San Francisco Passed Law Regulating Free Toys in Children's Meals

I was checking out this article on CNN -

Happy Meal toys no longer free in San Francisco - CNN
A new San Francisco law goes into effect on Thursday that prevents fast-food restaurants from giving away trinkets, action figures and other toys in their kid's meals unless their food meets nutritional requirements.

The meat and grist of this new law is that fast-food restaurants now have to charge customers for something that was formally free with purchase, which means profits.

If you take out the morality play this law declares itself to be, i.e. protecting the children from the big bad Corporate machine that has delicious fries and toys just like Santa Clause, the law appears to be more a way for corporations to start making visible profits from something they have previously taken losses on.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that some people will choose to go the healthier route for the lure of a free toy with the purchase of a meal, but realistically part of the allure of getting the meal is the act of eating it. Kids like eating probably just about as much as the free toy they'll have a short romance with, cover in ketchup then leave in the backseat to be forgotten.

I don't really know if ten cents will really raise an eyebrow, since purchases at the fash-food register tend to be frenetic and made hastily due to the nature of the beast and ten cents probably won't sound like much when you've got a kid standing beside you that will be shattered for life if the promise of a toy isn't fulfilled with every meal outside of the home.

What next, no quarter under the pillow for losing a tooth?

What I'm curious about regarding this law is the angle. There is a profit hiding under the pretext of a decision for the people, and that does not appear to be addressed as a point behind why this law was passed...but how could making money not be a deciding factor?

Even if people go to different restaurants that can still offer free toys, think of the people who will just shrug off the ten cents and still go to the same restaurants to feed their children.

Does this law strike any of you as devious as well?

In my opinion they should make a law saying that fast food places such as McDonalds and the countless of others cannot sell Kids Meals or serve children

reply to post by muse7


Why?

Serving children is fine, kids need to eat as well and adult sized portions of healthy food is no better for children.

What I'm driving at is the need of a law such as this, that doesn't regulate the quality of the food but whether or not the consumer spends ten extra cents when they are buying a Happy Meal for their kid.

The reasoning behind the law feels superfluous, the real point behind it being an increase for revenue for the fast-food corporations in San Francisco and whichever cities follow suit after this being passed.

I think they should be banned.. these bits of plastic crap that a child will lose interest in within 10 minutes ends up in the landfill sites where they take more than 10,000 years to decompose.. At least they could give away something useful not just crap that does nothing and is loosely ties to the latest pixar movie...

What is the penalty for breaking that law? If those affected restaurants REALLY wanted some free publicity, they could all still hand out the crap toy with the crap food until the sfpd was stretched thin trying to arrest Ronald McDonald.

reply to post by Fryaga


Oh thats just great! This is messed up, rather than regulate healthy choices into those meals and encourage kids to eat something good for them and get a little present, a little toy, they take away the toy and leave the garbage?

Edit to say this will change NOTHING, people who are addicted to Mcdonalds are still going to eat it. Try looking at the government funded school lunches and start from there. Now they have big money soaking into the afterschool food programs and weekend take home 'snacks' as well which are going to do nothing but cause an even greater weight problem for many children.

And McDonald's kid's meals do not. The meals have to be less than 600 calories and contain fruits (a half-cup) and vegetables (3/4 of a cup). They must have less than 35% of the total calories coming from fat, less than 640 milligrams of sodium and less than 0.5 milligrams of trans fat.

So they are regulating what kind of meal you can give kids with free toys. The 1 and 1/4 cups of fruits/vegies seems absurd. How many kids will eat that much fruit? There's a reason no one orders the apple fries or whatever McDs calls them.

In the end, it looks to be a money marketing scheme. if you order the meal with juice and apples instead of coke and french fries, you'll get a free toy, otherwise you'll have to pay an extra $$$ for the toy.

Originally posted by SilentNoise

And McDonald's kid's meals do not. The meals have to be less than 600 calories and contain fruits (a half-cup) and vegetables (3/4 of a cup). They must have less than 35% of the total calories coming from fat, less than 640 milligrams of sodium and less than 0.5 milligrams of trans fat.

So they are regulating what kind of meal you can give kids with free toys. The 1 and 1/4 cups of fruits/vegies seems absurd. How many kids will eat that much fruit? There's a reason no one orders the apple fries or whatever McDs calls them.

In the end, it looks to be a money marketing scheme. if you order the meal with juice and apples instead of coke and french fries, you'll get a free toy, otherwise you'll have to pay an extra $$$ for the toy.

Notice that's why McDonald's isn't complaining more or taking this to court. I'm sure McDonaldland has some good lawyers. Somehow, the Hamburgler is still on the streets after all these years.

As someone who produces some McD training videos, I can assure you McDonalds is not making more $ on this.

All happymeal toys are sold for 10 cents in San Francisco, that 10 cents goes to the San Francisco Ronald McDonald House. Some good comes of this.

So the real question is...what are other businesses doing?

This law is completely irrelevant. Don't you think restaurants factor in the cost of the toys into their happy meal prices? That "free toy" is only free because the restaurant added another 25 cents to the cost of the meal.