h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: The Rise and Fall of the 'King-Size' Chocolate Bar - A13983834
Author: Chocoholic's Delight Club - a hootoo club with a difference - U4288864

(I'm AKA Emmily U190758)

There's no links yet, I'll add some over the next few days.

As always, comments and suggestions welcome.

CD/Em

Hi Em,
It is odd how things happen around us and we mostly just don't notice. I noted in the back of my mind that kingsized bars could no longer be found, blamed it on my corner shop being out of stock and moved on. It would never have occurred to me there were govt think tanks and quangos behind all this!

It reads well, if a bit abruptly. I wonder if you could tell us whether there have been any repercussions to the decisions to do away with the kingsize (other than 'the big one') Any slow down in obesity rates? Also are there any UK chocolate companies (any more...) you could quote?

I was looking for a couple of things: a reference to Yorkie Bar (coz that was marketed to men, sort of ), some reference to the whole 'supersize' phenomenon, and a link in, no matter how brief, to junk food in general and its effect on health and nutrition.

Too much? Sorry, I am very interested in these topics.


W

On this, there are still 'Lion' King Size bars, saw some the other day

"Then launched a selection of three eight chunk 'Dairy Milk' bars. Which they later claimed could be broken and saved for later or shared."

I'm a little confused by this bit. There should be a subject in the first sentence "[They] then launched...". I don't understand what "three eight chunk" bars are; is it a selection of three different varieties of eight-chunk bars that can be broken into 8 pieces? The last sentence also has no subject, would read better as "They later claimed these could be broken..."

I don't know if you are interested in this or not but just for the sake of trivia, king-size bars have always been (at least since the 1970s) and still are available everywhere in the US.

<-- looks like a king-size bar to me. Look, it's as big as my head! -->

Wilma, Matt and Milos

Matt, have added a bit to cover your point.

Milos, hope the changes to the sentences make it clearer. And I'll see if I can find out more about when king-size where introduced in the UK. I've added a Footnote about king-size availabilities in other countries including the US.

Wilma, I hadn't noticed the king-size had disappeared until I came across a news story while researching another chocolate bar, so you weren't alone there.

'Any slow down in obesity rates? Also are there any UK chocolate companies (any more...) you could quote?'

By recent news stories, promgrams and reports I'd say no, but the Entries not really about that, it just has a passing reference to obesity, which now links to BigAl's obesity Entry. I can't find any more quotes from UK choc companies I can use, and keep the Entry balanced.

As for the Yorkie bar, I was hoping the the introduction of the 'not for girls' slogan would coincide with the end of the king-size, but it didn't. I found a picture of a Yorkie bar 'king-size (not queensize)' I'll look into it some more, see if I can find something releivant to the Entry.

>>some reference to the whole 'supersize' phenomenon<<

Sorry, the Entry is not about 'supersize', it's about the king-size chocolate bar.

CD/Em

I'm all for short Entries Em, but this one seems a little lacking - I think it needs more facts. The first sentence sets the tone:

'In the 1990s some new versions of a few well-known chocolate bars...'

I think in an Entry this concise we'd need to know that 'in 1992 the Cadtree company launched a new version of their Camarickers bar..' or whatever.

The first two sections don't have a vast amount of content in them; try to find some facts or advertising slogans you can quote; anything to make the 'rise' seem a bit more of a story. The final section is very good, though.

Apart from the last bit:

'At the time of summer of 2006, there is still a scattering of king-size chocolate bars on the shop-shelves and some 'big bags' of chocolates, such as Maltesers remain, as they are not technically classed as king-size, and can be easily shared or not consumed all at once.' - so you're saying that some king-size products are ok, as long as they don't say that's what they are?

and apologies Rich

I was trying to take on board all the criticisms and comments I'd read recently. There's so little info about this online I was worried if I used too many facts I'd be accused of copying from the web sites. Then there was the balance thing, I thought, rightly or wrongly that I couldn't say something positive/negative about one company, without doing the same for the other, and the more companies I mentioned the more problematic that would get, then there's Jims concerns about advertising.

I'll forget what everyone has said, stop worrying and put in what I think ought to be there, then I can re-word or remove what's not suitable.

