Month: November 2022

• MICHELIN^® Pilot^® Sport EV tire earns “Best of What’s New” award in automotive category
• This is the third Michelin product to receive an award from Popular Science, following two “100 Most Innovative Products of the Year” awards

 

GREENVILLE, S.C., Nov. 30, 2022 – Michelin, a leader in sustainability and innovation, announced today that the MICHELIN^® Pilot^® Sport EV tire is a 2022 Popular Science “Best of What’s New” award winner in the automotive category. Featuring technologies born from Formula E racing, the Pilot Sport EV tire is Michelin’s latest offer for consumers to confidently drive the full potential of electric sports cars.

“We are thrilled to have the MICHELIN Pilot Sport EV tire recognized as an award winner, which showcases how performance can be improved and maintained with the inclusion of more sustainable materials,” said Katelyn Berry, vice president of marketing for Michelin North America, Inc.’s business to consumer products. “MICHELIN is ranked the No.1 Tire Brand across major categories and segments by industry experts and consumers alike and developing tires with manufacturers for electric vehicles proves our dedication to a sustainable future. Our consumer tire portfolio is primed for the EV revolution, and we’re proud to see our efforts being recognized by Popular Science.”

Each year since 1988, the editors of Popular Science review thousands of products in search of the top 100 innovations – breakthrough products and technologies that represent significant advancements in their categories.

 

 

“The ‘Best of What’s New’ Awards are our way of celebrating the most exciting and groundbreaking innovations of the year. These awards highlight the revolutionary inventions that are helping to improve our daily lives, our society, and our planet,” said Rob Verger, technology editor for Popular Science. “From the future of air travel to revolutionary skin care products, and from sustainable outdoors equipment to game-changing gadgets, this year’s list is a thrilling mix that we’re proud to call the ‘Best of What’s New.’”

The MICHELIN Pilot Sport EV tire benefits directly from the progress Michelin has achieved over seven seasons in Formula E and incorporates ElectricGrip Compound^™ technology, which features a hard compound for the center of the tread to provide the grip required to handle high-torque characteristics of electric sports cars. Consumers can experience low rolling resistance that extends range by up to 37 miles[1], and 20% less perceptible road noise thanks to MICHELIN Acoustic^™ technology, which takes the form of a custom-developed polyurethane foam that reduces cabin noise[2].

Michelin has worked consistently for many years to reduce the ecological impact of its manufacturing activities in pursuit of net zero emissions for Scopes 1 and 2 by 2050. To achieve carbon neutrality throughout the life of its tire and address the demands of electric sports car owners, Michelin has committed to reduce the environmental impact associated with the tire’s production and transport to its point of sale.

To find more information, please visit michelinman.com.

 

About Michelin North America

Michelin, the leading mobility company, is working with tires, around tires and beyond tires to enable Motion for Life. Dedicated to enhancing its clients’ mobility and sustainability, Michelin designs and distributes the most suitable tires, services and solutions for its customers’ needs. Michelin provides digital services, maps and guides to help enrich trips and travels and make them unique experiences. Bringing its expertise to new markets, the company is investing in high-technology materials, 3D printing and hydrogen, to serve a wide variety of industries — from aerospace to biotech. Headquartered in Greenville, South Carolina, Michelin North America has approximately 22,500 employees and operates 34 production facilities in the United States and Canada. (michelinman.com)

 

About Popular Science

Established in 1872, Popular Science is one of America’s oldest and most trusted magazine brands. ?Popular Science? has a legacy of bringing readers groundbreaking innovations and discoveries, demystifying the world, and examining everything from the marvels of deep space to the secret lives of everyday staples. Popular Science makes science and tech engaging, approachable, and inclusive to keep readers, listeners, and viewers plugged into and excited about the world around them. Popular Science is part of Recurrent Ventures., a privately held media company that includes brands like The Drive, Futurism, and Outdoor Life.

 

For more information contact:

Contact: Christian Fisher

Email: christian.fisher@michelin.com  |  www.michelinmedia.com

[1] Rolling Resistance internal study carried out in October 2020, comparing a 255/45 R19 MICHELIN Pilot Sport EV (6.7kg/t) with the same-sized MICHELIN Pilot Sport 4 SUV (8.8kg/t). In the case of an electric vehicle weighing 2,151kg with a range of 540km, the difference (2.1kg/t) equates to more than 60km of additional range, or more than 10%of the original range

[2] Internal noise measurement (170-230Hz band) carried out in 2016 based on a KIA Cadenza equipped with 245/45 R19 tires. Noise level measured on the range “170-230Hz”. Results may vary depending on vehicle, tire range and size, speed and road conditions.

