I for one couldn't care less if they are exactly "1 foot or 6 inches" long or not. To me these terms are indicative of the sort of size you get rather than the exact volume\weight.
Do any of you honestly think that as a result of complaints subway will increase the quantity they give the customer? No... they're a business so they will put the same amount of ingredients into a longer skinnier sub to address the complaints and ultimately I as a customer will get precisely no benefit from all this... Just my opinion of course...
"I was born not knowing and have had only a little time to change that here and there." | Electric Kiwi | Sharesies - Richard Feynman
sidefx: Do any of you honestly think that as a result of complaints subway will increase what they give the customer? No... they're a business so they will put the same amount of ingredients into a longer skinnier sub to address the complaints and ultimately I as a customer will get precisely no benefit from all this... Just my opinion of course...
Yes, I agree with this point fully. But I don't agree with the mentality that because they are working with a material which gives random results they should be able to mislead people.
Where do you draw the line? Footlong sub of 11 inches is fine? How about a 10 inch one? 8 inches? Any bread roll they bake which is shorter than a foot should be rejected. Just like other companies do when they make products out of specification. I would imagine if they did this then it would be more economical for them to aim for 13 inches - give away slightly more and waste a lot less.
Satch: This issue is simply a company not selling what they advertise (if imperial measurements in retail are illegal in NZ, then why haven't they been prosecuted by now? Again, irrelevant). I've seen via the media other companies that were prosecuted in the past for selling under-weight/under-volume products, so why should this particular situation be any different?
Imperial measures are illegal on goods that require labelling of weight or dimensions under the FSA or FTA legislation, all measurements must be in metric.
Subway's "footlong" and "6-inch" are both only trademarked product names to describe a product. They are not FSA mandated labelling requirements for foodstuffs as there is no legal requirement for on premise made takeaway food to include any weight or dimension requirements under the FSA labelling laws so they're not breaking any laws.
Satch: This issue is simply a company not selling what they advertise (if imperial measurements in retail are illegal in NZ, then why haven't they been prosecuted by now? Again, irrelevant). I've seen via the media other companies that were prosecuted in the past for selling under-weight/under-volume products, so why should this particular situation be any different?
Imperial measures are illegal on goods that require labelling of weight or dimensions under the FSA or FTA legislation, all measurements must be in metric.
Subway's "footlong" and "6-inch" are both only trademarked product names to describe a product. They are not FSA mandated labelling requirements for foodstuffs as there is no legal requirement for on premise made takeaway food to include any weight or dimension requirements under the FSA labelling laws so they're not breaking any laws.
Of course breaking laws and misleading customers are two separate things - otherwise the advertising industry would be a lot different... If I buy a car advertised with 17" rims and it comes with 15" rims, I'd be entitled to get it righted under the CGA. If I buy a TV advertised as 48" and it turns out to be 44", I'd again be going back under the CGA. Having said that, a sandwich is a more organic product - you can expect some shrinkage in adverse weather ;-)
Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly
to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.
Trusted
Retired Mod
Biddle Corp
