本页使用了标题或全文手工转换

品客

维基百科,自由的百科全书
跳转至: 导航搜索
品客的商标
品客洋芋片

品客Pringles,旧称“翘胡子洋芋片[1][2]),是美国家乐氏旗下的一个马铃薯片品牌。其商标是一个有著咖啡色大胡子和红色领结的人脸。

历史[编辑]

品客于1967年时以“Pringle's Newfangled Potato Chips”之名面市,1968年开始改为现称,目前几乎在世界各地均有贩售。品客除了口味多样之外,还有限定贩卖地区或时间的特色口味,相当受到消费者的欢迎。2012年2月15日宝洁将旗下的零食业务品客薯片(Pringles),以27亿美元现金(约210.6亿港元)出售予食品巨擘家乐氏(Kellogg)。

品客洋芋片的特色在于采用厚片波浪造型来增加口感(严格来说是双曲抛物面造型),且采用长筒罐状包装以避免压碎洋芋片。这种特殊包装是由弗雷德里克·J·鲍尔(Fredric J. Baur)所发明,鲍尔是位有机化学家与食品保存技术人员,在宝洁公司(P&G)从事研发与品管工作(甚至他在过世要求将骨灰放入他所发明的品客包装筒)。

品客洋芋片产品容量大小有许多种,从最早的200公克至今日常见的169公克、110公克以及小罐59公克包装.

主要成分[编辑]

一罐品客标准版从美国制造的原味洋芋片,其成份可能包含:(香港/台湾版)马铃薯葵花油米粉、小麦淀粉、麦芽糊精乳化剂(脂肪酸一甘油脂与脂肪酸二甘油脂)/脂肪酸甘油脂(植物来源)、葡萄糖、酸度调节剂(柠檬酸)等。

贩售口味[编辑]

台湾的品客洋芋片(原味)
  • 原味
  • 洋葱
  • 青葱(限定)
  • 炭烤BBQ
  • 起司
  • 奶油(限定)
  • 酸奶油(限定)
  • 田园沙拉
  • 印度咖哩(限定)
  • 蜂蜜芥末
  • 披萨
  • 香辣
  • 拿坡理蕃茄(限定)
  • 培根(限定)
  • 起司乳酪 (限定)
  • 奶油乳酪 (限定)
  • 焦糖奶油 (地区限定)
  • 蜂蜜奶油 (限定)
  • 炸鸡 (限定)

争议[编辑]

洋芋片争议[编辑]

2008年7月4日,英国高等法院判决,品客“薯片”其实不是“薯片”,因为产品的马铃薯成份只有42%,而外形、口感都和真正的薯片不同。这是应P&G公司提出的上诉所作的判决。因为这个判决,品客“薯片”不用缴纳对薯片征收的17.5%的增值税,而得以和普通食物一样免税[3][4][5]

然而,在2009年4月,英国上诉庭推翻了高等法院判决,品客“薯片”必须缴纳对薯片征收的增值税[6]。宝洁公司发言人说在等待法院最后判决的同时,宝洁已经预防性地缴清税务局所要求的款项。[7]

新口味争议[编辑]

品客在2015年于各地推出了新包装的洋芋片,每份重量由134g调整为110g,包装罐的直径缩小,风味也做了调整。 但是此变化收到了消费者褒贬不一的回应,部分民众抱怨,新版包装罐的小尺寸使他们难以伸手进入罐中,而风味也不如以前强烈[8];对此品客公司表示,这些变化是因为生产工厂所在地由美国改变成马来西亚,尺寸与价格部分则是因应原物料上涨而做调整。[9]

被查验出含有致癌物质[编辑]

轶事[编辑]

香港财政司司长曾俊华有“胡须曾”及“薯片叔叔”的称号(因其二撇鸡与品客薯片里的头像相似而得名),但他个人并不在意。现在“薯片”更是他的别名之一。

外部链接[编辑]

  1. ^ 宝侨家品|品客, 查阅日期:2014-01-24, 品客官网
  2. ^ 三少四壮集-喉糖与翘胡子洋芋片. 中国时报. 2013-03-08 [2014-01-24]. (原始内容存档于2014-02-01).  无效|dead-url=bot: unknown (帮助)
  3. ^ Pringles 'are not potato crisps'. UK: BBC. 2008-07-04 (英语). Mr Justice Warren ruled that Pringles were not "made from the potato" - as set out in the definition laid down by the 1994 VAT Act. 
  4. ^ 英法院裁定品客薯片非薯片. 香港: 苹果日报. 2008-07-06 (中文(香港)‎). 法官沃伦(JusticeWarren)指,消费者将品客划归为薯片,但根据法律规定,需征税的薯仔食品要“完全或主要由马铃薯制成”,品客的薯仔成份只占42%,未符合规定,所以判宝洁得直。 
  5. ^ 2008 EWHC 1558 (Ch) 宝碱公司(UK) 对垒 英国税务与关税局, British and Irish Legal Information Institute, 2008-7-4, (英文). This appeal is allowed because Regular Pringles are not, on the facts found, products "made from the potato, or from potato flour, or from potato starch" within excepted item 5.
  6. ^ 2009 EWCA Civ 407 英国税务与关税局 对垒 宝碱公司(UK), British and Irish Legal Information Institute, 2009-5-20, (英文). In the course of his urbane submissions on the "made from" aspect of Regular Pringles Mr Cordara QC referred to "the potato as a fiscal contaminant", the "essential characteristics of the paradigm potato crisp", the absence of "findings of potatoness" and the "quantitative role of the potato." In contending that Pringles (42% potato, 33% fat) were not "made from" the potato he put forward this proposition:"If a product has a number of significant ingredients it cannot be said to be 'made from' one of them." So it is argued that Regular Pringles, which also contain fat and flour, cannot be said to be "made from the potato." The response to these points is that it is vital to recall why the Tribunal was required in the first place to answer the question whether the goods in question are "made from" the potato. It was not in answer to a scientific or technical question about the composition of Regular Pringles, or in response to a request for a recipe. It was for the purpose of deciding whether the goods are entitled to zero rating. On this point the VAT legislation uses everyday English words, which ought to be interpreted in a sensible way according to their ordinary and natural meaning. The "made from" question would probably be answered in a more relevant and sensible way by a child consumer of crisps than by a food scientist or a culinary pedant. On another aspect of party food I think that most children, if asked whether jellies with raspberries in them were "made from" jelly, would have the good sense to say "Yes", despite the raspberries.
  7. ^ Pringles lose Appeal Court case. UK: BBC. 2009-05-20 (英语). But a spokesperson for Procter & Gamble said the company had been paying VAT on the snack pending the appeal process, and so was not liable for any back taxes. 
  8. ^ [1]
  9. ^ [2]
  10. ^ 南方都市报关于致癌进口品客薯片的报道
  11. ^ 宝洁公司对品客致癌事件的官方回应