Weigh what you're paying for
You're not imagining it: the pack got smaller and the price didn't. Read the price per unit, weigh the pack, fix the recipe, and know who to tell.
Built from people comparing what a pack held last year with what it holds now — including the retail-pricing staff among them who confirmed it — with the weights-and-measures rules checked against the US inspection standard and every brand named in those conversations replaced with its kind.
You could swear the bag was bigger. The price is what it was, the picture on the front is the same, and yet the bowl fills less than it did, and you wonder whether you’re remembering wrong. The people behind this page wondered the same, then went and weighed things.
You’re not imagining it. Read the price per unit on the shelf label instead of the pack price, weigh what you buy against the net weight on the label, and write your recipes in weights rather than “one can” — that’s how you see the shrink the day it happens instead of the year after.
Everywhere the people here looked, they found it: sauce, granola bars, crisps, detergent, toilet roll, ice cream, yogurt, cake mix, chicken, chocolate. Two separate conversations include people who price goods for a living, confirming what the shoppers suspected. Four conversations name the tell — “new look” on the front, a smaller number on the back — and three describe the version you can’t see, where the weight holds and the water goes up. It isn’t new, one correction says: it has been going on a lot longer than five years. It has just got faster.
The first question below is the how of it, so you can see it coming, and the two things this page won’t claim: why it happens, and that every change is a cut. The second is the two instruments — the unit price and the scale — with the legal grain that separates a tolerance from a violation and the office that actually takes the report in the United States. The third is the recipe that stopped working, and what you can change: cook it yourself, buy differently, or say something, which the people here argue about at the bottom of the page.
Who this page is not for: anyone comparing a pack from one shop with a pack from another, or a metric label with an imperial one — the first isn’t shrinkage and the people here corrected it, and the second is an open question here. Anyone who wants to know whose fault it is; the arguments here don’t end. And anyone being told to cook everything from scratch — the people here who said that were answered by people without the hours, and this page is with the second group: the instruments take five minutes.
The far side is small and it compounds. A shelf label you actually read. A scale you trust more than your memory. A recipe that says four hundred grams instead of one can, and turns out the way it did when you first made it.
The community disagrees on this one
The argument people have about it: when you've caught a pack short, is there any point in saying so?
Report it — the scale and the label are on your side
This side weighed the pack, photographed the reading, and told someone. Their case is that the rule is on the consumer's side — the average has to meet the label — that state inspectors do act on verified patterns, that a maker sent coupons or a refund when shown the photo, and that the practice survives precisely because it counts on shoppers not bothering. Someone has to bother.
Walk — change what you buy, and don't expect the company to
This side has reported, switched, and watched the next brand do the same thing. Their case is that where a few companies dominate an aisle there's nowhere to switch to, that a regulator's investigation puts nothing back in your trolley, and that the only lever you actually hold is what goes in the basket: the raw ingredient, the store brand, the thing you made yourself.
The decider the argument names is whether you have somewhere else to go: a category with real competitors rewards walking, and one without rewards reporting, because the report is one of the few pressures there is. The two things this page asks first — read the unit price, check the weight — belong to neither side, and the recipe fix is yours either way.
Common questions
Is it really happening, or did I misremember the old size?
It's happening, and you have company: the people behind this page noticed it in sauces, granola bars, crisps, detergent, toilet roll, ice cream, yogurt, cake mix, chicken and chocolate, and two separate conversations include people who price goods for a living confirming that packs are cut or watered down while the price holds or rises. Here is how it's done, so you can see it coming. Across four separate conversations, the tell is the redesign: 'new look', 'new design', 'improved' on the front usually arrives with a smaller number on the back. Single accounts describe the specific tricks — a deeper dimple pressed into the bottom of a jar, a narrower roll of paper the same height, a box the same size with fewer items inside, a bottle that reads 'bigger' because the plastic grew and the contents didn't, a detergent that changed what a 'load' means rather than the size of the bottle, and one that shrinks the pack quietly, then later adds a little back and announces 'now with more' beside a price rise. Three conversations, and two more, describe the version you can't see on a label: the same weight with more water, more sugar or cheaper oil — a sauce that's thinner, an ice cream whipped with air to hold its volume, a chicken that's been plumped. Two things this page will not do, because the people here couldn't settle them. It won't tell you the cause: three separate arguments run greed against rising costs and none ends, and this page leaves it where they left it. And it won't tell you every change is a cut — one insider account describes a sauce jar that changed shape and size because production moved from one country to another, not to short you, and a correction here notes that comparing a pack from one chain with a pack from another produces phantom shrinkage, and an unresolved exchange suspects a metric label read against an imperial one does too. So the rule is: don't rely on memory, and don't accuse the shelf. Measure, which is the next question.
