The Pringles Tube Is Being Redesigned Because It's a 'Recycling Nightmare' (bbc.com) 132
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: The distinctive Pringles tube is being re-designed after criticism that it's almost impossible to recycle. The current container for the potato-based snack was condemned as a recycler's nightmare. It's a complex construction with a metal base, plastic cap, metal tear-off lid, and foil-lined cardboard sleeve. The Recycling Association dubbed it the number one recycling villain -- along with the Lucozade Sports bottle. Now Pringles' maker Kellogg's is trialling a simpler can -- although experts say it's not a full solution. The existing version is particularly troublesome because it combines so many different materials
Some 90% of the new can is paper. Around 10% is a polyal (plastic) barrier that seals the interior to protect the food against oxygen and moisture which would damage the taste. But how about the lid? Well, two options are on trial in some Tesco stores -- a recyclable plastic lid and a recyclable paper lid. Kellogg's says these lids will still produce the distinctive "pop" associated with the product. [Simon Ellin from the Recycling Association] said the polyal-coated card might be recyclable but the product would need to be tested in recycling mills. And what of the much-criticised Lucozade Sports bottle? Mr Ellin said its unchanged basic design was still a big problem, as machines found it hard to differentiate the plastic in the bottle and the plastic that makes up its outer sleeve. He called on the makers, Suntory, to reduce the size of the external sleeve, as it has with the new Ribena bottle.
Some 90% of the new can is paper. Around 10% is a polyal (plastic) barrier that seals the interior to protect the food against oxygen and moisture which would damage the taste. But how about the lid? Well, two options are on trial in some Tesco stores -- a recyclable plastic lid and a recyclable paper lid. Kellogg's says these lids will still produce the distinctive "pop" associated with the product. [Simon Ellin from the Recycling Association] said the polyal-coated card might be recyclable but the product would need to be tested in recycling mills. And what of the much-criticised Lucozade Sports bottle? Mr Ellin said its unchanged basic design was still a big problem, as machines found it hard to differentiate the plastic in the bottle and the plastic that makes up its outer sleeve. He called on the makers, Suntory, to reduce the size of the external sleeve, as it has with the new Ribena bottle.
Paper top, not plastic (Score:4, Interesting)
Paper actually gets recycled - the paper recyclers are profitable. The reason is there is basically 1 type of paper.
Consumer Plastic is not profitable to recycle because there are 7 different types (in USA). Each one must be handled separately and it is practically impossible to separate them out. The corps can send all their type 1 waste they get pre-consumer, but any plastic you diligently put into a recylce bin is 99% likely to be land filled.
Re: (Score:2)
Paper that is covered with grease from having potato ships on it is usually not recyclable. I'm not convinced that a Pringles can will ever be meaningfully recyclable if it contains any paper at all, because the very nature of that environment precludes it.
IMO, they'd be better making it entirely out of PETE or something, so that at least would at least be straightforward to recycle it, rather than out of paper with a plastic coating, which is pretty much guaranteed to remain landfill material for the for
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Some, not all, places have you put greasy paper/boxes in with the yard waste for composting. But, if there is a plastic lining it likely rules that out.
Unless of course the plastic is biodegradable. TFA doesn't mention whether that's the case for the 10% plastic in the current design, but it does say the company designing the container [Suntory] is "working on a new material made entirely from seaweed extract that [is] 100% edible, biodegradable and compostable."
Re: (Score:2)
Suntory? I wonder if that's the Japanese whisky and gin distiller?
But, in any case, the Suntory mention in the story isn't about the Pringles container - it's about Lucozade Sport drink, which shared the "top spot" (so to speak) with Pringles.
(and to answer my question... according to Wikipedia, the sport drink is indeed made by the Japanese distiller)
Re: (Score:3)
Greasy paper may not be recyclable but at least it's compostable. But plastic is neither compostable nor easily recyclable unlike foil and so replacing the foil with plastic is a step backwards. I can't believe they're actually considering it.
Cardboard coated with a vegetable oil-based wax might work. It's both airtight and compostable. Yes it can go rancid, but only after months of storage.
Re: (Score:2)
Greasy paper may not be recyclable but at least it's compostable. But plastic is neither compostable nor easily recyclable unlike foil and so replacing the foil with plastic is a step backwards. I can't believe they're actually considering it.
I think they just misspelled "polyol" there, which doesn't necessarily preclude compostability.
Re: (Score:2)
Have a look at the "best by" date on some pringles cans. There's a fair chance they've spent many weeks in transport/storage since manufacture, so rancidity is definitely a concern, but there's ways to extend that.
Re: (Score:2)
>IMO, they'd be better making it entirely out of PETE or something, so that at least would at least be straightforward to recycle
Or better yet, metal. Make an extra-tall beer can with a plastic or screw-on lid. Aluminum, steel, whatever you like. Metal has the benefit of being extremely easy to recycle no matter how dirty it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Aluminum, steel, whatever you like. Metal has the benefit of being extremely easy to recycle
About 65% of aluminum is recycled. So by the third cycle, most are in a landfill.
Re:Paper top, not plastic (Score:5, Informative)
Aluminum, steel, whatever you like. Metal has the benefit of being extremely easy to recycle
About 65% of aluminum is recycled. So by the third cycle, most are in a landfill.
In the US the Aluminium can recycling rate was at around 50% in November 2019. In Germany, for example, the recycling rate is over 90%, 75% in the UK and ~70 in France, the European average was 73.6% 9 in 2018 so it mostly just depends on what your culture's perception of value is. By any reasonable business logic the recycling of Aluminium is way cheaper and makes more sense than dumping the stuff in landfills and then mining and smelting bauxite to make new aluminium. According to EPA data, in 2017, US landfills received approximately 2.7 million tons of aluminium which means that US America is missing out on a pretty enormous business opportunity or, if you look at it from another perspective, a resounding victory for Aluminium mining industry lobbyists.
Re: Paper top, not plastic (Score:2)
That's down to lazy and dirty people either not putting it in the recycling or just littering. It is a better option than plastic.
Re: (Score:2)
or not realising. The protective foil was aluminium? Well, colour me surprised! I thought it was plastic, it doesn't exactly feel like aluminium after all.
I always cut the metal base off (why is that metal and not plastic like the lid?) and recycle that and the card separately. Beats me why they can't make the whole tube out of the same design they use for coffee cups that are now recyclable as the plastic lining comes away and can be fished out (apparently).
Or we could just burn the whole lot and reduce th
Re: (Score:2)
In the San Francisco Bay Area (serviced by Recology), greasy paper/cardboard is composted if you put it in the right bin. The compost is sorted, graded and often ends up in soil for wine grapes in Napa / Sonoma counties.
Problem -- pizza boxes are a common form of this, but folks often throw those in the paper/cardboard/plastics/metal bin. Not kosher, but perhaps these are manually separated
on a good day. In any case, stuff put into the trash bin is not further sorted and that goes straight to landfill.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: Paper top, not plastic (Score:2)
Ive never had greasy Pringles. They are certainly much less so than chips like Ruffles, whose chios in the bottom of the bag are always soaked.
Re: (Score:2)
Paper that is covered with grease from having potato ships on it is usually not recyclable. I'm not convinced that a Pringles can will ever be meaningfully recyclable if it contains any paper at all, because the very nature of that environment precludes it.
Are Pringles greasy? I thought they were baked? I seem to recall them stating something like that in a commercial 30 years ago. I could be wrong though, as I could probably count the number of times I've eaten them on one hand.
They're not ridiculously greasy, but they're definitely not zero-grease. And I'm pretty sure they're fried.
Re: (Score:2)
Plastic recycling is also very questionable as far as environment goes. For example, if you have to wash the plastic thing you want to recycle in warm water before putting it in the bin, it's probably a net negative for the environment when other option is to put it into trash that is burned for energy. My apartment building recently got the plastic recycling bin, and that is in the instruction printed on top of the bin.
Considering that this stuff is going to be greasy, and grease burns quite well just as p
Re: (Score:2)
It's only confusing because you're ignorant as hell [sciencedirect.com] concerning incineration. Nobody's running plasma gasification furnaces to generate energy.
Re: (Score:2)
You're scientifically illiterate. The abstract literally starts with:
>Incineration of plastic waste in an open field
Which is not done in overwhelming majority of waste incineration plants that exist in the Western countries.
