Not only the reduction in size/amount but taste is disappearing. I have been noting food that has no taste. This week it was almonds. I closed my eyes and chewed a few to see if I could discern any flavor...none! Scary.

I have a wooden bagel cutter. Ray's New York bagels have always been too big for the cutter. Then they started to drop right in because they had shrunk. I contacted Ray's; they responded that the cost of flour had increased. Time to find AnnT's bagel recipe.

Airline tickets have not increased much.

They just cramp in more seats, and take away 4 inches of leg room per seat.

dcarch

Goes to show it's not quality and excellence in anything anymore, it's bottom line. The big corporations are squeezed by big government, therefore they are squeezing the consumer, who's only recourse is to squeeze their employers by not giving 100 percent, or go on the government take, therefore the vicious circle continues. No-one wants to eat the losses.

I always buy Cottonelle toilet paper. The last package I bought, the rolls were the same size around, but were shorter--squatter-- from top to bottom.

Don't even bring up toilet paper. I go into a panic attack whenever I try to figure out which has the most paper for the least amount of money, while still being able to, er, uh, perform to my standards.

And chocolate - a certain brand reduced it's size by half and is charging more for it. I won't buy it any more.

Sally

This is a regular topic that comes up. It started with cake mixes being a lot smaller, which affects the quality and size of the cake.

Bacon used to be 500 grams, it's now 375 grams. Bricks of cheese are smaller than 500 grams.

Everything is smaller, and the price goes up at the same time. The packaging is the same size, so that people won't notice.

4 sleeves of soda crackers used to fit snugly in my container. Not only are they smaller, but the holes are bigger!

I think someone coined the term "size zapping" in 2007 when sizes changed drastically due to the recession.

You really have to be on your toes when you make recipes from old cookbooks or your old favorites that have been around for longer than 40-years, and be sure to use a scale to weigh food amounts so you get 16-oz. of pumpkin, not the 14-oz. they now contain. Or how about trying to remember what the size of a can of tuna was "back when" because it's changed a number of times.

When it comes to TP, I found the only way to accurately calculate the true cost is to weigh a roll, and figure the cost per gram like you would produce. That's the only variable they ALL have in common. So many of the variables change - ply count, "sheet" sizes vary so number of sheets is meaningless, as do the width, as someone mentioned above. I have some rolls that are 3/8" narrower than other rolls - but I'd rather have extra length than extra width. In the end, my quick test is if you give it the old "Charmin Squeeze" and it gives a lot (usually the kinder, gentler brands), leave it on the shelf if you are seeking to save money. The 1,000 sheet varieties (except Scott Extra Soft), and one from Dollar General that has 1,250 sheets per roll and comes in a 4-pk are the price savers.

Another method is to check the pkg. for total sq. ft. Now insert a decimal point two places to the left. If cost (minus coupon if using one) is less than or = to the cost, it's a good deal. Basically, $0.01 or less per square foot.

-Grainlady

And try to find a 1 lb. coffee can...

What I love is that they shrink and shrink the containers and the contents, and then they introduce a "new larger size" at a much higher price that brings the size back to where it originally was.

Amazing though how the packages keep shrinking, but the food on our plate (and waistline) keeps growing!

And while the price per item is the fundamental bottom line, the size shifting does screw with the recipes where a can is no longer a can of whatever.

I think a lot of the issue is that there are so many consumers who choose price above all else too.

I spend more on consumer goods than many people, and while I will track the prices of things that fluctuate, whether it's soda pop or blueberries, and try to buy them when the price is down, I prefer to buy the best rather than the cheapest.

Recently, I bought a jug of Lactaid milk to use in cooking for a friend and encountered this shrinking package phenomenon. The organic, smaller dairy, milk I usually buy comes in paper cartons in normal sizes. (According to my milk expert, who can name the dairy by the taste of the milk like a wine fan identifying a vineyard, it's very good milk.) The only variation is that they have cream by the pint rather than the cup. I usually need more than 8 oz., when I do buy cream, so that's fine. :)

I don't see a real problem, so long as one reads the contents label. Even with the same old sizes, one often has to do that. Day before Thanksgiving, I found a man in the baking section looking truly baffled. He was send for "chocolate chips". There were at least a dozen sizes, shapes and brands. He couldn't call for details. I figured out from what he knew they were not for that they were probably for cookies, and suggested the 12 oz. package of Nestle's semi-sweet. Much better than all those mismatched bags of a quarter pound of musty chips that end up in the cupboard with the staples. :) But you have to know what you need!

