Slideshow: A greener, cleaner office building?

There are many cool products on the market this season, but not all are equally worthy of your money.

Woman's Day has done much of the hard work for you, vetting some of the best new items out there and then recruiting readers for an extra reality check. The 30 best of the best make it to the Woman’s Day Great Value Awards.

The magazine has selected affordable finds ranging from standout newcomers to trusted go-to's in cooking, fashion, beauty, home and health categories, according to Taryn Mohrman, senior editor at Woman's Day.

Some of the Woman’s Day Great Value Awards winners:

L'Oreal Paris Elnett Satin Extra Strong Hold Unscented Hairspray

• $14.99 at drugstores
• Why it’s a winner: Why has this hairspray long been a photo-shoot staple? It goes on dry (with no tacky feeling) and stays flexible.It fights frizz and isn't greasy.

Old Navy The Flirt Boot-Cut Jeans

• $29.50 at Old Navy
• Why it’s a winner: These jeans have just the right amount of stretch, clean flat-front pockets and high back pockets (for a little lift!) to give sizes 0 to 20 a flattering fit.

Nordic Ware Naturals Aluminum Baker's Half Sheet Pan

• $20 at amazon.com
• Why it’s a winner: The raised rim on this pan allows you to bake or roast in it, and the handy lid helps keep food fresh.

Mrs. Meyer's Liquid Hand Soap

• $3.99 at mrsmeyers.com
• Why it’s a winner: Unlike so many eco options, these hand soaps really suds up and come in garden-inspired scents, such as  rhubarb and geranium.

Charles Rex Arbogast / AP

In this photo taken Oct. 13, 2010, cashier Ciara Helton stocks the aisle at the Aldi grocery store in Chicago. Nearly nine in 10 consumers are substituting private-label, or store, brands for national brands, according to a new survey.

Fewer and fewer consumers are staying loyal to their favorite brands.

A new survey shows brand loyalty has dropped for the third year in a row. Deloitte's annual American Pantry Study out Tuesday shows nearly nine in 10 consumers are substituting private-label, or store, brands for national brands they've regularly bought in the past. 

The survey, which was conducted in January, also finds 94 percent of Americans indicate they will remain cautious and keep their spending for food, beverage and household goods at its current level despite the stronger economy and climbing stock market.

The last recession left a deep scar, and many consumers are harboring a tremendous amount of remorse over prior careless spending habits, according to Pat Conroy, vice chairman and U.S. Consumer Producers Leader at Deloitte. He believes there has been a permanent shift in the way people shop.

"The recession was so severe that people across all income levels had to go out and experiment with ways to save. They tried various lower cost options and the vast majority of them found there was little noticeable difference in quality," said Conroy. "This was an epiphany for the consumer."

The consumer staples business is facing the steepest uphill battle to get back customers who have wandered, Conroy said.

"Every manufacturer has been affected by this," he added. "None of the manufacturers had as many must-have brands as they thought they did. The playing field has fundamentally changed. It will not go back to the way it was right before the recession…. Manufacturers must find a way to differentiate the product and find a better way to get the product into the consumer's pantry."

Los Angeles-based branding expert Rob Frankel said he expects the penetration into private brands in the U.S. is only getting deeper. 

"Conditions are ripe for that because the major brands aren't articulating their brand strategies," Frankel said. "That makes them vulnerable to private labels, which yield higher margins—and easier relationships, terms and conditions—to retailers."

Chris Radtke, a 39-year-old digital executive from Brooklyn, considers himself "fiercely loyal" to the brands he loves. But, even Radtke has had to dump some of them. And, his unfaithfulness extends beyond common household items.

"I can't afford to buy my Marvel comics each week. I want to, but they have become so expensive and things are tight right now," said Radtke.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Thursday told auto lenders that they would be held responsible for “unlawful, discriminatory pricing” by auto dealers that costs minority customers millions of dollars a year in higher interest rates.

“Consumers should not have to pay more for a car loan simply based on their race,” said the agency's director, Richard Cordray, in a statement.

It works like this: A potential car buyer finances the vehicle through the dealership. The dealer sells the loan to what’s known as an indirect auto lender, which can be a bank, credit union or finance company.  

Before the dealer’s finance department sets the price of the loan, it contacts the lender to see what interest rate they’ll accept. Some lenders allow the dealer to increase that rate and keep some or all of that extra revenue.

“There’s no way to know if the loan is marked up or by how much,” said Chris Kukla, senior vice president at the Center for Responsible Lending. “Past lawsuits have shown that borrowers of color were more likely to pay a markup. And when they did, they paid more than similarly-situated white borrowers.”

The NAACP is pleased that the consumer agency is tackling the issue.