Re: (Score:2)
I defy you to identify a meaningful distinction between open field burning and a MSW furnace [smithsonianmag.com]. They're inherently open since they use a moving grate system [bioenergyconsult.com] to load the furnace and dump the bottom ash. They operate at less than 1000 C, which means that it's essentially impossible to c [squarespace.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You could literally look at the thing you're citing. We have everything from process control, industrial automation, scrubbers, catalytic converters and so on.
The last link you're citing is hilarious nonsense, which is why it's on squarespace. The favoured hosting for cheap way to make a website for people posting things like conspiracy theories. It's literally listing things we've long developed process control to completely eliminate in burning today as if they're relevant today, and is open about being a
Re: (Score:2)
And still they routinely fail to meet NAAQS requirements.
Ad hominem fallacy. Either you dispute the factual accuracy of Table 7 or you do not. Since those actions are public records, I suggest that you do not.
Re: (Score:2)
>Either you dispute the factual accuracy of Table 7 or you do not. Since those actions are public records, I suggest that you do not.
You remind me of the anti vaccers. Your arguments are carbon copy of theirs - "there's a tiny amount of this chemical in vaccine which here in table 7 says causes damage, cancer, etc, therefore vaccines are horrible for your health".
And environmental agencies issue violations for things like momentary failures in automation. Which sometimes happen, because no automation is
Re: (Score:2)
Table 7 was where the plants were exceeding the Federal NAAQS for those elements.
"We only caused 10 cancers in 100,000. So what if we're supposed to cause at most 1 cancer in 100,000."
Re: (Score:2)
That may be what you call it, but it doesn't do what you claim [princeton.edu]. And it also routinely fails to be controlled [epa.gov], even in this decade.
Re: (Score:2)
"If you don't get 100%, you get nothing."
Anti-vaccine argumentation at its finest.
Re: (Score:2)
NAAQS aren't 100% removal, and this isn't vaccination.
Re: Paper top, not plastic (Score:2)
Would be good to see the impact of either, in function of carbon content of energy source which may be very low in some countries
Re: (Score:2)
Recycling (and producing) paper uses much more energy and water than recycling plastic. In general, as a packaging material, plastic is much more environmentally friendly than paper, assuming that it is disposed of properly. Modern recycling systems can easily separate the different types of plastic (but possibly doing so is not cost effective in countries without the proper legal framework).
Note that it has already been known for years that the Pringles can is a recycling nightmare. They just don't care, o
Cantenna hackers are panicking! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Cantenna hackers are panicking! (Score:4, Insightful)
really? (Score:3)
Cantenna hackers are panicking!
Oh no, how will we ever get access to a metallic cylinders?! I hope someone can pipe me a solution!
Re: (Score:2)
No they aren't. The Pringles can was one of the worst possible cantennas for most applications.
Was a nightmare to recycle these in Tokyo. (Score:5, Interesting)
I lived in Tokyo (Kawasaki-ku) for a month last year, and -- recycling Pringles was a nightmare. The Japanese system is detailed, let's say, -- much more so than the fairly involved system here in Seattle, and taken much more seriously.
Whenever I bought Pringles, I had to get a pair of scissors, cut off the tops and bottoms, (which is hard, because it's a thick cardboard,) and put the parts into 3 different bags, and even then, I'm not sure I did it right. It was far more work than anything else I bought.
My simpler solution was to just stop buying Pringles. But it was really too bad, because I love the taste, and it's nice to have something familiar now and then in a foreign country.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be easier just to light it on fire and recycle the metal? It's not like the oil-soaked, metal-infused paper can be recycled, so it's probably just going to get incinerated in the end anyway. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be easier just to light it on fire and recycle the metal? It's not like the oil-soaked, metal-infused paper can be recycled, so it's probably just going to get incinerated in the end anyway. :-)
I suspect it's not entirely trivial to separate the metal from the paper ash that remains after burning. I'd be interested in hearing the opinion of a process engineer on the matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the metal is the ring at the top and the plate at the bottom. It should be trivial to at least separate those two.
If you care enough to separate out the foil, it should be possible to separate it mechanically, either by heating it until the metal liquefies or by suspending it in water, then agitating it. Aluminum is a little more than three times as dense as wood ash, so in suspension or in a liquid state, the aluminum should sink to the bottom. Then just dispose of the ash.
