The main problem isn’t just the reduction itself, but also how it was presented. The external dimensions of the container would have remained virtually unchanged. On a store shelf, the packaging still looks familiar. To the casual consumer, it appears unchanged.
Watkins argues that this creates a misleading impression. Although both brands now sell similar quantities of pepper, McCormick’s container appears larger and thicker at first glance. Watkins uses transparent packaging, allowing customers to see exactly how much product they are buying. Conversely, McCormick’s opaque packaging conceals the contents.
Why transparency is important for consumers
For older consumers in particular, trust plays a major role in their purchasing decisions. Many people over 60 have been buying the same brands for years, even generations. They value honesty and consistency and often feel loyal to companies that are part of their daily routines.
When the packaging appears unchanged but the contents are reduced, this trust can be shaken. Even if the net weight is clearly indicated on the label, most consumers don’t carefully examine this information. Studies and retail experts have long observed that consumers tend to rely on visual size rather than the small print.
Transparent packaging eliminates this uncertainty. When consumers can see the product, they can make informed decisions. Opaque packaging, while common, places a greater responsibility on the consumer: to read and compare easily overlooked details.
The role of packaging reduction in food purchases
