Crispy M&M’s are $2 while peanut butter M&M’s are $1.35. Why is there a $0.65 difference between the two? The peanut and plain M&M’s on a shelf below are also $1.35, so there’s something about crispy M&M’s that singles them out. What’s different about them? Anyone who’s ever held a handful of M&M’s on a hot day knows they do melt in your hand. Maybe the crispy M&M’s don’t. I’m thinking of applying for a $3.35 million research grant to study this question.
![Gene Shalit’s Wife [Part 3]](https://freethinkersanonymous.com/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-23-related-posts-plugin/static/thumbs/3.jpg)
Hmmm… here are my theories — The crispy ones are more of a novelty item so the price is higher. Or maybe the guy/gal stocking the vending machine screwed up.
I’m thinking it’s a screw-up more than anything else. The crispy ones are placed among the higher-priced items. Maybe that was just where there happened to be a free space.
Well, we can’t see the back side of the crispy M&M package but they probably say something like, “Indulge your sweet tooth with our organic, free-trade crispy rice, lovingly hand stuffed into each chocolate candy shell”. Thus the reason for the upcharge…
That’s it–they’re not just any old regular M&M’s. They’re artisanal M&M’s.
The crispy M&Ms would appear have fewer calories than the others, so it makes sense when you think about it.
Health foods are always exorbitantly priced, after all.
It must be the extra processing they have to go through. But you’ve really highlighted the irony here: fewer calories and a higher price means we’re paying more but getting less.
Crispy comes at a cost, Chris.
Is that an M&M with Donald Trump hair on the red package? Eeesh, that just made me lose my appetite.
No self-respecting M&M would have Donald Trump hair. Then again I don’t know how much self-respect M&M’s have. The little buggers insist on melting in my hand.