So trivial, yet it really ticks you off.

[tonyb]

^^^^^
Over this way we’ve witnessed many a supermarket product made incrementally smaller but priced about the same as the larger product it supplanted. The size difference is often small enough as to go unnoticed by many.

Still, though, this is the land of the supersized. A bacon cheeseburger with a large order of fries seems to many of us an almost light lunch. So make it a DOUBLE bacon cheeseburger. And a 16-ounce Coca-Cola.

 

[Who?]

“Serving you better by giving you less.” seems to be the trend.

 

[Zombie_61]

^^^^^
Over this way we’ve witnessed many a supermarket product made incrementally smaller but priced about the same as the larger product it supplanted. The size difference is often small enough as to go unnoticed by many...

Or the manufacturer has "camouflaged" the change somehow. Bar soap, for example. "Oh, we've re-shaped it to make it more ergonomic and easier to hold when it's wet." Rubbish. They've found a way to sell 25% less soap per bar while increasing the price. It's not "ergonomic", it's "economic". For them, that is, not the consumer.

 

[Trenchfriend]

People, basically not knowing what they want. Unable to make decisions.

 

[Edward]

“Serving you better by giving you less.” seems to be the trend.

My experience has been that most companies are aware the market does not respond well to price rises, so as costs rise, in order to maintain the same level of profit while raising the price as little as possible, they will tend to cut corners. When I bought my first pair of DMs for £45 back in the early 90s, they were still made in the original factory, and the quality was pretty decent. Then they moved manufacture overseas to save costs and keep selling them at the same price. Which is fine, I have no 'country of origin' snobbery at all. Makes no difference to me qualitatively where something is made (although I'd prefer geographically closer when possible for thought of the airmiles and environment). The boots still were pretty good.... but quickly the labour cost saving wasn't enough to maintain the profit margin, so rather than raise the price, the quality was dropped over time until it became impossible to maintain the price, and so it rose. Last time I handled DMs, some of the upper price band ranges, both UK and overseas produced, seemed pretty good, though the more affordable options did not impress me - and are now a lot more expensive than they were in my day. I can completely see it from the pov of the manufacturer, but it's frustrating that many people out there (we may differ on here, but I think we're a minority) can see only price but not value. Of course, I try also to remember that not everyone is fortunate enough these days to be able to afford to pay more for quality: the Captain Vimes Boots Theory of Economic Inequality rears its head big time here!

 

[Who?]

This one really raises my ire, and just irks the living ———— out of me.

Uniqueness is an absolute attribute, so something is either unique or it is not.

A thing cannot be “rather unique”, “very unique” or more or less unique than another thing.

 

[tonyb]

I’m guessing that’ll stop about the time the novelty of it wears off.

It’s been suggested that I get an
Apple Watch, as another measure toward continuing my earthly existence. Its heart monitoring features are impressive indeed. I’ve noted that many front-line healthcare providers (lovely people, to a person, but I’d still prefer seeing less of them) are wearing the things. I just wish I more liked the way they look. In that regard, I prefer my 1950s(?)-vintage Mido. But I’m not one to die for fashion.

I stopped by an Apple Store in a hoity-toity mall yesterday, looking to buy an Apple Watch. The young fellow who checked me in said a sales person would see me in five or 10 minutes. After 20 minutes I told him I couldn’t wait any longer and split.

I ordered one online later in the day. It arrived early this afternoon. The only reason I went to the store (I like Apple products, but I don’t like Apple Stores) was to have a couple questions answered so as to be as certain as I could be that I was buying the version that would best suit my purposes.

I believe I accomplished that on my own. It was easy for even techno-illiterate me to pair it with my iPhone and to install the health apps I wished (oximeter, heart rate monitor, one-lead EKG, etc.).

For most of its functions, though, it’s essentially an extension of my iPhone. It receives and sends text messages and emails. It has mapping apps and shows me news from my preferred sources and a bunch of other things. Oh, and it tells me the time of day, too. And it’s easier to read than I feared it might be.

