<![CDATA[Consumerist: Deception]]> http://cache.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/consumerist.com.png <![CDATA[Consumerist: Deception]]> http://consumerist.com/tag/deception http://consumerist.com/tag/deception <![CDATA[ Banzai Wild Waves Water Park Box Picture Vs Reality ]]> Hey kids, want to spend the summer with five of your friends in your very own backyard pool? Then stay the hell away from Banzai's Wild Waves Water Park! David Ng juxtaposed Banzai's box art with a picture of his disappointed kids standing next to the fully assembled "water park." He wasn't the only one deceived, according to the reviews on Amazon...

Here are several representative snippets:

"I have two preschoolers (ages 2 and 4) and this pool is just the right size for them."

"It is the worst product I'd ever bought from Toys R US and I'll never go to Six Flags! Don't buy it."

"One person can't slide down the slide while one person is in the pool let alone have 2 people sitting in it! The slide is so small and when you turn on the hose to let the sprinklers come down the orange top collapses and has no use!"

"As every one else has said this pool is tiny maybe good for 1 or 2 toddlers. Picture on the front is NOT accurate. A 6 year old can't go down the slide with his legs out because they hit the wall. My 3 year old hardly fit. Buy a sprinkler for $5.00 my kids had more fun with that."

The box admonishes buyers "product may not be as appears on image;" a gross understatement for a gross distortion.

SPIN SPIN SPIN [Popper Font] (Thanks to Paul!)
Banzai Complete Water Park [Amazon]
(Photo: davehwng)

]]>
Consumerist-5031698 Sat, 02 Aug 2008 00:00:01 EDT Carey http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5031698&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ This Colgate Toothpaste Packaging Is Awfully Deceptive ]]> Logan thought this bonus pack of Colgate contained two equally-sized tubes of toothpaste. After all, the boxes are exactly the same size. Yet when he opened the bonus box, he found a smaller box containing a mini tube of toothpaste.

Logan writes:

I bought some toothpaste last night as my wife an I had been surviving on tiny, dentist-issued travel tubes for the past couple weeks. We're lazy, so to save ourselves the trip after the next big tube was gone, I decided to buy a double pack of toothpaste. Thinking that the marginal savings of bundled toothpaste was the way to go, I grabbed a healthy sounding combo and was one may way. When I got home though, I was in for a big surprise. When I pulled the "Bonus" tube out of its box, it was actually in another, smaller box. Whaaaaat? Why the double boxing? Was it for packaging reasons? Or was it to hide the widespread reach and effectiveness of the the product shrink ray?

This isn't the feared Grocery Shrink Ray. This is deception, pure and simple. The weasels running Colgate's marketing team stuck to the law by printing the net weight on both boxes, but they clearly want consumers to assume that the boxes are the same size.

Way to waste an extra box, Colgate!

]]>
Consumerist-5024618 Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:15:41 EDT Carey http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5024618&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Readers Write In With Examples Of More Shrinking Products ]]> con_tinytp%26pb.jpg Brawny's not the only product skimping on size to sneakily increase profits. Here are two more items readers have noticed recently.
 
Henry writes:
Our house uses Skippy Peanut Butter, but i just found out they changed their jars from 18 ounces to 16.2 ounces for the same price. I know 2 ounces is not a huge amount of peanut better, but still.
And Matt writes:
I have noticed this same thing with Quilted Northern. I don't know what the price used to be but i noticed while shopping at sams club now you get less quilted northern than you used to.
If you know of another company that's downsized a product without passing along the savings, let us know. Maybe we can put together a single reference post so shoppers will see which products are the worst offenders.

RELATED
"Brawny Paper Towels Shrink By 20% While Price Goes up 6%"

]]>
Consumerist-369993 Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:51:19 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=369993&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Brawny Paper Towels Shrink By 20% While Price Goes up 6% ]]> Yet another common product has been hit with the shrinking ray—this time it's Brawny paper towels, which Jason noticed recently received a new package design, apparently to disguise that there are now fewer sheets and a higher price.

Today at the store I picked up some Brawny paper towels. Specifically, the 8 roll pick-a-size ones. I try to use paper towels only for really messy stuff like coffee grounds and stuff. These are nice since the area of each towel is smaller than most other ones, so I don't have to use a big towel for a small spill. Anyway, I noticed they changed the package design, as well as that the price increased from $5.98, which is what it's been for the 6+ months I've been buying this brand, to $6.36.
 
After I got home I compared the dimensions listed on the package to those listed on the previous package of Brawny 8 roll pick a size paper towels that I purchased. On the previous package of Brawny paper towels that I purchased it says that each roll has 110 2-ply paper towels and a total area of 403.3 square feet. On the new package of Brawny paper towels it says that each roll has 88 2-ply paper towels and a total area of 322.6 square feet. So the price went up 6%, while the number and area of the paper towels on each roll decreased by 20%.
 
