The picture must have come from a US product. I never saw that one here.

Mike   2002-11-27

PS, John, does Ohio have 24 months in a year? (see your date below)

----- Original Message -----
From: "kilopascal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 8:41 AM
Subject: [USMA:23598] Re: M&M's


| 2002-22-26
|
| Interesting.  The package shown on the web site is labelled as 1.69 oz
47.9
| g.  Another case of the xx.9 g designation.  But, this time to get it,
they
| had to come up with an even more ridiculous declaration in FFU.  Go
Figure!
|
| John
|
|
| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Mike Joy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Sent: Tuesday, 2002-11-26 04:31
| Subject: [USMA:23597] Re: M&M's
|
|
| > All this talk recently (e.g.. see below) got me curious, so as I was
going
| > shopping anyway today I picked up these 2 M&M packs so you can see the
| > labels - too bad you can't taste them! See www.m-ms.com.au for info.
| >
| > I thought I'd look around this giant store and see how many references
to
| > FFUs I could see, but had a hard time finding any. I eventually found a
| few
| > items in the international section where some imported jams and
chocolates
| > had ozzies and flozzies in brackets.
| >
| > I noticed that Australian producers don't put a space between the unit
| name
| > and quantity, but some UK producers do.
| >
| > Mike
| > Perth, Australia
| >
| > ----- Original Message -----
| > From: "kilopascal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 4:23 AM
| > Subject: [USMA:23580] M&M's
| >
| >
| > 2002-11-25
| >
| > I was in the store again today and saw a display for M&M's Christmas
| > candies.  The package size was 14 oz 396.9 g.  It seems that no matter
| what
| > size it is in FFU, the metric conversion is always something point nine
| > (xxx.9)  I find this strange.  I wonder what Mars Products is trying to
| > prove with this.
| >
| > John
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
|
|

Reply via email to