Shonkys 2020 Winners Announced

The 2020 Winners are


What. No Mosaic Brands or Paleo Pete?

And only 5 winner from a cast of hundreds?

Tell ‘em their dreamin’.

Perhaps Choice can make the annual Shonkys nore formal like the Logies and other presentations.

Perhaps hosted by Ricky Gervais with nominations for each product or service category, with the “proud” winners being personally presented with their trophies on stage.


1 Like

Disgusting grubs.

1 Like

They offer from time to time extended credit without interest. If you check out the charges for this paying interest would be an advantage.


Welcome @Riverrat

I have moved your post to this one on the 2020 Shonky awards which include Harvey Norman as a recipient. Thank you for the post and the information. I’m sure it will help others who may think of using that service.


The Choice Shonky’s get some kudo on ABC News.


I have some concerns about the review of floor cleaners. When you have a performance scale from 0 to 100 % and all your samples score 39, 40 or 41 % something strange is going on.

First question: was any test of reproducibility done? That is, was the same test repeated for the same product a number of times to determine if the score was reproduced? If so what were the results?

The reason for doing this is to determine if there is any significance in the different scores awarded or were the results within the margin if error of the testing procedure. If for example you tested plain water ten times and got 39, 40, 39, 40, 41, 42, 38, 39, 42, 40 then a one percent difference either way is not significant. In other words the power of the test to discriminate is zero. You would not be entitled to say that of the samples that returned 39, 40 or 41 that there is any real difference between them, they are indistinguishable.

Second question: how was the meter used to determine reflectance calibrated? What was the recorded value of the soiled tile before any cleaning? What was the value of a printine tile that was never soiled? If they were not zero and 100 respectively then what does the scale actually mean?

Third question: was any substance at all tested that returned a result that was significantly different from the measured samples? For example if pure methylated spirits or detergent at ten times the concentration tested gave results of 70 or 90% then the test is measuring useful differences, if on the other hand there is no substance that gives more than 41% nothing useful is happening.

The point of the these questions is to determine why there is so little variation in performance. Is it because the all the samples were effectively the same as water, which seems to be what we are being told, or is the testing system useless?


Hi @syncretic, you’re asking the right questions.

Our testing was conducted in a NATA accredited laboratory with regularly calibrated instruments, including a mechanical scrubbing apparatus to ensure the exact same speed and pressure for each sample. On top of that, each sample was tested eight times, and the results averaged. We also calculated the standard deviation to ensure results are accurate and consistent. Given this, we’re confident we could re-test these products today and get the same results, allowing for degradation of active ingredients over the time between initial testing and now.

Regarding the calibration method for the spectrophotometer used to measure soil removal, I’ll need to take that on advisement and talk to the laboratory about it, but I can confirm that the unit in question is within calibration as per NATA requirements. What we’re measuring with this test is the percentage of soil removed through the use of a given floor cleaner. As such, reflectance is measured after soiling and prior to cleaning, and then again after (the spectrophotometer measures the amount of light reflected back off a sample and is significantly more accurate than the human eye). As such we’re not benchmarking against black and white, we’re benchmarking against before and after.

Yes. This test was conducted in parallel with our surface cleaner testing, which shared the same method and equipment, and gave us a wide range of results (the top score being 88% for Nifti, if you’re wondering). The difference being the surface cleaners were tested undiluted, whereas the floor cleaners were diluted as per the manufacturers instructions. That is, we followed the recommended procedures for use with each of them. It’s also worth noting that of all the floor cleaners we tested, diluted mentholated spirits was the only one to perform noticeably better than plain water - and it’s not a floor cleaner. So yes, the test does give us a wide spread of results, and a significant difference between the best and worst performers, but we found all the floor cleaners were within one or two percent of the performance of plain tap water.

Our theory on why is that while these products do contain surfactants and other cleaning agents, they’re diluted so much when you use them that there just isn’t enough of them to make a difference. As for how some can perform worse than water, that’s because they can ‘lubricate’ the soiling on your floor so your mop glides over the top of it, rather than biting in and removing it. We do see the same thing with some toilet cleaners.


Talking about fresh produce I am very careful and I do check the quality and generally quality is good but some places like my local iga, should have been added to shonky awards for buying produce that goes moldy or rotten only the day after. Even when I look still happens. Can’t believe how can happen

I was an employee with InvoCare at a management level, I will happily confirm that the company is ALL about profit! It’s a shame because majority of staff are genuine and compassionate. Unfortunately in my opinion the powers to be are profit focused and ruthless. I think they are despicable to be in an industry with such sadness and pain and just want to profit!


Welcome to the Community @nb3391

I have moved your post to this already existing topic on the Shonky awards for 2020 in which InvoCare received one of them.


Thanks for your detailed reply. I didn’t think I was going to pick holes in your methodology but the results were so odd I thought I ought to ask.

The design priorities of floor cleanser are smell, colour (at least in the bottle) and not leaving streaks or residue, but not about cleaning. The marketing copy claims to include cleaning ability and includes hints about disinfection but those claims do not stand scrutiny. Manufacturers don’t make understanding any easier by providing little or no information about what is in these products.

This is a conundrum, you can buy other cleaning products, like dishwashing liquid, at similar prices that are essentially surfactants that do work and work in concentrations at or lower than recommended for floor cleanser. So why not floor cleanser? It looks like you are paying for very dilute industrial perfume with some colour and thickener added so it doesn’t look like water.


Please do - if you find a hole then we can fix it!
But yes, floor cleaners are great for making your floors smell nice - if that’s a priority for you then by all means use them. Getting the floor actually clean? Not so much.


When necessary I’ve resorted to professional grade cleaners sold for preparing surfaces prior to repair or other trade work. The level of dilution recommended has been low or even straight from the container. One such group of products is intended for cleaning tiles and grout prior to over coating. IE painting or a second layer of tiles using a bonding agent. The cost is more than the super market. Handling precautions are important, and the results notable.

Perhaps @airedale Choice might look at some of these options next time and offer a more informed opinion. Davco is one brand/supplier specialising in products for tiling.


And there in one sentence is the difference between investigating to find a predetermined result and investigating to attempt to find the facts.


I would think it is more an example of the continual improvement process, ISO 9001, ITIL, and others that all good organizations should strive to follow.

1 Like

The release of the shonkys reminded me of mine

At the beginning of the year i bought a green enviro friendly lunch box for $75! I thought i was buying for life. Turns out its only designed for 1 year, when i contacted the manufacturer they stated that it only has a life span of 1 year (18months if you hand wash)
Still makes me angry!


Can you advise the brand so as to forewarn other Community readers?


Hi @mumjass, welcome to the community.

One would expect that a lunch box, especially one that cost $75, would last a lot longer than around a year. It is likely that you have rights under the the Australian Consumer Law for resolution. The relevant information is as follow:

I would be writing to the company in question stating that the lunch box should last more than the period you have had it for, especially since it is labelled an environmentally friendly lunch box. (Note: The term environmentally friendly implies that it is good for the environment…including one that will last a long time and not become waste.)

Also state that under the Australian Consumer Law, a consumer law

Products must be of acceptable quality, that is safe, lasting, with no faults

As it appears to be a major fault, you can chose under the Australian Consumer Law what sort of remedy you would like. If you believe that a replacement lunch box will last the same amount of time, then you are within your rights to ash for a refund.

This is quite ridiculous. Consumers would expect that a lunch box can be placed in the dishwasher and washed no differently to other regularly used consumer products. It appears that they may know there is a problem with their ‘environmentally friendly’ lunch boxes if they are telling customers they should only last for 12 months.

It is a shame that this company seems to be greenwashing consumers in relation to its environmentally friendly claims. This may also be something that the ACCC is interested in.

Let us know the outcome when formally contacting the company in question.