Ok, not sure if this is the correct subforum to post this in (apologies if not), it's not that I think any of the mags I'll be referring to are fake, exactly, but this forum seemed the most closely relevant. Also, just want to make clear I'm discussing factory/ph@rm@ packaging here, not the packing v3nds/sh!ppers use, so I assume this should be okay to discuss. I noticed something today that's very bizarre and rather disconcerting, and was hoping somebody on here could maybe give some insight.
So with the two major generic brands of S3wm@h mags from the land of masala and sacred bovines, there are (if I'm recalling correctly) both I.-P and U.S.-P. (for export only presumably) versions/editions of both (dabbing animals I don't think have I-P if I'm not mistaken, but regardless those aren't at issue here). With P@!n-0h, it's all English text on the bl!5t3r 5tr!p5 so those aren't at issue. With Pr0, there's an all-English-text version that I think is the U-S-P, with that silly jangly Comic Sans-looking font, and until recently I'd never had I-P Pr0s0m@. Got some in a little while ago, and noticed something odd...
On the bli5t3r5, right next to/after the text that says "Pr0s0m@ (trademark symbol) ___ (the dose, either 3-5-0 or 5-0-0), in tiny print there's this Ind!@n script (which is I assume Devanagari, but IDK) which from context seems to say "m!ll!gr@m5" and then a number in a weird font which almost looks handwritten (though it definitely isn't). But here's the thing--that number contradicts, is totally different and in all cases slightly lower than the number(s) on the rest of the packaging/"cover" so to speak!
With the 3-5-0 word-per-paragraph magazine, "3-5-0" appears three places/times on the m@g covers: once after the "c@r!s0pr0d0ll t@b5 I-P", once following the publisher and trademark symbol, and once again after the "each...contains" line. But that weird little number after the !nd!@n text says "3-4-0". For the 5-0-0 edition of same m@g, it says "4-0-0".
I know it's common knowledge or at least widely suspected the !nd!@n mags featuring this topic/model are und3rd0s3d, but WTF is going on with this? Is the publisher just brazenly admitting right there on the cover that that's the case, and that the real number of words per paragraph m-g-wise is the tiny one after that !nd!@n script? I mean, it wouldn't be that shocking or all that big of a deal, but it's so peculiar, confusing and I want to know what's up with this. On one hand, if I'm correct about what this indicates, hey, at least some publisher brands/imprints are honest I suppose, but on the other, this feels rather shameless and makes me feel like kind of a sucker as a reader. Seems similar to the whole "locals' price, versus (way higher) tourists' price" phenomenon that's very common in various parts of the developing world. But do they really think we can't read (Arabic numeral) numbers?! That part doesn't make sense.
Then I examined a different m@g more closely--namely T@p@l, and I never noticed this before but yep...same thing. In theory different m@nufactur3rs/publishers but same little !nd!@n/Devanagari script, with a lower number--on the 5-0s, that number is 4-0. On the 7-5s, it's (very weirdly) 6-4.
Has anyone else noticed this? Maybe I'm missing something here, perhaps that !nd!@n text doesn't actually say "m!ll!gr@hams" and I'm just totally mistaken here about what these numbers mean? (That'd be one hell of a bizarro coincidence, tho.) Perhaps (and I'm really reaching here, but) there's something in !ndi@n law/regulations kind of opposite to the U-S "can legally contain as little as 85% of the stated d0s3" thing such that ph@rm@ publishers are required to be conservative and list the minimum amount of words-per-para (in em-gee) their mags might permittably contain so they could have anywhere between that little # and the other main/stated one on the cover? Or is this exactly what it looks like and what I think it is? Does anybody know?
(I vaguely remember when last having Pr050m@ years back that it seemed a little less effective than the P@!n-Oh publication, and this observation seems to perhaps confirm this, but to my recollection there's never been a clear consensus on that (whereas when it comes to the P@!n0h everyone seems to agree that the 5-00 word edition is much more compelling reading material than the 3-5-0 one, even accounting for surface difference in word count) and I've never had enough Pr0s to say with any certainty.)
So with the two major generic brands of S3wm@h mags from the land of masala and sacred bovines, there are (if I'm recalling correctly) both I.-P and U.S.-P. (for export only presumably) versions/editions of both (dabbing animals I don't think have I-P if I'm not mistaken, but regardless those aren't at issue here). With P@!n-0h, it's all English text on the bl!5t3r 5tr!p5 so those aren't at issue. With Pr0, there's an all-English-text version that I think is the U-S-P, with that silly jangly Comic Sans-looking font, and until recently I'd never had I-P Pr0s0m@. Got some in a little while ago, and noticed something odd...
On the bli5t3r5, right next to/after the text that says "Pr0s0m@ (trademark symbol) ___ (the dose, either 3-5-0 or 5-0-0), in tiny print there's this Ind!@n script (which is I assume Devanagari, but IDK) which from context seems to say "m!ll!gr@m5" and then a number in a weird font which almost looks handwritten (though it definitely isn't). But here's the thing--that number contradicts, is totally different and in all cases slightly lower than the number(s) on the rest of the packaging/"cover" so to speak!
With the 3-5-0 word-per-paragraph magazine, "3-5-0" appears three places/times on the m@g covers: once after the "c@r!s0pr0d0ll t@b5 I-P", once following the publisher and trademark symbol, and once again after the "each...contains" line. But that weird little number after the !nd!@n text says "3-4-0". For the 5-0-0 edition of same m@g, it says "4-0-0".
I know it's common knowledge or at least widely suspected the !nd!@n mags featuring this topic/model are und3rd0s3d, but WTF is going on with this? Is the publisher just brazenly admitting right there on the cover that that's the case, and that the real number of words per paragraph m-g-wise is the tiny one after that !nd!@n script? I mean, it wouldn't be that shocking or all that big of a deal, but it's so peculiar, confusing and I want to know what's up with this. On one hand, if I'm correct about what this indicates, hey, at least some publisher brands/imprints are honest I suppose, but on the other, this feels rather shameless and makes me feel like kind of a sucker as a reader. Seems similar to the whole "locals' price, versus (way higher) tourists' price" phenomenon that's very common in various parts of the developing world. But do they really think we can't read (Arabic numeral) numbers?! That part doesn't make sense.
Then I examined a different m@g more closely--namely T@p@l, and I never noticed this before but yep...same thing. In theory different m@nufactur3rs/publishers but same little !nd!@n/Devanagari script, with a lower number--on the 5-0s, that number is 4-0. On the 7-5s, it's (very weirdly) 6-4.
Has anyone else noticed this? Maybe I'm missing something here, perhaps that !nd!@n text doesn't actually say "m!ll!gr@hams" and I'm just totally mistaken here about what these numbers mean? (That'd be one hell of a bizarro coincidence, tho.) Perhaps (and I'm really reaching here, but) there's something in !ndi@n law/regulations kind of opposite to the U-S "can legally contain as little as 85% of the stated d0s3" thing such that ph@rm@ publishers are required to be conservative and list the minimum amount of words-per-para (in em-gee) their mags might permittably contain so they could have anywhere between that little # and the other main/stated one on the cover? Or is this exactly what it looks like and what I think it is? Does anybody know?
(I vaguely remember when last having Pr050m@ years back that it seemed a little less effective than the P@!n-Oh publication, and this observation seems to perhaps confirm this, but to my recollection there's never been a clear consensus on that (whereas when it comes to the P@!n0h everyone seems to agree that the 5-00 word edition is much more compelling reading material than the 3-5-0 one, even accounting for surface difference in word count) and I've never had enough Pr0s to say with any certainty.)
