The most recent Tide HE Laundry Detergent bottles seemed smaller than the one we were about to empty and, indeed, they were:
Call it 9% smaller, based on the volume in liters. I suspect the price was also 9% higher, but that would require more digging in the file cabinet than seems justified.
Note that both bottles claim “64 loads”, each with an asterisk (well, a lozenge ◊ symbol) explained on the label:
That’s the new chart. The old chart was more explanatory:
Note the “just below Bar 1 on cap” weasel wording. The term “meniscus” enters the chat, although laundry detergent doesn’t have much in the way of surface tension.
One might reasonably assume the bars on the new cap have gotten shorter, so that the volume of detergent used for each load would be smaller.
One would be wrong:
The blue cap on the right is one we’ve been using for the last few years, because I put black tape at the level of the first bar to match our “Medium” loads. I cannot imagine how much dirt would require filling the cap to Bar 5.
The clear cap on the left is the new cap. I filled the blue tap to the top of Bar 5 with water and poured it into the clear cap, where it comes about 3/4 of the way to the top of the new Bar 5. Evidently, the amount of detergent required to get grubby clothes clean has increased by 33%.
The old cap holds just shy of 4 fluid ounces to the top of Bar 5:
The new cap holds 5.5 fluid ounces to the top of its Bar 5:
If you have really crusty clothing, you’re now using 36% more detergent per load.
The obvious arithmetic shows the old bottle holds 23 “Bar 5” loads and the new bottle holds 15.
To the limit of my measuring ability, both caps hold 1.3 fluid ounces to the top their respective Bar 1 levels. I cannot vouch for the “just below” level, but I suspect more accurate measurements would show the new caps have slightly lower volume at that level, juuust enough to make the “64 loads” weasel wording come out right.
As with all too many such claims, they lie.
The Smell of Molten Projects in the Morning 
Comments
5 responses to “Tide HE Laundry Detergent: Shrinkflation”
Over here in Europe laundry detergent brands might advertise you need less product due to an improved formula, or simply by being more highly concentrated, resulting in less waste shipping liquid around.
(I’ve decided I prefer powder.)
IIRC, the instructions mentioned powder, but it was obvious they expected you to use the concentrated HE-formula liquid detergent. We settled on the fragrance-free flavor and that was the end of that story.
But I agree: not shipping so much water around makes a lot of sense.
$SPOUSE dislikes Tide (I try to maintain plausible deniability with respect to laundry knowledge) but rather likes Kirkland Free and Clear*, though she usually decants working quantities into smaller containers. Some of the working decanters might just have Tide logos on them.
I’ve been instructed that for my next Costco run, if Kirkland us out of stock, go with All Free and Clear.
((*)) Oxiclean F&C in liquid form was the preference for really dirty stuff, but that’s succumbed to supply chain issues. Powdered detergents and local septic systems do not get along. I don’t know if it’s universal or what the well sends up when we request water.
I vaguely recall the All brand from long ago, but Mary tells me we’ve been using Tide for as long as she’s had a say in the matter, so it’s settled.
Yes, ancient brand. I also have that t-shirt. If I want it washed, agreement is advised.