I think they already have price controls in effect. I haven't quite figured it out, maybe I should start taking a note pad to the grocery store with me to see if I can find/figure out the pattern. It would be a lot of work because I would need to focus on stuff that I don't buy also, but of the stuff I do buy it just doesn't make sense that the prices fluctuate from inflationary, back to pre covid, back to inflationary. There has to be some sort of method to that madness.
It has also occurred to me, given them have out priced most people from name brand products, it could just be something along the lines of a less inferior product reduces the among of the ingredients. Naturally, that's why they are inferior. But they've been stuck on this for sooooo long now, you have to start asking yourself why. So it could be a couple of things. You can make more inferior products with less costly ingredients, fewer ingredients, and those products can be spread over a larger region of people, in other words, increasing their availability to a larger percentage of the population, including increasing your export options. The next option sort of goes in hand with the above option but would have to be done under the belief they've priced fixed somehow the entire system that if retailers go along, they are guaranteed a larger share of their off brand products by enabling them to sell them cheaper by rising the price on the higher quality products which the rich can afford to absorb the loss by higher price increases on quality brand products, because really doesn't make any sense, I mean no logical sense what so ever, that a large bottle of Heinz catsup cost six bucks, or Kraft mayo the same or more. Nor does selling Doritos for five bucks a bag, and what's considered a deal is 2 for 8 bucks but you got to buy two. Everything name brand is like that. So think about that, let's give it a run down. You go to the store and buy a bottle of catsup for six bucks, two bags of Doritos for eight bucks, and two boxes of Go Gurts for eight bucks, you've just spent 22 bucks for five things. If you want the quality stuff the only other option is the bottle of catsup for six bucks, one bag of Doritos for five bucks, and one package of Go Gurts for five bucks, which you just paid 16 bucks for 3 fricken things! Not that a superior bottle of catsup is on my shopping list, it's mostly for the grand kids and they don't know one catsup from another) but you can't help but notice that the off brands have less on the shelf because people aren't going to folk out six bucks for catsup so there's always more of them on the self. You look at the price and it's telling why. You really have to think to yourself what's the method to their madness on this one. Maybe most people don't stop to think about that and the answer, at least at this point, for how long it's been going on, isn't a fear of rising prices to make yourself go out of business so it has to have some connection to reducing demand on higher quality product by selling less to people who can afford to make up the loss on profits by selling less. But why comes the next question, and that would be to decrease demand on product ingredients, and/or increase demand on lower grade products to make inferior products to sell to the poor. Our largest retailer here, I don't know this year stats, but last year they make thirty percent increase in profits the year before, and I am sure it came via demand on their store brand product because no one in their right mind would pay those prices demanded on higher quality products, maybe for a special occasion, holidays or something, they go into "treat" status mode, lol, at that point.
This was HUGE for my family, pre covid quality brand snacks and treats were the go to norm at home so there was no skimping for me on that one when my grand kids came for the weekend, they simply refused to eat lower grade stuff. It was a long torturous journey for them to downgrade but they finally adjusted, they finally got that something was better than nothing. Sad really. Poor babies.
RE: Not My Meme! #717