“Those who have the least to lose are losing the most with these types of nefarious practices,” said Dedrick Asante-Muhammad, the NAACP’s senior director of economic programs.

The National Automobile Dealers Association and the National Association of Minority Automobile Dealers said they strongly oppose any form of discrimination, but they cautioned that a change in the way dealers are compensated could drive up the cost of credit.

“The dealer-assisted financing model (indirect auto lending) has been enormously successful in both increasing access to, and reducing the cost of, credit for millions of Americans. Consumers overwhelmingly choose optional dealer-assisted financing because it’s convenient and competitive,” they said in a statement.

Consumer advocates call this markup disparity a “widespread practice” that they’ve been trying to stop since the mid-1990s. The National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) sued various lenders about this practice.

“In our lawsuits, we were able to show that the loans for African Americans and Hispanics were marked up more often than whites and the mark-ups were higher than whites, even though they had equal credit scores,” said NCLC attorney John Van Alyst.

For example, the NCLC found that black car buyers in the Northeast who financed through a dealership with one of the major auto company lenders paid an average dealer markup of $451. That compares with just $183 for white customers with similar credit histories. (Read the full report: Racial Disparities in Auto Lending)

The CFPB told indirect auto lenders to make sure fair lending laws are being followed, by paying a flat fee per transaction and eliminating dealer discretion to markup prices.

Consumer groups agree that it’s time for the current system, with hidden fees that are randomly set, to go away. 

“Buying a car is already one of the most challenging and complicated buying decisions consumers make, to further compound the purchase by discriminatory loan practices is deplorable,” said Jack Gillis, director of public affairs with the Consumer Federation of America and author of "The Car Book." “The tragedy is that many buyers probably don’t even know they are being discriminated against.”

Your best defense is to shop around for financing outside of the dealership, so you’ll know what’s fair inside their finance offices, Gillis advised.

More information:

News release: CFPB to Hold Auto Lenders Accountable for illegal, discriminatory markup

FCPB tipsheet: Buying a Car? Here’s What You Need to Know

FTC: Understanding Vehicle Financing

Consumer Reports: How to Get the Best Car Loan

The New York Times via Redux

Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. and Rep. Maxine Waters D-Calif., have introduced a bill to limit overdraft fees, which provide banks with billions in revenue every year.

Congress will get another chance to limit checking account overdraft fees that continue to annoy customers and produce billions of dollars in revenue each year for banks and credit unions.

Reps. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., and Maxine Waters, D-Calif., have introduced a bill that would limit the cost of overdraft fees and prohibit practices that increase the likelihood customers will overdraw their accounts.

“It protects banking customers from overdraft practices that the courts have found to be unfair, misleading, deceptive or fraudulent,” Maloney said. “And at a time when some many are still struggling, it will help to put an end to those unexpected $35 charges for a cup of coffee.”

Consumer groups believe the Overdraft Protection Act of 2013 would solve a lot of problems.

“It’s very clear that banks are gouging customers with incredibly high and outrageous overdraft fees that are not related to their cost,” said Ed Mierzwinski, consumer program director at U.S. PIRG. “The idea of a $35 fee for the privilege of overdrawing your account is good for the banks, but not for the consumer.”

According to a new report from Moebs Services, an economic research firm, financial institutions in the U.S. earned $32 billion in overdraft revenue last year, an increase of $400 million (or 1.3 percent) from 2011.

“Overdrafts have evolved from an ad hoc courtesy into a routinely administered, very high-cost, very short-term credit product,” said Rebecca Borne, senior policy counsel with the Center for Responsible Lending.

The nation’s bankers oppose the bill. They don’t believe it’s needed and they warn that more government regulation would only limit consumer choice.

“History has shown that when the government intervenes in how private markets price their services, there are unintended consequences that usually are adverse to consumers,” said Nessa Feddis, senior counsel at the American Bankers Association.

Key provisions of the bill
The Overdraft Protection Act would limit overdraft coverage fees in various ways. It would:  

• Prohibit financial institutions from charging more than one overdraft fee per month or more than six each year.
• Require overdraft fees to be “reasonable and proportional” to the amount of the overdraft.
• Prohibit a fee if the overdraft results solely from a hold placed on an account that exceeds the amount of the transaction. Many merchants, such as hotels and gas stations, automatically place a hold on the money in your checking account when you pay with a debit card. At some gas stations that hold is $100 no matter how much you pump – something they don’t have to warn you about.

The bill would also ban the practice of posting checking account transactions in a way that maximizes overdraft fees. Some financial institutions routinely clear debits from highest to lowest dollar amount.

