I realize this brings up another point. Are markets under way to convert their unit pricing. All grocery, hardware, lawn, etc stories I've been to unit price in USC. If certain products are metric-only this will certainly cause some problems for current pricing methods. Any speculation on how long it takes/whats involved for stores to make that transition- and, will it happen by 2010?
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 09:49:05 -0700, "Bernard Rachtmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Thank you for going out on a limb and welcoming me! Lol > > I am wholly in agreement that the rounded and understood metric sizes > would drop their supplemental inch/pound, as the consumer typically > looks right over this. I've never heard people talk about 67.6 oz > bottles. This seems sensible and would open the doors towards more > rounded metric sizes. > > My only concern is about the 2010 deadline. I think commerce could > certainly be hampered if separate product lines (for rounded inch/lb) > are to be maintainted for Euro/American consumers. Also this could > potentially have a negative impact on US metrication. As of now many > companies list dual even where FPLA doesn't apply. This is because > theres an assumption it may meet an international/European market. If > separate lines were created they may just drop the metric indications > all together. I can't off the top of my head think of the exceptions > not covered by FPLA, but I know there are quite a few. > > -Best regards > > On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:15:57 -0500, "Paul Trusten, R.Ph." > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Bernard, > > > > Welcome to the USMA ListServer! You'll find this engaging, and sometimes > > addicting, conversation. Please read and contribute on a regular basis. > > > > You say that people won't buy 3.79 L of milk, and I agree with you. This > > wouldn't be a product where we would find a producer exercising its > > option > > under an amended FPLA. At the start of the age of the U.S. metric-only > > option, I would expect that the carbonated beverage industry would drop > > the > > fluid ounce labeling entirely on its round metric sizes, because these > > volumes are well accepted among U.S. consumers to the point that they are > > advertised only in the metric system (I saw a convenience store marquee > > the > > other day that recognized the submutiple "0.5 LITER" for bottled water). > > I > > would expect pro-metric companies such as Procter & Gamble to do the > > same. > > The point is that, in this gradual advance of metric usage in the U.S., > > allowing the metric system to stand alone AT ALL would be a significant > > advance in its status in the country. It should serve as a strong > > inducement > > for other manufacturers to participate and for consumers to learn. > > > > Paul Trusten, R.Ph. > > Public Relations Director, USMA > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Bernard Rachtmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > > Sent: 06 Oct 18,Wednesday 17:34 > > Subject: [USMA:37370] Re: Interesting document on the NIST metric page > > > > > > > Hi, new poster here. > > > > > > In a nutshell I can't see it happening... > > > I suspect a compromise will ultimately be struck. Conversely, I am not > > > surprised that the FPLA hasn't been amended....yet. Though I'm not > > > well-versed on the issue, its clear both sides would lose if neither > > > yielded. Also if only one were to yield there would still be trade > > > dilemas. My guess is that this particular EU directive will be > > > suspended indefinitely, while FPLA will be amended. > > > > > > Lets be honest here, many American consumers are familiar with certain > > > inch-pound sizes (I can't see milk exclusively marked "3.79 L." with no > > > mention of gallon by 2010, etc), and should there be extras or a > > > packaging run duplicated, they'll want the potential market still open. > > > Now, a EU-made product thats all metric would need only slap a sticker > > > on for US sales, rather than tear off or marker out the contents. > > > Besides, doesn't this directive also ban inch/pound from advertisements, > > > brochures and even websites? This realistically would cause too much > > > commotion in commerce. > > > Perhaps they haven't amended it yet so it could be used as a potential > > > bargaining chip. > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 20:10:24 -0600, "Mike Millet" > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > >> I was looking through the NIST metric page for any updated information on > > >> amending the FPLA and found this PDF which was a business alert released > > >> by > > >> the NIST a couple months back.. > > >> > > >> http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/Metric/upload/Business_Alert_2010.pdf > > >> > > >> The composer of the document seems to not be for or against metric > > >> transition but the document did a good job of summarizing the relevant > > >> information. > > >> > > >> I found it shocking that several organizations within the EU are actually > > >> pressuring the EU to continue the use of dual labelling simply because US > > >> companies haven't switched, but I'm sure this deadline will not get > > >> extended > > >> once more. > > >> > > >> Has there been any more relevant movement or information on the issue > > >> that > > >> anyone is aware of or is it doomed to a slow quiet death in a > > >> congressional > > >> commitee ? > > >> > > >> Mike > > >> > > >> -- > > >> "The boy is dangerous, they all sense it why can't you?" > > > -- > > > Bernard Rachtmann > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > -- > > > http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and > > > love email again > > > > > > > > > -- > Bernard Rachtmann > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service. > -- Bernard Rachtmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home and the web
