Three men suing Chipotle because they felt too full...

Options
2

Replies

  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    johunt615 wrote: »
    Why would anyone only list the calories in one ingredient? What was the thinking on that?

    This was my point. It kind of seems intentionally deceptive.
  • fishshark
    fishshark Posts: 1,886 Member
    Options
    regardless if its mislabeling or deceptive we are talking about adults who can work, pay bills, and be productive members of society... no website is gonna ever convince me one of their big *kitten* burritos is 300 cals!
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    Their website seems to be accurate. The question is how that sign got made. My assumption is dumb mistake or words got cut out at the last minute, not intentionally misleading, as it was sure to get pointed out quite soon so would be not a very likely to be successful attempt to mislead more likely to get bad press, and they had to know that.
  • leanjogreen18
    leanjogreen18 Posts: 2,492 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Their website seems to be accurate. The question is how that sign got made. My assumption is dumb mistake or words got cut out at the last minute, not intentionally misleading, as it was sure to get pointed out quite soon so would be not a very likely to be successful attempt to mislead more likely to get bad press, and they had to know that.

    Three different locations and this is in the lawsuit as well...

    "The lawsuit further alleges that information on Chipotle’s website also contains misleading information about the calories in a chorizo burrito and other products."

    They probably have changed the website by now:).

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    johunt615 wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    Their website seems to be accurate. The question is how that sign got made. My assumption is dumb mistake or words got cut out at the last minute, not intentionally misleading, as it was sure to get pointed out quite soon so would be not a very likely to be successful attempt to mislead more likely to get bad press, and they had to know that.

    Three different locations and this is in the lawsuit as well...

    "The lawsuit further alleges that information on Chipotle’s website also contains misleading information about the calories in a chorizo burrito and other products."

    They probably have changed the website by now:).

    Based on how the nutrition calculator on the website works I'd have to see good detail on how it could give you 300 calories for the burrito.

    I am sure the sign was a multi-store or even chain-wide promotion; doesn't mean human error isn't why it's off or misleading. I bet there were more words that got cut or some such.

    Makes no sense they would (1) think they could get away with being extremely intentionally misleading about the chorizo burrito; and (2) would do so with just that one product (and I am familiar with their calculator and site so know they aren't in general -- I don't ever eat their burritos or anything but a couple of specific bowls, and yet even I know how much they list their various ingredients for).
  • leanjogreen18
    leanjogreen18 Posts: 2,492 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options

    Chipotle's only comment was that it was the Chorizo thats 300 calories.

    I don't understand how in at least 3 different locations no one that worked there/managed there, noticed the error. And if they did why was it left for possible 4 years (class action lawsuit retro for 4 years)?

    Any rate whatever the case it will be interesting to see what happens.

    In the past being ignorant of calories I probably would have also believed the burrito was 300 calories (ugg I know). But now I could take one look at ingredients and size and know there is no way. ETA- maybe employees/manager was also ignorant of calorie counts?
  • shellyld2016
    shellyld2016 Posts: 288 Member
    Options
    That is very misleading to put it on the menu that way. I always worry about the accuracy of the menu calorie counts. I usually try to go under on those days just to leave room for error, but that is crazy high.
  • dragon_girl26
    dragon_girl26 Posts: 2,187 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    Lol, how in the hell would someone think that one of their burritos with all the sour cream and guacamole they put on it would only be 300 calories?

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
    9285851.png

    Wishful thinking?

    Or maybe they subtracted all of the negative calories from the lettuce....

    Never seen the appeal of Chipotle anyway. I guess because I'm a Moe's girl myself. Still, it's frightening to think that people would really think a burrito like that is only 300 calories.
  • PaulaWallaDingDong
    PaulaWallaDingDong Posts: 4,641 Member
    Options
    Mmmmm..Chorizo....
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,725 Member
    Options
    Maybe whomever made the sign just thought calorie information on marketing products was a gimmick and not a real thing.
  • acorsaut89
    acorsaut89 Posts: 1,147 Member
    Options
    fishshark wrote: »
    regardless if its mislabeling or deceptive we are talking about adults who can work, pay bills, and be productive members of society... no website is gonna ever convince me one of their big *kitten* burritos is 300 cals!

    I agree with this - while they may have been mislead it is also up to the consumer to know and understand what they're eating.

    Consumers - of anything, not just food products - have to be aware of what they're buying and be able to think for themselves about it.
  • vingogly
    vingogly Posts: 1,785 Member
    Options
    I agree the Chipotle sign is misleading. So are packaged food labels that say "300 calories" on the front but when you read the nutritional label you see that 300 calories are for 1 serving -- and the package contains 2.5 servings. But there's a simple solution: read the damn labels.

    Caveat emptor. When I'm going to a new place, I get out my cell phone, go to the company web site, and read the nutritional information. If you do that to "build" a Chipotle burrito, you'll see the chorizo alone is 300 cals. I understand why the guys are suing Chipotle, but you have to take responsibility for looking up the numbers when you eat out.

    I used to get a burrito bowl there -- no guac, no sour cream, half a normal serving of brown rice. But since the food poisoning incidents, I can't bring myself to eat there again.
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,136 Member
    Options
    Kinda reminds me of the woman who sued McDonald's because she spilled hot coffee on her lap.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants
  • mattdhall
    mattdhall Posts: 85 Member
    Options
    Three crunchy steak tacos with lettuce and cheese is only 465 calories. And delicious.
  • Sabine_Stroehm
    Sabine_Stroehm Posts: 19,263 Member
    Options
    Hmm... seems like this IS an important issue, that's being spun a certain way.
    Chipotle appears to be giving it's customers false, misleading information. Suppose it was about allergens, like peanuts....

    Yes, we're all responsible to think. But Chipotle should be obligated to ensure that the nutrition information they share is reasonably accurate.
  • leanjogreen18
    leanjogreen18 Posts: 2,492 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    johunt615 wrote: »
    on the Chorizo burrito that was listed at 300 calories. Turns out the burrito is 3 to 4 times that amount.

    http://laist.com/2016/11/19/make_chipotle_healthy_again.php

    I bet any mfper could look at the ingredients alone and know that it was more than 300 calories - cheese, flour tortilla, white rice, chorizo, black beans and salsa.

    ETA - not to mention the size of that burrito. My little low calorie burrito is 300 calories plus and its half that size.

    Are you saying it's ok to defraud the public because you would have known better?

    Not sure what I said that would lead you to believe I would think it's ok to defraud the public.

    ETA - read my other comments in this thread and you'll see that I feel quite opposite.
  • canadianlbs
    canadianlbs Posts: 5,199 Member
    Options
    Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
    Yes, we're all responsible to think. But Chipotle should be obligated to ensure that the nutrition information they share is reasonably accurate.

    "unspecified damages and an injunction against Chipotle that prohibits the company from using allegedly misleading information in its advertising and promotional campaigns"

    nothing wrong with that injunction, iyam. seems like the reports are mostly trivializing the 'silly' factor, but spinny point-and-snicker reporting doesn't really remove the substantive aspects involved.

Categories