This may not be the case everywhere, but today in our local grocery store I found a huge display of Russell Stover candies in a bright red bag with the words "Low Carb" written in big letters on the front.

Surprised, I read the label, and sure enough, .25 carbs per serving.

$3.99 for about 8 little pieces (pb cups, truffles, caramels, etc.).

Now, on the other side of the rack were the Russell Stover "Sugar Free" candies. Green packages. "Sugar Free" written on the top.

SAME CARB COUNT and identical ingredients' lists ...

$1.69 for the same 8 little pieces and the same selection.

I do believe Russell is attempting to take advantage of those of us craving LC products that are in line with our lifestyles. This is a shame and I plan to ask in our store why the pricing is so different. I had no time today, or I'd have done so and had a report for you.

nevermind!!

From the Russell Stover's site:

1 box LC = .2 carb/piece
1 box is 6 oz ~ $4.99

1 box SF = .33 carb/piece
1 box is 7 oz ~ $2.99

Why pay more for less? In my area, the LC ones run about $2.99 on up, and the SF ones are around $1.50. Guess which ones I buy!

I'll bet that extra .13 carb is killing you!

I just found it ludicrous that the difference is impossible to see in the ingredients listing, and that the price is incredibly different. I'm glad I checked the other side of the rack!

Thanks for the detail on this -- very interesting and Russell Stover needs a good lashing for this!

not seen the "LC" Russell Stovers, already hooked on the "SF" though, so what do I care... LOL

i wouldnt eat either, since they contain partially hydrogenated oils, definitely something you want to stay away from!

Gee whiz, partially hydrogenated oils. How much can there be in one little candy bar.
Compared to the vast amounts of partially hydrogenated oils on Cheetos, Chips Ahoy! and all the other high-fat foods we used to eat.
Ya gotta have some fun

I have to defend Russell Stover on their two types of candy not only because their candy is quite good, but because they are trying to gain a wider market for their products. Sugar Free appeals to diabetics, low-carb to Atkins diet followers. It is like Pepsi One appealing to men, Diet Pepsi to women. They charge more for one than the other. Again, they are aiming at different markets.

Yes, it's a marketing thing. If you're new to lo carbing and not used to reading labels, which would you buy? Went to the RS store today to make a purchase (the prices have gone way up at the usual places to buy), and as soon as you walk in the store there's 2 HUGE displays of the lo carb stuff. The SF was way at the back of the store.

I first saw the LC RS's in Walgreens...it was displayed with the other LC items...the SF was displayed in the candy aisle w/ the SF candies...and right by the pharmacy pick-up window...for all those diabetics who'll be getting their prescriptions filled.

Go into almost any store (grocery or retail)...let's say you're in the "cereal" aisle...look around you...sitting there, seemingly out-of-place, you're apt to see displays of "kiddie" spoons/bowls, toys, candy, anything a kid might start screaming at Mom to buy. Now, who do you see in the aisle??? Mom and the kids...

This is not due to sloppy management...this is called MARKETING, and if you're in the retail business, it's essential...

Russell Stover just jumped on the LC band wagon...taking two markets with the same product. Although I hate it, from a marketing/management standpoint, it's bloody brilliant!

It wouldn't suprise me if, pretty soon, you see the different pricing vanish altogether...hook the consumer and them reel him in! You want the product bad enough, you pay the price.

60s

Actually, guys, it really isn't a marketing scheme. I emailed Russell Stover and they informed me that the LC product is more expensive because of the chocolate. The LC is made of pure malitol, while the SF is a malitol "mix"; hence, the difference in price.

Good for you, Ziggy13! Go right to the source!

This information is something I can't see on the packaging (I purchased the SF version), yet I can't imagine the more than double price for a mix of sweeteners.

I'm satisified with the SF version and the extra .13 carbs per piece, since I eat only one piece about once a week or less.

I suppose if a person consumes more of this candy the LC version might be a boon, but I'm not sure of the actual difference in effect on the body.

Thanks for the information!

Ziggy!

That's using the old noggin"...............if unsure about something, go right to the source! You know what happens when we assume!!!! You make an A** out of U and Me!

Russell Stovers has been around too long and has too much competition, I believe, to start screwing around with trying to deceive the public IMHO!

I'm sure they aren't trying to deceive the public ... but they are taking advantage of a "new market" with the LC labeling.

While not a deception, it is a pricing issue that .13 carbs decides for me.

This is my take on the new LC version of the Russell Stover chocolates. If this info is wrong and anyone knows differently.. feel free to correct me as I am still learning like the rest of us here..

From what I can tell there are 3 sugar alcohol ingredients listed on the box of the sugar free chocolates that I have.. ( coconut miniatures)

Maltitol, Erythritol, and Sucralose. They are all 3 sugar alcohols. I would think that the straight maltitol would create more intestinal upset in those that are sensitive to the laxative affect that happens when they eat these candies and products that contain heavy amounts of the maltitol.. than if they were to have the 3 mixed sugar alcohols.
I have a whole package of the crystal form of Erythritol and a breakdown of the chemical makeup and the improvements in the product that I got from the company who makes it. According to that company the Erythritol has less intestinal upset qualities that are common with the maltitol.
Just a thought for those of you who would want to spend the extra money for the LC version.
As for me.. I will stick to the SF ones as well.
I am fortunate to not have the tummy problems associated with the maltitol.
I never eat the recommended or allowed amount. Usuall I have 2 to 3 when I have them. Serving size on my box of chocolates is 5.. 20 g carbs.. 3 fibers.. and 16 sugar alcohols.
Sure is some wonderful candy ..