Actually, now that I
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks. I suspected much of what you said, but hoped for an expert to chime in.
Aluminum is plentiful, but expensive to manufacture energy-wise, so it makes sense to recover it in recycling wherever possible.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if Pringles cans differ from country to country, but here in Canada they don't have a metal ring at the top like a nuts/peanuts can, it's just rolled-up cardboard like what you'd find on a fast food drink cup and the plastic/metal foil seems to be glued/heat sealed on the rim.
Re: (Score:2)
It's probably the same here. I've never ripped the top rim of one apart.
Re: (Score:2)
I just cut the top of one, there's no metal apart from the laminated internal foil, which happens to be on the outside at the top because of the rolled rim. Maybe that's why some people think there's a metal ring at the top?
Re: (Score:2)
What if you just skipped the recycling ritual altogether? Surely you'd be safe from the sorcerous wrath of the Earth spirits in Tokyo.
You could buy organic clothes and gluten-free sunglasses for extra protection.
Pringles are quite tasty.
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIK in Japan trash and recycling bags are see-through so your neighbours can see if you're a good citizen or not, shame forcing you to properly triage your trash and recycling.
Re: (Score:2)
And you can still just decide to live your life and let them see what they see rather than worrying about what will people think about the contents of these trash bags. If they're going to be jerks about trash disposal rituals, then they walk around looking for excuses to be jerks every day.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing keeping an individual from pushing back against (or simply ignoring) ritual behavior that has nothing to do with anyone. If people want to be jerks about your trash, they can go ahead. I don't know if there's a Japanese equivalent to "why are you being a jerk (a. k. a. a Karen) about something that has nothing to do with you or anyone else?"
We don't have to observe religious environmentalist rituals unless the environmentalist religious police are watching. Without firsthand knowledge, I will gue
Re: (Score:2)
I know. I'm pretty sure that, regardless of cultural attitudes, people retain the ability to make individual choices.
Re: (Score:2)
We should all consider alternate thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
I use a Stanley knife (aka box cutter) for Pringles tubes. Not the easiest thing to prepare for recycling, but not as bad as getting the labels off many glass bottles.
Re: (Score:2)
Why don't they just stop using cans for them? Most crisps come in a bag and they could even make that out of strong paper.
BTW if you haven't tried them the Calbee salad flavour potato sticks are delicious.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Recycling is a bit oversold (Score:4, Informative)
From NPR, a group that one would think would be pro-recycling: [npr.org]
Heck, a lot of places nowadays don't even recycle glass. [google.com]
Metal I think is okay. Probably high quality cardboard. That's about it as far as I can tell. We do the ritual cleaning and sorting but it's mostly an empty ritual at this point, as far as I can tell. I would like to be wrong about this but I don't think I am.
Re: (Score:3)
It's all about marketing - making people believe the can is recyclable. It has metal which seems to be legitimately recyclable but the rest of it is just standard deceptive marketing with what the plastics industry has done in the past (and don't get me wrong - I'm not a luddite or a flowers-in-my-dreadlocks hippie - plastic is fantastically important for healthcare and packaging - but we still have a problem with waste, cannot ignore the reality):
Re:Recycling is a bit oversold (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not sure about all the differences between US and EU regarding plastic recycling, but here in the Netherlands it doesn't look so dark. Here is a video on a sorting facility for a mixture of plastic, cans, and beverage cartons: https://youtu.be/WB0nMz8pgdY [youtu.be] . The commentary is on Dutch, but summarizing, they separate the mixture into aluminum, steel, cartons, and various types of plastic (PP, PET, PE, etc.) using eddy currents (aluminum), magnets (steel), image recognition (cartons), mechanical size selection, and IR spectroscopy (plastic types).
Here is another company reworking plastics into granules: https://youtu.be/zOr7cfFSmvk [youtu.be] .
Now, these are promotional videos and I'm sure they skip over the fact that a part of the plastic stream cannot be identified or is too much contaminated and ends up being burned. Also, most plastic packaging cannot be recycled into food containers for safety reasons, and whatever they recycle it into (plastic crates, toys) won't be recycled again, so you could argue whether it can be called "recycling" rather than lifecycle extension.
