If one product is labeled in metric-only and a competing product is dual-labeled, then the unit pricing tags would need to be in metric to make comparisons across all similar products.
On Tuesday, June 05, 2007, at 09:55AM, "STANLEY DOORE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Paul et al: > >Unit pricing could be in either English or SI units regardless of how they >are labeled. It's done by computer which computes and prints the shelf >labels. So, SI labeling only should be no problem mechanically. It's >getting consumers adjusted to it. However, back in the 1970s the head a >national consumer organization said that UP in SI would not be much of a >problem since consumers shop by comparing items and unit-prices. > >Regards, Stan Doore > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Scott Hudnall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 11:48 AM >Subject: [USMA:38871] Re: the states united--a psychological barrier > > >> I do believe that would require changing all the unit-pricing tags in >> stores to compare prices in metric :) >> >> The current unit-price labels I've seen do not include any metric on them >> whatsoever, even for such obviously metric product as a 2 L soft drink. >> One would think that a 2 L soft drink would have a unit price listed as >> $/mL but the tags read $/fl oz. >> >> >> On Tuesday, June 05, 2007, at 08:39AM, "Paul Trusten, R.Ph." >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>I've read that FMI letter numerous times. It is five years old now. It >>>seems to >>>have been written in a panic. Relabeling products in the metric system >>>only, >>>would not change the size, just the labeling. Since all products must be >>>labeled in metric, price comparisons could still be made between >>>metric-only, >>>and dual-labeled, products. >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > >
