• Dojan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    They’re referring to the label on the shelf saying 4oz, which is ~113g. Seems to me like a mislabeling honestly.

      • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I 100% doubt this. In what place would you be allowed to round the weight of whatever you’re selling up by half a unit?

        • polygon6121@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a mistake in the label template. In variable label printing it is common to use the same template for all products, i would imagine that the weight is probably stored as a floating-point number in the database and it is required to round the number to fit it on the template. It probably looked fine for 99% of labels being printed, especially in the European market where we use the metre SI… but in this case it did not work out, classic programmers nightmare to handle different locales especially for a company that probably centralize all label printing for all Ikea stores in the world.

          • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That is a possible explanation, but I don’t buy it for a simple reason: I don’t know of any country where the shelf-label weight is allowed to differ from the actual gross weight by almost 15%. Ikea isn’t a small chain that just opened. If you are indeed correct and they simply haven’t bothered to update their templates, would really not a single person have sued since they started?

            This being a temporary consequence of shrinkflation is far more likely than this being a permanent oversight. Sure, the US is the wild west for consumer rights in many aspects, but not this far.

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      They are probably just rounding up the 3.53 oz to 4 so make it more legible in the tag. It very well may have said 3oz if it had ended up being 3.47oz

      • Dojan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        That doesn’t sound legal, but then again in the US it’s okay to lie about prices on the label, so lying about weight should be just as fine.

        • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well there does need to be a cutoff somewhere.

          If you were buying a cake you wouldn’t necessarily need the price to say $.$$ per 30.54 ounces, 31 ounces is accurate enough.

          Yes there is a much bigger difference between 3.5 and 4, but it easily could just be an error in their computer system since most things don’t need to be that accurate.

          • Dojan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I don’t see why there needs to be a cutoff? In my country we list exact prices and weights. Of course there’s room for error with the actual weight of the product in some cases, but that’s unrelated to the label itself.

            Listed is how many pieces, total price, as well as price per piece.

            Same with weight, though gram instead of piece, as well as price per kilo, making any sort of conversion easy.

            And same thing with volume.