“That’s a big problem,” said Linda Sherry, director of national priorities at Consumer Action. “If you had one large check and several smaller debit card charges hit on the same day, they’ll clear the big check first. That drains a lot of money out of your account and could cause more of the little things to bounce. And the key here is you can be charged for each overdraft item, debits, checks or ATM withdrawals.”

Banks say customers want the biggest transactions paid first because they tend to be the most important, like the rent or mortgage payment. But a survey by the Pew Charitable Trusts shows just the opposite.

“Almost 90 percent of the people in our survey said they were somewhat or very concerned about bank reordering practices,” said Susan Weinstock, director of Pew’s Safe Checking in the Electronic Age Project.

Credit unions are also concerned about any new regulatory burden.

"This legislation seems to address a problem that doesn't exist in the credit union system," said Ryan Donovan, senior vice president of legislative affairs at the Credit Union National Association. "Because we are owned by our members, we are not out to abuse them."

Donovan believes the issue of overdraft charges is better handled by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rather than Congress.

Getting rid of customer confusion
If you try to make a point-of-sale payment with your debit card or withdraw money from an ATM when you don’t have enough money in your checking account, the transaction will be declined – unless you’ve signed up for overdraft coverage.

In that case, the bank or credit union will process the transaction and charge you an overdraft fee.

Consumer advocates believe many people don’t understand how this opt-in system works. A Pew study, which the banks challenge, found that 54 percent of the customers who had overdrawn their accounts said they did not realize they had signed up for an overdraft service that cost money.

“This just shows there is a very high level of confusion about how this works and why better consumer protections are needed,” Weinstock told me. 

The banking industry insists customers are not confused. Feddis at the American Bankers Association said all the terms are spelled out before anyone signs up for the service.

“Customers receive a one-page consumer-friendly form that explains the price of the overdraft coverage, that there are better and cheaper options and the requirement to affirmatively opt in,” Feddis said. “And in the event they didn’t understand it, they will when the first overdraft charge occurs and they can opt out at any time.”

It doesn’t have to be this way. Since August of 2010, Bank of America has eliminated overdraft coverage on point-of-sale debit card payments. If there’s not enough money in the account, the transaction will be declined.

“We elected to eliminate that source of frustration for our customer and we think it was the right thing to do,” said Andrew Plepler, Bank of America’s global corporate social responsibility executive. “The feedback has been very positive. There are a lot fewer complaints about overdrafts.”

Plepler said they had expected customers to be upset when their transactions were denied. But that hasn’t happened. He believes the benefit of avoiding a surprise overcharge fee outweighs any short-term inconvenience of being unable to make a purchase or withdrawal.

“There’s certainly been a revenue hit for the bank,” he told me, “but we’re in the right place for the long term.”

The bottom line
This is Rep. Maloney’s second attempt to rein in overdraft charges. She could not get a similar bill passed last session and it’s clear this Congress is not in the mood to upset business. Yet, she remains confident.

“It’s common sense, it’s reasonable and it’s fair,” she said. “It’s time to put an end to these deceptive practices.” 

More information

Pew Factsheet: The Need to Address Excessive Bank Overdraft Fees

Pew Factsheet: The Need for Transparent and Fair Bank Deposit and Withdrawal Processing

Center for Responsible Lending: Overdraft "Protection" A Racket; Not a Service

American Bankers Association: Overdraft Protection Services

Herb Weisbaum is The ConsumerMan. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter or visit The ConsumerMan website.

Most people who have a complaint don’t really push for a solution. They make a quick phone call or send an email, but if they get the brush-off, they’re done.

The fact is, if you want to get your problem solved, you need to speak up and stand your ground until the company makes you happy.

“Yes, it’s the squeaky-wheel system of customer service,” said Amy Schmitz, a law professor at the University of Colorado. Her study “Access to Consumer Remedies in the Squeaky-Wheel System” was published in the Pepperdine Law Review.

Schmitz believes some companies would rather give customers the runaround than deal with their complaint.

“It appears deliberate,” she told me. “If they know they can save money by only providing remedies to those who are most persistent, businesses may be able to maximize their profits and elude legitimate complaints.”

If you know how to complain and are willing to be a squeaky wheel, you’re more likely to be successful.

“Don’t give up,” she said. “Otherwise you will be ignored.”

To find out how to complain, I spoke with Ruth Susswein at Consumer Action. They’ve published a step-by-step booklet on how to get results when you complain. Here are the highlights of our conversation:

Q: What are the most important things to remember when we’re going to complain?

A:  Be calm, be firm and be concise. Decide what you’re looking for. What’s the outcome you want? Do you want your money back?  Do you want a new product? Or do you just want to vent and get an apology? 

I’ve seen complaint letters that go on and on about the problem, but never explain what the customer is looking for. Figure out what you want. Briefly state the problem and what you expect the solution to be.

Q: You say it’s important to complain right away. Why does that matter?

A: There are certain kinds of complaints that have deadlines attached to them. For example, you have 60 days after you receive a credit card statement with a charge on it that you intend to dispute, to write a complaint letter to the credit card company. There’s often a time limit for a health insurance appeal. If there’s a deadline related to your complaint, don’t miss it.

Q: Is there a right forum to complain? How do you know whether to use the customer service line, write a letter or send an email? How do you decide where to begin?

A: Sometimes it doesn’t matter. It all depends on the type of complaint. Ultimately, you want your complaint in writing. You can start calling the company, but you need to follow-up in writing. You want some proof that you made that complaint and the only way to do that is by putting it in writing.

Q: What about records that document your complaint?

A: The more records you have, the better. If you have proof, provide copies of that proof to help make your case. Never send originals. So for example, if you have a receipt that shows when you bought the item and how much you paid for it, send a copy with your complaint letter.

Q: What if you explain the problem, document your case and you still get turned down?

A: Then you need to escalate; take your problem to the next level. It may be the CEO of a company; it may be that you have to turn to a regulator, a government agency that oversees this kind of industry. There are lots of places to turn. No matter what sort of complaint you have, there’s probably a government agency to turn to if your complaint is unresolved.

Q: Odds are the CEO won’t read your letter, but that’s not the point, right?

A: Right. Someone in the CEO’s office is going to take it seriously and will direct your complaint to someone who hopefully can resolve it swiftly.

Q: So your advice is: if I have what I believe to be a legitimate complaint and I’m being ignored, don’t give up.

A: Absolutely!  Go after it again and again. In the case of a health insurance claim, you may have to re-appeal a decision. You need to be persistent, but also patient, calm and  in control. The way to get the best results is to stay calm. 

Herb Weisbaum is The ConsumerMan. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter or visit The ConsumerMan website. 

Do you have a success story about complaining and getting good customer service? Share your story in the comment field.

Dinah Keck didn’t realize the caller was a crook. The caller told the 70-year old, who lives near Ann Arbor, Mich., that she had won $3.5 million dollars in a lottery.

All she had to do was pay $3,500 to cover administrative fees and taxes and the check would be on its way. Those payments would be made via Green Dot MoneyPaks – $1,300 upfront and then $200 a month.

Keck went to the store, bought the MoneyPaks and gave the “award company” the PIN codes to access $1,500.

Thankfully, she contacted the Better Business Bureau before she sent the bad guys any more.

“I will never see that money again,” Keck said. “I’m behind in paying all of my bills because of what I did.”

Scammers still use wire transfers and credit card numbers to fund their frauds, but cash-load PINS, like those used by Green Dot, have become the new preferred payment method.

“It’s an easy way for them to get someone’s money without being traced,” said Katherine Hutt, director of communications at the Council of Better Business Bureaus. “We’ve seen numerous cases where people have been defrauded out of thousands of dollars this way.”

The Better Business Bureau in St. Louis recently reported on a Missouri man who lost his life savings to prize scammers. Over the course of many months, he sent them $41,000 using Green Dot MoneyPaks.

How the scam works
A MoneyPak lets you go to a supermarket or drug store (more than 60,000 places nationwide) and convert cash into digital currency that can be loaded onto a prepaid debit card or added to a PayPal account.

The MoneyPak card you buy at the store is a deposit slip. It gives you access to that money via the 14-digit authorization code on the back.

“As soon as the victim gives the scammer that code, they use it to load all of your money onto their prepaid card,” explained Karen Hobbs at the Federal Trade Commission. “Then they can run to an ATM and get all of the money in cash or they go to an electronics store and buy things that are easily fenced. Once that money is offloaded, it is essentially irretrievable.”

A number of companies provide a cash-load service for prepaid debit cards. Green Dot is the leader in this industry and therefore the most requested by the bad guys.

Green Dot

Green Dot MoneyPak's have a warning highlighted in yellow cautioning users about fraud.

“We do not want people to be victimized by fraudsters who try to steal their money this way,” said Green Dot spokesman Brian Ruby. “We hope people will see the yellow warning that is now on the MoneyPak card, right above where you scratch to get the card number.”

“Use your MoneyPak number only with business listed at www.moneypack.com. If anyone else asks you for your MoneyPak number, it’s probably a scam. If a criminal gets your money, Green Dot is not responsible to pay you back.”

The prepaid card industry is keenly aware of the fraud problem and is working to thwart the bad guys.

“We’re setting up systems to identify when a prepaid card is getting several reloads via PINs followed immediately by cash coming off the card, especially when it’s in a foreign country,” explained Terry Maher, general counsel for the Network Branded Prepaid Card Association. “That would trigger an alert and the card could be blocked.”

Lies and more lies
MoneyPaks are now used for a variety of scams that involve an upfront payment for a service that is never performed, such as advance fees to get a loan, a grant or a credit card. 

They’re also a popular payment method for all sorts of prize, sweepstakes and lottery scams.

The con artist who called 67 year old Jean (she asked that we not use her last name) told her she had won a million dollars in the Publisher’s Clearing House Sweepstakes.

Jean, who lives near Cleveland, was skeptical, but she had entered the contest. The caller spent a lot of time talking to her about how the check would be presented on TV.

“I hope you’re not scamming me,” she told him.

“Oh no, we wouldn’t do that,” he said. “We’re the real thing.”

Jean says he was “very smooth” and had an answer to all of her questions. She remembers that he kept telling her someone from the Better Business Bureau would be there when the check was delivered.

By the time she realized she’d been duped, Jean had given the phone crook $5,000 loaded onto Green Dot MoneyPaks.

“That’s a lot of money,” she said. “If I can get the word out and stop just one more person from being taken, it’s worth it to me.”  

Be advised:  Publisher’s Clearing House does not operate this way. They never ask for money to claim a prize award.  In a fraud alert on its website, the company says:

“PCH employees would never contact you personally or in advance to notify you of a prize award.  Our prize awards are presented just the way you see in our popular TV commercials, ‘live and in person’ by our Prize Patrol, with balloons, champagne and check in hand - - and with no advance notification!”

Also, the Better Business Bureau does not help companies give out prize awards.

 “A lot of scammers use our name to gain credibility,” said the BBB’s Katherine Hutt. “We do not participate with any contest, lottery or giveaways.”

Remember: with legitimate contests you never have to pay to claim your prize. If there are any federal taxes to pay, that’s between you and the IRS.

Don’t get burned
The only reason to use a MoneyPak or other reload PIN is to add money to your own prepaid debit card, or PayPal account, or one that belongs to a close family member.

“You should never let anyone convince you to buy a reload PIN or MoneyPak and give them that authorization number,” warned Terry Maher with the prepaid card industry. “If anyone tells you that, it’s a guaranteed scam.”

 Should you fall for the slick pitch and realize you’ve been taken, call Green Dot right away. They may be able to freeze the funds on the scammer’s card, if it hasn’t been offloaded.

Better yet, know the warning signs of a scam and protect that PIN number just like you would cash – because that’s what it is: digital cash. Green Dot has these fraud prevention tips:

• Only use a MoneyPak with businesses on the approved list, found at www.moneypak.com
• Never give the number to a private individual

If you’ve been burned this scam, report it to the Federal Trade Commission, the Better Business Bureau, or Fraud.org. You may be able to help protect others.

More Information:
AARP: Beware of Green Dot MoneyPak Scams
FTC: Prize Offers
FTC: Using Money Transfer Services

Herb Weisbaum is The ConsumerMan. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter or visit The ConsumerMan website.

• It’s no secret that the way you drive can significantly help or hurt your car’s fuel economy.
•  Jack rabbit starts burn up fuel. Using cruise control when possible boosts fuel economy. 
• Make sure your tires are properly inflated. You can improve gas mileage by up to 3.3 percent by doing that, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Check your tires at least once a month. 
• Mike Quincy at Consumer Reports Autos had this tip: get rid of any unnecessary weight – golf clubs or big containers of kitty litter in the trunk – and remove any roof rack or bike rack that you’re not using regularly. “The added weight of excess cargo or the extra aerodynamic drag caused by those racks will really reduce fuel economy,” he said.

Herb Weisbaum is The ConsumerMan. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter or visit The ConsumerMan website.
 

When you sit down for a meal at your favorite sushi restaurant, the bite at the end of those chopsticks probably isn’t what you think it is. A new report sheds light on this dirty secret of the food industry: Cheap fish is widely passed off as more expensive varieties, at customers’ expense.

One third of the 1,215 samples collected from grocery stores and restaurants by advocacy group Oceana were actually a different kind of fish than what the seller purported. The group found instances of fake fish across the country, and at all kinds of establishments. Nearly half of the 674 retailers Oceana visited sold mislabeled fish.

“Sushi venues had the worst level of mislabeling at 74 percent,” the group said. Excluding sushi restaurants, 38 percent of other restaurants sold mislabeled fish. (Grocery stores, which had the most accurately labeled fish, still had a mislabeling of 18 percent.)

"If you can’t trust your restaurant... it’s kind of off-putting," said Hem Borromeo, an academic adviser at Excelsior College who was not affiliated with the Oceana report. He said a New York Times article last year about fish mislabeling in New York City enlightened him about how pervasive the practice is.

At a sushi eatery he visited earlier this year, Borromeo said he encountered a piece of yellowtail he suspected not have been quite as advertised. “I had... a suspicion,” he said. He ate the mystery fish anyway, but added, “I didn’t go back there again.”

The most common mislabeled fish is snapper; only seven of Oceana’s 120 “snapper” samples were the real deal. Snapper is an easy target because it looks like other, cheaper fish. Once it’s skinned, filleted and cooked, it’s hard for even discerning foodies — or cooks, for that matter — to tell if what’s actually on the plate is tilapia. 

There’s a tremendous financial incentive for restaurants to pass off cheaper fish to unsuspecting diners, said Marcus Guiliano, owner of Aroma Thyme Bistro in Ellenville, N.Y., a restaurant certified by the Green Restaurant Association. Guiliano video-blogs about mislabeled restaurant food at TruthinMenu.com.

Yoshikazu Tsuno / AFP - Getty Images

One third of the 1,215 fish samples collected from grocery stores and restaurants by advocacy group Oceana were mislabeled, according to a new report.

“If you bought cheap tilapia today, it would be maybe $3.50 a pound on the high side,” he said. The wholesale price of snapper, meanwhile, could be as much as $11 per pound, he said. And it’s not just snapper. Farmed Atlantic salmon wholesales for about $6 per pound, Guiliano said, while authentic wild salmon easily costs twice as much. Fake fish can boost profits, and customers are usually never the wiser.

For a restaurant owner to know what they’re actually getting, Guiliano said, “you buy from a person who works directly with the boats. I always ask where, when and how was it caught, and what was the name of the vessel."

From a business perspective, it’s hard for restaurateurs to budget food costs accurately if the price of a particular type of fish fluctuates; from a customer service perspective, it can be risky to tell diners an item on the menu isn’t available.

And marketing plays a powerful role, too.

"People just get stuck on names. That’s the big problem with a lot of items in our culinary field," said Paul Rother, a culinary school teacher and restaurant industry veteran.

“Those are things that help us.... market food," Guiliano said. "Certain things in a menu, when you write it, makes it more appealing."

For instance, the phrase “white tuna” has a certain cachet to it, yet 84 percent of the samples in Oceana’s study turned out instead to be escolar, a fatty, deep sea-dwelling fish that can give diners gastrointestinal distress.

“When I was younger I worked at a Greek [restaurant] and we used to get whole sides of escolar,” Rother said. Having broken down the fish into fillets, he said he knew escolar when he saw it. On one occasion, Rother confronted the owner of a sushi restaurant about the mislabeling. The owner angrily denied it, he said.

Fake fish is endemic, in part, because the market for seafood has become globalized and more complex, said Beth Lowell, Oceana’s campaign director for Stop Seafood Fraud. More than 90 percent of the seafood we eat is imported.

“The more hands, the more processing your seafood goes through, the more opportunities for seafood fraud. The further you get away from the whole fish, the more likely that seafood fraud can occur,” she said. Mislabeling, whether unintentional or deliberate, can happen when the fish is packed, shipped or sold by wholesalers or retailers.

For instance, as New England’s traditional cod-fishing industry dwindles — beyond the point of recovery, some worry — Americans eat cod that was caught in Norway and packed in China, fisheries economist Jenny Sun of the Gulf of Maine Research Institute told The Associated Press.

Less than 1 percent of seafood imports are screened for fraud, Lowell said. Oceana is campaigning for a traceability standard and more stepped-up enforcement. “There’s not a lot of enforcement on the labeling of seafood," she said. Importers and other middlemen who knowingly pass on this counterfeit fish are gambling that they won't get caught, Lowell said. "And they’re winning."

Courtesy Hasbro

The Heartbreaker bow, part of the new Nerf Rebelle line, will hit store shelves this fall.

Nerf has long been a favorite of little (and, let’s be honest, not so little) boys. But more girls may soon be getting in on the foam dart-shooting action as Hasbro prepares to launch the Nerf Rebelle, a new product line marketed for girls. First up will be the Heartbreaker bow, which will hit store shelves this fall.

The line promises the same power as items in the Nerf Elite line, but with pretty girly colors and designs. Nerf, however, says the differences between the Rebelle and Elite lines go beyond pink. In an effort to connect with girls and how they play, the Heartbreaker will also come with collectible darts and the line will have an app, which encourages teamwork and strategy and lets girls capture photos and videos of all of the action. The bow is also sized and shaped differently, making it easier for young girls to handle.

“It used to be that people just make pink versions of boys’ products for girls. We found that girls wanted products made just for them,” said John Frascotti, Hasbro's global chief marketing officer. “We didn’t just make a pink version of the boys’ product. We made a product just for them.”

Frascotti also noted that in today’s age of childhood obesity, parents are concerned about the sedentary nature of traditional girls’ play. “We did a lot of research about girls and how they play and looked at what wasn’t in the toy aisle. We found a big white space opportunity for active play for girls. Other than sports, there aren’t a lot of active play opportunities for them,” he said.

Given the popularity of "The Hunger Games" and "Brave," which both feature young heroines who are skilled archers, the Rebelle line may find an eager market. In the lead-up to last summer’s Olympics, many noted the rise in popularity that archery was enjoying, thanks to Katniss and her bow. Industry experts think Nerf might be onto something with the new line. “Girls love Nerf, but most Nerf is sold to boys. This says, ‘OK, you want to play Merida? You want to play 'Hunger Games'? Here’s something just for you’,” said Chris Byrne, toy expert and content director for Time to Play.

The Nerf Rebelle line is the latest toy to get a makeover in order to appeal to a different gender. Recently, Hasbro announced that it would start selling Easy Bake Ovens in a more gender-neutral black-and-silver palette. That move was in response to an online petition started by a 13-year-old girl who wanted an oven that would appeal to her 4-year-old brother. The company was largely applauded for that change. LEGO has also made headlines in recent months for launching LEGO Friends, a new product line targeted toward girls. Although critics accused LEGO of promoting gender stereotypes with Friends, consumers have been scooping the toy up, helping to increase profits for the makers of the little bricks.

And the gender crossover of toys seems to be a continuing trend.

“LEGO basically said, ‘Hey, if you do enough research and development, you, too, can address the 50 percent of the market you are currently missing,’ ” said Gerrick Johnson, toy industry analyst from BMO Capital Markets. “Lead times are long, and things being worked on right now won’t hit shelves until next fall. So I guess we should expect some more introductions later this year and into next.”

Byrne agrees.

“As our cultural notions about what defines gender identity relaxes, we open the door," he said. "There’s a great deal more comfort with a boy playing with an Easy Bake Oven now, and we see that in the redesign of the Easy Bake Oven.”

Frascotti hinted that Hasbro may have more of these gender-crossover products in the works.“There are lots of opportunities to broaden play opportunities that historically have been more gender-specific.”

Dana Macario is a Seattle-area writer.

A new report from the Pew Charitable Trusts calls into question the main marketing claims used to sell payday loans to 19 million Americans each year.

Payday loans are billed as a quick and easy solution to an unexpected financial emergency – an affordable, short-term loan that will help the borrower get to the next pay day. But they're not.

Most customers (58 percent) routinely have trouble meeting their monthly expenses. For them, the loan is a way to cope with a persistent lack of money. In fact, Pew found that seven out of 10 borrowers use these loans to pay regular living expenses, such as rent, utilities and credit card bills.

The ultimate cost and duration of these loans are “highly unpredictable and bear little resemblance to their two-week packaging,” Pew found. Only 14 percent of those who take out a payday or bank deposit advance loan can repay it in full.

“Our research shows payday loans are unaffordable,” said Nick Bourke, director of Pew's small-dollar loans research project. “The average borrower simply cannot afford to pay back an average payday loan which requires $430 on the next pay day.”

The Community Financial Services Association of America (CFSA), which represents payday lenders, called the Pew report incomplete and inaccurate.

“Pew unfairly paints the entire industry with a broad brush,” CFSA said in a statement. “In our current economy and constricted credit market, it is critical that consumers have the credit options they need to deal with their financial challenges.”

Why turn to payday loans?

For someone struggling to make ends meet, payday loans are mighty appealing. They’re easy to get. They’re confidential, so family members don’t need to know about them. Customers believe the advertising that describes them as a short-term fix for a temporary cash-flow problem.

Related: Are you earning minimum wage? We want to hear from you.

“That appeals to people because they don’t want more debt,” Bourke explained. “They don’t want another bill on the pile. They want an in-and-out solution, but for most payday loan borrowers it doesn’t work out that way. The reality is that the average payday loan borrower is in debt for 5 months of the year and pays $520 in finance charges.”

CFSA said its members provide an Extended Payment Plan, at no additional charge, if customers cannot repay their loan when due. Pew suggests the vast majority of borrowers don’t take advantage of this program where offered.

Why is this happening?
Simply put, customers have “unrealistic expectations” about the total cost of that loan. Pew found that they know the price they’ll pay upfront – typically $55 for a $375 loan – but they fail to consider the negative impact that loan will have on their budget in two weeks when it comes due. How are they going to come up with the cash – $400 or more – needed to pay off the loan in full?

“The loans are really difficult or impossible to repay unless the borrower gets some kind of a windfall or a bailout,” Bourke said.

The report quotes a former borrower from Manchester, New Hampshire who sums it up this way:

“Well, Friday came, you gave them your pay, what you owed them, which cleared off that loan, but now you have nothing, so you have to re-borrow to survive the week or two weeks.”

Payday loans are often marketed as a way to prevent checking account overdraft fees. Pew found they do not eliminate that risk. In fact, for about a quarter of the borrowers (27 percent) an overdraft occurred when the lender made a withdrawal from their account.

What’s it like to be a payday loan customer?
Borrowers expressed mixed feelings about payday lenders. They like getting on-the-spot credit, but they’re frustrated by how difficult it is to repay the loan.

A majority said they appreciate the service payday lenders provide – quick cash and friendly service. In fact, some said it’s too easy to get the money. A majority also said they felt taken advantage of by the high cost of the loan.  

One person told Pew researchers it was a “sweet and sour” experience. It’s sweet when you get the money and sour when you have to pay it back.

Maybe that’s why borrowers overwhelmingly want to see changes in the way payday loans work and more government regulation.

A call for action
Millions of people use small-term loans when they’re short on cash. But as consumer advocates have long insisted and Pew researchers have now documented, all too often that quick loan doesn’t solve the problem and may make it worse. 

“Policymakers need to pay attention to this research,” Bourke said, “because it really shows payday loans are not working as advertised.”

Payday lenders insist they provide “an important financial tool” for people who need money to pay for an unexpected expense or manage a shortfall between paychecks.

More Information:

• Read the full Pew report: "Payday Lending in America: How Borrowers Choose and Repay Payday Loans"
• ConsumerMan: Thinking of getting a payday loan online? Don't do it

 Herb Weisbaum is The ConsumerMan. Follow him on Facebook and Twitter or visit The ConsumerMan website.

Soe Zeya Tun / Reuters

Movie theaters and studios have increasingly turned to techno wizardry innovations to lure viewers into the theater by offering them the one thing they can't recreate in their living room, even with a high-def flat-screen TV.

Blame the 3D goggles.

Average movie theater ticket prices hit an all-time not adjusted for inflation high of $7.96, reports the National Association of Theater Owners (NATO).

That number is essentially the sum of all ticket revenue divided by all tickets sold among the chains surveyed, NATO spokesperson Patrick Corcoran said. It includes lower cost admissions, like discounted tickets for matinee, children, and seniors, as well as bulk rates like the 10-packs of movie tickets for $72, or $7.20 a ticket, recently sold by Costco. At the higher end, the average also includes figures like one adult ticket to "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - An IMAX 3D Experience" at the AMC Loews Lincoln Square 13 in Manhattan selling for $21.

Combating market intrusion by Netflix, streaming video on demand, BitTorrent, and other home-viewing options, movie theaters and studios have increasingly turned to techno-wizardry innovations to lure consumers once again into darkened cinemas by offering them the one thing they can't recreate in their living room, even with a high-def flat-screen TV.

"It's not so much a rise in prices as it reflects how people are going to see the  movies," said Corcoran. "More adults are going to the movies... there's more 3D and IMAX in the marketplace and they charge more."

The release of films like "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey," "Skyfall" and "The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2" helped pump up prices in 2012. All were available in IMAX, while Twilight and Hobbit were also available in 3D and IMAX 3D. "The Hobbit" was also shown in some theaters in a "High Frame Rate" format, shot at 48 frames per second instead of the usual 24. Tickets for these special formats usually carry an average $3 markup.

The $7.96 average ticket price is up three cents from 2011 and the .4 percent growth rate is the 18th year of annual increases. However, the ticket price only just recently edged over into "all-time high" status. The bulk of the increases came in 2008, 2009, and 2010 at 4.4 percent, 4.5 percent and 5.2 percent respectively. In those years it became more common to offer 3D and IMAX versions of films.

But the trend has jumped the 3D shark. In May 2013, moviegoers will be treated to a 3D version of F. Scott Fitzgerald's literary classic, "The Great Gatsby." The  film will no doubt feature 3D polo balls hurtling at viewer's faces, 3D flapper kicks, and 3D green lights beckoning from beyond the edge of a 3D dock.

In Fitzgerald's novel, the green light was a symbol of the alluring and unattainable American dream. For theaters and studios, the dream of turning back the trend of home-viewing over going to the nickelodeon will remain similarly out of grasp.