Re: Time to Boycott Hersheys

[Pico Rico]

"Sqwertz" <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message
news:75ystp3k4wxz$.dlg@sqwertz.com...
> In an attempt to dominate the Chocolate World, Hersheys has blocked
> the import of all Cadbury chocolate into the United States. Next up
> are Switzerland and Belgium.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/24/nyregion/after-a-deal-british-chocolates-wont-cross-the-pond.html
>
> I used to be loyal to Hersheys since I lived near there, not so much
> because of their default chocolate. But now I say screw 'em. Just
> another greedy corporation using their weight to nudge out the little
> guys for a mere 1/20th of a percentage of the domestic chocolate
> market.
>
> Get your REAL Cadbury chocolatse while you can and make sure it's not
> manufactured by Hershey's.
>
> -sw

You should be upset with Cadbury, not Hershey.

Cadbury COULD have changed their packaging to avoid trademark/tradedress
infringement problems, but they chose not to.

Cadbury COULD have decided to sell their Cadbury items in the US rather than
license Hershey to sell Hershey products under the Cadbury Trademark, but
they chose not to.

[Dave Smith]

On 2015-01-27 10:22 AM, Pico Rico wrote:

> You should be upset with Cadbury, not Hershey.
>
> Cadbury COULD have changed their packaging to avoid trademark/tradedress
> infringement problems, but they chose not to.
>
> Cadbury COULD have decided to sell their Cadbury items in the US rather than
> license Hershey to sell Hershey products under the Cadbury Trademark, but
> they chose not to.
>

I don't know about that, but I do know that Hershey's is really strange
tasting chocolate. Cadburys is much better.

[notbob]

On 2015-01-27, Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> I don't know about that, but I do know that Hershey's is really strange
> tasting chocolate. Cadburys is much better.

Really? I feel jes the opposite. Cadbury's always tastes like
there's still some foil on that chunk I jes bit off. A synthetic
metalic flavor.

nb

[Cindy Hamilton]

On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 11:18:02 AM UTC-5, Dave Smith wrote:

> I don't know about that, but I do know that Hershey's is really strange
> tasting chocolate. Cadburys is much better.

Oh, well, there's no disputing taste. I like the slightly sour-milk
flavor of Hershey's. Other milk chocolates taste one-dimensional.

I generally eat semi-sweet, anyway. More flavor bang for the caloric
buck. Lindt, in the white wrapper. Just finished a little piece,
maybe half an ounce.

Cindy Hamilton

[James Silverton]

I was badly disappointed by my first American KitKat candy. The
difference was that the Cadbury version used hazel nuts and the American
one made by Hershey's, pea nuts. i think that is still the case.

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.

[Pico Rico]

"Sqwertz" <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message

news:1cx6azo37ee3$.dlg@sqwertz.com...

> On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 07:22:41 -0800, Pico Rico wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message
>> news:75ystp3k4wxz$.dlg@sqwertz.com...
>>> In an attempt to dominate the Chocolate World, Hersheys has blocked
>>> the import of all Cadbury chocolate into the United States. Next up
>>> are Switzerland and Belgium.
>>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/24/nyregion/after-a-deal-british-chocolates-wont-cross-the-pond.html
>>>
>>> I used to be loyal to Hersheys since I lived near there, not so much
>>> because of their default chocolate. But now I say screw 'em. Just
>>> another greedy corporation using their weight to nudge out the little
>>> guys for a mere 1/20th of a percentage of the domestic chocolate
>>> market.
>>>
>>> Get your REAL Cadbury chocolatse while you can and make sure it's not
>>> manufactured by Hershey's.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> You should be upset with Cadbury, not Hershey.
>>
>> Cadbury COULD have changed their packaging to avoid trademark/tradedress
>> infringement problems, but they chose not to.
>

> Changing to packaging of the Twix (or was it KitKat?) would not have
> affected the restriction. Anything with the Cadbury name on it would
> have been disallowed. All the other Cadbury products are banned not
> because of similarities in packaging.

>
>> Cadbury COULD have decided to sell their Cadbury items in the US rather
>> than
>> license Hershey to sell Hershey products under the Cadbury Trademark, but
>> they chose not to.
>

> Yes, Cabdury gave up some of it's rights here in the U.S. with the
> license deal. But it was not an exclusive license to *sell* Cadbury
> products here in the U.S. - only to manufacture them. Hershey's then
> used the weight of its mighty lawyers and to scare away the little
> importer(s).
>
> -sw

you read the license agreement?

[Dave Smith]

On 2015-01-27 12:48 PM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

> Oh, well, there's no disputing taste. I like the slightly sour-milk
> flavor of Hershey's. Other milk chocolates taste one-dimensional.
>
> I generally eat semi-sweet, anyway. More flavor bang for the caloric
> buck. Lindt, in the white wrapper. Just finished a little piece,
> maybe half an ounce.
>

I usually have dark chocolate, something in the 75-80% cocoa fat range.
If you like Lindt you should try the hot pepper version. I love that
stove. I once made the mistake of getting the Wasabi version. it was
on sale cheap. It definitely tasted of wasabi and based on that
experience, my humble opinion is that chocolate and wasabi are not a
good combination.

[dsi1]

The Cadbury tends to be kind of bland - it's kind of like a fake chocolate. I'm not a big fan of chocolate but I do have a 6 pack of Hershey's Bars in the refrigerator. It's great stuff and it's pretty much the archetype of milk chocolate in my mind.