I bought a box of frosted mini-wheats this week...the box is so thin that it will hardly stand up on its own. I think what irks me is what Annie said....they think we won't notice it.

Pasta used to come in 1-lb. box. Now it's 13.25 oz. But price is same.
We just started eating cereal again and noticed, too, how small the boxes are.

Car batteries used to cost $40 and last five years … now they are over $100 and are guaranteed for even less time. Tires. It is everywhere. You go to a movie and spend $6 for five cents worth of popcorn. It is everywhere. It is the 'new economy.' If you have any old quarters, I'll give you two dimes for each.

dave

I think a lot of the issue is that there are so many consumers who choose price above all else too.

That's a lot of it, along with consumers who can't do third grade math or who are to busy updating their Facebook status to notice anything. The major chain around here puts the price per oz, pound, count, etc. on the shelf tag. I've noticed any number of times where the "sale" item isn't "cheapest" item on the shelf and what even more interesting that "larger" package of an item isn't the always the cheapest either. I think we've been trained to assume, say, the 100 count should be cheaper per item than the 50 count.

Remember a few years back when Penney's new CEO decided he was going to do away with the constant sales. Instead of taking the $10 shirt, marking it up to $15 and putting it on "sale" for $10, they were just going to price the shirt at $10 from the get go. Confused the heck out of a lot of people who don't care who much they spend as long as the saw the "sale" sign.

I saw something on the news the other night were a couple of companies are getting sued in California for "misleading packaging" (or something like that - basically less product in the same size box).

Why? Because if they raised the price proportionately to keep the bag of sugar at 5 lbs., most people would be complaining they're being "ripped off" by a massive price increase.

It's the same reason that appliance quality goes downwards over time in the "middle tier" - corporations know that people have mental 'price points' for stoves, refrigs, DWs, etc., beyond which they start hesitating to buy. There's never any more than a handful of companies whose name "stands" for quality or features that people are willing to pay extra for; e.g., Wolf, Miele, etc.

Did you ever think the day would come when $35,000 barely buys you the average car? It seems like only yesterday we paid $10K for a used 1985 Taurus (3 yrs old, so that makes it 1988) and that was a huge financial stretch for us, LOL!

Paychecks are shrinking too...what?!?!?! Something is dreadfully wrong with this picture.

People shop buy end price not the value. I have a family member who likes to shop at any of the dollar stores. She will say look what I get for $1. I frequently point out that the per unit price is much higher than at our local Wegmans. Still the $1 attracts people.

I would rather pay more for the "normal" size. Sometimes I have to buy more than one item to get the quantity I need.

jkom, I hear you! Just try finding a base model of car. My vehicle before this one was a plain jane base model. Can't do it now. They are always trying to sell a more expensive car and more options with a longer loan because people focus on the payment vs. what they actually paid for the car.

>>now paychecks are shrinking too>>

Depends on where you are. They are certainly not shrinking in the area where I live. Minimum wage is on its way to be phased in at $15/hr and the overall economy is doing well.

One reason people around here are sometimes more limited in discretionary spending is that a lot of young people have student loan debt. Or, they want to buy/have bought a house; even starter homes run half a million $$$$ here.

Yeah well OHIO...not so much....sigh....

"---Depends on where you are. They are certainly not shrinking in the area where I live. Minimum wage is on its way to be phased in at $15/hr and the overall economy is doing well.---"

Not trying to go off topic, but if the "doing well" is a result of heavy borrowing from other countries, it is all fake and dangerous.

dcarch

I am surprised that no one has mentioned the revised federal guidelines for school lunch programs as a factor in food prices because it's been a major one in the last few years.

Watch what California's new law for free ranged eggs will do to food prices.

dcarch

Most people have no choice but to shop for price, rather than quality. I shop for both. I admit I've gotten into the habit of looking at quality first, but it's necessary to look at price, too.

A little off topic of the original post, but even the exact same item can vary by $1.00 or more, depending on which store you buy it at. For example, a 4 oz. bar of Ghirardelli chocolate is $1.88 at Central Market, (our local gourmet grocery store, part of the HEB chain) around $2.25 or so at Target, and as much as $2.99 at Tom Thumb. So, I make sure that whenever I make a trip to Central Market, I load up on chocolate. Of course, they have so many cool cheeses, breads, great produce and such, that I end up spending lots at that store to save money on chocolate.

Totally off topic ... Debrak said, "at our local Wegmans..." I sure wish I could say that.

Sally

Today even "base" cars are pretty well equipped - automatic transmission, power windows and locks, keyless entry, a/c, stereo with CD player and some kind of aux input, etc. I'm old enough to remember that not only an FM radio was an option but so was the entire radio. While you can find cars with manual transmission (discounting the sporty models) the resale value of those cars drops below whatever you might have saved on the transmission. For example, if the manual transmission saves you $600 when you buy the [new] car, it will be worth $1,000 less when you go to sell it because nobody want to shift. Years ago manual transmissions used to offer greater fuel economy but today advances in computer controls have all but eliminated that advantage too.

I don't know if that's a function of manufacturers wanting incremental profits or them simply meeting the demands of the buying public. I suspect it's a bit of both.

I don't care what you have to pay for eggs. Really. I'm happy to contribute to an egg fund to make up the price difference for the very poorest people who can barely buy the cheapest eggs now. Chickens which are used as laying machines, which are confined in cages too small to stand or turn in, are being treated too cruelly to support anyway. If the people in Iowa don't want to change their poultry practices they can keep their eggs. We don't want them in California. This law was enacted by a huge percentage of the electorate.

The minimal allowed environment for the chickens in this law is still pretty bad by my lights. I only buy eggs from local, free range producers. They're still cheap! Perhaps too much if you're subsisting on pennies, but there will still be plenty of even cheaper eggs. The eggs I buy are much less likely to be diseased than the factory eggs, and they taste a lot better because the chickens are allowed to roam outside and peck bugs like normal chickens.

Ruthanna, Please tell more about the lunch guidelines. I've seen reports on them, but not on how they affect food costs. I do know that around here there used to be good food cooked by good cooks, but long ago it changed to prepackaged crap. They've been trying to bring back more fresh food, but I don't know the progress.

Re cars: There are huge inventory and carrying costs associated with having too many different combinations of features. The dealership model has the individual dealer guessing what his market wants and ordering cars to suit that market. There are some incentives from the makers to chose certain models and packages that the maker wants to make (to meet their own requirements), and there are disincentives, like for gas guzzlers, where the maker may limit how many each dealer can order.

The features and gizmos are now in packages because it's all robotic assembly and custom takes human intervention. I once tried to buy a car which had the right colored headliner in the wrong package, and I was told they had no way to custom order it with the color I wanted because of the robots. I didn't understand why they couldn't just put my headliner in the top of the "wrong" hopper before shift but I guess there's probably some kind of RFID or something the robots can sense, and they can't change it because it's deep inside or something. Pffftttt. I like the car I ended up with better, anyway.

Custom is the choice, however. You used to be able to yes or no every feature. You can only do the packages now, so I have a totally useless (to me) sun roof, but you can get what you want. If you want a totally stripped down base car, you can get it. They do make them, though mostly for companies which do a lot of aftermarket work to them. This is where we come down to price, however. Buying the least loved car in the lot (one that's been sitting there unsold for awhile) is probably going to get you a better price, with whatever bells and whistles are in it, than a base model ordered special. There are discounts for custom orders, because they're pre-sold, but the margins aren't huge, and without the packages, there isn't a lot of fat for them to cut.

The rise in CA egg prices due to mandated chicken coop space requirements will mostly affect only Californians. We don't export a lot of eggs, per se. Produce, yes; wine, yes; eggs, not so much.

Eggs overall are going up in price due to a couple of other factors:
- people are eating more eggs (probably as one of the cheaper sources of protein)
- Mexico has substantially increased its purchases of US eggs due to a devastating virus in their chicken flocks.

Re: eggs, note that I did not making any judgement about what is, isn't humane. Only about price increases.

My point goes further; If you pass laws in CA, will that make it more likely to have the same law passed in other states?

If you pass laws requiring more room for chickens, what about cows? Pigs?

dcarch

If you pass laws requiring more room for chickens, what about cows? Pigs?
I certainly hope so.

The same law applies to cows and pigs. It's about confining crates. It's a very minimal standard! They must be able to stand, lie down, and turn freely, extending their limbs. There are some practical exceptions (such as for transport or veterinary care). This is still a miserable life for an animal, if it has no more than the new standard of minimal amount of room to move, but it's just horrid, rather than grotesque.

It is also illegal to sell foie gras in California because of the torture inflicted on geese and ducks.

There are lawsuits trying to prevent the confinement law from applying--I think it goes live in July. Most are from out of state vendors who want to ship their grotesquerie eggs here. If they had to disclose on their egg packages the horrible way they treat their chickens people wouldn't buy them. Most people have an image of Farmer Jones with a pitchfork and straw hat, and Mrs. Jones casting corn in the barn yard, not of Matrix-like egg factories where the chickens never get to move or see the sun.

Let the price of eggs rise and rise until they reflect humane, responsible stewardship of the chickens!!

If egg prices and meat prices go way up, any strategies for the 49.1 million Americans lived in food insecure households, including 33.3 million adults and 15.8 million children?

dcarch

This post was edited by dcarch on Sun, Jan 4, 15 at 18:12

Find incentives for low priced distributors to open in the neighborhoods where the poor people live (they're often in food deserts, where the prices are higher than in the rich people's neighborhoods). Get people like Grainlady, who know how to make a food budget stretch and last, to give courses. Offer addiction reduction programs so the cigarette money can be spent on food. Offer courses in container gardening and donate seeds. Continue to offer healthy diet instruction in the schools so the kids will want to eat zucchini--nothing will make them not want cupcakes, but wanting healthy food is a start. Have school and community gardens where the neighborhood can benefit from the produce. Teach kids to make their own danged cupcakes so their parents aren't wheedled into wasting money on them. Organize food buying/planning/prepping clubs that can benefit from bulk discounts, and the community of preparing jar dinners together. Teach how to use least cuts of meat for delicious cooking.

Food should be wholesome and well created for all. Poor folk should not have to eat poisoned eggs from tortured chickens just because it's cheaper.

I spent a year with a very very limited budget and learned to cook from the first lick of scratch. We ate just fine. Packaged foods are not only not as tasty or nutritious, they're much more expensive.

Teach people to cook! Then they'll be able to afford to eat much better!

If the people in Iowa don't want to change their poultry practices they can keep their eggs. We don't want them in California. …

P: if you are going to talk about how things are in Iowa, I suggest you come visit. I'll even give you a tour. You might want to stay here. Believe, if you will, the stories you read online or hear from Cher. I do like the anthropomorphic concept of happy, talking cows, although I will still buy Wisconsin dairy first.

I do appreciate what you have to say, though, because it might get people to tend to want to think for themselves once in a while, something people seem reticent to do these days.

dave

I fully support better treatment of animals. I have been a vegetarian most of my life, and it's not because I am necessarily against eating meat, but rather I refuse to support the horrible conditions the animals live in. And will continue to live in as long as people keep buying it. I am so happy to see legislature finally stepping in.

I buy eggs at $7/dozen from Whole Foods here in CA from happy chickens, and the yolks are much darker than regular eggs. I am considering re-introducing a little bit of meat into my diet if I can find similarly sourced (grass-fed, pastured) meat. I would happily pay 4x as much if I knew the animals had been treated well.

I know I am fortunate to have the means to be able to spend so much on quality food, but I also think there are many opportunities that many in the US won't explore. It's not difficult to eat healthy for cheap. We don't need meat 3 times a day. Every diet should be mostly vegetables anyway, and produce is still affordable and even free if you grow it yourself.

Again, I am not here to argue about morality, or politics. I am as we all are, concern about animal cruelty, but I am also concern about practicalities of many ideas, wonderful as they may sound. We are in a real world, the real world has hungry people and children, and people can die. Whatever policies you are trying to push, do consider all sides of the issue.

“Let them eat bread” is not the solution, “Look, I can put three chickens in the same cage and solve world hunger “ is not the solution either.

Just two days ago I was in Los Angeles. I had a chance to talk to and exchanged ideas with the people who are involved with a wonderful program, as part of LA Mayor Eric Garcetti’s “Good Food” program for the poor.

“While Los Angeles has the unfortunate distinction of being the epicenter of hunger, we also have an opportunity to be a leader in eradicating it. As Mayor, I will expand on the Family Source Center system that I helped to create, as well as mobilize our city’s libraries, schools, parks and community centers to deliver information and enrollment services to constituents who can benefit from CalFresh. Putting together a network like this can be a great example for other cities and hopefully influence how regional and state agencies conduct their education and delivery of these services. Hunger is a shared responsibility, and I’ll make sure we’re working together to utilize all available resources to feed Angelenos.”

