It's cheaper to put the label on all products rather than a stream for CA and a stream for elsewhere.

Reader comment on: Photo of the Day

Submitted by Lyle (United States), Jul 1, 2012 23:47

If you build a separate product stream for CA there would be added costs, and since the cost of a label is small it's cheaper to do it nationwide. (This is why the toilet water use standard is Federal the makers of toilets wanted it that way for example, also why the new federal mileage standards). Now on some products the cost differential is substantial enough to justify the distinct SKUs but that is a business decision (see power lawn equipment for example).

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.

Other reader comments on this item

Title By Date
It would be nice to have real data! [102 words]Mrs. ScottAug 27, 2012 08:33
⇒ It's cheaper to put the label on all products rather than a stream for CA and a stream for elsewhere. [83 words]LyleJul 1, 2012 23:47
↔ The real reason for this label [21 words]Michael GreenbergJul 2, 2012 19:27
↔ Old Lucifers [24 words]ColinJul 11, 2012 03:34

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to It's cheaper to put the label on all products rather than a stream for CA and a stream for elsewhere. by Lyle

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.