Should remind BWMA about those U.S. fl.oz's!
Duncan

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: January 6, 2001 13:04
Subject: [USMA:10290] US shampoo products in UK


>I sent a compliant yesterday to Neutrogena about the ad (by Boots The
>Chemist) in yesterday's Independent for their shampoo. The label
>showed "10.1 fl oz (300 ml)". However, today I visited a branch of
>Boots, and was pleasantly surprised to find that the bottle was
>labelled '300 ml' - only. Not only that, but it said 'Made in the
>USA'. It shows what nonsense the TABD's arguments are (especially as
>those are US fl oz). I shall apologise to them, and commend them for
>using round metric sizes.
>
>However, the supreme irony is that I also found a range of 'Big Hair'
>products from a company called Charles Worthington of London, which
>were labelled 'Net 8.5 fl oz  250 ml'. They have a Web site at
>http://www.cwlondon.com (obviously not so proud of being British to
>choose a .co.uk address).
>
>I also received a leaflet from the UK John Lewis chain, promoting a
>range called origins. The photos show labels like '1.7 fl. oz/50 ml e'
>and '1.7 oz/50 g e'. I haven't yet determined if that really is how
>they appear in the stores, but that 'e' suggests it is. However, a
>visit to their Web site (http://www.origins.com) shows that they are
>also using round metric sizes, even if they show the fps first.
>
>-- 
>Chris KEENAN
>UK Metrication: http://www.metric.org.uk/
>UK Correspondent, US Metric Association
>

Reply via email to