I think the EU requires that consumer plastic waste is processed within the EU; it cannot be shipped to Asia or Africa for "recycling".
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds more like the industry sold the public on an idea they knew American government was too incompetent to implement. The reality is plastic still is valuable, as a fuel source, as a product stream for mixing with other processes, and no when done properly it is not more expensive than making new.
I suppose the areas which consider them expensive are still taking the 90s era approach of separate bins, getting people to try and recycle, or similar useless recycling mechanisms. These days where I live the o
What pop? (Score:2)
I just ate a small tube of salt and vinegar pringles, the pop is a myth.
Re:What pop? (Score:5, Insightful)
I just ate a small tube of salt and vinegar pringles
I'm very sorry.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm also sorry, because what diabolical grocery store would sell him small Pringles tubes?
It's not like Pringles couldn't hire an intern (Score:2)
in package design to spend 10 minutes to create a foil pouch shaped like a can.
Paper can be composted (Score:2)
should have seen the original can (Score:3)
When Pringles first came out, the can had corrugated paper on the inside in addition to a metal pull top. the corrugated paper kept the chips from breaking.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm really not sure they deserve to be called "chips". They're made from a potato-based dough that's pressed into that shape and dried.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes they are dried by deep-frying in oil and made of potatoes. Literally the definition of a chip. Having added cornstarch does not make them non-chips.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say the definition of a chip was that is was chipped off a potato and fried.
So it fails to be a chip from that point of view. Reformed as it is.
That definitions work both for chips and in this case crisps as they are. Either way though pringles aint them. The paprika ones are nice though!
Re: (Score:2)
So all those corn-based and vegetables-based chips are not proper chips by your narrow definition?
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say the definition of a chip was that is was chipped off a potato and fried.
They are chipped off a potato, just in very small chips. Then mixed with cornstarch, rolled and fried. The size of the chip does not a chip make.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pringles have about 42% potato content, the remainder being wheat starch and flours (potato, corn, and rice) combined with vegetable oils, an emulsifier, salt, and seasoning.[17] Other ingredients can include sweeteners such as maltodextrin and dextrose, monosodium glutamate (MSG), disodium inosinate, disodium guanylate, sodium caseinate, modified food starch, monoglyceride and diglyceride, autolyzed yeast extract, natural and artificial flavorings, malted barley flour, wheat bran, dried b
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah exactly what I said. Potato chips mixed with starch. The rest of the ingredient list is literally in every other chip as well, it's called seasoning.
Re: (Score:2)
The English calls french fries "chips", so I guess pretty much anything potato-based can be chips.
Hell, in Soviet Russia they even sell liquid chips.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if there are two "go to" countries the rest of the world looks to for leadership when it comes to food, it's certainly England and Russia. :-D
Re: (Score:2)
Message to England and Russia. [imgflip.com]
wifi extender (Score:2)
Hold onto those old tubes,
they're great for extending wifi range
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Laminated = Bad (Score:2)
Instead these product containers could just have form-fitted plastic "bag" that fits inside cardboard, but is not laminated/glued/etc so should trivially slide out of product or allow exterior cardboard to otherwise be removed. There just isn't a consumer benefit to having everything stuck together, or preventing the consumer from disassembling it. Similarly, seems like if they want metal base, that can be fitted cap that can be removed as easily as the top.
I mean, the higher amount of materials will tend t
IT COULD BE WORSE AMERICANS (Score:2)
You could have the dingy little 'weeny' pringles that Australia now has, after they moved us from US sized can (can just fit your hand in) to these tiny asian cans - they suck.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You're not far from the truth [twitter.com].
What's the point given current state of recycling? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And yet those materials are real, physical things while money is an imaginary thing invented by humans. We truly are fucked-up as a species.
NOOOOOOOOO! (Score:3)
Or (Score:3)
Stop eating this garbage. It's probably made with the scraps that the other companies sweep off the floor. Now they started selling the "all dressed" flavor in the states! All other flavors pale in comparison. Voodoo chips are probably the closest you can get.
Re: (Score:2)
They are literally made with a mixture of corn starch and potato flakes. The notion that they are "made with scraps" is just completely ignorant of basically the entire food industry. Quite the opposite, when you bulk buy on the scale of a large manufacturer you typically get fine raw ingredients without the extra steps needed to make them single person friendly at your local shop.
