I would, in most cases, prefer to pay more for the same amount of a product. Shrinkflation always feels dishonest and I have little sympathy behind some of the reasoning.
Rather than shrinking their products, public companies like PepsiCo have two other options when facing inflation: Raise prices, which could result in fewer sales, or accept lower profits on existing sales, which will assuredly upset shareholders.
Why shouldn't shareholders feel the consequences of changes in value of a product? To me at least it all feels a little fake, if you're making the same profit by making a product smaller then would it remain a success if it was full-size at a higher price? If not, then maybe the appetite isn't really there for it? In many cases the items we're talking about are luxuries anyway, no one needs a chocolate bar so it should cost what it costs.
|More notable items
|< If life were like web design
|Tesla Model Y real world EV road trip >