Ice is sold in metric containers in metric countries, even by American ice companies, and also in the UK and Ireland, where US units have always been illegal anyway. I have never seen an ice container in a shop, here or on the British Isles that was a US unit. This so-called 'international' body is lying through its teeth. It is just as 'international' as the Maporama site was some time ago. At least, Maporama isn't 'international' anymore.
Han ----- Original Message ----- From: kilopascal To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Tuesday, 2002-11-26 19:45 Subject: [USMA:23587] Ice Cream 2002-11-25 According to the INTERNATIONAL ICE CREAM ASSOCIATION Most Ice Cream is sold in pints, quarts and gallons. Either ice cream is not popular world-wide, or ice cream is sold world-wide in FFU containers. Is ice not sold in litres anywhere? Three-quarters of all ice cream is sold in half-gallon containers, but the pint container segment is experiencing the fastest growth (up 10% since 1998). According to 1999 supermarket/supercenter gallon sales, regular ice cream accounts for the largest share of the frozen dessert market, at 77%. http://www.rab.com/membership/samples/icecream.pdf John ----- Original Message ----- From: kilopascal To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Tuesday, 2002-11-26 09:46 Subject: [USMA:23586] FFU down-sizing 2002-11-26 The most opportune time to metricate is when changing package sizes. Well, ice cream is going from the traditional half-gallon (1.89 L) containers to 1.75 quart (1.66 L). Why not 1.75 L? Every time the issue of metrication comes up, the excuse as to why it can't be done is that it would cost a fortune to change packaging. Well, here we have another example of a producer changing a package size and for some reason, the cost is not an issue. Maybe there should be a law that says if you are going to change your package size, then you have to change it to something metric. And a series of allowable sizes would be listed. This way the manufacturer has the choice to pick the metric size that is best for himself and the "market forces". see: http://www.washtimes.com/business/20021119-9797683.htm John