[Pico Rico]

"Sqwertz" <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message

news:1o73xhks3zw5a$.dlg@sqwertz.com...

>> you read the license agreement?
>

> A license agreement between Cadbury and Hershey's cannot exclude a
> third party importer/exporter. Anybody is free to start a Cadbury
> importing business. There's nothing preventing Cadbury from selling
> their products unrestricted to you or your agent in the U.K - or any
> other distributor for that matter.
>
> Just be prepared for a legal battle.
>
> -sw

Wrong. Grey market imports are subject to trademark infringement actions
when the gray market product is materially different from the corresponding
U.S. version of the product.

Clearly that is the case here.

[dsi1]

On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 7:48:40 AM UTC-10, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 11:18:02 AM UTC-5, Dave Smith wrote:
>
> > I don't know about that, but I do know that Hershey's is really strange
> > tasting chocolate. Cadburys is much better.
>
> Oh, well, there's no disputing taste. I like the slightly sour-milk
> flavor of Hershey's. Other milk chocolates taste one-dimensional.

That sounds disgusting yet kind of tasty! :-)

OTOH, when I think of Hershey's Bars, I think of how the GIs in WWII must have felt when they had to time to open one of those babies. It must have been quite pleasurable. It must have opened up memories of home and their sweethearts back home. Now, when I am able to partake, I like to think of WWII. I guess that's only fair.

[Jean B.]

Sqwertz wrote:
> In an attempt to dominate the Chocolate World, Hersheys has blocked
> the import of all Cadbury chocolate into the United States. Next up
> are Switzerland and Belgium.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/24/nyregion/after-a-deal-british-chocolates-wont-cross-the-pond.html
>
> I used to be loyal to Hersheys since I lived near there, not so much
> because of their default chocolate. But now I say screw 'em. Just
> another greedy corporation using their weight to nudge out the little
> guys for a mere 1/20th of a percentage of the domestic chocolate
> market.
>
> Get your REAL Cadbury chocolatse while you can and make sure it's not
> manufactured by Hershey's.
>
> -sw
>

Not hard to boycott them, especially when one reads the ingredients in
most of their products. It is not good that OUR lousy standards for
chocolate are now being forced on another part of the world.

[Jean B.]

Sqwertz wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 07:22:41 -0800, Pico Rico wrote:
>

>> "Sqwertz" <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message
>> news:75ystp3k4wxz$.dlg@sqwertz.com...
>>> In an attempt to dominate the Chocolate World, Hersheys has blocked
>>> the import of all Cadbury chocolate into the United States. Next up
>>> are Switzerland and Belgium.
>>>
>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/24/nyregion/after-a-deal-british-chocolates-wont-cross-the-pond.html
>>>
>>> I used to be loyal to Hersheys since I lived near there, not so much
>>> because of their default chocolate. But now I say screw 'em. Just
>>> another greedy corporation using their weight to nudge out the little
>>> guys for a mere 1/20th of a percentage of the domestic chocolate
>>> market.
>>>
>>> Get your REAL Cadbury chocolatse while you can and make sure it's not
>>> manufactured by Hershey's.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> You should be upset with Cadbury, not Hershey.
>>
>> Cadbury COULD have changed their packaging to avoid trademark/tradedress
>> infringement problems, but they chose not to.
>

> Changing to packaging of the Twix (or was it KitKat?) would not have
> affected the restriction. Anything with the Cadbury name on it would
> have been disallowed. All the other Cadbury products are banned not
> because of similarities in packaging.
>

>> Cadbury COULD have decided to sell their Cadbury items in the US rather than
>> license Hershey to sell Hershey products under the Cadbury Trademark, but
>> they chose not to.
>

> Yes, Cabdury gave up some of it's rights here in the U.S. with the
> license deal. But it was not an exclusive license to *sell* Cadbury
> products here in the U.S. - only to manufacture them. Hershey's then
> used the weight of its mighty lawyers and to scare away the little
> importer(s).
>

> -sw
>
I was speaking more of the egg issue. But yes, imported products with
the traditional ingredients as vs. what we get here, too.

[Dave Smith]

On 2015-01-27 3:03 PM, Jean B. wrote:

> I was speaking more of the egg issue. But yes, imported products with
> the traditional ingredients as vs. what we get here, too.

Those Cadbury eggs are disgusting. I grew up with Laura Secord eggs.

[Saint George]

On 27/01/2015 02:58 am, Sqwertz wrote:
> In an attempt to dominate the Chocolate World, Hersheys has blocked
> the import of all Cadbury chocolate into the United States. Next up
> are Switzerland and Belgium.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/24/nyregion/after-a-deal-british-chocolates-wont-cross-the-pond.html
>
> I used to be loyal to Hersheys since I lived near there, not so much
> because of their default chocolate. But now I say screw 'em. Just
> another greedy corporation using their weight to nudge out the little
> guys for a mere 1/20th of a percentage of the domestic chocolate
> market.
>
> Get your REAL Cadbury chocolatse while you can and make sure it's not
> manufactured by Hershey's.
>
> -sw
>

I'm all for it, as long as that horrible Hersheys crap stops coming in
our direction...

[sf]

On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 07:22:41 -0800, "Pico Rico"

Same sort of problem with Lea & Perrins.

--
A kitchen without a cook is just a room

[Jean B.]

Well *I* don't like them, but I do see why those who DO like them are
protesting. I really don't like what happens when corporate
conglomerates start mucking around with traditional foods.

[Pico Rico]

"Sqwertz" <swe...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message

news:14se4yem...@sqwertz.com...

> Whoosh. Yes, Hershey's may have a case (agreement was reached outside
> of litigation, it seems). But you totally ignored the point I was
> making - that Cadbury in the U.K can sell to whoever they want to.
> There is nothing in any license agreement between two parties that can
> bind a third party.
>
> -sw

Cadbury can agree not to sell to those who it knows or learns is selling in
the licensee's exclusive territory. Cadbury can include in its terms of
sale a condition that the purchaser will not sell in its licensee's
exclusive territory.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 1/27/2015 2:27 PM, Sqwertz wrote:

> There is nothing in any license agreement between two parties that can
> bind a third party.
>
> -sw
>

True, but in the case of grey market goods there are always warranty
responsibility issues. Candy bars are not a big deal, bur cameras and
electronics can be.

[Bryan-TGWWW]

On Monday, January 26, 2015 at 8:58:33 PM UTC-6, Sqwertz wrote:
> In an attempt to dominate the Chocolate World, Hersheys has blocked
> the import of all Cadbury chocolate into the United States. Next up
> are Switzerland and Belgium.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/24/nyregion/after-a-deal-british-chocolates-wont-cross-the-pond.html
>
> I used to be loyal to Hersheys since I lived near there, not so much
> because of their default chocolate. But now I say screw 'em. Just
> another greedy corporation using their weight to nudge out the little
> guys for a mere 1/20th of a percentage of the domestic chocolate
> market.
>
> Get your REAL Cadbury chocolatse while you can and make sure it's not
> manufactured by Hershey's.
>

I'm currently enjoying this product from ALDI. It's priced like Hershey's
or Cadbury, but I like it far more than either of those brands.
https://www.aldi.co.uk/en/product-range/exclusive-to-aldi/chocolate/choceur/choceur-product-detail-page/ps/p/dark-hazelnut-chocolate/

>
> -sw

--Bryan

[Bryan-TGWWW]

On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 11:48:40 AM UTC-6, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>
>
> I generally eat semi-sweet, anyway. More flavor bang for the caloric
> buck. Lindt, in the white wrapper. Just finished a little piece,
> maybe half an ounce.
>

Lindt is good chocolate, and the sugar calories from chocolate are nicely
balanced by the good fat calories from the cocoa butter. If a person were
to eschew all empty starches like potatoes, bread and pasta, she could
center her diet on leafy greens, cultured dairy and chocolate, with meat and
eggs as desired. Carbs from chocolate are better than carbs from almost any
other source.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

--Bryan

[Travis McGee]

I used to live across the street from the Reese's factory in Hershey.
The smells it emitted were puzzling; on some days it smelled like
chocolate or peanut butter. On other days, though, it smelled like
rotting garbage. I was never able to figure out what caused the bad smell.

[Julie Bove]

"Dave Smith" <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:WSOxw.1927427$Q61.1...@fx13.iad...

I don't like either one and Nestles is worse still.

[Julie Bove]

"James Silverton" <not.jim....@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ma8j7g$e5$1...@dont-email.me...

Kit Kats don't have nuts!

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1OPRB_enUS532US550&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=kitkat%20ingredients

Might be processed on equipment with nuts but no nuts in the candy.

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 10:59:46 PM UTC-6, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "James Silverton" <not.jim....@verizon.net> wrote in message
>

> > I was badly disappointed by my first American KitKat candy. The difference
> > was that the Cadbury version used hazel nuts and the American one made by
> > Hershey's, pea nuts. i think that is still the case.
>
> Kit Kats don't have nuts!
>
> https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1OPRB_enUS532US550&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=kitkat%20ingredients
>
> Might be processed on equipment with nuts but no nuts in the candy.
>
>

I've never had a KitKat that had nuts in it either. But last year our Filipino IBM engineer gave my co-worker and me some KitKats he'd brought back from either the Philippines or Japan; sorry can't remember the exact location. They were truly s t r a n g e tasting. they were in green wrappers and I *think* they were made with green tea.

[dsi1]

I have seen the green tea Kit-Kat as well as the strawberry. I've never
been game enough to try either. Japan chocolate is pretty bland stuff too.

http://www.amazon.com/Kit-Kat-Mixed-Flavor-Flavors/dp/B00PIB2YTQ

[itsjoan...@webtv.net]

Personally, I don't think you've missed anything by not eating the green tea version. Very off-putting taste but the strawberry sounds interesting.

[pltrgyst]

"James Silverton" <not.jim....@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ma8j7g$e5$1...@dont-email.me...

> I was badly disappointed by my first American KitKat candy. The

difference was that the Cadbury version used hazel nuts...

Kit Kats have been for forty years by far my favorite candy bar. The
only one I eat, actually.

Cadbury never made Kit Kats -- they were originally made by Rowntree,
and then acquired by Nestle, which now has the NA version produced by
Hershey.

None of them contained nuts.

I've been eating the European Kit Kat Darks for many years, and they're
still far superior in flavor to the ones that Hershey is now producing.
Much less sweet, more bitter chocolate flavor.

The Kit Kat Whites are just plain awful, no matter who makes them, IMO.

-- Larry

[Bryan-TGWWW]

I should thank all of the slobs out there who gob down chocolate that is
made with cocoa butter substitutes. You help keep decent chocolate from
being more expensive.

I should also thank the slobs who suck down margarine, drink watery-ass
reduced fat milk, and eat ice cream with adjuncts like vegetable gums
that are added to compensate for skimping on butterfat. You keep cream
prices low. It is bizarre to me to see the gallons of whole, 2% and skim
milk, all at the same price point, but I'll take it.

The chocolate that I'm eating as I type this (Choceur) is made with real vanilla. Most chocolate is made with vanillin (Hershey's...). Thank you
Hershey's eaters for helping keep vanilla prices where they are, and you
also help keep cocoa butter less expensive because Hershey's replaces some
of it with this stuff.
http://www.thehersheycompany.com/nutrition-and-wellbeing/what-we-believe/our-ingredients/ingredient-topics/pgpr.aspx

I'm also eating little pinches of sweetened coconut with the chocolate bar,
and I guess I need to thank the slobs for low coconut prices. Imagine if
they made the switch from cheap palm fruit oil to palm *kernel* oil, which
is similar enough to coconut oil that they are substitutable in most
applications.

So thank you, slobs. Thank you for your stupidity, and your lack of
discriminating palates. Enjoy your Cool Whip. I mean that.

--Bryan

[Gary]

Bryan-TGWWW wrote:
>
> So thank you, slobs. Thank you for your stupidity, and your lack of
> discriminating palates. Enjoy your Cool Whip. I mean that.

Hi there, Bryan.
As little as I use it, I like Cool Whip just fine. Bite me! :-D

[Bryan-TGWWW]

On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 11:52:20 AM UTC-6, James Silverton wrote:
> On 1/27/2015 12:35 PM, notbob wrote:
> > On 2015-01-27, Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> I don't know about that, but I do know that Hershey's is really strange
> >> tasting chocolate. Cadburys is much better.
> >
> > Really? I feel jes the opposite. Cadbury's always tastes like
> > there's still some foil on that chunk I jes bit off. A synthetic
> > metalic flavor.
> >
> > nb
> >

> I was badly disappointed by my first American KitKat candy. The

> difference was that the Cadbury version used hazel nuts and the American
> one made by Hershey's, pea nuts. i think that is still the case.
>

Good news if you want hazelnut KitKats. ALDI has a hazelnut version.

http://www.candyblog.net/blog/item/choceur_chocolate_crisp_bars

Way better than anything Hershey's or Cadbury makes.
>
> --
> Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)
>
--Bryan

[Nunya Bidnits]

"notbob" wrote in message news:ciq0j1...@mid.individual.net...


>Cadbury's always tastes like [...] synthetic metalic flavor.

Absolutely agree. And we can't BOTH be eating the foil wrapper. ;-) But I do
suspect the packaging has something to do with it.

[Nunya Bidnits]

"Sqwertz" wrote in message news:75ystp3k4wxz$.dlg@sqwertz.com...

> using their weight to nudge out the little
> guys for a mere 1/20th of a percentage

Cadbury is not "the little guys". It's Big Food wars. So Hershey wins this
round. BFD.

Anyway the Cadbury eggs have been changed for the British market, for the
worse according to articles, so who gives a crap?

Anyway the best price for *good* chocolate is still found at Aldi AFAIC.

[Dave Smith]

On 2015-01-28 3:03 PM, Bruce wrote:

> Did you read the last sentence of your link?
>
> "... but it’s not like it’s all natural or a particularly great list
> of ingredients which include fake vanilla and palm oil, albeit low on
> the list.)"
>


Fake vanilla? I presume that means artificial vanilla, and that is
common in most commercial products. It costs half as much and most
people can't tell the difference. Heck, given the amount of grocery
store shelf space and the brands and sizes of artificial vanilla
compared to real vanilla extract, it is pretty clear that most people
are using it at home as well. If you want products with real vanilla
extract you will be paying premium prices.

[dsi1]

It doesn't matter to me what the heck is in a candy bar. The only thing
that matters is if I like it or not. People fool themselves into
thinking they have discriminating tastes. It makes them feel better
about themselves and their lives. Mostly, all it means is they put more
weight on what's printed on a label than what's on their tongue.

Not knowing a thing about a product is the only way to evaluate without
prejudice. Evaluating without prejudice can rock your world and your
beliefs but that's a small price to pay for truth.

[dsi1]

On 1/28/2015 11:18 AM, Bruce wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 10:46:37 -1000, dsi1
> <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
>
>> It doesn't matter to me what the heck is in a candy bar. The only thing
>> that matters is if I like it or not. People fool themselves into
>> thinking they have discriminating tastes. It makes them feel better
>> about themselves and their lives. Mostly, all it means is they put more
>> weight on what's printed on a label than what's on their tongue.
>>
>> Not knowing a thing about a product is the only way to evaluate without
>> prejudice. Evaluating without prejudice can rock your world and your
>> beliefs but that's a small price to pay for truth.
>

> What if you don't want to eat crap, not even if it tastes good?
>

You should never eat crap if you don't want to. Do I gots to explain
everything!??! You best be putting on your thinking cap! :-)

[dsi1]

On 1/28/2015 11:30 AM, Bruce wrote:

> Oh, I thought you were just advocating the consumption thereof.
>

I'm advocating that people judge what tastes good by taste. Not by a
label or price tag or by how other people can't get it. Does this make
me a bad person? :-)

[Dave Smith]

On 2015-01-28 3:28 PM, Bruce wrote:

>>
>> Fake vanilla? I presume that means artificial vanilla, and that is
>> common in most commercial products. It costs half as much and most
>> people can't tell the difference. Heck, given the amount of grocery
>> store shelf space and the brands and sizes of artificial vanilla
>> compared to real vanilla extract, it is pretty clear that most people
>> are using it at home as well. If you want products with real vanilla
>> extract you will be paying premium prices.
>

> I'd rather not eat it than get a chemical replacement, but each to
> their own. The thing is that Bryan wrote the following somewhere else
> in this thread:

>
> "The chocolate that I'm eating as I type this (Choceur) is made with
> real vanilla. Most chocolate is made with vanillin (Hershey's...). "
>

Think of it as synthetic or artificial rather than fake. Some people
are under the impression that anything synthetic is inherently bad while
anything natural is automatically healthy. When I go to the expense and
effort to bake something I use real vanilla extract and/or vanilla
beans. I am well aware that just about everything produced commercially
uses artificial vanilla.

[Dave Smith]

On 2015-01-28 3:46 PM, dsi1 wrote:

>> Fake vanilla? I presume that means artificial vanilla, and that is
>> common in most commercial products. It costs half as much and most
>> people can't tell the difference. Heck, given the amount of grocery
>> store shelf space and the brands and sizes of artificial vanilla
>> compared to real vanilla extract, it is pretty clear that most people
>> are using it at home as well. If you want products with real vanilla
>> extract you will be paying premium prices.
>
> It doesn't matter to me what the heck is in a candy bar. The only thing
> that matters is if I like it or not. People fool themselves into
> thinking they have discriminating tastes. It makes them feel better
> about themselves and their lives. Mostly, all it means is they put more
> weight on what's printed on a label than what's on their tongue.
>

That's a pretty pathetic attitude. Some people do have discriminating
tastes. They can tell when real ingredients are used and when something
is made with with cheap substitutes. I have met and talked with a
celebrity chef. She always looks a little plump on TV, but in real life
she looks amazing. She uses a lot of cream, butter, cream cheese and,
since it is baking.... a lot of sugar. She days that when you use rich,
quality ingredients smaller servings are more satisfying.

> Not knowing a thing about a product is the only way to evaluate without
> prejudice. Evaluating without prejudice can rock your world and your
> beliefs but that's a small price to pay for truth.

FWIW, we were once comped a dessert after a mistake on a menu order.
We had their Tiramisu. Call me a food snob, but Tiramisue uses lady
fingers dipped in espresso with booze, usually rum, a filling made of
sambayon, mascarpone and whipped cream. They could have got away with
the sponge cake subbed for lady fingers. Pastry cream is not an
adequate replacement for the proper ingredients. Where they really
screwed up was using artificial rum flavouring. They went from a cheap
imitation to a bastardization.

[dsi1]

If you're saying that some people have awesome taste buds, I already
knew this. What's your point?

[dsi1]

On 1/28/2015 12:35 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 11:36:02 -1000, dsi1

> I don't know. Who can we ask?
>

You can ask me. The answer is "evidently yes."

[Dave Smith]

On 2015-01-28 5:34 PM, Bruce wrote:

>> When I go to the expense and effort to bake something I use real
>> vanilla extract and/or vanilla beans.
>

> Why not apply the same standard to stuff that you buy?

I don't buy many commercial baked goods. There are two bakers in town
that use high quality ingredients and I occasionally buy desserts from
them. Most of the cookies and pastries that we eat are home backed by me.

>
>> I am well aware that just about everything produced commercially
>> uses artificial vanilla.
>

> The only thing we buy that might contain vanilla, is ice cream. I'd
> have to check if they use the real thing. I assumed they do.

Unless it is premium ice cream it will be artificial vanilla. Cookies
and cakes usually contain vanilla, and if they are commercially made
products it is most likely artificial vanilla.

>

[sf]

Tiramisu is varied and AFAIC, which one you like is a personal
preference. I've tasted too many restaurant versions to want to take
any chances on wasting my money on something I don't like. I always
like the one my sister in law makes. I like it so much that she'll
give me my very own tiramisu cake for Christmas. Hubby and I are in
hog heaven for days afterward.

--
A kitchen without a cook is just a room

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 1/28/2015 5:24 PM, Dave Smith wrote:

> . She days that when you use rich,
> quality ingredients smaller servings are more satisfying.

Very true, IMO

>


> FWIW, we were once comped a dessert after a mistake on a menu order.
> We had their Tiramisu. Call me a food snob, but Tiramisue uses lady
> fingers dipped in espresso with booze, usually rum, a filling made of
> sambayon, mascarpone and whipped cream. They could have got away with
> the sponge cake subbed for lady fingers. Pastry cream is not an
> adequate replacement for the proper ingredients. Where they really
> screwed up was using artificial rum flavouring. They went from a cheap
> imitation to a bastardization.
>

You described about 90% of the tiramisu available. Like so many things,
it has become a second rate product and the masses have no idea what the
real deal is like.

[Dave Smith]

On 2015-01-28 21:04, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>> FWIW, we were once comped a dessert after a mistake on a menu order.
>> We had their Tiramisu. Call me a food snob, but Tiramisue uses lady
>> fingers dipped in espresso with booze, usually rum, a filling made of
>> sambayon, mascarpone and whipped cream. They could have got away with
>> the sponge cake subbed for lady fingers. Pastry cream is not an
>> adequate replacement for the proper ingredients. Where they really
>> screwed up was using artificial rum flavouring. They went from a cheap
>> imitation to a bastardization.
>>
>
> You described about 90% of the tiramisu available. Like so many things,
> it has become a second rate product and the masses have no idea what the
> real deal is like.
>

I have had it from a number of places. I would place that closer to the
1% range. Some of the others may not have been great tiramisu, but this
one was horrible, and bore no resemblance to the real thing.

[dsi1]

I'm not a fan of the stuff. Mostly, it's a soggy, messy, mass of
unpleasantness. The appeal quite escapes me. :-)

I am a fan of tres leches cake which some people would probably see in
the same light. Tres leches cake is pretty much instant death for my
guts but what a way to go.

http://allrecipes.com/recipe/tres-leches-milk-cake/

[Bryan-TGWWW]

On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 2:29:02 PM UTC-6, Bruce wrote:

> I'd rather not eat it than get a chemical replacement, but each to
> their own. The thing is that Bryan wrote the following somewhere else
> in this thread:
>
> "The chocolate that I'm eating as I type this (Choceur) is made with
> real vanilla. Most chocolate is made with vanillin (Hershey's...). "
>

The Choceur chocolate that I have here at home, both the dark, and dark
with hazelnuts, are made with real vanilla, and no cocoa butter substitutes.
I didn't know that their KitKat knockoff had vanillin, and if it has palm oil,
I'm pretty certain that the palm oil is in the cookie portion, not the
chocolate covering. I know that you want to show me to be incorrect about
things, and sometimes I am mistaken, and I appreciate being set straight when
I am incorrect. All that said, you should check out the chocolate at ALDI.
It's better than Hershey's, Nestle or Cadbury at a comparable price.

Another nice thing from ALDI is the Herres Brut Sparkling white wine. It is
unusually dry for a bubbly wine, and while it is admittedly not very
interesting, it is very clean tasting, and it was $4.99/750ml. It's a nice
find at this point in my relationship with alcohol. I know that you dislike
me, but you seem like a gentle enough man that you probably nevertheless wish
me success in my transition away from Alcohol Use Disorder. I'm already
drinking at a level that isn't very unhealthful, averaging 3 drinks an evening.

That's huge. I've been dumping down 3-4 cases (cases being 24 cheap beers) a
week, or the equivalent for the past 15 years, on and off, and the ten years
before that were more like 5 cases, and that was down from 7-8 cases through
my twenties.

Naltrexone really does seem like the *magic bullet*. I just finished one
bottle of 11% bubbly, and there is no demon prompting me to just one more,
and then another. I'm going to sleep now. Goodnight.
>
> --
> Bruce

--Bryan

[sf]

On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 16:31:28 -1000, dsi1
<ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:

> I'm not a fan of the stuff. Mostly, it's a soggy, messy, mass of
> unpleasantness. The appeal quite escapes me. :-)

I totally understand! If I didn't like my SIL's version so much, I'd
say I didn't like it too.

[sf]

On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 21:04:45 -0500, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:

> On 1/28/2015 5:24 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>
> > . She days that when you use rich,
> > quality ingredients smaller servings are more satisfying.
>
> Very true, IMO

I say baloney to that. I hear people make that claim when I can
unabashedly eat two big pieces of whatever it is.

[Julie Bove]

"Nunya Bidnits" <nunyab...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote in message
news:mabdf6$cpr$1...@dont-email.me...
> "notbob" wrote in message news:ciq0j1...@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>>Cadbury's always tastes like [...] synthetic metalic flavor.
>
> Absolutely agree. And we can't BOTH be eating the foil wrapper. ;-) But I
> do suspect the packaging has something to do with it.

I liked Cadbury when I was a kid. I suspect it was made differently then.
Haven't liked any cheap chocolate for many years.

[JRStern]

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:58:30 -0600, Sqwertz <swe...@cluemail.compost>
wrote:

>In an attempt to dominate the Chocolate World, Hersheys has blocked
>the import of all Cadbury chocolate into the United States. Next up
>are Switzerland and Belgium.
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/24/nyregion/after-a-deal-british-chocolates-wont-cross-the-pond.html
>
>I used to be loyal to Hersheys since I lived near there, not so much
>because of their default chocolate. But now I say screw 'em. Just
>another greedy corporation using their weight to nudge out the little
>guys for a mere 1/20th of a percentage of the domestic chocolate
>market.
>
>Get your REAL Cadbury chocolatse while you can and make sure it's not
>manufactured by Hershey's.

Haven't bothered with Cadbury since started buying Lindt, which are
sold especially cheap at Target stores, best mass-market stuff in the
US if you ask me.

J.





>
>-sw

[notbob]

On 2015-01-30, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid> wrote:

> Haven't bothered with Cadbury since started buying Lindt....

Besides, why boycott Hershey's? Nestle's is a much bigger threat to
the entire world, than Hershey's.

nb

[dsi1]

On 1/28/2015 7:05 PM, sf wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 16:31:28 -1000, dsi1
> <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I'm not a fan of the stuff. Mostly, it's a soggy, messy, mass of
>> unpleasantness. The appeal quite escapes me. :-)
>
> I totally understand! If I didn't like my SIL's version so much, I'd
> say I didn't like it too.
>

I can't believe that they teach kids how to make this awful dish in high
school. It's a disgrace!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_NMQ2mupPM

[sf]

On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:18:07 -0800, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid>
wrote:

> Haven't bothered with Cadbury since started buying Lindt, which are
> sold especially cheap at Target stores, best mass-market stuff in the
> US if you ask me.

Trader Joe's chocolate is better.

--
A kitchen without a cook is just a room.