On the package of the new Brawny paper towels it claims that they're now softer & thicker. I don't know who cares about the softness of paper towels, and if anything the new ones seem less soft. They do seem slightly thicker, though, although the difference is minimal.
This is one of those small-but-offensive ways companies screw over their customers, by sneaking in price increases disguised as reformulated products or packaging. We know why they do it—so nobody can accuse them of suddenly hiking the price by 25%—but we wish new package designs had to clearly display price/size differences between the new product and the previous for, say, a six month period.

RELATED
"General Mill Will Decrease The Size Of Cereal Boxes, Raise Prices"
"Dial Full Force Soap Bars Now 10% Smaller"
"New Taller Honey Nut Cheerios Box Is 15 Oz Lighter"
"Cadbury: Our Eggs Aren't Smaller, You Are Bigger"
"Charmin Rolls Out Shorter Ultra Big Rolls"

]]>
Consumerist-369489 Wed, 19 Mar 2008 15:04:17 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=369489&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ San Diego Union Tribune Tries To Trick Customers Into Renewing By Demanding Payment For "Unpaid Bill" ]]> Dean writes:

I received a call yesterday from my newspaper (the San Diego Union Tribune). The nice young man on the phone told me that I had an unpaid bill, and if I liked, he could take care of that over the phone with me right then. I take a certain amount of pride in paying all my bills promptly, so my first impulse was to go ahead and get it taken care of asap. But after the first few seconds of surprise and confusion, I got suspicious.

Usually you pay for subscriptions like this up front, so I asked the young man if this was really a past due bill, and he had implied, or a subscription renewal. He sheepishly admitted that yes, he was trying to get me to renew my subscription. I immediately declined, and silently vowed to never subscribe to their paper again (we get most of our news on the internet anyway, so no big loss).

At first I thought it was just some kid free-styling with the script a little to try to bump his numbers, but then later that same day I get another call, this one from a young woman, using the exact same script. The newspaper folks must be getting desperate to sink to such tactics. It's just sad to see such devious tactics from such a large and respected company.

Those poor newspapers, still struggling to cope with 18% profit margins. Thank heavens FCC Chairman Kevin Martin swept in on spectacled dragon of deregulation to allow papers to buy up other media outlets so they won't have to rely on sneaky renewal practices.

Ask for an itemized bill if a company makes a questionable request for payment. Don't forget to mention that sending baseless requests for money constitutes mail fraud, a federal crime.

(Photo: stickywikit)

]]>
Consumerist-365441 Sat, 08 Mar 2008 09:12:09 EST Carey http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=365441&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Best Buy Still Embracing Deceptive In-Store Kiosks ]]> Best Buy still uses a secret internal website to deceive customers, according to the L.A. Times. The website appearing on in-store kiosks resembles Best Buy's official site in every way, except for the prices. Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal was surprised to hear that his investigation failed to end Best Buy's bait-and-switch, telling the L.A. Times: "We thought Best Buy had addressed this. That's what they said to us. Apparently that's not the case." A tipster in Virginia also reports the continued existence of the secret website.

According to our tipster:

Not that anyone should be surprised, but Best Buy is still at it.

My wife spent several hours at home researching digital picture frames online, and Best Buy actually had the best price on one, as well as being the only way to get it in time for Christmas. Last night we went to our local Fairfax, Virginia, Best Buy. They didn't have the frame at first, and I actually have to commend the staff, they searched for about 30 minutes because one of them thought he had seen it somewhere. They finally came up with one, the Kodak EasyShare EX1011. I took it to a different station and asked them to price check it, and it came up at $255.99, well over the $234.49 that was listed online.

We went to one of their public computer terminals and searched it and it came up at the $255.99, no surprise.

iPhone to the rescue. At first it was showing the $255 price on my iPhones browser, then I realized it was connected through WiFi, so they have it blocking the external Best Buy site and feeding the fake one. I disabled WiFi and searched again and bam, there it was, $234.99.

The electronics department said I had to go to customer service for such a thing, and they promptly took care of the price change.

Keep up the great work, Consumerist.

The L.A. Times called Best Buy's pen of Pinocchios to provide an explanation:
[Sue Busch, a Best Buy spokeswoman] said the kiosks were never intended "for price-match purposes," but admitted that "a small percentage of customers did not receive a price match when they should have due to errors in policy execution."
What is a "small percentage of customers?" Maybe a Best Buy salesman in California can clarify:
"Every day we get at least one person asking why he can't find a price he saw online," the salesman replied.

