The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2026
Albert Heijn's to-go price tag made a €3.95 sandwich look like €3, and the RCC upheld it
An Albert Heijn to-go price tag printed '3' very large and '.95' tiny, where a comma should sit. The RCC read it as €3.
Albert Heijn · 2026-07-13
What happened
In an Albert Heijn to-go branch, the price tag for the "AH Vers belegd broodje kipfilet" (fresh filled chicken filet sandwich) printed the euro amount very large and the cents in a very small typeface, placed where a comma is normally expected — so the cents were even harder to notice.
A consumer complained the display made the sandwich look 95 eurocents cheaper than it was. The RCC chairman agreed the effect on the average consumer was to read the price as €3 when the actual price was €3.95.
Albert Heijn said the display was part of a pilot testing different forms of price communication. An evaluation showed this form did not have the intended effect, so the pilot had been ended and the displays removed before the ruling.
The chairman found the price indication breached Article 4(2)(a) of the Dutch price-indication decree (the sale price must be clear and unambiguous) and therefore Article 2 of the Dutch Advertising Code as contrary to law. The recommendation applied only insofar as still necessary, since the display had already been withdrawn.
Why it happened
- A price tag is the one place a retailer must be unambiguous — and scaling the euro up while shrinking the cents hid a 95-cent difference
- The cents were placed where a comma belongs, so the visual grammar of the tag told the reader the price had ended at the big number
- It was a tested pilot, not an accident — Albert Heijn ran the design, measured it, and pulled it only after it failed
The lesson
Line weight is part of the claim. Printing the euro bigger than the cents makes the price read as €3 when it costs €3.95 — misleading even though every digit is truthful.
Aftermath
The RCC chairman ruled the price tag breached Article 4(2)(a) of the Besluit prijsaanduiding producten and therefore Article 2 of the Dutch Advertising Code, because the average consumer could wrongly believe the sandwich cost €3 rather than €3.95. Albert Heijn said the design was a pilot that testing had already shown not to work, so the displays were gone and the recommendation applied only insofar as still necessary.
Sources
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
Lidl's '€16.78 cheaper basket' ad was suspended in Portugal — the comparison was rigged
Hydro Service ignored the ad watchdog's binding order — so it published their name
Vomar was 'the cheapest' twice in three weeks — the RCC called both ads misleading
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →
Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.