Just read this on The Age website. Anyone surprised by this?
Court Bans Coles Fresh Bread Ads for Three Years
tightarse on 29/09/2014 - 15:45
Related Stores
Comments
"Not unlike our senior management, our bread is half-baked before entering the store"
Supermarket giant Coles has been banned for three years from advertising its bread was made or baked on the same day it was sold when this is not the case.
I would've thought that every company would be automatically and permanently banned from advertising any claim which "is not the case".
But after three years they can do it again?
Is this bureaucratic inefficiency or just poorly written journalism?
"Supermarket giant Coles has been banned for three years from advertising its bread was made or baked on the same day" … regardless of whether or not their bread is baked fresh.
Essentially, it's a order that gags them from mentioning about the "freshness" of their breads, even if they decide to freshly bake their breads from now on.
I think you are misreading the sentence.
I think you are misreading the sentence.
I don't think so, you omitted the last 9 words of the sentence.
"Supermarket giant Coles has been banned for three years from advertising its bread was made or baked on the same day it was sold" … "when this is not the case."
Essentially, it's a order that gags them from mentioning about the "freshness" of their breads, even if they decide to freshly bake their breads from now on.
I think you are misreading the sentence.
Essentially, it's a (sic) order that gags them from mentioning about the "freshness" of their breads, even if they decide to freshly bake their breads from now on.
The clause "when this is not the case" must be satisfied for the whole statement to take effect. So if it is the case that their "bread was made or baked on the same day it was sold" the ban would not apply.
An easier example:
You should not drive when you are sleepy.
That statement doesn't tell you if you are or aren't sleepy. If you are sleepy the statement tells you that you shouldn't drive. If you aren't sleepy the statement has no effect.
The difference between the word "when" and hypothetically substituting it for "if" is that "when" assumes that the following clause will be true at some point in time.
I think everyone on OZB is smart enough to understand what the author wrote.
But to elaborate on your nonsensical argument,
"this is not the case" refers to "the bread was not made or baked on the same day it was sold".
(Unless you have a different interpretation of what the "case" is.)So, substituting the above word-for-word into the original sentence results in:
Supermarket giant Coles has been banned for three years from advertising its bread "was" made or baked on the same day it was sold "when" the bread was not made or baked on the same day it was sold.
and not,
Supermarket giant Coles has been banned for three years from advertising its bread "was" made or baked on the same day it was sold "if" the bread was not made or baked on the same day it was sold.
Furthermore, "was made / was sold" as opposed to "is made / is sold" implies a past event, not a future event. Therefore, it doesn't even matter if Coles decides to or not to make fresh bread today, tomorrow, or in the future, since the ruling was about what "was" done, and not what "is or would be" done.
Therefore, the sentence is correct. This also debunks your "if/when" argument.
(However, considering that you down-voted my comments, it appears that you just want to be right. Therefore, lets just assume that you are right and end this silliness.)I downvoted you because your second reply was little more than a copy-paste of your first one.
You've made an error in changing the present tense to the past tense:
"this is not the case" should be substituted by "the bread is
wasnot made or baked on the same day it iswassold".Anyhow as I'm sure you're aware, the only difference between your two modified statements is the conjunction being "when" in the first case and "if" in the second.
However as I stated in my previous post, the conjunctions "when" and "if" have identical meanings in this case except only for the fact that "when" assumes that the following clause will be true at some point in time.
If you don't believe that you can read a concise explanation here:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/if-o…
Or more here:
"bread WAS made or baked on the same day it WAS sold" was quoted directly from YOUR original post. Just FYI.
The case IS that the "bread WAS (not) made or baked on the same day it WAS sold".
Half baked today
Serves them right.
Why did it take the comment of a premier to have any action taken? Surely others had raised this point before? Its been raised on this site a few times I believe so one would think at least one case had been raised to the ACCC before.
are they going ban fresh food fruit/veggies ads as well?
Nope because they are importing them through a loophole. A friend of mine works for Woolworths the imported fruits and veg go to N.Z first and then are redirected here. They have to go through 35 chemical checks from China, but only 6 from N.Z regardless of origin.
is this serious? is there any proof to read on this?
I have heard this also, it's a trick not only with fruits and veg but other foods too.
Be very careful with foods "Made in NZ". Our labelling and food laws that allow this are a joke and should be fixed straight away.
From what I gather from Woolie's ads 'Fresh' == ` Not frozen', or their 10 month old lettuces would be a breach.
[edited as the site seems to escape quote marks….]
Supermarket giant Coles has been banned for three years from advertising its bread was made or baked on the same day it was sold when this is not the case.
This is not clear to me. Why was this banned only for 3 years? I thought this should be banned indefinitely. Are they saying after 3 years, Coles is allowed again to sell non-fresh bread with the advertising slogan: "Fresh Bread baked today"
Yes, that bit confused me as well.
I think the only interpretation that makes sense is that for 3 years they are not allowed to use the slogans even if the bread is really baked today.
I think it means that even if they start baking bread on the same day, they can't advertise it for three years.
After 3 years if they continue not to bake it on same day, they will not be allowed advertise.
Edit: greenpossum you beat me by a couple of minutes
Coles deserves to be punished for taking Oz public for a ride; but why just 3 years?
I would assume that a breach that occurs within this time period renders Coles liable to further penalties. It's odd isn't it?
Should have been ordered to pay a hefty fine and make a written apology to its customers for taking advantage of them.
The shares for Coles will be 'Down, Down' after being busted on this matter!
..goods [bread] had in fact been made months earlier on the other side of the world, namely, Denmark, Germany and Ireland, before being frozen and transported to Australia.
These bread could have been sold at a premium price with a slogan like "European made!".
Seriously, it is cheaper to make bread in Europe, freeze them send them to Australia to be baked again?
Apparently Luneburger, a German bread chain here, does bring in parbaked bread from Germany, and they taste pretty good. So Coles missed a marketing chance by resorting to deception.
Clever and insidious marketing for Woolworths to launch their 85c everyday low price, now that people will accept that the bread ain't that fresh.
I saw the Woolworths 85c bread ad the other day and was wondering why Coles didn't counter attack with their own ad. Now I know why and also learnt about their half-baked bread.
I'm probably alone on this one but I don't really think it was misleading. The bread technically was 'baked today' even if it was partially pre-baked somewhere else. It's not like they claimed it was 'made today'.
Yes I think you are alone, but you are entitled to your lonely opinion
yeah. at least still taste better than woolies…. again taste is very subjective
time to get woolies bread!
woolies homebrand always got recall notice that worries me, so i prefer bakers' delight…… not that pocket delight though
Get their bakery bread, much better than home brand, cheaper than bakers delight.
You can't compare factory made home brand to bakers delight.
I'd like to announce a toast to the good news.
Thats a crummy joke aboabo
That's the way the joke crumbles.
A Coles Danish pastry … made in Denmark, months earlier. Kind of sounds wrong and right all at the same time.
Its like a overnight pizza tasting better the next day!
In this case it must taste many times better being months later!
I actually prefer the taste of texture of Coles glazed donuts compared to Krispy Kremes, not sure if being par-baked in Europe is the reason!
All I can say is that the frozen/whatever bread made in Ireland was much better than the one being made here now. I don't really care about the technicality of when it was made. It tasted extremely fresh and far superior to anything else available at coles/woolies. The do gooders spoiled it for everyone.
No body is stopping u from buying the stuff.
They don't sell the Irish stuff anymore. It's all Australian now.
Anybody wonder why they need to be half baked in ireland? Why couldnt Coles import the ingredients (assuming it is better than in oz) and just bake them here?
Probs just cheaper
…so this is why bread is slashed down to 85cents now
Personally I have switched to bread from Aldi. Good prices and good tasting.
didn't something like this happen to subway too how they had "half baked" bread that was frozen and baked fresh from frozen
They wont have to worry about making fresh bread for the next 3 years
Wonder what they'll put in its place: Finished today? Warmed up today? :)