 

Contact Information:

Name: Christian Fisher
Email: christian.fisher@michelin.com
Job Title: Consumer Public Relations Manager – Michelin North America

New York, NY – Nov 30, 2022 – The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs determined that Perrigo Company plc provided a reasonable basis for certain cost savings claims for its store brand hypoallergenic infant formula but recommended that other challenged claims be modified or discontinued.

Mead Johnson & Company (MJ), manufacturer of the competing Enfamil Nutramigen formula, challenged claims relating to Perrigo’s generic extensively hydrolyzed casein formula, one that is designed for infants with a cow’s milk allergy and is sold by various retailers under their respective store brands. The Perrigo claims appeared in consumer and pediatrician-directed websites, as well as in pediatrician-directed print advertising, and range from unqualified assertions of Perrigo’s store brand formula being more affordable to specific cost savings calculated according to Perrigo’s price-per-pound calculations.

At issue before NAD was whether Perrigo’s price comparison claims between its generic store brand hypoallergenic infant formula and Nutramigen are truthful and non-misleading.

Percentage Savings Claims

Based on IRI Market Advantage annual retail sales data and Perrigo’s price calculations on each container’s price per ounce, NAD found the following claims supported:

• “Store Brand Hypoallergenic Infant Formula costs less, allowing families to save at least 22% … compared to leading name brands”; and
• “The chart with the claim “provides the best value for hypoallergenic infant formula … at least 22% of  savings.”

NAD also determined that the advertiser’s evidence, a double-blind, randomized crossover clinical study, provided a reasonable basis to support the claim that Perrigo’s store brand formula is nutritionally comparable to leading name brand hypoallergenic formulas.

Monthly Savings Claims

NAD determined that the IRI retail sales data and Perrigo’s calculations provide a reasonable basis to support:

• The advertiser’s daily, weekly, monthly, and annual savings claims comparing Perrigo to Nutramigen;
• The bar graph titled “At Least $75 in Savings Per Month” depicting Similac Alimentum as costing $250 per month, Enfamil Nutramigen as costing $252 per month, and Perrigo Store Brand Hypoallergenic Formula as costing $173 per month; and
• The claim that “families who switch from expensive name brand formula to Store Brand infant formula can save approximately $62 monthly” as it relates to hypoallergenic However, NAD found that the second part of that claim “which can help cover more than half the cost of diapers” was not supported and recommended that portion of the claim be discontinued with respect to hypoallergenic formulas.

NAD concluded that disclaimers referencing 2021 sales data that qualify the $75 monthly savings claims should be modified to ensure they are clear and conspicuous and placed in close proximity to the claims they qualify.

Affordability Claims

Based on IRI retail sales data and Perrigo’s price calculations, NAD found the following claims supported:

• The general “more affordable” claim;
• “Parents deserve a more affordable hypoallergenic option and now they have one”;
• “Finally, you can now recommend a more affordable option for your families”; and
• “The cost comparison in the claim “parents deserve a safe effective and lower-cost hypoallergenic infant formula that meets the same high-quality standards as expensive name brands. And as their pediatric provider, you can now recommend a more affordable option with confidence.”

However, NAD determined that “the same high-quality standards as expensive name brands” conveys a broader message of equivalence that is not supported by the advertiser’s clinical study. Therefore, NAD recommended that this portion of the claim be modified to clearly state that Perrigo meets standards for AAP hypoallergenicity.

NAD also found that an unsupported message of broad equivalence between generic hypoallergenic formulas and brand name hypoallergenic formulas is reasonably conveyed by the claim “you can’t put a price on health and nutrition, but there’s no reason to pay a premium just for the name on the label.” Therefore, NAD recommended that the claim be discontinued or modified to avoid conveying such a message.

Implied Claim

NAD found that the implied claim caregivers will spend less money on hypoallergenic formula over the course of their infant’s cow’s milk allergy if they use Perrigo’s store brand formula instead of Nutramigen is supported. NAD noted that cow’s milk allergy infants need to consume hypoallergenic infant formula as a replacement for regular formula or breast milk, and the pricing evidence demonstrates that Perrigo hypoallergenic formula costs less than Nutramigen.

