Pringles are crisps!

[Walsingham]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...ato-crisps.html

 

 

I know pringles are tasty, but ever since I found out they were a third grease I refuse to eat them. Note that the manufacturer's appeal to the court was that they shouldn't be considered potato-based. Eurgh.

[Matthew Rorie]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...ato-crisps.html

 

 

I know pringles are tasty, but ever since I found out they were a third grease I refuse to eat them. Note that the manufacturer's appeal to the court was that they shouldn't be considered potato-based. Eurgh.

 

I hate pringles for their advertising. For the longest time they ran these ads insinuating that opening a tin of pringles was a ticket to PARTYVILLE and that music would start playing and your family would love you if you ate them, but oh no, cut to Mr. McGreasyHands who's eating regular chips and wiping his hands on his shirt as he cries off in a corner, sure in the knowledge that loneliness will accompany him to the grave.

 

I generally hate any advertising, on a frightening and primal level, that insinuates that buying a product will in some way make you happier. To a degree this means I hate all adversiting, but some ad campaigns are much more blatant about it.

[Aristes]

What are you two fools talking about? I've seen the ads and I'm certain some nubile young lady will jump me the second I open a can of pringles and that my wife will be on hand to condone the whole thing and maybe join if I so desire! Geez, some people just don't have their heads in reality.

[Llyranor]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyauGeRa5T0

[Walsingham]

I generally hate any advertising, on a frightening and primal level, that insinuates that buying a product will in some way make you happier.

 

"Matthew Rorie

PR/Marketing Producer"

 

I guess this would explain why we never see any of those powerful adverts featuring a kid playing an Obsidian game and doing that fist-in-the-air-and-shouting-AWESOME-along-with-his-friends. For shame, sir.

[Humodour]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...ato-crisps.html

 

 

I know pringles are tasty, but ever since I found out they were a third grease I refuse to eat them. Note that the manufacturer's appeal to the court was that they shouldn't be considered potato-based. Eurgh.

 

I hate pringles for their advertising. For the longest time they ran these ads insinuating that opening a tin of pringles was a ticket to PARTYVILLE and that music would start playing and your family would love you if you ate them, but oh no, cut to Mr. McGreasyHands who's eating regular chips and wiping his hands on his shirt as he cries off in a corner, sure in the knowledge that loneliness will accompany him to the grave.

 

I generally hate any advertising, on a frightening and primal level, that insinuates that buying a product will in some way make you happier. To a degree this means I hate all adversiting, but some ad campaigns are much more blatant about it.

 

I want to have your babies.

[LadyCrimson]

I know pringles are tasty, but ever since I found out they were a third grease I refuse to eat them.

So are most restaurant hamburgers and real butter cookies, and yet so many still eat them. We're a funny lot, aren't we?

I loved Pringles as a kid, mostly because they were 'forbidden' and thus I could rarely get my grubby hands on them...But eh...I lost my taste for chip-like foods a long time ago. Pringles now taste kinda like salty wax paper.

(edit) And I'd say Pringles are potato based...I mean, they have to buy potato in some form or other to put in there, even if it's powdered or whatever ... thus taxable I guess.

 

I generally hate any advertising, on a frightening and primal level, that insinuates that buying a product will in some way make you happier. To a degree this means I hate all adversiting, but some ad campaigns are much more blatant about it.

Beer and sports drinks.

Edited May 22, 2009 by LadyCrimson

[Walsingham]

Their case was that they were mostly not potato, and so not potato crisps. But the court decided that

 

a) 40% potato was enough

b) the Treasury could use the money.

[LadyCrimson]

And my case was that I agree you can make a case that 42% potato is enough to call them "potato-based"... enough to be taxable anyway. Although if it was me, I'd say they only have to pay half the tax...7% not 15%, or some such. Hah, hah.

 

My impression based on the wording of the VAT rule quoted in the article is that it's really less about the potato issue as it is about whether under the new law, Pringles constitute a certain kind of junk food item...Pringles is a snack/non-food and they can't deny it, so they're trying to get out of being taxed through a potato loophole.

 

But I do agree that if govnt's want to tax food to fill their coffers, just do it...stop putting all these stupid little "it has peanuts, so is it a cookie or a candy bar" distinctions in there. If you're going to make non-good food taxable, a candy bar with peanuts is still junk food (so are cookies for that matter) and should be taxable etc. Or something.

Edited May 22, 2009 by LadyCrimson

[Walsingham]

And my case was that I agree you can make a case that 42% potato is enough to call them "potato-based"... enough to be taxable anyway. Although if it was me, I'd say they only have to pay half the tax...7% not 15%, or some such. Hah, hah.

 

My impression based on the wording of the VAT rule quoted in the article is that it's really less about the potato issue as it is about whether under the new law, Pringles constitute a certain kind of junk food item...Pringles is a snack/non-food and they can't deny it, so they're trying to get out of being taxed through a potato loophole.

 

But I do agree that if govnt's want to tax food to fill their coffers, just do it...stop putting all these stupid little "it has peanuts, so is it a cookie or a candy bar" distinctions in there. If you're going to make non-good food taxable, a candy bar with peanuts is still junk food (so are cookies for that matter) and should be taxable etc. Or something.

 

But what is junk food, really? To a secretary it's junk food. In a ration pack it's essential heavy duty energy.

[Pidesco]

Why eat Pringles when there are cheaper, better crisps available on the market which are actually made of potato?

[LadyCrimson]

But what is junk food, really? To a secretary it's junk food. In a ration pack it's essential heavy duty energy.

That's my point...either tax food or don't.

[Walsingham]

But what is junk food, really? To a secretary it's junk food. In a ration pack it's essential heavy duty energy.

That's my point...either tax food or don't.

 

I don't think it should be beyond the law's ability to draw distinctions. If you think about it, that's its whole purpose. If it can't tell teh difference between a potato snack and a peanut snack or whatever then it's got no hope of judging guilt in a murder trial.

[LadyCrimson]

I don't think it should be beyond the law's ability to draw distinctions. If you think about it, that's its whole purpose. If it can't tell teh difference between a potato snack and a peanut snack or whatever then it's got no hope of judging guilt in a murder trial.

Twinkies will always be Twinkies, I'm sure. After all, they probably have at least 200 years worth already on the shelves...