You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
In July 2008 in the London High Court, P&G lawyers successfully argued that Pringles were not crisps (even though labelled "Potato Crisps" on the container) as the potato content was only 42% and their shape, P&G stated, "is not found in nature". This ruling, against a United Kingdom VAT and Duties Tribunal decision to the contrary, exempted Pringles from the then 17.5% VAT for potato crisps and potato-derived snacks.[14] In May 2009, the Court of Appeal reversed the earlier decision. A spokesman for P&G stated it had been paying the VAT proactively and owed no back taxes.[20][21]
what about eating actual chips that taste good and arent reformatted mashed potatoes
as someone who deeply loves and respects potato chips, there is no difference between a sufficiently thin actual potato chip and a Pringles-style potato crisp.
You have to get really good potato chips to notice the difference.
what about eating actual chips that taste good and arent reformatted mashed potatoes
as someone who deeply loves and respects potato chips, there is no difference between a sufficiently thin actual potato chip and a Pringles-style potato crisp.
what about eating actual chips that taste good and arent reformatted mashed potatoes
as someone who deeply loves and respects potato chips, there is no difference between a sufficiently thin actual potato chip and a Pringles-style potato crisp.
no
that's just not true at all
that is a comestible falsehood
show me the functional difference between plain Lays and a plain Pringle.
You can tell them apart but which would you rather have? It doesn't matter, they are the same thing in different shape and thickness.
I will be honest with you, before your sudden obsession with them, I did not actually know that Pringles Guy had a name.
This isn't sudden, Pringles have actually been an irregular obsession of mine since I was very young
I don't honestly know what there is to obsess over.
Don't get me wrong Pringles is a consistent snack food. They also occasionally roll out new flavors which are actually good instead of just novel (see: Mexican Dip, which seems to have disappeared). Which I can't say is true for like, most potato chip companies.
You can obsess over everything ABOUT Pringles! The logo. The can. The fun-to-say name. The bizarreness of the fact that Coke didn't swoop in and buy it when they had the chance to do so in 2011 (though P&G tried to dump it into a joint venture with Coke that would have also included their much less appealing product Sunny Delight along with Coke's own Minute Maid and Five-Alive products)
You can obsess over everything ABOUT Pringles! The logo. The can. The fun-to-say name. The bizarreness of the fact that Coke didn't swoop in and buy it when they had the chance to do so in 2011 (though P&G tried to dump it into a joint venture with Coke that would have also included their much less appealing product Sunny Delight along with Coke's own Minute Maid and Five-Alive products)
You can obsess over everything ABOUT Pringles! The logo. The can. The fun-to-say name. The bizarreness of the fact that Coke didn't swoop in and buy it when they had the chance to do so in 2011 (though P&G tried to dump it into a joint venture with Coke that would have also included their much less appealing product Sunny Delight along with Coke's own Minute Maid and Five-Alive products)
According to a BBC News report, the negative publicity escalated when a Sunny Delight television ad showing a snowman turn orange was released at about the same time as reports of a girl who had turned orange – due to the UK product's use of beta-Carotene for colour – after drinking too much Sunny Delight.
Comments
can they be legally called potato crisps?
P&G lawyers successfully argued that Pringles were not crisps (even
though labelled "Potato Crisps" on the container) as the potato content
was only 42% and their shape, P&G stated, "is not found in nature".
This ruling, against a United Kingdom VAT
and Duties Tribunal decision to the contrary, exempted Pringles from
the then 17.5% VAT for potato crisps and potato-derived snacks.[14] In May 2009, the Court of Appeal reversed the earlier decision. A spokesman for P&G stated it had been paying the VAT proactively and owed no back taxes.[20][21]
that's just not true at all
that is a comestible falsehood