I said I was looking for a DVD player I'd seen online that was selling for $71.99. I said it wasn't on the kiosk site.

"Here," the salesman said, "let me show you a secret."

He switched to a different screen, typed in his employee I.D. number, and the real Bestbuy.com came up. "Try now," the salesman said.

I asked why the real website wasn't available to everyone.

He shrugged. "I wish I knew."

Maybe that's something California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown should also be wondering.

Best Buy kiosks not connected to Internet [L.A. Times]
(AP Photo/Paul Sakuma)
PREVIOUSLY:
Best Buy's Secret "Employee Only" In-Store Website Shows Different Prices Than Public Website

Best Buy Confirms The Existence Of Its Secret Website
UPDATE: Best Buy Still Using Its Secret Website ]]>
Consumerist-337161 Sun, 23 Dec 2007 15:45:07 EST Carey http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=337161&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Dial Full Force Soap Bars Now 10% Smaller ]]> The latest installment of quietly shrinking packages arrives care of Dial's Full Force Soap Bar. Once 4.5 ounces per bar, Dial now packs a mere 4 ounces of sudsy splendor.

Downsizing is a sneaky way to pass on a price increase because you are getting less for your money but may not catch the change. As is typical for many downsized products, the manufacturer diverts your attention from the net weight statement to something else "new". In this case, they are calling it a "new grip bar" because ridges have been carved into it.
Soap bars are supposed to shrink in the shower, not on the shelf.

Dial Soap: The Incredible Shrinking Bar [Mouseprint]

]]>
Consumerist-321295 Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:22:46 EST Carey http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=321295&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Prevented From Calling Your Produce USDA Certified Organic By Federal Law? Call It "Artisan Naturals" Instead ]]> Die%20Evil%20Fraud%20Carrots.jpgStemilt Growers can't call its produce USDA Certified Organic until they grow without chemicals for three years, but that isn't stopping them from branding their produce "Artisan Naturals" in the interim. The three year chemical-free transition period is marked by insect infestations, infertile soil, and poor crop quality, which conspire to ravage a farm's profitability. Stemilt, one of the nation's largest apple growers, is hoping that consumers will pay a price premium for "natural" produce, which will likely be confused for USDA certified organic produce.
The orchard is in its second year of transition to organic, but the fruit will be sold under Stemilt's Artisan Naturals label, promoting its naturally farmed history.

"On produce, food safety is an expectation, and I think the organic sector has higher expectations and we understand that, but we think for naturally farmed products, the first expectation is flavor," said Roger Pepperl, Stemilt director of marketing. "We get a little more because it's a premium product, and we position it as being a premium product.

"But people assume good things when they hear natural, naturally farmed," he said.

Stemilt expects only 25% of its apple crop to qualify for organic certification in the next ten years. It is a shame to see the notoriously flimsy USDA certification process treated as a lofty aspirational standard thanks to deceptive marketing efforts like "artisan naturals."

Almost-organic fruit may still fetch a pretty penny [AP]
(AP Photo/Elaine Thompson)

]]>
Consumerist-297734 Sat, 08 Sep 2007 10:20:05 EDT Carey http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=297734&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ It's A Matter Of Degree. Of Bullpoopy ]]> Josh is mad because they took away his favorite Degree 'Shower Cleaner' Unisex Deodorant. It smelled clean and fresh and the world was right. In its place are two different deodorants, one for men and one for women, each of which have their gender-specific smells. They stink.

He wrote Unilever, inquiring why they can't, "stick with the products that don't suck donkey sack?"

Uniliver, in its response, contends that the Women's version is the same as the unisex one Josh loved. But Josh has tried that one, and his nose knows different.

The heated exchange between the erstwhile lovers, inside.

Related: Sure Deodorant Is The Same As Secret


"Hi. I had been buying the Degree 'shower clean' unisex deodorant for over seven years up until it's sudden replacement with "new and improved" men and women specific products several months ago. As a male I appreciated the simplicity of the original product. It didn't smell like spices or cleaning products like every other deodorant marketed towards men. It smelled good.

Ever since the disappearance of the original unisex product from every known store, I first tried the similar looking 'shower clean' now labeled 'Women". I took it home, and it smelled awful in my opinion so I threw it away. I have a small stockpile of the travel-sized sticks of the original 'shower clean' (as the stores still have those in stock), as well as a full stick that some neglected convenience store still had in stock.

More recently I was excited to see what appeared to be the original unisex 'shower clean' (not labeled with what sex you had to be in order to purchase!) in a new click-wheel container. While it is close to the original, it is also not quite right. While certainly better than the horrible Degree 'Men' ones I smelled at the store, it is still not the original. When I compare the ingredient lists on the back of the original 'shower clean' I have, and the new inferior one, there are differences, which I assume is responsible for the different smell. My question then is, why tinker with a good product?

Furthermore, when I went to www.degreedeodorant.com just now to find out how to, well, complain, I instead found some nice comic relief in your new marketing campaign.

The homepage is divided into 'women' and 'men', to polarize the consumer immediately into women, who simply need only to observe the product, rest assured that it's "Ultra Clear" and the men, who are invited to "Take Risks", such as blasting through a storefront window with a motorcycle.

Clicking on each, the women site appears to be a fashion ad offering a free sample. The men site opens with an animation claiming the product "Protects Men Who Take Risks" as the words break through more glass, and inside: "Welcome to Stunt City" and "Risk Taking Poker Tips". Right, yes, the stunts and the poker and the shitty spice smells. I know you need to hook the 13 year olds with your product as they start to stink, but can't you at least do that with some skateboarding rebels with kneepads and stick with the products that don't suck donkey sack?

Thank you for you time,

- Josh Polly"

Unliver's response:

Hi Josh,

Thanks for writing!

We apologize for the difficulty you are having in locating the product. It is still manufactured and can be made available to any store willing to carry it in the Women's line only. According to our records, we have not changed the formula.

We have now designed our Degree Women products specifically for Women, and our Degree Men products specifically for men. This is also true of our fragrances. While we design Degree Women fragrances for women and vice versa, there is nothing preventing a Women from using a Degree Men product or a Man from using a Degree Women product.

Please inform your store managers that you are interested in the product. Urge them to contact their distributor, so they can carry it on their shelves and make it available to you and other consumers.

Thanks for your interest!
Your friends at Degree

pm

Moral of the story: Marketers are liars. Josh either needs to buy his deoderant from random people with cache piles on Ebay, or find a new product to cleanse his armpits.

]]>
Consumerist-208731 Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:45:12 EDT Ben Popken http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=208731&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Sure Deodorant Is The Same As Secret ]]> Everyone knows that in armpit odor land, Sure is for boys, Secret is for girls.

Secret's tagline tells it all: "Strong enough for a man. But made for a woman."

But is it really? A look at the products' ingredients and patent numbers, tells a different story.

New Secret tagline: Strong enough for a man, but marketed for a woman.

"Lessons From Armpits" [Killian and Company] (Thanks to Meghann!)

]]>
Consumerist-206620 Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:24:48 EDT Ben Popken http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=206620&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Save Money On Your Bills Through Lies and Deception ]]> frontline_combat5.jpgMonths back, we dismissed some advice on lowering your cable bill (try to cancel and then saying you change your mind if they don't lower your bill) with a snarky retort. We viewed it as spineless capitulation of consumerist ideals

We understand where we were coming from, but we've since read enough reader horror stories to understand that we can't expect a fair shake from any company, and going off to a competitor for lower rates just ends up with you getting reamed with a more alien protuberance. Consumers need to use every tool at their disposal — including lying, cheating and manipulation — to get good service. The days of Geneva Conventions and conscientious objectors when dealing with Corporate America are behind us: we're at war, and if a company isn't willing to give you fair service through diplomatic means, you'd better be ready to open their gullet with your teeth.

Having changed our minds, it's good timing that the Personal Finance Advice Blog has updated their advice on lowering your cable bill through the art of misleading feints and strategic deception. 15 minutes on the phone with a CSR can net you the same amount that $4,500 in a 5% account will earn in a full year. Let's all abandon our morals and just do it: at the very least, calling up and trying to cancel all our monthly bills in pursuit of discounts ought to supply us with prime 'Readers' fodder.

50% Off Cable TV Bill [PFAdvice]
Previously: How To Lower Your Cable Bill And/Or Self Respect

]]>
Consumerist-183900 Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:41:25 EDT consumerist.com http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=183900&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ AOL Gets Punk'd by Ashton Kutcher ]]> ashton.jpgThe world s crappiest ISP announced it hired Ashton Kutcher and his production company to adopt 20 different online personas and molest the walled garden s denizens. The results will be documented and used to create original programming, AOL Keyword "I pay for this service, so thanks for messing with me and my time, Time Warner douchebags."

We re sure tamigachi691987 and syb3rgramm1e123456789 (and, you know, our pops) will be thrilled to bits to know they re paying not just for lollipop connectivity but also to be harassed by Hollywood s prince of jackasses and his minions.

AOL Content Deals [PaidContent]

]]>
Consumerist-154961 Wed, 15 Feb 2006 09:43:07 EST popkin http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=154961&view=rss&microfeed=true