The per 100g price makes it seem like the 1kg (bottom) item is cheaper than the 2kg one.

I wonder how many people are baited into getting the more expensive item (by weight).

  • ZombiFrancis
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    Only if it is a 2 pack of 1kg containers. I know costco does that often so I imagine walmart might too. (And if that 2-for-12 runs you a total of 4 kg.)

    • Showroom7561@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Top one is 2kg (single unit) and the bottom is sold as a 1 kg single unit, or 2 / $12 (2 x 1kg), which is STILL not a better value than the top one! LOL

      • expr@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        It very well could be typical corporate fuckery, but that makes me wonder if it’s actually a bug and that it’s computing the per kg price based on the single until price but dividing by the total weight of the pack.

        Or perhaps it’s a “bug” that’s left intentionally until called out.

        • Showroom7561@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          If it’s a “bug” that they are actively profiting from, likely for years, it’s probably a feature! LOL