Full text : http://goodfoodla.org/2013/05/19/eric-garcetti/

While I was in the City Hall, I got a private guided tour of the historic building. Here is me pretending I was the Mayor, making a speech. LOL!

{{gwi:2134382}}

dcarch

Dave, I mentioned Iowa because one of the big lawsuits to stop the measure from taking effect comes from there. An Iowa producer, one of the plaintiffs, was moaning far and wide about his rights to sell chicken Matrix eggs in California. I otherwise have no issues with Iowa, and have had online friends who were farmers there. But they don't have factory farms. :) Perhaps if Iowans and Missourians would enact similar laws, we could all feel better about eggs. The little bit of online news that I look at comes from established news organizations, such as the major papers. What does Cher have to do with eggs?

The talking cows ads are silly, and not all dairies in California have happy cows. There were some suits about that slogan, and I think they kept the cows but dropped the tag line. I buy California milk because I live here. You're close enough to Wisconsin that their milk makes sense for you. I don't know why you'd want California milk when you have Iowa and Wisconsin. Price competition is probably good, but shipping fluid milk that far seems downright silly.

Thanks for the offer of a tour. I'm sure it's beautiful country, and I'll take you up on it if I ever get out that way. :) I haven't seen a state yet that wasn't mostly beautiful. I don't think I'll stay because I'm not dealing well with 58° and couldn't bear snow, but I hear that there are people who actually revel in it and I don't begrudge them their enjoyment of it.

...any strategies for the 49.1 million Americans lived in food insecure households, including 33.3 million adults and 15.8 million children?

As long as the chickens are happy why worry about the people?

My girlfriend used to buy the cage free, free range, free roaming, worm eating, whatever eggs and I always thought it was silly to spend that much when they tasted the same as eggs costing less than half as much.

And there you have it. Eggs are going up a few cents because Californians like me think Mike should be eating eggs from layers who can stretch their wings open.

At least they're keeping to the multiples of six (6/12/18/30), rather than trying to palm us off with eleven eggs. :)

What Plllog said.

Sally

"---And there you have it. Eggs are going up a few cents ----"

40% is the prediction. Egg producers will need to double their real estate and labor.

dcarch

If all goes as has been, there will be ten eggs to the dozen and then the price will go up.

Still trying to figure out how 5 pounds of sugar now weighs 4 pounds.

USA is the second largest egg exporting country world wide after China.

With this new law and higher egg prices, wonder what will happen?

dcarch

Exporting? And yet the stores here have eggs from New Zealand. I've occasionally bought them for their nifty overpackaged plastic containers, which make it easier to take them camping. :) (I have a camping egg box, but large graded eggs barely fit, and some don't at all.)

40% price increase is what the naysayers say to scare people. The only affected producers are the ones with the most egregious operations. Many of them have been previously closed for health violations. I don't cry for them. In the end, the price of eggs will be what people are willing to pay for them, and while there might be a spike, there will be someone coming along and selling lower until it settles where what the producers want to charge and what the people want to pay for the same quantity of eggs settles down. Demanding a certain level of cleanliness and humanity does not cancel out the free market.

5 pounds of sugar does not weigh 4 pounds. A similar sized bag might, but if the bag says 5 pounds, put it in the produce scale and see that it weighs 5 pounds before you buy it. Otherwise, there's fraud or a leak. Complain to the store manager and refuse to buy it without a 20% discount.

I think there is size zapping, but I also think it might depend on where you live and what goods are sold where.

Like I still get sugar in 5 pound bags- I buy store brand. I noticed that brand name comes in 4 pound bags.
The canned veggies and fruit on my shelf run 15-15.25 oz, with refried beans weighing in at 16 oz. Small tomato sauce is still in 8 oz cans, big cans are still 28 oz. I say still compared to when my mom wrote down recipes in the 70's.
Most of my pasta comes in a 1 pound box- cept large shells, which is 12 oz. I stock up when pasta is on sale for a buck a box.
Coffee runs 28-36 oz depending on the roasting type.
Packaged cheese has shrunk a bit, as has bacon. Meat prices have gone up in general. Turkey was at 55 cents/pound on sale deal this Thanksgiving past. When bone in ham goes on sale for 1.29 a pound, I pick up two if I got the freezer space because that's a good deal. I pick up chicken hind quarters when they are on sale for 99 cents a pound. Hamburger is a steal when it rarely goes on sale for 2.49 a pound.
A dozen large eggs have gone from 1.55 to 1.60 over the last few years.

