Comment on I'm sure people fall for this type of greenwashing all the time...
Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 1 day agohow did you arrive at the larger bottle being 90% more detergent?
24.3 oz vs 64oz. When I say “detergent”, I’m talking about the product itself, not the specific ingredient, which isn’t listed by a means from which to compare them by.
It’s EXPLICITLY clear that the concentration is higher in the smaller bottle.
Explicitly??? You’d only know because you can compare the two bottles. But someone shopping would see the same brand, same coloured bottle, same label, but smaller size (at nearly the same price). The marketing only focused on plastic and water, which to me, seem to benefit the manufacturer more than the consumer (lower shipping costs while selling at the same price per load).
Why not match the load amount per bottle if you are marketing this as a better replacement from what they offered before?
Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Is the text ULTRA Concentrated not clear?
Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
I’ve already corrected my OP and admitted to my overreaction.
But…
No, it’s not. That’s a marketing buzzword.
“Ultra concentrated” means absolutely nothing to a consumer without knowing more, like how is concentration level determined in this product? How does it compare with other liquid laundry detergents? And how does it compare to their 64oz version?
Whirlpool says that most brands list the concentration level on the bottles in the form of 1x, 2x, 3x, etc., but that’s not on the bottles in the OP.
All we know that we get less volume, fewer loads, and a slightly higher price per load.
Less plastic? Sure, but with fewer loads in the bottle, it’s not an equal comparison from the start.
That’s like saying, “our ‘ultra compact’ size 8 shoes use less rubber compared to our size 11 shoes!”. 🤔