[JRStern]

On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 23:41:18 -0800, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:18:07 -0800, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>> Haven't bothered with Cadbury since started buying Lindt, which are
>> sold especially cheap at Target stores, best mass-market stuff in the
>> US if you ask me.
>
>Trader Joe's chocolate is better.

I was going to mention TJ's chocolate, they have a lot of varieties
and I've tried most, and some are pretty good, but Lindt is better
across the board IMHO. TJ's prices are good and much better than
Lindt at the local market, but not better than Lindt at Target - which
may be one of the best secret bargains in town, actually!

Target also offers Blue Diamond almonds a LOT cheaper than the
markets, and I still like them better than any almonds at TJ's.

J.

[Gary]

JRStern wrote:
>
> Target also offers Blue Diamond almonds a LOT cheaper than the
> markets, and I still like them better than any almonds at TJ's.

YES! Blue Diamond salty almonds are to die for! I haven't bought any
in a long time.

As far as chocolate goes....every knows about those large bars of
chocolate (with almonds inside) that schools sell to raise money.
They used to cost $1.00 a bar but probably more now. I love those but
rarely see them. Anyone know the company name or where to buy them on
a regular basis?

[Brooklyn1]

Too bad you never tried Barton's Almond Bark.

[Gary]

I rarely eat any candy. I bought a box of chocolate covered cherries
on sale before Christmas and the box is still sitting on my counter
unopened. Once I get in the mood though and open it, I'll probably
eat all 16 within a day or two. ehehh

[JRStern]

See's Candy out here is wicked good, and their solid chocolate (if you
have the strength to buy only that) is roughly as good as Lindt's, but
costs a lot more.

J.

[Bryan-TGWWW]

Target has certain things at really good prices, but I hadn't noticed the
Lindt. I know they are cheaper than anyone on canned Friskies. It's $.47
a can, then you get 5% off that if you get one of their red cards. Kids'
blue jeans are cheap there, and the quality is good. The last thing I bought there were Dearfoams house slippers that were clearanced to 70% off.
>
> J.

--Bryan

[sf]

On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 10:20:43 -0800, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid>

wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 23:41:18 -0800, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:18:07 -0800, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Haven't bothered with Cadbury since started buying Lindt, which are
> >> sold especially cheap at Target stores, best mass-market stuff in the
> >> US if you ask me.
> >
> >Trader Joe's chocolate is better.
>
> I was going to mention TJ's chocolate, they have a lot of varieties
> and I've tried most, and some are pretty good, but Lindt is better
> across the board IMHO. TJ's prices are good and much better than
> Lindt at the local market, but not better than Lindt at Target - which
> may be one of the best secret bargains in town, actually!
>
> Target also offers Blue Diamond almonds a LOT cheaper than the

Agree about prices, but they are certainly going up (1lb of TJ's brand
fancy mixed nuts, no macadamia, is flirting with $8). Can't say I've
seen Lindt or Blue Diamond brands at TJ's. Won't say "ever" but
certainly not in a very long time. Most TJ's only carry a fraction of
the products they have to choose from and they are all individualized
to their particular customer base, so it's likely there are stores I
don't shop in (but I bet none are in California) that would carry
them.

[JRStern]

I'm a regular there for some other brand name OTC drug store items
that are like half the price there compared to traditional outlets.

Campbells soups and some other brand name canned goods are always
cheap there and only occassionally discounted to that level in the
supermarkets, but for my part I don't really go to Target for
groceries.

Like when I go to a 99cent store they have various packaged and fresh
foods, but I won't touch them!

Target is good for minor hard goods, plastic storage containers, some
kitchen gadgets, informal clothing items, cheap placeholder furniture,
and random other items. And a chocolate bar more often than not, dark
chocolate, for the medicinal value don't you know, beta blockers to
reduce blood pressure ... and maybe a milk chocolate bar while I'm in
the neighborhood!

J.

[Julie Bove]

"Bryan-TGWWW" <bryang...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:733abb16-e526-4f14...@googlegroups.com...

They sell Lindt. I got some to put in a gift basket. Not sure how good the
price is but overall they have the lowest grocery prices of anyone. They do
have the lowest price on Friskies Broth. We like the C9 line by Champion.
We buy a lot of that clothing.

[Julie Bove]

"JRStern" <JRS...@foobar.invalid> wrote in message
news:5v7oca5flbmm7eag7...@4ax.com...

I went there for groceries for a time. Would probably go there more often
if they were closer and if mine had a full line of groceries. They will
have something once like cilantro but then never again. So I can't depend
on them if I am making a specific recipe. So I go with an open mind and a
small list and look for bargains.

I have gotten things like multi packs of antiperspirant, liquid soap and
body wash for cheap. Also some Watkins dish soap which I loved. They
sometimes mark down certain flavors or scents of things too. And I once got
some Rotel tomato sauce for cheap.

[spamtr...@gmail.com]

On Friday, January 30, 2015 at 10:47:53 AM UTC-8, Gary wrote:

> As far as chocolate goes....every knows about those large bars of
> chocolate (with almonds inside) that schools sell to raise money.
> They used to cost $1.00 a bar but probably more now. I love those but
> rarely see them. Anyone know the company name or where to buy them on
> a regular basis?

World's Finest Chocolate (sic) from Chicago. Buy online, or at one of
their two Chicagoland outlet stores.

http://www.worldsfinestchocolate.com/eng/customerService/outletstores.cfm

[spamtr...@gmail.com]

When we were feeding our old dog cooked food -- to keep up her appetite --
Target had the cheapest prices for frozen vegetables. Also good for
"Mexican" foods: canned beans, tortillas, etc.

