To think that grammar matters and to ring Tesco to berate them for their "Same luxury, less lorries" sticker on my loo roll?

[SmiteYouWithThunderbolts]

As the title says really... As if "10 Items or Less" wasn't infuriating enough, Tesco have now extended this to proudly proclaiming that they use LESS lorries to transport their packs of loo roll.

I would like to ring them just to scream the word "FEWER" down the phone at them.

It does matter, doesn't it? Ok, so perhaps in forums and private emails it matters less if there are a handful of errors here and there, but on advertising and packaging from a national supermarket chain, AIBU to expect them to at least use the correct words?

Did that bit of packaging really make it through every level of their massive marketing department without a single person pointing out the erroneous use of "less"? Or was it a conscious decision because... well... Nope, I cannot fathom the logic of why anyone would knowingly use the wrong word.

This actually made me cross enough to take a photo of the offending item and tweet it to Tesco. That was maybe slightly U of me.

^I didn't understand what "more luxury, less lorries" meant. I wasn't actually being pedantic. I genuinely didn't understand what "less lorries" meant.

What on earth did you think it meant, Betty? Now you know it is referring to fewer lorries, are you able to explain how Tesco is managing to achieve this?^

I guess what I was trying to say was, reading the thread title, saying "same luxury, less lorries" didn't make much sense to me (I was watching multitasking whilst reading my phone)- whereas saying "same luxury, fewer lorries" is much clearer- probably because it's grammatically correct!

Re: you question on how Tesco are "achieving this" - I'm guessing there aren't using any additional lorries to transport the lovely items...

Cecily as to how they are acheiving this- I really don't know- why don't you contact Tesco?

ivy, I have sometimes fancied changing my baby for another one. I am always disappointed when the baby changing facility is empty. Quite like him most of the time though.

How are they achieving it? well maybe they are rolling it tighter or using a smaller diameter insert, using lighter paper. Maybe given it is Tesco it might be that by using a grammatically incorrect sentence they do not have to live up to their claims so actually they are just transporting the same old toilet paper in new packaging with some jumbled up English on the side that means nothing. Hmmmm makes me wonder.

Tesco is not the only one making this annoying error. I buy Sainsburys' own brand toilet rolls. They've made the cardboard roll smaller apparently so they can get more into one lorry. On one side of the packaging is say 'less lorries' and on the other side it says 'fewer lorries'. Drives me mad.

If you're going to made grammatical errors at least be consistent.

Obviously fewer is not an error.

I know already, Betty, as I have these aforementioned toilet rolls. They achieve it by a smaller carboard tube, so the overall roll is smaller. May be hard to get onto the toilet roll holder though. Hence you can fit more into the lorry. Wouldn't say they are particularly luxurious by 2013 standards.

On one side of the packaging is say 'less lorries' and on the other side it says 'fewer lorries'.

I don't know - that way you can keep everyone happy.

perhaps the lorries are lesser, ie smaller, so smaller and fewer...all in all much reduced lorryage:o

I quite like "better than half price".

Less than half price could mean it's only a quarter off the original price which is obviously not what's intended. I think it's quite an elegant solution to a clarity problem.

I think "better than half price" can only mean more than half off. Otherwise this would certainly run afoul of trade laws. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong.

This would never happen at Waitrose.

Tesco is being talked about. That is their aim, regardless of grammar.

Whilst on the subject, can someone please explain my Co-op nectarines...
'Conventionally Grown - reducing, banning and controlling pesticide use'.

Leaving aside the annoying 'G', anyone able to interpret this?

As they were 20p, might seem churlish to complain...

Doesn't it just mean 'not organic, but we're trying to cut down on the bad shit'?

While you are ringing Tesco can you have a word about their general slogan 'Every Little Helps'. That one really gets on my nerves!!

I would e-mail them to point out the error.

I am a pedant and proud.

Dunno something. I just couldn't work out why the conventional growing of my nectarines (sorry, Conventional Growing) whatever that means meant that this managed to reduce, control and ban pesticide use all at the same time. Clever little nectarines.

I DON'T CARE! (pause) I LOVE IT!!!!

Less than half?? How hard is that to understand??! It's less than half of what it was before! "Better" is a value judgement. Could be more, could be less. Utter stupidity.

Less than half?? How hard is that to understand??! It's less than half of what it was before! "Better" is a value judgement. Could be more, could be less. Utter stupidity.
Quite.

And OP, whilst you're on to Tesco about the less/fewer situation, could you please point out to them that 'DVDs' does not require an apostrophe.

Thanks.

I once complained in Asda about their sign by the tights saying "Hoisery" and also in JOHN LEWIS no less, about a sign saying "sorry for the inconvience." It matters, at that level when supposedly educated people have been employed to oversee PR/Marketing, whatever, it is inexcusable.

I complained to Tesco about this around six months ago. They called me back and made sympathetic noises. Clearly, they did nothing about it!

I think you need to get a life...

While we're on this could someone explain to my hairdresser that either I am going on holiday or I'm not. I can't go away a bit - all of me goes or all of me stays. So her enquiries as to whether or not I'm going away 'at all' are pointless and frustrating and do my head in. Lovely woman mind and damn fine hairdresser.

A Damn fine hairdresser is such a precious thing that I'd overlook any amount of bad grammar so as not to sour the relationship in any way,

I would consider the 'at all' to indicate a sliding scale from a weekend away somewhere within a couple of hours' drive to a month long sojourn to the other side of the world so I think you are being harsh to interpret her question in such a way that makes her sound as though she thinks you might be leaving selected body parts (presumably those which have misbehaved?) at home.

It's like people saying that you can't have something that's 'very unique' whereas I would argue that I am a bit unique due to the individual nature of my DNA, personality and physical make-up, whereas the last remaining example of a species would be 'very unique'. Sometimes you have to prize clarity of meaning over the need to be 'right' as determined by what amount to fairly arbitrary rules.