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).
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).
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.
I love thinking about peanut butter being a stripper, thank you.
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