The Wall Street Journal found itself on the defensive this week after a social media post about younger Americans and grocery spending drew millions of views,
This is kind of true, but a little misleading. They sell it at a loss because it was about to expire. If it’s reaching the sell-by date. They cook it and sell it as a rotisserie chicken to recoup the losses. They’re usually only selling it at a loss because that’s the alternative to throwing it out.
Rotisserie chicken is like the absolute cheapest food a person can buy.
It’s a loss leader. It’s up there with milk and eggs in terms of standard grocery items that are cheaper than they should be.
This is kind of true, but a little misleading. They sell it at a loss because it was about to expire. If it’s reaching the sell-by date. They cook it and sell it as a rotisserie chicken to recoup the losses. They’re usually only selling it at a loss because that’s the alternative to throwing it out.
Which is why it’s extra bullshit that you can’t use food stamps to buy them. How dare people want to stretch their food budgets, right?
Cheaper to buy prepared at the grocery near me, in Ontario.
I wonder what the cost is wherever the Wall Street journal people shop.
In Dallas, you can get one at Sam’s Club or Costco for $5.
The Sam’s/Costco ones are like $5 across the country. I don’t think I’ve seen one for more than $6
We don’t have a Sam’s/cosco here, but Kroger’s are 7.99. still not terrible
That’s closer to my price.
That’s what I thought, but I wasn’t sure. My family eats at least one a week.
Damn, guess that’s the cost if you don’t need to heat the coops.