Emmily

oh

>>The man-size bars may have been aimed at the male market.<<

hmmmmmm. I have been known to eat a King Sized Mars Bar - once or twice, mostly after a 10km run. Do you mean the word King is a male thing, which is aimed at men? I know plenty of women who don't have a problem with the size of the bar, and a few men who would. If you see what I mean? (this from one who was once heard to comment that she's patiently waiting for a 4 fingerd version of the King-Size Chunky KitKat )

In the Does Size Matter section, you mention in passing the 'value for money' aspect - any chance of mentioning how much the King-sized bars cost in relation to the normal sized ones?

I'm guessing this relates only to the UK? In which case, do you think you could change the title to reflect this?

I think the male market is something the chocolate companies wnat to try and break into more - just look at the Yorkie bar advertising in the UK.

Not for Girls indeed.

Sho

>>Do you mean the word King is a male thing, which is aimed at men?<<

No, I meant the bar size was a stereotypical advertising ploy by the company, though king is masculine as well. And I still think there's a tie-in somewhere with the male targeted Yorkie, but I still can't find any proof, and I doubt if I will. The 'not for girls' advertising campaign began in 2001, that doesn't appear to coincide with anything else, ah, just thinking aloud there.

I sorted your points Sho, not sure if I need the Footnote I put in earlier, now I've changed the title, but I'll leave it for now.

CD/Em

simpost - that's what happens when I click reply, then make and eat a packet of before I type the post.

Oh, meant to say I've not finished the full update, still more to find out from Rich's post.

CD/Em

I'm craving a Yorkie now. Thank goodness I can get one next month.

Short but very sweet

"Approximately 30% to 50% larger"
That's very approximately - how about about "Usually between 30% and 50% larger"

"than it's standard counterpart," - I think you know what's wrong here

"the man-size bars" - 'man-size' should be in single quotes.

"The 'Big Bags' (sometimes referred to as king-size) of chocolates" - this doesn't sound right - maybe "sometimes referred to as king-size bags"?

Alex

Alex, all sorted.

I've discovered something new about Nestle. Matt, it was a Nestle product, king-size Lion Bar you saw recently. Nestle at first refused to withdraw their larger products, and were the last to withdraw their king-size, (assuming they have, I've got to check that out) which is why there's still some Nestle king-size products available. That'll be in the Entry soon.

CD/Em

A few other things I spotted:

An example is Nestle's Lion Bar, which is aimed primarily at young men aged 16-24, and with the more mature male in mind; with the well-known slogan 'not for girls', the chunky Yorkie bar. >> is that semi-colan in the right place? is the Lion Bar for the more mature 16-24-year olds, or is it the Yorkie that's targeted at the mature demographic?

These were eventually replaced by the 'Duo' a twin bar pack, if the same weight as the king-size, but split into two bars; the idea of which is to share or save one bar for another time. >> that sentence goes on for a bit... How about "These were eventually replaced by the 'Duo', a twin bar pack. Duos are the same weight as the king-size but split into two bars, the idea of which is to share or save one bar for another time.


I think I'd enjoy living somewhere with no king-size bars. That said, I've just discovered the Maya Gold in my desk drawer is 3.5 oz (and mighty expensive it was, too). Although I can't imagine anyone eating one all in one go - I've been working on this one for about 6 weeks.

>>as they can be easily shared or not consumed all at once.

I'm a bit puzzled by this.

In what way? I thought it made sense that bars with break points and bags of small individual sweets could easily be shared out, or could be eaten so as to leave some of the chocolate untouched for later consumption.

Milos, I'll get back to you on your points

Gnomon (and Alex) I'm puzzled as to why you're puzzled by

>>as they can be easily shared or not consumed all at once.

The health and obesity concerns where about the encouragement of large chocolate consumption. The 'Big Bags', such as Maltesers weren't a concern because they're not a large bar, and can easily be shared, or sealed with a peg and saved for later. (hmmm might add the peg bit, with a link to 'peg' entry)



CD/Em

>>'as once opened they can be easily shared or sealed with a peg and saved for later.'<<

Is that clearer?

CD/Em

Scrap post 19, I've changed it again, still more to do.

CD/Em