My favourite mathematical concept of the moment is 92%. Not because that is the vote count in North Korean elections, which tends to be of the order of 99% in favour of the government (God help the dissenting 1%!). The 92% I’m thinking of is the top-of-the-poll positive rating which Burns received in a survey of actual users by Which? Magazine of the Consumers Association.
“92% customer score. Burns came 1st out of 24 dog food brands in our survey.”
“Sitting at the top our table, Burns dog food comes 1st out of 24 dog food brands, beating popular brands Royal Canin and Hill’s Science Plan.”
But here’s a coincidence: This week I carried out a review of daily feeding costs of almost 1300 dog food brands. 92% – yes 92% of those brands – cost more per day to feed than Burns!
I put it to you that that’s quite an achievement. Top of the poll for customer satisfaction and yet very low cost to feed. What about the old adage that you get what you pay for? Burns is often thought of as being an expensive food but the answer lies in digestibility.
The clue is in the poo. (Sorry)
The ingredients in Burns are highly digestible and we don’t use beet pulp, so the feeding amounts (and cost) are lower than most other foods, including more expensive brands. An additional benefit of high digestibility is that the dog produces less poo, so less to clean up, which is better for the environment also.
The UK is about to experience a cost of living shock, and Burns will not be immune from that, so value for money will be more important than ever.
Read More: https://burnspet.co.uk/dailyfeedingcosts/