[dsi1]

There's much excitement in my little home town - there's a new Target opening! Kailua has become a tourist destination since the president started staying there on his vacations. My guess is that the Japanese tourist are going to go nuts at Target. Yes sir, there's gonna be some big changes a'coming.

[spamtr...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, January 31, 2015 at 12:14:14 AM UTC-8, dsi1 wrote:

> There's much excitement in my little home town - there's a new Target opening! Kailua has become a tourist destination since the president started staying there on his vacations. My guess is that the Japanese tourist are going to go nuts at Target. Yes sir, there's gonna be some big changes a'coming.
>

Target's best recurring deal is giving you a $5 gift card for buying
two things you would buy anyways, like detergent and toilet paper.

And back-to-school time is a good time to buy things like lamps and
wastebaskets, if you don't mind looking like you live in a dorm.

[Gary]

Thank you for that. Yes, I remember that name! :-D I might just have
to order some. I really did like those.

[Dave Smith]

On 2015-01-31 3:14 AM, dsi1 wrote:

> There's much excitement in my little home town - there's a new Target
> opening! Kailua has become a tourist destination since the president
> started staying there on his vacations. My guess is that the Japanese
> tourist are going to go nuts at Target. Yes sir, there's gonna be
> some big changes a'coming.
>

Target stores up here are all closing. The chain was a major flop. It
was interesting to see a comment in an online media about what
hypocrites we are that we never supported the Target stores here but we
are all rushing there to snap up their merchandise on sale. I did go
into the one near us. I was looking for something. I thought it might be
on sale. Nope. No big sales. No sales at all. FWIW, it was the first
time I went in there that they actually had what I was looking for.

[notbob]

On 2015-01-31, Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:

> Target stores up here are all closing. The chain was a major flop.

I can't imagine why. In CA, I shopped at Target all the time. I
could find the exact same items as in Walmart, but Target's would be
cheaper prices for the same thing. This was especially true for
infant funiture and the like. Car seats, high chairs, etc, where
always an avg of $10 less at Target, for the exact same brand and
model. Target also had a much better selection and prices for toddler
clothing. We have no Target where I live in remote CO. That's OK, as
Coloradoins insist on calling Target, "Tar-Jay", like some kinda
reverse Fr snub, and it gets pretty tiresome after awhile.

nb

[dsi1]

That was an interesting thing. Somehow, Target misjudged the Canadian shopper. There's something scary in all that.

[Bryan-TGWWW]

I haven't heard Tar-jay in a long time. I think the idea was that
Target's softlines were considered to be higher quality (and higher
priced) than Wal Mart and K-Mart.
>
> nb

--Bryan

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 1/31/2015 11:19 AM, notbob wrote:
> On 2015-01-31, Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>> Target stores up here are all closing. The chain was a major flop.
>
> I can't imagine why. In CA, I shopped at Target all the time. I
> could find the exact same items as in Walmart, but Target's would be
> cheaper prices for the same thing.

I've not found that to be true here. Target does have different brands
though. It is our least visited store. Not sure exactly why, but I
really don't care for it that much.

[JRStern]

On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:25:16 -0800, sf <s...@geemail.com> wrote:

>> I was going to mention TJ's chocolate, they have a lot of varieties
>> and I've tried most, and some are pretty good, but Lindt is better
>> across the board IMHO. TJ's prices are good and much better than
>> Lindt at the local market, but not better than Lindt at Target - which
>> may be one of the best secret bargains in town, actually!
>>
>> Target also offers Blue Diamond almonds a LOT cheaper than the
>
>Agree about prices, but they are certainly going up (1lb of TJ's brand
>fancy mixed nuts, no macadamia, is flirting with $8). Can't say I've
>seen Lindt or Blue Diamond brands at TJ's. Won't say "ever" but
>certainly not in a very long time. Most TJ's only carry a fraction of
>the products they have to choose from and they are all individualized
>to their particular customer base, so it's likely there are stores I
>don't shop in (but I bet none are in California) that would carry
>them.

Every Target I've been in around Los Angeles (maybe about a dozen) has
had 95% to 100% the same product line - although NOT the same prices,
they seem to have A and B versions of pricing, depending on I'm not
sure just what.

Can't say about out of the area much less out of state.

The Target expansion attempt into Canada was apparently as badly
planned and badly executed as possible, when they couldn't even fill
the shelves something was seriously wrong, and when they didn't
realize they'd have to have very different pricing there, you have to
wonder what was going on. Well, new management at Target now, and
they pulled the plug on the Canadian experiment rather than trying to
fix it.

J.

[Jean B.]

Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-01-27 3:03 PM, Jean B. wrote:
>
>> I was speaking more of the egg issue. But yes, imported products
>> with the traditional ingredients as vs. what we get here, too.
>
> Those Cadbury eggs are disgusting. I grew up with Laura Secord eggs.

Well, some people obviously like them enough to protest. I don't recall
whether I ever had one. Probably. At any rate, it is not something I
ever needed to hunt for.

[JRStern]

On Sun, 01 Feb 2015 08:58:27 -0400, lucreti...@fl.it wrote:

>On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 18:26:29 -0800, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid>
>wrote:

>When they made the announcement they were pulling out they said they
>could have made it profitable by 2017 but decided against it.

That was the original plan, in the pullout announcement I saw they
said it was (now?) going to take at least until 2021, or maybe that
was to break even once they had some profits. Anyway, doesn't matter
now.

J.