How do I catch it, and who do I tell?
Two instruments, both free. First, the unit price. Across three separate conversations, and three more, the number to read is the price per ounce, per pound, per litre or per hundred grams — the small line on the shelf label, or the maths you do on the back of the pack — because that's the number a shrink can't hide behind. The pack price is what they want you to see; the unit price is what you're paying. Three conversations add the surprise: the bigger pack is not always cheaper per unit, and a 'family' size can beat a 'mega' size, so read the small line on both before you reach. Second, the scale. Four separate conversations weigh what they buy — on the store's own produce scale, which one account notes is checked and certified, or a kitchen scale at home — and compare the number to the net weight printed on the pack; two accounts say the reading came up short. Some care is needed here, and the people here supply it: under US labelling law the printed weight is the net contents, not the packaging — the people here weren't sure of that, so weigh with the tray off; frozen goods lose and gain moisture, so a few grams either way means nothing; and fluid ounces are volume, not weight, though for the same liquid a lighter bottle does mean less product. Two cautions add the legal grain, and the standard US inspectors use agrees: packs are allowed to vary a little, and the rule is that the average across a batch must meet the label and no single pack may fall short by more than a set limit — so one light pack is a tolerance and a pattern across several is a violation. When you find a pattern, the people here say tell someone, and they correct each other on who. It is not, one correction says, the food-and-drug agency; in the United States it's your state's weights and measures office, usually inside the state department of agriculture, which checks scales and package weights; for meat and poultry it's the federal meat inspection service. One account contacts the maker directly with a photo of the scale and the label and reports coupons or a refund in return; one caution says a report to a regulator brings an investigation, not quick money. And one more thing the label must tell you, on chicken: if water was retained in processing, US rules require the pack to say how much — 'up to so many percent retained water' — so read that line, and buy the bird that says less.
My recipe stopped working. And what can I actually change?
The recipe is the shrink you feel first. Three separate conversations and two more describe the same failure: a recipe written around 'one can' or 'one box' or 'one jar' goes wrong when the can holds less than it did, and a correction here gives a worked example — cake mixes went from 18.25 ounces to 15.25, about a sixth less, and the old recipes built on the old box came out flat. The fix is to write recipes in weights and volumes, not packages, and when an old recipe says 'one can', check what a can held when it was written. Now what to change, and this is where the people here divide, so the fork at the bottom of the page carries both sides. The first option is to make it yourself: six single accounts, across sauce, yogurt and patties, say the homemade version is cheaper, better and immune to shrinking, and one grows a few vegetables whose shop price stopped making sense. Three objections and one account push back hard, and this page carries them: cooking from scratch takes time, tools and energy that a single parent does not have, and a page that says 'just make it' isn't talking to them. Both are true. The second option is to change what you buy: switch to the brand that hasn't shrunk yet, buy the raw ingredient rather than the processed one — one account notes that breaded chicken is paying meat prices for breadcrumbs — or, one account says, buy from a bulk retailer whose return policy means a short pack goes back. Three conversations answer that switching often changes nothing because the competitor is doing the same. The third option is to notice and say so, which the previous question covers. And one small honesty about 'offers': one account describes the multi-buy deal that quietly ends or quietly changes as a price rise with the price unchanged. Read the shelf, not the sign.
Full tip: https://findangel.org/tips/weigh-what-youre-paying-for · FindAngel.org — free, always.