|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094
old hand
|
OP
old hand
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,094 |
Recently many fast-food restaurants have been advertising that they offer more than one size for their combo meals. Basically, they're saying that they'll give you some more fries and a bigger cup for your drink, that you can refill for free anyway, for a little more money. I don't have a problem with the fact that they're offering different sizes. My problem is what they name the sizes: Medium, Large and Extra Large. Now, I've always thought that something can only be medium-sized if there is something both bigger and something smaller than it. In this instance, medium is the smallest size.
What say you? Simple stupidity or advertising ploy?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
Advertising Ploy! Although the whole corporation could have collectively/intentionally  ran out of the small size, and knows it's not worth spending the money to reprogram their cash registers/databases and reprint signage to reflect this permanent super-sizing. Just raise the price 50% and offer a buy-2-get-1-free deal. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 427
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 427 |
It seems that they are using Medium to indicate "average", as in the average size portion that a person might eat. If you are really hungry, you might want a slightly bigger portion, so you'd go for Large, and if you are both very hungry and a big eater, you would be sure to order Extra Large. If they kept the sizes of their meals exactly the same, but they labelled them in the logical order of Small, Medium, Large, average eaters would end up a few sizes bigger and dieters would feel very virtuous but never get any thinner! An entirely different question is what different places consider an "average" size meal to be. We've been to places in the north of Spain where we'd end up requesting "quarter rations" of the regional dishes, and even those were pretty big helpings! The locals would look at me with pity, but my partner got those looks that said "You wimp!" 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439 |
Oh, they have the small ones alright! Those are the ones you get when they have the "two cheeseburgers for 99cents" specials.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618 |
Can it be a simply stupid advertising ploy? Surely asking for an extra large unhealthy meal will stimulate those guilt centres in the brain more than asking for a large unhealthy meal, regardless of the size of the meal itself. I'm inclined to agree that "Medium" is the wrong term. Maybe "Regular" is more apt, on which note ...
the smallest condom size you will find is "Regular". After all, who would want to buy a "Small"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,773 |
The marketers are missing an opportunity here. If I were a condom maker, my smallest size would be labeled "large," and the sizes would go from there to "giant", "gargantuan", and "studking". Which brand do you suppose would lead in sales, hmmmmm?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Which brand do you suppose would lead in sales, hmmmmm?
Trojan.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,055 |
After reading this thread, I now know what Mr Fawlty should have said to his petit guest:
'Would you like long drink, or a, er .. medium!'
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
" Which brand do you suppose would lead in sales, hmmmmm?
Trojan."
I must timidly remind the Gutter Police Commissioner that "Trojan" used to be, and perhaps still is, a brand of
..................forgive me, condom.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 218
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 218 |
I recently noticed the same problem when buying dishwasher soap. The sizes included Jumbo, Family, Giant, and Economic (which, as one of the largest, brings to mind Rusty's inaptonym thread because some might think it to be smaller). Looking at those adjectives, I'd have a hard time getting them in order of size.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,412
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
953
guests, and
2
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
