Minstrels, Toblerone, Yorkie – are the only brands I can recall at the moment who have tried to short change me of my chocolate (I swear I don’t have a problem). Basically they started selling less chocolate in their bars/bags for the same price.
Especially bad when you’re dealing with an addictive substance like sugar.
Toblerone got slated on Twitter.
“How can we increase revenue without dropping our price?
Just give them less chocolate?
But won’t they notice?
Nah! we’ll be grand!”
That’s how i assume the conversation went. All i remembered is feeling outraged and discussing this scandalous affair with anyone who would listen.
The thing is people notice when the money/value axis becomes imbalanced and especially when it tips in the wrong direction – ie less value for the same money. It sparks a negative reaction, that sticks in the mind of the consumer. Every time you unwrap one, you’re reminded of the dastardly deed this company pulled. And then slowly but surely that negative spark turns into an association and the longer it goes on the more likely it is to stick.
So it begs the question was the short term revenue increase worth the long term brand damage?
Thomas Duggan 