I have noticed that a few beers, Heineken and Tiger, now have adopted a different can size, same volume but taller and a more child friendly circumference. Will this be the new norm and what could the reason be for this change. Many soft drinks also come in this size.

 

Main problem is that they don't fit in my can holders, too slim for both can and bottle holders.

Nope, no idea, they don't fit in the fridge properly either.

 

Change for change's sake

 

EDIT Apparently it makes one feel that one is consuming less, or something like that.

 

http://www.packagingnews.com.au/news/it-s-in-to-be-slim

 

Personally it just feels wrong, beer has been short and fat (like me) forever.

 

Reduce the volume and keep the same price = more profits. This has been going on for years not only beer but others drinks and household items too.

2 hours ago, shady86 said:

Reduce the volume and keep the same price = more profits

OP stated  this -

3 hours ago, pattjock said:

same volume but taller

Not the same as bottles of Singha and Leo which were reduced a while ago now.

I dont usualy bother noting the size or the texture of a beer can i just neck the contents.

1 hour ago, jeab1980 said:

I dont usualy bother noting the size or the texture of a beer can i just neck the contents.

It's an old people thing, they are very sensitive to package sizes.

29 minutes ago, maxpower said:

It's an old people thing, they are very sensitive to package sizes.

nope, it's an intelligent people thing.

many companies regularly change product package sizes, usually reducing them and keeping the same price.

if you enjoy being screwed, I guess it's up to you.

They fit into shop fridges a lot better

1 hour ago, jeab1980 said:

I dont usualy bother noting the size or the texture of a beer can i just neck the contents.

the perfect customer!

2 minutes ago, manarak said:

nope, it's an intelligent people thing.

many companies regularly change product package sizes, usually reducing them and keeping the same price.

if you enjoy being screwed, I guess it's up to you.

Yeah its an intelligent people thing. OP sets the scene - sorry about that.

 

I prefer them as I can get more in my fridge.

Easier for smaller hands to drink, ie the underage and lady market.

I don't mind the new shape as such but have problem with different shaped cans as they will not fit in my can holders.

 

I may be incorrect but feel that because there now is a shorter distance from the warm outside of the can to the center of the can the beer will get warm faster than when in the old shaped can. If this is true it will also get cold faster when put in the fridge.

 

Have anyone seen can holders that will fit the new shape of can?

7 hours ago, manarak said:

the perfect customer!

Too true any beer or piss water (larger) in a can is rubish any way and only deserves to be necked. No point in sampling pish now is there.

To prove my point who remembers the  party 7 double diamond cans pish but quantity. (Brit thing)

It is a subliminal message that beer does not make you fat. But tall and slim. I buy it.

Ask  the guys who sell the can holders/ condoms!

 

For me wrt soft drinks, is that they don't fit the shelf spacing in my fridge. For beer, I buy bottles.

hopefully Chang will leave things alone, so far so good, "if it ain't broke don't fix it"

4 minutes ago, ksamuiguy said:

hopefully Chang will leave things alone, so far so good, "if it ain't broke don't fix it"

Chang (chemical pish) has been broke for a long time ? but out of all the Thai beers its still head and shoulders above the rest.

8 hours ago, sanemax said:

They fit into shop fridges a lot better

...and you can fit more of them into your home fridge too.

Quite simply a device to make more profit. The amount of beer is less than before. 

4 minutes ago, pauleddy said:

Quite simply a device to make more profit. The amount of beer is less than before. 

Nope, as been stated several times already....taller and slimmer cans but SAME volume.

1 hour ago, jeab1980 said:

To prove my point who remembers the  party 7 double diamond cans pish but quantity. (Brit thing)

Party 4 and 7 when I was a teenager - Watneys Red from memory because it was cheaper than DD........

9 minutes ago, pauleddy said:

Quite simply a device to make more profit. The amount of beer is less than before. 

No, it's not, maybe you need to brush up on high school geometry..

 

15 hours ago, pattjock said:

now have adopted a different can size, same volume but taller and a more child friendly circumference.

It is all to do with efficiency? Smaller diameter tall cans take up less space for shelf display etc.. and they chill faster.

Had not the volume decreased?

From 330 > 220ml and 500 > 490ml?

Or have I confused it with something else?

1 hour ago, jeab1980 said:

Too true any beer or piss water (larger) in a can is rubish any way and only deserves to be necked. No point in sampling pish now is there.

To prove my point who remembers the  party 7 double diamond cans pish but quantity. (Brit thing)

Watney's Party Fours and Party Sevens. Ah, those were the days!

Same thing happened with Coke and Fanta and Pepsi. 

Maybe cans that are more dick-shaped are more popular in Thailand?

1 hour ago, ravip said:

Had not the volume decreased?

From 330 > 220ml and 500 > 490ml?

Or have I confused it with something else?

That was Chang bottles.

The slimmer cans allow more to be stored in the same space, chill quicker.

Whatever the reason, when they were introduced 3 or 4 years ago, sales increased, was more accepted by the public etc.  Simple marketing letting the public drive the product.

 

I don't have a definitive answer, but what I do know is the soft drinks in the slim cans chill down much faster than the shorter, fatter predecessors.

 

1 hour ago, Guitar God said:

Same thing happened with Coke and Fanta and Pepsi. 

Maybe cans that are more dick-shaped are more popular in Thailand?

Why do you like drinking from dicks