/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>19774725
>he didn't even see the ads
durr what?

>>19774725
Quarter pounder sure, but big Mac patties are most definitely smaller than advertised on the picture, just maybe not the pre cook weight disclaimer where they cover their ass.

Rekt. McDonalds ALWAYS wins.

>>19774725
Even if McDonald's some how did not win all they would have done was make the patties bigger and then charge more what a retarded waste of time

Any fat fuck who eats that shit often enough to care isn't even human and therefore cannot be misled.

>no proof [...] that the plantiff had even seen the ads
How?

>>19775458
When you have enough money to buy everyone, you don't need something sensible
Just throw more money at it

>>19774725
It's hard to win a case like that because you'd pretty much need to prove 51% of the restaurants are doing it if you're trying to sue the entire company over it.

>>19775098
this. when you bet against big burger, you are betting against god.

>>19774725
post image of deceptively large big mac

What are we ordering to celebrate bros?

How the fuck do they know he didn’t see the ads? Everyone has seen fast food ads and we all know the actual food looks nothing like what’s shown in the ads. We’ve become a joke of a country.

>>19776421
>>19776388

>>19775383
This was supposed to be an easy cash grab and you know it

>>19776421
I'd make the opposite argument, since every business is engaging in the same practice and everyone has seen the ads while everyone has also ordered a burger, they know they're not going to get anything that looks like the picture. If you buy something knowing full well what it is you haven't been deceived. The only person who could really claim that they've been damaged by deceptive advertising would be someone who's never ordered a burger before. Still, they'd need to prove they saw the ad and that was why they made the purchase and wouldn't have if the business had advertised a more accurate rendition of the product.

Damn the Big Burger defense force lawyers are here already.

>>19774725
>NY judge
They're corpo pozzed to shit. The suit would've never won.

>>19775458
>>19776421
Presumably the burger lawyers would have questioned the plaintiff about where and when he saw the ads, details about what was going on in the ads, provided the judge copies of the ads they had running during the time the plaintiff claimed to have seen them, so the judge can watch the ads in private and compare them against the plaintiff's description, and so on. If the plaintiff could not adequately describe those sorts of things it is easy for Judge to presume he was bullshitting.

>>19774725
>muh portion sizes

>>19774725
>mexicans

>>19776480
>you've been scammed before so you can't be scammed again
oy vey

>>19776791
Amazing how many Americans elect to get scammed by McDonald's and other fast food chains everyday. You'd figure they'd learn better.

>>19774729
This argument would only work on people like me, who use ad blockers religiously. I only see adverts when I periodically venture out to eat somewhere there are TVs, or like at the airport.

It is dumb as shit for any NPC who consooom ads like water. Especially the kind of NPC who sues over this shit.

>>19774752
I still remember when they were called out for their big macs being bigger, and they lied about it. Then hard proof came out ad suddenly they were silent on the issue. Truth is, they used to use two 1/3lb patties, and now they use two 1/10lb patties.