Originally Posted by
pjohns
This is correct.
And I would therefore opt for the second choice--without any hesitation.
Well, it is misleading, at least.
If they did not intend to be misleading, they would not have mimicked the (highly irregular) shape of the previous bottle.
Dunno.
But are you truly suggesting that "the average person" is not really very intelligent?
I simply do not know whether this is true, or not.
Certainly, it is true for those who come to the supermarket armed with 25 or 30 coupons. (It seems to me that they are not purchasing what they really want--or need--but are just buying to the coupons.)
As for others, I am not so sure.
I would probably be inclined to try the less-expensive rand--but than switch back to the original choice, if it were not as good.
I deeply believe in saving money--but without sacrificing quality. (If the only way to save money, in a particular instance, is to sacrifice quality, then I will simply refuse to do so.)
I make a very strong distinction between inexpensive and "cheap." (The former refers to price alone; the latter, to quality. Oh, and I simply do not agree with that old bromide that claims that "you get what you pay for.")