• 🌞 Alexander Daychilde 🌞@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I am making no such assumption, and you clearly do not know how businesses operate.

        I’m not fond of much of what they do, but I’m speaking in realities, not idealations.

        • MrShankles@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 hours ago

          You “make no such assumptions” of whether both sizes were available in 1991, but you do assume that the user has no idea how businesses operate. You’re not speaking in reality at all, you’re just arguing nonsensically

            • MrShankles@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              12 hours ago

              If people weren’t buying more of them, they wouldn’t’ve changed the size

              That’s what you said. If a business is already making sales and profit, why would they decrease the size? You think they were selling the candy at a loss or something, and had to slowly increase revenue?

              It’s the definition of “shrinkflation” and it’s anti-consumerism because they aren’t making it obvious that they’re increasing the cost of the product

              What kind of ignorant are you, that you can’t wrap your head around that? Go spout your elitist, anti-intellectualism elsewhere, cause ain’t nobody here buying it

              And if you truly believe in what you’re saying, good luck my dude, and may god have mercy on your soul

    • BillCheddar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Are you 15? Or do you just lack all common sense and ability to understand the universe around you?

      I’m serious. What you’ve written is so far from reality that I feel compelled to make sure you’re OK and not like, IDK, stroking out somewhere.

    • nogooduser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      If people weren’t buying more of them, they wouldn’t’ve changed the size.

      That’s not a valid conclusion.

      The only thing that we can say for sure is that the companies benefit from shrinkflation in some way otherwise they wouldn’t do it.

      If sales drop due to the smaller sizes but they still make more profit overall then you can be sure that we’d be getting smaller bars.

      • jtrek@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 hours ago

        The only thing that we can say for sure is that the companies benefit from shrinkflation in some way otherwise they wouldn’t do it.

        Nitpick, even though I agree with you: companies believe they will benefit. We can’t rule out how fucking stupid a lot of management types are. Like whatever company fired people for AI and then had to retire them, plus eat the lost potential from fucking around with AI for months.

        And even when the individuals aren’t stupid, the incentives are fucked. Google kills products because of internal fighting for promotions and recognition, not anything that’s good for users or the companies.

    • ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Companies have been trying to cheap out in manufacturing costd since manufacturing was invented.

      Don’t blame the consumer when the candy bar cartel shrinks their shit then lies about it.