Finally, NAD considered whether MJ’s evidence shows that Nutramigen offers materially different benefits than Perrigo products such that Perrigo’s price comparisons between the infant formulas are inherently misleading. When evaluating health claims especially in the context of infant nutrition NAD requires competent and reliable scientific evidence including when that evidence is used to rebut the advertiser’s evidence that establishes a reasonable basis to support its advertising claim. After considering all the data in the record, NAD determined that MJ has not provided stronger, more persuasive evidence reaching a different result than the evidence provided by Perrigo.

In its advertiser statement, Perrigo stated that it “will comply with NAD’s recommendations.” The advertiser further stated that while it “disagrees” with NAD’s recommendations regarding its advertising, “Perrigo respects the self-regulatory process, and appreciates the NAD’s decision and careful analysis.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs is where businesses turn to enhance consumer trust and consumers are heard. The non-profit organization creates a fairer playing field for businesses and a better experience for consumers through the development and delivery of effective third-party accountability and dispute resolution programs. Embracing its role as an independent organization since the restructuring of the Council of Better Business Bureaus in June 2019, BBB National Programs today oversees more than a dozen leading national industry self-regulation programs, and continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-directed marketing, and privacy. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy,    delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

New York, NY – November 30, 2022 – The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs has referred advertising claims made by Zscaler, Inc. to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) after the company failed to respond substantively to a challenge into claims made for its Zero Trust Exchange Platform. NAD recommended that Zscaler discontinue claims about various privacy protection attributes and benefits of its Zero Trust Exchange platform versus the technical capabilities of Prisma Access, the platform of challenger Palo Alto Networks.

Although Zscaler contended that NAD did not have jurisdiction to consider this challenge, NAD determined that, pursuant to NAD/NARB Procedures, it has jurisdiction over the advertising claims at issue in this case because:

 

• A non-disclosure agreement between the advertiser and an entity not party to these proceedings did not protect advertising claims contained within a marketing brochure from NAD’s review, although the advertiser argued the challenger tortiously interfered with a third-party confidentiality agreement. For policy reasons, it is important that advertisers not use a cloak of confidentiality to hide misleading advertising.
• The marketing brochure in which the challenged claims appear is a carefully prepared seventeen-page document with extensive design elements that suggest it was intended for broad dissemination. The advertiser acknowledged that it was provided to multiple recipients to promote the benefits of Zscaler’s security platform and, as a result, constitutes national advertising as defined in NAD/NARB Procedures.

 

NAD routinely considers challenges involving highly complicated technologies from many industries without issue and concluded that the issues in this case are not so technical that they are beyond NAD’s review.

Because Zscaler did not submit any argument or evidence to support its claims on the merits, the NAD/NARB Procedures allow NAD to conclude that Zscaler failed to meet its burden of providing a reasonable basis for its claims.

NAD/NARB Procedures further require advertisers to state in writing at the close of the case whether they intend to comply with NAD’s recommendations or appeal NAD’s findings. Zscaler declined to submit this written statement. Therefore, pursuant to NAD/NARB Procedures, NAD referred this case to the FTC and other regulatory authorities for review and possible enforcement action.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs is where businesses turn to enhance consumer trust and consumers are heard. The non-profit organization creates a fairer playing field for businesses and a better experience for consumers through the development and delivery of effective third-party accountability and dispute resolution programs. Embracing its role as an independent organization since the restructuring of the Council of Better Business Bureaus in June 2019, BBB National Programs today oversees more than a dozen leading national industry self-regulation programs, and continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-directed marketing, and privacy. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

Illinois Foundation Seeds, Inc. Announces Donation to USDA Maize Collection

Illinois Foundation Seeds, Inc (IFSI) continues its long-standing commitment to supporting the agriculture industry and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). IFSI recently announced a multi-year series of donations to the USDA Maize Collection in Iowa.

The donations involve supplying past, IFSI-developed inbreds to the USDA’s Maize Collection housed at the Ames, Iowa facility. In 2022, IFSI will release 66 inbreds with full descriptions and molecular marker data. In 2023, the company will release an additional 44 inbreds. Approximately 48 additional inbreds will be released beginning in 2024 and beyond. The inbreds will be grown at the North Central Regional Plant Introduction Station (NCRPIS) for distribution beginning no earlier than 2024. A list of the accessions donated can be reviewed here: https://npgsweb.ars-grin.gov/gringlobal/cooperator?id=184890 (The list at this link will update as more accessions are donated to the collection.)

Inbreds are lines of identical or virtually identical entities considered genetically pure. Corn hybrids derive from inbred corn lines. The foundation of successful breeding is diversity of inbreds.

“IFSI hired Dale Cochran in 1965 as our first Corn Breeder from Iowa State University,” says Brian Coombs, current General Manager of IFSI’s Field Crops Business Unit. “With Dale now serving as the Chairman of IFSI’s board, this donation to the Ames, Iowa facility feels like it has come full circle for us.  We are proud to publicly release these inbreds to the USDA for the world’s use.”

Through its research component, the USDA works to furnish genetic, genomic, and bioinformatic tools, information, and genetic resources to enhance American agricultural productivity.  The National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS) is a collaborative effort managed by the USDA Agriculture Research Service. The NPGS mission is to support agricultural production by acquiring, conserving, evaluating, documenting, and distributing crop germplasm. The bank of information provides a historical perspective of parental lines, which can be used now and in the future.

Headquartered in Tolono, IL, Illinois Foundation Seeds, Inc. is a leading research, product development, licensing, and production company established in 1937. For over 80 years, in locations worldwide,  IFSI’s commitment to development and dedication to exceptional quality has remained the same. The IFSI name means you can count on industry-leading products, research, licensing, and service.

New York, NY – November 22, 2022 – In a challenge brought by Dyson, Inc., the National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs determined that SharkNinja Operating LLC (Shark) provided a reasonable basis for claims that its Shark Air Purifier 4 meets or even exceeds HEPA standards but recommended that Shark discontinue these same claims for its Air Purifier 6.

The challenged claims include:

 

• “Capture 99.97% of dust, dander, odors, and more.”
• “Capture 99.98% of large, small, & micro-size particles.”

 

NAD also recommended that Shark:

 

• Discontinue claims that its air purifiers are better than other HEPA-labeled air purifiers because those purifiers leave behind pollutants.
• Discontinue its COVID-19 claims.
• Modify the “Clean Air 100%” claim by adding a clear and conspicuous disclosure explaining the basis of the claim.

 

Each of these filters is advertised as being a HEPA (high-efficiency particulate air) filter. HEPA filters are a type of pleated mechanical air filter that can remove at least 99.97% of dust, pollen, mold, bacteria, and any airborne particles with a size of 0.3 microns. HEPA filters can increase the air quality in a room over time and is often viewed as the gold standard in consumer-facing filtration products, such as air purifiers and vacuum cleaners.

HEPA Standards Claims

In support of Shark’s claims that its air purifiers meet or even exceed HEPA standards, the advertiser relied on testing conducted on the first batch of air filters from its production line (First Run Filters).

NAD considered whether the products being tested are representative of what consumers can purchase on the market and concluded that Shark’s testing of the First Run Filters was relevant for the Air Purifier 4. Further, NAD determined that the advertiser’s QC testing was reliable and was sufficient to provide a reasonable basis that its air filters, at least as of the time they left the production line overseas, met HEPA standards.

However, NAD concluded that, based on the challenger’s rebuttal testing of off-the-shelf filters for the Air Purifier 6 , Shark’s production line testing was insufficient to support its HEPA claims for such filters.

Comparative HEPA Claim

NAD assessed the messages reasonably conveyed by Shark’s claim that its filters are “True HEPA” whereas other “HEPA-labeled air purifiers can emit up to 10x more particles back into the air” and “can leave behind smoke, carbon dust, virus carriers, and mold.” These claims are made alongside images of Shark’s air purifier and what appears to be an unbranded air purifier. A small disclosure below the unbranded purifier states “Based on IEST-RP-CC007.3. 01-02 microns vs. a leading HEPA labeled air purifier.”

NAD determined that Shark’s comparison of its “True” HEPA purifiers to other purifiers, without identifying a specific purifier, directly pits Shark’s product against all “HEPA-Labeled Air Purifiers.” Although the disclosure does state that the “10X more particles” claim was based on a test against “a leading” purifier, the disclosure is tied only to the quantified 10X claims. NAD found that at least one message reasonably conveyed by the advertising is that Shark’s purifier is a “True HEPA” filter and other HEPA-labeled filters may be inferior.

