Jim is right, Marcus. I bought a frozen pizza once that was labeled "22.05 OZ (625 g)". I really don't think they were trying to make it 625 g exactly. They just made the pizza how they thought best and labeled it the way they always have. People don't really care whether a package says 454 g or 450 g. They usually look at the per-unit cost on the shelf tag, if anything.
There are several reasons a company might want to have irrational sizes on labels: 1. If the company simply put less product in a package, their products will be smaller than competitors'. 2. They would need to review their pricing scheme, since the product is now a different size. 3. Changing sizes means that they are changing their product line. 4. By using more packaging (not filling containers completely), they increase costs and reduce profitability. It is hard enough just trying to change the FPLA. The change we are trying to make is to *allow* more. We are removing restrictions, not adding them, and it is still taking time. We want to make metrication possible (by removing FFU requirements) and desirable. With international market pressure, companies want freedom to label in metric only. They don't want someone telling them how to run their multi-billion dollar manufacturing operation. When metric-only labels are introduced, companies will slowly begin making rational sizes in due time. The marketplace will change, but very slowly. I like the idea of a major push to metricate immediately, but that will not happen in the U.S. any time soon because people don't want that. There is not enough support, and if people get the impression that we are telling them what to do, they won't like it. Carl