Re: (Score:2)
You're talking about fruitcake [youtu.be]?
Guess that means no more cantennas (Score:2)
Most of the problem is marketing ... (Score:2)
Part of the problem with food packaging, is all the marketing plastered over it.
Surely a hi-tech solution can be found. One potential solution is augmented reality. The product on the shelf can be almost entirely plain, but a bar code identifier could be used to display product info - and yes, marketing, on a mobile device.
As for the packaging of fruit, vegetables and other perishables, this should be stopped for smaller volumes.
In fact, to encourage people to not buy more than they need. If the only way to
What? (Score:2)
optimize for sustainability, not some fucking lid pop sound :mindblown:
Wait, itn't it just like a milk carton? (Score:2)
You know... cardboard with aluminimum and a plastic foil layer on top?
Because yeah, I always assumes that's impossible to recycle.
Though if you finely grind it, and separate it by density (by throwing it in a vacuum and seeing how far and into which bucker it flies), you can recycle it.
Also, I think you could dissolve the glue, and the layers would come off. Or heat it until the plastic melts off the aluminium,, if that is just melted on
Re: (Score:2)
The metal bottom lid is pressed on the cardboard body, making it nearly impossible to separate them apart before recycling. It's the same problem with nuts cans.
I don't get this obsession with companies making hard-to-manufacture, hard-to-recycle multi-materials containers.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in the homeland of Linux, we've never had metal in milk cartons. At least since the 1980s, which is the earliest I can remember. It's just cardboard with some kind of plastic coating. It seems to work with some other products such as syrup as well, but most cardboard packages for liquids still have the metal layer.
Coffee used to come in plastic vacuum packages with a metal layer, but in recent years they have mostly done away with the metal, presumably due to recycling concerns.
Standardized Containers? (Score:2)
How about we standardize on containers?
Today, companies distinguish their products by the design of their packaging. That's really neat from a marketing standpoint, but it is super wasteful. Would it not be better if there were 10 standard beverage containers, all with the same shape, size, material, cap, and label. It seems to me that reduces the cost of production lines, filling lines, transportation, packaging, recycling, ... the whole life cycle. Sure, it means your Powerade, Gatorade, and Vitamin w
Recycling is insane (Score:2)
The current methods of recycling are just plain insane, among other things vainly hoping to undo entropy, for example by "comingling" everything and then hiring slaves to sort it.
A better solution is on the one hand reuse, which was common before the "no deposit, no return" revolution of the 60s, and on the other hand continuous chemical-engineered separation processes. The problem is that those involve energy, and there is a religious fervor about any process that consumes energy, since energy generally
Re: (Score:2)
The current methods of recycling are just plain insane, among other things vainly hoping to undo entropy, for example by "comingling" everything and then hiring slaves to sort it.
I've been to the USA once over a decade ago, and I thought it was ridiculous to have just one can for "recyclables". What's a recyclable? Isn't it much easier to recycle things like paper, metal and glass separately, because you know what they are. Of course, even those have their problems because a lot of packagings have mixed layers of different materials. But at least you could start with the obvious.
Paper vs. cardboard is an interesting split, because they're basically the same material. I've been to
Re: Never heard a "pop" (Score:2)
That's because you don't live at altitude. Here in the rocky mountains I hear a pop from Pringles - if they haven't popped from the air pressure before they got to me. The same is true for nuts and many other containers.
Re: (Score:2)
But would you be depressed and no longer buy them if some new recycling friendly package didn't pop anymore? Probably not. I mean, I would understand if Harley Davidson buyers would no longer buy their motorcycles that didn't crank out that awful racket, but potato chip buyers and the can popping open... seriously???
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure the Pringles pavlovian conditioning is not about the popping sound. The proof is that after reading "Pringles" so many times so far in this thread, I'm already eating some.
Now I'm hoping people will start writing "Nestea" a few dozen times, I'm getting thirsty from eating all those Pringles.
Re: (Score:2)
They used to pop way back when they had the aluminum pull-top lids.
Re: (Score:2)
They also mean different things. Trialing implies they're doing a trial run of the new cans (which they are), not just trying different versions in their workshop.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.google.com/amp/s/d... [google.com]