It is up to Government to protect the consumer, the retailer won't. Protection can include:
1) Price control 2) Package size control 3) Strict rules on unit pricing And finally, having a short conversion period reduces the window of opportunity for the unscrupulous trader. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Palumbo Sent: 04 February 2008 14:25 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:40371] Re: No more 'horsepower' on small engines in USA I don't know if it qualifies as "metric cheating" so much as metric price gouging, but there are several well known examples of brands in the UK reducing the size of their products while going from imperial to metric measure, but keeping the prices the same. Essentially when the product was dual-labeled, the size remained the same, and the second they went to a metric-only label, some unscrupulous companies shrunk the size of their product while keeping the price the same, hoping that people wouldn't notice amidst the conversion. Here's the link: http://www.bwmaonline.com/Metric%20Downsizing.htm Keep in mind this is a pro-inch-pound website, but unfortunately they do have a point here. Retailers took advantage of the conversion to reduce milk, for example, from ~570 mL to 500 mL, with no drop in price. This is not a problem with the metric system, of course, but anti-metrication forces will likely use it as such. We here in the states would do well to learn from this. -Mike Daniel Jackson wrote: > > > The answer is quite simple. The choice of units is not always that > which will make it a appear to the consumer that he is getting more > product for less money, but to confuse the consumer with units they > don't really understand so they can be sold something they thought > was more but turns out to be less and for more money. > > > Monitors are sold by their tube size and not by the viewable area. > Viewable areas are always smaller then the tube size. This is > deceptive but for some reason acceptable. Prior to metrication in > Europe, it was common for merchants to use deceptive measurements to > short change the customer. This practice is still common in the UK > where some merchants still used uncertified pound only scales and > often short change their customers. > > > For some reason, cheating of this nature is unheard of when metric > is used. It might be because metric is a legal system in all > markets and is policed better. When non-metric is used, it is > almost like a wild west scenario where anything goes and the > authorities look the other way. > > > I wonder how many engines that have their engine sizes stated in > kilowatts (anywhere in the world) are over stated. Most likely > there are none. > > > Does anyone know of any situation where there was cheating from the > use of metric units? > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > Carleton MacDonald > Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:36:08 -0800 > > That's actually a very good question. > > cm > > > > _____ > > From: John Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 20:58 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: Re: [USMA:40364] Re: No more 'horsepower' on small engines in USA > > > > In this case, then why aren't television and computer screen sizes marketed > in centimeters? > > Carleton MacDonald wrote: > > It's the same reason why Canadian and UK merchants still want to promote > pricing by the pound. > > The horsepower is smaller than the kilowatt. So if you can advertise your > car in horsepower, the number is bigger. Size matters. > > The pound is smaller than the kilogram. So if you can advertise your apples > or steak by the pound, the price is smaller. Size still matters. > > It's all about marketeering. > > Carleton > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>
