Would You Pay $8.50 a Gallon for Gas? Then Why Pay It for Soda?

Do the math. Smaller single-serving sized cans are absurdly expensive.

February 4, 2010 at 10:11AM by Marion Nestle | comment

I received this note yesterday from Michael Jacobson, director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, about his latest column in The Huffington Post:

How would you feel if you had to pay $8.50 a gallon for gasoline?

Then why on Earth would you pay that much for water and high-fructose corn syrup?

That’s how much Coke costs in those new 7.5-ounce, 90-calorie cans. Calorie-counters may appreciate the small size (90 calories) but dollar-counters beware: We did a little math and it turns out that Coke in the new can costs between 50- and 140-percent more than Coke in the old 12-ounce cans. Basically, Coke is charging two or three cents more per ounce for Coke in a smaller can—and this from a company that throws temper tantrums when lawmakers propose a one-cent-per-ounce tax on soda!

I once asked a group of retailing executives why the cost of smaller size containers was so high (surely the containers don’t cost that much. They said: "if customers want smaller portions they ought to be willing to pay for them." Oh.

Reminds us of the absurd wastefulness of single-serving packaging for food.

comment

tags: soda, coca cola, cost of food, absurdly wasteful food packaging

Comments

Marion Nestle

Noted author Marion Nestle is a Professor in the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University. She is the author of What to Eat.
read full bio.

see all posts by this author