Because Shark did not provide any support for the message that its purifiers are superior to 85% of the market or that 85% of competitors in the market, including Dyson, emit harmful particulates notwithstanding their HEPA-labeling, NAD recommended that the claim be discontinued.

NAD noted that nothing in its decision prevents Shark from educating consumers that some HEPA-labeled air purifiers may fall short of HEPA standards in a noncomparative context.

COVID-19 Claim

NAD determined that Shark’s claim “CAPTURES airborne droplets that can carry bacteria & viruses, such as CORONAVIRUS” reasonably communicates several messages, including that Shark’s air purifier:

 

• Captures (but does not kill) the coronavirus;
• Will prevent consumes from getting sick from the virus, either in part or completely; and
• Provides sufficient protection from becoming infected with COVID-19 that other protections are not necessary.

 

NAD noted that CDC guidance makes clear that solutions like HEPA air filters or cleaners are only part of a multi-layered approach to mitigate and reduce the risk of exposure to COVID-19 and is intended for use with numerous other precautionary practices. Because none of that context is present in Shark’s advertising, NAD recommended that Shark discontinue its COVID-19 claims.

NAD noted that nothing in its decision prevents Shark from claiming that air filters can be used as part of multiple mitigation strategies to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and lower the risk of exposure.

Clean Air 100% Claim

Shark advertises that its air purifiers offer “Clean Air 100%” by prominently displaying images of its purifier, which has a display known as Clean Sense IQ, with the numbers “100%” under the words “CLEAN AIR.”

NAD noted that none of Shark’s advertisements that contain the “Clean Air 100%” claim provide any explanation of what is meant by 100%.

A claim of 100% cleanliness is a powerful claim, and in the absence of context that clearly conveys the basis of the claim, NAD found that consumers may reasonably take away a literal message—that the air surrounding the purifier is 100% clean of any pollutants. Therefore, NAD recommended that Shark modify the claim by adding a clear and conspicuous disclosure explaining the basis of the 100% claim.

Finally, during the proceeding Shark voluntarily agreed to permanently discontinue the claim that its filters “capture 99.97% of  odors.” Therefore, NAD did not review this claim on the merits.

In its advertiser statement, Shark stated that it “will appeal NAD’s decision.” The advertiser stated that while “it is pleased that NAD determined that Shark’s evidence demonstrated that its filters meet the HEPA standard when they left the production line” and that “Shark provided a reasonable basis for its HEPA claims for the Shark Air Purifier 4,” it “disagrees with NAD’s other findings and recommendations.”

Appeals of NAD decisions are made to BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Review Board (NARB), the appellate-level truth-in-advertising body of BBB National Programs.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs is where businesses turn to enhance consumer trust and consumers are heard. The non-profit organization creates a fairer playing field for businesses and a better experience for consumers through the development and delivery of effective third-party accountability and dispute resolution programs. Embracing its role as an independent organization since the restructuring of the Council of Better Business Bureaus in June 2019, BBB National Programs today oversees more than a dozen leading national industry self-regulation programs, and continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-directed marketing, and privacy. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

New York, NY – November 22, 2022 – The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs determined that the American Beverage Association (ABA) provided a reasonable basis for the following environmental benefit claims related to its Every Bottle Back program, which is designed to encourage and increase beverage container recycling in the U.S.:

 

• “Our bottles are made to be remade.”
• “We’re carefully designing our bottles to be 100% recyclable, including the caps.”
• The “That completes the circle” portion of the claim “That completes the circle and reduces plastic waste.”
• “Increasing awareness about the value of 100% recyclable plastic bottles.”

 

However, NAD recommended that ABA modify certain aspirational claims regarding the use of recycled materials in bottles, as well as claims relating to ABA’s partnerships with non-profit organizations and efforts to achieve sustainability goals together. ABA will appeal these portions of NAD’s decision.

The claims at issue, which appeared on ABA’s website and in a video advertisement, were challenged by NAD as part of its independent routine monitoring of truth and transparency in U.S. national advertising.

ABA is the trade association for the U.S. nonalcoholic beverage industry whose members are Coca-Cola Company, Keurig Dr Pepper, and PepsiCo. Consumers who are loyal to ABA’s brands care about environmental stewardship and cannot readily verify the truth and accuracy of environmental benefit claims.

 

Recyclability Claims

NAD assessed the evidence provided by the advertiser in support of claims that center on the recyclability of the bottles and further explain that the material is reused and recycled.

