business news in context, analysis with attitude

We reported last week about Supervalu’s new line of Culinary Circle products, and commented that this sounds like a great idea as long as they taste good. To which MNB user Delos Walton responded:

I've had several of these, found at my local Albertson's. Overall, they taste very good. My favorites so far are the grilled vegetable medley - actual grilled vegetables that are warmed up in the microwave, and the stuffed peppers with Turkey and wild rice.

The only draw back I see in this line at the moment would be the caloric content. But if you keep the portions small by spreading these entrees out over a family of four, and add a quick salad or other vegetable side, you got a great meal that's easy to make and taste's pretty good. Costs are reasonable too, if you spread it out over the number of mouths within a family too. They retail at about $7, so if you add in a bagged salad, you're looking at dinner that cost's about $2.50-$3.00 per head for a family of four. Not too bad for a dinner that will take about 10 minutes or less to make once you get home.

And MNB user Todd Conrad wrote:

I have purchased a number of the Culinary Circle products and they have exceeded expectations on quality!! Smart move by SV and I think they have delivered on the product as well!

On the subject of “diets” vs. “lifestyle changes,” (we like the latter here at MNB) one MNB user wrote:

I agree. I lost a significant amount of weight after college due to a major life style changes: Beer (less of). I did increase my take of wine though! It just wasn't healthy, less pizza and junk food, and more healthy fruits and veggies.

Weight Watchers I think has the best idea, but they miss such a valid point (I've been on weight watchers before), or the people on the program miss the point I should say. They use a point system, so you can have say 21 points in a day, and every food you eat have a point value based on fat, calories and fiber. That's great, except I've noticed that
people tend to put the good foods aside and eat junk until they are out of points. Also there are certain items that have a zero point value!?

How is this? Gummie Bears are a great example. I think 12 or 15 have a zero point value, so they eat 45 throughout the day, without a thought that the have just consumed 175 calories. You get my drift. They are missing the "change".

Chiming in on an ongoing MNB discussion stream, MNB user Matt Wicker wrote:

Just had to comment on Richard Layman’s comments about organic foods not being that much better for you than fresh or frozen foods. Organic foods are not only healthier for you due to the fact you’re not ingesting pesticides and other harmful chemicals, but the environment is also not being abused by these chemicals. There are also numerous studies showing the nutritional contents of organic foods to be much greater than their conventional (chemically treated) counterparts. I’ve seen studies showing that 3 organic apples have the same nutrients as 7 conventional apples. While the organic apples cost much more, doesn’t it make sense to eat 3 for the same price?

I wrote with some disappointment last week about the new Jerry Seinfeld-Bill Gates commercial for Microsoft, and MNB user Kate Kelley agreed:

I was expecting the commercial to be some kind of 'blow my socks off'. But it was lacking and made me wonder what the ad was even for. I have been a die-hard Apple fan since the mid 90s, and think that they produce more creative ads and products than Microsoft can even begin to imagine. I still believe that there is no better sound, than the sound my Mac produces when I turn it on.

Another MNB user wrote:

I saw the Seinfeld/Gates ad…until the end, I thought it was for American Express (since Jerry was their pitchman at one time).

Microsoft? Huh??

No, the Amex ads had Seinfeld and Superman, not Seinfeld and Gates.

And there’s a big difference between Gates and Superman.

Kryptonite doesn’t affect Gates.

There was a story last week on MNB about a study saying that older people seem highly committed to “green” shopping – and the only thing that we found alarming was the idea that “older” started at age 55 (which seems dangerously close at the moment).

MNB user David Jenkins responded:

Had to chuckle at your view. Did you think 55 was elderly when you were in your late 20s and early 30s?

Not elderly. Ancient.

And MNB user David Richard wrote:

This made me laugh when I realized that getting irritated about being called old is the first sign of getting old. And, (of course), I don't remember the second sign.

KC's View: