uDunkin’ Donuts Customers Pay It Forward Every Single Friday At Pennsylvania Drive-Thrur

4 4 4 9

• 

  (m01229)
  

  We’ve heard a good share of “pay it forward” stories at coffee shops and elsewhere, where customers ask to pay for the next person’s order, sometimes leading to a chain of people willing to brighten up a strangers day. But one Pennsylvania Dunkin’ Donuts has probably seen more of these pay it forward acts than others: the manager says it happens every Friday, no matter what, like clockwork.

  Sometimes only two customers participate, sometimes 12 — and sometimes, the chain of giving would last even longer, if only there were enough customers in the drive-thru line that day, the Dunkin’ Donuts manager tells the York Dispatch.

  He started noticing the Friday pattern after he started work as a manager at the Dunkin’ Donuts, which includes a drive-thru window. One customer would ask how much the next order was and then pay for it. Then the next person would find out they’d had their order paid for, and pay for the person behind them.

  And this happened every week, on Friday.

  “I’ve never experienced anything like it at other locations,” the manager said.

  The generous mood reached its peak a few weeks ago when 32 people participated on one day. It would’ve kept going, too, but there were no more cars in the drive-thru. The most expensive order someone paid for was $9.32.

  “We wanted to keep it going, there was just no more customers,” the manager explained. “My employees did everything they could.”

  He gives credit to the speed of his workers and how they excited they get for the Friday tradition that has evolved this year.

  “We have a hardworking crew here,” he said. “And the best part is they love doing it.”

  Doughnut lovers regularly pay it forward [York Dispatch]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

uTesla Reportedly Loses More Than $4,000 On Each Car It Sellsr

4 4 4 9

• 

  (Atwater Village Newbie)

  The base price for a new Tesla Model S with all-wheel-drive will run you about $70,000. While that price tag isn’t for the faint of heart, its doesn’t quite represent how much the electric vehicle maker is putting into its products, as a new report shows the company is losing more than $4,000 on each car it sells.

  Reuters reports that the Silicon Valley automaker has burned $359 million in cash in just the last quarter – mostly due to operating losses – leading the company to cut its production targets for the next two years.

  CEO Elon Musk said last week that he’s considering options to raise more capital, and didn’t rule out selling more stock, while continuing to promise that the first quarter of 2016 will see the company making enough money to mass produce a number of model vehicles.

  Tesla says that its operating costs and research and development spending rose during the second quarter of this year, while the average prices for its Model S vehicle dropped slightly – a combination that led to the losses.

  The funds being lost by Tesla likely stem from the production of its upcoming Model X SUV, as Reuters notes that engineering, assembly line equipment, testing and meeting safety and emission standards related to a bringing a new vehicle to market can cost more than $1 billion.

  And the company estimates it will spend even more this year – about $1.5 billion – than in the past, as it works to launch its new vehicle.

  Despite the $4,000 loss on each vehicle, Tesla has a valuation of $31 billion, more than many major automakers like Fiat Chrysler, Reuters reports.

  Of course, the losses aren’t necessarily a sticking point for the electric car company, as it’s faced downturns in the past.

  Back in 2012, the company recovered from a cash crunch by selling shares and renegotiating the terms of a federal loan, Reuters reports.

  Tesla burns cash, loses more than $4,000 on every car sold [Reuters]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

uAugust Food And Supplement Recall Roundup: Pieces Of A Conveyor Belt?r

4 4 4 9

• In this month’s Recall Roundup for food and supplements, turkey sausage might contain parts of a conveyor belt, a variety of products may be contaminated with nuts, raw pet foods keep testing positive for foodborne bacteria, and mozzarella cheese might be contaminated with egg.

  Our monthly Recall Roundups have grown so expansive that we’ve had to separate them into two separate posts: one for consumer goods, and one for consumables.

  If you have any of these listed items in your pantry, refrigerator, or freezer, first check the varieties and flavors against the ones listed on the recall site or press release, then check expiration date or lot numbers.

  When there’s a match, don’t panic! If an item is listed as having undeclared walnuts and you’re not allergic to walnuts, for example, you don’t have to do anything at all. You can keep the item, eat it, not eat it, or return it to the store or the manufacturer for your own peace of mind.

  Items that may be contaminated with pathogens or foreign objects are worrisome for everyone, and you should return them to the retail store where you bought them, or contact the company for a refund and further instructions.

  ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
  Angry Orchard Hard Cider – Bottles may explode when opened.

  SNACKS
  KellBran Caramel Popcorn – Contains undeclared milk
  Vic’s Original Popcorn – Contains undeclared milk
  Veggie Evolution Kale Crisps Zen Nori – Contains undeclared soy.
  CocoNoNut Cacao-Nectar Bar – May contain undeclared almonds.
  Natural Grocers brand Caribbean Nut & Fruit Mix – May contain Macadamia nuts contaminated with Salmonella.

  NUTS
  Mahina Mele Farms Macadamia nut products – May contain Salmonella.
  Maya Split Cashews – May contain Salmonella.

  CANDY
  Kilwin’s Milk Chocolate Caramels – May contain undeclared cashew.

  DAIRY
  Bella Rosa Grated Parmesan Cheese (BJ’s Wholesale Clubs) – May contain undeclared egg
  Kraft Singles – Packaging poses choking hazard

  VEGETABLES
  Real Foods Harvest Slaw Kit and Broccoli Salad Kits (Salads sold in Haggen stores) – May contain undeclared peanut ingredients

  PACKAGED MEALS
  Good Food Made Simple breakfasts containing turkey sausage – Imported from Canada without proper inspection
  Golden Gourmet French Toast Sticks with Turkey Patty & Peaches – Sausage may contain pieces of a conveyor belt

  CONDIMENTS AND SPICES
  Kroger Garlic Powder, Cinnamon, Pepper, and “artificial bacon covered chips” – Possible Salmonella

  SUPPLEMENTS
  Nutrition Resource Services Whey and Casein Products – De not declare that the products contain dairy.

  FISH
  Osamu Corporation Yellow Fin Tuna Chunk Meat – May contain Salmonella

  PET FOOD
  Bravo Chicken Dog and Cat Food – May contain Salmonella
  Nature’s Variety Instinct Raw Chicken Formula for dogs – May contain Salmonella
  The Natural Dog Company 12″ Tremenda Sticks pet chews – May contain Salmonella.
  Vital Essentials Frozen Beef Tripe Dog Treats – May contain Listeria.
  Stella & Chewy’s Dog and Cat Foods – May contain Listeria.
  Boulder Dog Food Company Turkey Sprinkles – May contain Salmonella

  MEAT
  Aspen Foods (Koch Poultry, numerous private-label brands) Stuffed Chicken Breasts – Possible Salmonella
  Barber Foods stuffed chicken breasts – Possible Salmonella
  Ambassador Beef Summer Sausage – Contains undeclared pork
  The Sausage Factory sausages – Misbranding

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

uTarget Promises To Stop Sorting Kids’ Merchandise By Genderr

4 4 4 9

• 

  (Ben Schumin)

  While every kid has preferences, there’s no reason why little boys can’t play with dollhouses or why little girls can’t play with plastic dinosaurs. Some parents, kids, and other activists have started to ask retailers why store sections for anything marketed to kids is always separated into strict “girls” and “boys” sections with signage to match. One retailer announced today that they’ll be changing that.

  Target will phase out their red-and-blue and pink-and-purple sections in the coming months, instead sorting items by what they are. For example, all cartoon character bedding sets or animated movies would be shelved together instead of separated by shelf for boys and for girls. Toys will be arranged the same way, with Target promising to even get rid of subtle cues about who toys are for, like “pink, blue, yellow or green paper” behind the actual shelves.

  Right now, our teams are working across the store to identify areas where we can phase out gender-based signage to help strike a better balance. For example, in the kids’ Bedding area, signs will no longer feature suggestions for boys or girls, just kids. In the Toys aisles, we’ll also remove reference to gender, including the use of pink, blue, yellow or green paper on the back walls of our shelves. You’ll see these changes start to happen over the next few months.

  UK-based Let Toys be Toys has done great work in pointing out examples of this from all over the world, and they also explain very clearly why gendered toys are such a bad idea. They explain why kids should be allowed to choose what they want to play with, rather than having retailers reinforce who each toy is for:

  Toys focused on action, construction and technology hone spatial skills, foster problem solving and encourage children to be active. Toys focused on role play and small-scale theatre allow them to practise social skills. Arts & crafts are good for fine motor skills and perseverance.For example, here are some gendered science sets:

  McDonald’s is a notable example of this, too: when there are two different sets of toys available, customers used to be asked whether they wanted the girl toy or the boy toy. While the chain has been trying to phase this out here in the U.S., apparently it’s still common in Canada.

  What’s in Store: Moving Away from Gender-based Signs [Target] (via Bloomberg)

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

uButter Can Be Bad For Your Health, Concludes Study Paid For By Dairy Industry. Wait, What?r

4 4 4 9

• When an industry funds a scientific study of what they do or produce, you can roll your eyes and safely

  

  (Robert S. Donovan)

  assume that the data will show that the phenomenon being studied is healthy or at least not actively harmful. Right? No, not necessarily. A study evaluating the health effects of eating butter regularly surprised cynics by showing that the substance raised study participants’ cholesterol.

  No study is perfect, but this one at least tried to put either butter or olive oil, randomly selected, in what was otherwise participants’ normal diets for two five-week periods. The study was even double-blinded, meaning that the participants and evaluators didn’t know who was consuming butter and who was consuming olive oil. (The researchers provided participants with rolls that already had either butter or olive oil baked in.)

  The results showed that eating butter increased the total cholesterol level, including LDL cholesterol, the type that builds up in arteries and causes blockages, and the study showed higher levels on Team Butter than on Team Olive Oil, increasing their risk of cardiovascular disease.

  This is all very interesting, but the problem is that the study was paid for by the Danish Dairy Research Foundation, which was presumably not looking for results that would point people toward eating less butter. The study doesn’t have much to say about whether eating butter is healthy in the long term, but shows that it does raise cholesterol levels.

  “[H]ypercholesterolemic people should keep their consumption of butter to a minimum, whereas moderate butter intake may be considered part of the diet in the normocholesterolemic population,” concludes in the article’s abstract, which means “limit butter if you know that you have high cholesterol, and otherwise don’t worry about it.”

  This study has made the news precisely because it’s an industry-funded study showing that some people should stay away from the food being studied, and that’s unusual. Just ask Marion Nestle, who regularly writes about “industry-funded studies with predictable results.”

  Always look at studies telling you what to eat or what not to eat with a skeptical eye. Someone is paying for that study about orange juice or butter or coffee or frozen pizza, and they sometimes don’t have objective science as their goal.

  A study about butter, funded by the butter industry, found that butter is bad for you [Washington Post]
  Butter increased total and LDL cholesterol compared with olive oil however resulted in higher HDL cholesterol than habitual diet [American Journal of Clinical Nutrition]

  RELATED:
  From The Cranberry Institute To Pickle Packers International: A Guide To Food Industry Trade Groups
  Diet Sodas Better For Weight Loss Than Water, Concludes Study Paid For By Soda Industry

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

uVerizon Gets Rid Of Contracts, Cheap Phones (For New Customers Only, Of Course)r

4 4 4 9

• 

  (Mike Mozart)
  

  T-Mobile may have a fraction of the customer base of industry-leader Verizon Wireless, but the little magenta company’s decision to do away with contracts continues to influence its bigger competition. Today, Verizon announced that new customers will no longer have to sign up for contracts, which also means they will have to start paying full price for their phones.

  Starting Aug. 13, Verizon is simplifying its wireless data plans for new customers. The company is now just charging for the size of the data plan, plus a monthly fee per device ($20/phone; $10/tablet or Jetpack hotspot), plus whatever your monthly payment is on your phone.

  VZW is also giving each plan a descriptive name according to its size:

  “Small:” $30/month for 1GB of shareable data

  “Medium:” $45/month for 3GB of shareable data

  “Large:” $60/month for 6GB of shareable data

  “X-Large:” $80/month for 12GB of shareable data

  So one person using a smartphone on the Medium plan would pay $65/month.

  Verizon has long been more expensive than the rest of the competition. As recently as January, the company’s CFO bragged that Verizon was a “leader, not a follower” and that it wouldn’t wage a price war even at the cost of a few customers.

  But today’s announcement puts VZW close to T-Mobile’s pricing, which charges $60/month for 3GB. Sprint also charges $60/month for “unlimited” service, while AT&T’s 3GB/month is the same as Verizon’s new price.

  All of these rates assume that you either pay full price for your phone in advance or get it through your wireless provider’s installment plan, which means you still pay full price but over the course of months or years.

  This is the latest move away from longterm contracts and the phone subsidies that come with them, and T-Mobile CEO John Legere didn’t waste time poking fun at the competition:

  Our mission with #uncarrier is to change to the whole wireless industry! When @VerizonWireless and @sprint copy our moves, consumers win!

  — John Legere (@JohnLegere) August 7, 2015

  Now that Sprint and Verizon have followed T-Mobile down the no-contract path, it leaves only AT&T among the four major carriers to still offer phone contracts.

  However, AT&T has made it increasingly more difficult to get a contract. Earlier this summer, it stopped allowing its retail partners like Walmart and Best Buy sell longterm contracts, meaning the only way AT&T customers could continue to get cheaper, subsidized phones was through AT&T-owned stores or through the company’s website.

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

uParents: Remember To Check Your Kids’ Carry-On Bags Because Hatchets, Grenades Aren’t Allowed On Planesr

4 4 4 9

• 

  (TSA)

  Parents, we are not here to tell you how to be a parent. But might we suggest you oversee your child’s packing efforts before you head to the airport? You know, just in case said kid decides to include a dangerous weapon in their carry-on bag.

  It’s been a doozy of a week, and we can only imagine that a few kids were grounded by their folks: the Transportation Security Administration says agents found a few things in young passengers’ carry-on bags, including a small hatchet and a grenade (non-working, still a bad idea).

  A TSA spokeswoman told My News 13 in Florida that the hatchet was found in a 16-year-old passenger’s bag at Orlando International Airport on Wednesday. Unclear if the kid was perhaps reading that classic tale of survival in the wilderness, Hatchet, but still, not okay.

  Earlier this week, TSA workers happened upon a grenade in 12-year-old’s carry-on at Jacksonville International Airport. It was later determined to be inert and therefore, not dangerous.

  Parents should always supervise their children’s packing, the TSA is reminding folks.

  “Hatchets, knives, grenades and guns are not permitted in your carry-on bags,” the spokeswoman reiterated.

  When in doubt, you can enter your desired item into the TSA’s “Can I bring my… through the security checkpoint?” search tool/app, and receive an answer immediately.

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist