The per 100g price makes it seem like the 1kg (bottom) item is cheaper than the 2kg one.
I wonder how many people are baited into getting the more expensive item (by weight).
You must log in or register to comment.
Only if it is a 2 pack of 1kg containers. I know costco does that often so I imagine walmart might too. (And if that 2-for-12 runs you a total of 4 kg.)
Top one is 2kg (single unit) and the bottom is sold as a 1 kg single unit, or 2 / $12 (2 x 1kg), which is STILL not a better value than the top one! LOL
It very well could be typical corporate fuckery, but that makes me wonder if it’s actually a bug and that it’s computing the per kg price based on the single until price but dividing by the total weight of the pack.
Or perhaps it’s a “bug” that’s left intentionally until called out.
If it’s a “bug” that they are actively profiting from, likely for years, it’s probably a feature! LOL
That’s why I stopped shopping by listed price a long time ago. My punk ass was poor, as in below poverty line several times while still working. Had to learn that lesson quick lol.
Once I learned that the per weight pricing was a more useful metric, I carried a calculator any time I shopped. Ain’t no reason to pay more for products that are functionally the same.
Now, I’m not saying that any given brand is worth the savings per weight. Some store brands suck, and do so hard enough that even though they cost less, they’re a waste. The products do need to be in line with needs as a primary factor.
Peanut butter in specific, there’s a chain here that it is so thick and gritty, you’d think it was a stripper. You take a taste and the only way you’d want it again is if it were twerking on a pole. So, even though name brands cost more, if it comes down to having to eat that crap or do without, I’m doing without.
The issue here is that the per weight pricing listed is half of what it should be.
Ahhh, gotcha. It wasn’t evident without paying attention more than I would have considered necessary given the title. Thanks for the correction
I love thinking about peanut butter being a stripper, thank you.
I have to admit, it took me a while to realize the bottom one was only 1kg. And all the numbers would “confirm” that they are both 2kg
It took me a while also. It all make sense if the price by weight is calculated when 2 are bought. Also, a comment about 4kg need not be.
What happened there? These are presumably calculated automatically, so does the second item has its mass listed as 2kg?
What happened? We live in corporate dictatorships where oligarchs can false advertise, price gouge, kick your dog, and fuck your wife… and your only recourse is a class action lawsuit where you make a few bucks after a decade.
Damn, I didn’t know things were so bad there in Canada.
The same dystopian enshittification is going on pretty much everywhere, you just aren’t aware of it yet.
I’ve been noticing bad math in the Uber driver app lately.
There have been a few times it tells me my ETA is 12 minutes but I’m 16 miles away. Like I know it doesn’t think I’m gonna be doing these residential streets at 90 mph
Afaik that’s deliberate to force the driver to get to the destination asap at all costs, but also to lie to the customer that their ride is just a few minutes away so there’s no need to cancel or look for alternatives.
Second item is 1KG.
Even in the detailed info? If so that’s weird; probably something along the lines of “the seller messed up the weight, fixed it, but for some insane reason the site doesn’t recalculate the price”.
My guess is that there’s some funky spaghetti code that’s using the promo, which is for 2 kg, as the weight of the product on the calculations.
Second is scam by 2 for 12$ but 35c(lol?) per 100g. = 3,50 per 1kg = 7 for 2kg… So 6.97 for 1 kg by 35ct per 100g. Wtf?
Price per 100g should not change.
How are you going to pass on one called great value? Would be like buying something that doesn’t have the word best in it when another product does. I’m not dumb.
Not sure if you’re Canadian, but we have a brand called “President’s Choice”… oh god.
As an American the last thing I’d ever be buying is something that’s “presidents choice”
the per 100g price on the bottom is incorrect. they are 70 cents per 100g… or I’m too high. choosing by weight is literally the frugal method.
edit: try living out of a vending machine - if you only have a dollar, you should buy the item with most weight and presumably most calories
Surprise, the heaviest $1 item was a 1500 g bottle of still water…
Well the second heaviest then
Oh, which one are you referring to here – of all those different 750 g supposedly exotic fruitberry-flavoured water beverages, all with 0 kcal? One of those with a dose of factory-added vitamins, or just the funkiest sun-kissed fruit imitation available?
There bottom one is 60 cents per 100 g. Top left it says 2 for 12$. It may be that the weight didn’t register correctly, as it says ‘1’ instead of ‘1kg’ or because some other conflict.
“Great value” is like “all natural:” a totally meaningless phrase that signals nothing except that someone’s selling you something.
Great value is like “kraft”. It’s the brand name. The store brand in this case.
Yep I can see that. I just find it fatuous.
Americans trying to understand this post
Ah fuck, I’ve forgotten how to do basic math
I’m stuck trying to figure out how many linear feet there are per gram.
…these are not comparable products. One is PB, the other is Lite PB.
I think you missed the point. If they were both the same size jar (2kg or 1kg, it doesn’t matter), then there may be a difference in price between regular and lite.
But the 1k jar is listed as being less expensive per 100g, and that’s flat out wrong when you do the math.
Especially in a physical store, I see it all too often
This seems to be the confusing product: https://www.walmart.ca/en/ip/Kraft-Smooth-Light-Peanut-Butter/10298330?from=/search
always. practicing basic division is also good brain excersise.
They did. It’s intentional.
Walmart unit price is completely broken in general. They also have glitches in the “did you forget to add?” page where it will show an item as a sale price, but when you add it, you’ll see total price increase by sale price, and a few seconds later, a second price increase to the normal price. Re-checking the cart will show the item as not on sale. There are some other real weird glitches with that e-commerce platform. A rat’s nest of bugs that might not be intentionally nefarious, but also could be.
Oh man, I’ve had their online cart show me a total amount “saved” that makes absolutely no sense.
It’s crazy that one of the largest retailers on the planet is so incapable of having a working online ordering system.
What a happy accident if prices go up before actually buying and paying
You should shop by ingrediends and ecological reasons. That’s sadly not represented by $/g.
The heavier product with the better “bang for the buck” is usually the one with the poorest quality and lots of sugar/additives/flavours/etc.
Discounter products like “Great Value” can easily have a better quality than stuff produced by “Kraft” and other Unilever/Nestle/etc. products.
Checking the ingredients list and the nutrition table should be a natural first instinct when grabbing something off the shelf.
You’re buying from the store? Don’t you know that’s terrible for your health and the environment? You should grow your own in your greenhouse. Jeez. Some people.
Yes. Because we live in a setting of specialists.
I am no specialist at efficiently growing healthy food. So if I try it, it will be objectively worse than if someone else more proficient does it for me. And if that one is worse in doing something I am better in, we both are off worse and everything overall.
So if we both would do things we are good at, the resulting products/services would be better, the processes would be more efficient (time, ressources, waste), which in return benefits all participants and the environment at the same time.
Actually that is so efficient, it is possible to pay for the store’s rent, the wage of the people transporting, managing and selling that stuff to me. If I ineffectively grow my own food, all these are out of their jobs or have to (badly) grow their food at home, which they cannot afford anymore and they even do not have the necessary space for a field to do so.
Well, get to working on becoming a specialist so you can do it better. Don’t you care about the harm you’re doing?!
Care to explain?
I’m making fun of your tone-deaf virtue-signaling response by being even more tone-deaf and virtue-signaling even harder.
What? How can my comment possibly be voted down?
While you’re not wrong that people should probably shop that way, if they can. It feels tone deaf, as many people can barely afford groceries in the first place, so shopping by cost per weight/calorie is almost a requirement.
At least I think that’s what’s happening.
Definitely what happened. OP sounds pretentious being like “you should be”.
yeah sounds way entitled. like people always have a choice of price to ingredient. sounds like someone who have never paid rent.
Thanks for stereotyping. I have and am still paying rent for all my life and the rest of it.
“Should” is meant here for a better/good way do do things. If it is not possible, a “should” just is not applyable, it is a “should” after all.
Maybe this is a language/cultural/mental perspective misunderstanding.
stereotyping is generalizing a group of people. sounds like implies it may not be so. so yeah. there is some laguage misunderstandings. my comment is a comment on a comment on a comment on how bad your comment sounded when read.
