Disclosure: In any review for a product or service, products or compensation may have been provided to me to help facilitate my review. All opinions are my own and honest. I am disclosing this in accordance with FTC Guidelines. Please see “Disclose” and "Terms of Use" tabs for more information.
This is a Sponsored post written by me on behalf of storebrandformula.com for SocialSpark. All opinions are 100% mine.
Earlier this week the US circuit court upheld a claim against Mead Johnson Nutrition Co. the company that makes the Enfamil line of baby formula products. The claim was made by PBM Products Inc. a store brand baby formula manufacturer and was for the sum of $13.5 million dollars for false advertising. This is a big deal because part of Enfamil’s advertising specifically said their brand was superior to the store brand. This particular piece of advertising was direct mailed to 1.5 million consumers. As a result of this unfair practice store brands upheld in court Mead Johnson was using misleading advertising in order to corner the market on baby formula. In actuality both brands have the same exact nutrients in the same levels so therefor one can’t be superior to the other. They are of comparable quality and the consumer should be able to see that and make an informed decision about their purchase, not based on a false mailing.
The courts also ruled that Mead Johnson must stop distributing the misleading advertising immediately in order to facilitate fair practices. For more information: more information . A good source for information about store brand formula: storebrandformula.com .
Earlier this week the US circuit court upheld a claim against Mead Johnson Nutrition Co. the company that makes the Enfamil line of baby formula products. The claim was made by PBM Products Inc. a store brand baby formula manufacturer and was for the sum of $13.5 million dollars for false advertising. This is a big deal because part of Enfamil’s advertising specifically said their brand was superior to the store brand. This particular piece of advertising was direct mailed to 1.5 million consumers. As a result of this unfair practice store brands upheld in court Mead Johnson was using misleading advertising in order to corner the market on baby formula. In actuality both brands have the same exact nutrients in the same levels so therefor one can’t be superior to the other. They are of comparable quality and the consumer should be able to see that and make an informed decision about their purchase, not based on a false mailing.
The courts also ruled that Mead Johnson must stop distributing the misleading advertising immediately in order to facilitate fair practices. For more information: more information . A good source for information about store brand formula: storebrandformula.com .
Well I’m glad when the little guy wins.
those places just don’t want you to save money