NAD determined that the claims “Our bottles are made to be remade” and “We’re carefully designing our bottles to be 100% recyclable, including the caps” are supported by a reasonable basis, including evidence that ABA member companies use 100 percent recyclable virgin plastic PET in their bottles and that some of its members are transitioning from the use of dark to clear plastic to make it more compatible with recycling processes and more likely to be reused.

NAD noted, however, that while PET is among the acceptable recyclable materials in the widely available recycling facilities nationwide, the claim “They’re collected and separated from other plastics so they can be turned back into material that we use to make new bottles” conveys the message that the bottles are recycled NAD found that the challenged claim does not make clear that this is a goal towards which the companies are working to achieve.

Further, regarding the “reduces plastic waste” part of the claim “That completes the circle and reduces plastic waste,” NAD found that while the ABA supported its recyclability claim, the evidence is less clear about a meaningful reduction in plastic waste even though the ABA provided evidence about efforts by its members to reduce total waste in their manufacturing practices.

For these reasons, NAD recommended that the advertiser modify its claims, “They’re collected and separated from other plastics so they can be turned back into material that we use to make new bottles” and “reduces plastic waste,” to better fit the evidence provided.

 

Increased Awareness of Recyclable Bottles

In support of its claim “Increasing awareness about the value of 100% recyclable plastic bottles,” the advertiser noted that aside from the advertising at issue in NAD’s inquiry, it has engaged in messaging on many digital platforms as well as recycling education programs (including at the community level) in the U.S. and several other countries that reached an estimated 28 million people. Based on this evidence, NAD determined that the claim was supported.

 

Reducing Plastic Footprint Claim

ABA’s claim, “Working with World Wildlife Fund through their ReSource: Plastic program to reduce our plastic footprint,” relates to its partnership with World Wildlife Fund (WWF), which in 2019 announced a goal of no plastic in nature by 2030 and the ReSource program would be the business partnership to achieve the goal. WWF uses its ReSource Footprint Tracker as the main analytical tool using a standard methodology to track the “plastic footprint” of companies that are members of its ReSource: Plastic program. NAD noted that “plastic footprint” is defined as “a measurement of the amount of plastic that someone uses and then throws away, considered in relation to the damage this causes the environment.”

NAD found that the reducing the footprint of ABA member companies claim is an objective claim that requires substantiation. NAD determined that the evidence provided was not a good fit to support the broad claim that ABA is reducing the plastic footprint of its member companies.

Therefore, NAD recommended that ABA modify the claim “Working with World Wildlife Fund through their ReSource: Plastic program to reduce our plastic footprint” to better fit the efforts and results of the partnership.

 

Modernizing Infrastructure Claim

Regarding ABA’s claim “Partnering with The Recycling Partnership and Closed Loop Partners to improve recycling access, provide education to residents and modernize the recycling infrastructure in communities across the country,” NAD inquired solely about ABA’s efforts to “modernize the recycling infrastructure in communities across the country.”

After reviewing the evidence, NAD found that ABA’s efforts are occurring in some communities in many states, but not broadly in communities across the country as the claim states. In addition, some of the progress, albeit noteworthy, does relate to some listed objectives, such as improving recycling access, but does not necessarily relate to infrastructure modernization (e.g., adding new recycling carts; education efforts).

Therefore, NAD recommended that the claim “partnering with The Recycling Partnership and Closed Loop Partners to improve recycling access, provide education to residents and modernize the recycling infrastructure in communities across the country” be modified to better reflect the recycling modernization efforts. NAD noted that nothing in its decision precludes the advertiser from touting its partnership with the Recycling Partnership and Closed Loop partners and benefits of those projects that are narrowly tailored to fit the evidence.

In its advertiser statement, ABA stated that it will appeal NAD’s “recommendations and interpretations that our advertisement overstates the extent to which our plastic bottles currently sold are made from recycled plastic and the efforts of our partnerships. These portions of NAD’s decision would limit our ability to effectively provide educational information about how the recycling system can work and inspire others to join us in striving toward our collection goals.”

Appeals of NAD decisions are made to BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Review Board (NARB), the appellate-level truth-in-advertising body of BBB National Programs.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive.

 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs is where businesses turn to enhance consumer trust and consumers are heard. The non-profit organization creates a fairer playing field for businesses and a better experience for consumers through the development and delivery of effective third-party accountability and dispute resolution programs. Embracing its role as an independent organization since the restructuring of the Council of Better Business Bureaus in June 2019, BBB National Programs today oversees more than a dozen leading national industry self-regulation programs, and continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-directed marketing, and privacy. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

 

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and leveling the playing field for business.

 

Contact:

Abby Hills
Director of Communications
BBB National Programs
703.247.9330 / press@bbbnp.org

Chicago, IL:   RudiCoder LLC, an e-commerce logistics company based in downtown Chicago, is pleased to announce the launch of PriorNotify, an e-commerce enabled application that automates the regulatory process for selling and shipping international food and beverages to customers in the USA.

“PriorNotify is a game-changer,” said Holly Urban, CEO and co-founder of RudiCoder.  “If you sell or ship non-US American food and beverage products to customers in the USA, then you know how difficult and time-consuming the US American regulatory process can be. With our PriorNotify app, the process can be completed in seconds,” continued Urban.

PriorNotify is designed for food and beverage producers, as well as for merchants, distributors, drop shippers, and fulfillment and shipping services.  International companies can now easily sell and ship edible products to US American retailers, distributors, and consumers.

PriorNotify offers seamless integrations with Shopify, WordPress (WooCommerce), Magento, PrestaShop, and WiX to automatically complete the regulatory process as soon as a product is purchased.

The app also works easily with any order management system, as well as online marketplaces like Amazon.   Even without a direct integration, customer order information can be easily uploaded, allowing high-volume sellers to operate quickly and efficiently.

PriorNotify is built for e-commerce, and lets international producers, shipping and mailing companies, drop shippers, and other merchants easily work with each other.

For example, food or drink producers can automatically complete the regulatory process as soon as products are purchased from businesses that sell their products.  Similarly, PriorNotify allows drop shippers to automatically notify their producers of each order, and automatically complete the regulatory process for each order, as soon as products are purchased.  PriorNotify also allows shipping and mailing companies to automatically complete the regulatory process as soon as products are purchased from their customers.

PriorNotify also allows users to easily create commercial invoices.  In addition, all PriorNotify app pages can be automatically translated into dozens of different languages.

“PriorNotify allows companies to effortlessly increase their product offerings, expand their sales and customer base in the USA, and drastically reduce their overhead expenses in the process,” Urban added.

Pricing is competitive with discounts as low as $0.10 per prior notice. There are no setup fees, no monthly minimum charge, no per-user fees, and no extra charges for preset product assortments.  Free trials of PriorNotify are also available.

RudiCoder LLC is a food and beverage-focused e-commerce automation company based in downtown Chicago, IL, USA.  For more on RudiCoder, please visit: RudiCoder.com and for PriorNotify: PriorNotify.com.

Real Estate Crowdfunding Platform Wins Prestigious Cashcow Award

 

November 2022 Rotterdam – On the 4^th November 2022, the Cashcow award winners were announced at the BeleggersFair in Amsterdam, the 8^th edition of the largest investor event in the Netherlands. Max Crowdfund, with headquarters in Rotterdam, was crowned Best Crowdfunding Platform 2022 alongside category winners including Saxo Bank, ABN Amro and eToro.

 

Five organisations per category were nominated for the Cashcow awards and voted for by the general public and the financial community. Max Crowdfund was delighted to win first place in the category of Best Crowdfunding Platform.

 

“It is really rewarding to be acknowledged for all the progress that has been made within Max Crowdfund over the last year. We have huge plans for 2023 and will do everything to maintain the high standard of the existing platform as it grows,” said Max Crowdfund CEO, Felix Berkhout, at his award acceptance speech.

 

Max Crowdfund was represented at the BeleggersFair, held in the Beurs van Berlage, by CEO Felix Berkhout, who presented a masterclass on investing in real estate through crowdfunding alongside Marketing Manager Marc Bakker.

 

The fair attracted over 3200 attendees including delegates from the Dutch Financial Markets Authority (AFM). AFM board member Jos Heuvelman spoke on trends, developments and risk in the investment market.

 

In February 2022, Max Crowdfund was named fastest-growing crowdfunding platform in 2021 by market research company crowdfundingcijfers.nl after a tenfold increase of its transaction volume on the previous year. The amount of investment for real estate projects raised via Max Crowdfund grew by a further 500% over the last 12 months. To date, the platform has raised over €35 Million and is awaiting approval by the AFM for a European Crowdfunding Service Provider licence.