasters at his disposal like our siblings at Consumer Reports. When he set out to compare generic and name-brand cereals, he found something even better. He rounded up the small children of his neighborhood, and subjected them to a blind cereal taste-test. [More]
Phill tells Consumerist that he saw a pricing error on cereal at his local Safeway, and brought it to the attention of store employees. In the process, he tried to invoke Safeway’s price guarantee. After all, if the cereal was marked 28 cents per pound (instead of 28 cents per ounce, as it should have been) why shouldn’t Phill be able to buy it at that price? Yet the store employees would hear none of it. [More]
Kellogg decided that it isn’t such a good idea to pretend Cocoa Krispies build your immunity.
A new Yale report finds that cereal companies spent $156 million per year marketing to children, and most of that money gets plowed into pushing the sugariest cereals, which they try to pretend are healthy.
We don’t recommend keeping your savings in your pantry, but in case you were wondering, here’s how much money you can fit into an Apple Jacks box. [Slate]
Late last month, a U.S. District Court judge dismissed a complaint filed by a woman who said she’d been buying Cap’n Crunch’s Crunch Berries cereal for four years under the assumption that crunchberries are a real berry. “The plaintiff, Janine Sugawara, alleged that she had only recently learned to her dismay that said ‘berries’ were in fact simply brightly-colored cereal balls.”
-That’s why you’re a junior account manager, Chuck. You don’t think outside the box.
Supposedly, Kellogg’s “brand reputation” is in the gutter after canning Phelps over the pot photo, slipping from #9 to #83 in a list of 5,600 companies. We’d believe it more if this “reputation index” chart from Vanno, a brand index company, didn’t look like someone was given PowerPoint and 3 minutes and told to produce some convincing evidence for a press release.
Dan can do math in his head, which is a great skill these days when you’re checking out the n objects for x price! specials at Target. In this case, Dan notes that the “temporary price cut” is so temporary that it doesn’t even exist: you’ll pay 13 cents more per box if you buy three of them. This is the third Target “special” we’ve seen this month that screws the consumer. Are we seeing a new trend? Is it legal to call it a price cut if it’s not?