In countries where only the metric system is legal and old units have been "delegalised", the consumer is at risk of fraud if old unit names continue in use. By delegalising a unit, a merchant can chose his own definition for the old unit name and the shopper would have no legal recourse if he/she felt cheated because the former definition was not adhered to.
The main reason the BWMA is opposed to the metric regulations is they force the merchant to use only metric scales. With the pound delegalised and the new scales not showing pounds at all it makes it easier for the merchant to deviate from the former legal definition and the shopper who chooses to continue to use old unit names would have no recourse if they were not given the former size when asked for. As long as devices exist to maintain the definition, then in essence the old unit lives on. Take away the devices and the old units have no meaning. Old unit names lingered on longer in countries where no official definitions were assigned to the old names. Even though in practice old names will assume new values, it should never be backed by the force of law. Thus names like 6 inches or quarter-pounders become mere trade names. In countries where the pound is legally defined as 500 g and in McDonalds case, the quarter-pounder is meant to be a quarter of a different value then 500 g, then McDonalds can not use the name quarter-pounder of beef if that quarter-pound does not equal 125 g. when I order from Subway, I never speak the "i" word, only use terms like large or small. The same is true with Chinese food. They usually size their products in quarts and pints. Interesting though, the Chinese carry-out that I have bought over the years was always heaping. Which gave me the feel of getting a litre in a quart container. As for the quarter-pounder, that is suppose to be the size of the pre-cooked patty. If I'm not mistaken, after cooking, the meat size is more like 100 g. Thus the 100 grammer (a real grabber) would be a better name. Even if it were to be 105 g after cooking, at least the consumer would know that by thinking it is 100 g he/she is getting more then the name implies. With the quarter-pound name, the customer is always getting less then he/she thought he/she was. FFU trade names are not meant to be exact, even if consumers think they are. Maybe that is why marketers like FFU. It is a very simple way to give the customer what you really want to give them and let them think they are getting something else. Cheating is such a wonderful thing. Euric ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Darfus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, 2004-03-20 21:21 Subject: [USMA:29254] Re: Australian labelling > What I find really interesting is that "Subway 6-inch" is trademarked, after all it's really not a 6-inch sub -- in a metric country it's actually 15 cm, right? So, Brent, what does McDonalds call their "quarter-pounder" with cheese, if there is such a thing in Australia? I suspect it's the same name, after all it's just a name and doesn't necessarily describe any physical attribute of the product (pre-cooked weight and all). > > <rant> > It's irritating when you read comments from anti-metricationists who worry over stuff like "so you mean we'll have to call it the 0.11 kilogrammer with cheese?" or "give em a meter and they'll take a kilometer" or "he won't budge 2.54 centimeters". NO! The colloquialisms only came about because they're cute or easy to remember and they are simply a product of the times in which they were created. They won't change just because a country or industry changes units of measurement. > </rant> > > jd > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brent AU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Mar 20, 2004 8:16 PM > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [USMA:29252] Re: Australian labelling > > You may be interested in looking at this Australian Subway (TM) Napkin, which also provides the energy value in kJ. > > http://users.tpg.com.au/adslw05b/subway.aus.napkin.pdf > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chris KEENAN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 6:24 AM > Subject: [USMA:29043] Australian labelling > > > > Someone at work has just returned from Australia, and brought back some > > biscuits. The brand was Arnotts, and I was surprised to see not a sign of > > non-metric anywhere - even the energy values were in kJ only. > > > > -- > > Chris KEENAN > > UK Metric Assoc: www.metric.org.uk > > > > > > > >
