100 Calorie Packs: Double the Price

Nothing earth shattering here. We live in a society of convenience. They have had little bags of chips and snacks for a long time that you can purchase and throw in the kids lunches, to save you the time of doing it yourself from the big bag. In the meat department, if you buy in bulk - you save. Buy a whole chicken and cut it up yourself and you save even more.

They did the work for you. It's divided into neat little 100 cal packs. You don't have to think anymore. They did it for you. Of course your going to pay extra. You pay for a nutritionist to tell you what to eat, a personal trainer to tell you how to work out. So now you pay for the food industry to divide up your snacks and put them into neat little packs.

Very few of the food companies really care about people as individuals. It is business. We are the customer base. It's the almighty dollar/euro/whatever .. that they are out to make! Not that there is anything wrong with that - we all have to make a living. So they provide a service and charge for it. Did you think about the cost for the extra packaging?

The only true upside of the one hundred calorie packs is the obvious--it makes you really think about opening another one to eat, which can help if you will just eat one after another after another. Which is of course the point that is made in this post about helping to control weight. Sadly they all seem to be junky foods, rather than healhy things--like nuts, seeds, and raisins--that are easy to overeat.

I don't buy the 100-calorie packs because of the extra trash I have to discard. I try not to buy processed snack foods anyway, but I do like crackers once in a while. I wish there was a fruit or vegetable that satisfied like a Triscuit!

i've had more success spending $1.00 on a pack of 4 sugar free jello cups or pudding cups than i have with those 100 cal packs. there are more fresh, healthy ideas out there that dont cost nearly as much if you just take the time to peer at the labels.

It seems like they're just making more of what people are demanding. Yeah, it's a ripoff to a lot of people, but plenty are willing to pay. I can't get riled up over it being a scam. It's not like you don't know how much it costs or they don't say how much is in it on the box.

Unbelieveable. First we complain about supersizing and how easy it is to get so much cheap food. Now we complain that they charge more for smaller packages. What the heck do we really want?

I usually avoid this junk also, full size and 100-calorie packs. But, I think paying double for smaller snacks (if it works to maintain health!) is a small price to pay for health and lower medical bills.

Wow, that's a big difference in price! I'm one that likes to get the best bang for my buck, which usually means I buy in bulk. And of course it's easy to overeat, so I've just gotten used to portioning out my snacks like pretzels, in plastic bags. It's worked well - and I save myself both money and calories.

The difference is also about not eating all the food at once and wanting your product not to get stale- but to stay fresh. Individual serving size packets stay fresh while if you open up a large package of something else- if you don't eat it all at once- it wont stay fresh. Its the same reason they started selling cottage cheese in serving size packages- or imagine this- once upon a time yogurt came in bulk packages and not in serving size containers- it took the fitness craze of the 70s to get yogurt in so many varieties and in single servings. Stop bitching and realize you get what you pay for- and who cares if you pay 3 bucks instead of $150 for doritos or cookies if you are spreading them out over a week instead of a day.

I understand how you feel about the price but it should be noted that most of the snacks in the 100 calorie snacks are not the same as in the big bags. The Chips Ahoy thin crisps are not sold in big bags, around here anyway, and the normal chips ahoy and even the light one have much more fat and calories in a serving (one cookie) than the small pack. Evan the Ritz Snack Mix is reformulated to be 100 calories.
I don't always get these because of the price, only when coupons and a sale make them a deal, but it is also true that one serving of chips ahoy reduced fat has 140 cal and 5g fat ( 40 more calories and 2g more fat.) In Weight Watchers, the diet I am on, it is a 2 point savings. I agree that the price is too high but it's not a direct comparable.

What's worse is how I frequently see co-workers patting themselves on the back for eating these - they might as well just swallow a fistful of sugar packets. Then, of course, they wash them down with those "healthy" fat-free jelly beans.

Ashley Wagner said:
Wow, that's a big difference in price! I'm one that likes to get the best bang for my buck, which usually means I buy in bulk. And of course it's easy to overeat, so I've just gotten used to portioning out my snacks like pretzels, in plastic bags. It's worked well - and I save myself both money and calories.[...]

I do the same thing when I have the time! Makes me feel double good. 1) Saving resources 2) Being better about portions.

Forget the price. What about the packaging? Those use so much more packaging than their regular counterparts. I don't buy any of it anyway, but I always feel it's better for the planet and my descendants to buy the item with the least packaging.

I'm horrified by the bottled water craze. The amount of plastic that gets used to drink something we can get for free out of our faucets just blows me away.

I don't worry about being calorie conscious with most of those items. That's pretty much a list to avoid if you are worrying about calories.

Eating Oreo cookies are something you splurge on.

Yeah, 100 calorie packs are sort of a rip off. What I do is buy the normal versions and put them into 100 calorie portions myself. Sure, it takes a little extra time, but it's worth my time. I figure, most diet food costs extra for a reason...we have to pay money to save ourselves from ourselves. We want to have our cake and eat it too; if it costs more, so be it.

Well here's one benefit - everywhere portions are "super-sized". At least it gives people a chance to get some perspective.

