The gastronomic portal Directo al Paladar publishes an article by Joana Costa with a headline with a word in parentheses, as is the fashion: "The (unsupportive) reasons why you should always take products from the bottom at the supermarket".
The beauty of the piece is that it explains the strategy of supermarkets when it comes to positioning products to capture the interest of customers. He also explains that, despite this strategy, the savvy buyer skips it: "The products that are most visible, that is, in the first positions, are those that are closest to the expiration date, since supposedly they are the ones who first take the clientele". If we take the ones that are further back, we get the ones that have been replenished recently and thus gain several days until expiration.
I don't know anyone who doesn't opt for this tactic. Why should I get a package of spaghetti that will expire in three days when I can get another that will expire in a month? Well, after detailing all these factors and concluding that it is logical for buyers to reach to the bottom of the shelf, he calls this action unsupportive. I love it: "All this reinforces the recommendation to always take the latest products, although it is an absolutely disrespectful gesture to other customers who, due to our bad arts, will be left with products closer to expiring". Because of our bad arts and, above all, because of the picaresque of the manufacturers, that there is no way to print the expiration date on the packaging in a font that is not tiny and in places that it costs God and help to discover.
Given that this practice has already become the majority, if I were a supermarket manager, I would reverse the tactic and put the packaging that expires earlier at the bottom of the shelves. So I would be the first that the customers would take, the owners would value me and in a matter of months they would appoint me as head of the area at the very least.