Is it worth the 512 bucks it set me back? In my case, with my health concerns, it’s easily worth it. But if not for that? Probably not.

 

[tonyb]

This one really raises my ire, and just irks the living ———— out of me.

Uniqueness is an absolute attribute, so something is either unique or it is not.

A thing cannot be “rather unique”, “very unique” or more or less unique than another thing.

Yeah, it annoys me, too. But I long ago accepted that the term is so often paired with “rather” or “somewhat” that those of us who still subscribe to the old meaning are in the minority. Popular usage trumps, alas,

 

[Zombie_61]

This one really raises my ire, and just irks the living ———— out of me.

Uniqueness is an absolute attribute, so something is either unique or it is not.

A thing cannot be “rather unique”, “very unique” or more or less unique than another thing.

"Sales lingo". It doesn't have to make sense, it just has to get the potential customers' attention and make them curious enough to want to try the product.

The one that has always annoyed me is "new and improved!". If it's "new" it didn't previously exist, so there was nothing to improve upon. And if it is truly improved in some way, it previously existed and therefore cannot be "new". People buy into this manipulation all the time without even thinking about it.

 

[Tiki Tom]

In our neighborhood, signs spring up every Saturday and Sunday pointing to the “New Hope Church”.
whatever happened to the “Old Hope Church”?, I can’t help but wonder. It’s been 2,000 years, after all.

 

[Edward]

In our neighborhood, signs spring up every Saturday and Sunday pointing to the “New Hope Church”.
whatever happened to the “Old Hope Church”?, I can’t help but wonder. It’s been 2,000 years, after all.

New Hope are post-1997 revisionists. Han shot first, splitters!!

 

[Trenchfriend]

Has anyone heared from US music-duo Lily & Madeleine, the last time?

It's curious. They seem to be totally disappeared from the surface, since Covid times. I miss them very!

 

[KILO NOVEMBER]

Ooohh! How about "Advanced ..." I frequently see companies with "Advanced" in their names or offering products with the same adjective. I wonder what became of the "Retarded ..." companies and products.

 

[EngProf]

This one really raises my ire, and just irks the living ———— out of me.

Uniqueness is an absolute attribute, so something is either unique or it is not.

A thing cannot be “rather unique”, “very unique” or more or less unique than another thing.

A similar mis-usage is the annoying "one of the only" phrase that news-media types say or write far too often. one = only : (!!)

 

[EngProf]

"Sales lingo". It doesn't have to make sense, it just has to get the potential customers' attention and make them curious enough to want to try the product.

The one that has always annoyed me is "new and improved!". If it's "new" it didn't previously exist, so there was nothing to improve upon. And if it is truly improved in some way, it previously existed and therefore cannot be "new". People buy into this manipulation all the time without even thinking about it.

Aside from the word mis-usage that you describe, the one word that usually applies to any product labeled "new and improved" is "worse".

 

[LizzieMaine]

"Added Bonus."

 

[Who?]

“Free Gift”

 

[Edward]

Ooohh! How about "Advanced ..." I frequently see companies with "Advanced" in their names or offering products with the same adjective. I wonder what became of the "Retarded ..." companies and products.

I remember an old Garfield cartoon where he's watching a television commercial with an inane chant that runs "Our cat food is new and improved! new and improved! new and improved!" Garfield comments "All this time I've been eating the old and inferior!"

In UK academia we have a special brand of nonsense called the REF (Research Excellence Framework, basically a metric for metrics' sake that has damaged research quality by leading universities to game their research to play to the system). Some years ago, ratings were given by a five star rating. All those departments given five stars proudly put it all over their marketing material. In the next cycle, the grading system was changed so that four stars was now the top grade. Marketing departments went mad...

 

[Turnip]

I wonder what became of the "Retarded ..." companies and products.

These are selling on manufactum…

 

[tonyb]

“Homeless advocate,” a phrase I heard far too frequently when I was covering the controversies surrounding the itinerant “tent city” in Seattle 20-some years ago.

Is the advocate homeless? And for what is s/he advocating? Homelessness?