My wife loves the 100 calorie packs. They satisfy her need for crunch. They seem to work for her, and she is continuing to lose weight. It helps. It's her way of indulging in a small way, so I'm not going to question her dieting success. She buys several kinds, so the variety makes it nice, and she counts calories, so this makes it easy too. There is a price for convenience; I must say, this is marketing genius.

girl said:
I do the same thing when I have the time! Makes me feel double good. 1) Saving resources 2) Being better about portions.[...]

How are you saving resources when you are using just as many plastic bags as you would if you used the 100 calorie packs? (Unless you reuse your plastic bags.)

Thanks for this! I don't really know how the trackback thing works, so I just wanted to let y'all at Diet Blog know that I linked to you from my Glamour magazine blog today:
http://www.glamour.com/bbg/blogs/2007/2007/08/more-snack-atta.html

Why can't some of us just support one another in not eating this low-grade chow in the first place, or only taking ONE piece at a time, when it's really what we most want? Obviously, this doesn't count times when we really haven't eaten ina long time, don't expect another chance soon and can't obtain any other nourishment. But let's try to avoid such situations. Anyone? I need some siupport on this. 100 calories of sugar, starch and fat caked with salt and MSG is not much of an improvement over 350 calories of the same stuff.

yeah but it tastes soooo gooood.

>the excessive price of these packs is not so great

No you're wrong! The excessive price is part of their cunning plan to get you to control yourself. They jack the price up for your own good. Really. It's for the best.

[Yet another reason why it's harder for poor people to be thin].

I get a kick out of chocolate bar "singles". Like one Kit-Kat finger or a slice of Aero chocolate bar. .89 for a freaking Kit-Kat finger! Just go to the dollar store, buy a whole Kit-Kat for .65 and share with three friends. Geeeeez...a fool and their money and all that rot.

Actually, it's not the sugar, salt or fat in these 100 calorie packs that bother me...it's all the chemicals. I tried those Quaker Crispy Minis or Crispy Delights or whatever they are. The ingredient listing is mind-boggling. I love junk food, but if I'm going to "indulge" in a treat, I want it to be something real, like a homemade cookie or one of my mum's doughnuts. I'd rather eat something like that and treadmill a little harder all week than stuff myself with chemicals.

I see people buying these packages at the nearby coffee cart. Of course, the price is even higher, but it serves a purpose. Of course, water is plastic bottles is a popular product too, and, umm...

They sell these 100 calorie packs in my high school, and last year this one guy at my table would buy three packs of the 'oreo's and two pretzels or nachos every day for lunch, plus he'd bring mountain dew from home to drink. Another girl at my lunch table last year would eat half a 100 calorie pack before she got sick of the taste and steal a drink of my water every day, and be done.
The 100 cal packs taste horrible. I'd rather have a single oreo cookie with 200 calories than a pack of those crackers they call an oreo.

The greatest thing here about all of you defending the 100-calorie packs and how "great" they are -- you're too lazy and hopelessly unable to control yourself to buy one box of Oreos and eat three at a time. There's no pity or understanding here; these packages are a waste to the environment and they epitomize laziness.

Is that every interesting! I have never bought those 100 calorie portioned snacks so I never would have noticed! I guess food companies think they should charge a premium or portioning out peoples snack foods.

And we are just now figuring this out? Inform yourself, and take a walk.

When I'm not on a diet, I avoid convenience foods like the plague. However, the 100 calorie packs can be a godsend, used judiciously. I'm on Weight Watchers, because it works for me. I've counted calories and I've counted carbs and counting points is just a lot easier. I try to eat healthily...I eat Eziekiel bread, for example, and fruits and veggies, and high quality meats, etc. However, sometimes I get a huge craving for a little something sweet, which is usually cookies or chocolate, etc. This is where those packs come in. I can have a pack and not have blown my whole diet. I find that I really have to think much more when I'm Weight Watchers about what I eat (which is a good thing) and so, by eating the 100 calorie packs, that's one less thing I have to think too much about. And lest anyone assume I have nothing else to think about, I'm a full time mother to a 4 month old baby and a graduate student in English literature, which means that I have about 20 books to read right now, and I don't mean Danielle Steel, either. So for me, they work to indulge me in a very small way. As for the greater cost, ALL processed food costs much more than simple, whole foods (like eggs, cheese, etc). If used in moderation, 100 calorie packs can be a useful tool in losing weight.

I think what some people don't realize is that yes, they're costing more - but it is the price of convenience. I also want to make the point that NO ONE is saving resources by buying the stuff in bulk and portioning it out. Unless you're portioning it out into biodegradable hemp bags or something, you're using little plastic bags.... in lieu of Nabisco's little plastic bags. It's the same thing! Plus, if you buy the box of Cheez-Its, and then buy the Ziploc bags, you're really not saving much at that point! Not to mention the fact that almost all of the 100 calorie packs are different than the "actual" product, and aren't sold in any other way. Plus, as a helpful hint, if you buy them at Wal-Mart, they're CHEAP (12 packs, sometimes 15 if they have a bonus box, for just over $3)