I hope I am not going to be branded a chicken hater.

I am only saying it is a good thing that you can afford higher food prices.

I am glad that you feel that poor people, all 49.1 millions of them, who cannot afford food now, will find a way immediately to deal with even higher food prices.

dcarch

Incremental raises in food prices aren't the main reason poor people can't afford food. It's not the people who have no food who are protesting the egg laws. This isn't a fruitful discussion anymore. We seem to be at an impasse. I debated posting this response but thought I should since you are ascribing feelings to me and I didn't want to appear to be in agreement with your assertion.

Let's talk about shrinking packaging instead.

I think there will be more resistance to the 10 egg dozen than to a price increase in eggs, but I could be wrong.

What is certain is that people have set points where price resistance comes in. It used to be a dollar a gallon for gasoline. But then that was broken, and people even paid more than four dollars. In Europe, it's priced by the litre and costs a lot more. At what point do you say the price of gas isn't worth it to you and take the bus?

What happens when they increase the price of sugar? They were projecting a sugar shortage this year. Much as we talk about cane vs. beet, turbinado vs. demerara, most people just want a bag of sugar. The sugar companies want you not to notice the shortage. If they put up the price for five pounds of sugar, you might decide you don't have to bake cookies after all, and give the kiddies the raisins unbaked.

The demand for sugar at its natural price evens out. But the sugar companies aren't happy selling fewer bags of sugar! They want you to be baking those cookies! Because sure as sunshine and rain, there will be a sugar glut in the future. How are they going to get you to bake if you fall out of the habit? So, instead, they make the bag lighter. It's enough to bake your batch of cookies, and maybe next time you need a bag of sugar the shortage will be over, or you'll buy three extra pounds to get the one you're missing.

Maybe the trick is to write down the size of the package when you make a recipe that calls for "one small packet of X". My mother's recipes were like that and I went through and did that because "large" meant different sizes in different recipes.

Eggs are going up a few cents because Californians like me think Mike should be eating eggs from layers who can stretch their wings open.

And my objection would be to Californians deciding how I should spend my egg money.

Based on my casual observation of the space allocated to free ranging eggs in the dairy case compared to the space allocated to eggs from abused chickens, the demand for later seems to be far greater. This is example of a well documented phenomenon, whose name escapes me, where people say one thing and do another because they want to perceive themselves (or have others perceive them) in a particular way. In other words, in the privacy of the ballot box (and it's also common in polling) they vote to free the chickens but at the grocery store they buy the eggs from the abused chickens.

As for the free market, assuming that the assertion that the great chicken emancipation will result in only a minor increase in the price of eggs then consumers who are buying free range eggs now are buying them at a hefty premium. Once the differentiation is removed, the price of the current "premium" egg should drop considerably. I suspect that the current buyers of those eggs are mostly those in the upper income brackets, so what we have in essence is another example of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.

At least the chickens will be happy. Assuming chickens can experience happiness.

Animal torture? Really? Humans treat humans so much worse, every day, all over the globe.

Reminds me of the recent experience a famed young chef had in trying to upgrade a public school lunch program. He had all kinds of ideas for healthy eating, until the administrator told him her budget. $1 per kid, per meal.

All his ideas were useless. Even Chez Panisse founder Alice Waters' school garden project in Berkeley is so underfunded, it was in danger of shutting down in 2014.

Back to the original topic: I coined a term many years ago about this and other experiences with various forms of commerce...

Marketing by scam!

I wonder what would happen if many of us here bothered to write the various food baggers/canners and complained. ? It might let them know that there are many of us who actually cook who have noticed their slight-of-hand.

There is no "might/maybe" about contacting food companies. I do it quite often, through the corporate website's "Contact Us" button. Direct feedback is like voting: people talk a lot but most don't do it.

It's simple and fast. And sometimes, when enough people give feedback, it even works. Almost all companies value direct contact; it's sadly rare. For a food company, unless you contact them, how would they know what you really think? They have no way of tracking who bought their products, and what niggling complaints they might have about it.

So tell them! If you can post on a forum you can just as easily go to a company's website.