CHOICE membership

Big Red rip off?


#1

A Shonky spotter on Facebook noticed a change in Big Red tomato soup varieties.*EDIT Reports indicate that the price of the smaller can has increased.


#2

It is worse than just the pricing rip off.

How many recipes have been published based on a ‘proper sized’ can.

Could it be an ill-advised attempt to reintroduce maths to scale recipes down or ingredients up, eg mentally update the ‘1 can (420g)’ to ‘1.4 cans (420g)’ and enjoy the leftover 0.6 cans worth, or scale the other ingredients by .7142857… :roll_eyes: (Nope, it is all about the $)


#3

I wonder if the concentrated soup (420gm) is now even more concentrated (300gm). It would be interesting to see the preparation and nutritional panel before making judgement.

If the final amount of soup after preparstion (in accordance with the instructions) is the same, both in volume and nutritionally, then one could argue that possibly the Big Red soup is a step forward for the environment. One could say that less water is transported and packaging is needed reducing the embodied energy and waste. The increase in costs could slso be argued as being additional processing costs to reduce the amount of water.

If the prepared soup is proprotionally less due to change in can size and is nutritionally equivalent, then Heinz havebeen crafty in making the consumer pay more for less.


#4

420g can from pantry: cooking directions -> stir in 1 can of water; serving size 210g
per 100g (main lines only)

  • energy 120kJ
  • protein 0.5g
  • fat 0.1g
  • carbs 6.1g
  • sodium 300mg
  • lycopene 4.3mg

from the 300g can from the Heinz website: -> stir in 1 can of water; serving size 200g
per 100g (main lines only)

  • energy 125kJ
  • protein 0.5g
  • fat 0.1g
  • carbs 6.3g
  • sodium 300mg
  • lycopene 5mg

Since there is less water added (although commensurate) the minor variations are explainable. But Heinz might want to borrow a calculator as their web site shows
image
from a single 300g can. Being a US company maybe it is the complexity of metrics?
:smiley:


#5

The wife woman is seeing red over this!

The Heinz Big Red was her go to soup in the cooler weather. As far as she was concerned, the contents of the 420g can was one serving. Now it won’t be enough. :frowning:


#6

Between Heinz and Campbell’s condensed soups they dominate the market. By many accounts Campbell’s usually sets the standard for ‘good soup’ while Heinz is a marketing engine that also sells soup and other canned and packaged foods.

Heinz also did their ‘trick’ shrinking their canned beans not long ago and seems to be on trend. In comparison other bean brands are still ‘full sized’ and grocery web sites still show 420g and 430g condensed tomato soups. How many will be encouraged to switch to Campbells?

If beans were a precedent Heinz shareholders will be happy. Heinz keep significant shelf space so their marketing juggernaut seems intact. When will we be subjected to their claims that the smaller can at the same price is a result of consumer demand?

Will Campbell’s follow suit and shrink to be ‘competitive’? Maybe not if beans are the litmus test. Stay tuned over the coming months.

edit: Look like 300g is Heinz new standard size.

image


#7

Maybe time to switch to Rosella tomato soup…Rosella is a wholly Australian family-owned company and all products are manufactured in Australia using Goulburn Valley tomatoed.


#8

I agree with you Peter, but this is her ‘go to’. I have bought other brands home but she who must be obeyed said they didn’t taste as good. What can you do?


#9

Try adding some cooked onion and garlic, fresh herbs…or even some Worcestershire sauce to flavour it up.


#10

Her indoors does flavour the soup with all sorts, but your suggestion sounds very appetising. :tomato:


#11

There’s been a 300g one available for many years. Usually the price is a bit lower than the 420g one though.

image


#12

There’s always been a 300gram tin.
Is the issue that the price has gone up or that you can no longer buy the larger can?


#13

Maybe Heinz should rename the product to ‘Little Red’, to reduce future confusions.


#14

It appears the issue may have been price related only. I’ve edited the original post :wink: