--- Stephen Humphreys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >The pound pricing is deceptive as you can not see > your pound request > >weighed out in pounds. The person doing the > weighing has to convert your > >request to grams and then weigh out the equivalent > grams on the scale. > >Just like in the UK. A customer may be limited to > asking only for certain > >specific sizes that can be easily converted to > grams. > > > And just like the UK you seem to think this is a > problem. Well at least you > seem to have accepted that that practise of buying > food by the lb exists in > the UK, and Canada now.
I don't know that people necessarily "buy" by the pound, as much as the stores still advertise the price per pound as the primary price. Fruits and vegetables are mostly sold in supermarkets where the customer selects and bags it themselves. Personally, I never go into the store with the idea of buying a certain mass of produce, I normally buy produce visually or by quantity (ten apples, eight bananas, or a bag of potatoes. Deli meats are usually priced per 100 g, and very often that is the only price displayed. Some stores will still display a price per lb, but it's becoming less common as more and more people are ordering their deli meats in grams. Dual pricing kg and lb is a bit more common for butcher meats. Obviously, in the cases where a person goes to a proper butcher shop, or to a produce vendor, and they ask for metric quantity they will be able to see how much of that quantity > In reality people are not experiencing a problem. > You could ask for a > pound, and get a pound. You'll get approximately a pound, since the scales used to calculate the price are metric scales. You'll get anywhere between 450 g and 500 g, in reality, and you'll pay for the exact amount you purchased. > You could ask for half a > kilo and get 500g. It will be much easier, of course, to be more precise in this case since the scale will be displaying the mass in grams. > > > >However, if any of us went into the same store, we > could ask for any amount > >in grams, even something like 656 g, and not have > the attendant do anything > >more then weigh it exactly as we asked for it. > > Take it from me, from a country where metric can get > used in stores and as a > neighbour to countries that are almost fully metric > - this DOES NOT happen. If I go into the deli and ask for 200 g of sliced ham, very rare will it be 200 g, exactly. It will either be slightly under 192 g or slightly over 207 g. But the scale calculates the exact price. (snip) > > >The continued use of pound pricing is designed to > keep people from > >adjusting to kilogram price so they can easily > cheat the customers. The > >perfect means to cheat a customer is to price it in > one unit and conduct > >the sale in another. My opinion is that it's because the price per kg is larger than the price per pound, and therefore seems like a higher price. If all stores had to display only the price per kg, then it wouldn't be an issue since it would all be comparitive. But as long as one store can display the price per lb, it will default to that since the stores that only display a price per kg would feel that they were losing business to the stores advertising a price per lb. > Except in either method: > 1) the scales are accurate, but in any case you have > no way of checking. > 2) People simply aren't that thick. > 3) The prices are shown in both units > > 'Reality' is a trip to a local UK supermarket (and > from the sounds of > things, Canada too) > > Personally I'd channel your energies in getting US > supermarkets to at least > give the choice of metric as well as USC/impeiral. If the US were to ever choose to sell produce and meats in metric, I would have a short adjustment period where both prices could be displayed, followed by an eliimination of the price per pound. Otherwise the conversion will never stick.
