2. 职称英语
  3. With the super-sizing of meals, restaurants found easy profits from consumer

With the super-sizing of meals, restaurants found easy profits from consumer

游客2024-05-01  15
问题     With the super-sizing of meals, restaurants found easy profits from consumers willing to pay a little extra to get what seemed like a lot more. Now. to appeal to health-conscious consumers who’d happily pass along the responsibility of trimming calories to someone else . restaurants and food manufacturers are rolling out snacks, beverages, and meals in tiny portions. And miniaturizing(小型化)could prove to be just as profitable as super-sizing.
    Dairy Queen and Starbucks are among the eateries to have recently launched tiny menu item treats. These treats aren’t expensive. but you get what you pay for. Actually. considering how small these menu items are. customers arguably get less than what they’re paying for. But that seems to be OK to many consumers who accept the tradeoff of paying a premium in order to avoid eating more than they’d hope.
    In terms of unit-size pricing, larger containers generally give more bang for the money. Everyone of a certain age must recall that 3-liter bottles of soda used to be the best drink choice at kids’ birthday parties—because they offered better value than handing out individual cans to each child. Now you might be worried that each child would drink an entire 3-liter bottle himself. But with items in small containers, you’re paying more for the packaging and less for the actual product. And why do we want that? "Americans don’t want to think about it. " says Carolyn Cost in, a food psychologist. "We’d like to be able to stop in a place and have our food made, packaged and certified for us as just enough. " He further explains.
    In purely financial terms, the mini-treats, mini-meals, and mini-cans are bad deals. The trend is mostly good regardless. For decades. American consumers have gotten used to portions getting bigger and bigger, and the extras that used to be brought home in doggie bags seem to increasingly wind up finished in one sitting.
    So. in the same way the best way to stop snacking, or smoking, or drinking is to get the snacks(or cigarettes or vodka)out of the house, there’s some logic to handing off the calorie-intake responsibility to someone else. If the option to indulge and overdo things is removed, more people will refrain from indulging and overdoing things. That’s good for their health, though not so good for getting the most value for their money.
    Whether the goal is to save more or cut calories, self-control often comes up short. That’s why every little bit of help helps.  [br] What does the author mean by "larger containers generally give more bang for the money"(Line 1, Para. 3)?
选项 A、Larger containers are so fragile that they are easy to break.
B、Larger containers usually cost more money.
C、Larger containers can offer people more value than smaller ones.
D、Larger containers enjoy great popularity among the people.
答案 C
解析 根据题干提示定位到原文第三段第一句：In terms of unit-size pricing，larger containers generally give more bang for the money．可知大一点的容器包装通常更划算，即得到的价值比小包装的要多。故C)项正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3578993.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)